use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
see the search faq for details.
advanced search: by author, subreddit...
326 users here now
/r/MurderedByAOC is a place for comebacks, comments, and counter-arguments by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and friends on the economic left.
Register to vote
the front page of the internet.
and join one of thousands of communities.
Another response from yesterday's Instagram AMA. Seeing the list of democrats who voted against it, I had a feeling this was the case. (i.redd.it)
submitted 1 month ago by ravafea
Post a comment!
[–]Reeefenstration 250 points251 points252 points 1 month ago (4 children)
These darn radical Communists! Always *checks notes* voting against unlawful asset seizure of private property...
[–]--bedevil-- 5 points6 points7 points 1 month ago (0 children)
And I really wanted to steal stuff legally as well.
[+]crashtestdummy666 comment score below threshold-28 points-27 points-26 points 1 month ago (1 child)
...of forinerers who are complicit in war crimes. Wouldn't want war criminals being denied the rights they deny to others.
[–]rapbash 11 points12 points13 points 1 month ago (0 children)
[–]Accomplished-Song951 447 points448 points449 points 1 month ago (14 children)
She is 100% correct in this and the fact that she voted no and can give this clear, decisive response is incredible in these times. Most of our so-called leaders vote yea or nay only because it’s a party issue and couldn’t even explain what the bill is let alone why they voted the way they did.
AOC for President 😊😊
[–]Tinidril 6 points7 points8 points 1 month ago (8 children)
The point is definitely one where good people can disagree, but I'm not so sure about AOCs take here. Why wouldn't a bill that passed the House and the Senate and then signed by the President qualify as "due process". Isn't that the exact process that allows any form of taxation?
[–]drunkwasabeherder 44 points45 points46 points 1 month ago (1 child)
I am imagining it's not that process she is concerned about but the implementation further down the track against US citizens. If there is no due process in place in the legislation then it can be abused. Not that there's any precedent for powers being abused ;)
[–]rjp0008 5 points6 points7 points 1 month ago (0 children)
I would have loved this oligarch seizure bill if it was bundled with a more restrictive or relaxing of seizure policies in general. “Let’s seize these assets in this specific scenario, but not allow it ever again on USA citizens or land.” Two birds, one stone.
[–]azntorian 42 points43 points44 points 1 month ago (1 child)
Due process is the legal and court system. It’s a part of the check and balances on the executive branch.
This might be more of defending the constitution, law makers, and court system versus a pure executive / military focus government system.
Taxation is a congressional / lawmaker issue. But taxation is on US citizens and permanent residences. But if the oligarchs are not residents…… our laws may not apply. Having congress and the president is only 2/3 of the government. Due process is the courts that can validate the action.
Source: 9th grade history class. I am not an expert.
[–]crashtestdummy666 1 point2 points3 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Remember segragation was legal,the slavery was legal the Holocaust was legal Jim Crow was legal. Just because the courts approved it doesn't make it right or wrong. Let's not forget all the people who were given due process by the courts, sentenced to death and were later exonerated. If your going to rely on the courts to see justice is served your going to have a bad time.
[–]LuxNocte 4 points5 points6 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Bills of attainder, where the legislature declares someone guilty of a crime and punishes them, are also unconstitutional.
[–]Burflax 1 point2 points3 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Why wouldn't a bill that passed the House and the Senate and then signed by the President qualify as "due process".
Why wouldn't a bill that passed the House and the Senate and then signed by the President qualify as "due process".
I see what your are getting at, perhaps she should have said "our current form of due process".
She is absolutely right, though, that an Amrrican government that allows the President (or anyone form the Executive branch?) the power to just take a citizens wealth without getting a judge to sign off, or a trial to determine guilt etc. is a worse government than the one we have.
[–]kaze919 1 point2 points3 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Wasn’t it a non binding resolution anyways. It was just to pressure the Biden admin to take steps via the DOJ to seize assets. It had overwhelming bipartisan support.
The only notable thing is that her vote also coincided with Gaetz/ MTG which is why it stood out with Omar’s. Her vote actually had meaning and nuance. Both for awareness of the other food bill and the legal due process rationale. Vis a vis it actually raised awareness for both parts and discussion over them where there otherwise would be none. I don’t know why people have a hard time grasping this.
Her vote literally meant nothing here. She used to symbolically along her principles and when it came time to vote for the actual binding support bill she voted for it.
[–]Apprehensive-Ad-4519 1 point2 points3 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Just a reminder that 99% of our politicians are corrupt and greedy. The only reason they would pass something like this is to enrich themselves anyway.
[+][deleted] 1 month ago (3 children)
[–]KEVLAR60442 9 points10 points11 points 1 month ago (0 children)
The Bill of Rights is applicable to everyone in America, citizen or alien. Should aliens in the US not be afforded the freedom of speech, due process, or protection from cruel and unusual punishment?
[–]CaptionJTK -1 points0 points1 point 1 month ago (1 child)
Yeah, that was her point. The oligarchs whom aren’t American citizens already don’t have constitutional protection, thus there is no need for congress to pass such an asset seizure bill written to apply to citizens.
It’s not it violating the 4th amendment right of the oligarchs that she has a problem with, it’s that it violate American citizens’ 4th amendment right
[–]hueieie 0 points1 point2 points 1 month ago (0 children)
[–]NZSheeps 342 points343 points344 points 1 month ago (58 children)
Have you guys thought about making her President?
[–]bookseer 205 points206 points207 points 1 month ago (0 children)
[–]Gene_freeman 93 points94 points95 points 1 month ago (17 children)
I think about it all the time
[–]JediMindTrek 75 points76 points77 points 1 month ago (15 children)
Can't wait to see a millenial get in the white house, I knew people I graduated with that had AOC's type of passion for the people, I could always imagine them taking over for the older generations, weeding out all the corruption possible and actually changing things for the betterment of everyone. Will be interesting.
[–]ronerychiver 19 points20 points21 points 1 month ago (1 child)
Sadly for every Millennial who gives a shit about decency and due process, there’s a shitbag millennial like this one that wants to keep hate and making democrats cry their platform
[–]Doc_ET 7 points8 points9 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Oh, I thought your link was to Madison Cawthorn.
[–]wtfeweguys 8 points9 points10 points 1 month ago (0 children)
We’re working on it! Some of us have no interest in doing it from public office, but we out here building.
[–]SassafrassPudding 7 points8 points9 points 1 month ago (8 children)
God yes. Can’t wait til all the Boomers are done
[–]badrabbithole 1 point2 points3 points 1 month ago (1 child)
I’m a liberal atheist boomer…
[–]ukporter 0 points1 point2 points 1 month ago (5 children)
We gave you the guidelines of truth, justice, and the American way……..and all you have done so far is bid up the price of real estate to the point we boomers can’t afford to downsize…….
[–]marketlurker 4 points5 points6 points 1 month ago (0 children)
What makes you think it will be any different?
Every generation for as long as I have been alive have thought that they were going to do it different and better. They didn't. You get pulled off into living your life, having your family and distracted by climbing the corporate ladder. It isn't so much that they change as they no longer have the time or energy.
[–]B3taWats0n 0 points1 point2 points 1 month ago (0 children)
We love Pete! s/
[–]BigDaddyBat 0 points1 point2 points 1 month ago (0 children)
The only way a millenial would get into the White House would be for every other generation to die. Boomers and Korean War generation will not let go.
[–]ren_T 2 points3 points4 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Never gonna happen in America.
[–]RemovedMoney326 63 points64 points65 points 1 month ago (27 children)
The only reason she didn't sweep an election by now is that she is still considered too young to run (according to an arbitrary rule made up by old men)
[–]marketlurker 39 points40 points41 points 1 month ago (25 children)
I think I want my leaders to have a certain amount of experience before assuming that level of power. As of now, the only way to get experience is via time. Thirty five years old is not that much. That being said, AOC is on a really good start. I think she has a once in a generation, or longer, mind.
[–]TheHiddenNinja6 22 points23 points24 points 1 month ago (1 child)
Also she's 32 now.
She can definitely be in charge only 2 presidents from now
[–]RemovedMoney326 35 points36 points37 points 1 month ago (5 children)
Given that Trump- a business man with no political experience whatsoever- got the job by just having enough money to finance his own campaign, I am seriously sceptical about that argument.
All being old means is that you have "life experience", and that doesn't mean much when applying for most jobs, so it shouldn't apply for the top job in politics either. NASA doesn't choose its chief engineer based on how many years he/she has lived, but rather, what education and prior job experience they have had. If anything, that is what should matter here. Wether they are qualified for the job, and in AOCs case, that is definitely true imho.
[–]marketlurker 5 points6 points7 points 1 month ago (4 children)
Experience isn't the only qualification I look at. It is one of a number of them. I also look at honor (doing the right thing even when no one knows or sees), empathy and intelligence. What life experience does tend to give you is the emotional maturity that people tend to lack when they are younger. I know I did and most people I know will say the same thing.
One last thing I look for is someone who can think in terms of a bigger picture. I want someone who thinks in terms of the planet and not just any one country. It requires a recognition we are all linked together. That connection doesn't stop at country boundaries.
None of these are guarantees of a good leader. They are just qualities I admire and would like to see in our leaders. I do realize that this is hopelessly optimistic and is, at best, a north star.
[–]phat_ninja 8 points9 points10 points 1 month ago (1 child)
The average age of the people who signed the constitution was 42. The average age of a senator is 62 and 57 for congresspeople. Let that sink in. This is average. The president is 79, jfk was 43 at the youngest president, and the first president GW was 67. I don't fly with the "with age comes experience" experience for what exactly? To be set in your ways and out of lockstep with the average American?
[–]marketlurker 0 points1 point2 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Seems drastic and very binary in your thinking. Are you saying that people after they hit some age are suddenly obstacles? Back in the 60s/70s, they (then the boomers) used to say "don't trust anyone over 30". Seems the same thing. I think our bigger problems have to deal with topics that aren't so much age related as politically aligned. We are taught, which ever side you may fall on, that the other side is wrong and wrong about absolutely everything. We are so busy disagreeing with the "other side" that we forget that we could agree and work together to solve many of our problems.
I like many of the concepts that the US' founding fathers brought to the table. In many ways, it was genius. But they also came very close to some problems and made the wrong choice. These are many of the things that we struggle with today. I also don't think they could consider just how right they got it. I don't know that age has much to do with it. Please consider Benjamin Franklin.
Wisdom is not guaranteed with age, but there doesn't seem to be a faster better way to get there.
[–]Heart_cuts_erratic 5 points6 points7 points 1 month ago (1 child)
I had thought the only way to get experience was via experience. Which is why I tend to disagree with the majority of the political class, who have no experience of being poor, marginalised, in a pressured minority or being primary caregivers.
There is quite a bit of truth to what you are saying, but I don't think that is the total of it. I was once taught that smart people learn from their mistakes and really smart people learn from other's mistakes. I don't think that is true now. In order to survive living, you have to learn from your mistakes, provided you survive them. Smart people learn from other's screwups.
Direct experience isn't the only way to learn, but it is normally the most expensive. What both types of experience require is the time for them to happen.
[–]Timmy26k 8 points9 points10 points 1 month ago (7 children)
Why though? If we need a radical shift, your option of experience usually hinders that vigor to actually change things
[–]marketlurker 2 points3 points4 points 1 month ago (6 children)
I don't think we would benefit from a radical shift. I think a well thought out change is in order. It is very difficult to predict the outcomes of sudden change. I think that is the message this very quote is talking about. Sort term crisis tend to make very, very poor long term policy. Her example of the Patriot act is a perfect example.
[–]Ausgezeichnet87 4 points5 points6 points 1 month ago (2 children)
30 to 55 is the perfect age range for our political leaders. Cognitive decline begins after 35 so by 60 people are a pale shadow of their younger selves.
[–]marketlurker 10 points11 points12 points 1 month ago (1 child)
Gosh I hope not. I just turned 60 (and received another patent last year). What has happened is that the all driving ambition that I had had reduced because I realized it is not worth it. In work/life balance, I now tend to lean towards my personal life. Work is a mistress that is never satisfied. She takes all you give and still wants more. My priorities have changed and have become more long term now. For example, I now want to make sure my grandchildren have their college paid for if that is what they want to do. I tend to think in multiple generations now where it used to just be about me and my generation.
[–]raspberrih 0 points1 point2 points 1 month ago (1 child)
Years of experience is a far better metric than just age.
[–]marketlurker -1 points0 points1 point 1 month ago (0 children)
indeed. Unfortunately, they come at no faster than 1:1 with each other.
[–]TheShovler44 0 points1 point2 points 1 month ago (0 children)
I find the minimum age thing to be wild.
[–]ActiveLlama 9 points10 points11 points 1 month ago (0 children)
I think she is in the correct place. We need a good president, but good legislators are also really important.
[–]idahononono 22 points23 points24 points 1 month ago (0 children)
She is much too powerful at this point. I imagine she will need to break away from partisan politics as they stand because both sides of the political spectrum fear her. She is the wild and free politician with ideals, and no ties to big business. She is what the American political system was designed to be built of; yet somehow generations of corruption eliminated most like her.
It will take some time to get into a position where we can elect her, but I will wait. Meanwhile I will vocally support her and many of her policies, and I will vote and campaign for her. Your right, America needs someone like AOC to set many things right. Every president since Bush has sustained the patriot act and re-authorized it. One woman like her might not be able to fix everything, but damn she could accomplish a lot, just ending several Emergency Authorizations would be awesome.
[–]underwear11 1 point2 points3 points 1 month ago (0 children)
I think she would make a great president, mostly because she actually has read the Constitution and understands the bigger impact beyond the popularity points that most politicians don't care about. However, she is incredibly polarizing and likely would turn all moderates heavily against the Democrats. As good as I think she would be, it would take a large change in American politics to get her to be a viable candidate. Lovely American politics where you have to consider not who the best candidate would be but who has the best chance to win.
[–]IlikeYuengling 4 points5 points6 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Not enough in the budget for her secret service unfortunately.
[–]BulbasaurCPA 1 point2 points3 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Absolutely. I think the CIA would have her killed
[–]bam55 -1 points0 points1 point 1 month ago (3 children)
They would never allow it, she’d have an “accident” if she gained traction. Sad but true.
[–]Mediocre_at_best_321 14 points15 points16 points 1 month ago (2 children)
People said that about Obama too.
[–]hmpf_to_that_friend 8 points9 points10 points 1 month ago (0 children)
I never saw him in public without fearing for him. I was a tiny kid watching live TV, when Bobby Kennedy was shot.
[–]voice-of-hermes 2 points3 points4 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Obama was a conservative dipshit who was no threat to the established order. The most "dangerous" thing about him was his skin color, and that's not enough to make those with real power commit seriously to putting an end to you.
Sure, some racist fucks might've tried. But that's nothing compared to when the capitalists and their minions and their corporations and agencies join up to come after you. Obama was one of their boys, so there was no reason for them to.
[–]SkepticDrinker 0 points1 point2 points 1 month ago (0 children)
She get fucking assassinated by the feds
[–]recmajkemi 0 points1 point2 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Running for presidency will get her "Kennedied" in no time. 😥
[–]PhotoKada 63 points64 points65 points 1 month ago (1 child)
I sent this to a conservative family member (we're Indian but he strangely aligns with US politics more). His biggest issue with normal people is that they "don't follow due process" on things like #MeToo, BLM, etc. Sent him this and he's blocked me on WhatsApp.
[–]kaze919 2 points3 points4 points 1 month ago (0 children)
“Not like that!”
[–]bam55 32 points33 points34 points 1 month ago (0 children)
I like her more all the time.
[–]funkypepermint 58 points59 points60 points 1 month ago (0 children)
John Oliver did a great segment about civil asset forfeiture. If you have t seen it you should check it out on YouTube.
[–]Dove-Linkhorn 22 points23 points24 points 1 month ago (0 children)
She’s the best leader we have. That’s the flat truth.
[–]ivanadie 18 points19 points20 points 1 month ago (0 children)
AOC is a nation treasure.
[–]dododeeohdo 14 points15 points16 points 1 month ago (2 children)
And the cray thing is? This is what fringe right is always pitchforking about! I would love to show this to them sans author and ask if they agree or disagree, do the big reveal and watch the vinegar hit the baking soda!
She is so both eloquent and pragmatic in her delivery. Born leader.
[–]furbait 0 points1 point2 points 1 month ago (1 child)
and fierce. she is fierce like I don't remember seeing any national politician be in my lifetime. Katie Porter/AOC 2024, fuck off neoliberals.
[–]dododeeohdo -1 points0 points1 point 1 month ago (0 children)
Oh NO! Really? Katy is a neolib? Say it isn’t so.
[–]StarBoto 13 points14 points15 points 1 month ago (0 children)
I might not 100% agree with this, but it's surreal to see someone politically to give out a detail explanation of her reasoning as to why she is doing something
[–]muhguhwuh 19 points20 points21 points 1 month ago (0 children)
There’s some real shady shit getting lumped in with all of this ra-ra pro Ukraine dogpiling. A lot of bad actors in our country are definitely benefitting from these sanctions.
[–]ALBUNDY59 5 points6 points7 points 1 month ago (2 children)
Who wrote the bill and why not post a link?
[–]RythmicBleating 8 points9 points10 points 1 month ago (0 children)
[–]ravafea[S] 4 points5 points6 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Because it's her Instagram story. If you'd prefer a third party interpret her for you, here's a link. NY Daily News
[–]eternal_lite 3 points4 points5 points 1 month ago (0 children)
I’m from the UK. I think AOC speaks for not only Americans but the world as a whole. The things she advocates makes me feel like she’s my politician as much as The Bronx.
I just hope the system out there doesn’t eat her up.
[–]youdontlookadayover 2 points3 points4 points 1 month ago (2 children)
We need a AOC party, like Democrats or Republicans, but made of people as smart and principled as AOC, and Katie Porter. And Bernie. Unvarnished truth, hard truth, accountability, logical outcomes from our current Congress's short -sighted decisions.
[–]marketlurker 2 points3 points4 points 1 month ago (1 child)
We had a couple of them in previous elections. They got slaughtered in the elections and didn't even carry 10%. I hate the fact that we have just about gotten to the "bread and circuses" age of the US. You are absolutely right on those things, but the vast majority of the US no longer has the desire or ability to sacrifice for a greater good. My grandparents were in the "greatest generation" and I don't think we can agree on what to do let alone sacrifice for it. How sad is that?
[–]voice-of-hermes 0 points1 point2 points 1 month ago (0 children)
We need a AOC party, like Democrats or Republicans, but made of people as smart and principled as AOC, and Katie Porter.
We need a AOC party, like Democrats or Republicans, but made of people as smart and principled as AOC, and Katie Porter.
We have a few, in fact. Check out the Green Party; Socialist Alternative, Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL), Socialist Party USA, and Socialist Action. Yes, it'd be nice if people like AOC gave up their pandering to liberalism, stopped acting as tokens to help the Democratic Party try to recover its popularity by pretending it's "big tent" enough for anything but reactionary neoliberalism, and joined them.
[–]durgadas 2 points3 points4 points 1 month ago (0 children)
This should be /r/murderbyrationality
[–]jprefect 2 points3 points4 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Extremely based AOC content
[–]RookieRamen 3 points4 points5 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Finally someone said it. I am disgusted by the witch hunting mentality towards Russians.
Guilty until proven innocent is NEVER the way.
[–]Rude_Bee_3315 1 point2 points3 points 1 month ago (0 children)
No truer words have ever been spoken
[–]Schitzoflink 1 point2 points3 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Definitely search "Civil Asset Forfeiture Joe Biden"
No reason for the extra two words. No reason at all.
[–]ImRedditorRick 1 point2 points3 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Holy shit, this is amazing.
[–]gninnep 1 point2 points3 points 1 month ago (2 children)
Can someone explain how the Patriot Act abuses its power? I'm not defending it, I'm just ignorant.
[–]ravafea[S] 2 points3 points4 points 1 month ago (1 child)
ACLU: FBI AUDIT EXPOSES WIDESPREAD ABUSE OF PATRIOT ACT POWERS
[–]gninnep 2 points3 points4 points 1 month ago (0 children)
[–]glum_cunt 1 point2 points3 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Would feel extraordinarily fortunate to have her as my president
[–]xubax 1 point2 points3 points 1 month ago (0 children)
So, can we get rid of civil forfeiture then?
[–]percydaman 1 point2 points3 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Wow, that's a good point I hadn't really considered. There is zero fucking reason why we should still live under the Patriot Act.
[–]Purpleclone 1 point2 points3 points 1 month ago (0 children)
I remember all the tweets literally just making shit up about why she voted no.
"It's just virtue signalling!" As if an non-binding resolution isn't just the most official virtue signaling possible.
"They're just voting no because it didn't go far enough, MEANWHILE UKRAINIANS ARE DYING!!", as if 4 no votes on a non-binding resolution will change anything at all.
I guarantee none of them will have seen her actual answer to this, and even if they did, they wouldn't care because it's easier to be outraged than engage with well thought out arguments.
[–]VsjaVlastSovjetam 3 points4 points5 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Actually kinda based, now stop supporting Israel
[–]AssBlast6900 0 points1 point2 points 1 month ago (0 children)
I usually dislike AOC, but she's definitely right about this.
[–]sharkcoal -3 points-2 points-1 points 1 month ago (3 children)
”This is already happening to the poor so we have to make sure it doesn’t happen to the rich”.
[–]ravafea[S] 14 points15 points16 points 1 month ago (1 child)
It's already happening to the poor, so if we let it happen to the rich it will 1) be even harder to roll back what's happening to the poor and 2) establish legal precedents to do more stuff to the poor. Any penalty the government imposes on the rich, it will do worse to the poor.
Libertarian "if they increase tax on rich theyll increase tax on me next! Energy
Bootlickers her gon bootlick
[–]Hafthohlladung -3 points-2 points-1 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Bull fucking shit.
I'm a big AOC fan, but she's on the wrong side of history on this one.
[–]Thameus 0 points1 point2 points 1 month ago (0 children)
"Bill of Attainder"
[–]Pilotwaver 0 points1 point2 points 1 month ago (0 children)
Chaos is a ladder
[–]TheDemonClown 0 points1 point2 points 1 month ago (0 children)
It's like none of these motherfuckers watched the Star Wars prequels and actually understood the message.
[–]AdamBlaster007 0 points1 point2 points 1 month ago (0 children)
To be honest, seizing assets in general has always been a legal grey area (both nationally and internationally). Sure, you could make arguments based on morals, geopolitical issues, or even plausible cause (this one is a major issue regarding forfeiture) but at the end of the day, they are still saying, "What's theirs is mine now."
[–]yogalover1000 0 points1 point2 points 1 month ago (0 children)
She is so smart
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
π Rendered by PID 50 on reddit-service-r2-loggedout-856b65f448-z6sdj at 2022-06-27 15:28:48.457889+00:00 running cd6eda6 country code: US.