politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
I suppose you feel the same way when he was chanting "HANG MIKE PENCE" outside the complex where... Mike Pence was trying to do his fucking job, huh?
Until they breached the capitol, yeah. Of course. It's a fucking protest. By your definition lots of CEOs public death threats on lemmy daily. But they're just doing their jobs. Right? You're supposed to have a wide berth on speech and robust response to action. Especially political figures, even when they're doing their job.
You don't have to demonize and mistreat people having genuine dialog with you. We're allowed to have different opinions and still treat each other like human beings. Overall this is a small disagreement over human rights.
It was always their plan- including this guy's plan- to breach the capital. it was never just a protest, it was a straight up insurrection. Derrick actively encouraged people to break into the capital, and always planned on doing so. and he was convicted for being a leader in the insurrection.
i could accept it was political speech if one never went inside. There were plenty of people that got caught up in the rally. It was this guy's role, in the insurrection to whip up the crowd at the capital complex. the people that weren't part of the plan.
This is the same guy that now posted political leaders hung in effigy. Do you really believe the intent of his post wasn't to incite and encourage more political violence? because that's fundamentally crossing the line from political speech... and there was never any protection from the consequences of that speech. which, you so blithely seem to want to ignore.
I am not calling for him to be hung in a mob lynching- which seems to be exactly what Dereck was calling for, to happen to elected leaders. I am calling for him to lawfully arrested and tried for inciting hate speech. Which is a crime in this country.
I don't know his intent and I'm pretty lenient on plausible deniability. Some of the most vitriolic arguments I get in at work are about criminal justice reform and I have very strong opinions about individual liberties.
You have budged me a bit, though. I think, all strung together, a search warrant for texts and social media around those days would be in order, but if the private communications were useful for anything, it'd probably be the reason to prosecute and the rest of it is just supporting.