|
M Flynn suggest military in swing states....
|
 (December 21, 2020 at 11:43 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:(December 21, 2020 at 9:09 am)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: "What Flynn did was list what the President could do." Yep. 
We can call Trump's words "just words" all we want, but people are listening to him and acting on what he says.
Just now on Twitter a Representative basically said that if Biden gets inaugurated it will be the end of our democracy. Trump's words unfortunately matter, and his supporters are repeating his nonsense, and selling that conspiracy long term is what can destroy our democracy. It isn't just Flynn, but many others in his circle, and tons of GOP politicians across the country. 126 House members signed onto a frivolous lawsuit too. It is a collective climate that makes Trump dangerous.
The "dissidents" think they're the ones who actually understand the situation and know the reality of it. Sounds like a bigot to me.
 (December 21, 2020 at 12:54 pm)Brian37 Wrote: We can call Trump's words "just words" all we want, but people are listening to him and acting on what he says. So much for your First Amendment, then. Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
(December 21, 2020 at 1:05 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:(December 21, 2020 at 12:54 pm)Brian37 Wrote: We can call Trump's words "just words" all we want, but people are listening to him and acting on what he says. The 1st A. is not absolute. You can't shout "FIRE!" in a crowded theater or "AMBULANCE" in a crowded law school. (December 21, 2020 at 1:26 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:(December 21, 2020 at 1:05 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: So much for your First Amendment, then. I’m aware. But 37 thinks people shouldn’t be able to discuss the aspects and limits of presidential powers. Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
 (December 21, 2020 at 12:54 pm)Brian37 Wrote: We can call Trump's words "just words" all we want, but people are listening to him and acting on what he says. None of those things are illegal but I agree they do damage our democracy mainly because they perpetuate the belief that our elections are corrupt and unfair and that the Democratic Party is the party of corruption. All of those things continue to make the rift deeper. Both parties desperately need to clean up their rhetoric. Hillary shot off her own foot in 2016 with that stupid "deplorables" quip. Now when a politician openly advocates for violence against another person, anyone, that can be illegal. It depends on precisely what they say, but it can often spark an investigation. The more prominent the person threatened, the more likely it is to get investigated. Regardless, this sort of behavior is extremely low and furthers the rift in our country. No matter how bad an office holder is, they are just a reflection of the voters. But also keep in mind that absolutely none of this stuff is new. It has all been around since Washington's administration, who at one point in his second term dismissed everyone in his orbit who wasn't a Federalist, all while preaching national unity. Now, Trump even considering martial law and re-running elections, I think that's new. I've never read about any sitting president contemplating such a thing. I wouldn't put it past Nixon, though.
Why is it so?
~Julius Sumner Miller
"The Constitution isn't a suicide pact."
(December 21, 2020 at 1:44 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: "The Constitution isn't a suicide pact." I tend to disagree. If there is sufficient support that a law is detrimental to the survival of the state, then it needs to be modified, not ignored. But where the law is concerned, the cart often runs far ahead of the horse.
Why is it so?
~Julius Sumner Miller |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
