this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2025
136 points (97.9% liked)

news

95 readers
541 users here now

A lightweight news hub to help decentralize the fediverse load: mirror and discuss headlines here so the giant instance communities aren’t a single choke-point.

Rules:

  1. Recent news articles only (past 30 days)
  2. Title must match the headline or neutrally describe the content
  3. Avoid duplicates & spam (search before posting; batch minor updates).
  4. Be civil; no hate or personal attacks.
  5. No link shorteners
  6. No entire article in the post body

founded 3 weeks ago
MODERATORS
top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] echo 66 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It's call Fascism. It's not a slope. It's not slippery. This is treason.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Doesn't really fit the treason definition, him potentially offering Alaska in a deal with Russia would be treason.

[–] kofe@lemmy.world 19 points 3 days ago

Orchestrating an insurrection is also treason

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 27 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That's why everyone in the military swears an oath to the Constitution...not the president. They're supposed to refuse any orders that violate that oath.

We'll see how many of them do.

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca -1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Unfortunately, it's an oath to follow orders from commander in chief. Enemies foreign or domestic is whoever the fuck President says is an enemy. It's not up to anyone else to argue/debate/determine if President could be an enemy of the constitution to disqualify following his orders. LIteral 80's sunglasses movie could have lizard people aliens in charge, with party profiting from their rule, but they are constitutional authority.

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

This is not true. US soldiers swear an oath to obey the Constitution...not the individual President currently in charge. They are expected to follow the President's orders, unless those orders violate the Constitution. They have an obligation to refuse those orders, if they do.

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Deploying national guard in cities for non emergency is violation of constitution. Killing everyone on a civilian boat, from a plane/drone, is a violation of something too. It's only a violation after the supreme court says it is a fake emergency, or there is a declaration that a plane cannot assess that boat riders were invading terrorists, which it won't do. Military leaders can overthrow the constitution based on their assessment, but that is completely unconstitutional. Still, everywhere in the world, military not overthrowing the government is because the military is happy.

The US constitution is no threat to US government, and it was always just a "feel good" crutch to make you think you were free.

[–] chickenf622@sh.itjust.works 23 points 3 days ago

Fuck calling it a slippery slope. Call it what it is a war crime and a fuck you to the right of due process. If they can claim something is "illegal" and kill anyone in the vicinity of it, then it's a framework to kill any dissenters.

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 12 points 3 days ago

They already did that long ago .... the difference now is that they can do it on American soil ...

.... but then again, they already did that too .... I mean they did kill their own president at one point.

[–] motor_spirit@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago

Cops already been killing who-the-fuck-ever but yeah

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 6 points 3 days ago

We’re already there.

Again. Can kill anyone again. Like we haven't gone there before.

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Batshit crazy and stupid pedo facist dictator is planning American genocide. Spoiler: we’ve already slipped down the slope

[–] doingthestuff@lemy.lol 3 points 3 days ago

Come on, seriously? Not that Trump isn't doing this. But the US government has been doing this for generations.