It’s Official: With “Vermin,” Trump Is Now Using Straight-up Nazi Talk He’s telling us what he will do to his political enemies if he’s president again. Is anyone listening?

I feel pretty safe in saying that we can now stop giving him the benefit of that particular doubt. His use—twice; once on social media, and then repeated in a speech—of the word “vermin” to describe his political enemies cannot be an accident. That’s an unusual word choice. It’s not a smear that one just grabs out of the air. And it appears in history chiefly in one context, and one context only.

  • lagomorphlecture
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    8 months ago

    He was elected once and I hate to say it but there’s still a chance he’ll be elected again. He isn’t legitimate in the sense that he has no sense of decorum or history or human decency but he could be elected.

      • TechyDad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        You and I agree he’s ineligible, but if 2016-2020 has taught us anything, it’s that our laws and rules mean nothing if the courts don’t enforce them.

        What happens if Trump appointed judges decide that Trump still can be on the ballot? What if they decide that insurrection isn’t disqualifying because reasons?

        Trump could get into office again and shred any bits of the Constitution that he hasn’t already ripped up. And this time, he might decide that he’s not leaving office and judges he appoints could agree.

      • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Rules don’t apply to him because Democrats are only interested in following rules that keep themselves ineffective.

        • JonEFive@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          8 months ago

          They worry to much about “escalation” and the Republicans saying “don’t you do that, or we’ll do it too!”. They were going to do it anyway as soon as their old tricks didn’t work.

      • cybersandwich@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        8 months ago

        I understand that there is a huge argument for that. However, I wasn’t under the impression that this is proven. It would potentially go to the Supreme Court. I don’t have faith in the court as its currently configured.

        • ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          Congress could make this vote on their own motion. It’s only going to the courts because people can’t coordinate a way of forcing a vote through the legislature.

          • cybersandwich@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            8 months ago

            Oh, I couldn’t have any less faith in a Republican led house. They can barely elect a speaker or pass a budget. Anything more meaningful than that will certainly be off the table. Especially since they are all cowards and refused to call a spade a spade with Trump.

            • ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              The most beautiful thing, in my opinion, about 14a3 is that in times of crisis when we are likely to be divided, the vote is designed to fail. It’s a bottom line, 2/3 majority in both houses to requalify.

        • Carlo@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          The 14th Amendment to the US Constitution bars him from holding office again, on the grounds that after he swore to uphold the Constitution in his oath of office, he turned around and tried to do a coup. There are ongoing lawsuits to this effect in at least 2 states (Colorado and Michigan), seeking to remove him from the ballot. I don’t hold out much hope that they’ll be successful, but they’re right.

            • Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              What’s right and what happens are two different things. He is officially ineligible. That doesn’t mean he won’t physically be elected.

                • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  This is the same problem as a cross walk. You have the right of way, but the car will kill you. By the time a court rules on it you’ll be dead. What’s right and what’s real are two different things.

            • JonEFive@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              And bank robbery isn’t illegal unless you’re prosecuted, right?

              The previous person indicated that there is a clause in the constitution that would make him ineligible, not that anything had been done about it.