How has this community become so egregiously shortsighted? Suppose he doesn't get impeached by his coequal colleagues in Congress and somehow manages 4 yrs without further impeachments for random scandals. Suppose the term propaganda wasn't so nebulously defined in a court of law. Suppose that every judge from SCOTUS onwards who've been belligerent on every matter pertaining to Trump agreed with him. Suppose those very same judges did not litigate him on a technicality as they've already done with many of his business associates. Suppose he then goes on to win a second term.
Then what? Next guy that comes in overturns his decisions. These are awful precedents to set. Do you not get that that exact same logic of one office having unilateral control over the distribution of what it deems as propaganda quite precisely what they want?
Read all the messages. Idc what they think. This is a matter of logic.
First, remember. Not even SCOTUS backed him up. What makes you think rmving propaganda changes that and every judge?
Do you know what kept Trump in office amidst all the impeachment crap going on? Public support. Now tell me. Who supports Trump? Classical liberals, conservatives, and libertarians. Do you know why classical liberals and libertarians like him? Largely because of the freedoms he has promised.
Now go back to 2017 where most people are politically uninitiated. First, the libertarians and classical liberals read - Trump to declare propaganda iIIegaI.
Do you genuinely think they'd support him? People who are already skeptical about politics (aka the people who voted for him) would have dismissed him as a shiII. They'd think this is a horrible precedent to set, given that, ultimately, a single committee would be presiding over what is deemed propaganda or not. How do you define it, genuinely? By asserting only opinions that coincide with what is supported by major institutions are deemed not propaganda? What about opinion? Would you label it propaganda too? If so, do you have ANY idea how DRACONIC that would be? THINK.
Now for the important question. We've talked about the politically uninitiated. What initiated people into the political hemisphere? The very same propaganda you tried to thwart. You have to understand that while he could have assumed unilateral totalitarian control in America, propaganda would have still been a thing everywhere else. He wouldn't have the international community backing him up. It would have been all the more easy to impose an embargo without international support.
Now for the even more important question. What happens after Trump's hypothetical 2nd term, if he could even muster enough support from classical liberals and libertarians? If Trump could rmv policies, so could the next guy. Or, even scarier, redefine propaganda. Then what?
"ONCE. MORE. FOR. THE. PEOPLE. IN. THE. BACK. DrUmPf. IS. A. FASCIST. HE'S CENSORING THE MEDIA."
Because of that reaction, likely.
So what? They will bitch about whatever he does. Instead of letting them choose what to bitch about, let them bitch on your terms.
And give all the reason they've been looking for to get the international community to get involved. This isn't checkers.
You're also forgetting he was impeached over a phone call that was even publicly disclosed by way of transcript. Seriously?
Fuck the international community.
How has this community come to downvoting a comment like this?
Reread my comment. I've editted it just now.
How has this community become so egregiously shortsighted? Suppose he doesn't get impeached by his coequal colleagues in Congress and somehow manages 4 yrs without further impeachments for random scandals. Suppose the term propaganda wasn't so nebulously defined in a court of law. Suppose that every judge from SCOTUS onwards who've been belligerent on every matter pertaining to Trump agreed with him. Suppose those very same judges did not litigate him on a technicality as they've already done with many of his business associates. Suppose he then goes on to win a second term.
Then what? Next guy that comes in overturns his decisions. These are awful precedents to set. Do you not get that that exact same logic of one office having unilateral control over the distribution of what it deems as propaganda quite precisely what they want?
Why do you care what libtards think?
Read all the messages. Idc what they think. This is a matter of logic.
First, remember. Not even SCOTUS backed him up. What makes you think rmving propaganda changes that and every judge?
Do you know what kept Trump in office amidst all the impeachment crap going on? Public support. Now tell me. Who supports Trump? Classical liberals, conservatives, and libertarians. Do you know why classical liberals and libertarians like him? Largely because of the freedoms he has promised.
Now go back to 2017 where most people are politically uninitiated. First, the libertarians and classical liberals read - Trump to declare propaganda iIIegaI.
Do you genuinely think they'd support him? People who are already skeptical about politics (aka the people who voted for him) would have dismissed him as a shiII. They'd think this is a horrible precedent to set, given that, ultimately, a single committee would be presiding over what is deemed propaganda or not. How do you define it, genuinely? By asserting only opinions that coincide with what is supported by major institutions are deemed not propaganda? What about opinion? Would you label it propaganda too? If so, do you have ANY idea how DRACONIC that would be? THINK.
Now for the important question. We've talked about the politically uninitiated. What initiated people into the political hemisphere? The very same propaganda you tried to thwart. You have to understand that while he could have assumed unilateral totalitarian control in America, propaganda would have still been a thing everywhere else. He wouldn't have the international community backing him up. It would have been all the more easy to impose an embargo without international support.
Now for the even more important question. What happens after Trump's hypothetical 2nd term, if he could even muster enough support from classical liberals and libertarians? If Trump could rmv policies, so could the next guy. Or, even scarier, redefine propaganda. Then what?