361–370 of 413 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They will get a blanket pardon anyway. So in the end we will have to apologize to them.
Actually states can arrest them for any non-federal crime, punish them and incarcerate them and there is nothing Trump can do about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks! I knew that Obama created the USDS, but I thought he still needed the support from Congress. Well then, in that case I'm not sure why Trump would rather repurpose the USDS. Maybe it's easier to set up a temporary entity for DOGE that way?
It is in the same way you would assume an existing admin role to perform the highly privileged actions you want to take vs attempting to bootstrap access from scratch.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
USAID gave Politico $24k, not $8M. The entire US govt did pay Politico about $8.2M, presumably in the form of buying their subscription products. Politico really does do deep-dive analysis behind a paywall, and I can see why government people might want access. (I have no idea how justified this is, honestly, but I wouldn't immediately dismiss it.) This seems like a fair enough summary: https://www.axios.com/2025/02/…
So you see nothing wrong with the Government paying the media that is supposed to be independent? For what it's the worth the NGOs supported by American institutions like USAID have been raising hell accompanied by cries of "democracy is dying" when our Government here in Romania had done a similar thing, i.e. paying Government money to the local media (supposedly in order to advertise Government initiatives in said…
In this specific case, Politico is apparently worth over a billion dollars based on its sale in 2021, so I think that the US government giving it $8M would be a shit bribe and insufficient to hurt its independence. Based on its subscriber number boasts, it's getting at least $350M in annual subscription revenue. (Probably more, since I'm assuming the cheapest subscription there.) Would they care about a 2% drop in subscription revenue? Likely not enough for it to affect their coverage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No personal option stated or implied, but: exactly this was clearly promised before the election, and it is being delivered right now. The people voted for this: a majority of the American people. Democracy, no?
Trump also said he could shoot someone in broad daylight on fifth avenue. I think that might be against some rules though. Idk maybe it can be a campaign promise!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> He simply informs the President, That man is way too friendly. Just before the election he gave $300.000.000,00 to Trump. And he is so special, eh! He can read air-gaped, highly sensitive data that no one should see from government systems, just using his mind/indoctrinated minions. I hate it when people speculate this might have to do, amongst things, with dark money to be made in intelligence/elite level internat…
Neither him nor Trump ever hid what Elon was going to do if Trump was elected. Unlike other donators of both parties, we always knew what Elon's goal was. He literally spent the last year on Twitter tweeting about it. Many people, especially libertarians, voted for Trump for this exact reason. Yeah, you might think he shouldn't have access to these system but it's the President, who the majority of the people voted f…
We already have departments for improving and reforming spending. Elon and MAGA are inundating you with bad faith justifications for what is ultimately a goal to fund their next round of tax breaks before they expire this year using the working and middle classes as livestock.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Knowledge is power
You’re moving the goal posts of this conversation by redefining the word power. My point stands.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You suggested that the right is currently doing to the left what the left does to the right… Great evidence! Thanks!
Im suggesting doing different non-analogous things can provide balance. At no point did I assert they must be analogous nor am I obliged to prove your own assumptions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually states can arrest them for any non-federal crime, punish them and incarcerate them and there is nothing Trump can do about it.
What non-federal crimes and in what state are these crimes being committed that would give any state the jurisdiction to punish and incarcerate?
Prosecutors have the power to ask 2 years incarceration for jaywalking, without proof, 10 years for ignoring a stop sign and having not paying because the state has a wrong address for them and can let someone who empties a machine gun into a kindergarten walk free. But why go so far as to actually convict them of anything?
An IRS agent (and every state has them, not just the Federal government) could just accuse anyone of tax fraud 9 years ago, arrest, then deny bail (if the accusation is tax fraud it is the IRS agent that gets to approve or deny bail, not a judge), and then think about what they'll do next, for 3 years. They also have the power to block any particular bank account US-wide, or all bank accounts "that benefit an individual", so they can damage the person's family too.
No worries, after those 3 years, those now freshly declared innocent people will have to be paid 20 or so dollars per day to make it all alright (technically they don't, as they would not even be innocent, as the IRS does not need a conviction to declare you a criminal, but that's kicking someone hard in the nuts after incarcerating them for 3 years).
None of this requires even a single judicial decision, just an executive on your side. And Trump does NOT have the power to grant pardons over any non-federal matter (which is pretty ironic since part of the reason presidential pardons exist, is to prevent state or local governments from using state justice systems to influence the Federal government)