We are living in a Dictatorship

Chumpsky

All-American
Oct 19, 2025
3,360
5,167
113
There is no congress, and the Supreme Court is letting Trump violate the constitution on a daily basis.

Trump is now openly floating the idea of invoking the Insurrection Act and canceling the midterms.

If you know anything about history (maga this excludes you), you know you can't vote your way out of dictatorship.

Trump will have to be deposed.
 

Dadar

All-Conference
Dec 21, 2003
4,416
3,325
113
There is no congress, and the Supreme Court is letting Trump violate the constitution on a daily basis.

Trump is now openly floating the idea of invoking the Insurrection Act and canceling the midterms.

If you know anything about history (maga this excludes you), you know you can't vote your way out of dictatorship.

Trump will have to be deposed.
I believe he is juiced up by handlers like Stephen Miller
 

Chumpsky

All-American
Oct 19, 2025
3,360
5,167
113
He definitely is. Miller is the architect of mass deportations. They're all going to jail if they don't stay in power indefinitely. Either jail, exile, or a cooling board.

They're playing for keeps this time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fcctiger12

baltimorened

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
5,122
3,726
113
There is no congress, and the Supreme Court is letting Trump violate the constitution on a daily basis.

Trump is now openly floating the idea of invoking the Insurrection Act and canceling the midterms.

If you know anything about history (maga this excludes you), you know you can't vote your way out of dictatorship.

Trump will have to be deposed.
not sure how you're viewing the term deposed,

de·pose
/dəˈpōz/

verb
past tense: deposed; past participle: deposed
  1. 1.
    remove from office suddenly and forcefully.
    "he had been deposed by a military coup"

    Similar:
    overthrow

    overturn

    topple

but isn't that sort of counter to democracy?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerRagRob
Jan 20, 2019
719
994
93
Trump has no intention of allowing a fair election. He is an absolute idiot but he knows that his administration has done nothing but cause harm and that his approval ratings are beyond terrible
 
  • Haha
Reactions: JohnHughsPartner

Joe Cobb

Heisman
Nov 6, 2008
7,406
26,562
113
The fact that you can post this on a public forum proves that your post... is in fact... inaccurate.
salutes jack black GIF
 

baltimorened

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
5,122
3,726
113
to suggest we're not seeing signs of incremental creep in that direction is delusional.




to answer your question, I guess we first have to ask if Trump has taken any actions outside the bounds of his granted authority..and if there are some why has Congress or the courts not reeled him in? And if he has, in fact been reeled in and followed the direction of Congress and the courts, then how is that dictatorial?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerRagRob

tboonpickens

Heisman
Sep 19, 2001
19,897
35,178
113
no answers?
no answers about Trump doing unconstitutional things? do you really want me to explain to you why Grindr Mike Johnson does Lord Trump's bidding regardless of constitutional merit? have you been in a coma the last decade?

on the off chance that you're just a sub-50 IQ person looking for help, here's a starter kit. It hasn't been updated since June 2025, tho. it doesn't include things like standing in violation of the law he was forced to sign finally that was supposed to trigger the full release of the Epstein Files which his administration has promptly ignored...

(broken into two posts to fit character limit)

Trump’s catalog of constitutional crimes: Long and getting longer​

June 25, 2025
WASHINGTON—Donald Trump just bombed Iran. That’s unconstitutional, Al Green notes. Green, the Democratic congressman from Houston, wants to impeach Trump for the bombing. Trump violated the Constitution’s War Powers clause, which reserves to Congress the power to declare war, the lawmaker explains.

Green may be alone in calling for the impeachment of the right-wing Republican president on the vital issue of war and peace. However, when it comes to Trump’s other constitutional crimes, statements from other lawmakers, the Brennan Center for Law and Justice, the Center for American Progress, and others reflect how the list of crimes gets longer by the day.

Just Trump’s violations of the Constitution’s First Amendment alone, ranging from Trump’s ICE agents’ kidnapping of peaceful protesters and observers to threats against lawmakers for speaking their minds, would fill a book. They practically do at the progressive think tank, the Center for American Progress.

Trump even broke the Constitution when he broke labor law by declaring his Attorney General, Pam Bondi, could unilaterally revoke worker rights, with no appeal, says AFL-CIO General Counsel Jody Calemine.

“When a president can say what an unfair labor practice is, everybody should be very afraid” because he can apply that same rule everywhere, Calemine told reporters. “He says he is the law. It’s a power grab.”

“Do we want to be on record having opposed Donald Trump’s tyranny and fascist power grabs? Or to lie on the couch and have it be too late to act?” asks Rachel O’Leary Carmona, executive director of the Women’s March.

No one should be surprised by the breadth of Trump’s constitutional violations. He is, after all, the president who was impeached for ordering, aiding, and abetting the Trumpite invasion, insurrection, and coup d’etat attempt at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. And that was the second time the U.S. House impeached Trump, a record.

Its lawyers and their supporters, including a wide range of unions, recognized even then that Trump was a threat to the Constitution and the entire democratic system of government.

So it seems fair to say Trump has broken our basic charter of rights, liberties, and responsibilities—and the separation of powers in our government over and over and over again—more than any other president.

“In a recent interview, President Trump responded to a question as to whether he had to uphold the Constitution with, ‘I don’t know,’” wrote CAP’s senior director for government affairs, Peter Gordon.

“In the more than 150 executive orders” since he returned to the White House on January 20, the president “frequently asserts he is acting under authority granted him by Article II of the Constitution. In fact, the Constitution is intended to limit the powers of the presidency, not provide nearly limitless authority as President Trump is contending.”

“The Constitution does not give a president the power to violate the Constitution, create or change congressional statutes, or override U.S. Supreme Court decisions—no matter what the EOs say.”

Constitutional violations compiled
Specific constitutional violations compiled by CAP, lawmakers, the Democratic Attorneys General Association, and Democracy Forward include, but are not limited to:
  • Challenging the right of anyone of color to be a U.S. citizen, despite the clear, blunt language of the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment. It says “all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the states wherein their reside.”
Trump lost a “birthright citizenship” challenge in the lower courts. His administration appealed it to the Supreme Court and a ruling is expected by late June or early July.
  • Using the Alien Enemies Act of 1789 to have ICE agents summarily remove and deport people—alleged Venezuelan gang members—without due process of law, as the Constitution’s 5th Amendment guarantees.
Trump has flown some immigrants back to Venezuela, others to different locations in Latin America and some to civil war-torn South Sudan in Africa. A Trump-named U.S. District Judge in South Texas ruled against one AEA removal Trump ordered. The Ronald Reagan-named judge says that law can only be invoked in times of “declared war or invasion or predatory incursion.”
“An invasion is a military affair, not one of immigration,” the jurist added.
  • Millions of privacy violations, all to both gather information on individual Americans while also opening them up to the private greed of former Trump partner Elon Musk, then head of Trump-named “Department of Government Efficiency” teams.
DOGE computer nerds seized sensitive confidential financial information about individuals from the IRS, medical information from the Department of Health and Human Services, and data about labor law cases from the Labor Department, among others.

That’s unconstitutional. The 4th Amendment specifies a right to privacy: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated” except when there’s “probable cause” backed by sworn search warrants. DOGE, of course, had neither.
  • Punishing political enemies, including law firms and universities. Trump punished the law firms for defending his opponents by restricting their rights to practice in front of the government and threatening to cut off their clients.
Most firms caved. Kirkland & Ellis, a Chicago-based firm that provided partner Albert Jenner, a key House Judiciary Committee counsel during Richard Nixon’s impeachment, didn’t cave. It beat Trump., Nixon, too, wanted to use the government “to screw our political enemies,” in the words of top aides.
  • Executive orders yanking business from the law firms and threatening clients also “appear to be unconstitutional and in violation of multiple sections of the Bill of Rights,” CAP said.
One federal judge called such “using the powers of the federal government to target lawyers for their representation of clients and avowed progressive employment policies in an overt attempt to suppress and punish certain viewpoints contrary to the Constitution.” That violated the constitutional protections for freedom of speech, equal protection of the laws, due process, and the right to counsel.
  • Trump also pursues vendettas against leading universities, which he alleges aren’t cracking down on—and violating the free speech rights of—peaceful pro-Palestinian protesters. His actions feature yanking all the federal research grants they get, and, in Harvard’s case, actually trying to ban it from accepting foreign students. Harvard hasn’t caved—yet. Columbia has.
  • Breaking the Constitution’s “speech and debate clause” protecting lawmakers from being sued for whatever they say in Congress. Ed Martin, Trump’s controversial interim U.S. Attorney for D.C. “sent letters to Democratic members of Congress and senators purporting to investigate their public political speech as criminal threats.” Martin became too hot for even Trump to handle. He asked Trump to withdraw his nomination.
  • In another constitutional violation Martin warned top law schools “to end diversity, equity, and inclusion programs or their graduates would be blacklisted from Justice Department jobs.”
Trump cites two Supreme Court rulings, overturning affirmative action in college admissions at Harvard and the University of North Carolina, as justification for banning DEI programs government-wide, including in firms and universities that receive federal grants and money.

Trump’s Education Department—or what’s left of it—sent word to school districts nationwide to shut their DEI programs or face the loss of federal Title I student aid to schools with high shares of poor kids.
 

tboonpickens

Heisman
Sep 19, 2001
19,897
35,178
113
Prohibits free speech restrictions
“The First Amendment prohibits the government from mandating a speech code and prohibiting free association for the public,” one progressive legal analysis says. “The 5th Amendment prohibits the government from punishing people and privately held organizations without due process of law.”
  • Using tariffs as a bargaining bludgeon against enemies and allies alike, while claiming, with little evidence, that his high tariffs, especially against China, will bring factory jobs back to the U.S. Several unions agree with him. The AFL-CIO is more dubious, saying high tariffs can be used to help counter—and stop-foreign trade cheating. The Manhattan-based U.S. Court of International Trade had no doubt at all. The Constitution gives Congress, not the president, “the power to lay and collect tariffs,” it declared—in a lawsuit brought by right-wingers: The Koch Brothers and the Federalist Society.
  • Withholding money Congress appropriated. Nixon tried this, too, and Congress struck back in 1973 with the anti-Impoundment Act. Trump’s doing it now, say the top Democrats on congressional appropriations committees, which actually help dole out federal funds.
“The Trump Administration is breaking the law and undermining the Constitution every day by illegally stealing funds for the programs that help American families and businesses, firing career civil servants without cause, and dismantling agencies created by acts of Congress,” says one of the two, Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn.
“If presidents can decide when to spend and not spend all on their own, then Congress becomes little more than an advisory body to a monarch. Certainly that’s what the framers thought,” the Brennan Center for Law and Justice adds.
  • “The Trump-appointed acting director of the Office of Management and Budget ordered a government-wide impoundment of trillions of dollars that Congress,” the Brennan Center adds. That would end, OMB said, “after it reviewed whether agency activities implicate policies the president opposes, specifically citing ‘DEI, woke gender ideology, and the green new deal.’ It created immediate chaos” and lower court wins against Trump.
“In the words of one court, the budget office’s order ‘fundamentally undermines the distinct constitutional roles of each branch of our government,” especially Congress’s power of the purse,” the Brennan Center said.

Whether Congress will halt Trump’s transgressions is dubious. The history of impeachments shows a giant reluctance to use that ultimate constitutional weapon to deter executive excesses. The GOP-run House approved Trump’s “reconciliation” bill with budget cuts and his “recessions” bill clawing money back, including funds DOGE unconstitutionally grabbed. That leaves curbing Trump up to the courts.

And while U.S. District Court and Appeals Court judges have often taken on Trump, the Supreme Court, with its right-wing Republican majority—including three of that six-justice bloc whom he named—has often rolled over for him, most recently on June 20.

That’s when the majority gave the green light to his latest executive fiat: Shipping a planeload of undocumented people whom Trump’s ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) agents had grabbed off the streets, dragged out of cars and nabbed at courthouses to a war-torn nation most of the migrants had never even heard of, South Sudan.

It’s up to the High Court’s nine justices to step in and stop Trump, but those who cite his constitutional crimes are not sure it will. CAP’s Gordon says the court is using technical rulings, such as upholding a lower court order to “facilitate the return” of Smart-TD member Kilmer Garcia to the U.S. from a notorious Salvadoran prison, to sidestep the real issue.

“All this poses a big test for the Supreme Court,” the Brennan Center adds. “The omens are not all good. Less than a year ago, the supermajority issued one of history’s worst rulings, granting presidents vast criminal immunity when they claim their actions are ‘official.’

‘Now these same justices will have to parse Trump’s bid to seize personal control of the government. They seem to be squirming to avoid a direct conflict.”
Concludes CAP’s Gordon: “When a president acts beyond the scope of his constitutional powers, members of his administration and the other branches of government must step in to stop him, lest the nation face not just a constitutional crisis but also the dismantling of American democracy.”
 

tboonpickens

Heisman
Sep 19, 2001
19,897
35,178
113
educate yourself, ned....

Taking Action Against Presidential Abuses of Power​

December 23, 2025

The American system of representative self-government is being tested in ways we haven’t seen in generations, if ever. President Donald Trump’s second term has brought a wave of actions that challenge the very principles that system is built on.
From attempting to take control of federal elections to threatening peaceful protestors and bypassing Congress' power of the purse, Trump’s agenda seems clear: dismantle the checks and balances that protect our freedoms and replace the rule of law with the rule of one. This is the essence of what is known today as “authoritarianism.”
These actions, many of which are unconstitutional or otherwise illegal, threaten the rights that define us as Americans: the freedom to speak out, to choose our own leaders, to protest without fear and to live under laws that apply equally to everyone.
Attempts To Exercise Unchecked Power Are Eroding Our Democracy’s Safeguards
President Trump’s second term has been marked by a systematic effort to consolidate power and limit free expression. This administration has:
  • Ignored court orders and attempted to undermine the judiciary’s power to hold the executive branch accountable.
  • Issued unconstitutional executive orders that threaten the freedom to vote and our nation’s guarantee of birthright citizenship.
  • Intimidated citizens who are critical of the president’s agenda.
  • Attempted to assert control over our elections that is reserved for the states and Congress.
  • Dismantled ethics rules and fired watchdogs within the executive branch.
  • Threatened the sovereignty of states and cities by deploying federal agents and the National Guard to Los Angeles and Washington, D.C.
  • Begun an unprecedented effort to amass private data about Americans, often in violation of law.
  • Attempted to seize control of independent agencies that don’t fall under the authority of the executive branch; and more.
These actions are not isolated incidents — they are part of a broader campaign to erode democratic norms and concentrate power within the presidency. At the same time, Congress has abandoned its role as a necessary check on executive overreach, allowing the president to consolidate power with no limitation at the expense of our constitutional order.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rastafarian

tboonpickens

Heisman
Sep 19, 2001
19,897
35,178
113
wake up ned, wake up....

Can President Trump Do That?​

December 1, 2025

President Donald Trump’s second term has been characterized by relentlessly testing (and often overriding) the legal and constitutional limits of presidential authority. A mountain of legally dubious executive orders, a number of ethically questionable actions, and countless examples of executive overreach have blurred the line on where presidential power starts and ends.

Many of these actions have left the American people wondering: Can President Trump do that?

Quite often, the answer to that question is no.

Campaign Legal Center has created a running list of notable actions taken by President Trump that he does not, in fact, have the authority to take.

Can Trump and his administration build a national citizenship database?

As part of the administration’s unlawful efforts to control elections, the U.S.
Department of Justice (DOJ) and U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have been attempting to retrieve sensitive voter data for unclear and potentially harmful purposes.

This data collection violates voters’ privacy and could even discourage voters from participating in the democratic process altogether.

The DOJ sued several states that refused to hand over this sensitive voter data, and Campaign Legal Center took legal action to protect voters in a number of these states, including Maine, Michigan and New York. We also filed an amicus brief in the League of Women Voters v. DHS to fight back against any attempts by the DHS to use voter data to improperly verify citizenship.

In our brief, CLC highlights the separation-of-powers concerns implicated by DHS’s intervention in verifying voter eligibility.

This attempt to consolidate private and sensitive data by DHS is part of a larger effort to unconstitutionally shift election administration functions to the executive branch.
Read more about this issue.

Can Trump change federal election rules?

On March 25, 2025, Trump signed an executive order claiming to direct several federal agencies to change the rules for federal elections and implement unnecessary barriers to registering to vote.

Congress — not the president — has the power to pass laws that set national voting standards and override state laws governing federal elections. The Constitution does not give the president any role in setting election rules. This executive order contains a host of illegal and unconstitutional demands. That’s why Campaign Legal Center took Trump to court on this matter and won.

Trump attempted to change the federal voter registration form by imposing burdensome documentation requirements. After issuing a temporary pause in our favor in April 2025, the court ruled in November 2025 that the president has no constitutional authority to dictate the contents of the federal voter registration form, and it permanently struck down his unlawful attempt to do so, issuing a final judgment against the government.

Campaign Legal Center continues to litigate other unlawful provisions of this executive order, including the president’s attempt to override state mail ballot receipt deadlines and to make it more difficult for overseas and uniformed voters to use the federal post card application form to register and request absentee ballots.
Read more about this issue.

Can Trump take control of independent agencies?

On February 18, 2025, Trump signed an executive order purporting to give the president veto power over decisions made at independent agencies like the Federal Election Commission (FEC).

Congress designed these agencies to be independent from the executive office, and attempting to place their decision-making underneath presidential authority is illegal. Campaign Legal Center filed a legal brief in the Democratic National Committee’s lawsuit against the Trump administration challenging the constitutionality of this order.
Read more about this issue.

Can Trump get rid of ethics enforcement?

On January 24, 2025, Trump announced the immediate firing of at least 17 inspectors general (IGs) across the federal government.
IGs are ethics enforcers who conduct independent investigations to ensure that public officials are not engaging in unethical or corrupt behavior at the expense of taxpayer funds and the public good. IG investigations in Trump’s first term uncovered at least eight instances of corruption among Cabinet members.

These immediate firings are illegal — the president can only remove IGs after providing a 30-day notice to Congress.
Read more about this issue.

Can Trump end birthright citizenship?

On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued an executive order attempting to end birthright citizenship. The order would apply to children born to people who are in the country without authorization or who hold work, student or tourist visas.
But the 14th Amendment and more than a century of Supreme Court precedent are clear: Individuals born in the United States are citizens — no matter who their parents are.

Birthright citizenship is the law of the land and cannot be changed by any politician. That’s why Campaign Legal Center submitted a brief on behalf of Secure Families Initiative in State of Washington et al. v. Trump to urge the court to block Trump’s unconstitutional attempt to end birthright citizenship.
Read more about this issue.
This post was last updated on Dec. 1, 2025.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rastafarian

baltimorened

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
5,122
3,726
113
Prohibits free speech restrictions
“The First Amendment prohibits the government from mandating a speech code and prohibiting free association for the public,” one progressive legal analysis says. “The 5th Amendment prohibits the government from punishing people and privately held organizations without due process of law.”
  • Using tariffs as a bargaining bludgeon against enemies and allies alike, while claiming, with little evidence, that his high tariffs, especially against China, will bring factory jobs back to the U.S. Several unions agree with him. The AFL-CIO is more dubious, saying high tariffs can be used to help counter—and stop-foreign trade cheating. The Manhattan-based U.S. Court of International Trade had no doubt at all. The Constitution gives Congress, not the president, “the power to lay and collect tariffs,” it declared—in a lawsuit brought by right-wingers: The Koch Brothers and the Federalist Society.
  • Withholding money Congress appropriated. Nixon tried this, too, and Congress struck back in 1973 with the anti-Impoundment Act. Trump’s doing it now, say the top Democrats on congressional appropriations committees, which actually help dole out federal funds.
“The Trump Administration is breaking the law and undermining the Constitution every day by illegally stealing funds for the programs that help American families and businesses, firing career civil servants without cause, and dismantling agencies created by acts of Congress,” says one of the two, Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn.
“If presidents can decide when to spend and not spend all on their own, then Congress becomes little more than an advisory body to a monarch. Certainly that’s what the framers thought,” the Brennan Center for Law and Justice adds.
  • “The Trump-appointed acting director of the Office of Management and Budget ordered a government-wide impoundment of trillions of dollars that Congress,” the Brennan Center adds. That would end, OMB said, “after it reviewed whether agency activities implicate policies the president opposes, specifically citing ‘DEI, woke gender ideology, and the green new deal.’ It created immediate chaos” and lower court wins against Trump.
“In the words of one court, the budget office’s order ‘fundamentally undermines the distinct constitutional roles of each branch of our government,” especially Congress’s power of the purse,” the Brennan Center said.

Whether Congress will halt Trump’s transgressions is dubious. The history of impeachments shows a giant reluctance to use that ultimate constitutional weapon to deter executive excesses. The GOP-run House approved Trump’s “reconciliation” bill with budget cuts and his “recessions” bill clawing money back, including funds DOGE unconstitutionally grabbed. That leaves curbing Trump up to the courts.

And while U.S. District Court and Appeals Court judges have often taken on Trump, the Supreme Court, with its right-wing Republican majority—including three of that six-justice bloc whom he named—has often rolled over for him,


most recently on June 20.

That’s when the majority gave the green light to his latest executive fiat: Shipping a planeload of undocumented people whom Trump’s ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) agents had grabbed off the streets, dragged out of cars and nabbed at courthouses to a war-torn nation most of the migrants had never even heard of, South Sudan.

It’s up to the High Court’s nine justices to step in and stop Trump, but those who cite his constitutional crimes are not sure it will. CAP’s Gordon says the court is using technical rulings, such as upholding a lower court order to “facilitate the return” of Smart-TD member Kilmer Garcia to the U.S. from a notorious Salvadoran prison, to sidestep the real issue.

“All this poses a big test for the Supreme Court,” the Brennan Center adds. “The omens are not all good. Less than a year ago, the supermajority issued one of history’s worst rulings, granting presidents vast criminal immunity when they claim their actions are ‘official.’

‘Now these same justices will have to parse Trump’s bid to seize personal control of the government. They seem to be squirming to avoid a direct conflict.”
Concludes CAP’s Gordon: “When a president acts beyond the scope of his constitutional powers, members of his administration and the other branches of government must step in to stop him, lest the nation face not just a constitutional crisis but also the dismantling of American democracy.”
now I agree that the president has no authority to not spend the money as appropriated by Congress. So what happens when sued and courts ruling said funds had to be spent as appropriated. Did Trump follow the court order?

So you've come up with a whole list of things trump has done, and opinions by people obviously on the team opposite Trump. But you didn't answer my question. Trump is required to follow laws. We all agree on that. So, if he takes some action, is sued, goes to appeal, goes to supreme court and court rules in his (Trump's favor), isn't he (trump following the law)? How does that make him a dictator?
Now you might like the supreme courts decision, but under our constitution, that's the law. There are lots of supreme court decisions relative to decisions made by other presidents that I didn't like. But that didn't make them dictators.

I have posted before, you might have missed it....Trump pushes the envelope in his actions and decisions, there's no doubt about that. And there are processes and procedures, legislatively or judicially, to review and overturn things where Trump has overstepped his bounds. Now, IMO, if Trump is overturned by either of these other branches and fails to follow those decisions, then I would agree 100% on the road to dictatorship. On the other hand, if Trump follows the decisions overturning his actions, then isn't the system working the way it's supposed to?
 

tboonpickens

Heisman
Sep 19, 2001
19,897
35,178
113
I didn’t vote for Obamacare.

opposed it.

and yet it’s “law”

I guess that was dictatorship too
as stupid as this response appears at first glance, it's actually a pretty good crystallization of the modern Republican mindset.

Joe equates a felon like Trump's authoritarian urges and repeated constitutional overreaches, many of which involve state sanctioned violence against people both home and abroad, with Obama's desire for the greatest nation on earth to provide its citizens with affordable care.

GIF by SVU
 

TigerGrowls

Heisman
Dec 21, 2001
43,932
32,886
113
There is no congress, and the Supreme Court is letting Trump violate the constitution on a daily basis.

Trump is now openly floating the idea of invoking the Insurrection Act and canceling the midterms.

If you know anything about history (maga this excludes you), you know you can't vote your way out of dictatorship.

Trump will have to be deposed.
You are either @okclem or his brother.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerRagRob

Joe Cobb

Heisman
Nov 6, 2008
7,406
26,562
113
Obamacare was (and still is) an overreach by the US Government. Presented as a mandate, and constitutional under the Commerce Clause, the SCOTUS ruled that it in fact was a TAX.

Barack Obama stated that the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) individual mandate (requiring insurance or a penalty) was "absolutely not a tax increase," framing it as personal responsibility.

By the definition given in the beginning (and throughout this thread)... this is akin to a "dictatorship"

I could also press on with the government restricting Freedom of Speech during the last administration, or the governments "Arctic Frost" program as other examples of so called dictatorship.

Point is, the low brow arguments of what a "dictatorship" is have become so infantile it's just name calling now.

Peace out.
 

Rastafarian

All-Conference
Aug 21, 2025
970
1,060
93
Obamacare was (and still is) an overreach by the US Government. Presented as a mandate, and constitutional under the Commerce Clause, the SCOTUS ruled that it in fact was a TAX.

Barack Obama stated that the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) individual mandate (requiring insurance or a penalty) was "absolutely not a tax increase," framing it as personal responsibility.

By the definition given in the beginning (and throughout this thread)... this is akin to a "dictatorship"

I could also press on with the government restricting Freedom of Speech during the last administration, or the governments "Arctic Frost" program as other examples of so called dictatorship.

Point is, the low brow arguments of what a "dictatorship" is have become so infantile it's just name calling now.

Peace out.
So scotus ruled it’s a tax and thus you equate that to being a dictator?

what on earth garbage are you watching listening and reading? If you want to compare combatting misinformation and a national health care plan to masked thugs invading cities and repeated violations of the constitution as well as threats of cancelling elections and stripping citizenship then I question your ability to function in society.
 

tboonpickens

Heisman
Sep 19, 2001
19,897
35,178
113
So far these are the people the Trump DOJ is investigating in the murder of Renee Good:

Renee Good
Renee Good's wife
Tim Walz
Jacob Frey

People the Trump DOJ is not investigating in the murder of Renee Good:

The ICE agent who murdered her.

Meanwhile, the bootlickers grab their ankles for Peter Thiel's Palantir database. Just wait till Don Jr's company unfurls its spy drones all over America.

 
  • Angry
Reactions: dpic73

gravie25

All-Conference
Dec 1, 2008
1,117
2,116
108
as stupid as this response appears at first glance, it's actually a pretty good crystallization of the modern Republican mindset.

Joe equates a felon like Trump's authoritarian urges and repeated constitutional overreaches, many of which involve state sanctioned violence against people both home and abroad, with Obama's desire for the greatest nation on earth to provide its citizens with affordable care.

GIF by SVU
You can’t be serious! Maybe you are. Just absolutely mind numbing level retardation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerRagRob