|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: VT Headlines
|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: VT Headlines
Sarah George’s standard, as quoted in this article, is not whether someone broke the law, but rather how his/her behavior compares to the actions of others at the same event.
She also dropped charges against those arrested because “none of the three has an arrest record.”
She’s also undermining the credibility of the law enforcement authorities of which she is top official by doubting the work these LEO’s—who are trying to enforce the law—are doing to promote public safety and restore order.
Sarah George operates according to the situational ethics which deny objective truth and reality, and instead exalts feelings and opinions above the laws she was ostensibly elected to uphold and enforce.
Sarah George is doing exactly what she publicly stated she went to law school to do: dismantle the criminal legal system. Straight out of the Marxist playbook. She makes her puppeteers very happy. Those who vote for her will also make those same puppeteers happy.
That Marathon is a total waste of time and money.
Regarding the tragedy of hospitals eliminating birthing services:
And yet the state of Vermont (translated, you and I with our tax dollars) continues to give Planned Parenthood a million dollars every year to kill babies.
https://www.vtcng.com/news_and_citizen/opinion/opinion_columns/closing-copley-birthing-center-is-a-local-tragedy/article_81fd42f2-9ae8-4c89-89a7-b5ad3ae8c9a1.html
Regarding the traffic stops: the only data which is conspicuously absent from what appears to be an assumptively and confirmationally biased report, is the intention or motivation of every single LEO who conducted these traffic stops.
I’m no scientist or statistician, but I would think that to present a report such as this which doesn’t have some kind of underlying accusatory agenda, the same scientific data used to create this report would need to be correlated on a case by case basis in which each traffic stop includes the 100% truthful and honest anecdotal reason each LEO has given for conducting the stop.
Absent that kind of combination of scientific and anecdotal evidence, how can you ever claim the prejudice which reports like this seem to imply?
I’m open to correction and instruction here by those wiser about these matters than I.