• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

15 people have been charged in the Flint water scandal

Your original assertion was this:



The "problem" with the water didn't arise until AFTER Gov. Snyder disbanded the city government and appointed an emergency manager, and he and the key people below him and whose actions he was responsible to oversee, because that is the job of the boss, ****ed up the transition, hid problems, covered up problems, didn't fix problems they knew existed, which sickened and killed people etc...

So I have no idea what point you're making now. Other than "liberals suck" which I think is your only point.

Liberals do suck, but that is besides the point.
 
The Flint water crisis was a failure on the part of government at various levels. It may be unfair to single out government and civilian employees to blame for those systematic government failures.

^
Translation - Let's give the killers a pass.
 
^
Translation - Let's give the killers a pass.

The public desires to see individual's blood, no matter how much the government is actually to be blamed for the fiasco. They might as well blame Obama for the massive wildfire damages caused by badly designed federal forest management regulations.
 
The public desires to see individual's blood, no matter how much the government is actually to be blamed for the fiasco. They might as well blame Obama for the massive wildfire damages caused by badly designed federal forest management regulations.

Government is made up of people, is people. Holding the named people who committed the acts unaccountable for their individual acts by condemning the faceless, nameless entity called "government" is no different than holding a mob hit man unaccountable and blaming "the mob" who paid him.

And your example is unpersuasive because Obama didn't engage in any overt act that led to or contributed to the wildfires. And even those who you say "badly designed" the forest management plan may have made a mistake, but we're not talking mere "mistakes" in this case. In this case, individuals were informed about horrific water supply safety problems and took deliberate and purposeful steps to hide that information, cover up the safety issues, lied to regulators and others, and with deliberate intent left the water supply filled with lead and other contaminants, that sickened and killed people.

It's the difference between you giving your child water from your tap, believing (incorrectly) that the water is safe, VERSUS being informed it has dangerous levels of lead, is possible contaminated with deadly legionnaire's disease, lying to your wife about the known water problems, and continuing to provide poisoned water to your wife and child, telling them it's fine, safe, healthy, knowing the terrible and possibly life long adverse side effects including death possible as a result of continuing to use tap water in your home. The latter is what the named individual did to the city of Flint and its residents.
 
The public desires to see individual's blood, no matter how much the government is actually to be blamed for the fiasco. They might as well blame Obama for the massive wildfire damages caused by badly designed federal forest management regulations.

Apples and oranges here. People that Snyder appointed to run Flint's government are charged with manslaughter. They knew in advance what Flint's water was like, and went ahead with this anyways, and did it for the almighty dollar. What they did was homicide. But yea, let's make this topic about Obama. What are you gonna bring up next? Benghazi or Hillary's emails?
 
Government is made up of people, is people. Holding the named people who committed the acts unaccountable for their individual acts by condemning the faceless, nameless entity called "government" is no different than holding a mob hit man unaccountable and blaming "the mob" who paid him.

And your example is unpersuasive because Obama didn't engage in any overt act that led to or contributed to the wildfires. And even those who you say "badly designed" the forest management plan may have made a mistake, but we're not talking mere "mistakes" in this case. In this case, individuals were informed about horrific water supply safety problems and took deliberate and purposeful steps to hide that information, cover up the safety issues, lied to regulators and others, and with deliberate intent left the water supply filled with lead and other contaminants, that sickened and killed people.

It's the difference between you giving your child water from your tap, believing (incorrectly) that the water is safe, VERSUS being informed it has dangerous levels of lead, is possible contaminated with deadly legionnaire's disease, lying to your wife about the known water problems, and continuing to provide poisoned water to your wife and child, telling them it's fine, safe, healthy, knowing the terrible and possibly life long adverse side effects including death possible as a result of continuing to use tap water in your home. The latter is what the named individual did to the city of Flint and its residents.

Too many Americans suffer under the delusion that if the government is involved bad things should not happen unless bad actors pervert government regulations. That is not true. In the Flint water crisis several government agencies with unsound operating procedures failed to protect the people of Flint and the fault was as much in the shoddy enforcement procedures, the unclear division of responsibilities, the vague recommendations for handling issues which should have caused more alarm, and so forth. These professional public servants are being fed to the lions as though they deliberately broke laws. That did not happen. They did their jobs in a manner which was consistent with the way they were taught to do those jobs by officials who did the same things before them.

America has descended into a culture of hatred and blame and total misunderstanding of truth. I sympathize with these poor scapegoats.
 
Apples and oranges here. People that Snyder appointed to run Flint's government are charged with manslaughter. They knew in advance what Flint's water was like, and went ahead with this anyways, and did it for the almighty dollar. What they did was homicide. But yea, let's make this topic about Obama. What are you gonna bring up next? Benghazi or Hillary's emails?

You accuse public servants of criminal wrongdoing for greed. I never saw any evidence of that in the accounts I have read. Government failed and those at the heads of departments are made the scapegoats.
 
Too many Americans suffer under the delusion that if the government is involved bad things should not happen unless bad actors pervert government regulations. That is not true. In the Flint water crisis several government agencies with unsound operating procedures failed to protect the people of Flint and the fault was as much in the shoddy enforcement procedures, the unclear division of responsibilities, the vague recommendations for handling issues which should have caused more alarm, and so forth. These professional public servants are being fed to the lions as though they deliberately broke laws. That did not happen. They did their jobs in a manner which was consistent with the way they were taught to do those jobs by officials who did the same things before them.

America has descended into a culture of hatred and blame and total misunderstanding of truth. I sympathize with these poor scapegoats.

First of all, your premise is absurd. No, they didn't do the job in a manner consistent with those who did the same things before them.

But even if we accept the premise, they engaged in crimes and now is as good a time as any to hold them accountable for those crimes, which sickened many and killed dozens. The only thing I can figure is the Governor is a Republican, and that's why you're blaming "government" instead of officials appointed by and often answering to him. Otherwise it makes no sense at any level.
 
First of all, your premise is absurd. No, they didn't do the job in a manner consistent with those who did the same things before them.

But even if we accept the premise, they engaged in crimes and now is as good a time as any to hold them accountable for those crimes, which sickened many and killed dozens. The only thing I can figure is the Governor is a Republican, and that's why you're blaming "government" instead of officials appointed by and often answering to him. Otherwise it makes no sense at any level.

In the modern culture of blame the one with the deepest pockets or the one who is in charge of a division of government trying to do his job according to the vague guidelines set by regulators will always get the blame, regardless of facts demonstrating mitigating factors. An employer may reprimand an employee for being unsafe but if that employee does not listen and obey and gets hurt then it is the employer's fault and the lawyers go after the employer, not the one with the problem.
 
In the modern culture of blame the one with the deepest pockets or the one who is in charge of a division of government trying to do his job according to the vague guidelines set by regulators will always get the blame, regardless of facts demonstrating mitigating factors. An employer may reprimand an employee for being unsafe but if that employee does not listen and obey and gets hurt then it is the employer's fault and the lawyers go after the employer, not the one with the problem.

That's a pretty incoherent argument. There is nothing "vague" about the obvious and deliberate failures by those indicted. If you want to argue a particular case, that's fine, but we're not getting anywhere with you making general statements to excuse the specific actions in this case.
 
That's a pretty incoherent argument. There is nothing "vague" about the obvious and deliberate failures by those indicted. If you want to argue a particular case, that's fine, but we're not getting anywhere with you making general statements to excuse the specific actions in this case.

These government employees were just doing their jobs like others before them had done. If they took shortcuts or if they failed to act expeditiously on a matter it was because other government agencies also failed to act expeditiously. If Comey can forgive Hillary for supposedly not intending to do any harm in breaking multiple federal laws she understood, then these people should be given the same consideration.
 
These government employees were just doing their jobs like others before them had done. If they took shortcuts or if they failed to act expeditiously on a matter it was because other government agencies also failed to act expeditiously. If Comey can forgive Hillary for supposedly not intending to do any harm in breaking multiple federal laws she understood, then these people should be given the same consideration.

Sheesh - I should have known a terrible argument would eventually involve BUTWHATABOUTHILLARY!!!!

Of course your argument to this point is some version of "but what about other unnamed people in unknown other examples of a water supply poisoning and killing residents because of unknown failures by these unknown and unnamed people, as a result of unknown rules they were following like other unknown and unnamed employees before them and at the direction of unknown and unnamed supervisors." So it's just the broadest possible version of BUTWHATABOUT_______! except you're not even bothering to name any identifiable person/group of people or event.
 
Last edited:
You accuse public servants of criminal wrongdoing for greed. I never saw any evidence of that in the accounts I have read. Government failed and those at the heads of departments are made the scapegoats.

So they were indicted and arrested for nothing at all. LMAO. You crack me up.
 
Sheesh - I should have known a terrible argument would eventually involve BUTWHATABOUTHILLARY!!!!

Of course your argument to this point is some version of "but what about other unnamed people in unknown other examples of a water supply poisoning and killing residents because of unknown failures by these unknown and unnamed people, as a result of unknown rules they were following like other unknown and unnamed employees before them and at the direction of unknown and unnamed supervisors." So it's just the broadest possible version of BUTWHATABOUT_______! except you're not even bothering to name any identifiable person/group of people or event.

Never mind. Modern justice is often neither fair or reasonable. Godliness is on the wane and godlessness is on the rise, even in law enforcement and in the criminal justice system. Marilyn Mosby charged 6 innocent cops in Baltimore in the death of Freddy Gray. That was a serious miscarriage of justice but far too many Americans just didn't seen to understand that.
 
Last edited:
So they were indicted and arrested for nothing at all. LMAO. You crack me up.

They were arrested as scapegoats to appease ignorant public clamor for heads to roll. Just like the unjust charges against 6 innocent cops in the Freddy Gray suicide.
 
Never mind. Modern justice is often neither fair or reasonable. Godliness is on the wane and godlessness is on the rise, even in law enforcement and in the criminal justice system. Marilyn Mosby charged 6 innocent cops in Baltimore in the death of Freddy Gray. That was a serious miscarriage of justice but far too many Americans just didn't seen to understand that.

More BUTWHATABOUT!! This thread is not about Freddy Gray, and a case with different facts in every possible way has no bearing on the present case. There was a drug dealer convicted of murder in my home town last week. What does that have to do with Flint? Nothing!

What you've completely ignored is a single, specific reference to a single fact in this case.
 
They were arrested as scapegoats to appease ignorant public clamor for heads to roll. Just like the unjust charges against 6 innocent cops in the Freddy Gray suicide.

No they were arrested because of.....

Wait for it.....

Evidence.

But I can understand your wanting to stick up for them. Most likely for the exact same reason you support Trump, despite his saying the he could commit murder on Fifth Avenue and not lose any supporters.
 
The city of Flint knew about the problem for years before we ever heard about it.

The lock step incompetent democrat city leadership waited for it to get out of hand so the state could take over and take the blame.

Ummm.. the state was the problem. The GOP passed a law that could throw out all city officials and take over the town. That happened to flint. Then the state put in place their own putz to run Flint. That putz is the one that tried to save money cutting corners that put all that lead in the water.
 
You accuse public servants of criminal wrongdoing for greed. I never saw any evidence of that in the accounts I have read. Government failed and those at the heads of departments are made the scapegoats.

I am unsure of exactly who you think in government is or is not responsible for this "government failure". However, I have read most of a 30,000 word timeline of events and what is increasingly clear is that a couple of dozen individuals are responsible, including supervisors, managers, in-house "experts", communication spin doctors, and a couple of department heads. (Interestingly, the Governors office staff seems mostly to have been frustrated folks who either don't know who to believe, or want some action from the agencies...who dismiss their worries as needless).

Before I mention criminality, let's get to the nugget of what happened.

First, the governor appointed manager for Flint, with the endorsement of the Mayor and Emergency Svcs Manager, hired a engineering consulting firm to look at a cheaper temporary source of water for Flint, the Flint river, till a new pipeline was built and connected to a new provider.

Second, the firm identified the cost, and they (or another firm) specified the water plant upgrades needed. The plant was only for backup if the water from Detroit's system was interrupted.

Three, in spite of the misgivings of the Flint water supervisor, they made the mods and went operational in the spring of 2014.

Four, it took a mere THREE WEEKS for the first flint citizen to complain to the EPA about the scuzzy water. The EPA officials didn't know what to do with his request for free water testing. Nothing came of it.

Then between July and August of December of 2014 the crisis grew. Flint found fecal coliform bacteria, and issued public warnings to boil water. G.M. says the water is so corrosive that they can not use it to clean engine parts and reconnect to Lake Huron. In October the first suspected links to Legionnaires outbreaks are suspected. While the MDEQ found slightly elevated lead in the water, they issued no warnings.

Throughout January of 2015 while the public was not notified of the lead testing results, lead was detected at the University of Michigan and Government Offices of State workers in Flint - measures were taken to help them have safe water.

Then between February and August of 2015, while the lead crisis was fairly obvious to EPA regulator Miguel Del Toral, he was considered to be too incautious in his disclosure of information on his dire findings to a woman whose family suffered lead poisoning, and the EPA sided with the MDEQ that their was no lead problem, just maybe some homeowners lead pipes were at fault (even when they had plastic pipes) - the EPA even apologized to the MDEQ for Toral's relentless warnings.

In August, after Toral's memo was leaked, Virginia Tech professor Marc Edwards notifies MDEQ that he will begin an independent study of Flint water quality. The Virginia Tech study will prove to be a major breakthrough to fully and scientifically document a serious public health threat from lead in Flint’s drinking water. For the next six months he would publish the results of serious toxic lead in the city water supply.

Hanna-Attisha, a local hospital pediatrician, did her own studies (when the MDEQ refused to give her data) of blood drawn of children below the age of 6. Evidence lead poisoning was 2 to 3 times higher occurrence in the children than normal.

By March of 2016, the government agencies 18 months of denials of connections to poisoning and sickness , especially those of the MDEQ were no longer believed.

Who is to blame?

First, anyone whose job it is to manage a water plant and maintain the distribution system. The man who did was either incompetent, unskilled, or indifferent. His job is to provide safe water, properly tested and treated. He did not. Of course, he trusted the state's "experts" - also incompetent.

Second, the engineering consultants who apparently were also incompetent and didn't know that high chlorine levels and therefore anti-corrosion chemicals were necessary.

Third, at least twenty individuals at all levels of the MDEQ, the MCHHS (health and human svcs) and the EPA who denied, obfuscated, spun, and sometimes lied to customer or the press (or each other) about their knowledge. The ones that road-blocked independent study, withheld information, and blamed each other.

Frankly, I would not blame some department heads who dumbly followed the group-think of their in-house "experts". There was, however, at least one or two high level agency folks that were responsible for the disaster.

While many of the charges leveled might have been dubious, at the very least these people were guilty of misconduct in office and neglecting official duties. These are felonies and most of the original 15 charged should have been sent to trial and convicted.
 
People being charged doesn't mean it is the correct/right thing to do.
Lay the cases out.
And since this is a political forum, what are their political affiliations.

Watch the documentary "What lies Upstream." 90 minutes of your life. Tell me what you think. It's not propaganda. The filmmaker is a journalist who advocates for privacy, government transparency, and anti-lobbying efforts. I assume you don't have a problem with any of those stances. Give it a watch.
 
Watch the documentary "What lies Upstream." 90 minutes of your life. Tell me what you think. It's not propaganda. The filmmaker is a journalist who advocates for privacy, government transparency, and anti-lobbying efforts. I assume you don't have a problem with any of those stances. Give it a watch.
No. I have no need to watch propaganda form someone of such ilk.
 
No. I have no need to watch propaganda form someone of such ilk.

Didn't Trump who said we need lobbyists out of government? It would appear the stance is a bipartisan (until they need corporate money for campaigns, of course). So you won't watch a movie. Can you... read an article about it? Or would you like me to compile raw data that the film explores? Such data cannot be propaganda, because it's... you know... facts aren't propaganda.
 
Back
Top Bottom