Contrarian
England
'We have shown that the administration of justice can be fair, ...and neutral.' There is no such human state as neutral. Our car goes into neutral but it is not neutral it is actively idling. A neutral zone would leave the Law sitting on the fence
The article quotes: ’They changed the rules for F.B.I. investigations'; well, hasn’t that stood the test of time?
'“What’s not O.K. is for the White House, and especially the President, to have any involvement with criminal prosecutions.' Yet conversely it is perfectly acceptable for legal minds, factually Trump haters, at vast taxpayers expense to pathologically pursue Trump associate with the knock on the door in the dead of night tactic; now what does that remind you of? Kafka or Hitler?
‘As to a baseless new inquiry into Clinton’ so you have already decided that it is baseless, without due process, (I think that is the legal term. no lawyer me, thank God).
A neutral state it is an asinine claim, there is no hill outside language where we can stand on and silently observe it (language} in our neutral state, for even though we are silent (supposedly neutral) we are still thinking in language, indeed the argument goes that language is fascistic.
If one wanted to get all Wittgensteinian ‘It ain’t what you say, it’s the way that you say it’ and the context in which you say it. I should be lecturing at Journalism school, (Joke) Well, at least I am not neutral. Nor is Mr Leonhardt who judging by this piece is wholly partisan.
The article quotes: ’They changed the rules for F.B.I. investigations'; well, hasn’t that stood the test of time?
'“What’s not O.K. is for the White House, and especially the President, to have any involvement with criminal prosecutions.' Yet conversely it is perfectly acceptable for legal minds, factually Trump haters, at vast taxpayers expense to pathologically pursue Trump associate with the knock on the door in the dead of night tactic; now what does that remind you of? Kafka or Hitler?
‘As to a baseless new inquiry into Clinton’ so you have already decided that it is baseless, without due process, (I think that is the legal term. no lawyer me, thank God).
A neutral state it is an asinine claim, there is no hill outside language where we can stand on and silently observe it (language} in our neutral state, for even though we are silent (supposedly neutral) we are still thinking in language, indeed the argument goes that language is fascistic.
If one wanted to get all Wittgensteinian ‘It ain’t what you say, it’s the way that you say it’ and the context in which you say it. I should be lecturing at Journalism school, (Joke) Well, at least I am not neutral. Nor is Mr Leonhardt who judging by this piece is wholly partisan.
No comments:
Post a Comment