It calls for the preservation of an in-group by the extermination of an out-group.
I said this:
Fascists deserve fascism, but they deserve to be the victims of it.
You’re twisting my words and making fallacious arguments. This conversation is over. Feel free to write another novela, but I’m done reading.
I see the competition to be first against the wall is heating up.
Hard disagree. You’re making an invalid slippery slope argument. Eliminating fascists is self-defense. Eliminating other groups is not and therefore not comparable. The problem with fascists isn’t that they kill people; it’s that they systematically target out groups for elimination without regard to whether they are dangerous—and in fact they tend to target the least dangerous people first.
Also now that I think about it, eliminating fascists was your idea. I think that if they were to be eliminated, they would deserve it, but I wasn’t actually advocating it. What they need is to be kept far away from any kind of power or influence.
Compared to Trump? Yes, very much so.
There is no supreme court, just a fascist cabal in robes.
Read more carefully:
The president can issue executive orders pursuant to a grant of discretion from Congress, or under the inherent powers that office holds to deal with certain matters which have the force of law.
Executive orders are limited to exercising powers already granted to the President by Congress or the Constitution. The President cannot just make up new laws. This is basic stuff that should have been explained to you numerous times if you’re American.
Something something paradox of tolerance.
Why should we listen to you and not Sotomayor?
How would he “illegally introduce a new law”? He could issue a decree but it would be meaningless because nothing gives a president the power to make laws.
Not if they’ve been forcibly removed from office.
Christ you’re obnoxious.
Fascists deserve fascism, but they deserve to be the victims of it.
I didn’t care what the fuck other people deserve. I can’t control how other people act, but I’ll have to live with the same outcome as them.
Quit trying to justify the unjustifiable.
He’s due to die of natural causes any day now, so we’ve got that going for us.
And yet you can still buy phones with headphone jacks. Because there is demand for them. The reason you didn’t see many is because the demand is a lot less than what Lemmy users would have you believe.
I see from your own argument that you were a Trump supporter in 2016. Not someone I’d listen about anything.
From the dissent:
Whether described as presumptive or absolute, under the majority’s rule, a President’s use of any official power for any purpose, even the most corrupt, is immune from prosecution. That is just as bad as it sounds, and it is baseless
When the foremost observers of the fascist cabal say their ruling is “just as bad as it sounds”, I will take their word for it.
Presidents can’t pass laws any more then you or I can. Even Trump isn’t insane enough to think he can.
I found 8 brands of DVD±R discs—none of them Sony—before I stopped counting. If you think one company stopping production is going to stop people from using physical media, or that demand hasn’t been falling for years, YOU are the one who’s badly out of touch.
Let me spell it out for you: as long as there is demand, someone will find a way to make money filling it. No company, no matter how evil it is, can remove a product category from the market just by leaving the market. Suggesting that a company choosing to stop making a commodity product is an attempt to prevent you from having access to said product is nonsense no matter what company and product you’re talking about, because such a plan could never work.
And also impossible because the Republicanazis would never allow it.