Well for one the president has broken the law like, dozens to hundreds of times in this admin alone. Like, not “I think he broke the law”, he outright just disregards constitutional law on a regular basis.

3

And here in lies the problem. What do you, as a right winger, say here to make yourself look good without lying? You cant. Either you have to believe it’s right for Trump to break the law and are therefore at best an authoritarian, or you have to lie and pretend he isn’t breaking the law. Neither of which will actually fly. Which is why no right winger gives a shit about debating anymore. They know they’re lying, so what’s there to debate? Plus if they did they’d look bad.

9

Comment Deleted

0

The mass firings broke the law as ruled by a judge, the deployment of the national guard to civilian cities violates the Comitatus act, and Trump has repeatedly violated federal injunction regarding fema.

4

Just to name like a couple

3

That’s literally just off the dome

6

?

4

Comment Deleted

0

Oh you’d assume? Well gee since you assume.

2

What exceptions to that act does our currently existing situation permit?

2

Comment Deleted

0

If they’re deployed into civilian cities, they’re deployed on civilians.

2

See what I mean? You have to lie SO MUCH

2

Still waiting on you to show me that exception please.

2

Comment Deleted

0

Comment Deleted

0

Police? National guard are not police.

4

Interesting equation. And as for the exception, I want the actual exception as stated in the law. Not just, like, that you think it’s okay based on vibes. Textual evidence my man.

5

Quote it please.

4

Comment Deleted

0

… no. The military is not the police. That isn’t fucking semantics. God what a terrifying thing for you to say, jfc.

3

Comment Deleted

0

Right. So did you read that? It says that their use needs to be authorized by Congress, or called by a state (governor). Was the use of the military authorized by Congress in this case, or called for by the governor of the state they were deployed into?

2

I had to reread it like six times because it seems like you just underlined that sentence without even reading any of the prior ones, that doesn’t even remotely help your case lmao

3

Comment Deleted

0

Also yes, the act DOES apply to the national guard. the part that you underlined doesn’t say those groups are exempt wholly, it says they’re exempt when a STATE GOVERNMENT calls them in. That’s what the word STATE means in this context. The state government did not do that.

2

“Under state authority” means under the authority of a specific STATES government. As in, not the fed. Don’t even question my reading comprehension skill again, or anyone’s.

3

Here is where we get to the part where you either have to admit you were wrong or lie.

1

Comment Deleted

0

… okay. You don’t think it matters if he breaks the law? Is what you’re saying?

1

Genuinely checking to see if I have this correct. You think it’s okay for the president to overexert his power and break federal law in this instance? Not moralizing or anything just making sure I have your position correct.

2

Comment Deleted

0

Okay but Gavin’s right. There’s a law in place to prevent the national guard being sent to his state without his permission. You don’t get to pick and choose when the law applies. This is what I mean about conservatives knowing they’re liars and not caring about debate anymore. Are we fucking for real right now?

4

Comment Deleted

0

“Gavin newsom is breaking federal law by asking Trump to follow federal law” Bro stop acting like you give a shit about the law, you’re advocating for it to be broken right now. You can say “I disagree with that law” but nobody cares. I’m sure a lot of criminals also disagreed with the law.

1

This is why debate is so bad now a days. What do you want me to say to this? You’re just repeatedly saying that you “disagree” that Trump broke the law. Nothing you’re saying has any bearing on legislation or reality. It’s all feelings. All your beliefs are based on what you FEEL is true.

1