One guy spent 37 days in jail for posting trump's own words "We have to get over it" (about a school shooting that happened 2 years prior to Kirk's death)
"rules for thee but not for me". People who said _anything_ they deemed disrespected after Kirk died was basically crucified but when it's against someone they deem an enemy they dont care at all.
Trump supporters and voters will have to live with the fact that they enabled this for the rest of their life. I do not envy them. Especially those that will snap out of it at some point.
I think only a small percentage might ever feel remorse or empathy regarding how their voting choices shaped world outcomes thereafter. For those that ever do regret it, I think giving them a path to redemption is the only way the world will ever heal. For those incapable of having those feelings.. well, I can hope karma is real.
They won't just have to live with it. They like it.
My aunt is a republican lobbyist. She is also a drunk. This means she regularly texts us the most incredibly odious beliefs. Stuff like how my other aunt should kill herself because she is a leech for taking disability from the government. MAGA voters aren't sad that Trump is out here saying "fuck you, libs" on a regular basis. They love it.
That was true after 2016, and plenty of them did. The problem is that Grump was able to attract a whole bunch of new scumbags - from his destructive politicization of Covid, the surveillance industry seeing a more direct route to become an inescapable part of the government, the growing performative chest-thumping "manosphere" etc. At this point I don't see much shame on the horizon.
no denying your dick conclusion, but the former doesn't have to hold. You can like the outcome without supporting the mechanism. In fact,t here's an entire school of thought around ends vs. means.
But let's not get distracted here: unbelievable that anyone famous, let alone the president of the United States, would publicly promote such disgusting statements. Combined with his WH comments in front of the Japanese PM... I guess to a narcissistic (and frankly, just plain dumb) bully punching down feels like a big win...
Which is weird because the right explicitly called for violence against the left and transgender people in response but nothing ever happened to any of them.
Celebrating the act of murder is the distinction. There is no distinction here between someone gloating that CK is dead or someone gloating that RM is dead.
It would, but only once you have fallen under the spell of thinking meaning and authority was to be found there. Consider your zone has been flooded maybe?
Come on, seriously? Then you have fallen into an old trap.
As it implies you think it would be good if someone who has to be brought before a court of law to answer for their actions, someone who has to be given a chance to defend themselve, and to be judged fairly by an assembly of their peer, gets the opportunity to die without this public reckoning?
His social media posts are very specifically designed to distract and pack the news cycle full of garbage, drowning out what actually matters. His entire life, his main defense to anything has been to attack and distract.
His posting style is also very typical of facist governments.
His approval rating is the worst of any president since WW2, including his first term, which was the previous 'record holder.' The Iran war is deeply unpopular with the American people, the skyrocketing gas and diesel prices are infuriating many. He's desperate to shift attention.
I don't think they're "very specifically designed" to do that, I think that's just how he is, raw and unfiltered. He was a shitposter on Twitter too, that's why he was banned.
If that were true, the response would have been, "no, you're a bit off," instead of apoplectic rage and trying to cancel the person quoting him.
Let's not view any of this in isolation either. None of those accounts will say a single negative word about Donald's (most recent!) shockingly disrespectful thoughts for the deceased.
The fascists' only use high minded ideals as rallying cries to influence people who don't do the work to apply those ideals to the fascists' own actions - whether they're doing it deliberately as a team sport, or have mostly checked out of politics. For those in the currently-designated ingroup, the hypocrisy is the point.
Except the only "evil" thing that Mueller did was investigate Trump after he bragged about firing James Comey for investigating a potential Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Moreover, I'm not sure it is right for the president to celebrate this; isn't part of the job of a president to be diplomatic? It's one thing when a nobody like me celebrates the death of someone bad, but I'm not the president, no one expects me to be diplomatic, and generally speaking no one actually cares what I think about anything.
The full, unredacted report has never been released to the general public.
The Trump White House asserted a “protective” claim of executive privilege over the redacted portions and underlying materials, which helped prevent Congress from obtaining the fully unredacted report, though this did not block release of the already‑redacted public version.
In other words, the criminals in charge prefer to work in the dark.
The investigation produced 37 indictments; seven guilty pleas or convictions; and compelling evidence that the president obstructed justice on multiple occasions. Mueller also uncovered and referred 14 criminal matters to other components of the Department of Justice.
Trump associates repeatedly lied to investigators about their contacts with Russians, and President Trump refused to answer questions about his efforts to impede federal proceedings and influence the testimony of witnesses.
It absolutely said Trump was connected to Russiagate and very much broke the law, Mueller was forced to shut down the investigation.
We'll never know for sure, but the most likely scenario is that Trump did not collude with Russia, but also did not impede them or create any friction for them trying to get him elected.
Russia wanted Trump to win, because they understood him as deeply destabilizing.
> His 448-page report released in April 2019 identified substantial contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia but did not allege a criminal conspiracy. Mueller laid out damaging details about Trump’s efforts to seize control of the investigation, and even shut it down, though he declined to decide whether Trump had broken the law, in part because of department policy barring the indictment of a sitting president.
It still boggles my mind that Trump was even allowed to run for president again, when he publicly and very evidently did whatever he could to try to stop the investigation of himself. In what world does it serve democracy well to let people like that even be candidates or involved in politics at all?
He bragged about trying to stop the investigation! That's why Robert Mueller was appointed the first time. He went on TV and talked about how he fired Comey for even starting the investigation into Russia.
> It still boggles my mind that Trump was even allowed to run for president again
He was at least 35, a natural born citizen of the US, had residency for at least 14 years prior to his candidacy, only served a single term prior, and was never charged and convicted with insurrection.
Of course he was allowed, he met all the constitutional criteria to serve.
They did, it was a great piece of legislation. And you might note that they said that a state can't disqualify a candidate, not that they erred in a judgment that refutes your claim.
“A group of Colorado voters contends that Section 3 of the
Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution prohibits for-
mer President Donald J. Trump, who seeks the Presidential
nomination of the Republican Party in this year’s election,
from becoming President again. The Colorado Supreme
Court agreed with that contention. It ordered the Colorado
secretary of state to exclude the former President from the
Republican primary ballot in the State and to disregard any
write-in votes that Colorado voters might cast for him.
Former President Trump challenges that decision on sev-
eral grounds. Because the Constitution makes Congress,
rather than the States, responsible for enforcing Section 3
against federal officeholders and candidates, we reverse.”
At what point was Trump “charged and convicted” because that is what I wrote. Obviously it doesn’t matter what a “group of Colorado voters contends” or that “the Colorado supreme court agreed”, it didn't meet the limitations imposed by section 3 of the 14th, because they cant, only congress can using section 5.
> At what point was Trump “charged and convicted” because that is what I wrote.
You wrote other words too. I assume your assertion was that he was not legally excluded from the presidential ballot for insurrection. Colorado found otherwise.
> it doesn’t matter what a “group of Colorado voters contends” or that “the Colorado supreme court agreed”
Once again, "Colorado begs to differ". They found that he participated in an insurrection and, to be entirely honest, I trust them more than you.
Scotus isn't on your side here, they just said states can't disqualify federal candidates.
I don’t have a “side”. I said Trump was qualified to run for president because he satisfied all the qualification boxes—-if you dispute that, make your case. Colorado attempted to make their case and lost. He age qualifies, he citizenship qualifies, his residency qualifies, and he didn’t violate the 14th.
So I am not sure exactly what point you are trying to make. Frankly, there doesn’t seem to be one beyond just arguing a failed point.
I think you mean "he hasn't been found to have violated the 14th", we all witnessed the insurrection. And even that would be an inaccurate statement on your part, he was found to have violated the 14th by Colorado. Scotus did not vacate this finding.
> This case raises the question whether the States, in addition to Congress, may also enforce Section 3. We conclude that States may disqualify persons holding or attempting to hold state office.
You keep trying to use Trump's ability to run for federal office as some backwards way to claim he was neither the participant in an insurrection nor found legally to have been one.
He was, you're absolutely right! You're welcome to claim the Colorado finding is meaningless because of the scotus decision, just don't use it to fabricate a different set of facts.
Care to explain how it had any actual bearing on Trumps ability to run for president? How about how it changes my point that he was qualified, ran, was elected, and still holds the office? He was on the Colorado ballot, he received over 1.377M votes from folks in Colorado. You keep pointing to it as meaningful and how it somehow disproves my point that he was qualified to run for the office (and won and now holds the office) but where was this case’s impact on the result?
Apparently whatever nuanced point you think you are making, reality seems to disagree with you.
> In what world does it serve democracy well to let people like that even be candidates or involved in politics at all?
You are assuming that Trump's supporters care about the continuation of democracy, which is pretty clearly often not the case.
The only person who really had the means to put an end to Trump politically after his first term was Joe Biden, and people should absolutely never forgive him for his failure on that front.
I think when we say that an executive is the only one to put an end to another executive in power, we overlook how the problem might be that the parties have deadlocked Congress and the legislative branch is one to take power back from the executive branch.
Aaaaaabsolutely not. The president should have virtually no say in who is allowed or not allowed to run an election against them.
All but 7 Republicans in the Senate voted he was not guilty in his impeachment trial. They were gifted the opportunity to do the right thing, and they unquestionably failed.
All the richest sociopaths in SV have latched onto the meme that democracy and (their) freedom (to do whatever they want to the lower classes) aren't compatible, and these people bought control of the algorithms that are currently brainwashing anyone within eyeshot of a screen.
It did not find nothing, it found that the allegations were largely true and then shrugged and said "oh well, presidents are immune so no criminal conspiracy".
Mueller's report said: "the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."
Perhaps you're talking about obstruction of justice. Yes, Mueller refused to state a conclusion about that, but Trump could have been charged with that by the Biden administration after he was out of office. Yet, despite widespread "lawfare", Democrats never tried to bring that charge. Why not?
Because there we slam dunk cases against him for Jan 6 and the classified documents. Neither of which was lawfare. Neither of which would imperil any intelligence techniques or assets by being brought up during a trial.
I get why this got flagged and I'm kind of sad for that.
I found Mueller to be highly ethical at times and driven by irrationality (to the point of disingenuousness) at other times. There was a lot to cover about him.
What I find most interesting is that HN posters seem to overwhelmingly skew liberal, but HN flaggers lean extremist “conservative”. They rarely post, but completely control the discourse of the posters. Thats a crazy dynamic.
That's one possible interpretation. Another possible one is people don't want to see HN become Trump, Trump, Trump and maybe some other story like the rest of the news.
It just pushes everything to the middle. If you think logically about it, since there are few if any conservative posts, it makes sense that flagging appears to be conservative because the majority of posts that need to be flagged are liberal. If suddenly there were lots of conservative posts, the liberal flaggers would appear.
If you want evidence of this consider comments. Conservative comments are often quickly downvoted.
