But then they made lawfulness a subject for Supreme Court review, so only Republicans can be absolute despots. And Biden is a risk-averse institutionalist who would never consider extreme measures (like sending all the corrupt Supreme Court justices to Gitmo).
of course not. hes not going to be a precedent so later they say see its fine because biden did it. Man people love these damned if they do, damed if they don’t situations to call out the eternal badguy. I want to know if he still beats his wife?
Sometimes it is necessary for the long term good of humanity. Saying ‘we can’t use authoritarianism to beat authoritarians’ is the logic that got the nazis in power in Germany. The nazis should have been crushed early on, but instead liberals just kept appeasing them.
what im saying is if he did he would be getting so much shit for having done so and very likely by the same types bitching about him not. its a classic damned if you do damned if you don’t. he would then be responsible for every use of it after him by certain types.
that only matters if you care about your dumbass legacy more than the future of the country, which he certainly did, which is why he sought reelection in the first place.
unless he did it in case alls that matters is caring about the rule of law and the future of the country rather than his dumbass legacy. cause then doing it was about his legacy but now not doing it was about his legacy. either way did it all for him or his kind and did the wrong thing.
Biden obeys law and honored his oath so it’s apples to oranges.
The Supreme Court literally told him that it was impossible for the President to break the law while he was in office
But then they made lawfulness a subject for Supreme Court review, so only Republicans can be absolute despots. And Biden is a risk-averse institutionalist who would never consider extreme measures (like sending all the corrupt Supreme Court justices to Gitmo).
of course not. hes not going to be a precedent so later they say see its fine because biden did it. Man people love these damned if they do, damed if they don’t situations to call out the eternal badguy. I want to know if he still beats his wife?
wow I’m so glad he didn’t set a precedent; that must be why the fascist that came after him so strictly goes by the book now.
I’d like to have what you’re having.
You can’t beat authoritarianism by becoming authoritarian.
Sometimes it is necessary for the long term good of humanity. Saying ‘we can’t use authoritarianism to beat authoritarians’ is the logic that got the nazis in power in Germany. The nazis should have been crushed early on, but instead liberals just kept appeasing them.
Historically authoritarians tend not to return control to democratic processes. That is to say, you become the threat you’re trying to avoid.
In Germany, it was conservatives who kept appeasing them. Hindenburg was no liberal.
No no, liberals bad. Take your logic out of here
crushing fascism is not authoritarian.
Crushing fascism is authoritarian if you need to become authoritarian to do it.
no
what im saying is if he did he would be getting so much shit for having done so and very likely by the same types bitching about him not. its a classic damned if you do damned if you don’t. he would then be responsible for every use of it after him by certain types.
that only matters if you care about your dumbass legacy more than the future of the country, which he certainly did, which is why he sought reelection in the first place.
unless he did it in case alls that matters is caring about the rule of law and the future of the country rather than his dumbass legacy. cause then doing it was about his legacy but now not doing it was about his legacy. either way did it all for him or his kind and did the wrong thing.