Plotitical Issues

Just pondering some questions. To say that must mean that someone here must have the answers as part of their common knowledge. On the odd chance that they pique interests and a worthwhile discussion, here they are.

1. In this day and age, can we still have free and fair trials?

2. When the state wins a lawsuit agains a large corporarion, where does that money go?

3. If a govt official loses a lawsuit, from where does that money come from?

4. Was justice always meant to be a pay to play premise where its how much justice you can afford?

5. How come outsourcing US based businesses manufacturing isnt a matter of national security?

Have fun!

I know this really sounds a bit off bit, but I really think Donald J. Trump was the messenger of the " awaken lightbulb" that needed to be re-turned on in America's life. So instead, many people still wanted to believe that Santa will still come on Christmas Eve and deliver the Christmas presents down the chimney. What I'm say by that meaning is this: THE SMOKE OF FOLLOWING BLINDLY OF LEADERS WAS ENLIGHTEN BY DONALD J. TRUMP HAVING THE LEADERSHIP OF A MAN OF INSIGHT OF THE WICKEDNESS OF AMERICA'S LEADERS IN D.C. SADLY AS WE FOUND OUT ONE MAN DID MAKE A CHANGE AND THEN A NEW MAN ( IDIOT OF VAIN CHARATER ) CAME TO POWER AND DESTROYED THE "LIGHTBULB" THAT WAS TURNED ON.

1. In this day and age, can we still have free and fair trials?


Getting harder for free and fair trials.

Too much 2nd and 3rd hand hearsay being allowed and then believed by juries and judges.

Too much payoff to judges and to juries and blackmailed lawyers.

And Juries are getting "coached" and we don't even know it yet (yeah wait till that hits the MSM in a controlled form)😍

And too many Judges and Juries and lawyers are politicized !!!!!😁

a reply to: JinMI

1 . Only if We have Honest Non Biased Judges who do not Judge with their Preconceived Ideologies .

2. It should go into the States Treasury .

3. a Slush Fund .

4. No .

5. It is IMO .

originally posted by: JinMI
1. In this day and age, can we still have free and fair trials?

You have always been able to get the justice you can afford.

2. When the state wins a lawsuit agains a large corporarion, where does that money go?

Into deeper pockets than yours or mine. A pittance to whoever was directly affected by what caused the suit or settlement.

3. If a govt official loses a lawsuit, from where does that money come from?

Property taxes, typically.

4. Was justice always meant to be a pay to play premise where its how much justice you can afford?

No, but the Constitution has been bastardized since the 1860s.

5. How come outsourcing US based businesses manufacturing isnt a matter of national security?

It is, depending on what is being manufactured. ITAR compliance is the first quick and easy example that comes to mind.

a reply to: JinMI

All good questions. The way I see it:

1. I think that really depends on the judge. Some may consider justice, in its truest form, in every decision. Others, well, lets say their interpretation is ... unusual... I think its also dependent, at least to some degree, on what an individuals definition of justice is on any given case. Some people may think anything short of the death penalty for a pedophile does not qualify as justice while others think 20 years in jail is a good sentence.

2. If a state is suing a corporation it is usually to recover a loss of some kind. It may be on behalf of its constituents, or it may be a realized loss by the state itself, usually a lost investment or an EPA issue. Whichever it is, that money is meant to reimburse that loss.

3. That is a tough one to answer. If he is sued as in individual, it comes out of his pocket, or at least its supposed to. Unfortunately, it would probably be paid out of his campaign fund, his party campaign fund, or lobbyists interested in keeping him in his present position. If he is sued as part of a organization, the org is the one who would likely pay, though it is also possible that org would then in turn sue him to recover its own losses.

4. Not at all. It was only when celebrity became a commodity that justice was compromised in broad strokes. Of course, there were always some guilty parties that were wealthy enough to buy their way out of prison, or someone else's way in. But they were the exception to the rule. Now, justice is inversely proportional to your fame.

5. If it is any kind of product that involves technology or information critical to our safety as a nation - it is. I think it was someone on clinton's watch who sold a digital phone system to China. They reverse engineered it for a blueprint for printed circuit boards and off they went... If it is something really protected, say some kind of missile system, it is usually compartmentalized among multiple contractors who individually have no idea what the piece they are making is going to do. They just have to meet certain criteria and that is all they need to know.

a reply to: JinMI

I can't imagine what might have sparked such questions...

I have no answers tho. I'm wondering the same.

Big irony when the police have to get absolute proof of a crime and then the courts allow all the fake testimonies 🤡

originally posted by: JinMI
Just pondering some questions. To say that must mean that someone here must have the answers as part of their common knowledge. On the odd chance that they pique interests and a worthwhile discussion, here they are.

1. In this day and age, can we still have free and fair trials?

2. When the state wins a lawsuit agains a large corporarion, where does that money go?

3. If a govt official loses a lawsuit, from where does that money come from?

4. Was justice always meant to be a pay to play premise where its how much justice you can afford?

5. How come outsourcing US based businesses manufacturing isnt a matter of national security?

Have fun!

1) Yes

2) Highly situational. Medicare/Medicaid fraud settlements / damage verdicts generally reimburse M/M with some being used to defray the AG/State AG office costs. Other situations might see the damages flowing into the state’s general fund or to specific counties impacted or to a specific agency.

3) It depends on if the government official was found liable in a way that preserved their qualified legislative or qualified sovereign immunity — if they were acting on behalf of an official government policy the official’s government will generally cover the settlement. If the official engaged in a tortious act outside of the scope of their qualified immunity, the official pays the damages. Damages could also be proportionally split between the official and the government by the Judge or Jury.

4) Justice has always been pay for play but it was certainly worse before the Magna Carte, and better but still worse prior to the US Constitution. It can be improved further still — but it is likely equally impossible to remove corruption from systems of justice as it is to prevent all humans from being corrupt.

5) It is a matter of national security. The government is slowly understanding that. The US was incredibly naive in the 1990s regarding outsourcing, particularly to China and naïveté continued for most of the past 2 decades along with a high degree of corruption and a failure of institutions to pursue their stakeholders’ interests (such as unions, government agencies that work for the US public, etc.). Onshoring and near-shoring are now more dominant trends than offshoring, in part as a reaction to events of the past 3-5 years where everyone in US finally realized outsourcing critical things such as mil hardware and basic medicines to China was an absolutely terrible idea the entire time.

But there was a period where the US mostly naively hoped that economic partnership with China would prevent future conflict and cause China to become a moderate Democracy. Those people were idiots, but they were not generally corrupt regarding China, unlike a lot more recent individuals.