While listening to the podcasts on the election, it does seem, that there is a weird disonance between understanding the legal system.
Some people believve, that a law has inert power, that is interpreted by a judge, who then just reads it, understands it and makes a ruling.
On the other hand, there are people who believe, that a law is written as a sentence, that a judge has the inert power to interpret and decide what the correct ruling is.
And I am not comfortable with this gap in understanding.
Never mind stupid systems like the EU, where there's these international courts that can supposedly overrule national ones.
@Jens_Rasmussen
Well, the point was related to the "insurrection" 4 years ago.
One side says, that Trump did act based on a belief, that his interpretation of law would be justified in court, while the other one says, that he BROKE the law, hoping that the judge would change the law by interpreting it.
And that is an insane duality of the same action.
@Jens_Rasmussen
I am talking about the entire "fake electors" stuff.
The entire protest stuff is just retarded cope without excuse.
@Jens_Rasmussen
Also, I seriously don't care about the real mental state of Trump in this case, but about the mental framework of people reading the news.
Maybe when someone told him to back down and leave his supporters hanging, was the closest you'll get to that.