ex-President Trump

Ofc there should be prosecutions, there is a very long list of entities violating civil right law by discriminating against whites, Asians, and men, and a republican DOJ should go to great effort to prosecute as many of them as possible.

There is also plausibly some criminal responsibility of some democrats wrt FTX bankruptcy and other events, which should be investigated.

As for the implied worry they would make up cases with no substance, I don't think you have anything to worry about as courts/jury won't convict on mere random accusations.

As for Harvard (and other radical leftist institutions) it is actually very much about that at it's core. Dunno why you think it's a marginal theme, the violent occupation of colleges by radical leftists and the societal disaster coming out of that (from a right-wing pov) is very prominent as a topic in right-wing groups

It's not fascism to prosecute, it would be fascism to convict with no basis, setup kangaroo courts and so on, because you hate the accused, but that's not something Trump could do as president.

It's not fascism to prosecute to the full extent democrats every time something is off (like a name is say, on a list of known contacts of a convicted child prostitution solicitor), unless you act illegally in the investigation.

Then not all prosecutions end up with convictions, and that part would be out of Trump hands.

But you'd support him if he could, right?

D2_e4 just to understand what you mean, would you consider it fascism to go investigate in great details all recipients of political donations by FTX under the suspicion that they might have known something illegal was happening and/or they might have actually helped FTX in various ways hide the illegal acts they were committing?

I am not saying we know for a fact that was the case, I am asking if investigating the matter as much as possible and prosecuting if anything potentially criminal comes out of the investigation would be fascism for you, if a republican DOJ did that.

I'd support him do what exactly?

Set up kangaroo courts to try these pesky democrats purely in the interests of "retribution", and convict them with no basis in fact. You know, like the fascists did. Oh, of course there is always the facade that the proceedings are legit, but ultimately, the conviction is what we're after here, right?

Hm absolutely not? I very much believe in separation of powers which is why i don't even like the idea of prosecutionary discretion, nor the idea of prosecution a being a power of the executive lol.

I would have the judiciary being fully accountable to the public through elections though, both prosecutors and judges, but completely distinct from legislative and executive power.

To reduce the risk of concentration of power (in the same party for example) the elections would be in distinct years from the legislative ones.

The core ideas of minarchism are about avoiding centralization/concentration of power as the most threatening event in society, and never delegating any actual power to unelected bodies.

As for the democrats potential victimization, unfortunately though you might think it again, because I am pretty sure you can realize that given the amount of laws concerning everything in our lives, the probability all the main figures in the party and their most important donors never broke any of them is reaaaaaaaally low, and if you dedicate the full power of the state to search for such rule breaking, you will find it.

Can you now answer the question about an hypothetical investigation of FTX donations recipients?

Sure, investigate them. Is there some push by the democrats to not investigate them or something? I don't really have my ear to the ground on these things. I know SBF said he donated just as much to republicans as he did to democrats, he just donated to republicans in such a way that the information about these donations wasn't in the public domain. Whether that's true or not I have no idea, but that's what he said. But go ahead, investigate away, why not?

Well, Trump has made it clear that what I described is exactly what he would do if he could, so you probably need to make it clear that you support him despite these statements if what you say above is a true reflection of your views on the matter. Because, so far, you have not only not made that clear, you seem to be cheerleading for quite the opposite.

Well hm afaik right now there is no such investigation, and it's up to Garland to decide i think

I am cheerleading for Biden to win and the senate to be republican, so that almost nothing gets done which is usually the best i can pragmatically hope for.

Trump president with a democrat senate would be ok as well but it's a virtual impossibility given the senate map favours republicans more

I am not sure what you mean with "support", i think it would be a positive for society if, in case he wins, he starts prosecuting democrats a lot, because of the thinking process detailed before (so that left leaning people might realize the state has too much power, and change their view on the role of the state in society a little toward mine).

I think a lot of democrats would just take away the right to vote from supporters of trump if they could , but they can't so i don't worry about that either

And you think those things were done to punish political enemies?

Wasn't Trump's name on the Epstein list?

Ye mentioned because they went to a Trump casino lol, not because of other associations

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/1/4/...

Donald Trump
Former President Donald Trump is also mentioned in the documents but not accused.

Sjoberg mentioned an incident when she left with Epstein, Giuffre and a few others on a plane from Palm Beach, Florida, in 2001.

When the plane was unable to land in New York due to a storm, they had to land in Atlantic City and went to one of Trump’s casinos. Since Giuffre was underage at the time, Sjoberg was asked if she was allowed into the casino.

“I did not know anything about how old you had to be to gamble legally. I just knew she could not get in because of an ID issue, so she and I did not gamble,” Sjoberg answered.

Ye democrat donors very much like to abolish their competition by law

Dems also used the intelligence community to stay in power (collusion to get the intelligence community to say the laptop was fake right before the election) and they encouraged political violence (BLM & the supreme court intimidation plot). Trump used the dem playbook on nearly everything he is accused of doing wrong.

I'd be willing to be that if trump wins, he goes after more republicans than democrats. The democrats are known adversaries. Republicans betrayed daddy.

Hope springs eternal.

He would send all of them as envoys to the UN, then have the USA leave the UN.

Checkmate

Trump has never had any allegiance to the Republican party. One of the reasons that other politicians in the party have been so reluctant to move on from him is concern about what he would do the party if he were exiled.

Trump is the abusive boyfriend who threatens to kill his girlfriend if she leaves him.

She was told by President Trump to either stop down on her own or she'll be let go the hard way, and she chose to stop down on her own for not investigating reports of voter fraud by a Nicki Hailey staffer.

Exactly which donors are these?

My understanding is that most corporations that give money to political parties give to both parties.