View Full Version : Destined to become an authoritarian dictatorship?
gimmethesimplelife
3-4-24, 12:18pm
I just read online that the Supreme Court gave DJT a large gift of sorts - DJT WILL be appearing on ballots in Colorado, Maine and Illinois due to it's intervention. I'm really worried - not so much for this one particular decision but for the possible end result. Anyone else here worried? Rob
It seems a large chunk of our populace wants this man as their leader again. I don't get it other than he tells them what they want to hear.
ToomuchStuff
3-4-24, 7:22pm
How do you think this would happen?
Really seems ignorant to think that all the other mechanisms in place, like a constitutional convention to change from a vote to a dictatorship, and all those who swore an oath to uphold the constitution would just let him magically sign a piece of paper declaring himself dictator for life. let alone those that are there to protect him or whoever is holding the office at the time.
How do you think this would happen?
Really seems ignorant to think that all the other mechanisms in place, like a constitutional convention to change from a vote to a dictatorship, and all those who swore an oath to uphold the constitution would just let him magically sign a piece of paper declaring himself dictator for life. let alone those that are there to protect him or whoever is holding the office at the time.
Current law gives the president BROAD powers to declare martial law and do all sorts of things that would make our heads spin. Other than trump we've never had a traitor as president before so it hasn't been an issue. And last time he was president there were enough institutionalists in his administration to prevent him from acting on his worst inclinations. If given a second chance at the presidency he won't make that same mistake. He may be stupid but he's not THAT stupid.
The Posse Comitatus law requires the approval of Congress before a President can use the US military for law enforcement. We aren’t living in a conspiracy movie.
The Posse Comitatus law requires the approval of Congress before a President can use the US military for law enforcement. We aren’t living in a conspiracy movie.
A fact check is welcome, but I believe the president can order the military to suppress an "insurrection" without congressional approval. As we've seen, the definition of insurrection is somewhat fluid and could be confused with a demonstration.
A fact check is welcome, but I believe the president can order the military to suppress an "insurrection" without congressional approval. As we've seen, the definition of insurrection is somewhat fluid and could be confused with a demonstration.
A governor could use the state national guard in that manner but a president would need to either declare martial law, which would have a wider range of consequences, or get congressional approval to bypass Posse Comitatus restrictions. There's a process involved in every fantasy modern leftists engage in but that realization is usually lost within the daydream.
A governor could use the state national guard in that manner but a president would need to either declare martial law, which would have a wider range of consequences, or get congressional approval to bypass Posse Comitatus restrictions. There's a process involved in every fantasy modern leftists engage in but that realization is usually lost within the daydream.
Doing my own fact check, my daydream of the the Insurrection Act is different than your conservative delusion? We do construct reality to conform to our tribal consensus.
"The law, which lets the president deploy the military domestically and use it for civilian law enforcement, is dangerously vague..."
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/insurrection-act-explained
For another day, could Trump have ordered the National Guard to protect the Capitol on 1/6 if he had chosen to act rather than watch TV. Would there have to be a declaration of martial law or congressional approval. And how far does his immunity to do what ever go?
In answer to your question, Rob: Yes, I'm very worried. The possibility is the stuff of nightmares, truly.
Doing my own fact check, my daydream of the the Insurrection Act interpretation is different than your conservative delusion? We do perceive reality to conform to our tribal consensus.
"The law, which lets the president deploy the military domestically and use it for civilian law enforcement, is dangerously vague..."
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/insurrection-act-explained
For another day, could Trump have ordered the National Guard to protect the Capitol on 1/6 if he had chosen to act rather than watch TV.
Ahh, good catch! I was focusing on JP's concern about Martial Law. As far as the Insurrection Act, what types of activities are you expecting which would concern you enough to fear Trump invoking it?
As for your question about Trump possibly ordering the National Guard to protect the Capitol, you can correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the District of Columbia, lacking a Governor, the responsibility for calling up the National Guard rests with the Speaker Of The House. I suppose Trump could have invoked the Insurrection Act and sent active duty troops or gone through the process of nationalizing the National Guard but simply didn't, although Nancy Pelosi could have called up the National Guard as well, and neither did she. In hindsight, perhaps one of them should have.
Actually no, the speaker of the house is not able to call out the DC National Guard. So while you may be right that it should have been done, she wasn't the person to do it although she did call for it to be done.
So in future sight perhaps it would be best if we didn't elect a president with a history of attempting to overthrow the government. And who also went so far as to draft a memo to use the insurrection act. If he doesn't get punished for his past actions there's no reason to believe he will hesitate next time under whatever pretense he chooses to do so. After all, in his mind probably the only reason he's not still president is that he didn't act boldly enough. It's reasonable to think he won't make that same mistake if given a second chance.
https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-235651652542
Actually no, the speaker of the house is not able to call out the DC National Guard. So while you may be right that it should have been done, she wasn't the person to do it although she did call for it to be done.
You're right. Thanks for the correction. https://dc.ng.mil/About-Us/
Ahh, good catch! I was focusing on JP's concern about Martial Law. As far as the Insurrection Act, what types of activities are you expecting which would concern you enough to fear Trump invoking it?
It's speculation to say how far Trump would go and how much of his bolster is just talk. Conceivably he could use or try to use the military to squash just about any demonstration. He threated to use the military to control the George Floyd protests. You may take this for what it's worth, which includes a discussion of the Insurrection Act and the powers of the president. There is a Crosby, Stills, and Nash song that comes to mind, something about Ohio?
"...Trump and his allies are making plans for how a second Trump administration would use the powers of the federal government to punish Trump’s critics and political opponents. Among other things, Trump would reportedly invoke the Insurrection Act—a law that gives the president nearly unchecked powers to use the military as a domestic police force—on his first day in office so that he could quash any public protests against him."
Trump wants to use the military against his enemies. Congress must act. (slate.com) (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/11/trump-second-term-military-nightmare-congress.html)
gimmethesimplelife
3-6-24, 3:33pm
Now that Nikki Haley is out only death or assassination will spare the United States a nightmare election cycle that could quite possibly lead to an Authoritarian Dictatorship. I find myself not as worried about work - who n knows where I will be a year from now given that I am the very definition of the word dissident? I put Miracle Grow solution on my roses this morning - normally I consider Miracle Grow crack for plants - but I might as well have a bumper crop of roses while I'm still here and relatively unharrassed for being a dissident. Rob
Both the far left and the far right want civil war. Those of us in the middle don’t.
ToomuchStuff
3-6-24, 6:05pm
Both the far right and the far right want civil war. Those of us in the middle don’t.
I think Rob in the far left is the one here, pushing for civil war.
I think Rob in the far left is the one here, pushing for civil war.
Sorry, typo. Should have been far left and far right.
gimmethesimplelife
3-6-24, 9:52pm
I think Rob in the far left is the one here, pushing for civil war.I'll have you know I rode my Junior League Rummage Sale bicycle around the block a few time before calming down to respond. Phew.
So. No I don't want civil war per se. I accept it's inevitability given the insurmountable divisions in this country and that given for years I would have been better off in another country. I very much believe things have gotten to the point of near 1861 where little could stop the inevitable.
I sure hope the currency of the split country is less boring! Ditto the stamps. Rob
ToomuchStuff
3-7-24, 1:51am
There you go talking split again.>8)
I think many of us do NOT think it is inevitable, and would much prefer to get back towards the middle, instead of the two extremes. Going to far one direction, tends to push those in the opposite direction.
People say a lot of ridiculous, hysterical things on the internet, but I can’t think of a single person I know who’s primed to take up arms against whatever enemies you care to name. This isn’t 1861. It’s not even 1968.
gimmethesimplelife
3-7-24, 5:20pm
People say a lot of ridiculous, hysterical things on the internet, but I can’t think of a single person I know who’s primed to take up arms against whatever enemies you care to name. This isn’t 1861. It’s not even 1968.I won't mention my zip code again but I will say this much - most people in my.neighborhood believe a civil war is inevitable, as do I. I am far from alone in this. I dread it but I won't turn and look the other way, either. Rob
I won't mention my zip code again but I will say this much - most people in my.neighborhood believe a civil war is inevitable, as do I.
What is the basis of this belief?
early morning
3-7-24, 6:23pm
I can’t think of a single person I know who’s primed to take up arms against whatever enemies you care to name.
But I can. And it's scary as hell. And while I don't think civil war is an inevitability, I see no point in ignoring the fact that there ARE armed, disciplined, radicalized people people out there.
gimmethesimplelife
3-7-24, 8:03pm
What is the basis of this belief?Look around you, Alan. The glue that once held the fabric of this society together is falling apart. Some kind of nasty conflict really does seem inevitable. I've never seen such sorry candidates on both sides with no real solutions. Rapidly rising costs, health care a thing of terror for so many, stagnant wages, a border in chaos.....I see a perfect storm ahead for the dissolution of the United States. And for the record I DON'T WANT WAR. Have I made that point sufficiently clear? I'm adult enough to see what's going on and to accept the inevitability of some kind of intense future conflict. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
3-7-24, 8:05pm
But I can. And it's scary as hell. And while I don't think civil war is an inevitability, I see no point in ignoring the fact that there ARE armed, disciplined, radicalized people people out there.Yes. Radicalized folks on BOTH sides. I could not agree more. Rob
People say a lot of ridiculous, hysterical things on the internet, but I can’t think of a single person I know who’s primed to take up arms against whatever enemies you care to name. This isn’t 1861. It’s not even 1968.
You're correct that it's not 1861 or 1968. But if traitor trump wins in november it might be 1968 all over again on the afternoon of January 20th of next year. He's already promised as much. And the best rebuttal the sad party he leads can come up with is "don't pay attention to anything he says. He's not trustworthy in what he says."
Yes. Radicalized folks on BOTH sides. I could not agree more. Rob
Democrats are not currently radicalized. For that to happen will require trump to win in november and then follow through with his threats to be a dictator on day one and do all the shitty things he's promised to do to destroy the country. If he loses, as he should, we'll calmly continue on with our lives while he finally faces justice and then throw a ginormous party when putin's pathetic bootlicker finally goes to a supermax prison.
gimmethesimplelife
3-7-24, 10:52pm
Democrats are not currently radicalized. For that to happen will require trump to win in november and then follow through with his threats to be a dictator on day one and do all the shitty things he's promised to do to destroy the country. If he loses, as he should, we'll calmly continue on with our lives while he finally faces justice and then throw a ginormous party when putin's pathetic bootlicker finally goes to a supermax prison.I wish I could have more faith in your vision of the future, jp1, but I'll try. Rob
iris lilies
3-7-24, 11:20pm
Democrats are not currently radicalized. For that to happen will require trump to win in november and then follow through with his threats to be a dictator on day one and do all the shitty things he's promised to do to destroy the country. If he loses, as he should, we'll calmly continue on with our lives while he finally faces justice and then throw a ginormous party when putin's pathetic bootlicker finally goes to a supermax prison.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/02/democrats-congress-trump-january-6/677545/
is this headline correct or is it Clickbait? Democrats are saying they won’t certify Donald Trump if he wins the election? That seems, if not radicalized, petty and January 6ish.
I can’t read the article because paywall. Are the people bringing the suit in congress or some rando’s?
iris lilies
3-8-24, 12:34am
I can’t read the article because paywall. Are the people bringing the suit in congress or some rando’s?
it isnt a lawsuit.
https://americanmilitarynews.com/2024/02/democrats-indicate-they-may-not-certify-trump-election-if-he-wins-report/
this source quotes the Atlantic article as your buddies out there in California Adam Shiff and that crowd, won’t commit to certifying a Trump election.
“…According to (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/02/democrats-congress-trump-january-6/677545/) The Atlantic, Democratic Reps. Adam Schiff (Calif.), Eric Swalwell (Calif.), Jamie Raskin (Md.), James Clyburn (S.C.), and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jefferies (N.Y.) have refused to commit to confirming the 2024 election results if Trump wins in a potential rematch election against President Joe Biden.”
I guess that’s just more of the same peevishness that they exhibited in 2017:
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/no-trump-electoral-college-challenge-233294
but everybody’s doing it, it’s apparently just what Congress does these days.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/02/democrats-congress-trump-january-6/677545/
is this headline correct or is it Clickbait? Democrats are saying they won’t certify Donald Trump if he wins the election? That seems, if not radicalized, petty and January 6ish.
I don't know about civil war, but that would certainly get the attention of the armed radical right!
I see civil war chances as extremely remote, but I would not rule out isolated acts of violence, civil disobedience, and general disruptions to law and order.
iris lilies
3-8-24, 9:41am
…I see civil war chances as extremely remote, but I would not rule out isolated acts of violence, civil disobedience, and general disruptions to law and order.
Ah, just another day in St. Louis then
Ah, just another day in St. Louis then
Or Shitcago.
gimmethesimplelife
3-8-24, 11:10am
Or Shitcago.Or parts of Westside Phoenix. Rob
Ah, just another day in St. Louis then
Or a multiple there of.
Assuming Trump wins and the Democrats win majorities in both houses, would a 14th Amendment exclusion require a simple majority or a supermajority?
And if Trump loses, will every backyard tiki torch be hyped into Fort Sumpter 2.0?
iris lilies
3-8-24, 1:49pm
Assuming Trump wins and the Democrats win majorities in both houses, would a 14th Amendment exclusion require a simple majority or a supermajority?
And if Trump loses, will every backyard tiki torch be hyped into Fort Sumpter 2.0?
I just hope that whichever of the old men we don’t want in the White House wins, that oldster wins decisively with a large enough margin that there can’t be too much griping and moaning about it. But since every election is fairly close, it is unlikely I will get my wish.
I just hope that whichever of the old men we don’t want in the White House wins, that oldster wins decisively with a large enough margin that there can’t be too much griping and moaning about it. But since every election is fairly close, it is unlikely I will get my wish.
Between the Retribution guy and Democracy’s Savior, I’m probably going to vote Libertarian for the third time.
It's speculation to say how far Trump would go and how much of his bolster is just talk. Conceivably he could use or try to use the military to squash just about any demonstration. He threated to use the military to control the George Floyd protests. You may take this for what it's worth, which includes a discussion of the Insurrection Act and the powers of the president. There is a Crosby, Stills, and Nash song that comes to mind, something about Ohio?
I see that the Governor of New York has called up the National Guard to assist police within NY City's subway system although no one seems to be concerned about it. Do you think that 'so what' attitude will continue if a Republican did the same?
I see that the Governor of New York has called up the National Guard to assist police within NY City's subway system although no one seems to be concerned about it. Do you think that 'so what' attitude will continue if a Republican did the same?
I see a problem if Trump uses the military to handle problems that should be delt with on a state or local level without a request for federal help, or if they are us excessive force to squash demonstrations, protests, or rebellions by his political opponents or critics, like he has intimated. At least what I can think of off hand, but there may be more. Those are probably a little higher profile than an city's subway system. To be fair I could see Biden using the military if there is another election big lie and the extreme right people tries to storm federal government buildings again. I suspect it's a power that could be used or abused.
I don't quite understand how the NY subway relates to presidential use of the Insurrection Act if that is a point?.
I see that the Governor of New York has called up the National Guard to assist police within NY City's subway system although no one seems to be concerned about it. Do you think that 'so what' attitude will continue if a Republican did the same?
Depends on what the problem is that they call up the guard for.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.