How are controversial political figures, especially ones with school-age kids, treated in their

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it depends on the age of the child. The younger the child the probability there is less chastising. My child attended a school with children from a highly recognizable person from the past administration. The kids of this person were young, so no issues arose. I bet if the kids were older there would have been all kinds of problems.

I'm particularly wondering about grandchildren/teenage children of a certain past president. The oldest grandchildren are definitely old enough to have current events discussed in school. What is it like for those grandchildren? Are they being kept in a bubble by their parents/parents lying to them about how great their grandparent is and how awful everyone else is? Like, how do you explain an event like January 6 to those grandchildren? How is it discussed in their school?

Trump hasn't been formally implicated so it would be unlikely and inappropriate for a teacher to host a discussion about it. In the DC area in general, partisan issues are kept out of the classroom. Its possible to have a nonpartisan discussion of current events.

Wait, are you saying it would be "inappropriate" to have a discussion in a HS classroom about what happened on 1/6? How about the entirety of the 2000 election cycle and the lawsuits?

It would be inappropriate to say that Trump had a role in the attack. That hasn't yet been officially determined. The event can be discussed in a way that would not be in any way offensive to a Trump kid by discussing the facts and what has been established in court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it depends on the age of the child. The younger the child the probability there is less chastising. My child attended a school with children from a highly recognizable person from the past administration. The kids of this person were young, so no issues arose. I bet if the kids were older there would have been all kinds of problems.

I'm particularly wondering about grandchildren/teenage children of a certain past president. The oldest grandchildren are definitely old enough to have current events discussed in school. What is it like for those grandchildren? Are they being kept in a bubble by their parents/parents lying to them about how great their grandparent is and how awful everyone else is? Like, how do you explain an event like January 6 to those grandchildren? How is it discussed in their school?

The child you’re thinking of goes to a high school founded by a Koch family member.

So said child's parents put him in a bubble.

The grandchildren - to the best of my knowledge - do not attend schools founded by a Koch family member.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it depends on the age of the child. The younger the child the probability there is less chastising. My child attended a school with children from a highly recognizable person from the past administration. The kids of this person were young, so no issues arose. I bet if the kids were older there would have been all kinds of problems.

I'm particularly wondering about grandchildren/teenage children of a certain past president. The oldest grandchildren are definitely old enough to have current events discussed in school. What is it like for those grandchildren? Are they being kept in a bubble by their parents/parents lying to them about how great their grandparent is and how awful everyone else is? Like, how do you explain an event like January 6 to those grandchildren? How is it discussed in their school?

Trump hasn't been formally implicated so it would be unlikely and inappropriate for a teacher to host a discussion about it. In the DC area in general, partisan issues are kept out of the classroom. Its possible to have a nonpartisan discussion of current events.

Wait, are you saying it would be "inappropriate" to have a discussion in a HS classroom about what happened on 1/6? How about the entirety of the 2000 election cycle and the lawsuits?

It would be inappropriate to say that Trump had a role in the attack. That hasn't yet been officially determined. The event can be discussed in a way that would not be in any way offensive to a Trump kid by discussing the facts and what has been established in court.

The bolded is interesting. I think any conversation of that day would necessarily involve actions taken by Trump in the weeks and months and hours before the actual invasion of the Capital that are established fact. Whether a Trump kid would take offense to them is an entirely different question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it depends on the age of the child. The younger the child the probability there is less chastising. My child attended a school with children from a highly recognizable person from the past administration. The kids of this person were young, so no issues arose. I bet if the kids were older there would have been all kinds of problems.

I'm particularly wondering about grandchildren/teenage children of a certain past president. The oldest grandchildren are definitely old enough to have current events discussed in school. What is it like for those grandchildren? Are they being kept in a bubble by their parents/parents lying to them about how great their grandparent is and how awful everyone else is? Like, how do you explain an event like January 6 to those grandchildren? How is it discussed in their school?

Trump hasn't been formally implicated so it would be unlikely and inappropriate for a teacher to host a discussion about it. In the DC area in general, partisan issues are kept out of the classroom. Its possible to have a nonpartisan discussion of current events.

Wait, are you saying it would be "inappropriate" to have a discussion in a HS classroom about what happened on 1/6? How about the entirety of the 2000 election cycle and the lawsuits?

It would be inappropriate to say that Trump had a role in the attack. That hasn't yet been officially determined. The event can be discussed in a way that would not be in any way offensive to a Trump kid by discussing the facts and what has been established in court.

The bolded is interesting. I think any conversation of that day would necessarily involve actions taken by Trump in the weeks and months and hours before the actual invasion of the Capital that are established fact. Whether a Trump kid would take offense to them is an entirely different question.

You would be incorrect. It would be quite easy to discuss that the certification process was disrupted by a violent mob without any discussion of Trump at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it depends on the age of the child. The younger the child the probability there is less chastising. My child attended a school with children from a highly recognizable person from the past administration. The kids of this person were young, so no issues arose. I bet if the kids were older there would have been all kinds of problems.

I'm particularly wondering about grandchildren/teenage children of a certain past president. The oldest grandchildren are definitely old enough to have current events discussed in school. What is it like for those grandchildren? Are they being kept in a bubble by their parents/parents lying to them about how great their grandparent is and how awful everyone else is? Like, how do you explain an event like January 6 to those grandchildren? How is it discussed in their school?

Trump hasn't been formally implicated so it would be unlikely and inappropriate for a teacher to host a discussion about it. In the DC area in general, partisan issues are kept out of the classroom. Its possible to have a nonpartisan discussion of current events.

Wait, are you saying it would be "inappropriate" to have a discussion in a HS classroom about what happened on 1/6? How about the entirety of the 2000 election cycle and the lawsuits?

It would be inappropriate to say that Trump had a role in the attack. That hasn't yet been officially determined. The event can be discussed in a way that would not be in any way offensive to a Trump kid by discussing the facts and what has been established in court.

The bolded is interesting. I think any conversation of that day would necessarily involve actions taken by Trump in the weeks and months and hours before the actual invasion of the Capital that are established fact. Whether a Trump kid would take offense to them is an entirely different question.

You would be incorrect. It would be quite easy to discuss that the certification process was disrupted by a violent mob without any discussion of Trump at all.

Are there any politicians that you do think it would be necessary to discuss in that context?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it depends on the age of the child. The younger the child the probability there is less chastising. My child attended a school with children from a highly recognizable person from the past administration. The kids of this person were young, so no issues arose. I bet if the kids were older there would have been all kinds of problems.

I'm particularly wondering about grandchildren/teenage children of a certain past president. The oldest grandchildren are definitely old enough to have current events discussed in school. What is it like for those grandchildren? Are they being kept in a bubble by their parents/parents lying to them about how great their grandparent is and how awful everyone else is? Like, how do you explain an event like January 6 to those grandchildren? How is it discussed in their school?

Trump hasn't been formally implicated so it would be unlikely and inappropriate for a teacher to host a discussion about it. In the DC area in general, partisan issues are kept out of the classroom. Its possible to have a nonpartisan discussion of current events.

Wait, are you saying it would be "inappropriate" to have a discussion in a HS classroom about what happened on 1/6? How about the entirety of the 2000 election cycle and the lawsuits?

It would be inappropriate to say that Trump had a role in the attack. That hasn't yet been officially determined. The event can be discussed in a way that would not be in any way offensive to a Trump kid by discussing the facts and what has been established in court.

The bolded is interesting. I think any conversation of that day would necessarily involve actions taken by Trump in the weeks and months and hours before the actual invasion of the Capital that are established fact. Whether a Trump kid would take offense to them is an entirely different question.

You would be incorrect. It would be quite easy to discuss that the certification process was disrupted by a violent mob without any discussion of Trump at all.

You don't think the conversation might reasonably touch on the candidate that mob was hoping would end up as president? You don't think that conversation might touch on the unrest and questions raised about the integrity of the vote and subsequent lawsuits filed by Trump? You don't think it might touch on various rationales for why the certification should/could be disrupted and that those arguments were made to the sitting president?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it depends on the age of the child. The younger the child the probability there is less chastising. My child attended a school with children from a highly recognizable person from the past administration. The kids of this person were young, so no issues arose. I bet if the kids were older there would have been all kinds of problems.

I'm particularly wondering about grandchildren/teenage children of a certain past president. The oldest grandchildren are definitely old enough to have current events discussed in school. What is it like for those grandchildren? Are they being kept in a bubble by their parents/parents lying to them about how great their grandparent is and how awful everyone else is? Like, how do you explain an event like January 6 to those grandchildren? How is it discussed in their school?

Trump hasn't been formally implicated so it would be unlikely and inappropriate for a teacher to host a discussion about it. In the DC area in general, partisan issues are kept out of the classroom. Its possible to have a nonpartisan discussion of current events.

Wait, are you saying it would be "inappropriate" to have a discussion in a HS classroom about what happened on 1/6? How about the entirety of the 2000 election cycle and the lawsuits?

It would be inappropriate to say that Trump had a role in the attack. That hasn't yet been officially determined. The event can be discussed in a way that would not be in any way offensive to a Trump kid by discussing the facts and what has been established in court.

The bolded is interesting. I think any conversation of that day would necessarily involve actions taken by Trump in the weeks and months and hours before the actual invasion of the Capital that are established fact. Whether a Trump kid would take offense to them is an entirely different question.

You would be incorrect. It would be quite easy to discuss that the certification process was disrupted by a violent mob without any discussion of Trump at all.

Are there any politicians that you do think it would be necessary to discuss in that context?

No. A discussion of procedural issues such as the role of the VP and the senators would be sufficient context.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it depends on the age of the child. The younger the child the probability there is less chastising. My child attended a school with children from a highly recognizable person from the past administration. The kids of this person were young, so no issues arose. I bet if the kids were older there would have been all kinds of problems.

I'm particularly wondering about grandchildren/teenage children of a certain past president. The oldest grandchildren are definitely old enough to have current events discussed in school. What is it like for those grandchildren? Are they being kept in a bubble by their parents/parents lying to them about how great their grandparent is and how awful everyone else is? Like, how do you explain an event like January 6 to those grandchildren? How is it discussed in their school?

Trump hasn't been formally implicated so it would be unlikely and inappropriate for a teacher to host a discussion about it. In the DC area in general, partisan issues are kept out of the classroom. Its possible to have a nonpartisan discussion of current events.

Wait, are you saying it would be "inappropriate" to have a discussion in a HS classroom about what happened on 1/6? How about the entirety of the 2000 election cycle and the lawsuits?

It would be inappropriate to say that Trump had a role in the attack. That hasn't yet been officially determined. The event can be discussed in a way that would not be in any way offensive to a Trump kid by discussing the facts and what has been established in court.

The bolded is interesting. I think any conversation of that day would necessarily involve actions taken by Trump in the weeks and months and hours before the actual invasion of the Capital that are established fact. Whether a Trump kid would take offense to them is an entirely different question.

You would be incorrect. It would be quite easy to discuss that the certification process was disrupted by a violent mob without any discussion of Trump at all.

Are there any politicians that you do think it would be necessary to discuss in that context?

No. A discussion of procedural issues such as the role of the VP and the senators would be sufficient context.

What about a discussion of the lawsuits surrounding the election?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it depends on the age of the child. The younger the child the probability there is less chastising. My child attended a school with children from a highly recognizable person from the past administration. The kids of this person were young, so no issues arose. I bet if the kids were older there would have been all kinds of problems.

I'm particularly wondering about grandchildren/teenage children of a certain past president. The oldest grandchildren are definitely old enough to have current events discussed in school. What is it like for those grandchildren? Are they being kept in a bubble by their parents/parents lying to them about how great their grandparent is and how awful everyone else is? Like, how do you explain an event like January 6 to those grandchildren? How is it discussed in their school?

Trump hasn't been formally implicated so it would be unlikely and inappropriate for a teacher to host a discussion about it. In the DC area in general, partisan issues are kept out of the classroom. Its possible to have a nonpartisan discussion of current events.

Wait, are you saying it would be "inappropriate" to have a discussion in a HS classroom about what happened on 1/6? How about the entirety of the 2000 election cycle and the lawsuits?

It would be inappropriate to say that Trump had a role in the attack. That hasn't yet been officially determined. The event can be discussed in a way that would not be in any way offensive to a Trump kid by discussing the facts and what has been established in court.

The bolded is interesting. I think any conversation of that day would necessarily involve actions taken by Trump in the weeks and months and hours before the actual invasion of the Capital that are established fact. Whether a Trump kid would take offense to them is an entirely different question.

You would be incorrect. It would be quite easy to discuss that the certification process was disrupted by a violent mob without any discussion of Trump at all.

Are there any politicians that you do think it would be necessary to discuss in that context?

No. A discussion of procedural issues such as the role of the VP and the senators would be sufficient context.

What about a discussion of the lawsuits surrounding the election?

No. Not germane. Elections have been contested several times but only this certification process was disrupted. Therefore the lawsuits cannot be reasonably considered related. Litigation is considered a legitimate avenue to remedy disputes, not a precursor to other people violently attacking the capitol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it depends on the age of the child. The younger the child the probability there is less chastising. My child attended a school with children from a highly recognizable person from the past administration. The kids of this person were young, so no issues arose. I bet if the kids were older there would have been all kinds of problems.

I'm particularly wondering about grandchildren/teenage children of a certain past president. The oldest grandchildren are definitely old enough to have current events discussed in school. What is it like for those grandchildren? Are they being kept in a bubble by their parents/parents lying to them about how great their grandparent is and how awful everyone else is? Like, how do you explain an event like January 6 to those grandchildren? How is it discussed in their school?

Trump hasn't been formally implicated so it would be unlikely and inappropriate for a teacher to host a discussion about it. In the DC area in general, partisan issues are kept out of the classroom. Its possible to have a nonpartisan discussion of current events.

Wait, are you saying it would be "inappropriate" to have a discussion in a HS classroom about what happened on 1/6? How about the entirety of the 2000 election cycle and the lawsuits?

It would be inappropriate to say that Trump had a role in the attack. That hasn't yet been officially determined. The event can be discussed in a way that would not be in any way offensive to a Trump kid by discussing the facts and what has been established in court.

The bolded is interesting. I think any conversation of that day would necessarily involve actions taken by Trump in the weeks and months and hours before the actual invasion of the Capital that are established fact. Whether a Trump kid would take offense to them is an entirely different question.

You would be incorrect. It would be quite easy to discuss that the certification process was disrupted by a violent mob without any discussion of Trump at all.

You don't think the conversation might reasonably touch on the candidate that mob was hoping would end up as president? You don't think that conversation might touch on the unrest and questions raised about the integrity of the vote and subsequent lawsuits filed by Trump? You don't think it might touch on various rationales for why the certification should/could be disrupted and that those arguments were made to the sitting president?

Are you suggesting there are legitmate reasons to conduct a violent attack or disrupt a democratic process? No, I dont believe that would be an appropriate school discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it depends on the age of the child. The younger the child the probability there is less chastising. My child attended a school with children from a highly recognizable person from the past administration. The kids of this person were young, so no issues arose. I bet if the kids were older there would have been all kinds of problems.

I'm particularly wondering about grandchildren/teenage children of a certain past president. The oldest grandchildren are definitely old enough to have current events discussed in school. What is it like for those grandchildren? Are they being kept in a bubble by their parents/parents lying to them about how great their grandparent is and how awful everyone else is? Like, how do you explain an event like January 6 to those grandchildren? How is it discussed in their school?

Trump hasn't been formally implicated so it would be unlikely and inappropriate for a teacher to host a discussion about it. In the DC area in general, partisan issues are kept out of the classroom. Its possible to have a nonpartisan discussion of current events.

Wait, are you saying it would be "inappropriate" to have a discussion in a HS classroom about what happened on 1/6? How about the entirety of the 2000 election cycle and the lawsuits?

It would be inappropriate to say that Trump had a role in the attack. That hasn't yet been officially determined. The event can be discussed in a way that would not be in any way offensive to a Trump kid by discussing the facts and what has been established in court.

The bolded is interesting. I think any conversation of that day would necessarily involve actions taken by Trump in the weeks and months and hours before the actual invasion of the Capital that are established fact. Whether a Trump kid would take offense to them is an entirely different question.

You would be incorrect. It would be quite easy to discuss that the certification process was disrupted by a violent mob without any discussion of Trump at all.

Are there any politicians that you do think it would be necessary to discuss in that context?

No. A discussion of procedural issues such as the role of the VP and the senators would be sufficient context.

What about a discussion of the lawsuits surrounding the election?

No. Not germane. Elections have been contested several times but only this certification process was disrupted. Therefore the lawsuits cannot be reasonably considered related. Litigation is considered a legitimate avenue to remedy disputes, not a precursor to other people violently attacking the capitol.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I was asking whether a conversation specifically about the election lawsuits would be appropriate, and if so whether Trump might reasonably come up in those discussions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it depends on the age of the child. The younger the child the probability there is less chastising. My child attended a school with children from a highly recognizable person from the past administration. The kids of this person were young, so no issues arose. I bet if the kids were older there would have been all kinds of problems.

I'm particularly wondering about grandchildren/teenage children of a certain past president. The oldest grandchildren are definitely old enough to have current events discussed in school. What is it like for those grandchildren? Are they being kept in a bubble by their parents/parents lying to them about how great their grandparent is and how awful everyone else is? Like, how do you explain an event like January 6 to those grandchildren? How is it discussed in their school?

Trump hasn't been formally implicated so it would be unlikely and inappropriate for a teacher to host a discussion about it. In the DC area in general, partisan issues are kept out of the classroom. Its possible to have a nonpartisan discussion of current events.

Wait, are you saying it would be "inappropriate" to have a discussion in a HS classroom about what happened on 1/6? How about the entirety of the 2000 election cycle and the lawsuits?

It would be inappropriate to say that Trump had a role in the attack. That hasn't yet been officially determined. The event can be discussed in a way that would not be in any way offensive to a Trump kid by discussing the facts and what has been established in court.

The bolded is interesting. I think any conversation of that day would necessarily involve actions taken by Trump in the weeks and months and hours before the actual invasion of the Capital that are established fact. Whether a Trump kid would take offense to them is an entirely different question.

You would be incorrect. It would be quite easy to discuss that the certification process was disrupted by a violent mob without any discussion of Trump at all.

You don't think the conversation might reasonably touch on the candidate that mob was hoping would end up as president? You don't think that conversation might touch on the unrest and questions raised about the integrity of the vote and subsequent lawsuits filed by Trump? You don't think it might touch on various rationales for why the certification should/could be disrupted and that those arguments were made to the sitting president?

Are you suggesting there are legitmate reasons to conduct a violent attack or disrupt a democratic process? No, I dont believe that would be an appropriate school discussion.

No. I am saying that a conversation about the certification process may touch on all of the legal/procedural aspects of that process, including arguments made to the sitting president about why the election should not have been certified.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it depends on the age of the child. The younger the child the probability there is less chastising. My child attended a school with children from a highly recognizable person from the past administration. The kids of this person were young, so no issues arose. I bet if the kids were older there would have been all kinds of problems.

I'm particularly wondering about grandchildren/teenage children of a certain past president. The oldest grandchildren are definitely old enough to have current events discussed in school. What is it like for those grandchildren? Are they being kept in a bubble by their parents/parents lying to them about how great their grandparent is and how awful everyone else is? Like, how do you explain an event like January 6 to those grandchildren? How is it discussed in their school?

Trump hasn't been formally implicated so it would be unlikely and inappropriate for a teacher to host a discussion about it. In the DC area in general, partisan issues are kept out of the classroom. Its possible to have a nonpartisan discussion of current events.

Wait, are you saying it would be "inappropriate" to have a discussion in a HS classroom about what happened on 1/6? How about the entirety of the 2000 election cycle and the lawsuits?

It would be inappropriate to say that Trump had a role in the attack. That hasn't yet been officially determined. The event can be discussed in a way that would not be in any way offensive to a Trump kid by discussing the facts and what has been established in court.

The bolded is interesting. I think any conversation of that day would necessarily involve actions taken by Trump in the weeks and months and hours before the actual invasion of the Capital that are established fact. Whether a Trump kid would take offense to them is an entirely different question.

You would be incorrect. It would be quite easy to discuss that the certification process was disrupted by a violent mob without any discussion of Trump at all.

Are there any politicians that you do think it would be necessary to discuss in that context?

No. A discussion of procedural issues such as the role of the VP and the senators would be sufficient context.

What about a discussion of the lawsuits surrounding the election?

No. Not germane. Elections have been contested several times but only this certification process was disrupted. Therefore the lawsuits cannot be reasonably considered related. Litigation is considered a legitimate avenue to remedy disputes, not a precursor to other people violently attacking the capitol.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I was asking whether a conversation specifically about the election lawsuits would be appropriate, and if so whether Trump might reasonably come up in those discussions?

Yes, it is appropriate for children to learn about judicial processes using contemporary examples. But it would be deeply inappropriate to suggest that using legitimate processes is an incitement to violence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it depends on the age of the child. The younger the child the probability there is less chastising. My child attended a school with children from a highly recognizable person from the past administration. The kids of this person were young, so no issues arose. I bet if the kids were older there would have been all kinds of problems.

I'm particularly wondering about grandchildren/teenage children of a certain past president. The oldest grandchildren are definitely old enough to have current events discussed in school. What is it like for those grandchildren? Are they being kept in a bubble by their parents/parents lying to them about how great their grandparent is and how awful everyone else is? Like, how do you explain an event like January 6 to those grandchildren? How is it discussed in their school?

Trump hasn't been formally implicated so it would be unlikely and inappropriate for a teacher to host a discussion about it. In the DC area in general, partisan issues are kept out of the classroom. Its possible to have a nonpartisan discussion of current events.

Wait, are you saying it would be "inappropriate" to have a discussion in a HS classroom about what happened on 1/6? How about the entirety of the 2000 election cycle and the lawsuits?

It would be inappropriate to say that Trump had a role in the attack. That hasn't yet been officially determined. The event can be discussed in a way that would not be in any way offensive to a Trump kid by discussing the facts and what has been established in court.

The bolded is interesting. I think any conversation of that day would necessarily involve actions taken by Trump in the weeks and months and hours before the actual invasion of the Capital that are established fact. Whether a Trump kid would take offense to them is an entirely different question.

You would be incorrect. It would be quite easy to discuss that the certification process was disrupted by a violent mob without any discussion of Trump at all.

You don't think the conversation might reasonably touch on the candidate that mob was hoping would end up as president? You don't think that conversation might touch on the unrest and questions raised about the integrity of the vote and subsequent lawsuits filed by Trump? You don't think it might touch on various rationales for why the certification should/could be disrupted and that those arguments were made to the sitting president?

Are you suggesting there are legitmate reasons to conduct a violent attack or disrupt a democratic process? No, I dont believe that would be an appropriate school discussion.

No. I am saying that a conversation about the certification process may touch on all of the legal/procedural aspects of that process, including arguments made to the sitting president about why the election should not have been certified.

Who made the arguments to the president? It's possible this would be educational.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it depends on the age of the child. The younger the child the probability there is less chastising. My child attended a school with children from a highly recognizable person from the past administration. The kids of this person were young, so no issues arose. I bet if the kids were older there would have been all kinds of problems.

I'm particularly wondering about grandchildren/teenage children of a certain past president. The oldest grandchildren are definitely old enough to have current events discussed in school. What is it like for those grandchildren? Are they being kept in a bubble by their parents/parents lying to them about how great their grandparent is and how awful everyone else is? Like, how do you explain an event like January 6 to those grandchildren? How is it discussed in their school?

Trump hasn't been formally implicated so it would be unlikely and inappropriate for a teacher to host a discussion about it. In the DC area in general, partisan issues are kept out of the classroom. Its possible to have a nonpartisan discussion of current events.

Wait, are you saying it would be "inappropriate" to have a discussion in a HS classroom about what happened on 1/6? How about the entirety of the 2000 election cycle and the lawsuits?

It would be inappropriate to say that Trump had a role in the attack. That hasn't yet been officially determined. The event can be discussed in a way that would not be in any way offensive to a Trump kid by discussing the facts and what has been established in court.

The bolded is interesting. I think any conversation of that day would necessarily involve actions taken by Trump in the weeks and months and hours before the actual invasion of the Capital that are established fact. Whether a Trump kid would take offense to them is an entirely different question.

You would be incorrect. It would be quite easy to discuss that the certification process was disrupted by a violent mob without any discussion of Trump at all.

You don't think the conversation might reasonably touch on the candidate that mob was hoping would end up as president? You don't think that conversation might touch on the unrest and questions raised about the integrity of the vote and subsequent lawsuits filed by Trump? You don't think it might touch on various rationales for why the certification should/could be disrupted and that those arguments were made to the sitting president?

Are you suggesting there are legitmate reasons to conduct a violent attack or disrupt a democratic process? No, I dont believe that would be an appropriate school discussion.

No. I am saying that a conversation about the certification process may touch on all of the legal/procedural aspects of that process, including arguments made to the sitting president about why the election should not have been certified.

Who made the arguments to the president? It's possible this would be educational.

John Eastman (and before we go there, I’m not certain when or how the President saw those arguments, but I think safe to say his administration saw them)