"One of the main tactics of the second Trump administration has been the liberal use of threats and legal action against people who, for whatever reason, have attracted the ire of the government."
No, it isn't just because they have attracted the ire of government, it is because they have done something that has pushed the boundaries of legal behavior. Jesus, given all the vile and dirty mudslinging and name-calling the Democrats have lobed at Trump and his supporters, if this claim of only "ire" being the motivation, we would have seen a constant sea of legal actions against Democrats and other anti-Trump and anti-MAGA people.
It is intellectual hogwash to keep making this claim that Trump is exploiting the judicial to punish his enemies. First, there have never been anything close to the number of judge rulings against a sitting President as Trump has endured. Trump's cases against people that are his political opponents are 100% based on an opinion that laws have been broken, and people need to be held accountable for their illegal behavior. It would be irresponsible for any administration to ignore these types of cases as the broken window theory proves.
There are very good reasons for taking Trump to task for his illegal, unConstitutional, malevolent, vengeful, lying remarks and actions ever since he came down that golden elevator. He is clearly bent on turning the United States of America into the Disunited States of Trump.
Unfortunately, the legislative cowards and sycophants in ’the party of Lincoln’ have utterly failed to fulfill their own Constitutional oaths by holding Trump accountable for his words and actions.
There is no equivalence here with Democratic words or actions here despite all attempts to create one. Trump has four objectives in mind - to make as much money for himself and his family as he can, using the office of the Presidency to do so, to accumulate as much political power as he can regardless of the the Constitution and the law, to take as much vengeance as he can on those who oppose him, and to evade taking any moral responsibility for his depradations and to avoid any Constitutional or legal sanctions for his illegal and unConstitutional actions.
Run to your safe space over those dangerous words!
However, in terms of actions, nothing Trump has done is illegal, unconstitutional or malevolent, vengeful or lying. That is only your TDS voices in your own head.
Well then, please list those things. I will wait. I will hear nothing but crickets. Because there is none... only the noise in your Trump deranged media gaslit head.
Actually that shooting is just what Trump was hoping for when he sent the guard in. You are ignoring the obvious. Trump is just fine with political violence so long as it is committed on his behalf. January 6th following by the pardons. Any questions?
When it comes to questions about the legality of its actions, the administration doth protest too much, me thinks. (And when it comes to politics within the beltway, there are always plays within plays.)
"Most every commander and every judge advocate in the military has made some version of Kelly’s remarks to the troops in training or before a deployment."
A straightforward version of those remarks is part of basic training for all military personnel, including the lowliest. (I should know.) You get a lecture on it, and the lecturer doesn't wink. Yes, it can be impossible for you to judge the lawfulness of an order. With any luck at all, you'll complete your hitch without ever receiving an unlawful one. But the lecturer wants you to understand that "just follow orders" is an imperfect guide. Some orders, you're supposed to sweat.
Anyway, Kelly's spot announcement has come to the attention of all ranks and of the public at large. It must have been seen by everyone from generals who have a pretty good idea of an unlawful order to civilians who hadn't even known there was an obligation to refuse one. Now everyone knows, and everyone knows that everyone knows. That's a major public service.
This is one of those essays that makes me feel like the chair umpire at a tennis match. I look to the left and say to myself « that is really, really, ugly, » then I look to the right and go « oh, man. That is terrible. » I want to stare straight ahead and cover my eyes. The video is revolting and the sedition outburst is unhinged. As my grandmother used to say, they both smell on ice.
Today is a great day to reread Lincoln’s Thanksgiving Day declaration. Oh, for such a president today! Time to heal the wounds.
I need to vent this somewhere and it's on topic here. Can Democrats hide their glee a little better when Trump attacks the Constitution. I get like, 5 texts a day that I need to give money to Mark Kelly, because in Demthink, when Trump attacks the Constitution, Democrats are supposed to get money.
So you have like 1/3 of the party that just flat-out believes Democrats are "controlled opposition," probably because they fundraise off Trump doing bad stuff all the time.
Then you have all the obedient rank-and-file whose main interaction with the party is being aggressively panhandled at all hours of the day on all devices they own. Like isn't it kind of weird where -- privileged as I am -- Republicans don't actually bother me at home whereas Democrats do at all hours? Just another day of Democrats being all tactics, like micro-optimizing panhandling texts, and no strategy, like being liked by their own base.
They encouraged soldiers to disobey “unlawful” orders, yet you acknowledge no orders so far have been explicitly or verifiably unlawful. So are you trying to convince us they sent this message as a random “food for thought” exercise? Give me a break! Just like when they encourage violence against “fascists” (by which they really mean you and me), they are explicitly encouraging soldiers to adopt the left’s slanted position on what’s lawful and disobey their superiors. That is literally sedition.
Once again, persuasion fails the “would they platform this argument if the parties were swapped” test.
You're dramatically overconfident if you think that this announcement would be forbidden if it weren't the Democrats delivering it. It is part of normal training and is no more illegal than a PSA saying "Remember: Don't drive intoxicated"
So you believe this was just a totally normal reminder to do what the handbook says? Maybe they meant to release it under Biden and it’s just an unlucky coincidence that it looks like encouraging sedition? Not even the politicians you’re defending have adopted that level of gaslighting stupidity.
Retired General Mark Hertling provided the only valid caveat on the video that I've seen, in the Bulwark on November 21: that it runs the risk of conflating (unintentionally, I'm sure) the responsibilities of officers and enlisted personnel with respect to illegal orders. In brief, the responsibility of enlisted personnel is to follow orders, and the responsibility of officers is to ensure that the personnel under their command receive ONLY legal orders. Here's a link to his excellent piece:
"One of the main tactics of the second Trump administration has been the liberal use of threats and legal action against people who, for whatever reason, have attracted the ire of the government."
No, it isn't just because they have attracted the ire of government, it is because they have done something that has pushed the boundaries of legal behavior. Jesus, given all the vile and dirty mudslinging and name-calling the Democrats have lobed at Trump and his supporters, if this claim of only "ire" being the motivation, we would have seen a constant sea of legal actions against Democrats and other anti-Trump and anti-MAGA people.
It is intellectual hogwash to keep making this claim that Trump is exploiting the judicial to punish his enemies. First, there have never been anything close to the number of judge rulings against a sitting President as Trump has endured. Trump's cases against people that are his political opponents are 100% based on an opinion that laws have been broken, and people need to be held accountable for their illegal behavior. It would be irresponsible for any administration to ignore these types of cases as the broken window theory proves.
There are very good reasons for taking Trump to task for his illegal, unConstitutional, malevolent, vengeful, lying remarks and actions ever since he came down that golden elevator. He is clearly bent on turning the United States of America into the Disunited States of Trump.
Unfortunately, the legislative cowards and sycophants in ’the party of Lincoln’ have utterly failed to fulfill their own Constitutional oaths by holding Trump accountable for his words and actions.
There is no equivalence here with Democratic words or actions here despite all attempts to create one. Trump has four objectives in mind - to make as much money for himself and his family as he can, using the office of the Presidency to do so, to accumulate as much political power as he can regardless of the the Constitution and the law, to take as much vengeance as he can on those who oppose him, and to evade taking any moral responsibility for his depradations and to avoid any Constitutional or legal sanctions for his illegal and unConstitutional actions.
Pay absolutely no attention to Frank Lee. He is a right wing troll and unredeemable in his. He sees Persuasion as a great place to “own some libs”.
Democracy is an endless debate. Not engaging is not an option.
Run to your safe space over those dangerous words!
However, in terms of actions, nothing Trump has done is illegal, unconstitutional or malevolent, vengeful or lying. That is only your TDS voices in your own head.
That’s so far from reality as to make one wonder on what distant planet you’ve been living these past nine years.
Well then, please list those things. I will wait. I will hear nothing but crickets. Because there is none... only the noise in your Trump deranged media gaslit head.
Do your homework.
Just I thought. Say hi to the other inmates at your asylum.
Maybe you and your political ilk should go kill some more National Guard personnel.
Actually that shooting is just what Trump was hoping for when he sent the guard in. You are ignoring the obvious. Trump is just fine with political violence so long as it is committed on his behalf. January 6th following by the pardons. Any questions?
When it comes to questions about the legality of its actions, the administration doth protest too much, me thinks. (And when it comes to politics within the beltway, there are always plays within plays.)
"Most every commander and every judge advocate in the military has made some version of Kelly’s remarks to the troops in training or before a deployment."
A straightforward version of those remarks is part of basic training for all military personnel, including the lowliest. (I should know.) You get a lecture on it, and the lecturer doesn't wink. Yes, it can be impossible for you to judge the lawfulness of an order. With any luck at all, you'll complete your hitch without ever receiving an unlawful one. But the lecturer wants you to understand that "just follow orders" is an imperfect guide. Some orders, you're supposed to sweat.
Anyway, Kelly's spot announcement has come to the attention of all ranks and of the public at large. It must have been seen by everyone from generals who have a pretty good idea of an unlawful order to civilians who hadn't even known there was an obligation to refuse one. Now everyone knows, and everyone knows that everyone knows. That's a major public service.
This is one of those essays that makes me feel like the chair umpire at a tennis match. I look to the left and say to myself « that is really, really, ugly, » then I look to the right and go « oh, man. That is terrible. » I want to stare straight ahead and cover my eyes. The video is revolting and the sedition outburst is unhinged. As my grandmother used to say, they both smell on ice.
Today is a great day to reread Lincoln’s Thanksgiving Day declaration. Oh, for such a president today! Time to heal the wounds.
I need to vent this somewhere and it's on topic here. Can Democrats hide their glee a little better when Trump attacks the Constitution. I get like, 5 texts a day that I need to give money to Mark Kelly, because in Demthink, when Trump attacks the Constitution, Democrats are supposed to get money.
So you have like 1/3 of the party that just flat-out believes Democrats are "controlled opposition," probably because they fundraise off Trump doing bad stuff all the time.
Then you have all the obedient rank-and-file whose main interaction with the party is being aggressively panhandled at all hours of the day on all devices they own. Like isn't it kind of weird where -- privileged as I am -- Republicans don't actually bother me at home whereas Democrats do at all hours? Just another day of Democrats being all tactics, like micro-optimizing panhandling texts, and no strategy, like being liked by their own base.
They have your name from some previous donation or vote. The Republicans are equally obnoxious if you have donated even a small amount to them before.
They encouraged soldiers to disobey “unlawful” orders, yet you acknowledge no orders so far have been explicitly or verifiably unlawful. So are you trying to convince us they sent this message as a random “food for thought” exercise? Give me a break! Just like when they encourage violence against “fascists” (by which they really mean you and me), they are explicitly encouraging soldiers to adopt the left’s slanted position on what’s lawful and disobey their superiors. That is literally sedition.
Once again, persuasion fails the “would they platform this argument if the parties were swapped” test.
You're dramatically overconfident if you think that this announcement would be forbidden if it weren't the Democrats delivering it. It is part of normal training and is no more illegal than a PSA saying "Remember: Don't drive intoxicated"
So you believe this was just a totally normal reminder to do what the handbook says? Maybe they meant to release it under Biden and it’s just an unlucky coincidence that it looks like encouraging sedition? Not even the politicians you’re defending have adopted that level of gaslighting stupidity.
Read what I said more carefully if you mean for your response to reply to it, please
Retired General Mark Hertling provided the only valid caveat on the video that I've seen, in the Bulwark on November 21: that it runs the risk of conflating (unintentionally, I'm sure) the responsibilities of officers and enlisted personnel with respect to illegal orders. In brief, the responsibility of enlisted personnel is to follow orders, and the responsibility of officers is to ensure that the personnel under their command receive ONLY legal orders. Here's a link to his excellent piece:
https://www.thebulwark.com/p/what-americans-should-understand-about-the-military-disobeying-illegal-orders-two-oaths