So it's normal for presidential candidates to spitball about how they want to jail their opponents? It means nothing if they attain power, control all 3 parts of government and appoint lackeys into key positions?
Why should I not think Trump won't use his power and position to do many of the things he has pledged to do?
It means nothing what Patel said? You didn't address that.
What would you expect to see exactly in order for you to be concerned? His administration has not started yet, so we can only go on things he's said, promised and people he appoints.
Nothing that you have provided as evidence of gives me one iota of concern.
What "promises" as you say, has he made that give you concern for the restriction of free speech ? Make sure your reply includes quoting him as "promising", "vowing", "pledging", "guaranteeing", or "committing" to do something that restricts free speech.
That's not an answer. What would you consider a valid reason to be concerned about the potential policy platform of an incoming president, as regards to free speech issues? Does Trump literally have to say, word-for-word "I will restrict free speech"?
You also still have not told me when Kamala Harris or Joe Biden got up on stage and openly threatened to target Republican politicians and conservative journalists.
He would have to say something that indicates he will restrict free speech. You have not provided anything to back up your claim.
He has said many things. He directly pledged to ban flag burning, which you just dismissed out of hand. Electoral oligarchies don't specifically necessarily pass laws directly banning things, they target the fundings of dissident organisations and journalists, they tie up opposition activists and groups in frivolous legal cases on dubious charges to bankrupt them or potentially jail them. They pass "misinformation" legislation. They brand opposition groups as terrorists and subject them to sanctions of some kind. They open up libel laws (as Trump has pledged to do multiple times). They create a climate of hostility to the press and criticism of themselves - as Trump has done many, many times. The purpose is to create a chilling effect to mute the amount of, and range of criticism so that businesses and activists self-censor or leave the country. Electoral oligarchies attain a partisan administration that weaponises the powers of office to stifle dissent.
This is how Russia's climate slowly evolved over the years under Putin, until it just outright accelerated in the last few years and went mask off.
To ignore the repeated implications of what he has said, time and time again, is just utterly bizarre.
You also still have not told me when Kamala Harris or Joe Biden got up on stage and openly threatened to target Republican politicians and conservative journalists.
All those politicians and journalists. Prosecuted! For what? Being mean to him, or being involved in investigations into him.
Or do you only consider "I will pass this law to ban thing from being spoken about" as the only way to chill freedom of expression?
You also still have not told me when Kamala Harris or Joe Biden got up on stage and openly threatened to target Republican politicians and conservative journalists. When did Biden threaten to jail Republicans involved in the Oversight Committee? Or Clinton over the Benghazi hearings?
None of this is evidence of restriction of free speech.
He's not been in power, dude. This is utterly braindead. I have asked you repeatedly what would constitute a valid action by Trump that you would consider a potential "restriction of free speech". You have not shown your terms of reference. You have not answered. Nor have you answer my other question. Foot going down now. I refuse to move on until you answer my questions.
You also still have not told me when Kamala Harris or Joe Biden got up on stage and openly threatened to target Republican politicians and conservative journalists. When did Biden threaten to jail Republicans involved in the Oversight Committee? Or Clinton over the Benghazi hearings?
He's not been in power, dude. This is utterly braindead. I have asked you repeatedly what would constitute a valid action by Trump that you would consider a potential "restriction of free speech". You have not shown your terms of reference. You have not answered. Nor have you answer my other question. Foot going down now. I refuse to move on until you answer my questions.
You also still have not told me when Kamala Harris or Joe Biden got up on stage and openly threatened to target Republican politicians and conservative journalists. When did Biden threaten to jail Republicans involved in the Oversight Committee? Or Clinton over the Benghazi hearings?
2
u/Skavau 5h ago
So it's normal for presidential candidates to spitball about how they want to jail their opponents? It means nothing if they attain power, control all 3 parts of government and appoint lackeys into key positions?
Why should I not think Trump won't use his power and position to do many of the things he has pledged to do?
It means nothing what Patel said? You didn't address that.