That’s not what I’m saying, OP asked an LLM for a legal opinion on what democrats could do. LLMs are terrible at legal questions/opinions. Of the things it says, if they were true and made legal sense, none of it would stop the current war any time soon, it’s stuff that would take years to figure out, by which time this likely has blown over for the next crisis.
By all means, prosecute the fucker and his administration for everything and try and make his life hell. But asking an LLM for a legal opinion on what democrats could do seems like top grade cope/virtue signaling so someone can feel better going “see, there’s all these things they can do, but they don’t, so they’re in on it and bad”. when there’s enough valid reasons to think that about democrats without falling back on slop and there’s no shortage of valid criticism, nor valid actions they could take.
You’ve just demonstrated my favorite excuse from Dems.
“It’s okay that they don’t do anything because opposition is hard, and it might not work anyway, so why do anything?”
Not a democrat or even american, so 🤷
That’s not what I’m saying, OP asked an LLM for a legal opinion on what democrats could do. LLMs are terrible at legal questions/opinions. Of the things it says, if they were true and made legal sense, none of it would stop the current war any time soon, it’s stuff that would take years to figure out, by which time this likely has blown over for the next crisis.
By all means, prosecute the fucker and his administration for everything and try and make his life hell. But asking an LLM for a legal opinion on what democrats could do seems like top grade cope/virtue signaling so someone can feel better going “see, there’s all these things they can do, but they don’t, so they’re in on it and bad”. when there’s enough valid reasons to think that about democrats without falling back on slop and there’s no shortage of valid criticism, nor valid actions they could take.