mh (-), internet, TERFs, furry haters, uspol
I feel like I'm having another allergic reaction to my own alleged culture. Just keep running into things-- and people-- that make me feel low-grade icky about everything.
I'm so fucking tired of people picking on the things that I love. I thought I was done with this shit after the first-gen troll farms fell apart.
But nope, here they are, right down to an article by some steely-eyed leftist shithead who's determined furry transhumanism is "narcissism" because he vaguely read somewhere Extropians are both libertarians and transhumans, and Libertarian Things Are Selfish, plus a healthy dose of "the only reason someone would want to engage in self-expression is because they think they're the center of the universe."
Toxic. Fucking toxic, right on top of a bunch of uniquely cruel and petty-minded TERFery, and dealing with My Dear Allies getting a basic political fact wrong*. And I don't have time to shovel it out today. And I don't have time to sit around feeling like my life is on the defensive.
All I can do to reassure myself is remember that our very presence INFURIATES these people. They walk around with the same kind of ennui and low-grade irritation every day just because we do our thing. That feels pretty good honestly, because increasingly these are people I WANT to be unhappy. >_<
* Trump CAN invoke executive privilege as an ex-president. There was precedent set in 2001. The leftists confidently knee-jerking that he can't are not 100% wrong but yeah it's about 80%. >___<
mh (-), internet, TERFs, furry haters, uspol
@zebratron2084 I thought the executive privilege thing was part of why impeachment was so important in January?
re: mh (-), internet, TERFs, furry haters, uspol
@Leucrotta Well, it's complicated(TM). There doesn't seem to be any rule that executive privilege CAN'T be exercised by an ex-president. But the ruling was for a specific context and specific cases-- IANAL and couldn't really summarize what those cases are.
So it's still very very possible that Trump's CURRENT issues do not qualify for EP-- it's just that it's flat-out not factually correct to say you "have to still be President" in order to invoke EP. That does not guarantee by any means that Trump can do it as a frickin' insurrection defense.
And this is all my impression based on a frantic 5-minute skim of https://www.lawfareblog.com/can-former-president-assert-executive-privilege-impeachment-trial mid workday so feel free to read and correct me on the details I missed!
re: mh (-), internet, TERFs, furry haters, uspol
@zebratron2084 a quick read provides me with ample evidence for pessimism, since legal precedent seems to go both ways, which then suggests it could be determined by legislators, and anyone vaguely Republican will support their damn Führer. Relying on debatable executive privilege is a sleazy, painfully obvious cover up but Trump’s entire destructive life has been sleazy, obvious and unaccountable.
re: mh (-), internet, TERFs, furry haters, uspol
@Leucrotta EXACTLY. It's like damn near everything else about uspol-- it's determined purely by who's in charge, who's making the rules, how the rulesmaking process can be gamed, and what they can get away with. Abstract principle means NOTHING in the fact of it.
re: mh (-), internet, TERFs, furry haters, uspol
@Leucrotta I did pick up that basically there has to be a compelling reason-- in the interests of the COUNTRY, not the president-- for the documents to be kept secret.
And oh crap, I'd missed that Bush's 2001 executive order was REVOKED by Obama. There's still precedent but... OK, it's much more complex than I can offer an informed opinion on just yet. Let's just say it's complicated(TM). :)