I’m not saying the argument doesn’t have merit. I’m saying that this case wasn’t about “paying hush money to a porn star”. I really don’t care who he is if he can’t be nuanced. The world is not black and white. Bad Empanada is guilty of a straw man here and the result is that people who generally agree with the argument can’t tell if this is for or against Trump. Read a certain way it minimizes what Trump did. “Oh those other presidents did war crimes but THIS? This itty bitty little fraud is what gets a former president indicted?”
I’m not saying the argument doesn’t have merit. I’m saying that this case wasn’t about “paying hush money to a porn star”. I really don’t care who he is if he can’t be nuanced. The world is not black and white. Bad Empanada is guilty of a straw man here and the result is that people who generally agree with the argument can’t tell if this is for or against Trump. Read a certain way it minimizes what Trump did. “Oh those other presidents did war crimes but THIS? This itty bitty little fraud is what gets a former president indicted?”