The fact that you challenge the claim that Carter had meetings and made deals with klansmen strongly implies that you agree it’s an indictment of democrat politicians if they did this.
I challenge nothing, and your thoughts come from your inference, not my implication.
I simply ask, if you want it to be an accepted fact that Jimmy Carter met with and made deals with Kluckers, and therefore we should make future decisions regarding our feelings about and knowledge of Carter with that as an accepted fact, then where is at least some element of proof of the “fact?”
When one makes an accusation such as this, against an American President, one should never do so without proof to back it up. When accusations are made, without proof, it diminishes the believeablity of any of one’s other statements.
Personally, I can easily see Jimmah as a Klucker, but I’d need proof before I made such an accusation, as anyone should.
Old legal saw: “When one makes an accusation that one cannot prove in court, they are then often asked to.”