A Trump official previously complained about a caption beside his National Portrait Gallery photo mentioning his impeachments and the U.S. Capitol insurrection.
Access options:
- gift link — registration required
- archive.today
A Trump official previously complained about a caption beside his National Portrait Gallery photo mentioning his impeachments and the U.S. Capitol insurrection.
Access options:
In no way is compliance with safety laws compromising the mission of a museum. That’s one difference between those “laws” and it’s an important one. Another difference is that an executive order is not a law.
That’s what you choose to focus on? I’m not going to get into the minutiae of what a law is.
My overarching point here was that this omission may have been a purposeful tactic, and that I don’t believe a misstep taints the institution as a whole. I attempted to bring this to a polite close once you confirmed the inflexibility of your point of view.
Consider yourself to have won this conversation if that’s what you need.
Sure, dude. The meaning of words like “law” is minutia in the same way that a museum’s dereliction of duty to the truth is just a minor misstep that will be redressed once the mad king who issues decrees from his social media account just decides to stop being a tyrant. When hasn’t appeasing a tyrant worked, after all?
It’s all just so complicated, and not at all that a single guy is saying he has all of the authority in the world, limited only by his own morality and is calling on you with powers that he doesn’t legally possess to rewrite recent, thoroughly documented events and you’re licking his boots in hopes that he’ll leave you alone for a little while.