I, apparently, falsely assumed everyone knows Jane Fonda was not referred by congress to DOJ for treason. My thought was that this obvious hypothetical situation would illustrate some of the political theater with regard to the Jan 6 committee.
Are hypotheticals against the rules? Could my thread be reopened if the title was labeled a hypothetical. Or “If” was added?
Link?
Jane Fonda referred by Congress to DOJ for treason - In My Humble Opinion (IMHO) - Straight Dope Message Board
I don’t think you understand the reason for the closing.
I almost reported that thread for a deliberately misleading title, but then didn’t bother. You can make your point without that kind of nonsense.
Edit: Oh, wow. I just saw the OP last night when it was first posted, without any responses. I just read your responses, and . . . wow. That was what you thought belonged in Great Debates?
Well, only if you actually have a point to make.
You might have used the word hypothetical in the title. You might have asked what a referral to the DOJ means without the silly hypothetical.
If you want to discuss a topic, put it out plainly. Don’t be coy and beat around the bush and ask the same question over and over again. If you wanted to simply ask what obligation the DOJ has to prosecute when a criminal referral is made to them, then just ask, rather than having a silly hypothetical question that you basically answered yourself.
If you want to gripe about Congress or specific people in Congress, do that instead.
Your thread was senseless, just be clearer.
Yeah, it’s pretty clear that what he really wanted was to say, “If the DoJ hasn’t already indicted him, it’s because they know he isn’t guilty, so all you Dems should lay off him!”, but he lacked the integrity to just come out and say that.
No number of “ifs” added to the title will make things better when the intent is to argue in a dishonest fashion.
No.
Bait and switch OPs will not be tolerated. We don’t play gotcha anymore.
Also GD is for Debates, not musings or asking for opinions.
Who actually thought Jane Fonda was referred to the DOJ for treason. How is that Bait and Switch? Will my thread be re opened in IMHO?
It’s bait and switch because you didn’t really want to talk about Jane Fonda specifically, did you? You didn’t ask an honest question.
You didn’t even make clear what you wanted to talk about.
What was the point of your thread? Were you trying to confuse people on purpose? If so, that isn’t generally appreciated here, even if we do often engage in snark and sarcasm and jokes in many places, those kinds of pranks aren’t liked.
No, it will not. There is no reason to reopen it.
But the bait and switch is starting a thread talking about Jane Fonda so you can make a point about something actually happening.
Also, what you actually want to talk about is already being discussed in several other threads.
The political theater of politicians telling the professionals lawyers of the DOJ is silly. Just as the “referral” of the Jan 6 committee telling the DOJ (Biden DOJ). A Conservative Special committee referring Jane Fonda for treason is also silly.
You know what Janus? That sounds like a potentially interesting thread topic. You should have written that. You would probably have ended up with a lively thread rather than a locked one.
Threads shouldn’t be riddles where we have to piece together your meaning like solving a coded message in National Treasure. Just say what you want to talk about.
Do not discuss politics or issues not about the board in ATMB.
You will not be told a second time.
Nobody. I thought maybe some deranged doofus had come onto the board with a conspiracy theory, or was calling for her referral, or something like that. Then it turned out to be just another foolish and ill-formed complaint about the January 6 committee. Bait and switch.
I am not discussing politics. My thread was closed for “bait and switch”. I am arguing that it was not “bait and witch”. That my thread was quite obviously an allusion to the Jan 6 Committee. Nobody was “tricked” into believing that Jane Fonda was referred by Congress to DOJ for treason.
It was bait and switch. The second line of your hidden post is political. That is a fact.
I suggest strongly you drop this now and move on to some other subject if you wish to continue posting.
The title of the thread is quite obviously political. A reasonable person would not have to click on it to get to the second line. That is to say it was not “bait and switch”
It was bait and switch because you were acting like you had an honest question about the reasoning behind the referrals to the DoJ, when in fact, you already have an entrenched opinion on the subject, and are merely looking to harangue people for disagreeing with you.
If you want an actual discussion, start an actual topic. “Debate; Resolved: DoJ is better suited to determine if charges should be filed against Trump, so any referrals from Congress are just partisan politics”. That will get you a decent debate, but you’ll be expected to make actual arguments, not merely repeat the same thing over and over.
If you just want to rant, then there’s the Pit.