There have been calls for the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas,to be investigated over the attempts to overturn the 2020 election results.

  • Hot Saucerman
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    People think Elon Musk is an idiot (he is, but that’s beside the point I’m making) because he acts like the rules don’t apply to him.

    The thing is, for the most part, they don’t. He breaks the law with abandon because he knows he can get away with it and what punishments that can and will be handed down to him will be so miniscule that he can hand-wave them away each time he’s faced with them.

    In other words, part of the reason people like this are grand fucking idiots is because they’ve literally had no pushback, like ever, for their fucking chicanery.

    What’s really funny is that you can actually replace the name “Elon Musk” in my first sentence with a litany of other names “Donald Trump,” “Rudy Giuliani,” and so on. There really is a whole swath of society who are the biggest fucking morons you will ever meet because they’ve been completely enabled by a system that refuses to punish them because they have money.

    Dave Chapelle is now a rich piece of shit, too, but there was a point where it seemed like he understood this disparity in policing behavior. Considering this sketch was from around 2005, it’s kind of wild to see how things have only become worse and more brazen since then.

    Arguably, the worse and more brazen issue is another nail in the coffin of “these motherfuckers are absolutely stupid as shit” because they think we can’t see through their charade and how much more out-in-the-open their corruption is now. They’re not even hiding it.

    • mPony@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      The “not hiding it” is a flex.
      It’s the “hey, look what I can do” playground mentality expressed by a hyper-rich hyper-powerful person. It’s “grab the legal system by the pussy.”

      • Hot Saucerman
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I understand that, but it seems pretty stupid to me, considering human history. Rubbing your citizens noses in how you’ve captured government and make them follow rules you don’t have to follow doesn’t usually end super great for the leaders.

        Partially because corruption leads to the country failing to meet its basic obligations, and thereafter citizens will riot because they can no longer feed their starving children.

        It certainly feels like they think they’ve got citizens cowed enough, and for the moment, they surely have. However, with inequality spiraling way beyond where it was in the Gilded Age and the French Revolution, and with many instances of “let them eat cake”-like gestures and statements, I find it hard to believe that this won’t bite the people “running the show” in the ass in the Muammar Gaddafi kind of way.

        Quality of life is way down, cost of living is way up, it’s not sustainable without pushback from people who begin to starve, and the “flexing” just gives them more reason to build guillotines. Like I said, pretty fucking stupid to not know history and not know how your inane bullshit is going to cripple the country eventually, leading to riots and death.

        You would think conservative politicians would be more aware of this considering it wasn’t that long ago that a bunch of Republican voters stormed the capital, smeared shit on the walls, and built a guillotine while chanting “Hang Mike Pence!”

    • StarServal@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      We need a Poor Nobody Black Man clause to the legal system. If we really want the legal/justice system to apply equally to everyone, then everyone’s identity should be obfuscated and presented as being a poor black man of no fame or renown.

      It shouldn’t have to be this way, and it’s regrettable that people who naturally fall under one or more of those categories experience a different system than if not, but that’s exactly why it could be effective. It could either see the system changed to be less prejudiced, or it could see actual justice being done to those who deserve it most.

      Or I’m just totally out of my mind and don’t realize it.

      • Unaware7013@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’d rather see fines as a percentage of income. It would lessen the burden on the poor and actually give the wealthy meaningful consequences.

        But I know that’s literally the opposite of how the system is designed.