Presidential executive order over voting in the works

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe pillowman doesn't, but several hundred thousand rogue "ICE Agents" with weaponry paid for by the American public, should.

First, there are not currently, nor will there be, several hundred thousands of ICE Agents come November. And second, this is a country of 350 million people and a lot of power still rests at the state and local level. Third, a lot of states where they'd like to deploy these "agents" are either open carry or concealed carry. Minneapolis will look like a garden party compared to pulling that $h!t at the polls in Houston or Atlanta.

And your last bit sounds like a MAGA wet dream: The untrained MAGA ICE agents bring violence and provoke retaliatory violence at carefully selected polling spots in high minority communities— and Trump brings out the military for “peaceful “ intervention and uses this and incomplete elections to hang onto the presidency. It’s already Weekend at Bernie’s — something, just another variation for Miller, Vought and their boy Vance.

PP - you’re not wrong but that’s a choice of the regime and the consequences will be on the regime as well.

I’m not convinced the US military is actually going to start killing US citizens. There will be a massive groundswell of resistance in the military if Trump moves this way.

There MAY be a massive groundswell of resistance in the military if Trump moves this way. The leadership has changed a LOT in the last year or so — throughout all branches of the military. Many of the enlisted troops are, if not MAGA, people who wouldn’t necessarily put themselves at risk to avoid implementing what they’re encouraged to believe is their patriotic duty.

Again, it’s likely that this will initially focused on majority minority communities— starting with ICE agents predisposed to view these communities as “other” - if not as “other squandering their tax dollars and taking away their own hypothetical opportunities “. By the time the US military gets pulled in, they will be “defending” the ICE agents, and possibly local police and/ or National Guard troops. I wish I had the confidence that you do that the entire military— individually and collectively— would resist this.

For context, as a Black woman of a certain age, the idea that armed forces sworn to “protect and serve” might easily turn on a dime to, instead, gleefully destroy particular communities is not a hypothetical thought experiment.

I agree with you that it's not a hypothetical thought experiment. I have not been one to blow off the threat that I believe Trump represents. I believe it's pretty obvious what he has been doing and what he continues to work towards - eroding trust in institutions in order to retain power.

But I still have a hard time getting to US troops shooting and killing citizens over voting. I'm trying to think of the last civilian massacre committed by US troops against a foreign population, much less a domestic one.

Last, while I don't think we should sleep on the threat from Flynn/Lindell/Bannon this also feels like a tried and true tactic to float something in the press in order to get Trump to notice it.

Seriously? So, you’re not counting the bombing of schools in Iran today? Is that because of wanting more independent verification?

You’re not counting Kent State. You’re not counting any of the massacres of Native Americans.

And you’re not counting ICE as troops. Which might be accurate— I genuinely don’t know — but doesn’t make them any less lethal.

Given that most of the killing of US citizens has been done by militarized police officers of one kind or another, I can see not counting them as “troops” — although the overlap is increasing, so I’m not going to suggest the MOVE murders as examples. So, lots of civilian deaths, but quite a bit of wiggle room that varies with how we decide to define “US troops.”

I apologize for being gruesome but I'm talking about armed troops gunning down civilians in a face to face confrontation. Kent State was the National Guard. Massacres of Native Americans is wrong and horrific, it's also more than 200 years ago, which is kind of my point. I can't think of a confrontation with a civilian population where the military killed a large amount of civilians since My Lai in Vietnam and we prosecuted those soldiers (which was kind of a farce, but there was a prosecution).

These types of confrontations are rare and not accepted by the population. And the military is trained on what is and what is not lawful. I just think there's a major cultural and training hurdle before the military is going to turn on its own population.

Thanks for elaborating. I truly hope you’re right.

[Anonymous]

When it comes to racists gunning down the public to keep their own in power, there are no guardrails

[Anonymous]

EO won't go anywhere.

More members of the GOP will start speaking out against Trump after primary season ends.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe pillowman doesn't, but several hundred thousand rogue "ICE Agents" with weaponry paid for by the American public, should.

First, there are not currently, nor will there be, several hundred thousands of ICE Agents come November. And second, this is a country of 350 million people and a lot of power still rests at the state and local level. Third, a lot of states where they'd like to deploy these "agents" are either open carry or concealed carry. Minneapolis will look like a garden party compared to pulling that $h!t at the polls in Houston or Atlanta.

And your last bit sounds like a MAGA wet dream: The untrained MAGA ICE agents bring violence and provoke retaliatory violence at carefully selected polling spots in high minority communities— and Trump brings out the military for “peaceful “ intervention and uses this and incomplete elections to hang onto the presidency. It’s already Weekend at Bernie’s — something, just another variation for Miller, Vought and their boy Vance.

You missed a step. According to Bush v Gore, of someone interferes with voting, those votes just don't get counted, because the election itself it more important than the votes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe pillowman doesn't, but several hundred thousand rogue "ICE Agents" with weaponry paid for by the American public, should.

First, there are not currently, nor will there be, several hundred thousands of ICE Agents come November. And second, this is a country of 350 million people and a lot of power still rests at the state and local level. Third, a lot of states where they'd like to deploy these "agents" are either open carry or concealed carry. Minneapolis will look like a garden party compared to pulling that $h!t at the polls in Houston or Atlanta.

And your last bit sounds like a MAGA wet dream: The untrained MAGA ICE agents bring violence and provoke retaliatory violence at carefully selected polling spots in high minority communities— and Trump brings out the military for “peaceful “ intervention and uses this and incomplete elections to hang onto the presidency. It’s already Weekend at Bernie’s — something, just another variation for Miller, Vought and their boy Vance.

PP - you’re not wrong but that’s a choice of the regime and the consequences will be on the regime as well.

I’m not convinced the US military is actually going to start killing US citizens. There will be a massive groundswell of resistance in the military if Trump moves this way.

There MAY be a massive groundswell of resistance in the military if Trump moves this way. The leadership has changed a LOT in the last year or so — throughout all branches of the military. Many of the enlisted troops are, if not MAGA, people who wouldn’t necessarily put themselves at risk to avoid implementing what they’re encouraged to believe is their patriotic duty.

Again, it’s likely that this will initially focused on majority minority communities— starting with ICE agents predisposed to view these communities as “other” - if not as “other squandering their tax dollars and taking away their own hypothetical opportunities “. By the time the US military gets pulled in, they will be “defending” the ICE agents, and possibly local police and/ or National Guard troops. I wish I had the confidence that you do that the entire military— individually and collectively— would resist this.

For context, as a Black woman of a certain age, the idea that armed forces sworn to “protect and serve” might easily turn on a dime to, instead, gleefully destroy particular communities is not a hypothetical thought experiment.

I agree with you that it's not a hypothetical thought experiment. I have not been one to blow off the threat that I believe Trump represents. I believe it's pretty obvious what he has been doing and what he continues to work towards - eroding trust in institutions in order to retain power.

But I still have a hard time getting to US troops shooting and killing citizens over voting. I'm trying to think of the last civilian massacre committed by US troops against a foreign population, much less a domestic one.

Last, while I don't think we should sleep on the threat from Flynn/Lindell/Bannon this also feels like a tried and true tactic to float something in the press in order to get Trump to notice it.

Seriously? So, you’re not counting the bombing of schools in Iran today? Is that because of wanting more independent verification?

You’re not counting Kent State. You’re not counting any of the massacres of Native Americans.

And you’re not counting ICE as troops. Which might be accurate— I genuinely don’t know — but doesn’t make them any less lethal.

Given that most of the killing of US citizens has been done by militarized police officers of one kind or another, I can see not counting them as “troops” — although the overlap is increasing, so I’m not going to suggest the MOVE murders as examples. So, lots of civilian deaths, but quite a bit of wiggle room that varies with how we decide to define “US troops.”

I apologize for being gruesome but I'm talking about armed troops gunning down civilians in a face to face confrontation. Kent State was the National Guard. Massacres of Native Americans is wrong and horrific, it's also more than 200 years ago, which is kind of my point. I can't think of a confrontation with a civilian population where the military killed a large amount of civilians since My Lai in Vietnam and we prosecuted those soldiers (which was kind of a farce, but there was a prosecution).

These types of confrontations are rare and not accepted by the population. And the military is trained on what is and what is not lawful. I just think there's a major cultural and training hurdle before the military is going to turn on its own population.

Hegseth has been administering the cultural and training update.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:EO won't go anywhere.

More members of the GOP will start speaking out against Trump after primary season ends.

They WANT Dems to win. That's their plan...

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump, seeking executive power over elections, is urged to declare emergency

Activists who say they are in coordination with the White House are circulating a draft executive order that would unlock extraordinary presidential power over voting.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/02/26/trump-elections-executive-order-activists/

I don't believe that an EO can override the Constitution as to elections are the purview of each individual state. If he is stupid enough to try this then it will get to the SC so fast it will knock him off his pretend throne.