The US Has Invoked Alien Enemies Act(whitehouse.gov) |
The US Has Invoked Alien Enemies Act(whitehouse.gov) |
Just that I don't agree this topic fit in any of those categories, so just want to state it first.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/trump-...
It has only been 2 months. How much further can it go in one year? In 4 years? At what point would there be real consequences? I think these questions are important enough to warrant some serious discussion.
I'm not qualified to speak to hypotheticals and likely neither is anyone else here. However, the only consequences are either Congress removing him, the cabinet removing him via Article 25, an armed uprising, or potentially a Big Mac.
Until any of those happen, there are no consequences for the duration.
Of course, if you think this one deserves special treatment, the thing to do is email hn@ycombinator.com and ask for flags to be taken off. I think in this case it's a little uphill (as another toplevel comment points out - the news has already overtaken this thing) and you'd probably need to find some sort of third party reporting rather than the government press release.
You seemed to say (implicitly) that this isn't too dire because the judiciary stopped it. They in response made the point that even if this isn't effective now, the rapid escalation of the use executive power is a big deal that points to further escalation that might not be stopped.
Yes, they mentioned facts that appear in the article to support the point but nowhere this point is made, or furthermore, it doesn't even matter if it was. Expressing a similar opinion like one in an article quote makes his reply superfluous?
Saying "reddit" and "nobody is qualified to speak hypotheticals" seems more like you don't wish to engage with his point. The act that's been used to put innocent people in to concentration camps was invoked, more discussion should exist beyond dryly mentioning the mechanisms for ousting the US president.
I'm not assuming your opinions on the matter, the refusal to approach the question just seemed weird to me, so I wanted to note it.
> You seemed to say (implicitly) that this isn't too dire because the judiciary stopped it.
Do not /ass/ume what other's mean, and don't put words in my mouth.
I personally think there is value in discussion around first-in-my-lifetime events like this.