I'm convinced that the patterns of the federal judiciary freely supporting egregious misconduct by multiple agencies will last until roughly one week after the funeral of the current POTUS. Old age, complications, whatever, the pendulum will swing back.
The best case scenario for that swing-back is a prolonged and entirely civil witch hunt of the judges and attorneys involved, by force of intimidation by state governors threatening expulsion of federal personnel and nonpayment of funds to the Treasury unless a witch-hunting organisation is allowed to operate. This sounds horrible, but it is the option that most safely diffuses the tensions of implied violence. It's mirror, an entirely uncivil (force of arms) witch hunt, has historical precedents in other countries that suffered catastrophic civil wars and is the worst-case option.
Like it or not, every country has the pendulum and it can only be managed.
it will take a CENTURY to rebuild the US just from what they've done to this point, imagine two more years
every part of government now has been corrupted to the point where all you need is the next Heritage Foundation pick in place (JD) and it all keeps going on exactly like now, maybe even worse once they see they've gotten away with it
if the Dems don't get the Senate the Supreme Court will become unstoppable
btw only full impeachment will get his name off everything, even then maybe not everything, and there is still the existing corruption in place to sabotage even more on the way out
those last few months November 2028 - February 2029 are going to be 100x worse than anything we've seen to this point, they will burn it all the ground, hopefully not literally
What specifically it might entail isn't clear, though my suggestions would be very widespread impeachment followed by disqualification from any Federal office (an option but not requirement under US impeachment law), extensive civil prosecutions (not subject to Presidential pardon), as well as State criminal and perhaps ICC / CHR prosecutions (likewise, though not presently supported by the US).
Most of that would require a 60+1 seat majority in the US Senate, which would require support from GOP members even with a substantial normal opposition majority.
If Trump dies, Vance becomes president. If Vance dies, Mike Johnson becomes president. What do you know about those people that I don't that convinces you the hammer will come down once Trump is dead?
The electoral strength of the Trump base is their ability to identify with Trump, which makes the political component of open defiance a guaranteed loser. None of Trump's presumptive successors have his advanced age, imagery of an unregimented approach to self-care, comfortable ease with crude mannerisms or showmanship.
A USA where the economy is poor and the Gen X and older cohorts have returned to 2010 levels of apathy is one where Newsom, Walz, Kelly, Booker, Ocasio-Cortez etc openly directing anybody they have authority over to disregard all instructions of federal personnel up to indefinitely detaining federal personnel does not stop them from sweeping in 2028.
A big part of his draw is that there are a lot of truly reprehensible people out there, and Trump gives his base permission to say and act out their worst instincts.
For example, before Trump, it was slowly becoming increasingly unacceptable to openly espouse racist and sexist beliefs in public and among your peers. Now, we have official government communications and executive orders including blood and soil rhetoric.
He's loud and annoying, which many perceive as confidence. He's not confident, make no mistake, but people think he is. Someone smarter and better spoken will perform worse. They want a "simple man". Of course Trump is not actually simple, but because of how stupid he sounds they think he is.
However, he tries to portray himself as smart and knowledgable but is clearly quite stupid. That doesn't track with his supporters both believing what he says and also thinking that he is stupid.
In contrast, Boris Johnson (ex-UK Prime Minister) deliberately made himself look like a blundering fool (messy hair, stumbling over words etc.) whilst being very smart. Unfortunately, he lied a lot and abused his power, so we eventually got rid of him - not the kind of person you want to have power, but the type of person who seeks power.
Vance has the charisma of a moldy potato and Johnson is a fucking weirdo. Trump is (justly) hated by many but he was a celebrity with decades of fame behind him and billions of dollars to throw at the presidency.
Do you think that Vance or Johnson really have the skill and charisma required to stay atop the twitching corpse of a horse that used to be the republican party and keep it moving?
Here's a general rule and a hint - (aspiring) dictators and authoritarians always fill the positions closest to them with people who are semi-competent, but not competent or ambitious enough to threaten their power. That's because the greatest threat to their power is from their allies, not their enemies.
If Republicans found a spine or some love for their country one day they could easily impeach and remove Trump - there's no doubt the Democrats would vote for it. And, if Republicans ever do the math and decide that Trump is more of a weight than a boost, they will do exactly that.
This dynamic is why we've got Pete Hegseth running the military instead of someone... sober.
Ah yes, the famously fair, famously well thought out "witch hunt for thee, but not for me".
How about acknowledgement that there was a reason these people got elected and the addressing of grievances that brought that about. Problems heard and addressed.
> How about acknowledgement that there was a reason these people got elected and the addressing of grievances that brought that about.
How about acknowledgement of the tremendous damage that their decision made and addressing the grievances that resulted from the consequences of their action?
They warned me, all over Fox News they said “if you vote for Kamala we’ll be at war with Iran in a year!” and well, I voted for Kamala and here we are at war with Iran.
Nobody has a magic wand to produce the best option and they instead have to make do with the least bad physically possible option.
The constituency for the immiseration of the masses is unfortunately bipartisan. It predates Trump (and Biden) and was embraced by Trump (and Biden) to the opposite of their rhetoric. However, the historical consensus on tolerating extralegal behaviour by the executive and judiciary anywhere else on Earth is that it has a 100% track record of making immiseration worse. No other improvements can first occur without removing that state of affairs which bottlenecks everything else, by the least harmful physically possible method.
Cry all you want, the people are demanding justice for the egregious crimes of the trump administration and his pathetic, sycophantic supporters. I think they will have it, one way or another.
The Intercept is not far-left, they are Blob-aligned via Pierre Omidyar.
Reading this meter you linked from AllSides, it appears that the main purpose of that meter is to enforce the boundaries of the Overton window using faux-objectivity as a cover.
My dictionary says torture implies pain or suffering, so based on that... I don't think it's fair to say that keeping people from dying by malnutrition is somehow akin to torture. Interfering with their personal freedom, yes, but not the same as torture. Some also argue hunger strikes are a psychiatric issue... and we force people to go to mental hospitals sometimes, don't we? How is that any better?
This site's flagging algorithm is implemented all wrong. It doesn't look to take upvotes into account. This has serious consequences, shaping society in the wrong ways.
Some general advice that probably works around the world is, if you're present in a country illegally, don't go out of your way to seek out immigration enforcement officials to record them for TikTok.
Nothing in the article refutes the assertion that Carlitos Ricardo Parias has been in the country illegally for 2+ decades, so it's not surprising that he's detained by ICE pending deportation. The Intercept refers to him as a "journalist" though all I can verify is that has a large TikTok following.
The Intercept's editorial comment calling ramming ICE SUVs "a meaningless move in a small car physically pinned by multiple large SUVs" is laughable and destroys any notion one might have that they have journalistic integrity. I think in any country, when surrounded by police, if you ram police vehicles rather than stopping and raising your hands, you'll be in trouble. While him getting shot in the elbow is a great example of police ineptitude, I guess we've just gotten used to that.
There are plenty of things to complain about regarding ICE behavior, but detaining someone who's in the country illegally isn't one of them.
There are two realities at the moment: the everyday culture that really hasn't changed all that much, and a federal dog-and-pony circus act that roams around the country doing crazy stuff. The vast majority of people have no interaction with the circus. For them, everything is normal and these news stories are an aberration. If they watch the news, they assume there is some larger story that they aren't being told. So the circus continues like a bad sitcom, nobody caring enough to actually do anything about it because they aren't really sure whether it is real.
"What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act"
[...]
"This separation of government from people, this widening of the gap, took place so gradually and so insensibly, each step disguised (perhaps not even intentionally) as a temporary emergency measure or associated with true patriotic allegiance or with real social purposes. And all the crises and reforms (real reforms, too) so occupied the people that they did not see the slow motion underneath, of the whole process of government growing remoter and remoter."
[...]
"The dictatorship, and the whole process of its coming into being, was above all diverting. It provided an excuse not to think for people who did not want to think anyway. I do not speak of your ‘little men,’ your baker and so on; I speak of my colleagues and myself, learned men, mind you. Most of us did not want to think about fundamental things and never had."
They Thought They Were Free - The Germans, 1933-45
Without a trial? With a terrible firearm wound? Not even a murderer deserves such treatment in a civil country.
You people are far gone.
Fucking nazi Germany 1935
We must be watching different videos. There is no ramming or fishtailing of any vehicles in that body cam footage. Sounds like another case where ICE has released falsehoods as press releases and then went silent when it fell apart against evidence.
Law enforcement is always timely releasing bodycam footage when it shows them in a good light, but if it doesn’t? They wouldn’t even produce the video for this guy in court until after the deadline for discovery had passed.
Your comment is entirely untrue. The video shows a stopped car at rest, and you know this, because you are intentionally spreading falsehoods for the purpose of "flooding the zone with shit".
Your comment is entirely untrue. The video shows a stopped car at rest, and you know this, because you are intentionally spreading falsehoods for the purpose of "flooding the zone with shit".
What do you attribute to all the smoke? The car is boxed in but it does appear that the car reversed into the car behind and the smoke is from the tires spinning. What do you think should be done in this situation? The car does seem to be boxed in well but the car could potentially get out.
That's why it's mind boggling that you are insisting something so dubious is obvious. The certainty with which you believe this conclusion speaks more to your personal biases than what can be objectively observed in the video.
Article: In October, Parias was leaving his home and driving down the street when federal agents — including from ICE and the U.S. Marshals Service — used their vehicles to box him in, according to the criminal complaint.
Body-worn camera footage captures the ICE officer approaching Parias’ passenger side door and almost immediately stating that he’s going to “break the window.” As the officer smashes the window, the car begins to rev, later sending smoke billowing into the air. The officer pulls out his gun soon afterward, holding it in one hand as he smashes the window at the same time with the other.
The complaint alleged that when the rear of the car began to “fishtail,” it “caused the agents to fear that PARIAS may lose control of the Camry and hit them.” A Homeland Security Investigations agent wrote that Parias’ acceleration of the Camry “caused debris (likely rubber being shed from the tires themselves) to fly into the air, which struck some of the agents.”
I don’t see myself shooting someone in that situation. Worst-case scenario seems to be that he somehow manages to break away and drive off. Nobody seems to be in direct danger to me. He isn’t some sort of actively dangerous criminal that needs to be stopped at any cost, so even in the worst case scenario you just catch him some other time.
I’m an european. Gun use in US is simply completely normalized. Even if you say that the law allows shooting him there, why would anyone support that?
Well, law enforcement were the first ones to escalate to unbelievable levels of force here.
They executed a dangerous manouver, pointed guns at him, broke his window and shot at him. Yes, the person paniced, but I’m not surprised.
To law enforcement, this seems like a regular thing they do. They should be in control of the situation and be ready to use the appropriate amount of force for the situation. If they escalate things out of the gate like this, I do not think they should then also be allowed to just start shooting under the pretense of being in danger. That’s a risk they knowingly took by taking the actions they took.
You’re saying law enforcement can shoot anyone in the US, as long as they architect situations with the highest level of danger.
You can see it moving, hear it revving, and watch the huge clouds of tire smoke.
The social contract says you have to follow the laws our representatives write and our police enforce. A good citizen fights the cops in court, with laws. A criminal flaunts the law and uses a car to try to evade apprehension.
The best case scenario for that swing-back is a prolonged and entirely civil witch hunt of the judges and attorneys involved, by force of intimidation by state governors threatening expulsion of federal personnel and nonpayment of funds to the Treasury unless a witch-hunting organisation is allowed to operate. This sounds horrible, but it is the option that most safely diffuses the tensions of implied violence. It's mirror, an entirely uncivil (force of arms) witch hunt, has historical precedents in other countries that suffered catastrophic civil wars and is the worst-case option.
Like it or not, every country has the pendulum and it can only be managed.