Debates 2020

Debate Democrats Sure Do Love Threatening Their Foes

Republicans aren't the only ones who want to "lock 'em up"


During the Democratic debates this week there was a lot of tough talk.

On Tuesday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.), defended his plan to eliminate gas-powered car sales in the next two decades.

We've got to ask ourselves a simple question, "What do you do with an industry that knowingly, for billions of dollars in short-term profits, is destroying this planet?" I say that is criminal activity that cannot be allowed to continue.

Sen. Kamala Harris (D–Calif.), who is running on her record as a prosecutor, answered a question about the Mueller report and possible impeachment or prosecution of the sitting president this way:

There are 10 clear incidents of obstruction of justice by this president, and he needs to be held accountable. I have seen people go to prison for far less.

She might well have said, "I've put people in prison for far less."

Still, if you were feeling generous you could chalk this up to little rhetorical flourish, I suppose.

But leave it to former vice president and America's wacky Uncle Joe Biden to say the loud part quiet and the quiet part loud.

We should put some of these insurance executives who totally oppose my plan in jail for the 9 billion opioids they sell out there.

Important note: Democrats certainly do not have a monopoly on threating those who oppose them with severe legal sanctions.

In all these cases, the politicians are accusing their targets of having committed crimes. But threatening to prosecute your political opponents as an applause line at a campaign event isn't good practice in a liberal democracy, and both parties would do well to tone it down.

NEXT: Cory Booker's Slam Against Joe Biden's Criminal Justice Record Shoveled Some More Dirt on the Old Lock 'Em Up Consensus

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Except Hillary ACTUALLY committed crimes. And the FBI worked hard to protect her.

    Your attempt at moral relativism failed. As usual.

    1. This shit is why libertarians aren't taken seriously. The secretary of state put American lives at risk, was covered for my the people who were supposed to hold her accountable, and yet we're in the wrong for wanting her in jail.

      Meanwhile, Trump says mean things, so BOTH SIDES

      1. be sure

      2. For all the man, many faults of the republicans, they are still not 1% as bad as the democrats are now that the nutters are in charge.

    2. It is maddening how hard they work at being idiotic with these false equivalences

    3. Today's Progressitarian Moment:
      Let's "Both sides!" locking up Deep State criminals and car salesmen.


    4. No she didn't. You're stupid. You need to read something that isn't in the rightwing shitfilled fever swamp.

      If she committed crimes, why hasn't the Trump justice department charged her with any?

      She's an evil all-powerful sorceress or something?

      1. It's amazing how someone can give you the statute which only requires gross negligence... and you will ignore it for fucks sake tony, stop being a moronic shill. Try reading the laws regarding it you treat Democrats like royalty. You are a serf.

        1. And that statute has never once been prosecuted on gross negligence.

          1. People were imprisoned for considerably less than what Hillary did.

      2. By the way... does this mean you no longer believe trump is guilty?

      3. Well, since anyone who tries to testify about her activities ends up committing suicide...

        1. [sarcasm]... or get shot in the back in a failed robbery attempt.[/sarcasm]

      4. "No she didn’t."

        Even notorious imbecile Comey said she did it. He just ignored the law in regards to punishment of the crime.

        "If she committed crimes, why hasn’t the Trump justice department charged her with any?"

        They're having to deal with a coup attempt involving the FBI.

        1. Are people innocent until proven guilty in a court of law or not?

          Do you have any idea how fucking ridiculous you people sound with your pathetic Hillary obsession given how many much, much more serious crimes Trump committed, as explained in black and white?

          1. Except Trump didn't commit ANY crimes. He didn't even obstruct justice.

            Meanwhile, Hillary deleted thousands of emails under subpoena...

        2. Coup attempt in the FBI. The FBI, filled with socialists and partisan Democrats.

          You people need some serious decompression time in a yurt or something. Turn off the Glenn Beck and walk away.

          1. Says an acolyte of the "RUSSIA HACKED TEH ELECTIONZ!!" nonsense.

  2. Insurance executives? What about the actual pill mills?

    1. I'm guessing that was just a typical Biden gaff, but who knows what goes on in there.

  3. I agree with both sides. Every single politician in America should be thrown in jail for their crimes against The Constitution.

  4. "...both parties would do well to tone it down."

    Hey, it's a spectator sport. And the bloodier the better.

    1. As Shikha put it about a month ago, the right wing reaction is much stronger and harsher than the initial childish leftist poking. If Reason wants to see the tone turn down perhaps it should have written articles about how Hillary should be in jail for crimes against her country

      1. Well, Reason doesn't write articles. But, if you actually checked the archives (or actually remotely followed the website) you would know that there were a series of pieces by Judge Nap. articulating Clinton's criminal conduct. Sullum also wrote a couple as well if I remember correctly.

        1. Fair and fair.

      2. I remember that. Floored me.

        Still have no clue how she's part of the foundation.

        She's no libertarian or classical liberal.

    2. I'm holding out until Spartacus is matched up against Gladiator.
      Now THAT would be a debate I'd love to see!

  5. If you don't think the SoS having top secret government information that could put americans lives at risk stored on her private server is a jailable offense then I don't think you are of the right mind to be writing about government in the first place. Perhaps you can start your own blog about anarchy

      1. +1

    1. So you're calling the Trump justice department incompetent?

      1. In this thread Tony thinks all members of the DoJ are trump appointees. God you're dumb tony.

        1. Most of the DoJ, FBI, other executive branch bureaucracy pass from one administration to the next. There are a few appointed figure heads who always tender their resignations on an administration change so the new admin can appoint chosen figure heads. The body of the state is deeply entrenched despite head changes. And the Constitution and Federal Code of Laws remain on the books. No president is as powerful as supporters wish or enemies fear.

        2. There's always a fucking conspiracy theory to prove yourself right.

          Decades of attempts to nab Hillary for various and sundry crimes. Not a single success. Why aren't you bitching at the incompetence of Republicans?

          Always the victim. Fucking snowflake assholes.

      2. There is no "Trump Justice Department". There is the Deep State.

        Trump should have fired upper management at the FBI and DOJ on day one, and replaced them with law enforcement from around the country.

        Perhaps he didn't understand the need. Perhaps he did and felt he couldn't get away with it, that the Republicucks would bolt and help with impeachment.

    2. Do you have any details about the "government information that could put american lives at risk"? Because it sounds like you heard it was classified and therefore must be something like troop locations, when it's well known that the US Govt routinely overclassifies stuff that wouldn't give the slightest advantage in war or even trade negotiations.

      1. For starters, the Chinese murdered all our intelligence assets starting 2010. A year after Hillary took office as SoS.

        We really do live in clown world. Or Big Lie world. People self righteously proclaim the patently absurd everyday. Like they're at a Saddam Hussein rally, and the Enemy of The People Chipper is going full blast outside the rally.

        The SoS deals in *diplomacy*. That's all about secrets. The kind that gets people killed.

        Despite the MSM playing dumb for months - "there's no proof Hillary had classified information on the serve!" - anyone who doubted that for a millisecond was moron or a twisted DoubleThink creature.

  6. Mangu Ward with false equivalence for the win.

  7. This isn't fair to Kamala Harris. She's speaking as an expert. And now that Robert Mueller has definitively proved what MSNBC viewers have known for years, it's totally appropriate to analyze how Drumpf's obvious crimes should be handled by our legal system.


    1. Rachel Mad Cow Woman's former fans would like a word with you...

  8. Central planning only works if the plan is followed.

    1. And then it only works for the people doing the planning.

    2. Saboteurs and wreckers must be dealt with.

      1. Hey, John...we call them kulaks around here.

        1. The Kulaks will always be with us to blame and to crush.

  9. Bernie Sanders claims the automobile industry is destroying the Detroit, where there are still a hell of a lot of people making their living in the auto industry. Do those union voters feel the Bern?

    1. Union voters do whatever their shop steward damn well tells them to do [vote].

  10. "Debate Democrats Sure Do Love Threatening Their Foes."

    That's because democrats are so kind, understanding, tolerant, accepting and so inclusive...except when it comes to other people's opinions who differs from theirs.

  11. a perpetuity rule should exist on any Bernie Sanders proposal ... none can outlive him or something

  12. The difference appears to be that Republicans want people locked up for committing crimes, while the Democrats want them locked up for legal acts that Democrats disapprove of.

    That actually does track the difference between the authoritarian right and the totalitarian left pretty well.

  13. threatening to prosecute your political opponents as an applause line at a campaign event isn't good practice in a liberal democracy, and both parties would do well to tone it down

    This assumes that Americans give a shit about keeping a liberal democracy. The parties aren't doing anything we don't reward.

    1. "Americans"

      Import Not Americans, Become Not America.

  14. Don’t you just love it when they start to eat their own kin?

    It’s always the perfect opening for a rational, third party. But somehow, Libertarians always blow it.

    1. Watching those who destroyed America be consumed by the crocodile they fed will be one of the few consolations of the future.

  15. They're not the same. Not in the last three or four years anyway. Any attempts to link them as such is weak and specious.

    The DNC (like the Liberal party here) have pulled too far left and are illiberal identity ideologues.

    And they totes smell of sulphur.

    1. And what are Republicans, sensible centrists?

      1. Compared to this crop of loons?

        Surely you jest with the question.

  16. Donald Trump did commit crimes but we have to pussygrab our way around the issue because apparently a president is above the law, per Mueller.

    Part of that rule is that he still gets to be investigated for possible future indictment.

    1. You contradicted your first reply in this thread when you called them stupid shit for brains.

    2. He did commit crimes?

      Citation. Now. Or shut up and go fondle Don Lemon's poster.

      1. Did you read the report, a summary of the report, or watch the televised hearing about the report? I'll wait.

        1. You mean the report that didn't charge him with anything?

    3. “Donald Trump did commit crimes”

      Funny, a two year investigation by Top Men says otherwise.

      Silly bitch. Thinking isn’t your strong point is it? Stick with being a sloppy bottom

      1. No they didn't.

        You trust the Deep State when you think they exonerate Trump, but think it's a giant conspiracy if they didn't. That sounds like logic to me!

        (They didn't exonerate him of shit. Mueller said so in plain English on the TV.)

        1. Was that tv show a legal document?

  17. Someone should ask Biden which specific executive he believes should go to jail, and for which specific crime, and how he knows they are guilty of it.

  18. Medicare is 65% short of the money needed to pay promised benefits per the Government's Trustee reports. That is insurance fraud, we should lock up those who force that upon us and prosecute them.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.