• Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    3 days ago

    and after that was approved

    This is where I lose the plot. Someone in charge saw the request to put up a statue of epstein, and said “Well this seems like a plan I can trust!”

    Wat???

    • just2look@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      3 days ago

      Protest art on the national mall isn’t a new thing. So I’m not sure why it surprising that a bureaucrat did their job when presented with a legal request?

      It’s possible the president will be a giant man baby and order it removed again, but that doesn’t really have anything to do with the request and approval process.

      • Regrettable_incident@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 days ago

        Yeah, they probably have a list of rules like ‘Is it obscene?’, ‘Is it hazardous?’ etc and stuff that doesn’t tick any boxes gets the okay.

      • AItoothbrush@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Okay but as a non-american this is a reasonable response. Trumps shitstorm is seeping into every little crack in the government and youre telling me they approved an epstien and trump statue? Kinda wild if you ask me.

    • plz1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      1st amendment. It’s not in good taste (or is absolutely so, depending on your POV), but it’s not inherently inappropriate for public view. I’m more surprised it was allowed back, though, since this admin would absolutely fire the entire team that approved the permit the first time.