Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Mr Trump and many of his sycophants promote fascist idealogies. The idealogies have to be scrutinized, and laws created to prevent these actions.
It does not mean, one cannot speak of fascist idealogies. It does not mean they will not be allowed to be spoke or shown in public discourse. We do have Freedoms of Speech protections.
But premisies of white supremacy, the use of troops in cities, talk of abridging the constitution running for third terms, talks of Insurrection Acts whilst no insurrection, judges abridging our freedoms against Posse Comitatus laws, all should be deemed fasco manifesto, and those should be immediately charged and removed from office. Or prevented from running or nomination.
Being a fascist is not illegal.
The Nazis were not prosecuted at Nuremberg for being Fascists.
They were prosecuted for murdering people and committing war crimes.
Political murder can happen under any political ideology. Just look ANTIFA and how it attempted to murder Andy Ngo and many others and is radicalising people to commit murder.
My contention is that is should be. We fought a war and millions have died and were unalived.
The fact the war is over, should not mean these are not treasonous idealogies. They are.
Why do democrats hate the military?
name one
They were scrutinised, by the American people and the American people chose to return Donald Trump to the US Presidency.
What promises would those be?
That would be the National Guard. Who are there to be deployed in cities which are out of control, in this case, with crime. There have been double digit percentage drops in the rate of crime in every city the National Guard has been deployed to and polls show massive support from the populations of those cities for this.
This amendment was only brought in in 1947. What precisely is the argument against unamending it? FDR had three terms.
Examples?
Well thank God you're not in charge of anything then.
And if you want to be, put it in a manifesto and run for President.
As was said, its not the thought, but the action.
FDR is literally the argument against allowing more than 2 terms.