I didn’t read that he was for that. I (I hope obviously) wouldn’t condone that on any level either. As most people wouldn’t. I just meant that most of us would have no idea of his motivation, but there are legit reasons (specifically the three thing he has voiced against in the past) that might have helped make his decision, along with disruption.

I believe his motivation might stem from those, and then would wonder why he felt he had to make that decision, and look at the parties around him making the decisions, who’s lobbying etc… and question why that is too…