“(With) today’s Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity, that fundamentally changed. For all practical purposes, there are virtually no limits on what the president can do. It’s a fundamentally new principle and it’s a dangerous precedent because the power of the office will no longer be constrained by the law even including the supreme court of the United States.”

Throughout his address, Biden underscored the gravity of the moment, emphasizing that the only barrier to the president’s authority now lies in the personal restraint of the officeholder. He warned vehemently against the prospect of Trump returning to power, painting a stark picture of the dangers such an outcome could pose.

  • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    293
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    7 months ago

    Then fucking do something about it Joe! The DNC has been little more than passive observers to the raise of fascism.

    • Nougat@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      83
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      7 months ago

      Since we’re talking about a SCOTUS ruling, it would be on Congress to pass legislation.

      And to follow up on @teodor_from_achewood@lemmy.world’s comment, the Democratic National Committee is a private party organization that supports Democratic candidates in elections. They have nothing to do with passing legislation.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        103
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        It’s on Biden to personally demonstrate to SCOTUS just how dangerous the ruling was.

        • ExFed@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          35
          ·
          7 months ago

          I deeply disagree with this take. If we actually care about the Constitution and upholding what it stands for, then we have to work to undo the damage caused by this race to the bottom, not participate in it.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            66
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Good luck with that. You can “disagree” all the way to the concentration camp.

            • flicker@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              25
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              You know what would be a fantastic way to spur forward legislation and law stopping the president from doing anything bonkers?

              Having the president do something bonkers that the evil assholes who are setting the field to make Trump a king, have no choice but to stop.

              • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                7 months ago

                I like this idea. Republicans are desperate to prosecute the “Biden crime family” but can’t go after him because of this ruling. So Biden just has to do a bunch of illegal but non-violent stuff - like openly soliciting bribes - and Republicans would be forced to pass a law.

                For that law to be valid, it can’t be targeted at one person - called “bill of attainder” - it would apply to all presidents going forward regardless of who’s elected.

                Hoist them by their own petard.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        7 months ago

        It doesn’t do what it should.

        The point of the party is supposed to be long-term strategy and putting the platform over any one person.

        When people talk about what the DNC should be doing, it’s not some “gotchya” to point out that they’re not doing their job and leadership needs replaced.

        It’s just proving their point

        • teodor_from_achewood@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          7 months ago

          So because the National Committee’s short and long term strategy is not what you’d be doing, you think they’re not doing anything.

          Do you do any local political organizing?

          • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            19
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            7 months ago

            you think they’re not doing anything.

            What’s their long term plan?

            As far as I can tell, it’s only prevent progressives from taking control of the party.

            • teodor_from_achewood@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              14
              ·
              7 months ago

              For now, they’re planning on getting out voters for the general election, and recruiting volunteers along the way.

              Most planning falls to state and local parties - which you can easily get involved in.

              Why haven’t you?

              • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                14
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                7 months ago

                For now,

                Bruh…

                Do you know what “long term planning” means?

                If you don’t think they have one, say it.

              • Zorque@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                11
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                7 months ago

                So basically the only thing they care about is winning, not actually representing peoples values?

                Theyre more than just an election committee, thats what the DCCC is for.

    • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      45
      ·
      7 months ago

      I would love to see him detain every scotus justice and stash em in a safe house for their protection/national security. Give them no freedom of movement or agency over their lives… see if they change their tune.

      • Mango@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        This sounds like it would be way more effective than the obvious bullshit that came to my mind. I’m with you.

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      90
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      You apparently want him to do illegal things because he can now get away with it?

      edit: are basic norms being downvoted here because if republicans are corrupt af, we should not have any standards either?

      Edit 2: you’re not teaching me anything by telling me the Republicans did something more fucked up first. Do you people honestly think Biden would/could murder political opponents. He obviously won’t. He shouldn’t. Jfc

      Edit 3: yup I’m totally saying let’s do nothing about this. You people are brilliant.

      • catloaf@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        86
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        Apparently “when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal” is now law.

        • Beetschnapps@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          So again it’s now a matter of “what is allowed” vs “what is ethical or moral”…

          We all joke about the high road of democratic vs gop approaches. But how much does the difference matter?

          The hard part is we all get it, Biden is now technically allowed to do whatever. Is that a reason to immediately do the worst possible thing?

          Should he now cast aside the law and commit hate crimes purely to prove a point?

          The courts will never allow such a performative action, but they’ll allow the creep of fascism.

          • Sanctus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            7 months ago

            Yeah he should. Shock everyone. Show them how bad this ruling is. I’m sure there are impermanent ways to display this.

          • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            15
            ·
            7 months ago

            These people are proving that anarchy would never work. The second murder became “legal” they all jumped to suggest it.

            • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              Murder happens all of the time in Capitalist society, too, you know? Even though it’s ‘illegal’ and all that.

              Anarchy does not mean no rules, it just means there is no state to enforce those rules. Communities can still enforce their own rules in Anarchist society, and one of those rules can be ‘don’t murder’.

              • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                7 months ago

                I know what anarchy is. You’re assuming murder would be forbidden in every community, but if a lot of people in this thread started communities, (at least they themselves) would be allowed to murder. That was my point.

      • Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        44
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        No, I want him to call their bluff and rise to the challenge of meeting this constitutional crisis. The top court in the land has gone off the rails, and seemingly in collusion with a concerted effort to destroy the rule of law.

        Blithely waiting until the election to “let the people defeat Trump” is dereliction. This ruling may be curated in deference for Trump, but unless it is challenged forcefully it will not just go away on January 7th 2024 if Trump loses again. Because when the question of “What are ‘official acts’ v ‘private acts’ then?” comes up, it’ll go right back to the SCotUS the Heritage Foundation and their interpretations.

          • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Fucking lol,

            This entire thread is people giving you answers that range from reasonable to nuanced, and you sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming about how the only options are murder or nothing.

            I don’t get to pull this quote out very often, so please, feel honored.

            What you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

            • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              The only thing I’ve refused to accept is murder. Lying about that doesn’t change it. Btw practically no one suggested anything, but everyone who did and said something besides murder seemed somewhat reasonable to me.

      • pyre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        we should have standards. my standard for a fascist is that he should not exist.

      • SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        The Judiciary has decided that the Executive must not be beholden to neither the Legislative nor the Judiciary. This is terrible, because it breaks the separation of powers. Now, if only the Executive wasn’t beholden to any of the other powers to force the Judiciary to go back to reason… Oh, wait.

        Irony aside: no, this isn’t a matter of not having standards, this is a matter of making sure that democracy is capable of perpetuating itself. If the organism gets infected by a virus that intends to mutate the whole thing into a degenerated parody of itself, it must send its antibodies. Not doing so means letting the last line of defense fall all by itself, which is even against the very spirit of the law.

      • Squirrel@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        7 months ago

        He needs to act to safeguard our democracy, because others will not have the same hangups in doing the opposite. Acting with the power they have granted him in order to prevent future issues is not corruption.

      • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        The precedent shouldn’t be “they go low, we go high”, but “play stupid games, win stupid prizes”. He probably wouldn’t do anything because the aforementioned issue, but should just send an assassination squad on the 6 supreme court judges alongside with other politicians.

        • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          7 months ago

          You’re suggesting Biden sends a government hit squad to assasinate supreme court judges?

          Are you high?

          • Womble@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            7 months ago

            I mean, apparently he could now order a hit team to burst into Robert’s house at night, put a gun to his his head and say “Joe sends his completely legal regards” before leaving. Obviously killing them would be wrong but maybe it wouldnt be so bad to make them feel a bit of what they are unleashing, since conservatives often dont have empathy for things that dont happen to them or those close to them.

            • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              So…the hypothetical of trump using these new “standards” (for lack of a better word) that his judges set is justification for calling for the current president to beat him to the punch?

              Do you know what would happen if Biden did that? Best case scenario, is he IMMEDIATELY loses the 2024 election, and trump then continues the practice with the justification of “he did it first!”. That’s the BEST possible outcome.

              But it could go SOOOOOO much farther than that. It could honestly be the thing that starts the civil war 2 in this country before we even GET to the election. A government using it’s own resources to kill it’s own government officials. How is that not EXACTLY what russia does???

              Why stop at supreme court judges? Why not kill trump? Why not kill every political opponent you face?

              You tried to stop trump from introducing facism by saying it’s ok for Biden to introduce facism. Either way, this country falls to facism. You’re just debating which side is the new dictator.

              • Womble@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                Did you missread what i said or just choose to argue against what you wanted to read? I even included the words “obviously killing them would be wrong”, and its not like that was burried in dozens of lines nobody will read through.

                I suggested showing the judge he could be targeted with his own ruling not killing him.

      • Tja@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        They are literally not illegal anymore. He can declare Trump to be a danger and send seal team six to execute him. He can forgive half of all student debt and transfer the other half to an unlucky dude in Oklahoma. He can forbid to be called Joseph to everybody else. He can cancel the elections. Very legal and very cool.

      • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        The only thing you’re interested in is showing how much of a bigger person you are on the internet. What we’re doing is speaking about all the ways this is fucked up and hypotheticals about how it can go wrong. For a lot of us, this isn’t new. I my political life time alone, I saw 8 years of rights being eroded by the Bush II administration with no real push back and once Obama got in under the promise of fixing things, a whole lot of inaction on rolling back any of the rights violations.

        The powers that be are taking advantage of how distributed the responsibilities of government are. If it’s so easy to lose rights, why is it so hard to gain them back. There’s always someone else to point at for why that is the case. In Nazi Germany, that was called The Banality of Evil. I see that everyday when some injustice is hand waved away as being too ingrained to do anything about. Police Reform? Too hard. Effective Climate Action? It would hurt the economy. The SC is eroding our rights? Have to wait for someone to die or retired(lol).

        • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          7 months ago

          Given that I’m a programmer who hasn’t even had time to think about it I wouldn’t know.

          Things that should not be done about it: murder. I can’t tell if the people suggesting that are all joking or not, but it’s sort of shocking if anyone is being serious.

          • PlainSimpleGarak@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            7 months ago
            1. Lemmy is a rather small community by comparrison. I’m bound to run into you frequently.

            2. I don’t care what you do. It has no impact on me.

            3. If it truly bothered you, you would block me. It’s ridiculously easy.

      • andrewta@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        7 months ago

        I’ve given up on this crowd. You didn’t say do nothing.

        This crowd only understands their echo chamber. Unless you are 100% in agreement with them then you must 100% be against them.

        In another post I challenged them to give one specific thing Biden can/should do to fix this. They couldn’t even come up with one item.

        • AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          In another post I challenged them to give one specific thing Biden can/should do to fix this. They couldn’t even come up with one item.

          Nice to run into you again, still posting this tired line huh? And you’re lying, because not only did I provide specifics, so did multiple other people (there’s more than just these, I’ve seen a ton). It seems that you might be caught in some sort of personal echo chamber.

          Is there a reason you stop responding to people once they provide specifics?

          • andrewta@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            I kept checking and no one would give specifics. I gave up on the conversation. But I’ll go look

        • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          7 months ago

          I got one. Present a new bill that says supreme court judges are not for life with no chance to remove them.

          Every 4 years on election years, but months before the presidential election, (so maybe spring/summer) they allow the general public to vote on their performance. If they get less than 65% approval rating, they’re out. They’ll be replaced by the new president, technically next year (since the election happens in November, but the inauguration is in January).

          So if a court judge is less than 65% popular with the public, they’re gone.

          And yes, I see the problem of “but the nation is so divided right now that neither side could get that approval rating, and all 12 judges would just be replaced every 4 years…”

          Which is partially by design. We need a system that fundamentally breaks all systems that keep corrupt people in power, and actively discourages the media, and politicians from taking this “us vs them” mentality.

          A republican SHOULD be presenting their set of ideas that benefit ALL Americans.

          A democrat SHOULD be presenting a different set of opposing ideas that benefit ALL Americans.

          And the public should vote on what will benefit them most. There should be no such thing as career democrats, or career republicans. It should be a free flowing liquid set of ideas that get catagorized as democrat this time, but based on the people in the election, maybe next time you’re catagorized as more republican than the other guy. So, this election you’re republican instead.

          Because everybody is so concerned about “The other side”, that everybody forgets one key thing. It may be two sides, but they’re two sides to the same coin. That coin is America. Right now, and for the past 8 years, that coin has been just falling to the ground.

          • andrewta@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            thank you for presenting at least a decent idea. the ideas of shoot trump is just stupid. yeah biden can’t be prosecuted for it but the person who shoots trump can be. it’s still against the law and would basically guarantee a civil war in this country.

            while the bill is a good idea. would it actually pass? i mean think about it. right now the republicans own the court and will own it until the current batch dies. why would they vote for the bill? but on the face of it . it’s a good idea.

        • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          7 months ago

          Unless you are 100% in agreement with them then you must 100% be against them.

          I know what you mean. It’s pretty freaking sad. This isn’t facebook, where there’s an 80% chance I have horrid views if you think I might have them. Yet they behave like it’s facebook.

  • neidu2@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    158
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    So, Biden can order seal team 6 to permanently fix the Supreme Court by removing 6 and leaving 3 alive. Gotcha.

    After all, those 6 argued that he has the right to do so.

    • TunaCowboy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      81
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      Democrats will continue to give sternly worded remarks all the way up to their appointment with the gallows, so brave!

        • A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Democrats will continue to give sternly worded remarks all the way up to their appointment with the gallows, so brave!

          When They Go Low, We Go Die

          Chapter 3

          Marjorie smiled with great satisfaction as she looked at the crowd and began to check the rifle in her arms to make sure there was a round in the chamber.

          2 men with giant beer guts - who each wore different flavors of Punisher-style skull masks and were covered head to toe in pointlessly elaborate tactical surplus gear as if they were cosplaying their favorite Call of Duty characters - began dragging another elderly man up to the makeshift platform.

          The white-haired old man was dressed in a finely tailored dark blue suit with a little American flag lapel pin next to his tie. It looked so similar to the one that so many others in his cohort had adorned for probably the last 20 or so years, but he had been blindfolded by the men before being brought before the stage so he couldn’t see how many others still wore it or who had switched to the golden lion that… “the others…” now wore exclusively.

          The octogenarian ghost of a man feebly began to speak (not shout) loudly in protest as if trying to reason with whomever might be in charge, but the 2 pig-like men grinned and said nothing. They began tying his hands behind him against a wooden pole covered with small holes, indentations and spatters of red. As the grinning pigs both stepped away from the geriatric man secured to the pole, the mob just below him roared with wild bloodlust over his inaudible words drowning them out over and over again with : “USA! USA! USA! USA!”

          Marjorie laughed and took one hand away from the rifle to quiet the crowd so they could hear the old man’s words :

          “Point of order, Mr. Chairman! Point of order! I’m reclaiming my time! I’d like the gentle-lady to put down the firearm she just picked up, Mr. Ch-”

          …he was cut off with a loud and sudden BANG as he slumped into a dark puddle of red slowly expanding across the stage floor.

          The crowd roared and resumed its repeated chant…

          …and another blindfolded well-dressed elderly figure was walked up to the pole.

          Quoting the entire comment you’re replying to is kinda redundant

    • Bye@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Only if he claims it’s an official act though! Don’t forget that part! Write “official act as president” on everything!

        • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          It doesn’t have to be an executive order, he’s in charge of the military. Any command he gives them is an official act, and can’t be questioned now.

          And then he can pardon them as they don’t have the same immunity as he now has. Pardons are also official acts.

    • Fredselfish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Biden fucking dumbass going blast no kings well I can promise you if Trump wins exactly how he will act. He will take Full of advantage of this ruling.

      Best thing Biden can do but he want is take advantage of it to in helping out the American people.

    • xenomor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      46
      ·
      7 months ago

      Just tell Joe that there are six Palestinian children on the court and he’ll get right on it.

    • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      7 months ago

      He doesn’t. Impeaching judges is the House’s job.

      You know your house rep is up for election this year?

      • realitista@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yeah but now he’s above the law, so I say do it anyway and overturn the ruling his damn self.

        • madjo@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          7 months ago

          It sets precedents that you might not want, because if Trump or one of his cronies get into the oval office, they can do the same thing.

            • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              I think the problem is, if Dems do it first, they’re not better than the Republicans.

              Unilateral dictatorships are unilateral dictatorships no matter who does it.

              You can’t win in a game where one side insists on cheating and one side insists on following the rules. Our system of governance wasn’t designed for this level of factionhood. It should and could’ve been stopped the right way maybe 20 or 30 years ago. At the least, 8 years ago. And the very last chance was when Trump’s second impeachment made it to the Senate.

              But now, there’s no chance.

              It’s not even really “cheating” that the Republicans are doing. Most everything is getting a “legal” stamp of approval. Just in a shady way that clearly and defiantly goes against everything this country has ever been about.

              Hey I know another politician who was pretty popular for his time that did the same thing. Bright young man with a funny mustache.

          • FreakinSteve@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            OH MY FUCKING GOD WHY DONT YOU FUCKING PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT THEY WILL ALREADY FUCKING DO THAT!!! THEY DO NOT NEED OR EVEN WANT DEMOCRAT PERMISSION OR PRECEDENT!!! Goddamn a you fucking milquetoast losers who defended free speech for Nazis all this time and got us in this fucking predicament!! You NEVER understand who you’re dealing with!!

          • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            If Trump gets back into office, it’s game over, unless the people are willing to fight a civil war to stop him. Though even that will probably be too little too late because of the power vacuum it will likely create on the world stage when WWIII already looks possible in the next decade.

            It might already be too late because I agree that Biden pushing his weight around with these new lack of presidential limits would get messy. But the cat is out of the bag right now and it’s not going to go quietly back in.

      • Madison420@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Legally … but the law doesn’t apply to the president so long as they’re doing it for a reason they believe to be official.

        • trafficnab@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          The ruling more or less explicitly states that Biden could go on national television, say “Won’t someone rid me of these troublesome justices?”, have them assassinated, and face no legal repercussions because using the bully pulpit is covered by presidential immunity

          • Madison420@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            Farther. He could use the military or any branch of government to kill them and still get immunity. We now have a long, don’t get me wrong we always had some assumption that that’s how it went but seeing it on paper is an eye opener.

            Hell, he could sign literally every US asset over to anyone he pleases and there’s nothing we could do via a legal means. It’s not supposed to work that way but if no law constrains the office then the office is simply free to do literally whatever they want.

        • Akuden@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          The law applies to the president always.

          Here is what this ruling is for -

          First - if I order an enemy of the US dead I can be prosecuted.

          The president orders an enemy dead. That enemy is killed. The president cannot be prosecuted for that act.

          What this ruling does - the president may also not be prosecuted for that act after they leave office.

          That’s all this does. That’s it. If the president kills a maid in the White House he or she will go to prison because that is against the law and not within the duties of the office.

          • Madison420@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            It doesnt.

            Nope.

            Agreed.

            No or means they can’t be prosecuted for it ever so long as it was under the guise of an official act.

            Nope, that maid was a spy and deserved what she got.

      • eldavi@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        – again

        they’ll still find some other excuse not to do anything the next time around.

          • spidermanchild@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            7 months ago

            Sure, assuming you don’t think the American rescue plan, bipartisan infrastructure act, CHIPS, IRA, and the first massive tranche of funding for Ukraine are useful. I don’t think you realize how short 2 years is for the legislature and how narrow the dem margin was. They achieved significantly more useful legislation than I thought possible. Unfortunately they didn’t codify Roe, overhaul SCOTUS, or harden our institutions against fascism, so maybe you’re right. Who knows what they could do with a larger majority and control of the House/Senate for 2 more years though - it would be fun to find out, if we could avoid getting all worked up blaming different people we mostly agree with and vote big against fascism.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              assuming you don’t think the American rescue plan, bipartisan infrastructure act, CHIPS, IRA, and the first massive tranche of funding for Ukraine are useful

              No more than the CARES Act or the PROSWIFT Act or the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 or the Hong Kong Autonomy and Uyghur Human Rights Policy Acts, under the prior administration. We’ve never had a problem issuing large bipartisan bailouts in the thick of a recession, rolling out buckets of cash for proxy wars, or pissing away trillions on expanding legacy highway infrastructure. This is not something unique that Biden brought to the table.

              Hell, Trump was even sending military aid to Ukraine as early as 2019. One could argue it was this military escalation and subsequent bombing of the Donbas that kicked off the war with Russia to begin with. Thanks for that!

              Unfortunately they didn’t codify Roe, overhaul SCOTUS, or harden our institutions against fascism

              Because they’re a party heavily populated with Pro-Life Democrats, they genuinely like the business-friendly / anti-regulatory bent to the SCOTUS, and they are more than happy to break bread with fascists just so long as the fascists can be used as proxies against enemies of US business interests at home and abroad.

              This isn’t a fucking accident. It is deliberate bipartisan consensus.

              Who knows what they could do with a larger majority and control of the House/Senate for 2 more years though

              Exactly what they did in 2009. Send trillions of new dollars to the privatized tech sector. Roll out new privatization schemes for the USPS and US Education System. Bailout failed banks. Increase the size and the authority of police agencies. And impose a host of new unfunded mandates on consumers - via tariffs, anti-union tax increases on health insurance, and private lending schemes - that only serve to degrade quality of life in pursuit of higher corporate profits.

              FFS, the lowest hanging fruit imaginable for the Democratic Party is DC Statehood. Easiest win imaginable to just hand yourself two free Senators and 3-4 new House Reps. And they won’t do it.

              • spidermanchild@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                7 months ago

                You’re still making the mistake of treating dems like some single monolith. It’s a coalition of just about everything that isn’t MAGA at this point, covering all sorts of ideals, yours being just one small part. The answer is still “get a majority of reps that aren’t asswipes” and then we’ll get legislation we want.

                As to DC statehood, it would have gone through if not for Manchin because the Senate “majority” at the time hinged on his support. We need to win these seats with bigger majorities, period, and then they’ll pass better bills. The overwhelming majorty of Dems support DC statehood, saying “they won’t do it” is not a great take when they literally didn’t have the votes.

          • eldavi@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            7 months ago

            that was only a few years ago and i’m going to assume you’re older than 10.

        • Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          They impeached Trump twice. It’s not their fault the Constitution requires a 2/3 majority to convict and only 7 Republicans were willing to put country above party.

        • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          Like Matt Gaetz, who should be in jail. And MTG, who should be in jail. And Lauren Boebert, who should be in jail. And…

  • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    125
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Dumbass and spineless Biden and Democrats. The supreme court literally just started that America had a king but this dumbass party would rather take some stupid fucking high road bullshit instead of playing the game to ensure the fascist fuck around and find out.

    They don’t even have to resort to assassinations, they could really tell the IRS to audit 501© and remove their status from the churches and bullshit Republican charities, or tell the justice department to focus on domestic terrorism and corruption to fuck over Republican groups and representatives, or tell the FDA to allow the sale of raw milk.

    Play the god damn game and be the fucking king if these corrupt justice says there’s a king.

    • Kiernian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      they could really tell the IRS to audit 501© and remove their status from the churches and bullshit Republican charities

      That would be juuuuuust about the dumbest thing they could possibly do. It would mobilize gigantic swaths of voters who are heavily invested in rhetoric over fact-checking.

      Doing away with Roe mobilized many of those voters who could be considered to be fence sitters towards the left. Removing church tax exemptions would move them right back and it would do NOTHING to solve the problem, because while the actual big offenders are happily USING the hell out of that tax exemption, they’re rich enough that they’ll get along fine without it.

      It WOULD hurt a whole lot of TINY churches that employ 1-50 people per church and actually do community work, though. All of those would go away. That’s a LOT of rural food shelves.

      I’m largely against the religious tax exemption, but that’s a problem we should worry about AFTER we can replace the nationwide infrastructure we’d be dismantling by doing so with something at least as effective as what’s there now.

      • TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        It also screws over the many churches or other religious organizations that genuinely do good for their communities

        • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          But is he wrong? From Nixon, to Reagan, to Newt GIngrich, to Mitch McConnell to Trump, the Democrats have been feckless and refused to halt this march to fascism. They are complicit by tacit acceptance. This need to adhere to some vague Status Quo (Capitalist Donor Class) is why we are in this situation. It’s time to wake up and realize the Marxists were right all along. You can’t compromise with Capitalism.

          • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Yes, he and you are obviously wrong. Even if everything you said was 100 percent true (lol) the people who failed to stop facism are obviously not the same as fascists themselves. Everything thinking person knows this , and Marx would too if he was alive.

            • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              7 months ago

              the people who failed to stop facism are obviously not the same as fascists themselves.

              Superior Orders, or ignorance of what is happening, does not absolve one of responsibility.

              Since the 2020 election cycle began, “fascism” took on a plethora of new meanings, none of which actually accessed the ongoing material conditions surrounding the rise of fascism outside of the Republican Party. In fact, one could easily conclude that “fascists” and “republican” were interchangeable words if they paid close enough attention to the elections. But they are not. The confusion around fascism, weaponized by liberals to drive people to the voting polls, has disallowed any inspection of the primary role the Democratic Party (with its neoliberal, populist, and austerity police state policies) has played by sheltering and coddling this current iteration of fascism. source

              • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                7 months ago

                Again, that is not the claim that was made. You can’t even stay on topic. I bet Marx could stay on topic .

                • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Marx abused alcohol, so not sure. The Republicans are capitalists. The Democrats are capitalists. To Marxists they are the same. Liberalism fails because it cannot address the contradictions inherent to capitalism, inequality and wealth accumulation. Capitalism requires inequality for wealth accumulation.

                  Social democratic reforms can alleviate the inequality and distribute the wealth more equitably, but, because it does not replace capitalism itself, it always falters.

                  So, although Democrats and Republicans differ on social policy, they both defer to capitalism. Capitalism rules both parties.

          • TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Can’t speak for previously, but recently, a good chunk of Democrats’ failures have been because of a select few members holding out, no?

        • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Ah yes not understanding the small cultural differences of minority policies being used to pretend the difference between the sides while on the broader spectrum being the exact same. Not to forget when it comes to foreign affairs all brown people rights go out of the window.

          If both sides weren’t the same the Dems would make an effort to save the things you mentioned above. They’re not doing that.

  • crusa187@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    103
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    Ok Biden, time to do something about these fascists. They just gave you everything you need to squash the threat, on a silver platter fit for a king. It’s time to process the new information, understand the powers granted to you, and act - are you up to this task? Please don’t let America down, because you have asserted yourself as the only one who can now do anything about it.

      • ZK686@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        7 months ago

        Never mind the entire United States political system right? Let’s just ignore how our judicial system is set up, because, some liberals and democrats are mad that things aren’t going their way!

        • FlaminGoku@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          It hilarious because all of your gotchas are GOP projection. Gerrymandering is used by the GOP because reality has a liberal bias and they have to cut up counties to let them win.

    • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      7 months ago

      These threads are awash with comments like this but you can’t avoid fascism by becoming a fascist.

      Shit is fucked but arbitrary killing is not the solution.

      • Delusional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        Well republican fascism isn’t being stopped by the normal way of doing things since they don’t even take the law into consideration and keep fighting dirty. Seems to me that someone needs to fight dirty against them. As long as the rule of law and checks and balances can be continued afterwards then we’re good but currently, we’re heading into christofascism.

    • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Always beware of the fact, that the only thing hindering an all-out revolution is your fear of losing the scraps they throw at you. Gore Vidal

    • Zombie-Mantis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      The infrastructure for a national strike does not exist in America. You need a lot of labor to be organized, and it just isn’t. We can barely get individual facilities to go on strike, let alone an entire country. We used to, and that’s how we pressured politicians into the New Deal, but organized labor has been dismantled since then.

      As for why we’re not more like the French, a lot of it comes down to this: They have more unionized workers, as a fraction of the working population, than we do.

      Perhaps we forget, here on our islands of leftist beliefs, but the average American is not a radical Socialist, Communist, or Anarchist. They are not tuned-in closely to politics, they are not media literate, they are not part of any active organization besides maybe a local church. They’re not going to upend their lives over something they don’t understand, without any way to plan with their coworkers.

        • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          "First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can’t agree with your methods of direct action;” who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a “more convenient season.”

          Shallow understanding from people of goodwill is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

          • MLK jr
      • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        We used to, and that’s how we pressured politicians into the New Deal, but organized labor has been dismantled since then.

        It’s the downside of very rapid economic and social development in USA as compared to France since then. When things are changing so fast, some you just lose, maybe don’t even think you need them anymore, and have to build them again.

        EDIT: And most of the planet is less conscious than the French for this matter.

    • irotsoma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Because we’re exhausted and can’t afford to lose what little we all have. Even one day in jail can mean losing your job, even if charges are dropped. And a conviction could mean being stuck with only jobs that don’t pay a living wage for the rest of your life and few of us have enough savings to survive that for long.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      I don’t understand why we aren’t in the streets.

      We were in the streets for Palestine and then some seriously bad shit happened.

      • ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        7 months ago

        Because people are spineless cowards that won’t meet the fascist police with armed force in the streets.

        • colmear@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Isn’t that exactly the reason for the second amendment? From what I learned, it is not to go to the gun range because it’s fun, it is to fight the government if it goes rogue

          • uienia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            It is not. It is the interpretation right wing gunnits have claimed it is, so there is that I suppose…

            • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              They are free to interpret it this way just as you are your way.

              It would be weird for a new polity, result of a winning rebellion against lawful government, and definitely against its laws (some people think one can rebel not breaking any laws, apparently, claiming there are legal and illegal rebellions), to not have this in mind frankly.

              And from the context of the second amendment we know that back then it was interpreted exactly as a militia that can fight against federal military.

              One can argue in theory that this doesn’t mean individual gun rights, just that states should have their own armies (national guard). One can’t argue that it’s not intended for rebellion, because it very openly was.

          • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            TBF to fight a government that went rogue in our time you’ll need a whole lot more than knowing how to shoot a rifle.

            Field medicine. Chemistry. How to build underground shelters against airstrikes. How to make mortars and mortar shots in garage with commonly available tooling. Using FPV drones, of course. Using (and possibly making) AT shots. Maybe simple (Katyusha-level) artillery manufacturing. Making mines.

            That’s just some of the manufacturing knowledge you’ll need, it’s much more.

            Communications - something easy to get wrong.

            Then - tactics and teamwork, of course. It’s a lot to learn and requires lots of training.

            Logistics. Something which doesn’t seem as hard as the rest, while in fact the hardest.

            And I’m just mentioning things, one can write a book for every one of them.

        • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          7 months ago

          Not everyone needs to fight cops in the streets (respect and support to those that do!). There are other ways to fight as well: organizing strikes, sabotage, [redacted]. I think the main problem is that the fascism pot has been simmering for so long, that people are mostly used to it, and can no longer really imagine the alternative. We’re so isolated from each other, and desperate to survive that too many of us will “keep calm and carry on” as long as it isn’t our necks on the chopping block.

    • ours@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Terrible timing to bring up the French. They are scrambling to prevent the most right-wing turn since WWII.

    • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      7 months ago

      I’m reminded of all the “France Surrenders” memes I’ve seen. Meanwhile the French shut down their country at the suggestion of the retirement age increasing. An unelected group of 6 people decide your king president can do whatever they want with no consequence and Americans just shake their fists at the cloud complain online.

      • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Didn’t the French have to recently choose between a shitter who fucked them over (Macron) and putins nazi buddy (Le pen)?

        Man, we really are more alike then we realize.

  • BigMacHole@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    91
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    7 months ago

    Biden: The Supreme Court ruled I can do ANYTHING I WANT!

    Also Biden: So I will do NOTHING! Please Vote kthxbai!

    • ExFed@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yes, because he actually cares about what the Constitution stands for, not just some adversarial power game. Claim the paradox of tolerance all you want, but fighting fire with fire here is just participating in the same race to the bottom that’s destroying our democracy here in the USA.

      • Land_Strider@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        7 months ago

        Preemptive strikes exist. Law does not need to apply after the fact if the law is allowed preventive measures.

        And arguing about if one should take such a preventive strike, yes they should since the perp has already declared threatening intentions to cause immediate harm.

        • flicker@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          The people arguing against using this new power because using it now makes you just as bad as “them,” are the dog-sitting-in-a-room-on-fire meme.

          "Using the fire ax is just as evil as destroying the house yourself! Get fucked. We caught the Republicans smoking. Make them smoke the whole pack.

      • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        7 months ago

        If he has practicality no limits what’s preventing him from getting the decision undone and making it so that the president could never have such power?

        If he has all the power in the world he should also have power to undo that power.

      • Tja@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 months ago

        Alternative take: letting Republicans do whatever they want and not fighting back or taking actions to prevent it, is what is destroying your democracy.

        • ExFed@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Unless you’re willing to claim we’re in a civil war, then I’m not willing to call Republicans “the enemy” … That’s that the real enemies of America want of us: to divide and conquer from within.

      • mlg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        FDR trying to pack the crap out of scotus with liberal judges so all his social reforms would actually go through instead of being struckdown.

        • CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          7 months ago

          Modern dems cant fathom having gumption. All they have is furrowed brows while the repubs destroy dismantle and overthrow.

          Dem brow furrowing will intensify until GOP is the one true ruler.

  • Cyrus Draegur@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    91
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    7 months ago

    Wow it’s a shame he’s a fucking pussy who won’t author an ‘official act’ to oust the supreme court.

    • Mango@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I came into this post and your comment was pre-upvoted for me somehow. I didn’t upvote you, but I’m gonna keep it.

  • Wilzax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    “Biden Blasts Supreme Court” could have a whole new meaning after their latest ruling

    • anlumo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      44
      ·
      7 months ago

      Probably a lot longer. These SCOTUS decrees will last until the US crumbles to dust.

      Although, they might have accellerated the timeline towards the end significantly.

    • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      7 months ago

      Trump’s election proved that most of America’s governmental system was based around a series of “gentlemen’s agreements” and an expectation of fair play. America is not resilient to betrayal in any fashion. If one person stops respecting the rule of fair play the entire system crumbles.

  • Hawanja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    7 months ago

    I like how every single one of these comments are blaming Biden and the Democrats for a supreme court ruling that the conservatives and Republicans enacted. How about we put the blame on the people who are actually doing the terrible things?

    This is why the Republicans keep winning btw, because they’re united.

    • aesthelete@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      At what point do Americans use that 2nd Amendment against tyranny as it was intended? Or is that difficult because the wrong party and classes have most of the guns?

      People advocating for leftists to go out into the streets with firearms forget recent history:

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killings_of_Aaron_Danielson_and_Michael_Reinoehl

      The supreme court just made this type of thing entirely legal as well. Not that it mattered. I have to Google the incident everytime because it didn’t even register as a blip on the national radar, but the feds likely executed this guy.

      I unfortunately don’t know what the answer is or if there even is one, but this country historically and certainly recently doesn’t take kindly to armed leftists.

      • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I don’t think that case is a good comparison to a bunch of leftists taking up arms against the state. That was protestor on protestor violence and involved two people. Had nothing to do with a bunch of Americans standing up to a tyrranical government at once. The Marshall’s response was disgusting, but that’s to be expected with someone like Trump holding the reins.

        Some better examples would be MOVE in Philadelphia who got bombed, and the black panthers in California who got the Republican led government to make laws against the second amendment. Still, I think these groups were too small, we just need more people.

        You do bring up a good point, but we haven’t really tried, yet. It might be different when the feds are actually against a large group, but they will never be deterred by smaller groups. The problem is actually getting enough people to care enough. People are very attached to their bread and circuses, and I understand. The revolution would not be an enjoyable struggle.

      • FreakinSteve@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        What fucking “leftists”??? Where?? How is arming up against a fascist dictatorship “leftist”?? The simple fact is that Americans are spoiled fucking slobs who refuse to back up anyone that calls for resistance. On another platform I’m taking all sorts of heat from fucking brunchers who are terrified about trumpism but think arming up and being ready to defend self or neighbors makes me a barbaric ghoul and a “rittenhouse”.

        • aesthelete@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          What, pray tell, do you expect from online denizens in general? We aren’t generally on here to organize a revolution or counterrevolution, we’re on here to kill thirty minutes on break from work.

          And you’re on here too. If this shit is so important why are you here on memeville posting it up instead of actually doing anything about it?

    • retrospectology@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      To be honest I’m pretty energized. Not for Biden obviously, but just glad to see Democrats actually shifting their asses and just for people to finally be piecing together the predicament that the Democratic establishment has put us all in. There’s potential for actual change here, even if it requires going through some chaos and pain.

      The pressure of the non-vote threat is actually being felt by party leadership and they appear to be delicately trying to create an environment that will allow Biden to accept that he needs to step down. It would actually be huge for the party’s health if they pulled it off.

    • trafficnab@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      We’re supposed to be evolving into a more free society… this is just going backwards.

      You have discovered the great fallacy, the presumption that democracy and freedom are the natural course of things: they are not. Every single inch of it we have was taken by force from kings and dictators, and they’re always waiting in the shadows for their opportunity to take it back.

      The peace dividend created by the end of the cold war has unfortunately made an entire generation of people who believe this fallacy, this is one of the glaring reminders that it’s not true. Democracy and freedom are things that must be actively maintained in perpetuity by everyone who wants them, we must be ready and willing to use all four boxes of democracy (soap, ballot, jury, AND ammo) to defend it for the rest of our lives. We must educate, we must vote, we must nullify unjust laws, and we must arm ourselves, because at the end of the day, violence is the one enforcement method that everyone is forced to listen to. It doesn’t matter how right you are if the other side has more people willing to kill and die for their cause than yours does, so we better damn well make sure that’s not the case.

    • ZK686@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      So, you don’t think Obama and Clinton deserve some kind of immunity? Do you REALLY think they’re both completely innocent? Do you REALLY think their hands are clean?