The judge in the Alex Jones case: totally unbiased!
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (40)
sorted by:
Texas judges are elected politicians in robes.
This chick's court is in Austin, which voted (Travis County) 71/26 in favor of Biden.
It is a deep blue city/county and Alex Jones never would have received a fair trial from any liberal.
I have to ask you, since I think you are the best informed on this subject.
Which is worse, having elected judges or ones appointed by politicians - in the US context?
My fellow Eurofags are always trashing the US and saying that places with elected judges are the worst. I'm not sure about that, because I'm pretty sure it's just all terrible (including us).
I'm going to interject here because I've grappled with this topic a lot (and you can't stop me from replying).
Elected judges are clearly dangerous because of the partisan nature of their decisions. But unelected judges could be as bad, or worse, because they are totally unaccountable beyond the state apparatus.
I think a good compromise would be judges that are elected, but have to maintain high support. We think of "elected" as "judge who got the most votes". So, a judge with 30% public support can be a judge. But what if you had a kind of "confidence minimum". A situation where either the judge gets 60% of the vote at least in the election, or there isn't a judge. It would limit the judiciaries size, and it would also force the judiciary to be less explicitly partisan.
It doesn't super help in Travis County's case, but the problem there is systemic bias, like a black man in 1930's Jackson, MI. I think in most reasonable places, getting that level of approval would require someone to be pretty acceptable to the population in general, and likely not super-partisan.
Sure it wouldn't help in deep blue or deep red states, but I think that at least living among that population, it would be understood that certain things should be considered generally acceptable. It's kind of a "you know better".
Unfortunately there is no easy answer, but there is no doubt that if judges are elected, they are nothing but politicians in robes. They don't answer to anyone except the voters, so they can flagrantly violate the law as long as they do it in ways that the majority in their local community approve of.
In California we have both elected and appointed judges, and they're both generally shit, because Gavin Newsom is doing the appointments, so it seems like he appoints nothing but far left POC women. It's been like this for a while.
With elections, you might get a Republican judge in a Republican county, better than Newsom, but then you tend to have the same "politician" problem from the other side, though in general Right wing people are nowhere near as "activist" so you don't see much bullshit coming from them.
Judges should be fired if they ignore or violate the law. Unfortunately there is no mechanism to do this. As time goes on, politicians and the D/R political parties are ensuring that judges become hyper-partisan, but the Ds are much better at doing this than Rs. It's fucked up and it is resulting in idiots becoming judges because they check boxes and will be loyal leftists. I'm telling you that a number of judges I deal with in Socal are stupid and unqualified to a frustrating degree.
One wonders how you can have any optimism at all. You sound as screwed as we Eurofags are.
Look at history, back to the late 1970s. Look at the Jimmy Carter years. It looked very much like now. Then Ronald Reagan showed up and there was a strong backlash against the libs. You also had Thatcher and others. The 1980s were the most based decade since the 1960s. It took the Left 30 years to rebuild their strength. It was only in the 2010s - that mirrored the 1960s - that the Left was truly resurgent and powerful.
The Left is objectively wrong. You and I both know this, but the Left also tries harder, fights harder, and is far more motivated than the Right. The Right, always complacent, smug in its superiority, slumbers and waits until the Left gets obnoxiously powerful until it finally wakes up and swats the Left down again.
The Left was triumphant throughout the 1960s and 1970s last time. This time, it has been a much shorter time period - and interrupted by Trump - before the backlash has begun. This has two fundamental reasons: (1) the Left is more impatient, aggressive, and accelerationist than before. 2020 and BLM and "defund the police" all the sheer lunacy since then proved that the Left wants a fundamental overthrow of society NOW and they're not willing to play the long game nearly as much as they were the last cycle. (2) Even though most people are stupid and forgot the lessons of the past, at least SOME people remember, and so people are catching on and the backlash is coming faster now.
I have no doubt that, in the end, the Right will be triumphant. It is only a matter of how many iterations of libtardism we must endure until the liberals become insignificant enough to be ignored. We might live long enough to see 1-2 more cycles after this one. Every cycle, the Left will get weaker.
The Left represents a test against human fitness, just like COVID or any other disease tests your health and immune system. If your society is weak, Leftism will destroy it. People like us, you and I, have an outsized role to play in the societal immune system that defeats Leftism and forces it into remission again. We have to keep fighting and not stop until the Left is defeated. That's all.
Not sure whether or not they requested change in venue, but doesn't that court have to approve something like that anyway? I know with the J6 people, all change of venue requests are denied because they go to the very court they are trying to change from due to how corrupt and biased they are.
Alex Jones operates his show around Austin, which was a big mistake for him. He chose to operate in one of the most liberal areas of Texas. He should have moved his operations to a Red county.