Comment by ytpete
9 days ago
> Attorney General Pam Bondi told tech companies that they could lawfully violate a statute barring American companies from supporting TikTok based on a sweeping claim that President Trump has the constitutional power to set aside laws, newly disclosed documents show.
> Ms. Bondi wrote that Mr. Trump had decided that shutting down TikTok would interfere with his “constitutional duties,” so the law banning the social media app must give way to his “core presidential national security and foreign affairs powers.”
> The letters ... portrayed Mr. Trump as having nullified the legal effects of a statute that Congress passed by large bipartisan majorities in 2024 and that the Supreme Court unanimously upheld.
Of course, all that stuff about vetoes and overriding vetoes in the actual text of the Constitution were just a trap for the previous 250 years of presidents who weren't smart enough to find the secret hidden clause that lets them just arbitrarily decide that certain laws don't apply.
Buckle up, here comes the attempt at a dictatorship. There's a reason our constitution has checks and balances... and no, LEGALLY the president can't just ignore laws. But in this timeline I guess anything goes.
He hasn't abided by any checks nor balances so far. If you're not buckled up long ago, what exactly were you waiting for?
Good luck America, good luck the rest of the world.
2 replies →
The checks and balances come after the Executive branch (or any of the three branches) oversteps. They can't come before. If all three other branches refuse to do anything about it, how is that not the system working as intended?
I don't know why you were down voted this is exactly correct. The system is not working as intended though; it was designed to be adversarial with each branch expected to want to keep its own power. The whole system falls apart when the other branches of government simply abdicate all their power.
3 replies →
We're way past that point. The Trump regime is currently prosecuting a Congressmember on fabricated charges in retaliation for opposing his immigration policy. We've seen the same dynamic on the tariffs; a substantial majority of Congress knows the tariffs are bad and does not support them, but the Trumpists would never permit it to come up for a vote.
LEGALLY:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_immunity_in_the_U...
PRACTICALLY:
Things really are getting scary.
Tech people with bold ideas. Don’t go to America. Don’t build your companies there. Don’t employ Americans. Build it anywhere else.
America ain’t what it used to be. It’s slowly but surely becoming a dictatorship and it’ll be run by the dumbest American to ever live: Donald J Trump.
> the dumbest American to ever live: Donald J Trump
While like many, I can't stand him, I'm not sure if that's an accurate statement. He (or his handlers) have done an amazing job of leveraging the anger and fear of tens of millions. He's built a "tribe" that those pitching all those podcasts and courses a few years ago could only dream about.
11 replies →
I think you mean his cronies and conspirators: Steven Miller, SCOTUS, Russel Voght, et al.
Trump will eventually go away. What's really concerning is the replacement being someone much more intelligent and competent. Some of whom are already running the show behind the scenes.
2 replies →
Also, he’s pretty dumb but the real problem is his absolute and total lack of empathy. What a sociopath.
[dead]
[dead]
[flagged]
If Congress and SCOTUS say to ban TikTok, the President needs to go ahead and ban TikTok.
Gosh, if Ted Cruz thought Obama was abusing his powers, and now Democrats think Trump is, Cruz must be lining up bi-partisan legislation to finally crack down on the ability of the President to abuse powers!
You know full well that this isn't the same thing, which is why you've created a new account so your fascist apologia won't be linked with your main. He's claiming the authority not just to selectively enforce laws, but to rewrite them. (Why do the companies care about this distinction? They're worried, correctly, that many of us will demand the next administration prosecute them for what's now been months of flagrant lawbreaking.)