Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Piscator *'s avatar

Trump didn’t suggest shooting protesters in the legs until after the generals quashed his first idea-indiscriminate deadly force.

Expand full comment
JW Mansour's avatar

If our rights and liberties are dependent on who occupies the White House then we don’t actually have rights and liberties*; we have indulgences and privileges subject to the whim of one person.

If the president’s SCOTUS granted immunity allows him to violate the law at will in violation of our individual rights and liberties then we don’t actually have rights and liberties, we exist as either slaves or worshipful minions.

That doesn’t sound like the land of the free and the home of the brave, does it? Why is this so hard for some to understand?

*They certainly aren’t “inalienable”.

Expand full comment
4 more comments...

No posts