Which the sc will strike down. It's a fool's errand that'll set dangerous legal precedents moving forwards.
Still, I disagree with your second sentence. Trump’s candidacy poses the gravest existential threat to Western democracies since the Third Reich. When he was last president he tried to overthrow democracy - both by voter suppression and by inciting an insurrection. This time he’s promised to jail his opponents, declare martial law and set up a sprawling network of concentration camps. His sheer incompetence is somewhat of a source of comfort, but not enough to gamble the future of civilisation on! His advisers and allies may well have learned some of their errors in execution from last time.
The really dangerous precedent here is allowing Trump on the ballot.
I don't disagree that Trump (and more importantly, the cunts behind him like Bannon and Miller) poses an existential threat to the US and a whole bunch of other countries beyond their borders. They are vile, neo-fascistic demagogues who are hostile to any form of democratic governance. Just so we're clear.<...>
Still, I disagree with your second sentence. Trump’s candidacy poses the gravest existential threat to Western democracies since the Third Reich. When he was last president he tried to overthrow democracy - both by voter suppression and by inciting an insurrection. This time he’s promised to jail his opponents, declare martial law and set up a sprawling network of concentration camps. His sheer incompetence is somewhat of a source of comfort, but not enough to gamble the future of civilisation on! His advisers and allies may well have learned some of their errors in execution from last time.
The really dangerous precedent here is allowing Trump on the ballot. It would establish that people who try to destroy democracy will face no consequences for their actions. Even if Trump’s ultimately too thick to carry out his deranged plans a more savvy fascist may well not be. Sometimes a firm line in the sand has to be drawn. Trump must be held to account for his criminality.
The sentence I've put in bold in your quoted post, this is not going to happen in time for that to be considered.I don't disagree that Trump (and more importantly, the cunts behind him like Bannon and Miller) poses an existential threat to the US and a whole bunch of other countries beyond their borders. They are vile, neo-fascistic demagogues who are hostile to any form of democratic governance. Just so we're clear.
However, what they tried to do with this legal action is remove from the ballot a guy who, under current US federal and constitutional law, is not deemed to be ineligible to run. He has not been tried and criminally convicted of insurrection, sedition, seditious conspiracy or treason (or even any other criminal charge for which there is a prohibition clause against being qualified to run). Yet.
But that's the point: Yet.
Even though there is an overwhelming amount of public evidence for the commission and perpetration of these crimes, there is still a presumption of innocence until guilt is proven in a court of law -and that has not in fact happened. Yet.
If they had gone to the courts after he was tried and found guilty of his crimes, instead of blowing their wad early on a doomed legal gesture, they'd have stood a better chance of getting their way without making a big noise and giving the far right yet another grievance point to push on their voters and motivate them to turn out. In addition, there's that 'unaligned' third of the US electorate who have a significant percentage of their number that lean right and who (as a result of their 'principles') take a dim view of "government overreach" who might now become animated by this decision and, as a result, might put their electoral thumb on the scales in 2024.
All this exercise in legal futility has done is get a state-level decision about this issue made in Trump's (and now any other demagogic, far right dickhead's) favour, made a big showy noise in the national media, and drawn attention to the fact that, under the present system, the legal strategy of 'Delay, Delay, Delay' is one that works for showy grifters and dangerous extremists.
We may not like how it's currently being used and abused, but that's the system they work under. There are justifiable parallels between 1930's Europe and the present-day US -particularly WRT the breakdown of trust in government, a hopelessly dysfunctional legislative branch and a legal and constitutional system ill-prepared for such a focused and organised movement to subvert and destroy it -the mood music certainly sounds alarming.
Sadly, the only way to remove the guy is to work within the creaky and hopelessly compromised system that they find themselves in. Due to how badly stacked the deck is against such an action, going to court with a certifiable 'lock-out' would have been the better option (even then there's no guaranteeing that even that would succeed) -especially in a legal system where it seems that their publicly elected judges don't necessarily even have to have a thorough knowledge of the laws upon which they base their decisions upon.
The fact that they chose to go in prematurely and perform the legal equivalent of the charge of the light brigade is beyond short-sighted and self-defeating. All they have succeded in doing is fuelling this monster that threatens to overwhelm them all and that is bordering on the unforgivable.
I don't disagree that Trump (and more importantly, the cunts behind him like Bannon and Miller) poses an existential threat to the US and a whole bunch of other countries beyond their borders. They are vile, neo-fascistic demagogues who are hostile to any form of democratic governance. Just so we're clear.
However, what they tried to do with this legal action is remove from the ballot a guy who, under current US federal and constitutional law, is not deemed to be ineligible to run. He has not been tried and criminally convicted of insurrection, sedition, seditious conspiracy or treason (or even any other criminal charge for which there is a prohibition clause against being qualified to run). Yet.
But that's the point: Yet.
Even though there is an overwhelming amount of public evidence for the commission and perpetration of these crimes, there is still a presumption of innocence until guilt is proven in a court of law -and that has not in fact happened. Yet.
If they had gone to the courts after he was tried and found guilty of his crimes, instead of blowing their wad early on a doomed legal gesture, they'd have stood a better chance of getting their way without making a big noise and giving the far right yet another grievance point to push on their voters and motivate them to turn out. In addition, there's that 'unaligned' third of the US electorate who have a significant percentage of their number that lean right and who (as a result of their 'principles') take a dim view of "government overreach" who might now become animated by this decision and, as a result, might put their electoral thumb on the scales in 2024.
All this exercise in legal futility has done is get a state-level decision about this issue made in Trump's (and now any other demagogic, far right dickhead's) favour, made a big showy noise in the national media, and drawn attention to the fact that, under the present system, the legal strategy of 'Delay, Delay, Delay' is one that works for showy grifters and dangerous extremists.
We may not like how it's currently being used and abused, but that's the system they work under. There are justifiable parallels between 1930's Europe and the present-day US -particularly WRT the breakdown of trust in government, a hopelessly dysfunctional legislative branch and a legal and constitutional system ill-prepared for such a focused and organised movement to subvert and destroy it -the mood music certainly sounds alarming.
Sadly, the only way to remove the guy is to work within the creaky and hopelessly compromised system that they find themselves in. Due to how badly stacked the deck is against such an action, going to court with a certifiable 'lock-out' would have been the better option (even then there's no guaranteeing that even that would succeed) -especially in a legal system where it seems that their publicly elected judges don't necessarily even have to have a thorough knowledge of the laws upon which they base their decisions upon.
The fact that they chose to go in prematurely and perform the legal equivalent of the charge of the light brigade is beyond short-sighted and self-defeating. All they have succeded in doing is fuelling this monster that threatens to overwhelm them all and that is bordering on the unforgivable.
I read your recent posts, and I was just wondering are you anti semitic?
I see the prick thought better of it and deleted his post. Yep, definitely a troll, and a pretty inept one at that.I just read some of your recent posts (just for context) and wondered: are you just a troll?
If the alarm bells aren't ringing at this stage, they really should be.On his TruthSocial service, Trump recently posted this:
I'm not entirely sure that anyone should feel that comfortable around a man directly linked with a coup attempt now banging on about final battles and finishing jobs.
If the alarm bells aren't ringing at this stage, they really should be.
He's talking about 'routing the fake news media', meaning: controlling and assuming the authority to silence any opposition or non-aligned/fawning voices. Then he is using the catch-all 'drive out the fascists, communists, marxists' which will be any organisation, group or individual he labels it with as he takes the authority to attack and suppress to 'defend America'. He's a fascist of the post truth variety and many in the political and ruling classes across the world are lining themselves up to take advantage.
Nothing new there. All political parties rely on and reward the heavy donors.I read something about how the really rich in America are donating millions to Donny's campaign. If he gets elected, it is doubtful he will increase taxes on the rich.
If pollsters are so intelligent and wise why are they so often wrong?Two things that concern me:
1. There was some polling recently that showed Trump had a majority even among young people. Liberal Twitter was dismissing this, claiming young people don’t answer their phones to unknown numbers so can’t be accurately reached by polling calls, ignoring the fact that the polling industry isn’t stupid and weighs sampling for these sort of things. What they are not seeing is the reach of people like Andrew Tate and Musk, particularly among young men - there is a huge toxic wave of entitlement and misogyny fed by such heavily promoted social media stars, I suspect this is where the dark money is currently at work. Don’t ignore this.
2. Russia and Saudi Arabia recently agreed future cuts in production that look suspiciously timed for the US election cycle - this will push up prices and cause discontent. Oil states will interfere like this to try and keep out governments that back climate action (and Russia also had an interest in stopping support for Ukraine). Expect this to happen and oil prices to become an issue.
It is insane how quickly the algorithm on YouTube starts feeding you the likes of Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson based on e.g. watching something about a video game which flags you as a young man.Two things that concern me:
1. There was some polling recently that showed Trump had a majority even among young people. Liberal Twitter was dismissing this, claiming young people don’t answer their phones to unknown numbers so can’t be accurately reached by polling calls, ignoring the fact that the polling industry isn’t stupid and weighs sampling for these sort of things. What they are not seeing is the reach of people like Andrew Tate and Musk, particularly among young men - there is a huge toxic wave of entitlement and misogyny fed by such heavily promoted social media stars, I suspect this is where the dark money is currently at work. Don’t ignore this.
litterliberal twitter
it depends it normal to feel despondant about love bad poetry and smith songs are a legit outcome etc.It is insane how quickly the algorithm on YouTube starts feeding you the likes of Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson based on e.g. watching something about a video game which flags you as a young man.
A lot of the alt right gateway preys on young men's insecurities and anxieties about dating and about their masculinity and identity. It's powerful shit. If I think back to when I was an angsty teen frustrated in love, I can't say for certain that I wouldn't be drawn into it if I was a young single man today.
I know that’s a bit of a twatty term, but you know what I mean by it - those kind of complacent commentariat lot that still can’t figure out why people were lukewarm about Hilary Clinton. I hate this feeling that there will be people who didn’t see this coming and won’t have done anything to counter it before realising the consequences.liberal twitter
On the being found to be an insurrectionist ....why isnt he in clink?
And he doesn't seem to like America very much. Always denigrating it.