Reminder on why the left wins and conservatives are born and bred to lose
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (118)
sorted by:
As a right-winger, your going to be held to a much higher level of scrutiny, so you can't lie or steal without yourself getting completely nailed. Don't give the enemy ammunition.
So what, unload your gun and give that to them instead?
Not evey judge is compromised, but they can't do anything if you don't give them some wiggle room. Just be smart about it, aim for omission or "misunderstanding" rather than provable falsehood, work in enough plausible deniability and keep your mouth shut, don't be a retard like the George Floyd activist and brag about it to your friends, ever, take it to your grave. At worst you'll be deemed ineligible for the jury like that, but most likely you'll be fine and be one of the rare ones able to actually be able to do something useful for a change.
Engage in subversion damnit.
Lies can get you violently dragged in court, and a Leftist DA or Judge is going to look for an excuse to "send a message". So that when you do actually violate the law, you're going to get your asshole ripped open with over-zealous prosecution.
Subversion practically requires lying, at least in intentions, not lying is either cooperation or direct antagonism.
If you're waiting for a 100% perfect chance to fall into your lap, you're just going to twiddle your thumbs as you get inescapably boxed in. We'd be better off if everyone took a guarded swing when you get a 90% chance like jury duty.
Like I said, stick to omitting things you're not directly questioned on and bending definitions and you're almost impossible to do anything to in a criminal court unless you stupidly confess to what you're doing, keep your mouth shut and it's a low risk prospect. If your interrogation is thorough enough that you can't get by without omitting something you're directly questioned about, don't do it, answer the direct question honestly and call yourself unlucky as you become ineligible but otherwise suffer no consequences.
American, and more broadly Western, society currently heavily favors opportunism and being the first to try and take advantage of a situation. You probe with plausibly innocent transgressions, if they're on guard you'll just get a harmless warning and you can just keep testing others until someone's guard finally is down and you know you have the advantage before you start. Many lefty activists know this, that's why they often appear so limp wristed or spineless, they're always testing the water and are happy to back down from an unadvantageous confrontation before the stakes rise, so they can keep looking for someone with their back turned to strike at instead.
So start poking cracks and testing unguarded doors yourselves, it's the most advantageous strategy until something changes and society as a whole stops being so placid and starts being more vengeful.
Subversion does not require lying. It simply requires patience, persistence, and recognizing opportunities. I'm not saying that you wait for a 100% chance, I'm saying you don't lie, which could involve serious legal actions, and blowing up the trail.
The first mistake would be letting them know you're a right winger. I'm sure it can be figured out, but make them know you.
Hi I'm Max P. My pronouns are bullet/time.
This is also true. This is why the Left has their own distinct vocabulary. It's the "danger hair" of rhetorical signalling.
I call those shibboleths.
All he had to do was say nothing. If the prosecutor doesn't ask, don't answer.
Prosecutors are typically going to ask these things.
They didn't ask this retard to recuse himself. He did that on his own.
Insofar as juries are concerned, if he's not a law student or attorney then I'm all for doing whatever to get in the jury box.
To your larger point, I think any right-winger who gets under the cross-hairs of the left can probably assume they'll be unpersoned regardless.
"Show me the man and I'll show you the crime."
(Though I do see your point.)
Sure, but even the Left understands what bad optics looks like. This is perfectly demonstrated by Trotsky who the Left pretends was a peace-nik. He wasn't. He was in full support of terrorism and terror campaigns, he just didn't want random acts of terrorism that weren't co-ordinated as part of a larger effort.
There is a difference between charging into the barbed wire, and laying across the barbed wire so the platoon can move over you.