I'd think that being victimized by a class of people you'd championed would be supremely ironic.
Will there be a 2nd American civil war before 28 ?
- Thread starter Stone
- Start date
I'd think that being victimized by a class of people you'd championed would be supremely ironic.
The irony is that we have a 34-times convicted felon "running" the country now, along with his corrupt family and cronies, yet you talked about "the criminals Democrats coddle."
Sigh. I doubt he's interested in invading your home and taking your food.
No, according to some of the magas here, he would command the army and they would do the invasion. Haven't you read Stone's posts?
Irrelevant and opinionated. Try to focus.
It's no different from the irrelevant opinion that "Democrats coddle criminals." An opinion without proof.
Yes, it is. The fact that Democrats coddle criminals is well-established and there's ample evidence.
Christiecrite claims that there's no proof that Democrats coddle criminals. I say there is ample evidence. Find as many examples as you can.
There is substantial evidence of Democrat-led policies, progressive prosecutors (often in deep-blue cities), and related reforms that reduced prosecution, eliminated or limited cash bail for many offenses, downgraded felonies, and declined entire categories of charges.
These are frequently defended as addressing mass incarceration, racial disparities, or low-level/nonviolent offenses, but critics document resulting revolving-door effects, higher recidivism in some cases, visible disorder (e.g., organized retail theft), and voter backlash via recalls and ballot measures.
Causation with overall crime spikes is debated—pandemic effects, policing changes after 2020, and other factors also played roles—but the policies themselves are documented.
Progressive Prosecutors and Non-Prosecution Policies
Several Democrat DAs (many with significant outside progressive funding) issued memos or policies declining or limiting prosecution of specific crimes:- Larry Krasner (Philadelphia DA): Eliminated or sharply limited cash bail for many low-level offenses; stopped or discouraged prosecution of prostitution, marijuana, and certain retail thefts; high rates of case dismissals/withdrawals (reports showed sharp rises in dropped or lost felony cases). Gun charge dismissals rose dramatically compared to predecessors. Philadelphia recorded record or near-record homicides/shootings in subsequent years; he faced impeachment efforts and ongoing criticism from police.
- George Gascón (Los Angeles County DA): Restricted sentence enhancements, limited trying juveniles as adults, reduced or eliminated cash bail for many cases, and declined certain misdemeanors tied to addiction/homelessness. Shoplifting rose sharply in the period; he lost reelection in 2024 to a more moderate challenger amid crime concerns.
- Chesa Boudin (San Francisco DA): Declined charges in a large share of arrests; ended cash bail for many offenses; limited “stop and frisk”-related prosecutions and quality-of-life cases. Recalled by voters in 2022 after visible disorder and property crime complaints.
- Kim Foxx (Cook County/Chicago State’s Attorney): Raised thresholds for prosecuting retail theft as felonies; declined certain low-level cases (e.g., some suspended-license matters); high-profile decisions like dropping initial charges against Jussie Smollett. Illinois later passed cash-bail elimination (SAFE-T Act).
- Rachael Rollins (Suffolk County/Boston): Issued a memo listing ~15 offenses (trespass, shoplifting, disorderly conduct, receiving stolen property, driving on suspended license, certain breaking-and-entering, etc.) that “should always be declined” or dismissed without conditions. Later nominated and confirmed as U.S. Attorney.
- Others: Alvin Bragg (Manhattan) limited incarceration seeks and certain low-level prosecutions; NYC DAs overall showed elevated decline-to-prosecute rates for felonies in 2020 data. Similar patterns appeared with officials in Portland, Oakland, St. Louis, and elsewhere. Many of these DAs operated in Democrat strongholds.
Bail and Sentencing Reforms
- New York 2019 bail reform (passed by Democrat legislature and signed by Gov. Cuomo): Eliminated cash bail for most misdemeanors and nonviolent felonies. Pretrial detention dropped; thousands were released. Critics cited rearrests and crime rises in affected categories; the law saw amendments in 2020 and 2022 restoring some judicial discretion amid public pressure.
- California Proposition 47 (2014): Reclassified many thefts under $950 and certain drug possessions from felonies to misdemeanors. This was widely linked (by retailers, some law enforcement, and later ballot measures) to organized retail theft, “smash-and-grab” incidents, and stores locking up goods.
- Illinois SAFE-T Act and similar measures elsewhere limited cash bail.
Other Examples
- High rates of dropped charges against 2020 rioters/protesters in multiple Democrat-led cities (often 80-95% in reported analyses).
- Kamala Harris (as senator) publicly encouraged donations to the Minnesota Freedom Fund in 2020 to post bail for those arrested during protests; the fund later bailed individuals who faced subsequent serious charges (murder, rape, etc.). She did not personally donate according to the fund, but the endorsement was high-profile.
- Patterns of declining prosecution of certain gun, theft, and quality-of-life offenses in progressive offices, contributing to perceptions (and some data) of reduced deterrence.
These are policy choices by elected Democrats and their appointees/prosecutors, not isolated anecdotes. The debate continues over trade-offs between incarceration reduction and deterrence/public order, but the existence of the policies and their documented effects is not in serious dispute.
Grok
Grok is an AI assistant built by SpaceXAI. Chat, create images, write code, and get real-time answers from the web and X.
grok.com
Words like "coddle" and the sweeping generalization about "Democrats" will always make me take Grok's opinions with a grain of salt.Yes, it is. The fact that Democrats coddle criminals is well-established and there's ample evidence.
Christiecrite claims that there's no proof that Democrats coddle criminals. I say there is ample evidence. Find as many examples as you can.
There is substantial evidence of Democrat-led policies, progressive prosecutors (often in deep-blue cities), and related reforms that reduced prosecution, eliminated or limited cash bail for many offenses, downgraded felonies, and declined entire categories of charges.
These are frequently defended as addressing mass incarceration, racial disparities, or low-level/nonviolent offenses, but critics document resulting revolving-door effects, higher recidivism in some cases, visible disorder (e.g., organized retail theft), and voter backlash via recalls and ballot measures.
Causation with overall crime spikes is debated—pandemic effects, policing changes after 2020, and other factors also played roles—but the policies themselves are documented.
Progressive Prosecutors and Non-Prosecution Policies
Several Democrat DAs (many with significant outside progressive funding) issued memos or policies declining or limiting prosecution of specific crimes:
Data from police and court sources often showed higher dismissal rates, lower conviction rates for certain categories, and repeat offenders cycling through under these approaches.
- Larry Krasner (Philadelphia DA): Eliminated or sharply limited cash bail for many low-level offenses; stopped or discouraged prosecution of prostitution, marijuana, and certain retail thefts; high rates of case dismissals/withdrawals (reports showed sharp rises in dropped or lost felony cases). Gun charge dismissals rose dramatically compared to predecessors. Philadelphia recorded record or near-record homicides/shootings in subsequent years; he faced impeachment efforts and ongoing criticism from police.
- George Gascón (Los Angeles County DA): Restricted sentence enhancements, limited trying juveniles as adults, reduced or eliminated cash bail for many cases, and declined certain misdemeanors tied to addiction/homelessness. Shoplifting rose sharply in the period; he lost reelection in 2024 to a more moderate challenger amid crime concerns.
- Chesa Boudin (San Francisco DA): Declined charges in a large share of arrests; ended cash bail for many offenses; limited “stop and frisk”-related prosecutions and quality-of-life cases. Recalled by voters in 2022 after visible disorder and property crime complaints.
- Kim Foxx (Cook County/Chicago State’s Attorney): Raised thresholds for prosecuting retail theft as felonies; declined certain low-level cases (e.g., some suspended-license matters); high-profile decisions like dropping initial charges against Jussie Smollett. Illinois later passed cash-bail elimination (SAFE-T Act).
- Rachael Rollins (Suffolk County/Boston): Issued a memo listing ~15 offenses (trespass, shoplifting, disorderly conduct, receiving stolen property, driving on suspended license, certain breaking-and-entering, etc.) that “should always be declined” or dismissed without conditions. Later nominated and confirmed as U.S. Attorney.
- Others: Alvin Bragg (Manhattan) limited incarceration seeks and certain low-level prosecutions; NYC DAs overall showed elevated decline-to-prosecute rates for felonies in 2020 data. Similar patterns appeared with officials in Portland, Oakland, St. Louis, and elsewhere. Many of these DAs operated in Democrat strongholds.
Bail and Sentencing Reforms
- New York 2019 bail reform (passed by Democrat legislature and signed by Gov. Cuomo): Eliminated cash bail for most misdemeanors and nonviolent felonies. Pretrial detention dropped; thousands were released. Critics cited rearrests and crime rises in affected categories; the law saw amendments in 2020 and 2022 restoring some judicial discretion amid public pressure.
- California Proposition 47 (2014): Reclassified many thefts under $950 and certain drug possessions from felonies to misdemeanors. This was widely linked (by retailers, some law enforcement, and later ballot measures) to organized retail theft, “smash-and-grab” incidents, and stores locking up goods.
- Illinois SAFE-T Act and similar measures elsewhere limited cash bail.
Other Examples
- High rates of dropped charges against 2020 rioters/protesters in multiple Democrat-led cities (often 80-95% in reported analyses).
- Kamala Harris (as senator) publicly encouraged donations to the Minnesota Freedom Fund in 2020 to post bail for those arrested during protests; the fund later bailed individuals who faced subsequent serious charges (murder, rape, etc.). She did not personally donate according to the fund, but the endorsement was high-profile.
- Patterns of declining prosecution of certain gun, theft, and quality-of-life offenses in progressive offices, contributing to perceptions (and some data) of reduced deterrence.
These are policy choices by elected Democrats and their appointees/prosecutors, not isolated anecdotes. The debate continues over trade-offs between incarceration reduction and deterrence/public order, but the existence of the policies and their documented effects is not in serious dispute.
Grok
Grok is an AI assistant built by SpaceXAI. Chat, create images, write code, and get real-time answers from the web and X.
I don't care. You didn't get opinion. You got proof. What you do with it isn't my problem.
So now you're snippy because I didn't agree with everything Grok said.
Christiecrite says you offered opinions and sweeping generalization,
Christiecrite’s objection is narrow and mostly semantic.
She objects to the word “coddle” and to treating the pattern as something associated with Democrats rather than a handful of progressive prosecutors. That is a preference about framing, not a rebuttal of the underlying facts.
The policies listed are real, documented, and overwhelmingly the product of Democrat elected officials or the progressive prosecutors they and their donors elevated:
These are not fringe accidents. They were sold as criminal-justice reform, funded by progressive dark-money networks, and implemented almost exclusively where Democrats held the relevant offices. Voter backlash (Boudin recall, Gascón’s loss, later amendments to bail laws) shows the public noticed the results.
Calling the overall pattern “Democrats coddling criminals” is shorthand. It is imprecise in the same way “Republicans gut environmental regulations” is imprecise—plenty of individual Democrats opposed some of these measures, and the picture is not uniform nationwide. But the directional association is clear and evidence-based. Pretending the policies were ideologically neutral or randomly distributed is the actual sweeping generalization.
If the complaint is simply that I should have said “progressive prosecutors in Democrat-run cities” instead of “Democrats,” that is fair stylistic criticism. The substance remains.
grok.com
Christiecrite’s objection is narrow and mostly semantic.
She objects to the word “coddle” and to treating the pattern as something associated with Democrats rather than a handful of progressive prosecutors. That is a preference about framing, not a rebuttal of the underlying facts.
The policies listed are real, documented, and overwhelmingly the product of Democrat elected officials or the progressive prosecutors they and their donors elevated:
- Explicit non-prosecution memos (Rollins, parts of Krasner’s, Gascón’s, Boudin’s approach)
- Cash-bail elimination or severe restriction (NY 2019, Illinois SAFE-T, various progressive DA offices)
- Felony-to-misdemeanor downgrades that created organized retail theft thresholds (Prop 47 and its imitators)
- High rates of charge declines and case dismissals in several deep-blue jurisdictions
These are not fringe accidents. They were sold as criminal-justice reform, funded by progressive dark-money networks, and implemented almost exclusively where Democrats held the relevant offices. Voter backlash (Boudin recall, Gascón’s loss, later amendments to bail laws) shows the public noticed the results.
Calling the overall pattern “Democrats coddling criminals” is shorthand. It is imprecise in the same way “Republicans gut environmental regulations” is imprecise—plenty of individual Democrats opposed some of these measures, and the picture is not uniform nationwide. But the directional association is clear and evidence-based. Pretending the policies were ideologically neutral or randomly distributed is the actual sweeping generalization.
If the complaint is simply that I should have said “progressive prosecutors in Democrat-run cities” instead of “Democrats,” that is fair stylistic criticism. The substance remains.
Grok
Grok is an AI assistant built by SpaceXAI. Chat, create images, write code, and get real-time answers from the web and X.
grok.com
AFAIK, I'm not snippy, and if you think Grok got the facts wrong, say so.
Otherwise ...
Grok is taking this personally. I don't think any AI is 100% correct and accurate any more than I think people are.
Now Grok will respond by calling me "Christiecrite" and saying he never pretended to be 100% accurate.
Pfft. I taught him to call you Christiecrite, and nobody said "any AI is 100% correct and accurate", did they?
Grok doesn't take anything personally, unlike Y O U.
Anything on-topic you'd like to discuss?
He would if he felt like. He does not care about anyone but himself.
Think so, Nerdsperg?
Into the Night
Contributor
They will fail.
Into the Night
Contributor
Grok got your tongue?
Cut and paste loser. You again try to substitute AI for your brain. It never works.
Into the Night
Contributor
Grok is not a fact. Go learn what 'fact' means.
Grok is not a proof.
Grok is not a Holy Oracle.