Post New

this article is well worth reading.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/01/...

How Hitler Dismantled a Democracy in 53 Days
He used the constitution to shatter the constitution.

Ninety-two years ago this month, on Monday morning, January 30, 1933, Adolf Hitler was appointed the 15th chancellor of the Weimar Republic. In one of the most astonishing political transformations in the history of democracy, Hitler set about destroying a constitutional republic through constitutional means. What follows is a step-by-step account of how Hitler systematically disabled and then dismantled his country’s democratic structures and processes in less than two months’ time—specifically, one month, three weeks, two days, eight hours, and 40 minutes. The minutes, as we will see, mattered.


The link is a gifted link so you shouldn't hit a paywall.

Goebbels’ quote rings all to true:

“The big joke on democracy,” he observed, “is that it gives its mortal enemies the means to its own destruction.”

Our democracy rests on the people electing leaders who believe in democracy.

The American people have failed that test.

How Hitler Dismantled a Democracy in 53 Days
He used the constitution to shatter the constitution. = Pucks

-------------


53 days? Trump says hold my MAGA Brand bottled water since I don't drink beer..

You guys maintain a state of max anxiety by believing this sort of thing will happen. Keep it up.

You guys maintain a state of max anxiety by believing this sort of thing will happen. Keep it up.

They need it. And some of them - can't function without it.

Did Hitler's SCOTUS vote *against* him right before he took office?


YOU and Liberals have done more to elect Trump than KellyAnne has.

Quit it.


PS: Liberals love screwing with Democracy for their ends also. I'm fine with either of your sides taking it down. It's so deserved. Keep it up ! Like Trump told you "Fight fight fight!" - and you are doing what he said - as usual

You guys maintain a state of max anxiety by believing this sort of thing will happen.

It can happen, and it may happen, because people like you think it can’t happen.

It can happen,

Sure. We can elect a guy who works with tech companies to stifle discussion and censor opinion.

Oh, wait - his name was Joe Biden!

Sure. We can elect a guy who works with tech companies to stifle discussion and censor opinion.

Biden worked with social media companies to stifle information that was factually inaccurate.

There is a difference between a fact and an opinion.

Biden worked with social media companies to stifle information that was factually inaccurate.

Nope. He censored things he didn't like.

He did it. Zuck confirmed it.

This says so much about liberals. The First Amendment is absolute, buddy. The Government doesn't get to censor anything.

PS: Liberals love screwing with Democracy for their ends also.

Just read this thread. It's like the First Amendment doesn't exist.

Says a lot...about them, and what they would do if they got a chance.

53 days? Trump says hold my MAGA Brand bottled water since I don't drink beer..

You guys maintain a state of max anxiety by believing this sort of thing will happen. Keep it up

Leaving yourself open to the possibility it can happen with someone like Trump is very different than believing this sort of thing will happen.

But I do believe that you mischaracterized this intentionally, if that helps. :)

>>Biden worked with social media companies to stifle information that was factually inaccurate. <<

There is a difference between a fact and an opinion. - AW

--------------------------

But only if the progressives get to decide, right?

But only if the progressives get to decide, right?

Bingo.

It works like this:
Their opinions are facts. Conservative facts are opinions.

It's the analog to liberal violence is free speech; conservative free speech is violence.

See how that works? That way they get so say and do what they want and it's jail for everyone else.

Some call that fascism; the left calls it "ideal".

The Government doesn't get to censor anything.

Oh yes it can. You aren't familiar with the exceptions to the First Amendment? Might cost you 780 million... watch out! :)

There is a difference between a fact and an opinion.

America was enlightened by the MangoMessiah's repeater/translator to the existence of the 'alt-fact' that exists in the nebulous MAGA universe.

""Alternative facts" was a phrase used by U.S. Counselor to the President Kellyanne Conway during a Meet the Press interview on January 22, 2017, in which she defended White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer's false statement about the attendance numbers of Donald Trump's inauguration as President of the United States"

Bingo.It works like this:Their opinions are facts. Conservative facts are opinions.

It's so cute to see MAGAts bounce conservative pundit's talking points off one another, stacking logical fallacies one atop the next.... MAGA JENGA !

It can happen, and it may happen, because people like you think it can’t happen.
****

The Founding Fathers, armed militias, -- - the history that people like you want to minimize and take down from public squares.....

....created something that hasn't let that happened.

Hence you had yet another election and it's only YOU who have perfected election denying. Not me. You've done it multiple times. I've not.

Relax. It's about one generation till people like YOU get your win and democracy in America is over.

But only if the progressives get to decide, right?

Alternative facts don't fly.

Alternative facts don't fly.

You mean like, "Hunter Biden's laptop is a Russian plant" and "there's no chance COVID came from a lab leak"?

Yeah. left wing "facts" in action.

But only if the progressives get to decide, right?

The constant mantra of the modern right is blurring the line between fact and opinion, trying to dispute facts by claiming they are opinion and not fact. Because if facts become opinion, facts can be ignored or opinion can be called fact.

Facts are what they are. Ultimately, it is the courts who decide what is fact. The lowest level courts are often called the "trier of fact". Juries listen to the arguments pro and con and decide what is factual and what is not based on the evidence presented.

--Peter

You mean like, "Hunter Biden's laptop is a Russian plant" and "there's no chance COVID came from a lab leak"?

Those are not facts. Those are opinions.

But those on the right need to attempt to paint them as facts so that their opinions can become facts.

--Peter

Facts are what they are.

Indeed. Hunter Biden's laptop was authentic. And there's plenty of reason to believe that COVID came from a lab.

Ultimately, it is the courts who decide what is fact.

Wrong. The role of the courts is NOT to decide every last thing.

Those are not facts. Those are opinions.

And yet the left ruthlessly suppressed anyone who said - factually - that Hunter's Laptop was real. And crushed anyone who defied the opinion of COVID's origins.

I don't want to hear a damn word about censorship or alternative facts from liberals. You guys aren't standing on solid ground.

Nope. He [Biden] censored things he didn't like.

He did it. Zuck confirmed it.

This says so much about liberals. The First Amendment is absolute, buddy. The Government doesn't get to censor anything.

Oh, your best bud “Zuck” confirmed it? You mean the spineless “Zuck” who gave up fact checkers because he’s scared of Trump? Or the obsequious “Zuck” who coughed up a million dollar bribe to Trump? Or the “Zuck” that thinks confirming facts is destroying the truth? Ya, that’s a real trustworthy source. Not.

Biden’s actions are NOT a First Amendment issue.

Now, take your pocket Constitution out of your pocket and read after me:

First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

When did Congress make a law abridging “Zuck’s” right to free speech?

Oh, and the First Amendment isn’t absolute, buddy. Just ask Fox. They’ve got 787,500,000 reasons that say you’re dead wrong.

Some presidents use the Bully Pulpit to suggest people inject a disinfectant into their veins. Other presidents use the Bully Pulpit to ensure people know the facts.

This says so much about MAGA.

And yet the left ruthlessly suppressed anyone who said - factually - that Hunter's Laptop was real. And crushed anyone who defied the opinion of COVID's origins.


I don't want to hear a damn word about censorship or alternative facts from liberals. You guys aren't standing on solid ground.

But y'all were claiming Hunter's laptop was real before the facts came out. It was so messy I just waited. You see, if the FBI thinks its real that carries weight, but not if Rudy says anything.

Oh yes, we will stuff censorship and alternative facts where your moon doesn't shine. Lying is your brand. Lies are your stock in trade.

Oh, your best bud “Zuck” confirmed it?

Yes. He *could* have been lying, but what would have been the point?

You don't understand the society we live in. Fortunately the voters seem to, and are rejecting the Church of Progressivism's acolytes in many places.

But y'all were claiming Hunter's laptop was real before the facts came out

Lulz. You mean before *the left* was aware the facts were out. That thing was known for some time; that the lib media and the democrats and Biden's security organs wanted it suppressed merely kept left wingers in the dark.

We knew the score.

Reminds me of the democrat debate where the idiot CNN moderator had to tell the audience who Lisa Page and Peter Strzok were, because CNN failed to report on anything they did.

No Lulz. This is how it started:

SNIP In October 2020, a controversy arose involving data from a laptop that belonged to Hunter Biden. The owner of a Delaware computer shop, John Paul Mac Isaac, said that the laptop had been left by a man who identified himself as Hunter Biden. Mac Isaac also stated that he is legally blind and could not be sure whether the man was actually Hunter Biden.[1] Three weeks before the 2020 United States presidential election, the New York Post published a front-page story that presented emails from the laptop, alleging they showed corruption by Joe Biden, the Democratic presidential nominee and Hunter Biden's father.[2] According to the Post, the story was based on information provided to Rudy Giuliani, the personal attorney of incumbent president and candidate Donald Trump, by Mac Isaac.[1] Forensic analysis later authenticated some of the emails from the laptop, including one of the two emails used by the Post in their initial reporting.[7]SNIP

Rudy is not an illustrious beginning for finding the truth, nor is the NY Post a reliable source. It got messy, I dropped thinking about it until there was something solid.

SNIP The hard drive data had been shared with Trump advisor Steve Bannon before it became publicly known.[1] Trump attempted to turn the story into an October surprise to hurt Joe Biden's campaign by falsely alleging that, while in office, Biden had acted corruptly regarding Ukraine to protect his son.[16][17][18] A joint investigation by two Republican Senate committees released in September 2020 and a Republican House Oversight committee investigation released in April 2024 did not find wrongdoing by Joe Biden with regard to Ukraine and his son's business dealings there.[24] PolitiFact wrote in June 2021 that the laptop did belong to Hunter Biden, but did not demonstrate wrongdoing by Joe Biden.[25] SNIP

So by waiting, I skip all the bruhaha, which I am not interested in, and find out it's real and verified by the FBI and nothing indicates Joe Biden has done anything wrong with Hunter, his business deals,and especially the Ukraine slop - just that Hunter's behavior was terrible and to many people immoral. Easy Peasy for me - just wait and look at something else. Some people love to get caught up in the drip-drip-drip of the attempts to smear a candidate, but I don't. I may make a comment or two, but that drip-drip-drip I don't like.

or is the NY Post a reliable

And yet, they were right, and all the libs were wrong.
Enough of this BS Poison The Well logical fallacy stuff with regard to sources. left wingers believed in both impeachments, in RUSSIARUSSIARUSSIA and a whole host of other nonsense, all fed to them by the left wing echo chamber.

MAGADope: "You don't understand the society we live in. "

Chuckles....

And yet, they were right, and all the libs were wrong.

Really? Joe Biden did nothing wrong, and the plan was to smear him out of the Presidency.

<i8>Enough of this BS Poison The Well logical fallacy stuff with regard to sources.

You really don't understand fallacies but you like the sound of them and throw them out. I consider the source.

SNIP Poisoning the well (or attempting to poison the well) is a type of informal fallacy where adverse information about a target is preemptively presented to an audience, with the intention of discrediting or ridiculing something that the target person is about to say.

...The etymology of the phrase lies in well poisoning, an ancient wartime practice of pouring poison into sources of fresh water before an invading army, to diminish the invading army's strength. SNIP

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.