i have no issue with orderly transitions. it’s the guy i responded to that apparently has the issue. read what he wrote and then how i responded. putting any person in harm’s way without a trial is not an orderly transition, and it is also what i questioned when the other guy suggested it was condoned by q. so much for your contention that there are gaps in my knowledge, apparently. by the way, at the high level that is nothing to be ashamed of. no one knows everything, and so everyone has gaps in their knowledge, including even you.
Yes, the person you (SteveH) responded to was the one more or less advocating or thinking that Barr would advocated lawlessness. I read the back and forth also with a third person.
Apologies then, Steve. That’s what I get for skimming through the thread too quickly trying to catch up. Hereon I’ll keep my hands in my pockets.