Yet Another Example of Fascist Behavior

[K-9]

From defying federal judges to deploying military in the streets to replace local police, this administration shows example after example of fascist ideology. Now Trump’s BLS director seems to favor doing away with the critical monthly jobs report. Withholding, distorting, or creating false information is right out of the fascist playbook. 
 

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/08/12/trump-bls-jobs-report-00505025

[Hank]

23 minutes ago, K-9 said:

From defying federal judges to deploying military in the streets to replace local police, this administration shows example after example of fascist ideology. Now Trump’s BLS director seems to favor doing away with the critical monthly jobs report. Withholding, distorting, or creating false information is right out of the fascist playbook. 
 

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/08/12/trump-bls-jobs-report-00505025

Defying federal judges - if you're referring to Broberg, his ruling was vacated by the SC. 

Deploying military in the streets - if you're talking about LA, ICE agents were under attack, Bass wouldn't allow police to assist in a timely manner, Newsome refused to send in the guard. That wasn't a peaceful protest, that was rioting and looting. Trump did the right thing sending in the troops to quell the riots when Newsome refused to do it. Was it legal? I have idea, but I support his decision. 

BLS director - i agree with you, it looks shady. They say in the article that quarterly reports will be used until they implement a system that will give accurate data in a more timely manner than go back to the monthly reports, we'll see. 

[K-9]

3 hours ago, Hank said:

Defying federal judges - if you're referring to Broberg, his ruling was vacated by the SC. 

Deploying military in the streets - if you're talking about LA, ICE agents were under attack, Bass wouldn't allow police to assist in a timely manner, Newsome refused to send in the guard. That wasn't a peaceful protest, that was rioting and looting. Trump did the right thing sending in the troops to quell the riots when Newsome refused to do it. Was it legal? I have idea, but I support his decision. 

BLS director - i agree with you, it looks shady. They say in the article that quarterly reports will be used until they implement a system that will give accurate data in a more timely manner than go back to the monthly reports, we'll see. 

The defiance of the Broberg ruling occurred well before the friendly SCOTUS covered for the DOJ, whose lead prosecutor and since appointed federal judge, instructed his staff to “F the federal judges’ orders.”  The fact that the SCOTUS legitimized the action in the Broberg case is irrelevant, anyway. The DOJ did not follow our rule of law from the outset. 
 

The military in LA is not what I’m referring to, although it went against long established norms for deploying the National Guard, let alone marines on the streets of America. I’m referring to Trump’s deployment of national guard troops to patrol the streets of DC as law enforcement. Are you familiar with the brownshirts in 1930s Germany? How about Franco’s use of the military to police and maintain his control of Spain? Classic fascist behavior. 

I could list a number of other examples, but it would be fruitless. Instead, I will continue to share my concerns

Speaking of which, how about some exposure of previously propagated DOGE crap?
 

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/08/12/trump-doge-contract-claims-savings-inflation-00498178

[Hank]

1 hour ago, K-9 said:

The defiance of the Broberg ruling occurred well before the friendly SCOTUS covered for the DOJ, whose lead prosecutor and since appointed federal judge, instructed his staff to “F the federal judges’ orders.”  The fact that the SCOTUS legitimized the action in the Broberg case is irrelevant, anyway. The DOJ did not follow our rule of law from the outset. 
 

The military in LA is not what I’m referring to, although it went against long established norms for deploying the National Guard, let alone marines on the streets of America. I’m referring to Trump’s deployment of national guard troops to patrol the streets of DC as law enforcement. Are you familiar with the brownshirts in 1930s Germany? How about Franco’s use of the military to police and maintain his control of Spain? Classic fascist behavior. 

I could list a number of other examples, but it would be fruitless. Instead, I will continue to share my concerns

Speaking of which, how about some exposure of previously propagated DOGE crap?
 

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/08/12/trump-doge-contract-claims-savings-inflation-00498178

Friendly SCOTUS. Yes, I agree. I hastily said SC when I meant the DC Circuit. I know you're aware it's the DCC. That's my bad. What's interesting about the DCC is that seven of the 11 members are democratic appointees. How in the hell did two of the four republican appointees get selected to a three member panel? Seems improbable. Anywho, the ruled how they did, we'll see if it's appealed. 

I assumed you were referring to LA because I agree with you there's a question of legality there. I did not think you were referring to DC because POTUS is the commander of the DCNG and can deploy them as they see fit, there's no question of legality there. I'm not sure what their role was, if they worked independently or in tandem with local police. I suspect the latter but I'm not sure. 

DOGE - I don't need a left slanted POLITICO article to realize I'm disappointed with how it turned out, I got there all on my own. I was captivated by it and was let down. Truth be told though I think it did more good than bad. 

[K-9]

13 hours ago, Hank said:

Friendly SCOTUS. Yes, I agree. I hastily said SC when I meant the DC Circuit. I know you're aware it's the DCC. That's my bad. What's interesting about the DCC is that seven of the 11 members are democratic appointees. How in the hell did two of the four republican appointees get selected to a three member panel? Seems improbable. Anywho, the ruled how they did, we'll see if it's appealed. 

I assumed you were referring to LA because I agree with you there's a question of legality there. I did not think you were referring to DC because POTUS is the commander of the DCNG and can deploy them as they see fit, there's no question of legality there. I'm not sure what their role was, if they worked independently or in tandem with local police. I suspect the latter but I'm not sure. 

DOGE - I don't need a left slanted POLITICO article to realize I'm disappointed with how it turned out, I got there all on my own. I was captivated by it and was let down. Truth be told though I think it did more good than bad. 

The DOGE stats have been published by several outlets. One doesn’t need a “left slanted” article to read the data. It is what it is. 
 

Question: Is deploying the National Guard and federal agents to act as a municipal police force the intended use for those agencies? Especially when the reason given by Tump is the rampant violent crime in a city? When actual violent crime is down 25% in that city?
 

Is threatening to deploy NG and federal agents to act as municipal police departments in other cities where crime is also down the right thing? 
 

Trump is assembling his own brand of brownshirts. It is wrong on every level imaginable. 

[LTS]

The threatening part is what I focus on... he threatens a lot. He doesn't always follow through.

Unfortunately I have no clue which way it'll go until it goes that way and the threatening piece of it is what is really sad and scary.

As for DOGE, I'm still convinced that nothing more than a dog and pony show to get access to sensitive data on the American public to help facilitate actions at a later date and the whole "fallout" between Musk and Trump is merely a ruse to make people think otherwise.

It's all 100% sketchy performed under the auspices of addressing the hard issues while not actually addressing anything.

[K-9]

2 hours ago, LTS said:

The threatening part is what I focus on... he threatens a lot. He doesn't always follow through.

Unfortunately I have no clue which way it'll go until it goes that way and the threatening piece of it is what is really sad and scary.

As for DOGE, I'm still convinced that nothing more than a dog and pony show to get access to sensitive data on the American public to help facilitate actions at a later date and the whole "fallout" between Musk and Trump is merely a ruse to make people think otherwise.

It's all 100% sketchy performed under the auspices of addressing the hard issues while not actually addressing anything.

He wasted no time in carrying out his threat to deploy NG troops and federal agents in DC to act as a municipal police force. Why is it hard to believe his threats to do the same in Baltimore, Portland, and other cities are just bluster? 

Many of his threats have become reality since January and given that, we all need go assume he means what he says, regardless of his unparalleled penchant for uttering pure crap out of his pie hole on a daily basis. 

Again, I urge everyone to read the Project 2025 paper. It is a fascist authoritarian manifesto. 
 

 

[LGR4GM]

On 8/12/2025 at 4:36 PM, Hank said:

Defying federal judges - if you're referring to Broberg, his ruling was vacated by the SC. 

Deploying military in the streets - if you're talking about LA, ICE agents were under attack, Bass wouldn't allow police to assist in a timely manner, Newsome refused to send in the guard. That wasn't a peaceful protest, that was rioting and looting. Trump did the right thing sending in the troops to quell the riots when Newsome refused to do it. Was it legal? I have idea, but I support his decision. 

BLS director - i agree with you, it looks shady. They say in the article that quarterly reports will be used until they implement a system that will give accurate data in a more timely manner than go back to the monthly reports, we'll see. 

There's disinformation in here.

But just to clarify you support sending in armed US military personnel to deal with domestic law enforcement issues?

You support the Potus at any point sending the military to US soil to do... anything the potus orders?

[Hank]

6 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

There's disinformation in here.

But just to clarify you support sending in armed US military personnel to deal with domestic law enforcement issues?

You support the Potus at any point sending the military to US soil to do... anything the potus orders?

That's not close to what I said, but you know that. 

[LGR4GM]

29 minutes ago, Hank said:

That's not close to what I said, but you know that. 

Do you support deploying the United States military on US soil? 

[LGR4GM]

35 minutes ago, Hank said:

That's not close to what I said, but you know that. 

Do you support deploying armed US military personnel for domestic law enforcement operations?

Do you support deploying armed US military personnel to put down protests that are in opposition to the POTUS?

[Hank]

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Do you support deploying the United States military on US soil? 

What are you trying to do? Are you looking for a "gotcha" moment? In the post you quoted i clearly stated I supported a military presence to quell the riots in LA. I also clearly questioned the legality of it. 

[Hank]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Do you support deploying armed US military personnel for domestic law enforcement operations?

Do you support deploying armed US military personnel to put down protests that are in opposition to the POTUS?

Protest? No. Riots? Only when local law enforcement refuses to. I'm guessing Trump's decision in LA was influenced by the democratic leadership in Portland allowing antifa to riot for, what was it, over three months straight? Does anything Trump does surprise you? Me neither. So why were democrats stupid enough to put him into office a second time?

[LGR4GM]

6 minutes ago, Hank said:

Protest? No. Riots? Only when local law enforcement refuses to. I'm guessing Trump's decision in LA was influenced by the democratic leadership in Portland allowing antifa to riot for, what was it, over three months straight? Does anything Trump does surprise you? Me neither. So why were democrats stupid enough to put him into office a second time?

Why are Republicans hell bent on fascism?

13 minutes ago, Hank said:

What are you trying to do? Are you looking for a "gotcha" moment? In the post you quoted i clearly stated I supported a military presence to quell the riots in LA. I also clearly questioned the legality of it. 

I asked a simple question. Calling what was happening in LA "riots" is disinformation. Under that pretense, Trump can deploy the US Military anywhere on US soil for anything. 

[Hank]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Why are Republicans hell bent on fascism?

Good question, you should ask one. 

[LGR4GM]

You're clearly triggered. I asked a few follow up questions on your position. That's all, there is no "gotcha" coming. 

I disagree on your take. I don't have big smoking gun though which you implied a few times. 

[Hank]

People like to scream MAGA!!!! Trump has his base, but it's not big enough to swing the election. On November 5th did every swing state not have more registered democrats than Republicans? Enough of them either voted for Trump or didn't care enough to vote at all, that's the uncomfortable truth. 

[Hank]

21 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Why are Republicans hell bent on fascism?

I asked a simple question. Calling what was happening in LA "riots" is disinformation. Under that pretense, Trump can deploy the US Military anywhere on US soil for anything. 

Calling the riots "disinformation" is dishonest.