Former White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said that President Trump’s recent meeting with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán shows that he “wants to be a dictator.” “I think you’…
What do you mean “lead me in a particular direction”? Do you mean lead me to vote. Yeah, that’s exactly why I think it’s important. It’s motivates people to vote.
It makes people think that trump wants to be dictator, which is a standard talking point to scare people that are not paying attention. “BUT HE SAID HE WAS GOING TO BE DICTATOR ON THE FIRST DAY!!!” It was joke.
Why are you so sure he doesn’t? He demands completely loyalty, he commonly and regularly uses a lot of the same rhetoric, he praises a lot of dictators, and (most importantly) he literally tried to overturn an election he lost, and fired up his followers so much that they violently attempt to block peaceful transition of power. The fact that someone might look at this and have an opinion that he wants to be a dictator is reasonable, and there is absolutely zero false or misleading about reporting that someone said this.
I dont know for sure he doesnt, but dictators dont typically give up power once they have achieved it.
The problem with the article is that it gives air to a conspiracy theory and the only reason that do that is because it serves the purpose of trying to make trump lose.
but dictators dont typically give up power once they have achieved it.
Well, he tried to hold onto official power, but the system held up against it. Thankfully, I’m not so sure it will again now that he has learned some lessons. Also, he hasn’t actually given up much of his power. He has used his political weight to influence republicans the past 4 years, even getting them to vote against a bill that would give them pretty much Republicans everything they wanted when it comes to immigration and border security, with only having to “give up” more funding to Ukraine. He still has a ton of power.
The problem with the article is that it gives air to a conspiracy theory and the only reason that do that is because it serves the purpose of trying to make trump lose.
Let’s be honest here. You just don’t want them reporting on people sharing their informed opinions about Trump because you are afraid the truth might hurt his chances of winning.
Thats not how dictatorships work, they dont have rules they are forced to follow. In the end all that is happening conspiracy theories that have zero evidence to back them up.
Yeah, we are discussing him wanting to be a dictator. He wants that to happen (hell, he’s even arguing in court that he should be held criminally responsible for any crimes he committed while in office). That’s what we’re trying to stop. We’re trying to stop his desires from coming true.
And there is plenty of evidence. We literally have him on tape trying to pressure a GA election official into “finding” enough votes for him to win. We have him still claiming, after being completely unable to produce any evidence that wasn’t laughed out of court, that the election was stolen from him. We have him inciting his followers into attacking the capital, and him doing nothing about it for an hour and a half, in an attempt to stop the transfer of power. This idea that there is no evidence to support Trump trying to hold onto power despite losing and claiming he is above the law is laughable.
Uhhh, he said that NUMEROUS times before his whole “dictator on the first day”, and even then he walked it back AFTER being reminded that “hey, people aren’t quite ready for that”. How about the fact that his world-leader idols are almost all, to a man, dictators or wannabe dictators? Erdogan, Orban, Kim Jong-Un, Putin - this is a dude who said he most idolizes Mussolini and Andrew Jackson. One of his commonly-voiced complaints when he took office was that he couldn’t just unilaterally command that things be done, and according to aides, he had to constantly be reminded that things were illegal or beyond the scope of his office.
I dunno about you, but this sounds like the hallmarks of a man who would absolutely be a dictator, or close enough to it to not really matter.
Yeah you know what you’re so smart there guy on the Internet that thinks voting for a dude with 91 fucking criminal indictments for president is a good idea.
No other former president has even one criminal indictment.
There’s a reason why politicians typically resign when faced with even a single criminal indictment: they are too distracted by their legal problems to devote the time necessary to do the work of the people.
But somehow this guy who can’t even remember who the current president is will not be distracted by 91 criminal indictments? GTFOH
If it were one state, or one federal case, sure. Here’s the thing: he’s being prosecuted in multiple states, and in multiple federal courts for multiple different things. Generally, if you were trying to make a “kangaroo court” argument like Navalny had, then why go through all this rigmarole? If the government is so out to get Trump, why let him walk free and campaign and host rallies? Why wait 3 years to get the ball rolling on most of these cases? Why even bother coming up with plausible arguments and presenting them before a jury?
Why cant it be more than one state and the federal government?
Why wait 3 years to get the ball rolling on most of these cases?
Yes, exactly! Why wait until the middle of the campaign for president? Because the point of the case is so that he is damaged in running. Many people from jan 6th have already literally being tried, gone to prison, and are already out for a year before they even got a mugshot of trump.
What do you mean “lead me in a particular direction”? Do you mean lead me to vote. Yeah, that’s exactly why I think it’s important. It’s motivates people to vote.
Leads them in the direction of believing propaganda. And then like you say, it mostivates them to vote based on false or misleading information.
How on earth is this false or misleading?
It makes people think that trump wants to be dictator, which is a standard talking point to scare people that are not paying attention. “BUT HE SAID HE WAS GOING TO BE DICTATOR ON THE FIRST DAY!!!” It was joke.
Why are you so sure he doesn’t? He demands completely loyalty, he commonly and regularly uses a lot of the same rhetoric, he praises a lot of dictators, and (most importantly) he literally tried to overturn an election he lost, and fired up his followers so much that they violently attempt to block peaceful transition of power. The fact that someone might look at this and have an opinion that he wants to be a dictator is reasonable, and there is absolutely zero false or misleading about reporting that someone said this.
I dont know for sure he doesnt, but dictators dont typically give up power once they have achieved it.
The problem with the article is that it gives air to a conspiracy theory and the only reason that do that is because it serves the purpose of trying to make trump lose.
Well, he tried to hold onto official power, but the system held up against it. Thankfully, I’m not so sure it will again now that he has learned some lessons. Also, he hasn’t actually given up much of his power. He has used his political weight to influence republicans the past 4 years, even getting them to vote against a bill that would give them pretty much Republicans everything they wanted when it comes to immigration and border security, with only having to “give up” more funding to Ukraine. He still has a ton of power.
Let’s be honest here. You just don’t want them reporting on people sharing their informed opinions about Trump because you are afraid the truth might hurt his chances of winning.
Thats not how dictatorships work, they dont have rules they are forced to follow. In the end all that is happening conspiracy theories that have zero evidence to back them up.
Yeah, we are discussing him wanting to be a dictator. He wants that to happen (hell, he’s even arguing in court that he should be held criminally responsible for any crimes he committed while in office). That’s what we’re trying to stop. We’re trying to stop his desires from coming true.
And there is plenty of evidence. We literally have him on tape trying to pressure a GA election official into “finding” enough votes for him to win. We have him still claiming, after being completely unable to produce any evidence that wasn’t laughed out of court, that the election was stolen from him. We have him inciting his followers into attacking the capital, and him doing nothing about it for an hour and a half, in an attempt to stop the transfer of power. This idea that there is no evidence to support Trump trying to hold onto power despite losing and claiming he is above the law is laughable.
Uhhh, he said that NUMEROUS times before his whole “dictator on the first day”, and even then he walked it back AFTER being reminded that “hey, people aren’t quite ready for that”. How about the fact that his world-leader idols are almost all, to a man, dictators or wannabe dictators? Erdogan, Orban, Kim Jong-Un, Putin - this is a dude who said he most idolizes Mussolini and Andrew Jackson. One of his commonly-voiced complaints when he took office was that he couldn’t just unilaterally command that things be done, and according to aides, he had to constantly be reminded that things were illegal or beyond the scope of his office.
I dunno about you, but this sounds like the hallmarks of a man who would absolutely be a dictator, or close enough to it to not really matter.
Yeah you know what you’re so smart there guy on the Internet that thinks voting for a dude with 91 fucking criminal indictments for president is a good idea.
So the government never is incorrect or goes after people for political reasons?
No other former president has even one criminal indictment.
There’s a reason why politicians typically resign when faced with even a single criminal indictment: they are too distracted by their legal problems to devote the time necessary to do the work of the people.
But somehow this guy who can’t even remember who the current president is will not be distracted by 91 criminal indictments? GTFOH
So the government never is incorrect or goes after people for political reasons?
If it were one state, or one federal case, sure. Here’s the thing: he’s being prosecuted in multiple states, and in multiple federal courts for multiple different things. Generally, if you were trying to make a “kangaroo court” argument like Navalny had, then why go through all this rigmarole? If the government is so out to get Trump, why let him walk free and campaign and host rallies? Why wait 3 years to get the ball rolling on most of these cases? Why even bother coming up with plausible arguments and presenting them before a jury?
Why cant it be more than one state and the federal government?
Yes, exactly! Why wait until the middle of the campaign for president? Because the point of the case is so that he is damaged in running. Many people from jan 6th have already literally being tried, gone to prison, and are already out for a year before they even got a mugshot of trump.
Trump bot everybody.
Leftist NPC everybody.
What game are you the main character in? Mama’s basement wars?