Wait no, they were never officially allowed this degree of influence before 1933.
this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2022
16 points (100.0% liked)
United States | News & Politics
7209 readers
381 users here now
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
As always with these things:
-
Imagine if China was the one doing it
-
Imagine what the US would say about that
-
Imagine what the "international" community would say about that
Remember the 2014 referendum in Crimea, which was apparently "held at gunpoint"? Yeah.
The West said they same exact thing over the recent referenda in the four eastern provinces. Of course neglecting to mention that taking a ballot box around to allow those who are stuck at home (elderly and less-abled) to still participate in the voting requires armed security when in a warzone. Propaganda is as propaganda does...sigh
A Trump appointee and Federalist Society member. No surprise there.
Court cannot craft an injunction without violating the First Amendment.
Complete bullshit. Menacing voters at the ballot box is not a freedom of speech concern. There has already been a case that restricted the Republican Party from menacing Black voters in 1981. There's no reason not to do so again to protect the right to vote without having some idiots with guns breathing down voters' necks.
Federalist society stooge of a Judge. Doesn't surprise me, especially after who appointed them to the bench.
Just a vibrant democracy in action, nothing to see here.