Well said. I could not agree more. And very few of these random "purity tests" -- where the liberal candidate is horrible, evil, gonna burn down the world because they do not have the right stance on [pick an issue] -- in online conversation ever come across as authentic or genuine to me; rather, they seem to all be using the same playbook and advancing the same talking points, same as it ever was.

For example, I have NEVER, not once, met a fellow American in real life who did not know exactly where they already stood on Trump or Biden by the time the 2024 elections rolled around. Maybe that's because I'm old, but we've all been firehosed with propaganda day in and day out since 2015, and any middle ground had already long disappeared. Maybe such individuals exist, but for me it would be a wild unicorn sighting.

Yet I'm also supposed to believe that people already opposed to Trump would turn on a dime, hold their noses, and vote for him because Kamala = genocide? Hardly. If you genuinely care about genocide you care about people, and in a country where entitled righties were screaming FUCK YOUR FEELINGS at me that was the magical enticement for me or someone like me to stop caring about real people and vote for the one man who very clearly cares about no one but himself at all? Lol, no. I never believed that and I do not now, and anyone who lives here knows why just from their own lived experience.

These new purity tests are just more of the same, and as we get closer to the midterms I am spending less and less time online overall: if we don't see it, it's useless to them, oligarch cash wasted, and that just makes my heart glad.

If votes didn't matter, the oligarchs would not be spending hundreds of millions of dollars to try to change and/or eliminate them.

He was preparing a case to go to trial, one of the most important cases in American history. It's not a reality show. There was never an opportunity back then to make the statements he made this week. Frankly, most of that would have been the content of his opening statement to the court. When was the last time you heard a prosecutor give his opening statement to the media BEFORE he gave it to the court?

He never got the chance to say this stuff, mostly because Biden and Garland dithered and slow-walked the whole thing, compounded by Trump doing the one thing he's good at: manipulating the court schedule. That allowed MAGA to run out the clock, so Trump could cheat his way back into office and kill the investigations.

They should have gone after the 14th Amendment, Section 3 first, and disqualified him from holding office (as well as any other MAGA that supported him), and then gone after the criminal charges.

Jack Smith has been saying the right things all along, you just haven't been paying attention.

And if you expected him to make public announcements about it when he was still conducting the investigation, then you don't understand how the US legal system works because that kind of shit can get solid evidence thrown out in court. He had to cross every t and dot every i in this case, and he did his due diligence. The only place it broke down was when the scotus punted the trial till after the election.

Just because the Biden admin didn’t do shit doesn’t mean leftists think they’re the enemy

We can be mad about them not getting shit done in four fucking years and that doesn’t mean we think he should fucking be on trial by the people he failed to convict.

Your post, however, is a great example of what we mean when we say “lib take”

I’m not playing team sports here. Merrick Garland and Joe Biden were incredibly limp-dicked on this and are the reason we are where we are. They could have stopped this but they were afraid they would lose and they would be targeted for it. They were incredible cowards. Jack Smith put in the work but was ultimately silenced by his boss. He didn’t have to comply but that’s an even bigger risk to himself. None of this makes any of them the enemy.