Do you guys think Pat would have a calm emotionally intelligent response to Trump winning in 2024?

[MrRetardo]

"The US government has three branches and, as a result, a fairly effective system of checks and balances" is something I remember learning in Government and Politics when I was 16/17. They taught that in pre-Caliphate London. Didn't they teach it in Bumfuck, Wisconsin?

I remember hearing the term checks and balances as far back as 6th/7th grade. I think piggy is just retarded and instead of filling his brain with 'some' useful information from public school, he chose to fill it with twitter sewage.

 

[BoomerSperg]

I can understand the ego part. What did trump do that's actually fascist? Not hurl insults at people, but actual laws and policies that circumvented the constitution
He was anti war, pro vax, operation warp speed was his idea but ask any democrat and they will tell you he was anti vax
The sky is falling rhetoric of his is infuriating

Half heartedly enforcing immigration law for barely half his term was pure authoritarianism child, I'm sorry you're so stupid.

 

[quasi101]

I can understand the ego part. What did trump do that's actually fascist? Not hurl insults at people, but actual laws and policies that circumvented the constitution
He was anti war, pro vax, operation warp speed was his idea but ask any democrat and they will tell you he was anti vax
The sky is falling rhetoric of his is infuriating

Really the only thing kinda close would be his shenanigans regarding not conceding the election. If the election was stolen, fair enough, but the fake elector shit was kinda close. The call with the Georgia governor about the "find more votes" things was kinda like a mob plausible deniability thing. But in reality, not really anything.

The reason most non informed people think he is being fascist is due to how many of the things a president usually does are just by virtue of decorum, or just "that's the way it was done". If there's no law against it, its not really fascist, pass better laws. It may hurt us globally in some way , perhaps, but that's not fascist its just bad policy.

You could kinda argue that the impeachment touched on it by not calling witnesses, but that would be more like calling the senate fascist which is retarded. Thats probably the closest thing. Whether you agree with the impeachment being a sham or not, if the house votes, the dems had a majority, that's the way the laws are written. Theres maybe an argument there but its extremely thin.

 

[guest]

I remember hearing the term checks and balances as far back as 6th/7th grade. I think piggy is just retarded and instead of filling his brain with 'some' useful information from public school, he chose to fill it with twitter sewage.

Yeah, that was my point. If it was taught in England in an elective A-level course, it must've been part of the curriculum in the country where it was actually relevant.

He's fat is what I'm driving at.

 

[LeapYearRavioliCap]

Yeah, that was my point. If it was taught in England in an elective A-level course, it must've been part of the curriculum in the country where it was actually relevant.

He's fat is what I'm driving at.

Sir, he's also stupid

 

[guest]

Sir, he's also stupid

Drunk fag too

 

[Libby Son Of Loin]

View attachment 171980

Another 'Trump is literally worse than Hitler/Stalin" please tag Twitter Jews and Ukrainians

 

[Sue Lightning]

"The US government has three branches and, as a result, a fairly effective system of checks and balances" is something I remember learning in Government and Politics when I was 16/17. They taught that in pre-Caliphate London. Didn't they teach it in Bumfuck, Wisconsin?

I’ve argued before about the threat of Trump to become a dictator but i’ve been evaluating it more. There are only a few ways it could realistically happen, and why they wouldn’t work. The first is that upon reentering office he signs a bunch of crazy executive orders outlawing shit or flat out arresting people. As anyone knows though these have checks and balances as well, it’s not just the President declaring something. Before Trump even got to see the bill it would be struck down for being unlawful.

The second way would be he doesn’t do anything radical throughout his term but attempts to stay at the end of it which, again, there are so many checks and balances at play it would be ruled almost immediately that Trump has no right to the Presidency. And we’re not even talking about a “stealing the election” bullshit…he can only serve two terms and the dude would be 80+ at the end of it. There is such a strict basis for him leaving this time he would be forced to.

The third way is controlling the military and forming a coup which won’t happen. The military is too segmented and eyed by the Fed for any sort of revolt to happen, not to mention the size of the US. Even if you managed to capture DC the “real US” would move to a different capitol and you would have the wrath of all 50 states against a small city run by a paramilitary force.

There is truly no historical precedent you could bring up that you could theoretically compare to Trump becoming a dictator because America was specifically designed for that shit never to happen.

 

[Slackjawed Cow]

He’s definitely going to commit some kind of atrocity at the RNC this summer in Milwaukee

Check out his : BLM isnt the enemy and cops arent soldiers

Black Lives Matter is not the enemy, and cops aren’t soldiers

Sheriff David Clarke is wrong when he says we’re at war with Black Lives Matter.

thehill.com

 

[guest]

I’ve argued before about the threat of Trump to become a dictator but i’ve been evaluating it more. There are only a few ways it could realistically happen, and why they wouldn’t work. The first is that upon reentering office he signs a bunch of crazy executive orders outlawing shit or flat out arresting people. As anyone knows though these have checks and balances as well, it’s not just the President declaring something. Before Trump even got to see the bill it would be struck down for being unlawful.

The second way would be he doesn’t do anything radical throughout his term but attempts to stay at the end of it which, again, there are so many checks and balances at play it would be ruled almost immediately that Trump has no right to the Presidency. And we’re not even talking about a “stealing the election” bullshit…he can only serve two terms and the dude would be 80+ at the end of it. There is such a strict basis for him leaving this time he would be forced to.

The third way is controlling the military and forming a coup which won’t happen. The military is too segmented and eyed by the Fed for any sort of revolt to happen, not to mention the size of the US. Even if you managed to capture DC the “real US” would move to a different capitol and you would have the wrath of all 50 states against a small city run by a paramilitary force.

There is truly no historical precedent you could bring up that you could theoretically compare to Trump becoming a dictator because America was specifically designed for that shit never to happen.

america wasn’t “designed for that to never happen”, it was ceremonious after george Washington didn’t want to be a king, but two terms only became law after fdr was a literal dictator

Nice essay, stupid zoomer.

You don’t know what you’re talking about but that doesn’t stop you from talking.

 

[BoomerSperg]

I’ve argued before about the threat of Trump to become a dictator but i’ve been evaluating it more. There are only a few ways it could realistically happen, and why they wouldn’t work. The first is that upon reentering office he signs a bunch of crazy executive orders outlawing shit or flat out arresting people. As anyone knows though these have checks and balances as well, it’s not just the President declaring something. Before Trump even got to see the bill it would be struck down for being unlawful.

You don't have to sign bills to arrest anyone just appoint a flunkie at the doj and fbi and tell them to only go after your political opponents.

Sound familiar?

 

[quasi101]

struck down for being unlawful.

Stuck down by whom? Anything like this is going to get kicked up to the supreme court. I think that's where most of the hysteria comes from. Its basically the flawed premise that "trump stacked the supreme court". A supreme court judge is never going to get impeached by the senate. So that knocks out the senates leg as a check on the president.

If hypothetically that were true then president could, in a sense , do whatever he wanted. It wouldn't happen, but since the senate is never going to impeach a judge, the judiciary holds more power than should be the case. In the fantasy world where the supreme court rubber stamped any decision in trumps favor, trump could drone strike hilary or something , pardon himself and the supreme court rules it legal.

I think thats the real fear those dummies have.

 

[quasi101]

If you also think that the senate would impeach the president as a check in the above hypothetical, unless the dems had a super majority (which won't happen in 2024), when was the last time the senate had a 2/3 majority on any partisan issue?

 

[Sue Lightning]

america wasn’t “designed for that to never happen”, it was ceremonious after george Washington didn’t want to be a king, but two terms only became law after fdr was a literal dictator

Yes it was dummy. Of course the two terms shit was ceremonial until Washington but it was very obvious the United States didn’t want a king or dictator. Thats why checks and balances exist and we call the President, Mr. President and not “the right and honourable” or whatever the fuck. They didn’t want to venerate the office to that degree. Even if it doesn’t explicitly say so in the constitution all the Founding Fathers were aware that they didn’t want the country ruled by one guy, ever.

 

[IGotATreeOnMyHouse85]

I’ve argued before about the threat of Trump to become a dictator but i’ve been evaluating it more. There are only a few ways it could realistically happen, and why they wouldn’t work. The first is that upon reentering office he signs a bunch of crazy executive orders outlawing shit or flat out arresting people. As anyone knows though these have checks and balances as well, it’s not just the President declaring something. Before Trump even got to see the bill it would be struck down for being unlawful.

The second way would be he doesn’t do anything radical throughout his term but attempts to stay at the end of it which, again, there are so many checks and balances at play it would be ruled almost immediately that Trump has no right to the Presidency. And we’re not even talking about a “stealing the election” bullshit…he can only serve two terms and the dude would be 80+ at the end of it. There is such a strict basis for him leaving this time he would be forced to.

The third way is controlling the military and forming a coup which won’t happen. The military is too segmented and eyed by the Fed for any sort of revolt to happen, not to mention the size of the US. Even if you managed to capture DC the “real US” would move to a different capitol and you would have the wrath of all 50 states against a small city run by a paramilitary force.

There is truly no historical precedent you could bring up that you could theoretically compare to Trump becoming a dictator because America was specifically designed for that shit never to happen.

If Obama couldn’t find a way to make himself a dictator, Trump won’t be able to. While being very different politically - Obama and Trump are very similar when it comes to their huge egos. People forget how insane the media went fawning over Obama which went to his head. The media made Obama look like the second coming of Christ and it’s clear he still sees himself as that.

 

[IGotATreeOnMyHouse85]

If you also think that the senate would impeach the president as a check in the above hypothetical, unless the dems had a super majority (which won't happen in 2024), when was the last time the senate had a 2/3 majority on any partisan issue?

Problem is also due to democrats going impeach crazy with Trump that lead to nothing actually happening now being impeached is meaningless, it’s all for show.

 

[Sue Lightning]

Stuck down by whom? Anything like this is going to get kicked up to the supreme court. I think that's where most of the hysteria comes from. Its basically the flawed premise that "trump stacked the supreme court". A supreme court judge is never going to get impeached by the senate. So that knocks out the senates leg as a check on the president.

No offense but your line of thinking here is wrong. You’re assuming the checks and balances comes only after an executive order is signed. Lets look at the steps of what an EO gets:

“That process is coordinated by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which receives comments and language from impacted and interested agencies. Once OMB and stakeholder agencies have reviewed the draft language, the draft order is sent to the Attorney General and Director of the Office of the Federal Register for review, and then on to the President for signing.” (Not mentioned here is the Presidents administration and cabinet gives comments as well.)

Now not all of them go through this process but I imagine “Kill all my enemies” would put every agency on high alert. Any of these agencies have the authority to effectively “cancel” this executive order especially if it’s legality is in question. Because executive orders aren’t defined in the constitution theres little to no oversight but obviously the former example would be shut down before it got to Trumps desk.

If hypothetically that were true then president could, in a sense , do whatever he wanted. It wouldn't happen, but since the senate is never going to impeach a judge, the judiciary holds more power than should be the case. In the fantasy world where the supreme court rubber stamped any decision in trumps favor, trump could drone strike hilary or something , pardon himself and the supreme court rules it legal.

Again back to former example. It’s not about post checks and balances. Furthermore you’re only thinking about this on a court basis. The Supreme Court will hear the issue, sure, but even before that Congress could essentially pass a bill saying “He can’t kill political opponents” to override the EO, effectively making it unlawful. Or they could simply prevent the action of the EO being undertaken through claiming lack of funds. Only then after these efforts are exhausted would it be kicked up to the courts, and as you said we aren’t so biased 5/4 of them would agree to such a plan.

If you also think that the senate would impeach the president as a check in the above hypothetical, unless the dems had a super majority (which won't happen in 2024), when was the last time the senate had a 2/3 majority on any partisan issue?

Even in this hypothetical the Senate wouldn’t do it. Not only would you need the 2/3 majority but you would need a 1/2(?) majority to get it passed in the House. Furthermore even if the 2/3 requirement were met theres no guarantee he would leave. If he didn’t listen to an election or an amendment why would he listen to an impeachment? Back to in this hypothetical scenario he would be taken out forcefully, probably after legal battles.

Also not mentioned is Congress would have to find an impeachable offense. A reminder that impeachment is defined as such:

“The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

The only wiggle room in this wording for an impeachment is “high crimes and misdemeanors” which, as we’ve seen, are vague, ranging from lying about blowjobs to phone calls to wiretapping your political opponents (which, the only reason Nixon was about to get removed anyway was because we lived in a less partisan time than today.) It would have to be sorted out if the President committed this offense by staying past his two terms (I can’t even speculate on the legality of just staying in the Presidency despite an election, one term or two.), and if we look back in history at Presidential oversight I doubt this would be brought up. Both Lincoln and WW straight up removed the first amendment during wartime and never faced a lawsuit let alone challenge from within the government. Even W Bush had articles of impeachment drafted on him for lying about the WMDs and such which were never approved. Bottomline yeah the circumstances for an impeachment would also be insane.

 

[Sue Lightning]

If Obama couldn’t find a way to make himself a dictator, Trump won’t be able to. While being very different politically - Obama and Trump are very similar when it comes to their huge egos. People forget how insane the media went fawning over Obama which went to his head. The media made Obama look like the second coming of Christ and it’s clear he still sees himself as that.

The difference is is that regardless of your opinions on Obama he was like every other President. Every single President since Lincoln has met with their successor and acknowledged that their time in the office was limited. We’ve had a lot of people try to get the Presidency like Al Gore but none try to retain it like Trump. It’s because these people realized the office was bigger than the person who occupies it. Again with the comparison, Obama, despite fucking hating Trump and thinking he wasn’t gonna win, sucked it up, met with the guy and shook his hand, did the press outlets, and he told him “Ok heres what being the President is like.” Trump couldn’t do any of that for Biden. Even if you think the election was faked remember that in 2016 the liberals were crying about the Russians stealing the election and STILL gave the seat to Trump. Again, knowing the office is more than the person who occupies it.

 

[TheRevAlJolson]

Pat is more outwardly fascist than Trump ever was.

All progressives are like that. It's absurd that they all say shit like "Silence fascists!" "Abolish the fascist GOP!" "Trust the science, fascist!" Not one of them can even grasp the possibility that they are instead being the fascists.

It's maddening trying to talk to either side anymore, really. None of them hear anything but what they want to hear. It's just an exercise in being angry. What I don't get is that there's so much REAL ACTUAL SHIT to be angry about, but it goes largely ignored.

Instead it's all about the political kayfabe. Meanwhile we continue to allow immigration into a country with an admitted housing shortage, allow the Fed to dictate the interest in our home loans with zero restrictions, allow Americans to suffer from oppressive inflation, allow insurance companies to bloat the cost of healthcare - which even more egregiously, prices you out of your own private healthcare so you're FORCED to do business with them, a business which is essentially you betting with them against your own health. It's fucking absurd. Things have gotten fucking absurd.

Sorry about the rant. I recently started smoking weed again.

 

[SFWA liaison]

he'd squeal on X, maybe take a picture giving the TV the finger

and that's it, that's the extent of his "activism"