Reposted by Bret Baier
The statement is a sarcastic remark questioning whether there will be demands for an investigation into the alleged participation of elected officials in anti-ICE activities. It implies skepticism about accountability and transparency in public office, touching on issues of governance and public trust.
- The statement does not directly cause harm but uses sarcasm, which could be seen as dismissive or undermining serious discourse.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech, but it does indirectly question the integrity of public officials.Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue but rather uses sarcasm, which can be seen as a form of personal attack or ad hominem argument. [-1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
- The statement upholds free speech but does so in a manner that may not be entirely responsible or constructive, given its sarcastic tone.Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.