But if we’re talking about conservatives pulling a single data point out of context and running it up a “non-con bad” flag pole, then this example has accidental value.
Sounds like they gave her probation because she was making an insanity plea, because she had psychosis. That, and she was seemingly remorseful. Therefore they gave her probation.
Are you saying insanity pleas are invalid?
Either way, this has nothing to do with the DC AG or what he said. You clearly have no argument for that conversation so you just moved to the next.
What does that have to do with this?
It’s a statistically irrelevant example.
But if we’re talking about conservatives pulling a single data point out of context and running it up a “non-con bad” flag pole, then this example has accidental value.
Agreed
I was talking about the Democrats stance on crime
Sounds like they gave her probation because she was making an insanity plea, because she had psychosis. That, and she was seemingly remorseful. Therefore they gave her probation.
Are you saying insanity pleas are invalid?
Either way, this has nothing to do with the DC AG or what he said. You clearly have no argument for that conversation so you just moved to the next.
Then she belongs in a mental hospital
It was drug induced psychosis, not a chronic condition. You’d know that had read your own article.
It’s what I was referencing. They literally gave probation to a murderer.
Right, I got that part. But what does it have to do with the DC AG, who wasn’t on that case?