ShitShow at DOJ Today: Rule of Law Possibly Dead

[Edge-]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/12/u...entencing.html

And Federal prosecutors are now deeply concerned about Barr and Trump getting involved in cases they're working on. Because of course Trump is treating his DoJ more or less exactly like Nixon did.

And why shouldn't he? Republicans have signaled this is all fine and they don't care.

[Zaydin]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/12/u...entencing.html

And Federal prosecutors are now deeply concerned about Barr and Trump getting involved in cases they're working on. Because of course Trump is treating his DoJ more or less exactly like Nixon did.

And why shouldn't he? Republicans have signaled this is all fine and they don't care.

And the MAGAts, will, of course, see nothing wrong with Trumps actions.

[Fugus]

How long until we hear about executive privilege preventing him from saying anything?

What makes you think he will be honest? I mean what are they going to do, arrest him?

They lack the balls to use the Sargent at Arms or they would have by now, several times and Trumps people will be just fine either way.

[Zaydin]

What makes you think he will be honest? I mean what are they going to do, arrest him?

They lack the balls to use the Sargent at Arms or they would have by now, several times and Trumps people will be just fine either way.

Justified as it would be to have Capital Police haul Crooked Bill in handcuffs, you know if the Democrats actually used their authority the lie-based right wing media and the MAGAts would screech, completely lacking self-awareness, as to how crooked and corrupt Democrats were and how they would be trying to turn the US into a dictatorship.

[Fugus]

Justified as it would be to have Capital Police haul Crooked Bill in handcuffs, you know if the Democrats actually used their authority the lie-based right wing media and the MAGAts would screech, completely lacking self-awareness, as to how crooked and corrupt Democrats were and how they would be trying to turn the US into a dictatorship.

Oh, we know they would, but they would do that anyways.

If the Democrats grew a spine and did it, I would be amazed. Then would also watch as Trump tried to get the executive to raid the place to get him out and the Republicans would reluctantly back them still.

[Toppy]

Maybe Trump's impeachment victory is the second best thing that could happen for Democrats. Now Trump feels he is free to be himself. So, we get to see how well open and blatant corruption plays to anybody not drinking the Kool-Aid.

Are you implying people care about Trump blatantly breaking the law?

Same response every time it happens: ALL POLITICIANS DO IT, DEMS DO IT TOO!

Trump has always been protected by whataboutism, and will continue to be.

[PosPosPos]

Insinuating there was ever rule of law in America prior to this point.

I laughed.

[Levelfive]

So weird that no one on these forums except for like two posters seemed to have voted for Trump.

You should take them at their word--they likely didn't vote at all and are just delighted to ride the coattails of the "winner." They're like the kids in old summer horror movies, who glom on to the bully, gibber inanely at every shitty thing he says, and don't realize they'll be the first ones to die at the lake.

- - - Updated - - -

Somehow I've met very few Trump supporters in person. Virtually none. If I had to wager a guess, I've probably met many of them, they are just all ashamed of their position. I do work with a Trump supporter, however he never talks to me. Colleagues tell me about the shit he says, but I guess he picks his battles.

Kind of like the internet...

What do we call it when posters refuse to engage facts that directly contradict their position? If I were to illustrate how someone's position is directly anti-democratic, only to be ignored, are they "deciding" to pursue that position?

Let's face it. People don't know political science. Out of the thousands of posts I've read, only one person on these forums has ever demonstrated any actual knowledge of political science (his name is Glorious Leader in case you're wondering), and this is sampling from a population that presumably actually likes talking about this shit.

Bro, you're literally in a thread visiting Trump's complete contempt for the rule of fucking law. The Republican Party used to be the party of law and order. I don't even know where to fucking begin.. no matter what a person loves Trump for, he completely undermines the bedrock of American governance. At what point will the severity of defiance become so great, that we acknowledge *any* vote for Trump is complicit support for his disrespect of America's founding ideology? It's a package deal at this point. No one can act surprised anymore.

I ask any Trump supporter, seriously, what happens when the executive branch refuses to honor established law?

Also, nearly 35000 posts later and you've never seen a Russian apologist??? The fucking edge you still carry yourself on, man, just let it go.

Welp. That was bracingly well said. Don't overlook Slybak, though.

[Spectral]

Somehow I've met very few Trump supporters in person. Virtually none. If I had to wager a guess, I've probably met many of them, they are just all ashamed of their position. I do work with a Trump supporter, however he never talks to me. Colleagues tell me about the shit he says, but I guess he picks his battles.

Kind of like the internet...

What do we call it when posters refuse to engage facts that directly contradict their position? If I were to illustrate how someone's position is directly anti-democratic, only to be ignored, are they "deciding" to pursue that position?

Let's face it. People don't know political science. Out of the thousands of posts I've read, only one person on these forums has ever demonstrated any actual knowledge of political science (his name is Glorious Leader in case you're wondering), and this is sampling from a population that presumably actually likes talking about this shit.

Bro, you're literally in a thread visiting Trump's complete contempt for the rule of fucking law. The Republican Party used to be the party of law and order. I don't even know where to fucking begin.. no matter what a person loves Trump for, he completely undermines the bedrock of American governance. At what point will the severity of defiance become so great, that we acknowledge *any* vote for Trump is complicit support for his disrespect of America's founding ideology? It's a package deal at this point. No one can act surprised anymore.

I ask any Trump supporter, seriously, what happens when the executive branch refuses to honor established law?

Also, nearly 35000 posts later and you've never seen a Russian apologist??? The fucking edge you still carry yourself on, man, just let it go.

Most of this is just a highbrow version of calling people stupid or evil, but I do want to take a closer look at one important question:

I ask any Trump supporter, seriously, what happens when the executive branch refuses to honor established law?

This is exactly the question that people that have been paying attention have been asking for a fair few decades. Massive, expensive initiatives that are in direct conflict with laws have been undertaken for decades with nothing more than executive authorization. To take an example that most of us presumably agree on, Iran-Contra was blatantly illegal on pretty much every level and pretty much nothing happened to Reagan. George H.W. Bush lied about it, then defended it, then just said fuck it and pardoned everyone involved. Did this result in him being basically banished from polite company and regarded as a mistake? No, they made his fucking kid President, who preceded to tell even bigger lies and get us into the dumbest, most expensive policy mistakes of my lifetime.

So when Trump supporters roll their eyes at exhortations that the "rule of law is dead", what many of them are really saying is, "no shit, it died a long time ago and you Very Serious Policy People seem to have entirely selective outrage about the matter".

[Toppy]

Most of this is just a highbrow version of calling people stupid or evil, but I do want to take a closer look at one important question:

This is exactly the question that people that have been paying attention have been asking for a fair few decades. Massive, expensive initiatives that are in direct conflict with laws have been undertaken for decades with nothing more than executive authorization. To take an example that most of us presumably agree on, Iran-Contra was blatantly illegal on pretty much every level and pretty much nothing happened to Reagan. George H.W. Bush lied about it, then defended it, then just said fuck it and pardoned everyone involved. Did this result in him being basically banished from polite company and regarded as a mistake? No, they made his fucking kid President, who preceded to tell even bigger lies and get us into the dumbest, most expensive policy mistakes of my lifetime.

So when Trump supporters roll their eyes at exhortations that the "rule of law is dead", what many of them are really saying is, "no shit, it died a long time ago and you Very Serious Policy People seem to have entirely selective outrage about the matter".

Nice whataboutism and deflection you absolute tosser.

[Spectral]

Nice whataboutism and deflection you absolute tosser.

Great rebuttal, I'm sure it gets you Twitter points

[zorkuus]

So when Trump supporters roll their eyes at exhortations that the "rule of law is dead", what many of them are really saying is, "no shit, it died a long time ago and you Very Serious Policy People seem to have entirely selective outrage about the matter".

So what you're saying is tRump supporters know their corrupt president isn't any different than any previous one? Good to know I guess. I'm not sure how "two wrongs make a right" helps your argument though.

[Toppy]

Great rebuttal, I'm sure it gets you Twitter points

There's no point is arguing against someone who starts out playing the victim then immediately goes into whataboutism and trying to deflect. You didn't actually address anything stated yourself. So we can add hypocrite too.

[Low Hanging Fruit]

I bet if Obama did this the same sitting Senate would be like "yeah.. this is cool"

[Spectral]

So what you're saying is tRump supporters know their corrupt president isn't any different than any previous one? Good to know I guess. I'm not sure how "two wrongs make a right" helps your argument though.

I think most of them do, yes. My read is that their stance is basically, "wait, you never gave shit about any of this, but now suddenly I'm supposed to when I got my guy in?". The reply to that seems like a mostly feeble screech about Russians or something.

[zorkuus]

I think most of them do, yes. My read is that their stance is basically, "wait, you never gave shit about any of this, but now suddenly I'm supposed to when I got my guy in?". The reply to that seems like a mostly feeble screech about Russians or something.

If people didn't give a shit then stuff like Citizens United would've happened decades ago. You also don't seem to remember how unpopular the Iraq war was for example.

[Toppy]

I bet if Obama did this the same sitting Senate would be like "yeah.. this is cool"

Here's the thing.

He didn't.

[Adam Jensen]

Remember guys Trump totally learned his lesson from impeachment and will behave /s

Found Susan Collin's MMO-C account.

[szechuan]

I bet if Obama did this the same sitting Senate would be like "yeah.. this is cool"

Is that why Mitch McConnell and the Rethuglicans did everything in their power to stop Obama from doing anything?

[D Luniz]

Most of this is just a highbrow version of calling people stupid or evil, but I do want to take a closer look at one important question:

This is exactly the question that people that have been paying attention have been asking for a fair few decades. Massive, expensive initiatives that are in direct conflict with laws have been undertaken for decades with nothing more than executive authorization. To take an example that most of us presumably agree on, Iran-Contra was blatantly illegal on pretty much every level and pretty much nothing happened to Reagan. George H.W. Bush lied about it, then defended it, then just said fuck it and pardoned everyone involved. Did this result in him being basically banished from polite company and regarded as a mistake? No, they made his fucking kid President, who preceded to tell even bigger lies and get us into the dumbest, most expensive policy mistakes of my lifetime.

So when Trump supporters roll their eyes at exhortations that the "rule of law is dead", what many of them are really saying is, "no shit, it died a long time ago and you Very Serious Policy People seem to have entirely selective outrage about the matter".

Hilarious how you try to suggest that Trump supporters today weren't all in on Reagan (remind me again where Oliver North got a show?) And some how the people complaining about Trump's abuses weren't up in arms over Iran-Contra.