Anonymous ID: 08693c Nov. 14, 2018, 1:05 p.m. No.3903285   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>3500 >>3594

>>3903254

>>3903254

Felony disenfranchisement is the exclusion from voting of people otherwise eligible to vote (known as disfranchisement) due to conviction of a criminal offense, usually restricted to the more serious class of crimes: felonies (crimes of incarceration for a duration of more than a year). Jurisdictions vary as to whether they make such disfranchisement permanent, or restore suffrage after a person has served a sentence, or completed parole or probation.[1] Felony disenfranchisement is one among the collateral consequences of criminal conviction and the loss of rights due to conviction for criminal offense.[2]

 

Proponents have argued that persons who commit felonies have 'broken' the social contract, and have thereby given up their right to participate in a civil society. Some argue that felons have shown poor judgment, and that they should therefore not have a voice in the political decision-making process.[3] Opponents have argued that such disfranchisement restricts and conflicts with principles of universal suffrage.[4] It can affect civic and communal participation in general.[1] Opponents argue that felony disenfranchisement can create dangerous political incentives to skew criminal law in favor of disproportionately targeting groups who are political opponents of those who hold power.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony_disenfranchisement

Anonymous ID: 08693c Nov. 14, 2018, 1:27 p.m. No.3903561   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>3903526

Carlin was equally hard on politics as he was on religion. However, most of his bile was reserved for conservatives and Republicans. Itโ€™s hard to say if he was a Republican or a Democrat, however, as he refused to vote, considering it pointless because voting, as he said, is the โ€œillusion of choice.โ€

Anonymous ID: 08693c Nov. 14, 2018, 1:49 p.m. No.3903851   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>3985

>>3903782

Baker Notable

>these docs in and of themselves are rlevant and significant for one reason and one reason ONLY

 

>that is - they are preliminary declas crumbs that show many warrants FROM THE DS during the entire active SPYGATE period

 

>LOOK at the dates - that is 2008-2017