• jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    21 hours ago

    There’s a big difference between Kissinger and Graham, I mentioned this in another reply, but it bears repeating…

    Kissinger had the power and ability to act alone in his atrocities.

    Graham, as a member of the Senate, did not have that ability. Whatever evils he enacted, he was able to do so with the consent of a majority of the House, Senate and President.

    Kissinger did what he wanted, Graham literally could not on his own.

    Not saying he did good things, he was a complete tool, but a majority of the Legislative branch signed off on the things he did. Not the same thing at all.

    • Axolotl@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      18 hours ago

      he was able to do so with the consent of a majority of the House, Senate and President.

      So he was still a bad person but also other people agreed with him and enabled him to do bad stuff

      This is like saying “Jeff was not a bad person, they would restrain him so he couldn’t kill, while Josh was a very bad person because he could kill without restriction”