Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
No, you're not telling me what Trump and his followers will do. You have internalized what they will say as if it's persuasive to anyone else, which it is not, and you are regurgitating it as if it is the way the rest of us think. When you say Judge Berman was "supposed to" to act to avoid Trump attacking her, you're not describing Trump at all. You're repeating his attacks on her and saying that you believe them.
Whenever you say something like this and get challenged on it, you backtrack and pretend that you're just relating "the rules," "the playing field." That's bullshit. Trump will attack anyone and everyone who doesn't accept his dominance. He attacked Judge Curiel, who did not say anything like what Judge Berman Jackson did. When you suggest that Judge Berman Jackson brought Trump's attacks on herself by doing her job as a job, you are being naive at best. Yes, Trump's attacks are absolutely predictable. That's not an objective reality, it's a choice that Trump and his supporters are making. For some reason, their agency never enters into your thinking -- they are just a fact of nature and you spend your time lecturing the Judge Berman Jackson's of the world about how they ought to behave instead.
If, for just a second, you started from the assumption that Trump and his supporters and their decisions are the problem, then you might have different thoughts about what to do about them, and whether what Judge Berman Jackson should do as a federal judge to uphold the rule of law. You literally seem incapable of thinking those thoughts. Trump's dominance politics resonate deeply with you.
I'm sure Judge Berman Jackson was not surprised that Trump supporters attacked her. She absolutely invited attacks with her decision to say what she said. It does not even seem to have occurred to you that she knew what Stone did, she knew what she was saying, she knew that she would be attacked, and that she thought it was worth it.
|
What does “internalized” even mean? That’s a word like “impactful.”
The rest of the first paragraph is beneath both of us. Pass.
The second is true, and I’ve so stipulated. Trump attacks judges. Judges need to deal with that if they care as much as Berman seemed to. You seem offended by it. I don’t care. No one said judges are beyond attack. If a President feels like bullying them, they can fight back. Berman did. You have this bizarre reverence for them. Let them fight. They’re adults. And Trump’s followers are a fact of nature.
I’m so sorry this new evolution upsets your idea of how nature should work. Shit happens. Deal with it.
Trump and his supporters are not a problem. They are actors fighting for power in a system built on power. If you think differently, you’re naive. It’s always been a charade hiding a game of power behind the scenes.
I admitted several times Berman might not have cared, or actually intended to send a message. Go back and reread that. I made sure to repeat it for you. And I never disputed she knew where and how Stone lied. But she does not, and cannot, know that Trump engaged in illegal or unethical acts which were covered up by Stone. Because if she knew those acts, we’d know those acts.
Berman engaged in conjecture, Which She Can Do. But for which she will receive a response, and maybe not a good one. See Newton’s third law.
And now she and you and everybody who’d wish to see Stone go down can see his commutation made a little easier as a result of what Berman said.
Look, dude, you’re done here. You’ve been done. You’re arguing right and wrong in game that has nothing to do with that. It’s like arguing the Sixers are more honorable than the Celtics. My only point is to critique the moves.
