cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/9405812
“We are going to do something that I will say is slightly controversial but it shouldn’t be. We are going to indemnify policemen and precincts and states and cities from being sued. We want them to do their job. Our police and law enforcement has to come back and they want to come back and they want to do their job. And we are going to indemnify them so they don’t lose their wife, their family, their pension, and their job. We are going to indemnify policemen and law enforcement. We are going to tell them to get out, we love you, do your job.” – Trump, speaking last night at the New York Young Republicans Club gala.
Trump going after the tyrant vote.
That’ll get him a few more votes from the fence sitting fascists.
PLEASE TREAD ON ME
NoOo It’S tHe DeMoCrAtS tHaT aRe ThE fAsCiStS!
/wrist
Are we the baddies?
👩🚀 🔫👨🚀
Stupid people really do think of the stupidest solutions to problems that don’t exist.
The hard thing is hearing it over and over and over again. How many times has this shit already been tried? What was the result? Oh, you don’t know? Does that not strike you as phenomenally negligent of a policy maker, to not be aware of the likely results of your fucking actions? Go die, you orange piece of shit. Or win, and take this fucking irreparable democracy with you.
Bold of you to assume he doesn’t know damn well how totalitarian this is.
Honestly, I’m 50/50. He is a controlling rich asshole and knows things like police don’t actually affect him, but he’s also a bumbling moron. It’s kind of hard to tell with him sometimes.
He’s not smart in the book sense but he does know how to play the game. For example, if you listened to the audio of his call to Zelensky which lead to his first impeachment investigation, pay attention and you might notice he avoided being explicit with his quid pro quo and spent the whole conversation beating around the bush and using weasel words to try and get what he could out of him without implicating himself. Even if the Senate trial wasn’t openly a farce, he still would’ve been found innocent because for something like this you have to be able to prove intent and that’s extremely difficult unless you blunder your way into an explicit admission of intent to commit a quid pro quo somewhere along the line, which he didn’t do in the audio of the phone call. I’m not saying it’s wrong to be suspicious because that call was obviously shady as hell, but it was never going to meet the burden of proof.
His propaganda and overall rhetorical strategy are similarly manipulative. It’s very common to mistake his lies for being stupid and obvious and assuming that’s just the end of it when in fact it’s actually a very specific rhetorical strategy called firehosing. The idea behind firehosing is to flood the entire system with too many political narratives, misdirections, pivots, red herrings, strawmen, contradictions, and controversial statements to keep up with so that everything is up in the air and the less regard for truth and consistency you have, the more effectively you can pull it off because the goal is to overcome reason with aggression while simultaneously drowning out opposing narratives and/or fact checking with sheer volume and repetition. It’s kind of like gish galloping but on a much more broad and ambitious scale, or if you’re as much of a gaming nerd as I am it’s the ‘zerg rush’ of political rhetoric. This explains why his falsehoods are so effective despite being so obvious - ironic as it looks on the surface he would actually be far less effective if he vetted his own bullshit and tried to make sure everything he said were at least semi-close to being believable.
Tl;dr, he’s a moron at some things. Manipulating millions of people and accumulating power at their expense (and ours as well even if we see through it) is, unfortunately, not one of them.
Guarantee Trump learned the word “indemnify” right before that speech.
I had to Google it, not going to lie. It just convinced me even more that he doesn’t know the word or that his fan base would.
It’s a simple meaning, I should have come across it a lot by now if it were common language.
Just wait until he learns about qualified immunity.
I love how the man continues to give reasons to not vote for him every time his mouth opens.
He’s laying out his fascist plans in a bid to win fascist votes, and his odds are not terrible. His supporters will see how he failed last time and work to correct course next time. This whole police state thing and all his dehumanizing characterization of political opponents and his authoritarian leadership tendencies, align with mainstays of fascist rhetoric. This includes his narrative about domestic political subversion and his vow to suspend the Constitution, as well as his engagement with the QAnon wing of the MAGA movement.
https://news.yahoo.com/trump-hiding-fascist-plans-plain-110001819.html
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/donald-trump-fascist-vermin/
For us, it’s a warning, for them, it’s a selling point.
“When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.” -Maya Angelou
And yet millions of people still want to vote for him! It’s baffling!
They want to vote for him because they agree with him.
It is not baffling in the least.
They think they’ll be the one with their boot in someone’s face.
Not the one being “put in their proper place”
That’s because they think it’ll only apply to “those other people” that they don’t like. For example, with police brutality, the white, straight, Christian right thinks the police will only beat “black thugs” so it’s perfectly fine in their book.
Cite your sources!
SOURCE: 01/06
Academia notwithstanding, common knowledge doesn’t generally need to be cited unless it includes statistics. Asking the guy to cite his source for that statement would be like me asking you to cite a source when you claim that water is wet. It’s just kind of obvious, you know?
Guess my joke wasn’t “kind of obvious”? Crud.
I did eventually get it, but you might have been better off saying “Jan 6” instead of MM/DD format.
Yeah, makes better sense that way. 01/06 means something to me though. Got the PTSD merit badge and all. And that’s not a facetious comment. Can’t watch the videos, can barely glance at a pic, can’t even think about it except in terms that abstract away the reality.
When my Pilipino wife asked me about it (she wasn’t here at the time), I cried and yelled and cursed. Babbling like a madman trying to explain that day.
And that’s all I can talk about ATM.
Or, and hear me out, reasons to vote for him.
You are everything wrong with this country
How do you know? You don’t even know my personal views.
I struggle to understand why any common person would ever want less police accountability. Do you like being abused by people in positions of power? Is it some sort of sexual masochism?
So they are not afraid to do their job. The police need to have the freedom to do their job most efficiently and effectively.
You believe police need more leeway in their ability to brutalize people for them to police effectively?
That’s ridiculous, obviously.
You’re opinion is not an obvious fact. My opinion is not an obvious fact.
And no, I do not believe that. But many people do. And it’s all, just opinions. Just the opinions of of bunch of hapless great apes with too much consciousness.
There are few obvious, objective facts that can be discerned by human beings. And the few that can be, are not known by all. As a matter of fact human beings know very little about reality. Including the smartest of us.
Almost all of us are deeply ignorant and just cannot know much about reality. Yes, I include myself. But I don’t fool myself with thinking that how human apes run their affairs is anything other than preferences.
There’s a lot to unpack in this statement, but the short of it is that he’s thinking like a terrorist- that the role of police is to instill fear and the thing keeping them from fulfilling it is that they fear being sued. He’s telling his supporters that he wants cops to do crimes with impunity
So pretty much keep the situation as-is? I mean it’s really not THAT far off right now.
He wants them to blatantly mass arrest protesters, commit genocide, etc.
Let’s hope he loses and you don’t end up eating those words.
I think you were missing the point that US police is already horrible to begin with. Yeah it can be a shit tonne worse, I know, but that doesn’t mean it’s peachy right now
Yes, dude. Things can indeed get very much worse.
I know, I know. Just saying US police is already fucked up bad right now
This is the problem with ACAB. Losing sight of what worse looks like
I’m not an acab guy, believe me. U was just trying to say that US police in general is already pretty horrible compared to any other western civilized country
Sorry, didn’t mean that to be the point of my thoughts, if it came out that way. I’d actually have to think about whether I feel that way. I also don’t know what western civilized means these days.
Buuut… the data shows this is a very American problem. Police murdering people is only pandemic here. Brutality, killing pets, racism… def universal… but executions… mmmmerica way ahead #1. Another accolade alongside school shootings…
Things are bad, but they could always be worse, so let’s accept the way things are…?
No I’m saying that by irresponsibly overusing superlatives like “all,” we remove the potency of the word. E.g., “today sucks and cops kill innocent people all the time, especially if you’re a person of color, disabled, mentally ill, or a dog. And the decent ones don’t upstand and report making them complicit for fear of self preservation, but not necessarily bastards. Good thing they’re not ALL murderers using their privilege to rampantly kill. Because that would be thousands times even worse”
It gets worse. This is not all. There is more.
The whole point of ACAB isn’t to label all police as bad people, nor to say this we’re in literally the worst situation we could be. It can always, always be worse. Americans, by and large, have an extremely limited worldview in which many have historically not seen the cracks in our foundations or been in a position where such cracks have directly affected them. The point is to highlight those cracks. Could there be more nuance? Surely. That nuance doesn’t fit well within a concise slogan of four letters, however. Unless NACBALOCAB - Not All Cops But a Lot of Cops Are Bastards - sounds good to you, haha
How about the capitol police who responded to the January 6th riot? Did he even think the whole statement through?
“Back the blue! Except those blue.”
Did he even think the whole statement through?
Come on man, you know the answer to that.
Nah, doesn’t count. Seen all the twisting they’ve had to pull to not admit the cops weren’t on their side? They were anitfa, FBI plants, whateverthefuck. The one thing the capitol police were not, were a bunch of cops doing their job. Because that don’t fit the narrative.
Look at 'em go after the guy that shot Traitor Barbie through the neck. Somehow that was not a legitimate use of force against a mob trying to kill our Congresspeople?!
Imagine explaining to someone in 2016 that by mid 2021 the FBI wouldn’t be considered cops by the right.
Alright, so, real talk, this is an appeal directly to the people in police work who are in it for the authority (spoiler: too many, unfortunately), as well as to the asset owning class that depends on the police to keep them from losing their investments or worse. The message being sent is: vote for me, work for me, and you’ll be free from accountability.
Embracing authoritarianism to own the libs.
Nah, that’s something they’ll do just because they love it.
Trump continued:
“And so we can distinguish our brave police who have taken up our indemnification, we’ve designed a new uniform for them. They will have brown shirts and ties. i like brown, you like brown, everybody loves brown. And we will want a really good name, the best name for our brave Brownshirts. I was thinking something like the Storm Division. What do you think, isn’t that the greatest? I think it’s the greatest.”
Red shirt and brown pants are the best combo. Hides the stains if they ever get into an actual conflict
That sounds too close to Schutzstaffel to me (SS)
Nein, es sind völlig getrennte Wörter. Bist du George Orwell /s
thatsthejoke.png
EDIT: I’m not 100% sure that it’s not a real Trump quote and am second guessing myself
but some pepple dont like division because it divides people. i dont agree but some say this. maybe it can be a team or a squad, like squad cars or storm squad. they can have a cool storm logo with a lightening bolt and use S S for super sexy, because thats what they are.
Only if it uses the cool S
I’m not really sure what liberals are all concerned about. Don’t they have any faith that they can simply “fix” this inherently fascist institution - oops, sorry, I meant to say “law enforcement” - through “reform” and more “training?”
A promise to indemnify from an individual who is famous for not paying their bills… awesome!!! /s
Wait, is he actually trying to say everything the opposite of what the majority of US citizens want? Like maybe he’s actually trying to not win because he doesn’t want to be president again. Or this is all a joke to see how evil he can be and still win.
When it comes to presidents the majority doesn’t matter.
The opposite of what the majority of US citizens want is often exactly what Republican likely voters want and this is no exception. They want every cop to be Judge Dredd, only more bigoted.
Someone should explain qualified immunity to this chucklefuck. What’s next, he gonna tell us he would fight a war with no rules so he would win every time?
How brain dead do you have to be to even listen to his ravings let alone follow him and think he is a leader.
