Everyone who says "They're both equally bad. I refuse to vote for either candidate because they both support genocide" can shut the fuck up now.
I strongly suspect most of the people pushing that particular line aren't eligible to vote... in American elections, that is.
I don't, I know what it was like to be an optimistic young adult. I understand the allure of holding strong to an ethical code while others' compromises seem to make the progress all too slow.
The truth is that this shit takes time and requires a lot of pressure - and that's a fucking bitter pill to swallow.
Some of them no doubt, a lot of them are younger voters that are just sick of their country never having been sliding down into more and more blatant evil for their entire lives.
Or ones who don't understand propaganda when they see it
They could have also shut the fuck up at any point previous, but we’ll accept “now” as well.
THANK YOU. Jesus fucking Christ thank you. I'm so sick of this shit
What are you talking about? My close friend from Texas Oblast who owns a barbecuing shop says this all the time!
I'm really tired of Trump not being in prison.
I’m really tired of Trump not being in prison.
Yes, but I'm more tired of realizing he will never be in prison. There's not a judge in the country that seems willing to do more than make him fork over a little of his pocket lint. And if it's ever more than that, it's still going to be an ankle bracelet and a 1% lifestyle.
One justice system for the rich and powerful, another for the rest of us.
It would be great if nature took its course because the legal system never fucking will.
I think the last Republican presidential candidate to sabotage peace talks to help his own campaign was Richard Nixon in the Vietnam War, so Trump is just continuing their tradition of killing innocents for personal gain.
Reagan sabotaged the Iran hostages deal
So it is rumored
And those are only the ones we know of; dealing in death is pretty standard fare for people high up in Washington
It's not rumors anymore. It's a settled fact.
https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a43368900/reagan-iran-hostages/
Bruh. Reagan.
Throwback to Reagan’s team intentionally sabotaging negotiations for the Iran hostage crisis, so it would make Jimmy Carter look bad right before the election.
With Roger fucken Stone lurking in the background in both situations.
The "genocide Joe" crowd is deafeningly silent on this development, i see. How surprising.
Is it ok for Democrats to continue financing a genocide because Trump said he'd do it, too?
Biden isn't even in the race anymore. Why are you still trying to defend him?
Hey, lookit that, I'm learning how to summon them!
Who defended Biden? I pointed out how y'all seem exceedingly quiet on the matter, and what's your response? "Buh-buh-buh-Biden buh-buh-buh-bad!" I'll give ya one thing, you're as predictable as a Swiss watch.
Didn't Nixon do the same thing with the Vietnam war?
And Regan with Iran hostages. It's almost like Republicans always pull this shit and never get in trouble for it...
They didn't jail Nixon or that shitbag kissenger for the same shit, doubt anything will be done about this. Hell, both of those asshats got to live out their years rubbing elbows and "advising" the political elite of both parties.
Nor Reagan
Woohoo maybe this time there will be consequences since he is not president and it can't be an official act ...
How has that worked out so far?
Let's find out in 5 years.
Wow, if only there was something we could do about people crossing legal lines. Alas, we have tried nothing and are out of ideas.
The Logan Act was passed in 1799. A grand total of two people were charged with violating it, and none were convicted.
Those fun facts are never going to change. Prosecutors should find something else to charge Trump with, it won't be hard.
We can always change the traditions
One reason that it's never used is that a lot of lawyers suspect banning negotiation with anyone, even a foreign power, violates the First Amendment.
And if it's used against the Trump then the SCOTUS will surely agree.
How about the media stop using caveats like "may have" when shit is entirely 100% clear.
There are laws on the books regarding things like this. There is no may have. It's cut and fucking dried.
Netanyahu revealing which part of the US he's really an "ally" of. Maybe stop giving blank checks to a foreign power destabilizing your country ~~while you only hand out loans and debt to Ukraine~~?
There has been no consequences to his actions so of course he is going to do whatever he wants.
He's got what, 34 federal crime convictions?
He's still running around and the media is still treating him like some random dude running for president, oh look what crazy don said seven times today!
Shits ridiculous
Wouldn't be the first time he has 'crossed legal lines'.
However, wouldn't it be great if it was the last time?
nail him for treason
and nothing will happen, like every other time he "crossed legal lines"
Trump could punt a baby across a field and nothing would happen.
Supreme court: "To ensure that babies are put in their place, former presidents must enjoy total infant punting immunity."
“I did encourage him to get this over with. You want to get it over with fast. Have victory, get your victory, and get it over with. It has to stop, the killing has to stop,” Trump said at a New Jersey press conference on Thursday, referring to their meeting at Mar-a-Lago last month. But he also criticized cease-fire demands.
In other words Trump wants to have a quick genocide. That is the only way to stop the killing, without having a ceasefire. Even Biden was a hell of a lot better then this.
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
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