He didn't really know for sure, either, I don't think. That's why it's weird to me that he just 'surrendered'. Was what happened completely legal this way? Can he not go to prison?
Couldn't that have been just because of the immediate confusion and indecision about escalating by the lower unit commanders?
There could have been infighting in the military, but he surely would have had quite some support, no? Why not take the chance if he already commited to imposing martial law?
Edit: sorry if it came across like I support the guy. I don't. I'm just interested in sociology and politics. If you downvote me, could you explain what I'm getting wrong?
Yep, this is originally a righty post. That's why I'm so confused that it's actually kind of based. The rough consensus here is that it's based, so we have bi-partisan support. Let's get this on the Congress floor!
I'm hearing a "cringe" here, though I've heard quite a few "based"s (no consesus as is tradition for leftist discourse) ... I think "based" is winning?
Don't know. I hope this is a random person and they don't have his face.