You really have no idea what conservatives mean when they talk about small government. It doesn’t mean no government, and the Epstein case couldn’t be farther from a litmus test on a debate between smaller and larger government.
No, I didn't. You said there was very little evidence. Bullshit. Inciting a violent mob was only one part of Trump's crimes on Jan 6.
Show your work. That's all I can say. You're doing nothing but trolling right now.
In your case? Definitely.
No, we don't. But we do say you can't impinge on free speech by prohibiting funded speech.
Yes, you missed my point. I agree every last person who crossed into the Capitol that day should have served jail time. It is also true that proving a criminal charge of incitement would have been extremely difficult. That said, and because it's a political process and not a legal one, had I been in the Senate during the vote after Trump's second impeachment I would have voted guilty.
Sure, here's the "work," and I'll deliver it through the Socratic method. True or false, for no other reason than Joe Biden's actions, were credible evidence discovered tomorrow that Hunter Biden likely committed a serious crime in, say, 2019, it would be impossible for the federal government to successfully prosecute him?
Answer the above honestly, and we'll see who's putting their wants over facts and reason.
What it means is adding trillions of dollars to the US debt.
You're ignoring the easiest part of the Jan 6 case to prove -- John Eastman's fake elector scheme and Trump's eager willingness to go along with it.
Why would it be impossible? And who cares? This false equivalence between Biden's "corruption" and Trump's corruption are just ridiculous. And no serious person even brings it up.
I just did....far more honestly than you are capable of.
Epstein has nothing to do with this. The federal government cannot silence groups of people any more that it can silence an individual.
Well, for starters, you care. You're the one who brought up Biden claiming he never interfered with the justice system.
Because he didn't. He has right to protect his son from the deranged Trump. Stop pretending that wasn't a factor in Biden's decision.
It's a boring irrelevant hypothetical question....as you try, again, to normalize Trump's behavior.
That might have been what they claimed the goal was, but the result was essentially legalizing unlimited anonymous donations from businesses who have wildly more resources than the other groups you mention.
Not a child rapist. That was Joe Biden.
No, I'm demonstrating you're unaware of the fact that Biden acted to interfere with all current and all future investigations of Hunter Biden.
Did Epstein not have first amendment rights?
If your assertion is true, then the problem is someone, or some people, in the justice system who accepted a bribe. The problem you're describing is not a consequence of there being too much freedom of speech.
www.vox.com
And you think silencing other groups of people will help?If Epstein didn't directly bribe anyone, but gave campaign contributions and the law makers just decided to give him a slap on the wrist in response, is that different from what Citizens United did for corporations? If a corporation wants to dump toxic waste in a river and after giving a bunch of campaign contributions, law makers allow them to do it, is that not legal bribery?
Why Trump just killed a rule restricting coal companies from dumping waste in streams
Oddly enough, this was one of the GOP’s top priorities.
