I’ve been having a number of conversations on Hexchan recently trying to make sense of their politics. The most common instance of their hateful hypocrisy I’ve encountered is this constant assurance that they support trans people while immediately attacking and dog piling and trans people who point out that the situation would be much worse under Trump.

The hexchanners who aren’t actively Russian trolls seem to be little more than useful idiots for conservatives, minimizing the damage they do to vulnerable populations and engaging in high school level pettiness and hate.

https://lemmygrad.ml/comment/1879291

  • Frank [he/him, he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    Lol packing the court is categorically different than assassinating them.

    It's not "assassination", it's targeted killing, and it's perfectly legal and above board. The Supreme Court said so. The President gets to decide who dies and there's no judicial review possible because it's a "political question".

    At minimum, what you're describing would lose a bunch of Democratic support, and if a bunch of your own party is against you it's ultimately not going to work.

    Master statesman Saddam Hussein had a solution for that specific problem. You get all your party members in a room, demand they pledge personal loyalty to you, and then force the ones who did pledge to shoot the ones that didn't. Bam. Party discipline secured.

    I'm not asking for much. Just for the president to exercise the same tactics to control uncooperative democratically elected governments at home that he uses abroad. Biden allegedly couldn't do anything because Manchin and/or Sistema just couldn't be brought to the table for some weird reason. Somehow the guy who controls the army, the intelligence aparatus, the justice department, the DEA, the IRS, and the Post couldn't find any way to make them move even a little teeny weensie bit.

    • JuneFall [none/use name]
      ·
      1 year ago

      I'm not asking for much. Just for the president to exercise the same tactics to control uncooperative democratically elected governments at home that he uses abroad.

      Sounds funny, but it rings quite true. I am not sure with the decisions of the supreme court how one could stop those actions legally.

      • Frank [he/him, he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        AFAIK Congress could pass a law explicitly stating it's illegal for the president to murder people on a whim, but under the current legal regime I don't think there's any recourse at all. When al-Awlaki's father tried to represent his son before the court, arguing that al-Awlaki couldn't come in person because the US would extralegally shoot him in the head the second they had him in custody, the courts told him he had no standing and to fuck off. That was a whole ass moment.