this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2025
222 points (97.8% liked)

politics

26349 readers
2904 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

And he is now saying, I am going to acclimate the American public to the use of military force anywhere I deem it. Appropriate under any circumstances, and I may well, the president may be thinking, I may well have us in a war by the time the elections roll around, which will enable me to say any opposition to me and my party is basically treason and unpatriotic.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dhork@lemmy.world 29 points 2 weeks ago

But that's what he does, he pushes the boundaries until he finds resistance, pulls back, then tries again later. If it weren't for the court rulings against him he probably would have gone full "Marshal Law" already.

Also note that many of those rulings came from lower courts, some got partially reversed at the appellate level, and others got temporarily reversed at the emergency level at SCOTUS. At some point, SCOTUS will make the official rulings, on the record. That's when the real shit will go down. There are three ways it can go down:

  • a full repudiation of the Adminstrations's position. Not very likely, given this court.
  • a full embracing of the administration's position. This would be the point historians point to when American democracy died.
  • a narrow ruling against the administration, which the court takes great pains to imply doesn't set a larger precedent. Don't believe them! This will be identical to the one above.

Once this happens, no matter what the ruling is, the Administration will claim it as a victory and go full dictatorship. The nature of the ruling will dictate what institutions can do to counter it.