Possible typo... The article states: "She’d like to go to trial immediately, while the memory of living under de facto military obligation was fresh in her fellow citizens’ minds."
I think it meant to use the word "occupation" instead of "obligation" - maybe an auto-correction goof?
And maybe also: "The DOJ filed a superseding criminal information on October 10..."
which I suspect was meant to be an "indictment", not an "information"... ?
I think it's easy for us to read an article like this, enjoy the chuckle, then move on. It brightens our day to be reminded that there are small pockets of reality/resistance left in the nation.
But I'm concerned that if we do this, then we miss the broader picture - that when some goon scrapes their knuckles whilst rough-handling a peaceful protestor, the government is willing to *lie to a court* in order to perpetuate the fiction that this is some kind of armed insurrection or rebellion. Meanwhile, when other parties get caught actually moving boxes of classified materials so as to thwart a legitimate search warrant, that is somehow a vindictive prosecution.
But the concerning thing is that what appears to be a certain "persecution complex" on the part of the President is only accelerating the slide in to authoritarianism, fueled by the mistaken belief that somehow the prosecutions brought against the President were mendacious and vindictive and that the only thing that will satisfy him is to subject perceived antagonists to an even more harsh fate.
I understand that the President feels wronged. But there was nobody there to caution restraint against these prosecutions. There was nobody there to caution restraint against bombing fishing boats in the southern Caribbean. What will be the next instance when restraint was needed and missing?
Possible typo... The article states: "She’d like to go to trial immediately, while the memory of living under de facto military obligation was fresh in her fellow citizens’ minds."
I think it meant to use the word "occupation" instead of "obligation" - maybe an auto-correction goof?
And maybe also: "The DOJ filed a superseding criminal information on October 10..."
which I suspect was meant to be an "indictment", not an "information"... ?
I think it's easy for us to read an article like this, enjoy the chuckle, then move on. It brightens our day to be reminded that there are small pockets of reality/resistance left in the nation.
But I'm concerned that if we do this, then we miss the broader picture - that when some goon scrapes their knuckles whilst rough-handling a peaceful protestor, the government is willing to *lie to a court* in order to perpetuate the fiction that this is some kind of armed insurrection or rebellion. Meanwhile, when other parties get caught actually moving boxes of classified materials so as to thwart a legitimate search warrant, that is somehow a vindictive prosecution.
But the concerning thing is that what appears to be a certain "persecution complex" on the part of the President is only accelerating the slide in to authoritarianism, fueled by the mistaken belief that somehow the prosecutions brought against the President were mendacious and vindictive and that the only thing that will satisfy him is to subject perceived antagonists to an even more harsh fate.
I understand that the President feels wronged. But there was nobody there to caution restraint against these prosecutions. There was nobody there to caution restraint against bombing fishing boats in the southern Caribbean. What will be the next instance when restraint was needed and missing?