We all know that Trump doesn't do well in court, where facts matter. He'd be well-advised not to try to fight the executive privilege matter in court. Yes, he'll lose. It could also backfire.
One side wants to speed up the process. They envision a conveyor belt. For much of our history, criminal justice meant putting black men in jail. In autocracies, criminal justice is to put political dissenters in jail. . .
Make an outrageous statement not based on fact.
When people call it out as wrong, double down.
Finally, assert that following statutory procedure appears "weak."
Yes, the "bad guys" scorn people who follow the laws.
Does that mean we shouldn't?
Reading the Senate Report now on Trump's months-long attempts to subvert the election: cnn.com/2021/10/07/pol…
The attempts involve repeated abuses of presidential power and violations of "longstanding policies" intended to prevent a president from weaponizing the DOJ.
1/
Finding #1: Trump repeatedly asked DOJ leadership to endorse false claims about the election and to assist his efforts to overturn the election.
I seem to recall @RepAdamSchiff warning Congress that if Trump wasn't impeached and removed he'd keep abusing his power.
2/
Finding #2: Mark Meadows similarly "violated longstanding restrictions on White House-DOJ communications about specific law enforcement matters."
Why it matters: In an autocracy, the autocrat decides who to prosecute. Independent prosecutors are a safeguard of democracy.
Regulations from this era include the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, and our first affirmative action regulations.
"Insane" indeed.
Does anyone remember the economy tanking during the time from JFK to Nixon?
(That would be 1963 until 1968 or 1974, depending on how to count "Nixon.")
I recommend not arguing with such people. They use the firehose of falsehoods method: throw out lots of garbage and wear people out trying correct errors.
I retweeted because I thought the "insane" comment was interesting.
The hatred of regulations is why they hate government.