Autocracy has arrived to the US

[User]

2 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

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. 

What does your one hasty generalization about MAGA have to do with anything?

How is the administrative state being "seriously" damaged?

 

[Radiorum]

48 minutes ago, User said:

How is the administrative state being "seriously" damaged?

Trump seeks to overturn the Constitution, Supreme Court precedent, and long-standing federal law in order that he may abuse presidential power. Abusing federal funding is illegal and it's even more corrupt that he is doing this to bully and coerce.

 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, User said:

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

You figure a government in that state is a healthy place to be?

It sounds perfect for anyone who prefers it isn't there for anyone else.

[CdnFox]

42 minutes ago, Radiorum said:

Trump seeks to overturn the Constitution, Supreme Court precedent, and long-standing federal law in order that he may abuse presidential power

 

Obama definitely did that. Biden certainly tried and probably would have succeeded had he won a second term.

Why the fuss now?

Edited February 18 by CdnFox

[Radiorum]

1 minute ago, CdnFox said:

Obama definitely did that. Biden certainly tried and probably would have succeeded had he won a second term.

Why the fuss now?

if you can't see the difference, I can't help you

[CdnFox]

7 minutes ago, Radiorum said:

if you can't see the difference, I can't help you

If you can't explain your point then you can't help you either. Kind of sounds like you're not good for much of anything really   

The problem is there is no difference. You think that there is because you believe that something Obama did was okay or you approved of it and the thing that trump is doing is something you don't approve of but this is something that the left repetitively again and again fails to see: There's no difference and if you allow the one people will allow the other because you have already established it's normal.

I've said this for quite some time. And I'm right, history is in the middle of proving me right. History is proving you wrong. People have realized this is normal and they're just staying out of the way and they're not rising up and complaining about it.

This is the world you've crafted. If this isn't what you wanted you needed to do things differently. Something you might want to think about in the future because I absolutely guarantee that no matter how far trump takes it the next democrat to sit in the office we'll go even one step further and open that door just a little bit more unless they are held to account and rained in.

This is your doing. Enjoy

[Radiorum]

2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

There's no difference

The evidence tells me otherwise.

[User]

1 hour ago, Radiorum said:

Trump seeks to overturn the Constitution, Supreme Court precedent, and long-standing federal law in order that he may abuse presidential power. Abusing federal funding is illegal and it's even more corrupt that he is doing this to bully and coerce.

 

Once again, you change the subject. This time, you are interjecting yourself into a comment not even directed to you. 

I am not interested in your baseless assertions. Let me know when you have some evidence and an actual argument. 

[User]

58 minutes ago, eyeball said:

You figure a government in that state is a healthy place to be?

It sounds perfect for anyone who prefers it isn't there for anyone else.

We were not discussing whatever your subjective notion of what a healthy state to be in is. 

The path. That is your argument and you are failing to explain it. 

 

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Radiorum said:

The evidence tells me otherwise.

Your bigotry and bias tells you otherwise, the evidence supports me. And so does your inability to express the difference. You're doing the thing where you run and hide and stick your head in the sand when you run into facts you don't like

[Legato]

2 hours ago, Radiorum said:

The evidence tells me otherwise.

You should stop listening to the radio, instead, rummage around in box of common sense, perchance some might stick.

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, User said:

We were not discussing whatever your subjective notion of what a healthy state to be in is. 

The path. That is your argument and you are failing to explain it. 

I'm afraid the explanation laid out in the article I posted will have to suffice. I mean it's even titled The Path to American Authoritarianism. You're not that stupid you're just being stubborn.

In the meantime you seem to be quite happy with the things the authors are concerned about.

[CdnFox]

Oh and not to kick you while you're down @Radiorum but I figured I'd get a licking or two over the next issue which is bound to rear its head shortly.

In polling done during trump's trial about 75% or so of Americans agreed that the trial was happening for purely political reasons and was politically motivated. Obviously the majority were republicans but at 75% at least about half were democrats. So even the democrats realized by and large that the trial was political.

But the majority of democrats including the ones who felt it was politically motivated agreed that it was perfectly fine and that it should proceed. So they knew without a doubt that it was political, and they supported it anyway because it was against someone they didn't like

I'm sure they're not too distant future we're going to see the first cases of lawfare attacking democrats. I just thought I'd head you off before you pend to some ridiculous nonsense about how it's unprecedented and has never happened and point out that when it did happen and was president the democrats largely remain silent even though they knew what was happening because it was their guy who was doing it so they didn't mind.

Figured as I'd save you a talking to when the time came  

Just now, eyeball said:

I'm afraid the explanation laid out in the article I posted will have to suffice. I mean it's even titled The Path to American Authoritarianism. You're not that stupid you're just being stubborn.

In the meantime you seem to be quite happy with the things the authors are concerned about.

So you're saying that you as well cannot actually articulate your position. Your own thoughts are so unclear that you can't put them down coherently. Which strongly suggest you don't even understand the article that you posted.

I thinking person who believes in reason and logic can always articulate their position fairly clearly and with reasonable brevity. The fact that you can't suggest that your thoughts are based on ideology rather than logic or reason

[eyeball]

46 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

So you're saying that you as well cannot actually articulate your position.

Nope. I'm telling User to stop acting like a sea lion.

[Radiorum]

10 hours ago, CdnFox said:

In polling done during trump's trial about 75% or so of Americans agreed that the trial was happening for purely political reasons and was politically motivated.

This is false (I notice you rarely cite your sources). In fact, 57 % of Americans felt the charges were politically motivated (the word "purely" is yours - and is not reflected in the poll) - 93% of Republicans and 17% of Democrats.

This does NOT prove the charges were politically motivated, only that Republicans fall for Trump's BS.

In any case, there is no logical connection between this and the steps Trump is taking now to effect regime change in the US. By your logic, a criminal should be entitled to take over the system that held him accountable.

 

  

[User]

1 hour ago, Radiorum said:

In any case, there is no logical connection between this and the steps Trump is taking now to effect regime change in the US. By your logic, a criminal should be entitled to take over the system that held him accountable.

Another baseless assertion. What are the steps Trump is taking and what do you base claiming it is to effect regime change on?

Also... Trump is the current "regime" LOL

 

[Legato]

1 hour ago, Radiorum said:

This is false (I notice you rarely cite your sources). In fact, 57 % of Americans felt the charges were politically motivated (the word "purely" is yours - and is not reflected in the poll) - 93% of Republicans and 17% of Democrats.

This does NOT prove the charges were politically motivated, only that Republicans fall for Trump's BS.

In any case, there is no logical connection between this and the steps Trump is taking now to effect regime change in the US. By your logic, a criminal should be entitled to take over the system that held him accountable.

 

  

Then it also logically means a system can attempt to brand someone a criminal in vain, to make them accountable.

This is what happened, you will find the evidence inside the common sense box.

[Radiorum]

4 minutes ago, User said:

Another baseless assertion. What are the steps Trump is taking and what do you base claiming it is to effect regime change on?

It's not up to me to give you your education. It's not up to me to write you a book. Get out of your bubble and educate yourself.

[User]

1 minute ago, Radiorum said:

It's not up to me to give you your education. It's not up to me to write you a book. Get out of your bubble and educate yourself.

I did not ask for an education. I asked you to support your baseless assertions with facts and sound arguments. 

As you have repeatedly demonstrated, you have neither facts nor the ability to defend what you say with a good argument. 

 

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Radiorum said:

This is false (I notice you rarely cite your sources). In fact, 57 % of Americans felt the charges were politically motivated (the word "purely" is yours - and is not reflected in the poll) - 93% of Republicans and 17% of Democrats.

This does NOT prove the charges were politically motivated, only that Republicans fall for Trump's BS.

 

 

  

Sorry kiddo but that was just one pole and just one of the charges Other polls taken before or during had different numbers and polls looking at the charges that were brought against him in general had others as well, 

62% of Americans think that federal charges against former President Donald Trump are ''politically motivated,”

and other polls indicated even higher levels when they're asked if politics played a role. One cnn poll had 75 believing that he was treated differently than other convicts for example. 

But just for fun let's take your numbers even though they were taken after the trial rather than before the trial concluded as I had mentioned. In fairness it's a little late to complain after the trial's over but let's take those numbers anyway.

The issue here is to try and prove whether or not the charges were politically motivated. The issue here is to show that a sizable hunk of democrats believed that they were politically motivated but didn't speak out against it.

So when the time comes when trump starts conducting trials that you feel are politically motivated how much do you think that the republicans are going to listen knowing that democrats Did not care and thought they should proceed anyway.

Democrats were fine with the courts being used as a weapon against the democratic party's opponents. Republicans will be fine with it when the time comes.  

Eventually even your soft little brain will see how this works. 

[WestCanMan]

22 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

62% of Americans think that federal charges against former President Donald Trump are ''politically motivated,” 

Once you get up over 45% you've cornered the GOP market.

Once you get to 55% you've basically cornered the 'independent/libertarian' market.

At 62% you've got 7/45 Dem-voters, 16% of them, admitting that the charges were politically motivated. There would be a lot more who know that's the case but just won't answer "yes" to that question. 

What percentage of our leftists here would admit that the charges were politically motivated, even if they knew it for a fact? 10%?

By my own estimation, that 62% vote translates to probably 95% of Americans knowing that the charges were politically motivated. I can't imagine anyone doesn't know, if they're following closely.

[Radiorum]

29 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The issue here is to try and prove whether or not the charges were politically motivated. The issue here is to show that a sizable hunk of democrats believed that they were politically motivated but didn't speak out against it.

These are two unrelated propositions (and no, a sizeable chunk of Democrats did not), as my main point (that you did not address) makes clear

3 hours ago, Radiorum said:

This does NOT prove the charges were politically motivated, only that Republicans fall for Trump's BS.

In any case, there is no logical connection between this and the steps Trump is taking now to effect regime change in the US. By your logic, a criminal should be entitled to take over the system that held him accountable.

 

In any case, Trump got due process and a fair trial. Trump’s defense was present at jury selection and signed off on every juror. They had every opportunity to challenge jurors, introduce evidence, question prosecution witnesses and call their own. He was convicted because he was guilty.

What was political was the wholesale rejection of the American judicial system (not to mention the electoral system) by Trump and his sycophants, all of them “suggesting without evidence that it was the result of a push by President Biden and federal Democrats to prosecute Trump.”

“This is not the United States of America,” (Lara Trump) said. “This is the kind of thing you would expect to see in the communist U.S.S.R.”

Ted Cruz posted that the trial was “the kind of thing you see in a Banana Republic.”

Rubio compared Trump’s trial to a Cuban “show trial.”

Several Republican senators signed a pledge of non-cooperation with the Democrats that begins with this statement:

Quote

The White House has made a mockery of the rule of law and fundamentally altered our politics in un-American ways.

What a load of bullshit propaganda!

[Nationalist]

Too funny.

Sooo...Libbies...not liking the work to reduce government costs eh? Having trouble dealing with DOGE are we?

Tough titty.

It has never been more obvious that Libbies detest America. They would spend it into oblivion.

You sad-sacks lost. Now get the Hell outta the way while the Republicans clean up your Gawd Damn mess!

[impartialobserver]

DOGE.. a lot of the stuff that you read about on FOX NEWS is going to get scaled back. Existing law and precedent supercedes an EO. That being said.. it was time for something like this. 

[User]

20 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

DOGE.. a lot of the stuff that you read about on FOX NEWS is going to get scaled back. Existing law and precedent supercedes an EO. That being said.. it was time for something like this. 

I don't really watch or read Fox News. 

From the legal analysis I have been following, I think most of this stuff sticks. Once these TRO's start turning into injunctions, if they do, then Trump can start working them up out of the lower levels of the Courts where he will start winning because existing law and precedent back Trump.