Autocracy has arrived to the US

[gatomontes99]

10 hours ago, Radiorum said:

the problem with this is that Trump really did the crimes.

You are only proving my point. Only through TDS, a desperate need for these lies to be true and a complete disregard for facts and reality can anyone conclude that any law was broken. And the thing is, I could show you all the data and you'd deny all of it, so there is no point. But it proves that lawfare worked flawlessly, with you.

[Legato]

42 minutes ago, Radiorum said:

In my experience, 

The lack of which is on display for all to see.

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, Radiorum said:

 

To say that somehow Trump's actions are the fault of the Democrats is preposterous in the extreme. Trump is a force within himself. His actions are unprecedented. 

It isn't or you would have explained why. Instead you just simply say "Noooooooo!!!  U rong bad man! " and "trump orange man bad!". .

Trump's actions are not unprecedented in the slightest.  

Here ya go.  And these guys went easy on him. 

Obama’s curtain call: A look back on a legacy of executive overreach

As i said obama was horrible for it, where do you think trump began to learn this from?

And biden was just as bad. His student loan payment scheme for example, a brutal overreach that the supreme court shot down in the end, as well as his attempt to rig the definition of "waters".  And there were many he passed. 

So trump isn't "unprecedented" at all.  There's a long history of it. 

Now. Where were you when all this was happening?

3 hours ago, Radiorum said:

Trying to steal an election with fake electors? Unprecedented.

Yeah, you're half a decade too late to be worrying about that anymore. Sorry that's done and has nothing to do with what he's doing right now.

3 hours ago, Radiorum said:

Trying to concentrate all power in the executive branch? Unprecedented.

Nope. As I've noted he's not even the second. Obama was every bit as bad if not worse and so was Biden when he was awake

3 hours ago, Radiorum said:

Psychologically manipulating a cult following? Unprecedented.

Nope. Obama has done the same thing. His was called the intersectional coalition. And it was very cult  like.

 

So here's the problem. You either don't know your history, or you turn a blind eye to your history because it doesn't suit your narrative. Once again your hatred bigotry and tribalism has led you to applaud when the democrats do it and cry to the heavens when the republicans do. And people have caught on to that and that's why the democrats aren't doing so well right now.

Trump isn't doing anything new. This didn't happen in a vacuum. But you said nothing and stood silently by when people you liked did exactly the same thing or worse so now that you're complaining nobody's interested in what you have to say. You've already normalized this Behavior, and I've said about a trillion times now, anything you do will be used against you in the future so you have to care about what your people are doing today and you didn't and now there's a price

[Barquentine]

7 hours ago, User said:

I am not "you guys" and I am not the one pushing such absurdity.

I shouldn't have said "you guys" and I'm not saying you're pushing anything. I'm just asking about a hypothetical situation. The leaders Trump admires the most have done it.

[Radiorum]

6 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Trump isn't doing anything new.

Trump’s levels of corruption and dishonesty are unprecedented.

Even his Executive Orders are dishonest. Consider one example: Executive Order 14149 – Restoring Freedom of Speech and Ending Federal Censorship (January 20, 2025) which in part states:

Over the last 4 years, the previous administration trampled free speech rights by censoring Americans' speech on online platforms, often by exerting substantial coercive pressure on third parties, such as social media companies, to moderate, deplatform, or otherwise suppress speech that the Federal Government did not approve. Under the guise of combatting "misinformation," "disinformation," and "malinformation," the Federal Government infringed on the constitutionally protected speech rights of American citizens across the United States in a manner that advanced the Government's preferred narrative about significant matters of public debate…

The Attorney General, in consultation with the heads of executive departments and agencies, shall investigate the activities of the Federal Government over the last 4 years that are inconsistent with the purposes and policies of this order and prepare a report to be submitted to the President, through the Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy, with recommendations for appropriate remedial actions to be taken based on the findings of the report.

 

What these “remedial actions” consist of is not clear, but it sounds like a threat.

 

But what is the truth? Last June -

The U.S. Supreme Court handed a major victory for the Biden administration Wednesday, throwing out a lower court ruling that had placed major restrictions on the ability of government officials to communicate with social media companies about their content moderation policies.

… a stark repudiation of two lower courts in the South, and their eagerness to embrace conspiracy theories about alleged government coercion of social media companies.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett said that neither the five individuals nor the two states who sued … presented (any) proof to back up their claims that the government had pressured social media companies like Twitter and Facebook into restricting their speech. "Unfortunately," she said, the Fifth Circuit court of appeals "relied on factual findings that are "clearly erroneous."

For instance, she said, the plaintiffs who brought the case maintained that the White House had bombarded Twitter with requests to set up a streamlined process for censorship requests. But in fact, she said, the record showed no such requests. Rather, on one occasion a White House official asked Twitter to remove a fake account pretending to be the account of Biden's granddaughter. Twitter took down the fake account and told the official about a portal that could be used in the future to flag similar issues.

"Justice Barrett went out of her way to stress that facts matter and that lower courts in this case embraced a fact-free version of what transpired between officials in the Biden administration and Facebook, Twitter and other social media companies,"

 

But we know very well that facts do not matter to Trump.

[Nationalist]

31 minutes ago, Radiorum said:

Trump’s levels of corruption and dishonesty are unprecedented.

Even his Executive Orders are dishonest. Consider one example: Executive Order 14149 – Restoring Freedom of Speech and Ending Federal Censorship (January 20, 2025) which in part states:

Over the last 4 years, the previous administration trampled free speech rights by censoring Americans' speech on online platforms, often by exerting substantial coercive pressure on third parties, such as social media companies, to moderate, deplatform, or otherwise suppress speech that the Federal Government did not approve. Under the guise of combatting "misinformation," "disinformation," and "malinformation," the Federal Government infringed on the constitutionally protected speech rights of American citizens across the United States in a manner that advanced the Government's preferred narrative about significant matters of public debate…

The Attorney General, in consultation with the heads of executive departments and agencies, shall investigate the activities of the Federal Government over the last 4 years that are inconsistent with the purposes and policies of this order and prepare a report to be submitted to the President, through the Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy, with recommendations for appropriate remedial actions to be taken based on the findings of the report.

 

What these “remedial actions” consist of is not clear, but it sounds like a threat.

 

But what is the truth? Last June -

The U.S. Supreme Court handed a major victory for the Biden administration Wednesday, throwing out a lower court ruling that had placed major restrictions on the ability of government officials to communicate with social media companies about their content moderation policies.

… a stark repudiation of two lower courts in the South, and their eagerness to embrace conspiracy theories about alleged government coercion of social media companies.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett said that neither the five individuals nor the two states who sued … presented (any) proof to back up their claims that the government had pressured social media companies like Twitter and Facebook into restricting their speech. "Unfortunately," she said, the Fifth Circuit court of appeals "relied on factual findings that are "clearly erroneous."

For instance, she said, the plaintiffs who brought the case maintained that the White House had bombarded Twitter with requests to set up a streamlined process for censorship requests. But in fact, she said, the record showed no such requests. Rather, on one occasion a White House official asked Twitter to remove a fake account pretending to be the account of Biden's granddaughter. Twitter took down the fake account and told the official about a portal that could be used in the future to flag similar issues.

"Justice Barrett went out of her way to stress that facts matter and that lower courts in this case embraced a fact-free version of what transpired between officials in the Biden administration and Facebook, Twitter and other social media companies,"

 

But we know very well that facts do not matter to Trump.

Awe...is Twumpy-Wumpy taking away your toys? Poor dears.

[User]

3 hours ago, Barquentine said:

I shouldn't have said "you guys" and I'm not saying you're pushing anything. I'm just asking about a hypothetical situation. The leaders Trump admires the most have done it.

Might as well have asked if I will be OK with our new Alien overlords proclaiming themselves rulers of the Galaxy as they take over the planet. 

 

[User]

58 minutes ago, Radiorum said:

What these “remedial actions” consist of is not clear, but it sounds like a threat.

I love how you are more outraged over Trump ending the federal governments policies of putting pressure on social media to silence people than you are the last administrations using the federal government to put pressure on social media to silence people... 

Zuckerberg says the White House pressured Facebook to ‘censor’ some COVID-19 content during the pandemic

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/zuckerberg-says-the-white-house-pressured-facebook-to-censor-some-covid-19-content-during-the-pandemic

"WASHINGTON (AP) — Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg says senior Biden administration officials pressured Facebook to “censor” some COVID-19 content during the pandemic and vowed that the social media giant would push back if it faced such demands again."

 

[Michael Hardner]

The USA thrived in the 20th century, in an era of patriotic consensus and heavy censorship of communist, white supremacist and extreme viewpoints that could destabilize democracy. 

I remember at that time being handed leaflets of nonsense on the streets of Toronto, realizing that they were funded by the Soviet Union before I crumpled them up and threw them into the trash can, lovingly provided to me by the state. 

Left and right folks, at least those who see themselves as such, should take off their political hats and ask themselves what the best way is to engender a healthy public sphere. 

Anti-vaccination propaganda is a good starting point for the discussion IMO. 

I won't add my own perspective, except to say that it has changed over the last 10 years.

[Radiorum]

2 hours ago, User said:

Zuckerberg says the White House pressured Facebook to ‘censor’ some COVID-19 content during the pandemic

Yeah, I know, Zuckerberg has gone full-on MAGA. But let’s be real here. What Trump and Musk want is the freedom to lie. For example:

Quote

Billionaire government efficiency chief Elon Musk has repeatedly spread baseless or false claims about government spending, including by the U.S. Agency for International Development and other agencies, making various unsupported allegations of criminal activity and a recent misleading claim that disaster relief funds were spent to house migrants in “luxury hotels” in New York.

And it seems Musk has only recently discovered that the US has a Constitution, if his post of “If any judge anywhere can overrule us, we no longer live in a democracy!” is any indication.

[User]

2 minutes ago, Radiorum said:

Yeah, I know, Zuckerberg has gone full-on MAGA. But let’s be real here. What Trump and Musk want is the freedom to lie. For example:

Want the freedom to lie? We already have that freedom. You engage in that practice quite frequently here. 

And yet again, you change the subject. 

 

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, Radiorum said:

Trump’s levels of corruption and dishonesty are unprecedented.

Not even close. And that's your problem here you keep making these unsubstantiated comments which are easily shown to be not valid by anybody who's even remotely intelligent and slightly unbiased.

I've already shown you examples of government overreach just in the last 12 years that meets her exceeds his. And frankly his dishonesty is absolutely no different than many of the presidents that came before him. 

I could give many examples but let's take the most glaring in your face one that's in front of us today. For a minimum of 3 years the democrats propped up a president that was mentally incompetent and then tried to run him for another term. They lied every step of the way knowing full well that his mental health had deteriorated severely but claiming there was no evidence of any deterioration at all. In the final days Joe Biden was sitting in on top level meetings to help out. Who elected her?

Sorry but you've got a long way to go to make him the worst

 

 

Quote

Even his Executive Orders are dishonest. Consider one example: Executive Order 14149 – Restoring Freedom of Speech and Ending Federal Censorship (January 20, 2025) which in part states:

Snip

What these “remedial actions” consist of is not clear, but it sounds like a threat.

 

That's not dishonest, you just don't like it. Biden signed similar things

Biden and Kamala spent the entire election saying that trump promised that if he lost the election there would be blood in the streets. We know that's not true. It was one of many many lies that they repetitively told again and again knowing full well it was untrue.

And you had no problem with that. Way too late to be cleaning about dishonesty now.

Again, you had no problem with dishonesty when it was the democrats. You had no problem with government and presidential overreach when it was the democrats. You had no problem with illegal executive orders when it was the democrats.

Now you're trying to claim that republicans should be all bent out of shape about the very things that you allowed to happen when it was your turn.

The system doesn't work when only one group follows the rules. You didn't follow the rules and now you're mad that somebody else isn't following the rules but that is the inevitable result.

And the lawfare hasn't even started yet.

So next time your guy is in power you make sure that you and all your friends scream bloody blue murder when they lie, smack them in the head when they try lawfare, beat the snot out of them when they pass illegal executive orders or try and consolidate more power in the presidency.

Then you'll have a right to complain if the republicans don't do the same.

 

[Nationalist]

Just watching the Canada Finland hockey game from Boston. They cheered the Canadian anthem.

Common sense and respect. We Canucks need more of it.

Especially les Quebecois...

[eyeball]

16 hours ago, User said:

Why don't you explain how he can suspend the constitution and name himself president for life. 

It would be easy if enough people choose to ignore Orwell's advice, "Don't let it happen".

 

[User]

Just now, eyeball said:

It would be easy if enough people choose to ignore Orwell's advice, "Don't let it happen".

 

That is the case for anything and is thus a meaningless point of no real substance. 

Might as well say that you could become king of the planet too and we should be worried about that... well, because if enough people choose to ignore Orwell's advice... 

[eyeball]

40 minutes ago, User said:

That is the case for anything and is thus a meaningless point of no real substance. 

Might as well say that you could become king of the planet too and we should be worried about that.... well, because if enough people choose to ignore Orwell's advice

So if it's a meaningless concern the question remains, how do you feel about Trump being an autocrat? Further to that how do you feel about him leveraging that to put your country on the path of global domination?

Don't forget the victors get to write the history books.

[User]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

So if it's a meaningless concern the question remains, how do you feel about Trump being an autocrat? Further to that how do you feel about him leveraging that to put your country on the path of global domination?

Don't forget the victors get to write the history books.

Trump is not an autocrat. There is no means by which he can become one nor any practical path to such an outcome. Nor have you or anyone else here even tried to articulate what that path is that you think exists. 

America already dominates the globe and has done so since about WWII. So what?

 

[Deluge]

On 2/16/2025 at 7:00 AM, Radiorum said:

It's official. Autocracy has arrived to the US. The US authoritarian has made it clear. He posted this on the official White House account.

"He who saves his Country does not violate any law."

 

It's true. 

You see, cultist, sometimes it's necessary to overrule the abusers of power - and god knows the democrat party is packed to the gills with abusers of power - and that goes for a chunk of the Republicans as well. 

They all must be overruled and voted out. 

Edited February 17 by Deluge

[eyeball]

12 minutes ago, User said:

Trump is not an autocrat. There is no means by which he can become one nor any practical path to such an outcome. Nor have you or anyone else here even tried to articulate what that path is that you think exists.

Exactly what I said.

Donald Trump’s first election to the presidency in 2016 triggered an energetic defense of democracy from the American establishment. But his return to office has been met with striking indifference.

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/path-american-authoritarianism-trump

The Path to American Authoritarianism is indifference - the key ingredient to letting it happen.

Having lots of chuds behind you makes it even easier.

 

[User]

23 minutes ago, eyeball said:

The Path to American Authoritarianism is indifference - the key ingredient to letting it happen.

Having lots of chuds behind you makes it even easier.

This is not a path, its a platitude. 

 

[eyeball]

32 minutes ago, User said:

This is not a path, its a platitude. 

This reply is a stepping stone on the path.

[User]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

This reply is a stepping stone on the path.

You have yet to define any path. What path?

[eyeball]

10 minutes ago, User said:

You have yet to define any path. What path?

Indifference, the lack of concern...your self-assured hubris stands out too. Or do you think that's just your common sense coming through?

[User]

3 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Indifference, the lack of concern...your self-assured hubris stands out too. Or do you think that's just your common sense coming through?

That is not a path, that is a state of being that almost anyone could be at for any number of things. 

[SpankyMcFarland]

The MAGA Right is more anti-Left than pro-Right. They don’t seem to understand the difference between reforming the administrative state and seriously damaging it.