• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Trump's Second Term

carlosy said:
I guess that's what makes Trump so relateable. Can you imagine Hitler dancing to Y.M.C.A. on stage? (or anything comparable back in the days)

Trump appears openly as a deranged elderly clown (and as a genius to his cult at the same time), where his minions have to clean after him, time after time (drinking bleach etc.) while Hitler was an untouchable, stiff and strict but charismatic ruler. Hitler was an evil megalomaniac, but I don't think he was an idiot.

Imagine a duel between Hitler and Trump, not with fists, but verbally.
Click to expand...
Since Hitler knew and spoke only German, and Trump knows and speaks only pure gibberish and clearly has a comprehension problem with even pre-school English, my money would be on Hitler to walk away with the Sudetenland Peace Prize easily.
 
Andy_Ross said:
Stephen Miller
@StephenM
Minnesota has refused to provide the federal government with the names, social security numbers or identifying information of food stamps recipients — they just send a monthly bill. More judicial tyranny.
Click to expand...
Hi Stevie old pal,
The FBI has refused to provide Minnesota officials with all the evidence in the horrific ICE killing of Renee Good. They just said nope. More judicial ◊◊◊◊-assery from the Trump administration. Also, go screw yourself.
 
Ziggurat said:
That's not what a coup means. A coup isn't just any bad thing that government does. It's something much more specific.

True enough. But to the extent that the constitution clashes with voters, it's undemocratic. I'm OK with it being a bit undemocratic, and it's a bit undemocratic by design not accident, but recognize what it is. And again, appealing to violations of the constitution (which you haven't actually demonstrated) still don't automatically constitute a "coup". That word has a meaning, and the meaning does not fit what's happening in the US.

"Your". It's the possessive, not the contraction. And you got "Orwellian" wrong too.
Click to expand...
A coup is an illegal takeover of a government. The Constitution is the Law of the Land. Doing what a large minority of voters (48%) want you to do that violates the Constitution is a coup. Almost everything this administration does violates almost every single aspect of the Constitution. Everything from unilaterally withdrawing from our treaty obligations without Congressional approval:

Supremecy Clause - Violating the Geneva Conventions and various human rights treaties - bombing unarmed civilian boats on the high seas then murdering survivors in the water.

1st Amendment - Passing laws based on religious beliefs, Attacking protestors
4th Amendment - Detaining US citizens in entire cities and states on a daily basis without probable cause or a warrant.
6th Amendment - Deporting people without trial.
8th Amendment - Deporting people to the wrong country (El Salvador) to a prison that practices torture techniques. Including actual US citizens!

9th Amendment - Any power not granted to the US government, is a right of the people. Federal invasions of our streets, trespassing, kidnapping, and now outright murder. ICE and Border Patrol was NEVER given authority to enforce ANY laws other than immigration laws. This means they have exactly ZERO legal power to even so much as approach any individual without a warrant. This means they can't even use probable cause! They can only legally use a warrant with a specific address and/or specific vehicle with the make, model, description, plates, and VIN. Any traffic stop of any vehicle they have no warrant for, is illegal. Period. Only county sherriff's departments, city PDs, and state PDs have the authority to stop people based on probable cause. Not even the FBI and US Marshalls have that ability. Their jobs are to go after specific criminals. Usually highly dangerous ones, and/or ones that have fled across state borders. You'll never see an FBI agent or a US Marshal making traffic stops, because that is NOT their Congressionally-approved mandate. That's what we have state and local cops for.

10th Amendment - See above. Any power not granted to the federal government, is a power the states can have. Policing is a SHARED power. Which means that....NO. Federal agents are NOT superior to state and local police. And yes. They are required to follow all laws, including state and local laws. Anything outside of their lawful duties mandated by Congress as federal agents, is NOT protected under qualified immunity.

This doesn't even scratch the tip of the iceberg.

I could go on and on and on. The entire Republican Party in all three branches of government has completely abrogated their obligations to uphold the law, as is their legal duties and requirement.

PS: I know the use of your and you're. Stop being a grammar Nazi and focus on the argument.
 
Minnesota was easy. War soon over. Insurrection act till election.

Greenland is another matter. NATO is sending troops and planes. But planes are a bit of a problem. Goose Bay (the x) in Canada is where the Nato planes will operate from. Thule, marker up North, is too far from Greenland towns on the SW coastIMG_3025.jpeg
 
Last edited:
jimbob said:
www.theguardian.com

UPenn faculty condemn Trump administration’s demand for ‘lists of Jews’

Groups say EEOC demand for names and personal details echoes dark history and threatens safety and civil rights
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

I'm sure this is fine
Click to expand...
How else can they stamp out anti-semitism than identifying every jewish person?

One really doesn't want to say it but I feel compelled to type: perhaps they should be asked to wear a badge identifying their religion and/or ancestry?

/s
 
Darat said:
How else can they stamp out anti-semitism than identifying every jewish person?

One really doesn't want to say it but I feel compelled to type: perhaps they should be asked to wear a badge identifying their religion and/or ancestry?

/s
Click to expand...

I know, but maybe one could try to spot the antisemitism rather than the Semites.
 
Insurrection Act

Donald J. Trump
@realDonald Trump
If the corrupt politicians of Minnesota don't obey the law and stop the professional agitators and insurrectionists from attacking the Patriots of I.C.E., who are only trying to do their job, I will institute the INSURRECTION ACT, which many Presidents have done before me, and quickly put an end to the travesty that is taking place in that once great State. Thank you for you attention to this matter! President DJT
Click to expand...
 
Nihilianth said:
A coup is an illegal takeover of a government.
Click to expand...
And that's not what happened. What happened is that Trump took over the executive branch through an election. Which is both the democratic and the constitutional method for doing so.
Nihilianth said:
The Constitution is the Law of the Land. Doing what a large minority of voters (48%) want you to do that violates the Constitution is a coup.
Click to expand...
No, it isn't. You are confusing who wields power with how they wield power.
Nihilianth said:
Almost everything this administration does violates almost every single aspect of the Constitution.
Click to expand...
This is not a serious accusation, and doesn't need to be taken seriously. Basically all of your complaints could be applied to many different presidents, not just Trump. There are serious arguments to be made about whether to and how much to constrain presidential power in general. But you're not making those arguments. You're engaged in special pleading. When Trump does something controversial, you act like he's the first president who has ever done it, but that's simply not true. For example, military strikes on "civilian" targets? Where have you been for the past two decades? That's become routine. You can complain about that if you want to, but at least be honest and admit that every president in recent history did it.
 
jimbob said:
I know, but maybe one could try to spot the antisemitism rather than the Semites.
Click to expand...
How could one do that, those antsemites could easily be anti some other semites, that we are also anti, so therefore we have to know who the jews are, so we get the right antis. We really shouldn't have to explain this stuff, it should be self-evident.
 
Ziggurat said:
A coup is an illegal takeover of a government.
Click to expand...
And that's not what happened. What happened is that Trump took over the executive branch through an election. Which is both the democratic and the constitutional method for doing so.
Click to expand...
Trump may have "taken executive authority" following the rules laid out in the constitution.

However, the issue is that he has greatly expanded executive authority to where he ignores the authority of other branches of government (the courts and congress). Things like ignoring court orders over the issues of detainees, or ignoring a law passed by congress regarding the release of the Epstien files, or attempting to "get around" rules regarding appointments/confirmations.
 
Ziggurat said:
And that's not what happened. What happened is that Trump took over the executive branch through an election. Which is both the democratic and the constitutional method for doing so.

No, it isn't. You are confusing who wields power with how they wield power.

This is not a serious accusation, and doesn't need to be taken seriously. Basically all of your complaints could be applied to many different presidents, not just Trump. There are serious arguments to be made about whether to and how much to constrain presidential power in general. But you're not making those arguments. You're engaged in special pleading. When Trump does something controversial, you act like he's the first president who has ever done it, but that's simply not true. For example, military strikes on "civilian" targets? Where have you been for the past two decades? That's become routine. You can complain about that if you want to, but at least be honest and admit that every president in recent history did it.
Click to expand...
The Constitution is the Authority of the Land. It is literally the Law of the Land. Trump has completely and thoroughly shredded said Authority of the United States of America, and the other two branches have greatly assisted him in doing so. This is the very definition of a coup. When someone completely dismantles the entire legal framework of a nation. This is exactly what Hitler did, and he used his "emergency powers" to eventually cancel elections altogether.

He leveraged his own party to illegally and unconstitutionally deny a fair hearing for Obama's nominated replacement of RBG after she had passed away. That was the beginning of the coup of overthrowing 1 third of the government in his first term of office. Nevermind all of the rest of his illegal bypassed appointments, such as Elon Musk early last year, and giving him illegal control over highly sensitive government servers with DOGE.
 
Segnosaur said:
Trump may have "taken executive authority" following the rules laid out in the constitution.
Click to expand...
Then it's not a coup.
Segnosaur said:
However, the issue is that he has greatly expanded executive authority
Click to expand...
No, he hasn't. That's the thing: you don't like how he's wielding that authority, you thought other presidents wielded it better, but he's not actually doing stuff that other presidents haven't also done.

And it's fine if you want to complain about how he's wielding that executive authority. It's even fine to complain that presidents have too much authority. But the idea that he's somehow becoming a dictator just doesn't actually stand up to scrutiny in even the slightest bit.

There has never, ever been a dictator who tried to shrink the size and scope of government.
 
Nihilianth said:
The Constitution is the Authority of the Land. It is literally the Law of the Land. Trump has completely and thoroughly shredded said Authority of the United States of America
Click to expand...
No, Chicken Little, he has not.
Nihilianth said:
He leveraged his own party to illegally and unconstitutionally deny a fair hearing for Obama's nominated replacement of RBG after she had passed away.
Click to expand...
That was neither illegal nor unconstitutional. You can argue that it was a dick move, but the constitution doesn't require that congress play nice.
 
Ziggurat said:
This is not a serious accusation, and doesn't need to be taken seriously. Basically all of your complaints could be applied to many different presidents, not just Trump. There are serious arguments to be made about whether to and how much to constrain presidential power in general. But you're not making those arguments. You're engaged in special pleading. When Trump does something controversial, you act like he's the first president who has ever done it, but that's simply not true. For example, military strikes on "civilian" targets? Where have you been for the past two decades? That's become routine. You can complain about that if you want to, but at least be honest and admit that every president in recent history did it.
Click to expand...
Nobody ever complained about Bush's wars? Or the continued war-making under Obama? Where have you been for the past 25 years? Nobody ever complained about the conduct of Gitmo? About waterboarding? About the dismantling of workers' rights? About the Mai Lai massacre? About Kent State? Nobody complained that Biden pardoned actual criminals, such as the "Cash for Kids" judge from here in Pennsylvania? Or how about the Japanese internment under FDR? This is all one gigantic strawman argument. Trump is the president right now, and you are a liar.

There is a MAJOR difference between past presidential actions, and this current fascist regime:

Gitmo WAS shutdown, and the individual perpetrators WERE prosecuted. Waterboarding was banned. Many individual soldiers were also court-martialed for various crimes they've committed during the highly questionable nearly 2-decade-long wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. As were those who murdered civilians in Vietnam. There were a lot of allied soldiers who have committed crimes during WWII, and they were prosecuted. There was a formal apology from our government for interring Japanese people in concentration camps. We have erected monuments to black soldiers during WWII. Nixon was impeached, and he resigned before it could be debated in Congress. People complained when he was pardoned by Ford.

The entire difference is that presidents do not wholly get away with the monumental BS this Nazi is continually allowed to do. Nobody excuses Bill Clinton for having sex with an intern. Hell, Clinton was impeached over that, which is HARDLY the highly criminal, murderous actions this orange pedophile in the White House has done. At least Monica was a grown adult and not a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ CHILD! And she likely consented, if it even occurred at all. And nobody said its right for the president to commit adultery with a largely powerless intern.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom