For civil discussion of US politics. Be excellent to each other.
Rule 1: Posts have the following requirements:
▪️ Post articles about the US only
▪️ Title must match the article headline
▪️ Recent (Past 30 Days)
▪️ No Screenshots/links to other social media sites or link shorteners
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. One or two small paragraphs are okay.
Rule 3: Articles based on opinion (unless clearly marked and from a serious publication-No Fox News or equal), misinformation or propaganda will be removed.
Rule 4: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a jerk. It’s not acceptable to say another user is a jerk. Cussing is fine.
Rule 5: Be excellent to each other. Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, ableist, will be removed.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7. No conjecture type posts (this could, might, may, etc.). Only factual. If the headline is wrong, clarify within the body. More info
Info Video about techniques used in cults (and politics)
Bookmark Vault of Trump's First Term
The Epstein Files: Trump, Trafficking, and the Unraveling Cover-Up
Media owners, CEOs and/or board members
Alexander Hamilton: "So, what happens if the executive branch just doesn't follow the law?"
James Madison: "I can't imagine that happening, but if it does, then the experiment is over and we're all fucked."
It is becoming more and more apparent to me that the founding fathers didn't envision a society where duels didn't exist to act as a brake on this sort of behavior.
How about we start arresting the executive branch?
Who would be doing the arresting?
Start arresting people.
Apply consequences.
There are technically mechanisms for courts to enforce their orders, starting with the US Marshalls, but continuing to judges having the power to deputize anyone to go enforce their orders including with force.
For lots of reasons they're reluctant to do such things. For most of American history they haven't needed to, because everyone was working cooperatively and respecting institutions even if they disagreed with the outcomes.
So I'm guessing Trump, MAGA, and a lot of Republicans have mistaken the absence of direct enforcement by the courts for the inability to directly enforce.
We'll see if some judge or justice gets fed up enough with Republican shenanigans and starts with civil and criminal contempt findings with fines and jail time escalating to issuing warrants and calling up Marshalls or deputizing officers...
At some point I do expect things to go "too far" for the remaining pre-MAGA Republicans to keep going along. I could be mistaken.
The US Marshalls are executive branch.
That does not take the ability away from courts to deputize as they need to to see orders carried out.
They definitely are but they're also the group I'd expect to be most likely to honor a lawful court order even if someone in their chain of command didn't want them to.
One way we're a bit lucky even today is that it takes time to train high level law enforcement people (so not ICE) and we're only 6 months into Trump 2 (ugh).
That is even more the case for the high echelons of career (not appointed) law enforcement like FBI and Marshalls.
Start arresting people
Or what?
"Official acts", what are you gonna do about it?
You know I feel there is no talk about legitimacy and the lack of it in the executive. At our core we have a simple system. Congress creates the law and the judicial adjuticates it and the executive implements the law. All the branches are bound by law and if the executive ignores it, then it becomes illegitimate in its role.
Legitimacy is not earned through merit but maintained through a monopoly on violence. To truly delegitimize a branch, there must be a credible threat of violence that can surpass its capacity to enforce authority. Whether that authority is legitimate becomes irrelevant if it’s unchallenged. There is no debate with a failed state
to be america the government has to follow the constitution. Power which can involve violence allows keeping power but legitamacy is divorced from it. For example china is not legitimately part of imperial china as there was a revolution and that was left behind. Similarly russia is not part of its imperial past. The US is not legitamately part of the first nations or the british empire as those ties were cut. Power over a region does not grant legitimacy for a particular historical era.
Fuck you thats why
I'm old enough to remember when people were freaking out over Voice Of America because they hadn't heard of it before and they thought that Trump had created it to be his Ministry of Truth.