I guess it’s down to how they apply the conditional in that statement. Because obviously, if they buy into the “‘trespassing’ is violence” line that the left has been taking, that’s bad. If they follow this up by saying “oh, after some review, it turns out none of them committed violence,” that’s great. It makes it harder for the left to individually attack the people that they pardon, or to use those pardons politically.
Remember, both for political narrative and for the sake of the victims themselves, it’s not enough to pardon and forget. They really have to hammer that none of these people have done anything that should even need to be pardoned. Sure, you’re welcome to doom and say “OMG Vance won’t guarantee pardoning everyone!”—and I’ll admit there is a chance that they fumble it—but it’s also important to make statements like this if you’re trying to make it clear that you’re not just blindly pardoning a bunch of violent rioters because they’re on your side.
but it’s also important to make statements like this if you’re trying to make it clear that you’re not just blindly pardoning a bunch of violent rioters because they’re on your side.
No it's not. That means you accept their false position. That the pardons will be ideological and are meant to release a riot squad. Who even believes that bullshit? Then when you explain it away you allow it to become part of the conversation.
Vance is a retarded political operative. This was an intentional failure and a missed opportunity to take control of the typical hand wringing elitist Washington D.C. narrative sphere. Dude is a weakling.
Dooming, shilling, attacking the actually SUCCESFUL right wing elements (attacking the Trump admin, on the literal pro-trump site no less, over your own hysterics) and deliberately advocating for counterproductive retarded stances.
And
15 days old, conpro poster account, brigading a board that you have zero understanding of.
Go tell your wife's boyfriend you can't pay his salary anymore, fed goblin. You're super obvious. You lost, and you'll always lose. Die mad about it.
I guess it’s down to how they apply the conditional in that statement. Because obviously, if they buy into the “‘trespassing’ is violence” line that the left has been taking, that’s bad. If they follow this up by saying “oh, after some review, it turns out none of them committed violence,” that’s great. It makes it harder for the left to individually attack the people that they pardon, or to use those pardons politically.
Remember, both for political narrative and for the sake of the victims themselves, it’s not enough to pardon and forget. They really have to hammer that none of these people have done anything that should even need to be pardoned. Sure, you’re welcome to doom and say “OMG Vance won’t guarantee pardoning everyone!”—and I’ll admit there is a chance that they fumble it—but it’s also important to make statements like this if you’re trying to make it clear that you’re not just blindly pardoning a bunch of violent rioters because they’re on your side.
No it's not. That means you accept their false position. That the pardons will be ideological and are meant to release a riot squad. Who even believes that bullshit? Then when you explain it away you allow it to become part of the conversation.
Vance is a retarded political operative. This was an intentional failure and a missed opportunity to take control of the typical hand wringing elitist Washington D.C. narrative sphere. Dude is a weakling.
Let's pull the mask off here.
Dooming, shilling, attacking the actually SUCCESFUL right wing elements (attacking the Trump admin, on the literal pro-trump site no less, over your own hysterics) and deliberately advocating for counterproductive retarded stances.
And 15 days old, conpro poster account, brigading a board that you have zero understanding of.
Go tell your wife's boyfriend you can't pay his salary anymore, fed goblin. You're super obvious. You lost, and you'll always lose. Die mad about it.
Why would they need to buy into anything the left says at all