Do you agree with this image?

[Juxtapose]

Yes, it's obvious.

Nooo the government wouldn't do that!

[goaded]

Remember when a former US president wanted to do that?

"After repeating his claim that the results of the 2020 presidential election were "fraudulent," former U. S. President Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social on Dec. 3, 2022: “A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution.”"

Here's the whole pack of lies: "So, with the revelation of MASSIVE & WIDESPREAD FRAUD & DECEPTION in working closely with Big Tech Companies, the DNC, & the Democrat Party, do you throw the Presidential Election Results of 2020 OUT and declare the RIGHTFUL WINNER, or do you have a NEW ELECTION? A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution. Our great "Founders" did not want, and would not condone, False & Fraudulent Elections!"

And another lying and saying he didn't say what he said: "The Fake News is actually trying to convince the American People that I said I wanted to "terminate" the Constitution. This is simply more DISINFORMATION & LIES, just like RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA, and all of their other HOAXES & SCAMS. What I said was that when there is "MASSIVE & WIDESPREAD FRAUD & DECEPTION," as has been irrefutably proven in the 2020 Presidential Election, steps must be immediately taken to RIGHT THE WRONG. Only FOOLS would disagree with that and accept STOLEN ELECTIONS. MAGA!"

[Sasahara]

So thats a long way to write that you agree with the image asker posted?

[goaded]

@Sasahara That, and that only one president in US history has ever suggested it, and that's Trump.

[Snakeyes7]

That Trump suggested that he agrees with meme? I am confused.

[goaded]

@Snakeyes7 Trump, suspending your rights, based on a lie: "allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution".

[Snakeyes7]

Well then he is not the first. Far from it.

Just to name a few: FDR had internment camps for Japanese citizens during WWII, Lincoln suspended Hebeas Corpus to jail his opposition for the sake of the civil war, Woodrow Wilson signed the Espionage Act limiting freedom of speech during wartime, Bill Clinton signed the lobbying disclosure act of 1995 which enabled the bribery of corporations to do whatever they want including the removal of citizens rights or to work in tandem with the state, like what Pfizer did under Biden.

On top of it all, at least Trump wanted the lockdowns to be over by Easter of 2020 but Congress wasn't having it. Biden only further expanded this corruption with collaborating with Pfizer to vaccinate the population or else you will lose your job and won't be allowed in public places. He also wanted to make a ministry of truth (oh sorry, the Disinformation Governance Board) to stop "misinformation" to which the government itself will be immune to.

[goaded]

@Snakeyes7 Really? They suggested "termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution"? A president, or whoever, doing something arguably unconstitutional, even if that was the case in your examples, is vastly different because It will be adjudicated by the courts UNDER THE CONSTITUTION.

Trump's desire of "termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution" is eliminating the power of Congress and the courts. That's called a dictatorship. That's the sort of thing even 2A nutcases are supposed to be against, isn't it?

[Snakeyes7]

First of all, Trump did not say that he said "A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution." So that was a lie.

Second, the "termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution" just summed up all of the Biden presidency so of course the left is trying to project that was what Trump wanted after all.

Third, we haven't had a constitution respecting president in a century. Presidents violate the constitution to the applause of idiots who don't even realize what is really going on.

[goaded]

@Snakeyes7 Trump posted it on his stupid social media site. Don't pretend he didn't.

[Snakeyes7]

I quoted the post he made where he supposedly made that statement so I am not going to pretend about anything.

[goaded]

@Snakeyes7 What? You quoted the post that he said that I said he said, and that's somehow proof he didn't say it? Are you nuts?

[goaded]

@Snakeyes7 What? You quoted the post that he said *what I said he said, and that's somehow proof he didn't say it? Are you nuts?

[Snakeyes7]

You just took post out of context, like many people who like to be dishonest about Trump do.

[goaded]

@Snakeyes7 Then why didn't you post the full context? He literally said (posted) what we both quoted, the fact that it was in among a pack of lies doesn't make it any better, If you lose an election because of fraud, you prove the fraud (he can't) and you make a better argument next time. There are no circumstances where the constitution should be terminated.

[Snakeyes7]

I did, I wrote the entire sentence where he used "termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution." He was accusing the fraud that he thinks that caused him to lose the election, not that it was his plan.

>He literally said (posted) what we both quoted, the fact that it was in among a pack of lies doesn't make it any better, If you lose an election because of fraud, you prove the fraud (he can't) and you make a better argument next time.

Then why did you take that quote and make it mean something the sentence didn't even say? Even if it is surrounded by lies, you have proven that you are not trustworthy yourself by intentionally misquoting him. I agree that fraud isn't the reason he lost but that is not the point.

>There are no circumstances where the constitution should be terminated.

He never said that was what he wanted, you moron. Did you not read the quote?

[goaded]

@Snakeyes7 "A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution." Means that he thinks that IF there was fraud (there wasn't), it would allow "for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution", does it not?

I really don't see how you can interpret "if condition A then action B" other than that "action B" is permissible in some cases. It's not, when B is "termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution", in any circumstances.

[Snakeyes7]

Yes, he is saying that letting what he thinks is fraud become the norm will eventually lead to the end of elections and the rules, regulations, articles even those found in the constitution will go down with it.

This is by no means saying that this was his goal. I don't know how much more clear I can make this for you.

[goaded]

@Snakeyes7 No, he's not. He's claiming (without evidence) that there was massive fraud, and saying explicitly that that (if it existed, which it doesn't) would allow for "termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution", whcih it wouldn't. The solution to massive election fraud is to find the evidence and let the justice department and the courts deal with it.

[Snakeyes7]

So you admit that he didn't say that he wanted to terminate all rules, regulations and articles even those found in the constitution.

You can think that it wasn't fraud, and I would agree with you because he really lost due to a lot of rule changes, ballot harvesting and the censorship the Hunter laptop story, but he is doing all this fighting because he thinks he lost due to fraud and not addressing it will cause a bunch of issues with election integrity moving forward.

[goaded]

@Snakeyes7 No, that's exactly what he was saying, he was just using lies to justify it.

[Snakeyes7]

Well he is not making this clear in the message you quoted. If anything that was what he is saying he wants to prevent.

I think he's right in the sense that the democrats played dirty in the 2020 election, not with fraud but with last minute rule changes and ballot harvesting. If we don't get to the bottom of that then we will never have free and fair elections again, either both sides will be lying and cheating their asses off or one party will always be the winner and so far, it looks like that party will be the democrats.

[goaded]

@Snakeyes7 Rubbish. The last minute changes were because of a once in a century pandemic and elections in many of the states Biden won, like Georgia, were run by Republicans.

All the doubt about the 2020 election is down to Trump's lies about the election. It's no coincidence that most of the people caught cheating in the election were Republicans who were convinced that Democrats were cheating.

You really think the Democrats managed to fix the presidential election but didn't bother getting even a one vote majority in the Senate? Republicans voted against Trump; that's why he lost.

[Snakeyes7]

Well, yeah. Everyone was shoved into their homes like mini concentration camps and shoved "orange man bad" down their throat.

No wonder we had so many people vote for Biden after that crap despite how the economy boomed in 2019 to the point where Jim Cramer had the audacity to say that those were the best numbers of our lives.

How do you know he was lying? He could be legitimately thinking that he lost due to fraud. To prove that he was lying, you'd have to prove intent to deceive. We haven't proven shit yet.

Take it up with Time Magazine which literally came put and said that there was a shadow campaign of elites that "saved" the election.

[goaded]

@Snakeyes7 "To prove that he was lying, you'd have to prove intent to deceive"

"Trump said Pence was ‘too honest’ over January 6 plot, says ex-vice-president in book"

[Snakeyes7]

What was Pence saying?

[goaded]

@Snakeyes7 "Shortly before the January 6 insurrection, Donald Trump warned Mike Pence he was “too honest” when he hesitated to pursue legalistic attempts to stop certification of Joe Biden’s 2020 election victory and would make Trump’s supporters “hate his guts”, the former vice-president writes in his memoir." www.theguardian.com/.../trump-pence-honest-jan-6-capitol-attack-lincoln-project-book

Guess what? Saying not doing what Trump wants is "too honest" is proof that Trump knew what he was asking was DIShonest.

[Snakeyes7]

That doesn't prove shit. The reason Pence knew that Turmp supporters were going to be mad at him was because he was certifying the results of a fishy looking election before it was proven to be done in good faith.

[goaded]

@Snakeyes7 Exactly how does saying you're "too honest" to do something I want done not prove that what I want done is dishonest?

[Snakeyes7]

The thing that Trump said Pence was too honest about was him saying that he didn't think he has the constitutional authority to certify that Biden won.

[goaded]

@Snakeyes7 Exactly, and that's what Trump wanted him to dishonestly do for him. "intent to deceive".

[Snakeyes7]

I suppose I can accept that evidence that Trump was lying about the whole thing. I still think there were a lot of dirty games afoot in that election though.

[goaded]

@Snakeyes7 Does that justify "termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution."?

[Snakeyes7]

No because all I think he is doing is wasting time, regardless of whether or not that was actually his goal.

[goaded]

@Snakeyes7 I don't believe a word Trump says, except when he's telling you what he's planning to do to other people.

[Snakeyes7]

I'd take his word over everybody else in congress who salivate at the thought of shoving us in pods, forcing bugs down our throats and making us like it.

[Juxtapose]

@Snakeyes7 ^^ ditto. People like to forget that our government is literally evil. The CIA experimented with mind control using LSD.. what do people honestly think would happen if the government obtained mind control?

We would all be enslaved if we did not rebel.

[Snakeyes7]

@Juxtapose
Exactly, even if we are all wrong and they aren't actually taking our freedoms away for some nebulous reason that will ultimately benefit the elites in the end, vigilance in protection of our freedoms must always be maintained because the violation of these freedoms for ANY reason is a sign that we are dealing with tyrants.

[Lliam]

Of course. It's a tried and true tactic.

William Randolph Hurst did it to criminalize hemp for his own financial benefit. Appealing to racism is how he pulled it off.

Nixon started the war on drugs so that he could use it to crack down on civil rights and anti-war activists.

911. "In September 2000, the Wolfowitz vision of 1992 saw the light of day again in the form of a report by the PNAC called Rebuilding America’s Defenses, Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century. This 'process of transformation … is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor' ”.
That Operation Northwoods-like event was pulled off in 2001 and the Patriot Act, which had been written years before, was immediately pushed through congress to supposedly address "terrorism".

False flag mass shootings are used to push "gun control" measures.

Hate speech and "fake news" are now used to justify censorship.

The pandemic narrative was perfected in 2020. The list of civil rights violations resulting from that are innumerable.

The same pandemic playbook is now being applied to the fake "climate change" emergency.

[Lliam]

Thanks for the MHO, buddy.

[madhatters4]

this provision has been in law for over a century. how many times has it been implemented?

so no, having the provision clearly based on history has not led to abuse of the provision

[Juxtapose]

Did you completely ignore WW2, 9/11, Covid 19 and so on?

Jfc

[Juxtapose]

There are people alive today who can tell you about the Japanese put in internment camps.

The emergency of 9/11 was used to justify the Patriot Act which is entirely unconstitutional.

Almost everything about covid-19 was unconstitutional and a big money grab for big pharma.

[madhatters4]

the patriot act was voted into law by congress. you may not like it but it's not unconstitutional otherwise it would be gone by now. they didn't declare an emergency like the public health emergency. you are talking about two different matters.

ww2. not sure what you are talking about in regards to it. it was declared war. there was a draft. it followed established law not some declaration of an emergency

not sure what you are talking about with japanese internment camps. it came down as an executive order. an executive order has the effect of law temporarily until it has to be voted on by congress.

you are conflating issues here. but the fact is all of these actions were done legally via the established laws of the constitution, constitutional amendments and so forth. so to argue these things would be to argue that we need to revise American law but there was literally nothing unconstitutional about the way these things were enacted. we may not like them but they were legal and constitutional. if not a lawyer would've easily presented this in court and had it overturned.

you can be against the implementation of all the above scenarios or actions taken but you are simply wrong in challenging the legality of the actions.

[Juxtapose]

Just because something is voted in by Congress it does not mean it is constitutional.. at all. Congress is a den of thieves that is almost entirely influenced by narcissistic, sociopathic CEOs who want to utterly destroy the west and profit off of it while doing it.

The Japanese were stripped of their rights in America.. read a history book. That shit was not constitutional. I don't care if it was an executive order, citizens have certain unalienable rights. Your right to free speech for example does not disappear during wartime.

You think that just because the system of governments allows something that means it is right. Care to explain why whistleblowers are jailed?

[Juxtapose]

Also civil asset forfeiture exists and that is unconstitutional. Unreasonable search and seizure, etc.

[Juxtapose]

Abdulrahman Anwar al-Aulaqi was also unconstitutionally killed by Obama.

Just because of president or congress is capable of doing something doesn't mean it's constitutional. There's such a thing as disregarding the law or intentionally misinterpreting it.

[madhatters4]

if a law is voted on by congress and signed into law by the president it is has followed process. if it is unconstitutional then a legal challenge can be made.

why are whistleblowers jailed? that is an entirely different subject. not addressing this

the reality is all the matters you provided followed legal process. still not sure what you're issue with ww2 was but you provided in the 250 year history of america 3 issues (covid, 9/11 and japanese internment... funny you ignored the largest stripping of human rights slavery and native American genocide but whatever) ... you can disagree with the actions. i don't necessarily disagree. but saying they were illegal or unconstitutional are simply not true

[Juxtapose]

Yeah, I also didn't mention women's rights or how black people experimented on with syphilis. Your point?

No, you can intentionally misinterpret the law and then have a bunch of your cronies help you carry out that misinterpretation. The founding fathers were very wary of tyranny and encouraged the citizenry to be hypervigilant and utilize the Second Amendment if necessary.

Go ahead and tell me civil asset forfeiture is constitutional.

[Juxtapose]

*were experimented on with syphilis

Also there is the CIA which literally experimented with mind control using LSD and if they had succeeded they would have enslaved the citizenry by now.

[RealMarek]

“ Also there is the CIA which literally experimented with mind control using LSD”

@Juxtapose They followed legal, or at least regulatory process. Our judicial system is perfect and not biased toward the elites or major corporations in any way, so if it was unconstitutional it would have been overturned by now. /sarcasm off/

[Juxtapose]

@RealMarek ^^^ exactly man.

[GoodGuyBreakingBad]

Yes, it's obvious

[Joshydavid25]

Absolutely, I just watched a video of a climate scientist explaining this same thing with the whole global warming scare.. They use it as an emergency to get more funding and more power through the government, and the government gets more power..

[Billlewis]

Well said, Sir.

[lightbulb27]

I said no. But I think the answer is... the precident is there, the powers are shifted, and if there are such emergencies, they will use it.

Look at the "Presidental" directives. They will always stretch the limits of the laws and they can do what they want and have it challenged in court later.

[Billlewis]

Of course that's true.

[FreyaRed]

This is how it works

[DryGermanGuy]

The paranoia is strong in that one.

[Juxtapose]

lol you don't understand power at all you're so naive.

People in positions of power are cunning and Machiavellian. The CIA literally experimented with LSD to try to obtain mind control. What do you think they would have done with that capability if they were successful?

What about how government used the "red scare" to take away people's rights because of communism fears.

[DryGermanGuy]

I am German, so I am doing quite alright in the world of power. You are just an unstable paranoid bobble head, with your silly list. Those are just snippets of history and most had no impact on the general public at all.

[Juxtapose]

You live in a country where they make you your bitch and you don't have freedom.

Go ahead and try to openly deny the Holocaust in public. You don't have free speech.

[DryGermanGuy]

Germany: 58.000 prisoners. United States: 2.500.000 prisoners. End of discussion.

[Juxtapose]

That literally has nothing to do with free speech and if you don't commit crimes you won't end up in prison.

Guess how much trouble I have had with the police?

[Juxtapose]

I can say things in public you can't dream of.

[DryGermanGuy]

So you can say that "Dominion Voting Systems rigged the election for Joe Biden", like the FOX News moderators did? Or you can say that the Sandy Hook school shooting was "a false flag operation by paid actors", like Alex Jones did? Wow, what great freedom.
Go ahead and deny the Holocaust, you gigantic imbecile and see where it gets you. Here is how it's worked out for your comrade Nick Fuentes: en.wikipedia.org/.../Nick_Fuentes
And by the way, incarceration rates are an excellent metric to determine the freedom in a country. So if one country has an incarceration rate ten times that of another country, that tells us a lot. And by us, I mean not you.

[OddBeMe]

Yes, like the republican Patriot Act.

[Juxtapose]

Fuck that Bush bullshit I hate that war pig almost as much as Biden.

[OddBeMe]

Almost. Funny.

[TheUniqueOne96]

Sounds about right.

[DJB72]

Power corrupts...

[Drewtate]

Yes.

[Exterminatore]

Absolutely.

[Sasahara]

Yup.