“The Time to Stand Up to This Growing Tyranny is RIGHT NOW” https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/10/time-stand-growing-tyranny-right-now-president-trump/
( truth (lol) | raw text )
“THE WORLD NEEDS STRONG LEADERSHIP, AND DONALD TRUMP IS THE MAN FOR THE JOB” https://www.rsbnetwork.com/news/the-world-needs-strong-leadership-and-donald-trump-is-the-man-for-the-job/
( truth (lol) | raw text )
“Facebook Parent Co. Now Facing Budget Cuts, Hiring Freeze After Years of Censoring Conservatives, Including the President” https://dcenquirer.com/meta-freeze-hires-president-trump/
( truth (lol) | raw text )
“Obama Compliments Trump, Scolds Hillary and Media in Secret Meeting, Unsealed Docs Show” https://slaynews.com/news/barack-obama-gives-trump-compliment-scolds-hillary-and-media-in-secret-meeting-newly-released-docs-show/
( truth (lol) | raw text )
“New York Attorney General Letitia James Must Resign and Be Prosecuted for Abuse of Power — Her anti-Trump lawsuit is a staggering criminalization of politics” https://spectator.org/new-york-attorney-general-letitia-james-resign-prosecuted-abuse-of-power/
( truth (lol) | raw text )
(video TRUTH)
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/109105718375467986
( truth (lol) | raw text )
Not a cult.
This is the Trump thread so maybe not the place for this derail, but it’s mostly just him retruthing insane links so fuck it, I’m down for a post.
I think the reasonable answer is that force, up to and including deadly force, is only justified where there is a reasonable threat of violence. If someone breaks into your house, even if it’s just to steal shit, that’s a violent act and a person caught in that situation may react violently, so I see the use of force as protecting your own life as much as property in that case. If someone snatch and grabs your latte at starbucks and runs off, they aren’t really a threat anymore. They are just trying to get away with a $7 drink. Using deadly force would be insane there.
It’s the same reason police don’t really engage in high speed chases unless they are chasing down a violent criminal. More often than not they just end up killing other people/themselves over an otherwise petty crime. Sometimes the utilitarian “most good” option is just to let some crimes go.
(image TRUTH)
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/109105781627529097
( truth (lol) | raw text )
In the United States, I don’t think this statement is remotely accurate. I think this is still only the case with more ‘progressive’ departments. I have zero information or data to back that up.
1 Like
(video TRUTH)
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/109105850715032610
( truth (lol) | raw text )
The issue here is that reforms would need to pass the Senate which means 60 votes, unless Dems are willing to nuke the filibuster, which enough of them are not. It’s probably going to take like 54-57 seats to get reforms done.
I don’t even thing 54-57 generic seats would do it, it’s going to take 60ish seats occupied by AOC types. The vast majority of Dinosaur Dems think that the US is basically A-OK and that Donnie Dumb Dumb was a whoopsie but as long as we get the corporate cronies back in charge everything will be great again. It doesn’t matter how many corporate centrist Dems get elected, they are never as a voting block enacting serious reforms because they think that the country is 99% perfect.
3 Likes
I agree with that, but I think we currently have somewhere around 43-46 votes to nuke the filibuster for voting reform and perhaps SCOTUS reform, so we would need to pick up 4-7 more seats, assuming that the net pickup of 4-7 is all pro-reform. I don’t think they have to be economically as far left as AOC, they can just be in touch with the reality that our democracy is under serious attack and may not survive it.
Like, I don’t think Chris Murphy is anywhere near as far left as AOC or Bernie, but I think we have his vote to nuke the filibuster.
The catch is that nuking the filibuster and/or putting in good reforms almost certainly triggers a series of events that leads to stuff like single payer within 20 years, so a lot of eDems would rather roll the dice on our democracy than allow that. Those are the Tom Carpers and Chris Coons of the world.
I said this myself and I think there’s a “Cactus is an idiot” containment thread somewhere around here if you’d like to post in that, I might have a couple more responses in me. But this issue has been beaten to death and I think I’m being misunderstood. I am not saying what 's justified, only that I tend to place the overall blame on the initial harmer. If you break into someone’s house thinking I shouldn’t receive more than a bop on the nose for this, and wind up being shot dead… The disproportionate response doesn’t make me feel sorry for you in that the primary reason you’re dead is because you chose to break into a house. The headline for some is: Disproportional! Mine is, don’t break into houses imo
This actually seems like big news. Trump seems to be threatening defamation lawsuits against… the entire media? Also the jan 6 committee?
Can’t imagine that discovery would go to well for that.
Holy shit look at this fuckery:
https://twitter.com/fordm/status/1577047544219242507?s=46&t=TkNu28Qmm-ErGzYRrZx8Lw
Discovery never actually happens, we’ve been down this road before. Claim bogus privilege, appeal appeal appeal, the whole dumb thing is the same every time.
1 Like