Given the anodyne content some folks will label “racist” and “sexist”, such claims ought be taken with a very healthy dose of skepticism.

Not that I have any idea what the content was in this case, but that’s the point. If you’re impugning someone’s character, you need to be a lot more specific than simply parroting vague moral accusations.

Sounds like you've got a lot invested in redefining "exposed for sending extreme racist, sexist, antisemitic texts to fellow troopers" as "anodyne" without any evidence.

Please give me an example of what you consider "anodyne extreme racist, sexist, antisemitic texts". Just because you agree with extreme racist, sexist, antisemitic texts and send stuff like that yourself as blithely as Trump tweets doesn't mean it's "anodyne".

The word you're looking for is "normalized", and that is the problem with today's society, not a justification for extreme racist, sexist, antisemitic texts.

> If you’re impugning someone’s character, you need to be a lot more specific than simply parroting vague moral accusations.