Narauko

That would require the federal election committee to violate the constitution by putting him on the ballot, then the same for every State government. This is an order of magnitude beyond the attempts to keep him off the ballots for Jan 6, as he was never convicted of or tried for it. The Supreme Court would need to destroy the constitution to rule favorably on it, and thus remove all their own power as the third branch of government.

The US is not yet as corrupt as the CCP or Russia, and Trump doesn't have the political and personal capital of Xi or Putin to rewrite the constitution to allow more/unlimited presidential terms.

I do see the possibility, but if it is true then the only way to stop it is armed insurrection against a tyrant. Trump would have to dismantle the courts, blatantly violate the constitution, and fundamentally alter the government. The military would have to go along with it too. The problem is that you cannot make a preemptive strike or you give Trump a casus belli to do just that. Whomever acts first loses, and it should be the administration commiting unambitious treason first if you want to stop it. Until then, you need to keep working through the established legal system.

I still don't think Trump has the personal or political charisma to line up every hole in the swiss cheese of constitutional, legal, moral, and cultural protections to pull it off, but I'll be prepared to eat crow if he does succeed in overthrowing the government and becoming a dictator.

I am pro-border in the fact that I think borders serve an important purpose and that laws surrounding immigration should exist and be enforced. That said, I think fixing immigration requires following the god damned laws and constitution, you don't enforce the law by breaking it. Fuck! Immigration courts and the entire immigration bureaucracy needs to be beefed up to handle this, and law enforcement of any kind needs to be working under the judicial system. Warrants are needed, you can't suspend habeas corpus, cops should never be masked and anonymous, and all law enforcement should be held to a higher standard than everyone else.

I think Trump is causing the legitimate action of enforcing our laws to look bad, and he is harming law and order for decades or longer. It should not be controversial to enforce laws, and if it is those laws need to be changed.

Despite how scofflaw this administration is, however, I do not think Trump will run for a third term. I don't think we as a country or even the Republican party as a whole is willing to that blatantly flout the constitution, and I think that at least 60% of both parties want what is best for the country. I don't think actual Nazis or true jackbooted fascists are more than 10% of the right (I can't believe I now think it's that high), but do believe 20-30% are exploited by grifters and opportunists. That might be naive, but it seems like.everyone is abandoning their faith in the fundamental good of others all across the country/world and I think that is sad.

Very true, and everyone should keep that in mind. It's also true that there is an outsized visibility and impact that instances like ML and hexbear have on the zeitgeist/perception of the platform. It doesn't help that the creators are ML.

The Internet is not obsessed with speed running just because there exists websites on it obsessed with speed running.

The Internet also sends greeting cards and is used for business/stock market trading, but everyone knows that the Internet is FOR porn.

It depends on the instance and mods I think. I got a temp ban from an instance just citing "bad faith" for asking if there was a source article and getting flamed for "standing in the way of the movement". I accept that the Libre/FOSS space trends towards more niche user bases, and Lemmy is infinitely better than any other alternatives, but sometimes it feels a bit to close to Emo Phillips "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912".

Maybe guns are bad, and maybe if you bring a rifle to a high tense situation and hold it in any manner that may seem threatening, you deserve to get shot.>

Maybe guns are tools, and maybe if the majority of protesters were visibly armed then the police would not escalate tense situations to high intensity riot conditions and beat the protesters. Had the state had to hesitate to use violence on peaceful protesters, at least there would be a bunch less abuse of the media and civilians.

The Black Panthers proved this, which is why Reagan started gun control. Modern open carry armed protests have also proven it's still true. Cops are cowards, Uvalde proved that, even with superior equipment they will find a reason not to start. Getting the left to disarm and put their protection into the hands of the very governmental authority they continually protest against has got to be the biggest con job in history

The question they replied to was where the pro 2A people were. The point of 2A is that the armed populace meets or exceeds the armed tyrants. One person with a gun can't stop hundreds of cops with battle gear, that's the point of everyone having a right to be armed.

I would hazard a guess that in this context their answer is probably yes, they expect to need to protest with other pro gun (armed) protesters if they were going to be armed.

Ask the Black Panthers how well only one or two people being armed in a protest worked against the cops, compared to everyone being armed. There is a reason Reagan started gun control, and it wasn't because his supporters were the ones that were armed.

Yeah, but this is a little like protesting against gun violence by juggling loaded handguns and putting everything on the safeties working perfectly. You don't protest an unsafe amusement park by going on the unsafe rides standing up.

Point being, most people would probably not want to serve as the example of what not to do. Most rules/regulations are written in blood, but most people aren't volunteering to be the ink to pen those regulations.

Sorry for talking too much? Don't use Google because fuck the monopoly, Duckduckgo has other instances when searching for ICE handcuffing kids. Next time I'll just ask for the sauce instead, or just not bother since that seems to be the preference.

Certainly, it is perfectly valid to just want ideal outcomes for all individuals regardless of the system. You are also not required in any way to discuss your viewpoints with anyone. I will thank you for your time up to this point, and wish you a wonderful day.

I'm a bit confused and maybe something got lost in translation. A picture was posted of something questionable that appears to be a bad thing, with the poster of said picture saying it's even worse than what the picture shows. You told someone to look at the context for why it is indeed as bad as the poster said, but someone asking about the context you referred to/found is, is a bad thing/downplaying?

I do hope the judge looked him dead in the eyes at the sentencing and said "Bad dog" before rubbing his nose in the evidence bags.

On the positive side, he should be out after 2.13 human years. Sooner with good behavior and completion of an obedience class from a licensed training academy.