Jenna drifts from religious authoritarian to religious statist, and "blames" Victor Davis Hanson for convincing her.
https://twitter.com/JennaEllisEsq/status/1668349321245253656
"I just had a great conversation with
@VDHanson
, who brilliantly explained why the West is falling and why Republicans at large aren’t really interested in winning."
"This convinced me (after being a longtime outspoken skeptic) that process and precedent is not to be preferred above or instead of specific outcomes. This isn’t exclusionary, but when in conflict, we cannot default sacrifice specific outcomes for general precedent, which has been the modus operandi for conservatism as a movement in law and policy."
>I want this end result, so I'll abuse the system to get my desired outcome, regardless of the moral implications.
>The conservative right has been "playing by the rules" (not really) but now we need to make them up as we go so we can get what we want.
Here's an idea, Jenna. How about just holding the left accountable for their brash interpretation and selective application of the law? That will pretty much fix the problem. Conservative judges apply the law more frequently and fully (especially in regards to sentencing) than any other group. That's a fact, and why the left works so diligently to appoint leftist/marxist/communist judges.
"I’ve been a rather dogmatic “rule of law” philosopher, primarily because of my legal background and practice. Within obviously moral and legal guardrails, the conservative Right has to also be focused on outcomes, or we will cease to win."
>The right needs to reshape their approach to the application of law so as to build a hypothetical better end scenario regardless of the tried and tested method of constraints set by precedent that aren't getting us what we want.
So now we're going to take an ideological approach to legal processes and procedures regardless of their constitutional adherence?
"This paradigm shift into recognizing why Western Civilization is imperiled and why the system as the Right has generally accessed it is insufficient to fully address weaponized process and therefore weaponized outcomes is what I see undergirding why Florida has been so successful for conservatism."
>We need leaders that aren't afraid to take an approach of overreach in order to shape the desired outcomes in culture that our specific camp of constituents, conservatives, want to impose on everyone.
No, Jenna, this is exactly the problem. If you crank up the heat more you will end up pushing away even your own supporters that may share a vision of your desired outcome, but are also mindful of an ever-growing and pervasive government. This is very much anti-conservative.
"Listen to the discussion when we release it Wednesday on my podcast. It’s possibly the best episode I’ve ever done (I’m biased because it presented something that actually changed my mind 😂), and I’m grateful to VDH for taking the time to answer my questions."
I look forward to how you suggest that instead of weaponizing our laws to get the desired outcomes you seek, you and VDH discuss useful policy and procedural implementations that can prevent outside influences from having a direct impact on our DA, Judges, and top law enforcement agencies. You don't fix the issue by breaking the rules. You fix the issue in the real application of already existing laws, and remove external influences in our elections that put feckless ideologues in the positions of having the greatest influence in our culture. This has been an issue that regular, everyday people have complained about since OJ got off. Fix that problem, first, and you'll have your faith in "process is precedent" back. The world has enough reactionaries.