EatTheRich
President
Threatening to sue journalists ... encouraging violence against journalists ... who knows what other methods he'll use in the future.
The press has no obligation to cover the president positively.
GOP Sen. Flake compares Trump to Stalin
- Thread starter Bugsy McGurk
- Start date
The press has no obligation to cover the president positively.
Journalist have been sued long before Trump, soooooooooooooooooooooo
Journalist don't have a constitutional right to post known fraud......
Seems they're doing just fine
Constitutional Sheepdog
][][][%er!!!!!!!
You would bitch about it and cry Trump was a dictator and racist
Constitutional Sheepdog
][][][%er!!!!!!!
They have an obligation to report the truth
Constitutional Sheepdog
][][][%er!!!!!!!
Because you're an anarchist
Bugsy McGurk
President
Don’t forget his threats to the broadcasting licenses of networks whose coverage displeases him.
Quite Stalinesque.
Bugsy McGurk
President
First, I would be remiss if I did not your customary dodge of my question, and I hate being remiss.
And as you know, I said nothing about his alleged “intent.” I spoke of his words, set forth in a written statement.
Bugsy McGurk
President
Sounds about right. A good 90% of what Trump says and does is negative.
EatTheRich
President
False ... a Fox affiliate has gone to court to confirm a 1st Amendment right to lie on the air. They can't commit libel. But "libel" is not an honest mistake, much less factual information that reflects poorly on the president (the vast majority of what he is denouncing).
EatTheRich
President
So it's OK for the president to use totalitarian methods if he isn't immediately successful? In Nazi Germany it took about 4 years for the opposition press to be muzzled.
EatTheRich
President
It's reporting the truth that the president is denouncing them for.
EatTheRich
President
I have the 1st Amendment right to my opinion ... so, again, if they respect the law, they won't come after me.
EatTheRich
President
What makes you think he would respect a court ruling ... unless forced to do so by the strength of the resistance to totalitarianism ... which is what is holding him back now?
Emily
NSDAP Kanzler
He's not a dictator. We have a hardy system in America. The Executive can't simply ignore the Judiciary or the Legislature. He would abide by a court ruling whether he wants to or not; he'd have no choice. Witness the "travel ban."
U.S. Presidents have chaffed against the checks & balances system for a long time. We still have no totalitarian dictator. The Republic even survived FDR (though not unscathed). What the left screeches about Trump in this regard now, the right screeched about Obama before. It's not "the strength of the resistance to totalitarianism" that's holding back Trump; it's the American system of government, anti-totalitarian by design.
D
Deleted member 21794
Guest
So you concede Flake understands what he said more than you do. Noted.
You're halfway there.
which of these Totolitarian tactics do you feel exist today?
- Having a dictatorship
- Employing only one ruling party
- Rule through fear
- Censorship of media
- Propaganda in media, government speeches and through education
- Criticism of the state is prohibited
- Mandatory military sign up
- Secret police forces
- Controlling reproduction of the population (either in hopes to increase or to decrease)
- Targeting of specific religious or political populations
- Development of a nationalist party
Read more at http://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-totalitarianism.html#vZ0WeVSd1Io65XiR.99
redtide
Mayor
and who would that be?
EatTheRich
President
The Weimar Republic was anti-totalitarian by design too. What you are ignoring is that a Constitutional order depends on a balance of power among classes and when this balance is disrupted the constitutional norms are undermined.
