Literally anything… Have his opponents assassinated, openly take bribes in exchange for killing regulations or selling pardons or us citizenship… Anything
Sure, the president has been killing people and starting wars for decades and nothing happens. And how do you think all presidents are rich after being public “servants” for their whole lives? They will only get in trouble if its for personal gain directly.
OMG, Sam Seder, really? That dude is just a rage porn creator. And I dont really care what people claim or what way you guys are misleading. What is the exact method?
Don’t know the exact method, but I’m pretty sure appointing people that agree with him to the SCOTUS which will later rule that he’s got absolute immunity for official acts is one of the steps.
Do you see how the fact that you cant point to a path for these things to happen is the problem? The thing about immunity is just confirmation for what always has been, its not a new ruling. When they pretend like this is something new they are lying to you, its just now formalized.
Presidential immunity is not a new thing. It’s not just me saying that. A lot of people who are experts in the law are saying that, including the dissenting justices.
The president can now do everything up to and including having their opponent assassinated by the military. There’s a good video about this here.
The fact that someone insufficiently familiar with law can’t point to a path for these things doesn’t mean that someone with more knowledge can’t. Also, how are you so sure it isn’t you who’s being lied to?
Because I can look at what all the presidents in my lifetime have done and have zero consequences to. Trying to pretend that just now they cant get away with doing whatever they want is just silly. How many wars/conflicts have the presidents started on their own the few decades?
It’s always gradual up until the very end. They chip away at your sense of normal by changing little things. It starts with censorship. They delete the ideas they don’t like. Then they eliminate free speech. Punish protesters. Increase militarization of police. Add a few laws about “appropriate behavior” you know, dress codes, curfews, male escorts, mandatory church attendance, et viola, authoritarian state.
Oh gotcha, I point out reality so it must be a troll. It would be good for you to actually learn what the fuck is happening and not just repeat the propaganda you read on the internet.
Buddy, you didn’t point out shit, you gave a presupposition. If you want to point something out, point out the legislation behind each of the “steps the left has taken in the last few years.”
I never said there was legislation, and in fact if they can accomplish steps without legislation then thats even better for them.
Step 1 - Can you say mainstream ideas that conservative believe on social media and not get kicked off most platforms? No, you will get booted off most platforms.
Step 1 - Can you say mainstream ideas that conservative believe on social media and not get kicked off most platforms? No, you will get booted off most platforms.
Heh I know I’m starting a parallel reply chain, but I suddenly remembered this meme today. This is really the crux of the problem.
Step 1 - Can you say mainstream ideas that conservative believe on social media and not get kicked off most platforms? No, you will get booted off most platforms.
How many times have I been banned off this site or from sub-reddits for sharing tepidly conservative opinions? On this site I think temporarily 2-3 times, and probably 30 different subreddits. But you are free to yell any crazy leftist belief about the revolution and putting people up against the wall.
If we’re not talking legislation, then I don’t see how it’s all that important in a discussion about democracy. If a social media company chooses freely to decide they don’t want to platform someone, where’s the problem? That’s freedom, baby. I have very few carveouts where I will not support someone’s actual right to speech, but I do not think forcing any private entity to platform speech they are against is all that democratic.
I do not even agree that many of these companies are really all that quick to deplatform people either. There are many conservative voices on social media. The examples that come to mind where individuals were kicked off certain sites generally involve explicit undue vitriol against other people (individuals and communities), often wishing harm unto them. If this is not what you mean by the “mainstream ideas that conservative believe” that people are being kicked off platforms for (I sure hope not)…then what else? I mean, who is being booted off of platforms for saying they think the government is too big, or that they think x politician is doing a poor job, etc.?
The issue is the government is so big that it is married to corporations (mainly on the federal level). So the big issue is the government directly giving money to companies and telling them who to censor, and also how the financial system works and the funds that the companies get indirect to censorship. Also there is the “public square” argument that social media is the public square and a few companies have a monopoly on the public square.
What is the exact method a president like trump would use to “end democray”?
Any, whatever he does, it would be valid an de would be immune
What terrible thing would he do that he would be immune from?
Order the military to assassinate his opponent.
They cant do that without going to prison… They have already killed american citizens around the world, this is nothing new.
How would they go to prison? The highest court in the country just said that they have immunity.
No they didnt… They would get impeached and then stand trial.
How’s that gone so far?
Are you referring to Trumps impeachments?
According to whom? This was literally the example presented for this case and SCOTUS rules it was A-OK
Says the constitution and the three branches of government. And that was not what the SCOTUS said, that is the bulshit they are selling you.
Literally anything… Have his opponents assassinated, openly take bribes in exchange for killing regulations or selling pardons or us citizenship… Anything
Sure, the president has been killing people and starting wars for decades and nothing happens. And how do you think all presidents are rich after being public “servants” for their whole lives? They will only get in trouble if its for personal gain directly.
Cute
Here’s a writer of Project 2025 saying there won’t bloodshed as long as you don’t resist: https://youtu.be/-OdM4_WO2wk
OMG, Sam Seder, really? That dude is just a rage porn creator. And I dont really care what people claim or what way you guys are misleading. What is the exact method?
I also like to shout into a void for a sense of validation.
You guys still havent told me how anything is going to happen
You’re right, I answered the question I wished was asked: whether they’re planning bloodshed.
Are you claiming they are planning to overthrow the government violently?
With the way Biden is going… They probably won’t need to 🤦♂️
I dont think Biden has been running things for a long time. 30% of the population would vote for him if he were in a comma.
Don’t know the exact method, but I’m pretty sure appointing people that agree with him to the SCOTUS which will later rule that he’s got absolute immunity for official acts is one of the steps.
Do you see how the fact that you cant point to a path for these things to happen is the problem? The thing about immunity is just confirmation for what always has been, its not a new ruling. When they pretend like this is something new they are lying to you, its just now formalized.
Presidential immunity is not a new thing. It’s not just me saying that. A lot of people who are experts in the law are saying that, including the dissenting justices.
The president can now do everything up to and including having their opponent assassinated by the military. There’s a good video about this here.
Legal eagle is a biased person, he has bought into the propaganda just like all the rest of you guys.
The fact that someone insufficiently familiar with law can’t point to a path for these things doesn’t mean that someone with more knowledge can’t. Also, how are you so sure it isn’t you who’s being lied to?
Because I can look at what all the presidents in my lifetime have done and have zero consequences to. Trying to pretend that just now they cant get away with doing whatever they want is just silly. How many wars/conflicts have the presidents started on their own the few decades?
It’s always gradual up until the very end. They chip away at your sense of normal by changing little things. It starts with censorship. They delete the ideas they don’t like. Then they eliminate free speech. Punish protesters. Increase militarization of police. Add a few laws about “appropriate behavior” you know, dress codes, curfews, male escorts, mandatory church attendance, et viola, authoritarian state.
This is kind of funny/sad. Do you realize you just listed out the steps the left has taken in the last 10 years?
Who’s banning the fucking library books, Cap?
Do you think all library books should be available to all kids in public schools?
No
Then what is so bad with removing books they see as inappropriate for children?
There’s nothing evidence based or beneficial about the way they’re banning books. They’re just censoring what they don’t like.
What is not evidence based about banning books in public schools that have sexual content?
Obvious troll is obvious so I’m not going to waste time on you.
Oh gotcha, I point out reality so it must be a troll. It would be good for you to actually learn what the fuck is happening and not just repeat the propaganda you read on the internet.
Buddy, you didn’t point out shit, you gave a presupposition. If you want to point something out, point out the legislation behind each of the “steps the left has taken in the last few years.”
I never said there was legislation, and in fact if they can accomplish steps without legislation then thats even better for them.
Step 1 - Can you say mainstream ideas that conservative believe on social media and not get kicked off most platforms? No, you will get booted off most platforms.
Heh I know I’m starting a parallel reply chain, but I suddenly remembered this meme today. This is really the crux of the problem.
Oh wow, a meme that is more propaganda, wow good job!
‘These days you’re only allowed to have an opinion if it’s woke’, insists man who spends every single day freely expressing non-woke opinions
How many times have I been banned off this site or from sub-reddits for sharing tepidly conservative opinions? On this site I think temporarily 2-3 times, and probably 30 different subreddits. But you are free to yell any crazy leftist belief about the revolution and putting people up against the wall.
If we’re not talking legislation, then I don’t see how it’s all that important in a discussion about democracy. If a social media company chooses freely to decide they don’t want to platform someone, where’s the problem? That’s freedom, baby. I have very few carveouts where I will not support someone’s actual right to speech, but I do not think forcing any private entity to platform speech they are against is all that democratic.
I do not even agree that many of these companies are really all that quick to deplatform people either. There are many conservative voices on social media. The examples that come to mind where individuals were kicked off certain sites generally involve explicit undue vitriol against other people (individuals and communities), often wishing harm unto them. If this is not what you mean by the “mainstream ideas that conservative believe” that people are being kicked off platforms for (I sure hope not)…then what else? I mean, who is being booted off of platforms for saying they think the government is too big, or that they think x politician is doing a poor job, etc.?
The issue is the government is so big that it is married to corporations (mainly on the federal level). So the big issue is the government directly giving money to companies and telling them who to censor, and also how the financial system works and the funds that the companies get indirect to censorship. Also there is the “public square” argument that social media is the public square and a few companies have a monopoly on the public square.