This is mostly why we're better than they are: these things sometimes get reported, and our media criticizes these actions. There's a non-zero chance of punishing these people.
On the other side, these people are universally treated as heroes and if they're given something, it's medals or promotions.
But of course, we will need to actively work to maintain this superiority. It can vanish in an instant.
What a poor excuse of a cameraman.
I don't understand why a democrat president wouldn't abuse this. In fact, why doesn't the person who tells Biden what to do order Trump executed right now? I'm sure an accident with reasonable doubt could be arranged.
Fair enough. But then again, if you didn't have that, the campaigns of both sides would employ different strategies, leading to different outcomes.
No no, they just mean that people like that should have large penises. Extremely libertarian.
There's another theory why this is: calling Trump an existential threat is just a dishonest way to try to make people care about voting. They want to win for reasons that have nothing to do with how much in danger democracy is.
She’d never want to be President.
Paraphrasing Douglas Adams, that would make her the best candidate. But in real life, perhaps not so much.
Biden's security after his presidency is probably not in the top #1000000 of the problems if Trump becomes a president.
What I don't get is what would stop Biden from ordering the assassinations of Trump and 1000 of his closest supporters if this gives total presidential immunity?
What's the context for "were crushing it"?
We might compare Assange's treatment to how Navalny was treated. Assange is not dead and I believe he's about to be freed. And he did actual crimes whereas Navalny's crime was being a political opponent to Putin.
I don't know who or what civilist was.