The Republicans are a terrorist party.
I want to be absolutely clear: I mean that the Republicans are a terrorist party in the exact same way as Hamas is a terrorist party in most democracies (including the United States).
This is a political party which supported, and still supports, political violence to overthrow the democratically elected government of the United States - and a good chunk of which wants to install a theocratic government in its stead. Replace “Republican” with any other name, and you would get a declaration that this party, this movement, this organization is a political terrorist organization.
For some reason, Americans have their heads stuck up their collective asses when it comes to these things. The left is trying to rationalize some sort of imbecilic need for “decorum” and “tradition”. I’ve heard countless talking heads recount countless times how we just don’t charge our former Presidents with a crime because it is not our “tradition”.
You know what else isn’t in our tradition? Trying to overthrow the government with a literal violent coup. That’s never happened before either.
Let me explain to people about tradition: We can create tradition. Have you ever heard of the Nuremberg trials? Charging people for Genocide was literally never done before in modern legal history (let alone ancient history). This was a first. And there’s a reason why it’s a legal framework now: because we invented it to deal with a new situation. We didn’t just throw our hands up and say that we didn’t have a “tradition” of charging people with crimes against humanity. We created the conditions in which we could do that as a response to a new situation.
When I was young, we all idolized Lincoln. Do you think that Lincoln had a framework for fighting a civil war? Do you think that he had a framework for freeing the slaves? No. But it seems that Americans, back then, were absolutely willing to respond to situations by creating new frameworks and not necessarily invoking tradition as an excuse to do nothing.
I suggest that we take a page out of that book. Yes, it’s true: We don’t have a “tradition” of charging ex-Presidents with crimes, but we are faced with the situation for the first time in our country’s history wherein we need to charge him with crimes - egregious crimes. And we need to create a framework in which we don’t just shrug it off because it’s “not traditional”, buck up, and do it. And if his followers decide to react with violence, then we deal with them as well.