This is the part of the so-called “debate” I find most objectionable. The demonizing of opponents and the trashing of institutions because the outcome was unfavorable. This is simply a substitute for critical thinking by those too lazy to actually have a reasoned discourse. Don’t agree with the jury’s verdict in the Trump case? Never mind analyzing the evidence and forming your own conclusion. Simply rail at the vindictive prosecutor, the political appointee judge, the 12 “woke” New York jurors. Intellectual laziness and/or dishonesty.
No, he doesn’t. But that doesn’t mean the mold he does fit is any better.