what can you do, right? the history o' russia, china, north korea, syria and (fill in the blank with whichever nation you believe deserves to be in such illustrious company) is so inexorable enmeshed in corruption and blood, there just ain't a real solution. 'course you could say same for most any nation if you stretch the timeline back far enough, yes? england? france? sweden? any of 'em get off clean if we go back six hundred years? don't need to go back very far with germany, italy and japan, do we? as such, am not sure if shrugging the whole thing off as russians being russians is a compelling counter argument.
the situation in russia is never gonna change if the people in russia in particular keep shrugging off change as impossible.
being poisoned, imprisoned on trumped up embezzlement charges and possible murdered is okie dokie 'cause is russia and 'cause gorth has decided navalny were one o' the bad russians. if am misrepresenting, please clarify, 'cause anarchist or not, you gotta recognize what a precarious moral precipice 'pon which you are standing when you make such distinctions. and as much as we agree navalny's bigotry were rare mentioned by western leaders, you should see such is irrelevant insofar as deciding whether or not being poisoned, imprisoned and possible murdered were justified.
clarification: as an anarchist, gorth don't trust the russian government, but the russian peoples, for the most part, like putin and all those things you dislike about navalny don't bother most russians-- is the reason navalny went to prison for embezzlement and not one o' the sins you mention. can't trust the russians and their six hundred year traditions? ok, now what? does gorth get to decide which russians is bad and deserve punishment. obviously as an anarchist there ain't gonna be a government solution.
maybe gorth just don't care. as long as the bad guys he identifies suffer, then call it a win? am s'posing that works just as long as everybody everywhere agrees to adopt gorth's moral compass. am not gonna hold our breath waiting for that day.
let's use a western example and since a poster improbable brought up trump.
Gromnir is on record as being dubious 'bout the ny hush money case against trump. from as yet uncontroverted evidence, it would appear trump engaged in illegal behaviour multiple times as he paid stormy daniels but did not disclose those payments appropriate on his taxes or campaign contribution records. however, ny is trying to bring a case against trump for felony counts based on a rather novel bootstrapping approach; the individual charges against trump in ny is all misdemeanors. also, ordinary the fed would handle such a case given trump were running for national office, but they declined to do so reported 'cause they had no confidence that their primary witness, michael cohen, would benefit their case. of all the cases against trump, the ny hush money case looks weakest to us and am questioning its legitimacy. much like the mar-a-lago case, am thinking some o' the tv lawyering is giving the public false impressions... though in the mar-a-lago situation the media were underselling the threat to tump as 'posed to oversell.
trump has done all kinda wrongs. his knowing misrepresentations 'bout covid led to hundreds o' thousands o' unnecessary deaths, and those numbers is from folks chosen by trump to serve on his covid advisory team... and am not even talking 'bout fauci. we would be here all day listing the unconstitutional and moral wrongs committed by trump which should make anybody who has ever uttered tds sans irony look like a complete yutz. trump deserves prison, but he ain't going to prison unless it can be proven to a jury o' his peers, and beyond a reasonable doubt, that he committed crimes. is our opinion that even if ny can prove their hush money case against trump, it ain't a case which shoulda' been brought. that said, there is plenty o' other folks with more legal cred than Gromnir who disagree with us and am happy to argue the merits o' prosecuting trump in ny for his porn star payoff.
now suppose one o' the obsidian board liberals, bothered by our opinion on trump's ny case, starts pointing out how things work in russia and china. Gromnir complains 'bout the US media, but boardies ask us to imagine how chinese news papers would cover if somebody xi didn't like were being prosecuted. and btw, there is a whole lotta evidence trump is a russian stooge, so that makes all the russia whatbouting relevant somehow. were literal more than a dozen russian state-sponsored hackers who were convicted o' helping trump and the mueller report found considerable evidence o' collusion by the trump campaign insofar as russia in spite o' what bill barr convinced the maga faithful. is not difficult to find soundbites o' trump which make him look like a russian stooge. in russia, trump would be lucky to have any kinda sham trial, so our handwringing about the ny ag finessing the law a bit is so qq. etc.
insofar as the hush money case is concerned, chinese newspaper coverage, the russian system o' justice, and trump being responsible for more than 100k covid dead is irrelevant. if trump goes to prison for the hush money case, Gromnir is gonna question whether such were a fair outcome.
sounds ridiculous when you do same deflection and whatabouting, yes? heck, we didn't even work in the conspiracy theories.
whatabouting and deflection from the usual suspects hereabout is so reflexive, most o' us don't even consider how silly such is.
aside-- the mar-a-lago case remains the obvious no-brainer/dead-to-rights case trump is facing, but the judge in that case is utter incompetent and is dragging her feet at almost every opportunity. am literal unable to imagine a meaningful defense for trump in that case assuming the state proffered evidence is legit. contrary to conspiracy theorists, is improbable the feds engineered false recordings and made up testimony in their indictment if for no other reason than that such lies would be revealed easily during discovery. is near impossible for trump to claim evidence were planted after he called for a special master to return his seized property. a couple of trump's own attorneys has given testimony which incriminates the former President. there is audio recordings o' trump talking about documents he claimed in an affidavit were not in his possession. is also video tape o' his cronies moving boxes filled contemporaneous with the lawyer and fbi searches. is also the IT guy's testimony. etc.
in any normal situation, the defendant in such a case woulda' tried for a plea deal, but if trump can win the election, the prosecution disappears...
HA! Good Fun!
ps a fun fact am having mentioned once before is that when the US Constitution were penned, felonies were, by definition, those crimes punishable by death. high crimes and misdemeanors were a bit less baffling in 1787. felony v. misdemeanor has changed a smidge over the years. even so, am thinking many people is shocked to learn that in the US, misdemeanor ≠ trivial. max time o' imprisonment for a misdemeanor in most US jurisdictions is one year.