Is Nero fiddling while Rome burns?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,634
50,860
136
This is just another episode of Democrats being weak. The four star general, former NSA to Trump, who was convicted then pardoned by Trump for seditious behavior mouthed that we should have a coup in the US and it's mainly meh..
What should they do, exactly? It's most likely first amendment protected speech to call for the overthrow of the government so long as it's not intended to incite imminent lawless action.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,189
14,114
136
What should they do, exactly? It's most likely first amendment protected speech to call for the overthrow of the government so long as it's not intended to incite imminent lawless action.

Sure, there is a "clear and present danger" test. I think the point is arguable here because we've already had one violent insurrection based on the exact same lie that Flynn was telling right before he endorsed a violent coup.

I say put it in front of a judge and jury, and let them decide.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,634
50,860
136
Sure, there is a "clear and present danger" test. I think the point is arguable here because we've already had one violent insurrection based on the exact same lie that Flynn was telling right before he endorsed a violent coup.

I say put it in front of a judge and jury, and let them decide.
I hear that, although I think there’s a pretty significant downside risk if he’s acquitted.
 

Linux23

Lifer
Apr 9, 2000
11,333
705
126
This is a pretty standard Trumpkin tactic. Say something shitty and when you face a backlash lie and claim you never said it, no matter how incontrovertible the evidence. This is because Trumpkins simply don't care about truth or lies.
because there are zero consequences.
 

ewdotson

Golden Member
Oct 30, 2011
1,295
1,520
136
There *is* the option with Flynn of calling him back to active service and trying him under the UCMJ. (Which retired service members are remain subject to.) I can understand why they wouldn't want to go that route and I don't actually expect it to happen. But for anyone seeking a nuclear option ... that's it.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,634
50,860
136
There *is* the option with Flynn of calling him back to active service and try him under the UCMJ. I can understand why they wouldn't want to go that route and I don't actually expect it to happen. But for anyone seeking a nuclear option ... that's it.
To me this is the most viable and productive route. I really do think it is important for democrats to take this more seriously and send a strong message that this shit is not going to be tolerated. I think the odds of acquittal in first amendment grounds are high for Flynn as a civilian but I suspect there’s a lot they could do to ruin his day as a member of the military.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,022
2,872
136
Unfortunately, I don't see much hope overall unless someone other than Trump emerges as a conservative moral leader. Only from within can come change. And likely that would require the explicit formation of an alternative party. It is extremely frustrating to be vilified constantly through gross distortion and have attempts at bipartisan action be almost exclusively for show. Yet, trying to convince people of the misdeeds of Republicans does nothing but further isolate the parties.

As to standing up to Flynn, I think people should be calling in to AG Garland's office to advocate for pursuit of charges. Forget political fallout and optics. If the law supports an offense against the US, then prosecution should follow. The consequences of the behavior are already apparent.

I do not think Democrats should be playing along with the false appearance of will to govern in accordance with the structure of our political system. This does not mean they should do the same crap in return. It merely means they should not attempt to play along with the appearance of normal governance when it is demonstrated to be false. Where there are genuine attempts to govern appropriately in the interest of the people, regardless of how rare, hopeless, or insufficient they are, they should be respected entirely on their own without complaint by bringing in counter-example. If it becomes necessary to advocate for the public by using unilateral action, it should be done. But all attention should be toward public interest and exactly none toward politics/appearances.

Are we at risk of violent action to overthrow the Biden administration? I do not believe so. However, the foundation of America is currently crumbling under its own weight. A fantasy that Trump and Trumpism will go away because he is no longer President is not worthy of entertaining, mostly because the line of division had already been crossed (e.g. WaPo article about this during Obama administration highlighting Newt and others, and the host of media personalities [Rush, Tucker, Jones, etc.] who went full on echo chamber).
 
  • Like
Reactions: gothuevos

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,189
14,114
136
I hear that, although I think there’s a pretty significant downside risk if he’s acquitted.

The consequences of letting this pass and doing nothing are far worse. This isn't some rando on twitter. He's a retired army general and he knew exactly what he was saying. This is Flynn's second time, BTW. He already suggested that Trump employ martial law to use the military to overturn the election results. He is a traitor to his country and an utter disgrace to the US military.

Prosecute him for sedition. Court martial him for conduct unbecoming. Whatever. Just do it. This guy thinks we should do both:

 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,189
14,114
136
Unfortunately, I don't see much hope overall unless someone other than Trump emerges as a conservative moral leader.

Hey Beevis, he just used the words "conservative" and "moral" in the same sentence. [queue sounds of stoned laughter]
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,634
50,860
136
The consequences of letting this pass and doing nothing are far worse. This isn't some rando on twitter. He's a retired army general and he knew exactly what he was saying. This is Flynn's second time, BTW. He already suggested that Trump employ martial law to use the military to overturn the election results. He is a traitor to his country and an utter disgrace to the US military.

Prosecute him for sedition. Court martial him for conduct unbecoming. Whatever. Just do it. This guy thinks we should do both:

I agree they need to find some way to not let this slide. He's not just a retired general, he's also formerly (albeit briefly) the head national security official for the United States. The idea that such an individual would call for the violent overthrow of the government needs to be treated harshly.
 

kage69

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
28,745
40,187
136
I sure did. And I meant it too.

How does that happen without them forming a new party?

Seems like if a conservative says anything critical about Trump's criminal behavior or war on elections and democracy they are a RINO that needs to be silenced. There has to be voters who still value morals as well.

How do morals make a comeback for Team Treason? Sure as shit don't have any now.
 

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,022
2,872
136
How does that happen without them forming a new party?

Seems like if a conservative says anything critical about Trump's criminal behavior or war on elections and democracy they are a RINO that needs to be silenced. There has to be voters who still value morals as well.

How do morals make a comeback for Team Treason? Sure as shit don't have any now.

A new party sounds like the most realistic way to me. I am not sure it will be too hard to have success. But it can't be half-assed.
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,492
3,161
136
This reminds me of my Trumpie Qanon niece who keeps spewing her conspiratorial nonsense about denial of the holocaust, about Trump the messiah, about fake Biden look-alike's, about fake Bill Gates, about blood drinkers.... and she says "you don't need to believe me. Just look it up." And I say WHY WOULD I BOTHER SPENDING TIME LOOKING UP THIS NONSENSE IN THE FIRST PLACE?
 

nickqt

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2015
7,695
8,095
136
A new party sounds like the most realistic way to me. I am not sure it will be too hard to have success. But it can't be half-assed.
43/50 = 86% of Senate Republicans are in favor of treason if it helps their candidate win the Presidency.

175/211 = 83% of House Republicans are in favor of treason if it helps their candidate win the Presidency.

So, if the 7 Senate Republicans and 35 House Republicans formed a "new" party, how successful do you think it would be? Maybe a better question, what chance do you think those Republicans would have of winning their next election as a member of Party X instead of running as a Republican?
 

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,022
2,872
136
43/50 = 86% of Senate Republicans are in favor of treason if it helps their candidate win the Presidency.

175/211 = 83% of House Republicans are in favor of treason if it helps their candidate win the Presidency.

So, if the 7 Senate Republicans and 35 House Republicans formed a "new" party, how successful do you think it would be? Maybe a better question, what chance do you think those Republicans would have of winning their next election as a member of Party X instead of running as a Republican?

This may be debatable, but Congress critters don't elect themselves. If any fraction creating a new party proves more appealing to voters, they will all follow. To test this, it requires a critical mass to commit fully.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
Biden should reinstate Trump as "duly elected" president the day before 2024 election, and then use 22nd Amendment to disqualify him from "third" term.