PowerDump wrote:

mchekhov 2: Chek Harder wrote:

PowerDump wrote:This election is bringing out the absolute worst on both sides.

just an update trump is president now

*Just an update, Trump is president now.

Are you trying to sound smart?

Lol chill Michael, I thought it was funny that he corrected my honest mistake in use of words and then proceeded to not use as much care with his response.

Gosh some people are so uptight these days lol

i misread this situation

my bad

broseph i don't use caps or periods everyone knows this

PowerDump wrote: Where was this executive order about eradicating speech? Seriously, I haven't heard of it yet.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... rder-trump

I'm sorry but how is that possible? Isn't that basically censorship and isn't censorship against the constitution?

And isn't there an institution that can interfere whenever something is done or is about to be done against the constitution? (similar to a Constitutional court. I know US doesn't have this in particular which I've always found to be quite ridiculous given the history of democracy there and the respect for Constitution)

Someone info me on this. Because it sounds a bit out of place for a president to be able to freely break the constitutional laws.

RIFA wrote:I'm sorry but how is that possible? Isn't that basically censorship and isn't censorship against the constitution?

And isn't there an institution that can interfere whenever something is done or is about to be done against the constitution? (similar to a Constitutional court. I know US doesn't have this in particular which I've always found to be quite ridiculous given the history of democracy there and the respect for Constitution)

Someone info me on this. Because it sounds a bit out of place for a president to be able to freely break the constitutional laws.

The Supreme Court would be the ones who could declare something Trump did unconstitutional. It's one of the checks for the Judiciary to Executive branch.

But, I'm not exactly sure if what Trump is doing here is technically illegal/unconstitutional. While it sounds like censorship, and the article that was linked seems to sensationalize it a bit, it seems like what is actually happening is that Trump is basically saying, "don't do talk about these things or I'll be mad."

EDIT: but the fact we need to be having this discussion a week into his presidency is very, very sad

Literally everything you're asking RIFA is what many people are asking. How is this being allowed? Maybe because it's a government organization and he's the executive branch and he can tell the people in his department how to act? That may be "the answer" but it's still wrong as hell. And it's not just Trump saying "don't do this or I'll be mad," he's saying "you cannot do this" as evident by every single national park account being silenced (even after one [Badlands] tried to rebel and post anyway in protest). It's terrifying to me that this isn't trending and the mass public doesn't know about this.

He's hardly shutting people up about climate change though. People are talking about it more than ever by creating multiple accounts (gaining tens of thousands of followers in hours) in honor of those shut down (with one claiming to even be spawned off actual scientists going behind the associations back to make a personal united account)
https://twitter.com/BadlandsNPS
https://twitter.com/BadIandsNPS - 23K
https://twitter.com/BadlandNPS
https://twitter.com/AltNatParkSer (One claiming to be made up of actual scientists) - 44.3K

Oh so he's just "smart about it" like he was when he refused to pay his taxes.

What a symbol for a great nation lol.

Scientists are trying to plan a large scale march similar to the march this past week.

More details from that AltUSNatPark Twitter explaining the severity of the situation:
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN15906G

This is the beginnings of a dictatorship ladies and gentlemen.

i'd like asianversionofet to weigh in on all this