But of course.
Reminder that on their "deep investigation" into the alleged molestation case against Tara Reade, the NYT actually published the following paragraph, then stealth-edited it out minutes later:
>"No other allegation about sexual assault surfaced in the course of reporting, nor did any former Biden staff members corroborate any details of Ms. Reade’s allegation. The Times found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Mr. Biden, beyond the hugs, kisses and touching that women previously said made them uncomfortable."
One of the many reasons why I think this crisis is even deeper than it seems right now is because even the basic mechanisms of accountability within a liberal society are failing, and, perhaps more importantly, failing in a very visible manner. I don't refer to the court system, which is exactly the opposite of basic accountability, it's the definitive one. Because of that, it is very visible on purpose, which makes it obvious to everyone that it isn't perfect, but just as much, that it mostly works. It's a case of highlighting one flaw to obscure others. Let's look at the mechanisms which fall under the umbrella term "checks and balances". These are less visible than courts, both by design -- so they can be skirted with more ease -- and by simply being a much, much less frequent one. The impeachment hearing is a perfect example. It was a shameful event in such a scale way that only Qtards could possibly ignore the blatant and constant disregard for law and ethics. Of course, the simple fact that somehow a literal retard made it to the Oval Office is an even bigger failure of the system.
The mechanisms above, among others, are formal ones, and their violation is bad enough for the system's legitimacy before the public, but, arguably, even worse in the end are informal mechanisms, the most basic ones, unstated but expected behavior. It's a rather subtle category of that usually stands, but has been thoroughly ruined in the Trump administration. I guess you could cynically call them the "rules of the game", but a much better description would be, the "not even they would dare do that
" mechanisms. You know the kind of expectations of behavior that are assumed, a liturgy of sorts, that politicians are supposed to follow so as to not give the game up? Behavior that you hardly ever noticed because it was almost never broken, but whose breaking makes it glaring? Trump does that literally without thinking. Like asking other heads of State to help him win an election? That's something a civilized person just plain won't do, but he did, does and will keep doing because he's just plain to dumb to notice and too evil to care. Also the extortion mentioned here >>756120
. There are far too many examples of his clan doing it, so I'll skip on those. Of course, him flaunting all expected behavior from a president is, ultimately, just an extension of him ignoring even simple politeness and civility.
The point is, if these mechanisms which assumed to be there but never were triggered completely fail to do so when they're very, very clearly needed, well then they never existed in the first place then, did they? "The papers will tear him a new one", "his support base will disown him", "he will lose allies in Congress", you know, the sort of repercussions which everyone expected would happen, which made other politicians and personalities at least pretend to care about truth, justice and the American way. And there was precisely jack shit. There are multiple reasons for this (the sheer volume of heresies Trump commits, the incessant whining of liberal press is like crying wolf and makes actual issues fall through etc.), but the fact of the matter is, their failure does immense damage to the system's legitimacy, even if on a mostly unconscious level. And it should be pointed out that, besides eroding the people's trust, this only encourages other monsters.
If Joe Average can't expect an ogre like Trump to be treated fairly by the system i.e. suffer some
comeuppance, how can he expect it to treat him fairly for being a decent person? And the multiple crises are driving this point home, deeply. Like I said about the courts, no one can be surprised that the judiciary sometimes fails, it deals with grave matters and stakes are high so the players involved will try to escape justice and occasionally succeed, but hey, it mostly works and nothing is perfect. But this complete disregard for even the most basic social mores going completely unpunished? That's what settles it. It obviates that what the system is supposed to do is the exception now, and perhaps always has been. The formal mechanisms failing too often lets us see the rot within the system, the informal ones failing means it's too late.