Summary

Kevin Roberts, president of the Heritage Foundation and architect of Trump’s Project 2025, employs intense fire-related rhetoric in his upcoming book, Dawn’s Early Light: Taking Back Washington to Save America, advocating for a “controlled burn” of institutions he deems corrupt or antithetical to conservative goals.

Roberts calls for dismantling entities like the FBI, Ivy League schools, and the New York Times, framing it as necessary to “renew” America.

His incendiary language has sparked controversy, with critics alarmed by the violent imagery and its implications for Trump’s second term.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Yes, but only because they would have gone bankrupt if they didn’t. It was out of sheer desperation.

        Somehow people were less willing to send enough boys to an organization that had become super religious and was already trying to live down the sexual abuse scandal that had been going on for decades.

    • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      76
      ·
      6 days ago

      The boy scouts one is especially baffling. A lot of boys become more traditionally “manly” through boy scouts. It is physically active and they typically learn skills like camping, fire starting, wood working. We were also expected to do good deeds, be polite, and overall be decent members of society that help where is needed, such as litter clean ups and tree plantings. I guess the latter half of my point is where their issues start?

      • Stovetop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        105
        ·
        6 days ago

        Maybe because they now allow girls to participate. Integration is “woke” and must be destroyed.

        • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          29
          ·
          6 days ago

          I didn’t know that part. I thought conservatives hate them because they now allow gay leaders after being sued to pieces over it. Also didn’t they crack down on pedophiles in the organization? That is the number one pastime of conservative men.

          • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            6 days ago

            Lol. They didn’t get sued to pieces because their leaders were gay, it was because some of them were pedophiles.

            • Miles O'Brien@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              14
              ·
              edit-2
              6 days ago

              Nobody sued them over gay leaders.

              They got sued by parents over not doing anything about pedos, AND got sued by prospective leaders because they were being prevented from joining over their sexual orientation.

              Bill wanted to be a scoutmaster since he grew up with scouts, but since he was gay, he was not allowed. He then sued the organization over it. (idk names, that’s just for clarity)

            • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              6 days ago

              I obviously meant that they were sued for NOT allowing gay leaders and I think even scouts themselves. Google it if you care. Conservatives don’t like that they changed the policy on gays.

        • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          They are changing the name to just “Scouts” to reflect this. And is 100% why these assholes have an issue with them now.

          On May 7, 2024, BSA announced that the organization will change its name to Scouting America. While the name change will officially go into effect on February 8, 2025, on its 115th anniversary, all are encouraged to use the name immediately.

          Wikipedia: BSA

          Edit a word =(

        • morriscox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          If they are the Boy Scouts and allow girls to participate then this looks to be the start of a trans joke.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        6 days ago

        Both of them are pretty baffling. Because you’re right about the Boy Scouts, but also, BlackRock is basically a Republican dream company.

        • RedditWanderer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          37
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          Because he’s attacking all institutions that have some sort of control he wants. The wide net just feeds into the deep state narrative and he needs to capitalize on that right now

          Kids, healthcare, education, private equity etc… that’s how you make a dictatorship.

          See it this way, BlackRock has enough power to do to the republican party what the republican party is doing to the gov. They need all of that gone to become megalomaniac authoritarians.

          If I wanted to become Bill Gates, and make my own Microsoft, i first have to outlaw bill gates and Microsoft.

          • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            6 days ago

            I think this is right, but I would add there’s a chance this all ends up being for show and BlackRock makes some public show of fealty to the Trumpists that makes them look powerful and gets BlackRock some government contracts down the line. Like, hypocrisy is no barrier for the right wing, they’re fully capable of writing a whole novel about (e.g.) how we must destroy Google and then turning around and buying a bunch of shit from them.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 days ago

            If they already have that much power, it would make more sense to stay on their good side, at least for now, wouldn’t it?

            • RedditWanderer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              6 days ago

              Now is the time to scare them at least, and if there’s any time to have them on the bad side it’s now. See who kneels and who doesn’t imo.

            • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              6 days ago

              They have the upper hand now, if MAGA is firmly in control of the government, they can dismantle Blackrock in a month.

                • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 days ago

                  This kind of ignorance is what is most upsetting to me… People just do not seem to be able to grasp the totality of authoritarian rule. I understand why, there is nothing in recent memory even close to this to compare.

                  But we have really failed our students by not drilling home just how insidious fascism is. Under fascism, corporations become another arm of the government to be used however the singular leader sees fit. Or they get eliminated.

          • Miles O'Brien@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 days ago

            The keys to GAINING power are not the same keys needed to KEEP power.

            They gained the power (or will in a few months)

            Now they need to keep it.

            If one of the keys needed to get it could potentially turn on you, it’s better for your regime to eliminate them as soon as possible after taking power.

            For a better explanation, CGP GREY has a video about rules for rulers, which clears things up quite well: https://youtu.be/rStL7niR7gs

        • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 days ago

          I could see the blackrock angle as trying to appease the working class. Like “see we hate big wealth too” but then never actually do anything to hurt blackrock.

      • MightBeAlpharius@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 days ago

        I think the issue started a little over a decade ago, when the Boy Scouts got in some hot water for discriminating against gay kids and they actually tried to be better.

      • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        do good deeds, be polite, and overall be decent members of society that help where is needed

        They call that “woke”.

        Edit - oh whoops, didn’t mean to just steal that right out of @stovetop@lemmy.world 's mouth.

      • sylver_dragon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 days ago

        Not to mention many troops still have an emphasis on Christianity. Though it’s slightly less mandatory than it used to be.

    • dgmib@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 days ago

      A scout’s job is to gather facts and information, and report back so that an army can make informed decisions.

      Can’t imagine why a right-wing extremist would be afraid of an organization that teaches those skills to kids.

  • SasquatchCosmonaut@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    81
    ·
    6 days ago

    Why the fuck would you get rid of boy scouts it’s literally a patriotic paramilitary (kinda) organization with a checkered past on sexual abuse that should be a Republican wet dream lol

    • callouscomic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      ·
      6 days ago

      They renamed themselves the Scouts and let in girls. Maybe that’s why? These people are insane and evil, so honestly it doesn’t matter why.

      • Custodian1623@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        6 days ago

        which was done to keep the organization afloat revenue wise and weirdos on the internet tried to call it woke in a bizarre case of friendly fire

        • Lennny@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          6 days ago

          Also because scouting exists in many other cultures and most of them are mixed. Intercamp fucking slaps

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      6 days ago

      Whole it does teach survival skills and can teach about shooting, most of the skills are just to prepare you for life. Importantly though, it builds a community focused on helping people and doing good. It’s a children’s version of a mutual aid group almost. This is a bad thing for children to learn in their opinion probably.

    • Wahots@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      6 days ago

      Paramilitary is stretching it a bit, stuff like shooting guns is optional and with guidelines from the sane past. It plays an anemic role in the BSA, tbh.

      The vast majority of boy scouts is learning constructive things like how to cook, how to perform first aid on someone who got injured in a car accident or hike, how to use a map and compass if you get lost, and basic financial planning so you aren’t an idiot with money.

      In short, it prepares you for life and situations where someone might freeze up if they don’t know what to do in an emergency. It also makes people fluent with the outdoors and feel comfortable spending time outside of the big city.

      Tldr; it’s a group that prevents incel or gang behavior and helps people make friends.

      • fossilesque@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        My Girl Scout group was basically selling cookies and building dumbass popsicle birdhouses and wifecraft. I noped out in a few months even at that age lmao. No camping SMH.

      • doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 days ago

        Some parts of the military try to use the scouts as a vector for reaching potential recruits. definitely had a few army recruiters come by my troop. Also the rank structure, uniforms, focus on leadership, etc certainly looks a bit military-ish.

        And fwiw, I don’t think the scouts does much to address incel behavior. Maybe it helps with gangs, idk.

    • CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 days ago

      I’m pretty sure they recently changed to allow LGBT members along with toying around with integrating both boys and girls into troops since the girl scouts really only exists to sell cookies. I’ve seen lots of garbage on social media about how “woke” the Boy Scouts are now so they’re gunning for the organization.

        • JigglySackles@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          That’s still stupid. Just because an organization has ranks or leaders doesn’t mean it’s paramilitary. Oh no they have organization and structure that reflects how much work they’ve done! It’s not the same at all. Paramilitary is possibly the dumbest take on scouts I’ve ever heard. There are plenty of things to criticize without making up stupid fear mongering bullshit.

          • SasquatchCosmonaut@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            6 days ago

            adjective Of, relating to, or being a group of civilians organized in a military fashion, especially to operate in place of or assist regular army troops.

            Literally the first Google result lol

            Also said (kinda) paramilitary so settle down there guy lol

            • JigglySackles@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 days ago

              And literally doesn’t resemble scouts at all. Nothing to settle down. I just think this is a really really stupid comparison.

              • SasquatchCosmonaut@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                6 days ago

                They have ranks that resemble military ranks (1st class, 2nd class ~ 1st lieutenant, 2nd lieutenant) etc and have a hierarchical leadership structure.

                • JigglySackles@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 days ago

                  That isn’t an expressly military structure though. For fucks sake, almost every company in the world is hierarchical. The same goes for class, it’s just classification, not military.

        • JigglySackles@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          Learning to properly shoot a rifle as a group isn’t the same as a paramilitary at all. If that’s all it took then every gun safety course in the world is a part of a secret cabal intent on having a global paramilitary. Which is stupid as fuck leap. The fact that your troop went shooting in Alabama says more about being in fucking Alabama than it does being a scout.

  • lennybird@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    ·
    6 days ago

    We were close to holding right wing extremists accountable. We needed one more term at least. It was clear how suddenly Republicans try to denounce the FBI as a liberal institution after Wray said that white supremacists were the #1 domestic terrorist threat.

    Now, we’re fucked.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      6 days ago

      We were close to holding right wing extremists accountable.

      “We” had four goddamn years and did absolutely fuck-all with it! Frankly, in retrospect, the fix was in when Biden appointed Merrick Garland instead of somebody who would actually care about the rule of law and do his goddamn job.

      • lennybird@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        6 days ago

        I know this isn’t popular, but because I’ve literally never seen a substantive counter-argument for this, I have to say that I think Merrick Garland did all that he could given the stacked courts surrounding him. Nobody could’ve done better. He was clearly building a case from the bottom up that is a classic example of RICO prosecution style, hence the largest criminal investigation in the FBI’s history when going after those who committed January 6th. That was always going to lead to Trump. People, however are dreaming and romanticizing this belief that we could’ve “got” Trump within one year’s time and that was never possible.

        The only thing that matters is that many Americans knew what Trump was, and a large swath opted to sit out and go, “Both sides!”

        We couldn’t even convince the proverbial jury that was the American people of crimes in plain sight when they gave a verdict on November 5th.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          6 days ago

          For perspective, Hitler was arrested, tried, imprisoned, wrote Mein Kampf, and already released by when this much time had passed after the Beer Hall Putsch. I don’t really give a fuck what the excuses are; the fact that it was delayed this fucking long is absolutely wrong and, if not an indictment of Garland himself directly, then an indictment of the whole system of which he was the fucking head! Either way, Garland was incompetent at best and absolutely deserves all the blame he gets, and more.

          • lennybird@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            6 days ago

            Unfortunately Hitler’s Putsch was far more clear cut and our court systems already largely ruined by the time Garland assumed his office in 2021. Hitler never had the power to corrupt the courts preceding his failed coup. I also don’t know if we can compare 1:1 our criminal justice system to 1920s Germany.

          • nexusband@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 days ago

            Hitler had a lot of help, the economic hardships were a lot different and the Weimarer Republik was already weakened thanks to Heinrich Brüning and Paul von Hindenburg. The Weimarer Republik also did not have nearly as much safeguards as both the U.S. and for example modern Germany have. Not only that: There are still people that care and still people to fight. Trump and his cronies still have quite a bit of work to do - not only that, i believe they will stack their cards so badly and defund so many things, many Systems will just crumble. Hackers around the world are licking their fingers right now. ODNI, the FBI and CISA are instrumental in fighting all of that. Tanking them will wreack havoc and open so many doors, i’ll be surprised if the U.S. makes it unharmed to the midterms.

        • kandoh@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          6 days ago

          I would disagree, I have only my own perception to go off of but from my observations:

          There were 3 or 4 prosecutors chomping at the bit to go after Trump but Garland held them back.

          It wasn’t until they found out about the missing documents that things changed. Even then Garland just wanted the documents returned, if Trump had complied that would have been the end of it.

          It wasn’t until Trump refused to return specific documents that we knew he had - that crossed a red line for Garland.

          Once you let one prosecutor go after Trump, what’s the excuse for holding back the others? So the flood gate was open, but only when every attempt was made to let Trump get away with it all.

      • Wahots@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        6 days ago

        Four years to fix a global pandemic and undo some of the trump admin damage.

        That was the bipartisan infrastructure act to shore up stuff like roads, bridges and more, the IRA to address inflation, climate goals (freed up a ton of money for green infrastructure, replacing outdated equipment at factories like gas smelters and furnaces) and more, the CHIPS and science act to counter china and restart manufacturing here in the US, as well as smaller stuff like debt relief for students, consumer protections against banks and airlines, and repealing DOMA via respect of marriage act for interracial and queer families.

        In addition to conquering covid and rescuing a crashing economy in 2020. He realistically did most of this in two years because Republicans blocked them at the midterms.

        Not to mention a lot of anti-competitve and merger blocks that would have fucked our country, like having one grocery store brand across the entire US. (These will probably go through in a trump admin)

        He wasn’t able to get it all done, but he had one arm tied behind his back and still got a decent amount done before they got hamstrung.

      • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        6 days ago

        I know very little about the Chevron doctrine but I know that the overturning of that made it possible for corporations to essentially ignore any administrative oversight.

        I often wondered what would happen if someone were to take the frequencies of the military or even airport flight control and just started broadcasting. Does the FCC have delegated authority? If they don’t, sounds like anyone can broadcast Rick Astley on any frequency.

        The problem that these justices and elites seem to forget is that they are trusting on the very systems they dismantling working for them.

        • aesthelete@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          6 days ago

          I know very little about the Chevron doctrine but I know that the overturning of that made it possible for corporations to essentially ignore any administrative oversight.

          I saw an interesting thing yesterday saying that legally this could backfire because federal agencies can now be sued for their interpretation of the law.

        • Fedizen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          6 days ago

          I do expect that our future includes a lot of stupid plane crashes because of lax regulation

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        It is not just a continuation of this. Maybe some of the economic things in P2025 come from there, but I don’t think the Koch’s were ever trying to ban pornography and track women’s menstrual cycles.

  • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    6 days ago

    Didn’t Trump already say he’s not doing P2025 and wants to go with some other plan that involves messing around with taxes and taking troops out of Syria? And that the Right is pissed cause he’s not doing P2025…

    If true, that might be the first good deed he’s done

    If false, that sucks, cause I really don’t wanna end up in a camp

    • root_beer@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      6 days ago

      Christ’s sake. Like any of the shit that crime elemental says contains even a molecule of truth. He saw how upset people are by the prospect so he backpedaled like, well, someone who’s in infinitely better shape than he is. The benefit of the doubt that anyone can give—which, let’s be real here, he absolutely does not deserve—is that Trump himself isn’t going to do a goddamn thing apart from shuffle across a golf course on the daily and scribble on the occasional executive order; but you should know that the ghouls in his inner circle are the ones who do all the wetwork for him anyway. They’ll be the ones to raise their flag over Gilead, just as they’ve been planning to do all along. If you believed anything to the contrary, then I have a stainless steel electric truck to sell you.

    • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 days ago

      Didn’t Trump already say he’s not doing P2025

      Your first mistake was assuming Trump was telling the truth.

      About anything.

      Ever.

    • AngryRobot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      6 days ago

      I haven’t heard that. What I’ve heard is that Stephen Miller said they’re full steam ahead with Project 2025.

    • ehxor@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 days ago

      Didn’t Trump already say…

      Yeah. But what’s that got to do with anything he’s actually going to do?

  • Ketchup@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    6 days ago

    So basically, lead our attention astray as we invest all the good time and resources of our politicians and defendants of democracy trying to block every aweful measure of Project 2025. And While they dismantle every important institution, make more back door deals to personally enrich themselves. We will never catch up because they are now 6 steps ahead of us in the supreme court, however many seats, and 4 years time on the shot clock to do it. If there are 4 years of gridlock, we’d be extremely lucky. But the majority of America just used their ballots to lubricate all of our asses. January we all bend over and grab a hand full of ankles.

  • BigMacHole@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    6 days ago

    They LITERALLY wrote this all out before the Election so Voters could Read and Understand what they’re Voting for!

  • taiyang@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    6 days ago

    You know, at least there’s some solace in knowing Trump 100% didn’t and can’t read Project 2025. He’s still going to bull-in-the-china-shop his way though this but I don’t think he’s going to follow the script exactly.

  • scripthook@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    Right but a lot of 2025 restructuring is limited by the 3 branches of goverment. You can’t just get rid of the FBI so easily. You can’t deport illegals on a massive scale so easily. He has big promises but he won’t be able to do nearly as much. Even with loyalists there is a reason why our founders made certain overhauls difficult. Because of people like him…

    • Jyek@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      6 days ago

      At the end of the day those roadblocks are just laws. Laws that he has been cleared to break as long as he does so under the pretense of an official act.

      • scripthook@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 days ago

        So technically yes and no. He cant just say he wants to get rid of the fbi or remove term limits at will. Study how the Goverment works

        • OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          6 days ago

          Their goal is to break it. They control all branches of government. Who is there to stop them?

          • scripthook@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 days ago

            They can’t break it though. I mean anything he does deemed unconstitutional can be challenged by any appeals court judge that can strike it down. He needs 2/3 congress approval which he doesn’t have the votes for constitutional changes and changes to the exec branch. Lots of changes are complicated. Even removing the ACA.

            Remembered day one in 2017 he had that travel ban? A judge struck it down and they appealed and lost. He doesn’t have a magic wand…

            • AngryRobot@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              6 days ago

              They didnt have SCOTUS locked down at the time. They do now. They’ll appeal any appellate court decision to the Supreme Court, who will find any excuse to rule in their favor. It’s already happened with Dobbs, the plaintiff literally had no standing to bring a suit, but SCOTUS said, “We won’t worry about that.” Then ruled based kn a Brittish law from before we were a country.

              You seem to think they believe in the rule of law. They don’t. They have spent 50 years preparing for this fucking moment where they can become the ruling class. Look at how Alito and Thomas openly flaunt that they’re for sale.

              They. Don’t. Care.

              • scripthook@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 days ago

                I hope I’m right and you’re wrong for the sake of our democracy. I hope it lasts more than 250 years

                • AngryRobot@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 days ago

                  I hope so too, but the writing is on the wall. People saw Project 2025 and still voted for it. And now they’re gonna ram it down our throats.

            • candybrie@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              6 days ago

              I mean anything he does deemed unconstitutional can be challenged by any appeals court judge that can strike it down.

              And then appeal it to the SCOTUS who literally gave him criminal immunity. With Congress and SCOTUS, it doesn’t matter what the Constitution actually says. Just what they can twist it with paper thin reasoning to mean.

              So who’s stopping him?

              • scripthook@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 days ago

                You underestimate the reason we have separation of powers. If Trump wanted to get rid of term limits he would need 2/3 votes from both houses which he doesn’t have and 38 states need to ratify. This also includes with any constitutional change. There’s red tape for a treason

                • modeler@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  6 days ago

                  While the powers are separated, if all three are aligned there is nothing they can’t do. The supreme court has already demonstrated it’s able to reinterpret the constitution in a way no other court has done in history.

                • candybrie@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 days ago

                  That amendment really meant consecutive terms. So Trump being president again is fine.

                  That’s just as ridiculous of an argument as the president being criminally immune.

                  When the branch that has the final say on what the Constitution means is on board, you don’t have to actually amend it.

            • OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 days ago

              You’re not paying attention. They aren’t following the old rules anymore. They haven’t been for years. They will not be defeated by words on paper.