Philly DA Office is a Hot Mess

Discussion in 'Local and State' started by Jayfar, Jan 26, 2016.

  1. Templeton

    Templeton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    92
    The fact that two years in, with countless articles written by republicans/conservatives describing what an unqualified buffoon he is, not to mention comments by generals serving under him, you ask me to "argue the point" shows that no amount of logic and discussion would sway you.

    How about you read this recent article (among thousands out there) with comments from General McChrystal, and refute his points? Trump attacks McChrystal after retired general called Trump immoral - CNNPolitics

    You can also comment on why Romney is wrong too if you prefer.
     
    fiveomar likes this.
  2. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,704
    Likes Received:
    915
    It's all politics. McChrystal was in line for a job under HRC...obviously didn't get that, and certainly won't get one under Trump. To several of the various points by McC that I could find:
    • "Trump is immoral and a liar" -- This is a very general opinion by McC. I could not find any actual substance to refute.
    • To his point that Trump should not have signed hats last week in Iraq -- The Air Force said this was ok given that the hats were brought by the individual airmen
    • "we're far too focused on leaders at the expense of focusing on more fundamental things, like our communities and institutions". -- Agree with McC on this, especially communities. I disagree in part regarding institutions that are failing us (such as IRS, DOJ, FBI for starters). Note that the same exact thing about leaders should be said in reference to others such as Obama, HRC, etc
    • On Trump's criticism of Adm. McRaven: "The President is simply wrong, he's uninformed and pushing an idea that's not helpful." -- I agree with McC on this for the most part. Trump can say those things within the context of evaluating military success, but not publicly like this.
    • "If you pull American influence out, you're likely to have greater instability and of course it'll be much more difficult for the United States to try to push events in any direction. There is an argument that says we just pull up our stuff, go home, let the region run itself. That has not done well for the last 50 or 60 years,” -- here is where McC shows his globalist nature. We should not be the damn global police. Have we learned nothing from Iraq and Afghanistan? Why were we in Syria to begin with? We should get the hell out of that region and let the Russians and Turks get bogged down in fixing it if they want. Throw the Iranians and Saudis in and maybe they'll all be so preoccupied with each other that they'll forget about calling us the Great Satan for a couple of days.
    • “I don't believe ISIS is defeated,” McChrystal said. “I think ISIS is as much an idea as it is a number of ISIS fighters. There's a lot of intelligence that says there are actually more ISIS fighters around the world now than there were a couple of years ago.” -- ISIS is a CIA created entity, and the entire Syria thing was always about getting Assad out of power, and pipelines. All of our leaders have lost credibility on this subject. Again, let the regional players deal with their mess.
    • “I think the great mistake in the president's leaked guidance is that just when we were starting to sit down with the Taliban, just we were starting to begin negotiations, he basically traded away the biggest leverage point we have. If you tell the Taliban that we are absolutely leaving on a date ... their incentives to try to cut a deal dropped dramatically,” McChrystal said. -- in context of negotiations, yes I agree. Same thing Obama did in Iraq though. Having said that, the bigger picture context is that we just need to get the hell out of there and who cares about negotiations. This draws a very clear line on that.
    • “Of course I was worried about the confidence of the Afghan people because at the end of the day, that's what determines who wins in Afghanistan,” McChrystal said. “And I think we probably rocked them -- we rocked them in their belief that we are allies that can be counted on.” -- at this point, who cares. We've wasted far enough blood and treasure on a country that provides us exceptionally little return. Strategically we should stop getting into these kinds of entanglements.

    As far as Romney goes, he is aligning himself with the establishment in that Trump is not playing by their Queensbury rules and they don't like it. Note that Romney's op-ed is very light on specifics around negatives but actually mentions specific positives. That doesn't make for a persuasive argument. (also I have a difficult time reconciling Leftist support of someone that they absurdly trashed over a simple "binders full of women" verbal flub. The hypocrisy is laughable.)

    Listen, I get that Trump is crass and blunt to a fault. He's an opportunist, an exaggerator, and certainly not a sweetheart of a person. We all knew that he was like that for many years, as I've said that on here previously multiple times. But he clearly loves his country and was elected to shake things up...and that's exactly what he's doing. Many people don't like that kind of change in the status quo. Either because they feel he should behave more like them (which he never will) or they don't like the impact on their pocketbooks...especially rent-seekers, the political class, and allies(both foreign and domestic) that aren't pulling their weight. That is a pretty clear motive for a big chunk of the pushback against him that's happening. But instead of arguing the policies and facts, they get enraged over his tweets and resort to ad hominem. This all works to his advantage in the long run.

    Hence my advice is to ignore what he says and instead pay attention to what he actually does. Here's a good read on that: Sun Tzu And the Trump Doctrine
     
  3. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,704
    Likes Received:
    915
    Also a good summary of Romney's politics in regards to Trump, as seen online:
    • 2012 election: Romney begs Trump for endorsement and donations. Trump gives both.
    • June 2016: Romney gives press conference/speech and calls Trump "Every naughty word he knows"
    • Post-election 2016: Romney publicly grovels for SecState job
    • 2018 election: Romney begs for Trump endorsement, trumpets Romney/Trump "alliance"
    • January 2019: Romney declares man he begged money and endorsements from "unfit"
    Speaks volumes about how our political class operates.
     
  4. Politburo

    Politburo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    3,037
    Likes Received:
    197
    Speaks volumes about Mitt Romney.. something we can probably agree on.
    This is perfect. Frame it.
     
  5. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,704
    Likes Received:
    915
    It isn't just Mitt...he's just terrible at masking it.
     
  6. Politburo

    Politburo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    3,037
    Likes Received:
    197
    No doubt there are others, like current hero Lindsey Graham.

    What is less clear is how you go from the problems the GOP has had with accepting Trump and ascribe that hypocrisy to a whole 'political class'.
     
  7. Hospitalitygirl

    Hospitalitygirl Resident Ornery Bitch

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2008
    Messages:
    16,075
    Likes Received:
    794
    So...................rising homicide rates. Anyone else concerned about that?
     
    Titus likes this.
  8. ODragon

    ODragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2009
    Messages:
    238
    Likes Received:
    102
    Concerned yes, surprised, no. When they won't deal with quality of life issues, its hard to expect them to do more. Living in this city makes it feel like if its it's not a gimme arrest, it isn't happening.

    My neighbor was told it wasn't worth the police's time to deal with porch pirates because the value of the items taken are so low; even though they had video of the person(s) taking it. They just took a report and left.

    Another neighbor had something stolen (part of a fence being repaired but not attached yet) by a scrapper, and even though they had the license plate, they gave the same excuse about not being worth the time for the value.

    My feeling is that you can't be looking at this stuff in a singular manner. A porch pirate or scrapper who takes one thing and gets away with it is going to keep doing it.
     
    #278 ODragon, Jan 12, 2019
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2019
  9. Titus

    Titus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    Messages:
    2,310
    Likes Received:
    234
    The police numbers are down substantially from what I hear - they don't bother with any but the most serious crimes. It's become a free for all out there.
     
    Hospitalitygirl and fiveomar like this.
  10. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,704
    Likes Received:
    915
    What else should we expect to happen when the mayor advertises us as a sanctuary city?
     
  11. fiveomar

    fiveomar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    266
    The police in my neighborhood have explained that the DA's office is refusing to prosecute these "low level" crimes and that's why it's not worth the police time (and cited actual examples of individuals caught by them).

    The problem is, these supposed low level crimes DO AFFECT people, not to mention enables these perps to get more and more brazen with time, escalating to more serious crimes. I'm all for decriminalizing actions that truly have no affect on other humans (ie. smoking weed), or low-level first-time offenses, but decriminalizing actual criminal activities is a huge slap in the face to all other law-abiding Philadelphians.
     
  12. ODragon

    ODragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2009
    Messages:
    238
    Likes Received:
    102
    Fair enough but both lead to the same problems. Although, I'd imagine that there might be some sort of small percent that would be scared straight by being caught.
     
  13. OakmontGuy

    OakmontGuy NE Philadelphia Proud!

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2009
    Messages:
    365
    Likes Received:
    188
    There's something else that hardly anyone thinks about: If the DA/Police don't "have the law abiding citizen's back" when it comes to crime, then eventually those citizens will take matters into their own hands. Yes...vigilante justice.

    You only have to look to the past to predict the future. This DA only wants to concentrate on "high level" crimes? Just wait until people decide to start dealing with porch pirates with baseball bats. Or until entire blocks, sick and tired of being robbed and assaulted by petty thieves and ignored by the DA/police decide to turn to bigger ones (cough, mob, cough) for...protection.
     
    Tartan69 and fiveomar like this.
  14. Tedk

    Tedk Bean Counter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2010
    Messages:
    337
    Likes Received:
    331
    I was watching the Smerconish show the other day and I heard the term "survival crime" for the first time.

    Crimes of Survival

    Obviously Philadelphia, like Seattle and San Francisco, is at the forefront of this abomination
     
    Tartan69, fiveomar and OakmontGuy like this.
  15. OakmontGuy

    OakmontGuy NE Philadelphia Proud!

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2009
    Messages:
    365
    Likes Received:
    188
    That's the first time I've heard that term too. Thanks for the linked article.

    Reading the comments to it, looks like at least one person (Neal Hyde) was thinking along the same lines that I was in the post before yours:

     
  16. ShoshTrvls

    ShoshTrvls Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    Messages:
    4,237
    Likes Received:
    276
    Do you even know what that means? Because immigrants (legal and illegal) commit way less crime than native born Americans. So "sanctuary city" status would have infinitesimal effect on arrests.
     
  17. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,704
    Likes Received:
    915
    Firstly, sanctuary cities have nothing whatsoever to do with legal immigrants and everything to do with cooperation with the feds on illegals.

    Secondly, the very fact that the illegal immigrants are here means they are committing a crime.

    Thirdly, there is no definitive study showing that illegal immigrants commit more or less crime (beyond the crime of being here illegally) per person than native born. There is just not enough data to prove one way or another. Data aside, given that the US is very demographically homogeneous it also very much depends on what group within the native-born types you compare it to.

    Lastly, and most importantly, is what message is sent by declaring a sanctuary city. It says to all that we don't care about crime, and that politics is more important than law and order. That bleeds into our culture and makes it acceptable for all categories of people to ignore civilized norms. It is the far bigger impact beyond individual crimes from illegals.
     
    OakmontGuy and fiveomar like this.
  18. ShoshTrvls

    ShoshTrvls Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    Messages:
    4,237
    Likes Received:
    276
    There's plenty of data, you just don't want to accept it.

    Illegal Immigration Does Not Increase Violent Crime, 4 Studies Show

    http://www.collingwoodresearch.com/uploads/8/3/6/0/8360930/shelter_nopols_blind_final.pdf

    And there is no such thing as "illegals," there are PEOPLE who entered this country without proper documentation, many of whom have applied for asylum -- a legal right. Those who have not applied for asylum and have not been convicted of any other crime (an arrest is not a conviction, as much as you would like to believe it to be, at least for people of color) have committed, at most, a misdemeanor in crossing the border or overstaying their visa; mere presence in the US after doing so is not a crime. And those who came here as children did not have a choice, and did not willfully break any law. To do to them what trump and ICE is doing -- separating babies from mothers, putting children in concentration camps in the desert, where they lack medical care and are prone to being raped by the guards themselves -- is inhumane.
     
  19. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,704
    Likes Received:
    915
    I've read that NPR link previously. FWIW here's a response that I came across while researching:


    From a more academic perspective, here's a couple studies stating the opposite of what you found:

    "Undocumented immigrants are at least 142% more likely to be convicted of a crime than other Arizonans"

    Undocumented Immigrants, U.S. Citizens, and Convicted Criminals in Arizona by John R. Lott :: SSRN

    "New government data indicate that immigrants have high rates of criminality, while older academic research found low rates."

    https://www.cis.org/sites/cis.org/files/articles/2009/crime.pdf

    My entire point was that there is no definitive study. As stated in the CIS link above:

    "The overall picture of immigrants and crime remains confused due to a lack of good data and contrary information."​

    And even more importantly from that link:

    "However, the newer government data indicate that there are legitimate public safety reasons for local law enforcement to work with federal immigration authorities."​

    That's the primary issue I was addressing in my last post in regards to sanctuary cities. The actual rates matter less than the overall message that is being sent.

    Improper Entry is still a crime. Don't conflate severity and level of penalty with a binary true/false attribute.

    I agree with you on this, they should be detained together. I also understand that while this sometimes occurred under Bush and Obama as well, the blanket policies around this are new under Trump.

    Although as a parent I do still feel that there's a special place in hell reserved for those that subject their children to this situation.

    I agree with you on this as well. Immigration detention facility should be held to the same medical, safety, and liability standards as regular jails and prisons.

    What does that have to do with anything? Why are you dragging race into a conversation that has nothing to do with race? Why do you constantly assume the other side has a preconceived bias in that direction? Not only is it exceptionally poor form in a debate, but it also (yet again) speaks more to your character than mine.
     
    fiveomar and OakmontGuy like this.
  20. Politburo

    Politburo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    3,037
    Likes Received:
    197
    Yeesh.
     
  21. Elliott87

    Elliott87 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2015
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    56
    I noticed you did not say whether there is a special place in hell for those who are actually separating those children from their families.
     
    ShoshTrvls likes this.
  22. OakmontGuy

    OakmontGuy NE Philadelphia Proud!

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2009
    Messages:
    365
    Likes Received:
    188
    I'm curious as to how they handle this in other countries.

    And, never mind if there's a "special place" in hell for parents who subject their kids to this or for those who separate those kids from their families. The real question should be: Which hell do they get sent to PERIOD? Is it the Christian hell? The Greeks' Hades? Maybe the Hindu's Samsara? The Judaic Gehinnom?

    Personally, I'd lean towards that last one, since it involves throwing kids into a valley where their sacrificed to Molech. Seems somehow related.

    Oh, and another thing that puzzles me: If an adult takes his underage children with him while trespassing on private property, refuses to leave, and is apprehended by the police, would you complain with similar zeal about those children being separated from the parent and not being locked up in the same cell right along with him?
     
    Tartan69 likes this.
  23. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,704
    Likes Received:
    915
    What part of "I agree with you on this" did you not comprehend?
     
  24. Elliott87

    Elliott87 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2015
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    56
    In this case, in America, the child is usually placed with a relative to be cared for. That option was often available to the authorities, but they decided to incarcerate these children , even when the relative was an American citizen, or a legal resident. If no relatives were available efforts should be made to place the children with local charities or foster guardians. If all those other options were not available, it would then be preferable to hold the family in custody together as a family unit. In no instance would it be acceptable to separate the families, and hold the children alone in custody. Do you agree?

    In your example, is the child also guilty of trespassing, and therefore in need of incarceration?
     
  25. Elliott87

    Elliott87 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2015
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    56
    The part where you admit that separating and holding the children is not the right choice, and blame the parents for putting the children in this position, but do not blame those people who actually put the order in place that you say is wrong.

    If I allow my underage child to go out after curfew, and the police decree that now if they find kids out after curfew they will beat them on sight, you can say I should not have allowed my child to be out after curfew, and you would be correct. But then by not mentioning that beating children for curfew violations is immoral , and no officer should do that can't be ignored. Who is more guilty of harming the child in that case.

    If the officers pick up the child, return him or her, and fine me, then it is quite apparent to most people that I am more guilty of harming the child, and the officers are just doing their job, with the child's best interest at heart, trying to keep them safe.
     
  26. Hospitalitygirl

    Hospitalitygirl Resident Ornery Bitch

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2008
    Messages:
    16,075
    Likes Received:
    794
    THIS! A thousand times this!

    But you know, Krasner has made the defendants into victims and the rest of us are screwed.
     
    OakmontGuy likes this.
  27. Hospitalitygirl

    Hospitalitygirl Resident Ornery Bitch

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2008
    Messages:
    16,075
    Likes Received:
    794
    Can you imagine being a store owner and someone shoplifts from you, repeatedly, with no impunity because it's been deemed a low-level, practically victimless crime?
     
    OakmontGuy likes this.
  28. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,704
    Likes Received:
    915
    Agreeing that they should not separate the families inherently implies that the government policy is the first thing at fault.

    But aside from that, your analogy is invalid. A more accurate one related to curfew would be that the cops arrest your kids and then arrest you, and detain you in separate jails. "Beat on sight" is not part of what is happening. If it is then it is an illegal act itself by the cops.
     
    OakmontGuy likes this.
  29. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,704
    Likes Received:
    915
    Yes...and it causes the store owner to take matters into their own hands. That's exactly what's going to start happening. How long until we get another Bernie Goetz?
     
    #300 Tartan69, Jan 18, 2019
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2019
    OakmontGuy likes this.

Share This Page