A retired Tennessee law enforcement officer was held in jail for more than a month this fall after police arrested him over a Facebook post of a meme related to the September assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

Prosecutors eventually dropped the criminal charge brought against Larry Bushart, but his stint behind bars came to exemplify the country’s tense political and legal climate following the tragedy, when conservatives sought to stymie public discourse about the late controversial figure that it saw as objectionable.

Now, Bushart is suing over his incarceration.

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    4 hours ago

    (From the article)

    This is the image they jailed him for.

    This should be a slam dunk win for him. Blatant political retribution. The people who jailed him should be jailed, disbarred, fined, etc., the citizens shouldn’t have to pay the court award for their fascism.

    • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Yeah, but will any of the police officers involved in this disgrace lose anything? Or is it just going to be taxpayers signing a settlement check again?

  • Fizz@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    71
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    16 hours ago

    The US has lost their license to roast us (the rest of the world) for saying mean things on the internet and getting a vist from the police. Welcome to the club you fat bitch.

    • infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      14 hours ago

      I assure you the United States has both people who will continue to try making that roast, and people who never felt like they had that freedom in the first place.

  • Jax@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    280
    ·
    19 hours ago

    He quoted Trump saying ‘We need to just get over it’ about the Perry High School shooting in Iowa.

    What he said wasn’t even hateful, it was a fucking quote.

  • DarkSideOfTheMoon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    16 hours ago

    At least he is American and can sue. Some immigrants were deported and had their lives destroyed just because they had their opinions

  • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    149
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    19 hours ago

    As he should, absolutely his first amendment right was violated.

    If the right can spout pure hatred and bullshit with impunity, so can everyone else.

  • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Was there ever a time that Republicans actually stayed true to their principles when it wasn’t to their advantage?

    In my life experience I honestly can’t think of a time.

    • BassTurd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Almost 100% of the time actually. You gotta think, what are republican principles? The answer is hate and bigotry, and the vast majority have stuck to that in spades.

      • phutatorius@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        The only principle of any conservative is more money and power to the owning class. Everything beyond that is tactics.

      • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        I just read a paper saying that one of the primary objectives of Conservatism has always been to cover up Pedophilia. Many of their members are wealthy, and have transcended normal sexual behavior into more exotic forms, including pedophilia. They know the Dems would throw them under the bus immediately, but the Conservatives will circle the wagons. The Epstein Files is the example that proves the point.

      • KelvarCherry@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        until someone send them hate for their political actions; or they find some fringe group that hates ALL men / ALL white people, and conservatives lose their shit over that for years.

      • Madison420@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        22
        ·
        15 hours ago

        I think you might need to learn less civil war mythology and more actual history.

        They weren’t holding up to their principals then either, the whole thing was genuinely about states rights they just said their rights overruled other states rights because ownership of property didn’t change via interstate travel.

        It’s far more stupid then most textbooks imply.

          • Madison420@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            4 hours ago

            To retain ownership across state lines where the property is considered a limited person in the other state. What part of this makes you think I do not know the property in question were people, that isn’t however why the feds got involved. State sovereignity was. Even after emancipation it was still legal to own people and still technically is to this day as slavery was never outlawed it was simply limited. To add to that children were still held as property until I want to say 1930 to the point that the first successful children’s welfare group was the goddamn ASPCA arguing children are property like livestock that it’s morally and economically unreasonable to abuse.

            Your myopic and arguably ignorant meme usage and is implication is exactly what I mean by mythology.

            • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 hours ago

              To retain ownership across state lines where the property is considered a limited person in the other state.

              But that wouldn’t work for say heroin.

              If your state says heroin is legal and the fed says it’s illegal, you can’t really leave your state and still legally be in possession of it.

              I guess you could claim you own a person in a red state but once they leave, you no longer own them?

              Wasn’t that the red states’ whole complaint? That their slaves shouldn’t be considered free men once they leave?

              So in conclusion, the whole states rights argument doesn’t work because what they actually wanted was to have their state’s laws apply across the country.

              And this doesn’t even talk about the moral issues which imo and most people’s opinion should override the above logic anyway.

              • Madison420@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                3 hours ago

                That was an actual issue in America, nice of you to point that out for me and it’s also why drug prohibition was federalized.

                Correct, that was their property right claim. It’s nonsensical but quite a lot of wars are over nonsensical shit.

                So in conclusion, the whole states rights argument doesn’t work because what they actually wanted was to have their state’s laws apply across the country.

                No one said it worked, they fought and lost a war about it but that doesn’t actually make it not their argument nor does it imply we shouldn’t teach that property rights across state lines were the cause of the civil war, not in particular slavery as slavery was never outlawed and people were still considered property until well into the 1900s.

                Nuance is sometimes difficult to deal with but that doesn’t mean we should pare away inconvenient truths.

                Morality is subjective and therefore difficult to argue which is why they fought it as a property rights issue instead.

          • Madison420@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            15
            ·
            15 hours ago

            Read a history book those are all facts. Sure repubs were the “good guys” at the moment but that too is warped, Lincoln was against immediate emancipation but for slow rolling emancipation.

            Look it up, the mythology behind the civil war in this country is fuckin wild.

            • ngdev@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              14 hours ago

              youre fucking dumb and any conversation about the civil war, states rights, and property that does not mention slaves and that people are not property is disingenuous and fucking stupid. youre a fucking moron lol like fr? it was about states not recognizing property? you fucking clown lmao it was about (southern) states not recognizing people

              • HarneyToker@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                14 hours ago

                Yeah, I’m pretty sick of the “It was a different time” bullshit too. It was not about property because people are not property, and humans decided that slavery is wrong LONG before the Civil War. Look in the fucking Bible, the most disseminated piece of literature of all time, and the book that many dumbasses say the US was founded on.

                • Madison420@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  14 hours ago

                  I don’t believe people are property but we aren’t talking about what I believe we’re talking about how the civil war was framed and specifically the mythology it’s evolved into. Sure sane people don’t believe slavery is a righteous endeavor but clearly that’s not changed anything today nor in the past given that slavery hasn’t ended globally and in the US slavery specifically and legislatively isn’t illegal in certain instances like lawful imprisonment, again mythology.

              • Madison420@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                14 hours ago

                That’s clearly the property that was being referred to, I’m sorry I didn’t specifically spell that out for you.

                It was about states rights, they just framed it as interstate property rights because slaves were property. Again I apologize for not pandering to the dumbest among us but you’re making a good point that I shouldn’t discount just how dumb people can be.

              • Madison420@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                6 hours ago

                No one is sitting anything but teaching history instead of mythology. Though I do think you might need to work on your teaching comprehension if you got support or of anything I’ve said.

          • Madison420@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            6 hours ago

            Traitors clearly, I’m legitimately amazed you think knowing history is supporting the Confederacy. I know quite a bit about WW2 and want that taught directly as well, does that make me a Nazi?