To what end?

[berg80]

Uh. He raised the spending and cut the revenue stream. Its that simple. All the cuts to the poor and consumer and health protections he sunk into spending for big defense companies and corporate largess.

Well put.

 

[berg80]

False Trump cuts the power of government by tax cuts and regulation cuts. Democrats expand the power of government and they were the threat against free speech

In the two months since his inauguration, the government has taken the position in ongoing litigation that Trump’s actions prevail over statutes like the Civil Service Reform Act, the Impoundment Control Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act. Meanwhile, Trump has also openly ignored the Supreme Court’s decision in Humphrey’s Executor and a district court order limiting the deportation of individuals from Venezuela.

 

[berg80]

How? Please explain what he has done that is fascist? Arresting illegals?

Personally, I try not to use the word fascist because it tends to evoke such a visceral reaction. When you say "arresting illegals" it leaves out the part including the arrest and or harassment of US citizens profiled as illegal immigrants. And of course the denial of constitutional rights of the people deported without due process. Have you already shoved that stuff down the memory hole?

 

[Hafar1014]

In the two months since his inauguration, the government has taken the position in ongoing litigation that Trump’s actions prevail over statutes like the Civil Service Reform Act, the Impoundment Control Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act. Meanwhile, Trump has also openly ignored the Supreme Court’s decision in Humphrey’s Executor and a district court order limiting the deportation of individuals from Venezuela.

Trump has won most of the lawsuits against him

 

[Hafar1014]

Personally, I try not to use the word fascist because it tends to evoke such a visceral reaction. When you say "arresting illegals" it leaves out the part including the arrest and or harassment of US citizens profiled as illegal immigrants. And of course the denial of constitutional rights of the people deported without due process. Have you already shoved that stuff down the memory hole?

Trump is a genius he has put democrats in the position of defending Illegal criminals.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The claim was basically "Trump cant be a fascist he is actually reducing his power by shrinking the government". That argument is not supported by the facts - government is not shrinking. He's not reducing it. Shit, he just sent troops into the streets of California and Washington DC. That's not a smaller government.

Proving once again, that democrats support criminals and their right to victimize.

 

[Lesh]

No he isn't.

He’s expanding it and concentrating it… in himself

How can you not see that??

 

[Hafar1014]

Well put.

Tariffs are on track to bring in 1 trillion a year enough to pay off the defcit in 2 years

He’s expanding it and concentrating it… in himself

How can you not see that??

Trump cuts taxes regulations and thousands of government workers. Thats less government

 

[berg80]

Trump has won most of the lawsuits against him

What a typical, wildly inaccurate comment coming from someone detached from reality.

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/projects-series/trials-of-the-trump-administration/tracking-trump-administration-litigation

 

[berg80]

He’s expanding it and concentrating it… in himself

How can you not see that??

Cult.

 

[citygator]

Riiiiiiiiiiight

Because he has the power to unilaterally decide spending

Riiiiiiiiight

What a powerless Fascist dictator

Again. I was responding to the claim that Trump is making the government smaller so he cant be a fascist. It’s just not a good argument. Try a different angle.

 

[Independent thinker]

The Meaning of Article II and 'Executive Power' to Trump​

President Trump has cited Article II to justify everything from deportations to firing civil servants—these assertions present a challenge to constitutional order.

During his first term, President Trump proclaimed, “I have an Article II, where I have the right to do whatever I want as president. But I don’t even talk about that.” In his second term, Trump has talked about Article II a lot. In doing so, he has asserted that he has the authority to violate statutes passed by Congress and orders and precedents of the courts.

In the two months since his inauguration, the government has taken the position in ongoing litigation that Trump’s actions prevail over statutes like the Civil Service Reform Act, the Impoundment Control Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act. Meanwhile, Trump has also openly ignored the Supreme Court’s decision in Humphrey’s Executor and a district court order limiting the deportation of individuals from Venezuela.

Aggregating the administration’s assertions about Article II reveals the challenge that Trump’s vision presents to constitutional order. He has asserted that Article II contains implied powers to remove all subordinates within the executive branch, control spending, punish national security threats, deport immigrants without due process, and ignore judicial orders related to foreign affairs. Many of these actions conflict directly with the express or implied will of Congress and the Supreme Court. At times, the president may have a colorable argument that a given statute does not apply to the current situation or that a given case recognizes an exception. The continual invocation of Article II in the face of interbranch conflict, however, suggests that the president believes Article II takes precedence over Article I and Article III.

The Meaning of Article II and 'Executive Power' to Trump

President Trump has cited Article II to justify everything from deportations to firing civil servants—these assertions present a challenge to constitutional order.

www.lawfaremedia.org

The question here is not whether trump is asserting he has expansive power over the entirety of the government (and even areas outside of it) in ways no other prez in history ever has. That is demonstrably, unequivocally, true. The question is also not whether the unprecedented power grab is legally defensible. The question, as posed in the thread title, is "to what end?"

Is his lust for power and complete control a natural extension of his malignant narcissism? Malignant narcissism is a severe personality construct, not officially recognized in the DSM-5, that combines traits of narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) with antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) and paranoia. It is characterized by an inflated sense of self-importance, a need for admiration, a lack of empathy, and a tendency towards aggression, manipulation, and sadism. Malignant narcissists may also exhibit paranoia, feeling threatened or persecuted, and engage in manipulative or abusive behavior without remorse.

Or is there an even more nefarious design afoot. Is this a conscious attempt to change the nature of governance in the US? Does he have innate authoritarian impulses he can not suppress, surrounding himself with enablers who never question those impulses? Or has the end game always been to transform the nation in to an autocracy?

So, you are against democracy and the Constitution?

 

[Mac1958]

He’s expanding it and concentrating it… in himself

How can you not see that??

Cult.

I do wonder what that is. How they can rationalize and dismiss actions that are so damn clear.

I don't think it's monolithic. Some just delude themselves, some will just consciously say anything to get what they (think they) want. And maybe some just aren't intelligent enough to tie so many historical examples to modern day events.

 

[Paradoxical#1]

Uh. He raised the spending and cut the revenue stream. Its that simple. All the cuts to the poor and consumer and health protections he sunk into spending for big defense companies and corporate largess.

What cuts? You mean making people work to get free health care? What consumer health protections that have hurt you? Corporate largess? What do you mean by that?

 

[Paradoxical#1]

Personally, I try not to use the word fascist because it tends to evoke such a visceral reaction. When you say "arresting illegals" it leaves out the part including the arrest and or harassment of US citizens profiled as illegal immigrants. And of course the denial of constitutional rights of the people deported without due process. Have you already shoved that stuff down the memory hole?

I'm tired of this nonsense that they are targeting hard workers who have been here for years. If a few of those were arrested, it was a mistake. He is getting rid of MS-13, Tren and criminals first.

Using that argument is a smokescreen. What? He's supposed give 15 million illegals imported by Commyla a trial?

 

[berg80]

So, you are against democracy and the Constitution?

"Is this a conscious attempt to change the nature of governance in the US? Does he have innate authoritarian impulses he can not suppress, surrounding himself with enablers who never question those impulses? Or has the end game always been to transform the nation in to an autocracy?"

Too much for you to handle?

 

[22lcidw]

The claim was basically "Trump cant be a fascist he is actually reducing his power by shrinking the government". That argument is not supported by the facts - government is not shrinking. He's not reducing it. Shit, he just sent troops into the streets of California and Washington DC. That's not a smaller government.

A definition of crazy is people that are movers and shakers threatening to move to other nations or actually do it when Republicans come to power. Our nation is 3 million square miles. And there are some parts people will not or do not enter. And there are many parts where they are safe. Unfortunately, citizens listen to these crazy people and vote for their views of the world.

 

[berg80]

He's supposed give 15 million illegals imported by Commyla a trial?

He's suppose to respect the constitutional rights of all who possess them. Got a problem with that?

 

[80zephyr]

The claim was basically "Trump cant be a fascist he is actually reducing his power by shrinking the government". That argument is not supported by the facts - government is not shrinking. He's not reducing it. Shit, he just sent troops into the streets of California and Washington DC. That's not a smaller government.

There are many ways to reduce the size of government.

 

[80zephyr]

He's suppose to respect the constitutional rights of all who possess them. Got a problem with that?

Yes. The use of "due process" is when jailing or fining someone. Simply sending them home does not inhibit their constitutional rights.