3 ms·

"If a genuine emergency were to take place, and Trump tried to use the occasion to cancel elections or declare martial law, who would be able to stop him?" LOL

cryptonector 1y ago
This comment was killed, and I vouched for it because the comment's quote from TFA is accurate, and its implication in TFA is that the CIA should be able to do something like, idk, kill or remove the POTUS, something that is quite nefarious. Pointing out that TFA does that is very much worth having here. Feel free to discuss.
- HaZeust 1y ago
  Agreed, but it's a good question. Will the will of the people do it - should we expect the will of the people, as a conglomerate, to make such a concentrated and calculated decision?
  - cryptonector 1y ago
    What are you talking about? The subject was TFA implying that the CIA should be able to kill or otherwise remove the sitting POTUS. The CIA does not implement "the will of the people" -- the POTUS in principle does, and should, but the POTUS is an individual with his own will. There is no "will of the people" involved in this sub-thread. The question is: should the CIA have the capability and power to remove the sitting POTUS, yes or no?
    - HaZeust 1y ago
      While correct, the implication of the quote in the article that GP shares is that of, “who ELSE CAN incapacitate the president in event of overreach on the status quo?” There’s usually 2 implied answers to this - at least in American discourse (the people - with an extralegal right to revolution, and foreign states - as an act of war). However, the author actually introduces a party that usually isn’t discussed in the conversation - the IC. I was just bringing up the party of “The People” that is USUALLY assumed the responsibility in hypotheticals like these, and actually challenging the grounds of doing so

cryptonector 1y ago

This comment was killed, and I vouched for it because the comment's quote from TFA is accurate, and its implication in TFA is that the CIA should be able to do something like, idk, kill or remove the POTUS, something that is quite nefarious. Pointing out that TFA does that is very much worth having here. Feel free to discuss.

HaZeust 1y ago
Agreed, but it's a good question. Will the will of the people do it - should we expect the will of the people, as a conglomerate, to make such a concentrated and calculated decision?
- cryptonector 1y ago
  What are you talking about? The subject was TFA implying that the CIA should be able to kill or otherwise remove the sitting POTUS. The CIA does not implement "the will of the people" -- the POTUS in principle does, and should, but the POTUS is an individual with his own will. There is no "will of the people" involved in this sub-thread. The question is: should the CIA have the capability and power to remove the sitting POTUS, yes or no?
  - HaZeust 1y ago
    While correct, the implication of the quote in the article that GP shares is that of, “who ELSE CAN incapacitate the president in event of overreach on the status quo?” There’s usually 2 implied answers to this - at least in American discourse (the people - with an extralegal right to revolution, and foreign states - as an act of war). However, the author actually introduces a party that usually isn’t discussed in the conversation - the IC. I was just bringing up the party of “The People” that is USUALLY assumed the responsibility in hypotheticals like these, and actually challenging the grounds of doing so