NSFW THE TRUMPOCALYPSE

[Capstan]

I think THAT would lead to civil war.

You could be right, but I expect the 2nd Civil War would be much briefer than the 1st one. Today's Nazi Rebels have no logistical base. Pure hatred will not sustain them.

 

[beancounter]

You could be right, but I expect the 2nd Civil War would be much briefer than the 1st one. Today's Nazi Rebels have no logistical base. Pure hatred will not sustain them.

Yes, the do. It's called the POTUS and the U.S. military. It would be a perfect excuse/opportunity for Trump to become Dictator.

 

[Capstan]

Yes, the do. It's called the POTUS and the U.S. military. It would be a perfect excuse/opportunity for Trump to become Dictator.

No, this scenario is predicated on the US military being opposed to Trump and removing him from office, via a coup (see post# 2495, above.) In such a case, any rebellion that broke out would be among Trump supporters, who are only isolated, poorly organized mobs. Such a 'civil war' would be quashed quickly, both by the military and the majority of the citizenry. The president may be "commander-in-chief" in name, but I don't believe he has the loyalty of the United States Armed Forces. The Army, Navy, Air Force, etc. would arrest him, before setting him up as Emperor.

 

[MadamSarcastra]

Follow the Money: They Say It Was about Russian Orphans—They’re Lying

 

[MadamSarcastra]

Yes, with good reason (for him, anyway)

Trump's Arpaio pardon sends a message to sheriffs: I'm your get-out-of-jail-free card

I think it's also to show off his pardoning power to anyone involved in the Russia scandal....

 

[Second Summer]

The Army, Navy, Air Force, etc. would arrest him, before setting him up as Emperor.

I would hope that is the case, though from what I remember the various uniformed law-enforcers have seemed quite friendly towards Trump. E.g. didn't those border control agents carry out his first Muslim-ban to the bitter end?

 

[MadamSarcastra]

I would hope that is the case, though from what I remember the various uniformed law-enforcers have seemed quite friendly towards Trump. E.g. didn't those border control agents carry out his first Muslim-ban to the bitter end?

On the up side, remember that the military has been ignoring his transgender ban.... They don't respect him. So if he assumes he's going to be some sort of master puppeteer, he's got another think coming. LOL

(updated) -- Of course, we'll need to see what happens after this:
Trump Signs Memo Implementing Ban On Transgender People Enlisting In The Military **sigh**

 

[MadamSarcastra]

Counterterrorism Adviser Gorka Out Of White House Job

 

[MadamSarcastra]

Here you go:

Since viewing that video, I've had one song stuck in my head....

Heir Frumpenstein probably sings it to himself in the shower.... LMAO

 

[silva]

Since viewing that video, I've had one song stuck in my head....

Heir Frumpenstein probably sings it to himself in the shower.... LMAO

while Melania sings 'you're so vain"

 

[MadamSarcastra]

while Melania sings 'you're so vain"

Touché! LOL

 

[beancounter]

The president may be "commander-in-chief" in name, but I don't believe he has the loyalty of the United States Armed Forces. The Army, Navy, Air Force, etc. would arrest him, before setting him up as Emperor.

The armed forces pushed back on the transgender bane because they don't want to disrupt group cohesion, which is essential in a successful operation. But remember, the majority of soldiers are conservative, and if POTUS declared Left leaning groups as enemy combatants, they would be more than happy to oblige.

The next step would be removing anyone on the gov't who opposes him. Democrats, obviously, and any leaders of non partisan gov't offices that oppose his agenda on constitutional grounds would also be declared enemy combatants.

Then, if a group like antifa causes trouble, declaring marshal law could be justified. And it would just get worse from there. Anything action POTUS wants to take will be declared constitutional by a 7 to 9 Supreme Court. The Republicans who have played defense for him for so long will be too scared to oppose him at this point. (not that they ever had a spine...)

Russia will be made an ally, Europe, the enemy, and then the fun really begins.

 

[MadamSarcastra]

-- 5 New Emotions Created By The Trump Presidency

And this was done during the campaign, I just now saw it... still fun.... Two Men One Trump - The Secret Life of Donald Trump's Reflection

 

[Capstan]

The armed forces pushed back on the transgender bane because they don't want to disrupt group cohesion, which is essential in a successful operation. But remember, the majority of soldiers are conservative, and if POTUS declared Left leaning groups as enemy combatants, they would be more than happy to oblige.

The next step would be removing anyone on the gov't who opposes him. Democrats, obviously, and any leaders of non partisan gov't offices that oppose his agenda on constitutional grounds would also be declared enemy combatants.

Then, if a group like antifa causes trouble, declaring marshal law could be justified. And it would just get worse from there. Anything action POTUS wants to take will be declared constitutional by a 7 to 9 Supreme Court. The Republicans who have played defense for him for so long will be too scared to oppose him at this point. (not that they ever had a spine...)

Russia will be made an ally, Europe, the enemy, and then the fun really begins.

You seem to know all about how to set up a dictatorship. Do you really think the Joint Chiefs would carry out unconstitutional orders to arrest elected members of Congress, because of their political affiliations? Anything's possible I suppose, but I'm inclined to think they'd do just the opposite: arrest the president on legal grounds. An interim military government might be set up, until the Congress could arrange for new elections. If, on the other hand, your scenario was to play out, and 'the fun really begins,' then there really would be civil war, and I daresay Mexico and Canada would join the fight to re-establish the United States. I can see the president forced to retreat into living inside a fortified bunker, like Hitler. He would not be able to show himself in public, for fear of execution or assassination. Or like Hitler, perhaps his own people would try to kill him. Dictatorship for Trump would ultimately be suicidal. On the other hand, I believe he IS suicidal, and wants to take us all with him. I pity him.

I think you overestimate the loyalty of military personnel to the current POTUS. I also disagree with your assessment of why they support transgender troops. They're doing it, not for logistical reasons, but on Constitutional grounds. Just because one man at the 'top' violates his oath to uphold the Constitution, doesn't mean they all will. Not by a long-shot. If they do, they're in for a fight they can't win. I expect military defections would become the norm, and very widespread.

 

[beancounter]

You seem to know all about how to set up a dictatorship.

Yes, I do..so you better watch your step...

Do you really think the Joint Chiefs would carry out unconstitutional orders to arrest elected members of Congress, because of their political affiliations?

In the current political environment, yes I do.

Never underestimate peoples desire for power, and for those who don't have it to follow those who do have the power.

 

[MadamSarcastra]

Can Valerie Plame Get Trump Kicked Off Twitter?

Plame, who ran counterproliferation operations for the CIA, is seeking to raise $1 billion to buy shares in Twitter. Her goal: force the company’s management to rescind President Trump’s use of its platform. -- “We’re raising a thousand dollars a hour,” [sic]

 

[Capstan]

Yes, I do..so you better watch your step...

Ah, so your doomsday scenario is a Hollywood script?

In the current political environment, yes I do.

Never underestimate peoples desire for power, and for those who don't have it to follow those who do have the power.

So the US armed forces will become Trump's personal Gestapo? I'm not sure what you mean by, 'current political environment.' Sounds like a catch-phrase like, ...these are dangerous times.... Can you explain what it is?

I can't imagine the Joint Chiefs swearing fealty to a man who consistently performs hatchet-jobs on his subordinates, and, without the military, the president has no power, only a set of golf clubs...

 

[beancounter]

So the US armed forces will become Trump's personal Gestapo? I'm not sure what you mean by, 'current political environment.' Sounds like a catch-phrase like, ...these are dangerous times.... Can you explain what it is?

I can't imagine the Joint Chiefs swearing fealty to a man who consistently performs hatchet-jobs on his subordinates, and, without the military, the president has no power, only a set of golf clubs...

The current political environment is hyper partisan.
hyperpartisan. Adjective. (not comparable) Extremely partisan; extremely biased in favor of a political party. Sharply polarized by political parties in fierce disagreement with each other.

Your opinion of him doesn't matter in this regard. The only thing that matters is the opinion and political calculus of those in power and /or close to power.

 

[Amy SF]

Alec Baldwin's Trump Impression Is Apparently Even Better Than We Thought | HuffPost

The beginning of the linked video has this guy Erik Singer analyzing Alec Baldwin's impersonation of Donald Trump. It's interesting to watch. But I recommend watching the entire 29 minute video because I think it's really fascinating. He analyzes other actors portraying famous people (and one iconic fictional character; you'll see which one).

 

[Capstan]

The current political environment is hyper partisan.
hyperpartisan. Adjective. (not comparable) Extremely partisan; extremely biased in favor of a political party. Sharply polarized by political parties in fierce disagreement with each other.

Totally confusing. You offer two separate definitions of, 'hyperpartisan,' each one the exact opposite of the other. So which is it, the 1st or the 2nd, and, can a political environment be intelligently defined by a single word? I think not. That's just more catch-phraseology. You'll have to do better than that, if you'd like to be taken seriously.

Your opinion of him doesn't matter in this regard. The only thing that matters is the opinion and political calculus of those in power and /or close to power.

"In this regard?" What regard are you talking about? And who has the power? The Joint Chiefs? Or the president? We are, after all, talking about the use of military force on United States citizens, up to and including elected officials, which also includes the president himself. The Joint Chiefs already have the power. Betraying the Constitution would not gain anything for them, beyond what they already have. If you're suggesting Trump can buy the military (equating money with power [money = power,]) I think you miscalculate the military mind. If they were interested in money, they would never have become soldiers. Upholding the Constitution, which they are sworn to do, would actually solidify their power, so its far more likely that's what they'd do. Power takes many forms, as you should know.