The Political Satire/Meme Thread
- Thread starter Danoff
- 13,687 comments
- 749,280 views
UKMikey
Premium
- 17,816
- Grea'er Laandan
- UKMikeyA
- UKMikeyA
Regrettably, this indeed seems to be the case with a particular brand of online commenter which likes to "end" arguments with "yeah but 🇺🇦 is the universal sign of stupidity..." while seemingly unaware that the
Last edited:
Joey D
Premium
- 47,251
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
Unfortunately, they haven't investigated other presidents as extensively because other presidents didn't run their mouths and admit to crimes on social media. Trump shouldn't be the exception here, he should be setting the precedent that we investigate politicians and hold them accountable for committing crimes. And, if they're found guilty of crimes, they should be punished just as severely as anyone else would. If Trump is convicted, then he should 100% be in federal prison.
Nixon should've absolutely been charged but wasn't, and I don't believe for an instant the Clintons aren't dirty.
With Biden, it's hard to tell what's real and what the Republicans are pulling out of their ass. I don't think Biden is clean, but I also don't think he's the crimelord that the Republicans are trying to paint him as. Some of Biden's family on the other hand seems like they're shady, but what wealthy and influential family isn't full of shady characters?
Nixon should've absolutely been charged but wasn't, and I don't believe for an instant the Clintons aren't dirty.
With Biden, it's hard to tell what's real and what the Republicans are pulling out of their ass. I don't think Biden is clean, but I also don't think he's the crimelord that the Republicans are trying to paint him as. Some of Biden's family on the other hand seems like they're shady, but what wealthy and influential family isn't full of shady characters?
Danoff
Premium
- 33,739
- Mile High City
I'm really not understanding this consistent need to claim that others are bad too. It's ok for Trump to be the guy we're talking about right now. We don't need to say "but also maybe the clintons, and people are making noise about the bidens" in the process. Nixon probably should have been charged for something, but it's hard to know what would have happened if the appetite was there. Nixon defused the situation instead of insisting on pushing it.
- 13,140
- Seattle-ish
This need for false equivalents is embarrassing. Trump clearly committed massive criminal acts. Whatever sketchy things the Clintons or Bidens have done are insignificant in comparison. “Well, yes, Trump got blind drunk and intentionally drove his SUV into a crowd of BLM protesters killing dozens, but I saw the Clintons speeding on I-695 once, and I’m pretty sure Biden didn’t renew the license tabs on his Corvette, so, pretty much the same, right?
¯\(ツ)/¯”
¯\(ツ)/¯”
Last edited:
Joey D
Premium
- 47,251
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
Because there's this idea that Trump is the only criminal president.
What I'm saying is Trump isn't the exception; he's likely the rule. As a country, we should demand better from our politicians and support investigating them. If you're an elected leader, you should exemplify the best we have to offer, not the worst, and I'm tired of having to put up with it.
The thing is, we don't know if they are insignificant in comparison or not because things aren't/weren't investigated as heavily as Trump. Other presidents also knew when to keep their mouths shut and how to bury scandals, whereas Trump just embraced it because he's an idiot. It also shouldn't matter the level of crime being committed. If you, I, or anyone else without influence would be arrested for it, then politicians shouldn't be exempt, but that's not what happens.
Joey D
Premium
- 47,251
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
Except we know other presidents have committed crimes. If you want the most obvious example, Bill Clinton straight-up committed perjury and obstruction, an act that would land you or me in jail.
As for others, Reagan flagrantly broke the law with the Iran-Contra Affair, Nixon broke several laws with Watergate, and, for the most famous example, Warren Harding absolutely committed god knows how many crimes but had the good sense to die before he could be arrested. If you venture into war crimes, there probably isn't one president who isn't guilty of something but that's probably a pretty iffy area.
Danoff
Premium
- 33,739
- Mile High City
Clinton perjured himself in a sexual harassment case. Sexual harassment is an interesting crime in that it wasn't a crime in the time of earlier presidents, so many presidents have likely done it. The perjury (a crime) was to get away with a crime that didn't used to be a crime. You can say Clinton should have faced steeper punishments, and you'd almost certainly be right, but it's not remotely in the ballpark of what Trump has done. Each one of Trump's big offenses, and there are quite a few, is significantly worse than Clinton's perjury and sexual harassment. Clinton was impeached for his actions, Trump has been impeached twice - each time for worse.
With regard to Reagan and Iran Contra, it's not completely clear what Reagan knew. Regarding "war crimes", that's simply not something we hold the president accountable for. The president's job is to wield the military in the interest of the US. As far as I know the only way for that military action to be considered criminal is if it's wielded against US citizens, and even then there appear to be opportunities.
With regard to Nixon, he definitely broke laws. Nixon's offenses weren't as bad as Trump's either, but they were worse than any previously mentioned here. As far as criminal presidents, the top of the list prior to Trump was Nixon, but Trump is absolutely head and shoulders above.
Regardless, even if it weren't, even if somehow Nixon was a bigger criminal than Trump as president, we should still discuss Trump in isolation and hold him accountable to actual standards. It was worth discussing Clinton's perjury at the time even though Nixon was worse, and Nixon's behavior in no way diminished Clintons, and nor did it need to be mentioned in the context of Clinton. If it did, there was no point in discussing Clinton's acts whatsoever. It was wrong for the President to sexually harass staffers, and it was wrong for him to try to cover it up. The fact that it paled in comparison to Nixon was immaterial. Nixon need not enter the discussion.
The same is true of Trump of course. Nixon and others need not enter the discussion. Trump's criminal acts are many, and they are shockingly horrific. The fact that we've gotten used to them is also part of the problem. He needs to be held accountable. It's useful to put him in context, but there is no need to bring up context for any sense of even-handedness. Trump's crimes stand on their own, and we can complain about them in isolation without hypocrisy.
Last edited:
- 29,501
- Bratvegas
- GTP_Liquid
Europe's Future Map (1915)
In the event of a central powers victory.
England, Wales - German Buffer Zone
France - New German Imperial Realms
Poland - Kingdom of Poland (German Federal Territory)
Scotland - Kingdom of Scotland
Ireland - Kingdom of Ireland
Cornwall - Rump England
For North and East Europe, only Switzerland, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway and Sweden remain untouched.
In the event of a central powers victory.
England, Wales - German Buffer Zone
France - New German Imperial Realms
Poland - Kingdom of Poland (German Federal Territory)
Scotland - Kingdom of Scotland
Ireland - Kingdom of Ireland
Cornwall - Rump England
For North and East Europe, only Switzerland, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway and Sweden remain untouched.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll
