307
Trump supporters have to be made to face the fact that they betrayed us all
Some Nazi party members had to be walked through concentration camps to convince them of their wrongdoings.
Many still didn't believe that they were in the wrong. They shed some crocodile tears and moved on.
Honestly I dont think this is really surprising. At some level, just about all humans want to think of themselves as being good people, or at least not horrible. Accepting that one has done something that heinous is such a horrible truth that it isnt hard to imagine some people just refusing to accept it no matter what they are shown, and if denial that the crime happened is no longer available, because the evidence is right in front of one's face, some of those people will go to any absurd length to believe that it was justified somehow, or that they were somehow innocent of it. This isnt a defense or excuse for those people of course, those people deserved none, just a statement that it isnt really unexpected that some would act that way given the circumstances.
Wasn't this a precedent set after the Civil War?
Well, the slavers didn't bother with the crocodile tears.
Not really. Johnson totally screwed up Reconstruction, because he was a Confederate supporter.
And much of the surrounding German populations by decree from Eisenhower to make sure they couldn't deny it ever happened.
It's crazy with amount of documentation, Nazis record keeping, and film denial is stronger today.
Saying the 14th Amendment doesn't apply to Trump is textbook Special Pleading.
He's guilty of even more... and should be hanging from the gallows.
Surely the law and order party will stick to the letter of the law. Surely.
With "more than 25 women who have accused Trump of sexual assault or misconduct (which he has denied), and the countless more who have endured public vitriol and threats to their life after being targeted by him, have all been punished either for challenging him or for denying him what he fundamentally believed was his due" law and order is the least of their concerns.
It's a really good article and everyone should read it in full.
What if Bush got to just decide after the votes were tallied if he wanted the electoral college to apply for that election cycle or not? The rules agreed to before an election are by definition democratic. It would be undemocratic to day "well we have always played by the rules but this time they don't favor me so let's just not use that rule this time?"
It's weird you pick Bush when that election also wasn't a democratic process. The US Supreme Court decided who would be the president - as it is trying to do again.
I just picked a name, but yes someone like Kerry or Clinton would make more sense as they literally would have won their elections if they could have just flipped a switch to turn the EC off.
We really need to stop being afraid of how his supporters might react and just deal with it when it happens.
They want to start a civil war? Ok let's see how well their rip-off semi-auto tacticool AR-15s do against the US National Guard and a few predator drones.
this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2024
307 points (98.7% liked)
politics
19080 readers
1842 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS