Why did you say six months?
He's coming.
This matters. This is important. Why did you say six months?
Why did you say five minutes?

Monday, January 18

Rant

Pixy Had Never Seen Such Fuckery

This latest thread from Bret Weinstein requires a response, because it is the most outrageous political commentary I have ever seen from anyone not already on trial at Nuremberg.

(Full text on Threadreader - though I'm not sure if it will survive if the tweets get deleted.)



First: Encouraged supporters to do what, Bret?  Peaceably assemble and petition the government for redress of their grievances?  Because that is what he actually did.

Second: Congress has neither the right nor the power to prevent him from seeking political office again.  That would be a violation of his First and Fifth Amendment rights, and the Tenth Amendment rights of the states and of his supporters.  It is not anywhere in the enumerated powers of the Senate, nor in the Constitutional procedure for the election of the president.

Third: Are you fucking kidding me?  That would require a show trial of a single day, and then you speak of avoiding political witch-hunting?



Fourth: No, the nation is not more important than any person.  The nation is the people.  Putting the nation before its own people is not merely the road to disaster, it is the disaster itself.

Fifth: Our focus on Trump is not unnatural.  We have not been drawn into anything.  That's you.  That's the Democrats.  That's the mainstream media.  You have been driven insane by your own irrelevance.

Sixth: If the Senate acts as you describe, it will be catastrophic.  They will be wiping their behinds with the Constitution, trampling every process and protection in the name of - in the name of what, exactly?  They will never be forgiven.

Seventh: If the republic cannot afford an innocent man to go free, then the republic cannot be saved, indeed, is not worth saving.  Not that I even for a moment accept your premise.


Eighth: This is not a pro nor anti-Trump proposal.  It is a fascist proposal.  You have explicitly placed the state before the rule of law or the rights of the individual.  You have determined that a show trial, without rules, without evidence, without opportunity for defense, is somehow just.

Ninth: And who, pray tell, has put the republic into a tailspin?



Tenth: The president's family?  Why would they need a pardon at all?

Eleventh: Beyond?  Beyond to where?  Just pardon everyone?

Twelfth: Hope is unpatriotic now?



Thirteenth: I agree with nothing you have said.  Nobody should agree with anything you have said.  Your premises are false.  Your understanding of the law is juvenile.  Your proposed course of action is totalitarian.  And your logic has the intellectual rigour of warm jello.

Fourteenth: Speaking for the world - which I do, I have a permit - fuck the world, if this is what it takes to "save" it.


Coda


The nation is divided between fascists and defenders of liberty, and you, Bret, have made it abundantly clear you do not side with the latter.


Postscript



This is Weinstein's podcast.  I haven't watched it and don't intend to, but I will note that the comments are not kind.  Not kind at all.  And this is from his own viewers.

It seems that the YouTube commentariat is less hopelessly lost than Twitter.

Update: And the savaging he's getting in the comments is apparently what remains after a purge.  I can barely imagine what the deleted comments were like.


more...

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 01:53 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 782 words, total size 7 kb.

<< Page 1 of 1 >>
44kb generated in CPU 0.12, elapsed 0.5614 seconds.
51 queries taking 0.5017 seconds, 183 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Using https / https://ai.mee.nu / 181