Archangel1313 @ Archangel1313 @lemmy.ca

Posts

0

Comments

275

Joined

2 mo. ago

Only if people go into this looking for it.

That's an Onion article. You can tell because Trump hasn't been shooting protesters for months already. That's what comes next. And that's when it stops being a protest, and turns into a civil war.

Don't be so eager to make that happen.

But, when you say, "they"...you are painting the entire protest as violent, unless you make the distinction that it isn't. And the vast majority of protestors are simply exercising their 1st amendment rights, in a perfectly legal manner.

The people setting those fires should absolutely be charged for their actions. But their actions don't negate the Constitutional rights of everyone else who is protesting. And calling in the National guard before the local authorities have declared the situation to be out of their control, is a direct violation of Constitutional law.

And THIS is what the 2nd amendment is actually for. California needs its own state-run militia to defend its territory from Federal overreach.

It was never about individual civilians owning weapons. All that would do, is give Trump a justification to invoke the Insurrection Act. But if the State of California itself is armed against tyranny, then the people's rights are being defended.

Escalation to violence is exactly what they want. It gives them all the justification they need to invoke the Insurrection Act, declare martial law and suspend your Constitutional rights. And not just in California.

This is what the internet is for.

“But you have a governor who let the city burn down, didn’t want water to be sent down to him,” Trump complained about Newsom and January’s wildfires. “I mean, I sent billions of gallons of water. I wanted to do it in the first term. He wouldn’t do it over. I don’t know, they have environmental reasons, but there were no environmental reasons. It’s, I think it’s just a political philosophy. But it’s lucky for the people in Los Angeles and in California that we did what we did.”

They dumped an entire reservoir full of water designed for agriculture purposes, into the fucking ocean! That reservoir didn't even connect to LA's supply.

Did Trump declare martial law while I was asleep? Because last time I checked, he can't deploy the military on US soil unless the country is in a state of emergency. And peaceful protests don't count.

...but, did it work?

For all the alarmists acting like this is going to pass...it won't. This is part of the normal process that all new legislation goes through. Politicians propse a bill, which contains everything they can think to include...throwing it all at the wall, just to see what will stick. Then it gets torn to shreds during the debate session, by legal advocacy groups and human rights organizations, who know exactly what kinds of legal challenges they can see coming a mile away. Anything that's garaunteed to get tossed out in court is discarded from the legislation.

Why? Because there's no point in passing legislation that can't actually be legally enforced. Law enforcement has been trying to get these kinds of "tools" implemented for decades. And the courts have all said, all the way along...no. You need a warrant for that kind of intrusion. They need probable cause to look at these things. They need a reasonable justification beyond, "I want to look, just in case". None of the shit in this bill is going to pass the legal smell test. Period.

Cheese.

I was referring more to the fact that Elon Musk has already been allegedly funneling DOGE data directly to the Russian government...but yeah, all the rest of that is pretty bad too. Lol!

...and it's all going to "accidentally" find its way onto Russian servers.

Except that it is still America, and the government seizing private property...especially from a billionaire...is straight up "socialism" as far as most Americans are concerned. I have a feeling that might not go over as easily as people think.

Wut?

And just like they did in Maine, California will sue him and win.

Except that NASA is a nationally owned branch of the government. They answer directly to the executive branch and are funded by Congress. They are not a "company". They are a government agency.

That's because...technically...the government mostly provides contracts to SpaceX to take their stuff to and from orbit. They're basically paying for a service...not investing in SpaceX's product development. Even though that is an indirect result of giving them those contracts.

It's like hiring a landscaper to do your lawn. They come with their own equipment, so even though they bought it using the money you pay them...you don't own any of it. They do.

SpaceX operates a fleet of privately owned ICBMs under license from the US government.

That's not true. All nuclear weapons in the US's arsenal are under the control of the US military. You are correct to say that it would be illegal for any private contractor to operate its own fleet of ICBMs...and that includes SpeceX.

The intellectual property they are using is subject to ITAR regulation. Any American trying to transfer that IP outside of the US would be quickly indicted. Any foreign government using or authorizing the use of that IP would be heavily sanctioned.

ITAR doesn't prevent SpaceX from moving its base of operations to another country. As I said, they are a privately owned company. Moving their operations to another country is not the same thing as "giving" that technology to that country.