Re: Objectively intelligent.
 

Although one should give Trump credit where credit is due. In the end, he cost Republicans the Presidency, the House, the Senate, Georgia and Arizona.

Re: May it please the court...
 

Pretty Little Donald, the words don't say what you say they say, and we can look that up in the record and show that you are lying.

Here's what I said in reply to you saying Orange Boy was a threat:

"He's not, and he never really was. The system held together, and his attempts to thwart it have been performative, and largely laughed at by sane, sober people."

In the first sentence, I state Trump was never a threat. In the second, I admit that he sought to threaten, and would indeed have threatened, but was hopelessly unable to do so. I'll cite the Black Knight from Monty Python after having lost all of his limbs as an apt analogy for Trump as "a threat." (That analogy has been used here in other contexts, but I can't think of a better one for an incompetent like Trump.) I also noted that his efforts have been largely performative. In the past, that's been both intentional and unintentional. Often, his attempts to thwart norms and laws are so off the wall, so doomed to fail, they wind up being entirely performative, as it's impossible for them to come to fruition. Other times, such as with his demand that Pence reject the electoral votes, they are clearly, entirely performative and designed solely to whip up his base.

Finally, I noted that sane and sober people laughed at Trump as a threat to distinguish them from people who seriously thought he could ever have turned us into a dictatorship. Those in the media engaged the argument he was a serious threat because it created fear, which sells airtime and gets clicks. Neither their perception nor their wits were scrambled. They were cynics, nihilists, opportunists, people moving product. Those who truly believed this tinpot Mussolini had a chance of flipping the election, of subverting a system that's withstood 100X worse than his silly, preposterous efforts, have deluded perceptions of reality. They're ingesting too much media perhaps, or congenitally too emotional to think straight about politics. I don't know the cause of their flawed perception, but I do know it is, clinically, quite unclear. Bordering on, partially, or fully delusional.

Re: Objectively intelligent.
 

I saw a clown car of opioid addicts, QAnon loons, and middle aged burnouts trash the Capitol for an hour. This is a serious threat to our democracy as a pothole might stop a tank.

I'm going to wager you aren't Dr. Manhattan and weren't in all of the dozens of cities where riots simultaneously occurred after Floyd's murder.

It isn't all hicks suffering economic anxiety. But a lot of it is. If you doubt that, consider the photos of that mob. You're citing extreme outliers. The overwhelming majority look like people missing fingers from playing with M-80s in their double-wides.

Re: Objectively intelligent.
 

To be fair, he accomplished in only 4 years what it took Obama 8 years to do: turn the entirety of the Federal government back to the opposing party.

Re: Objectively intelligent.
 

What about the pipe bombs, molotov cocktails, and guys with zip ties. What were those for? https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/zi...capitol-riots/

Re: Objectively intelligent.
 

Clearly the kind of panic that results from widespread economic insecurity.

Re: Objectively intelligent.
 

If the federal judge is inclined to put the prosecutors to the test. I would expect something more like a simulacrum of due process.

Re: May it please the court...
 

Thanks to Trump and his Republican supporters, and apologists like you, we have established that if a party holds Congress, it can reject electoral votes and install its losing candidate. It is an obvious threat to democracy that was not on anyone's radar six months ago, and yet here we are. To say nothing of what it means that he has persuaded significant numbers of people that Biden did not win legitimately.

Re: Objectively intelligent.
 

I've heard great things. Will watch.

Re: Objectively intelligent.
 

Re: May it please the court...
 

FWIW, I was always confident that McConnell and the Supremes would not bow to trump crazed theories. They have actual power and putting a dictator in place would mean they no longer any. I don't know who ran Germany's Supreme Court the day before Hitler took over but I do know he had no power the day after. McC and the Supreme Court Judges are not stupid. They were never going to throw it away.

As to Sebby's point that Trump was not a threat because he ultimately did not suceed, I wonder if that means he would not have found Hitler a threat?

Re: May it please the court...
 

I didn’t say that. I said he was never a threat to democracy. He wasn’t, and he isn’t. No one can turn this system into a dictatorship.* You’re watching too much TV. Drama.

He was never going to overturn this election. Never. Cruz and Hawley were just performing, cynically.

The system precludes an attempt to create a dictatorship. The effort can’t even start. Trump never even came close to having a chance at turning us into a dictatorship. And he had no chance of doing it if he won the election.
_____
* Social media might become de facto dictators, but that’s a different conversation.

Re: May it please the court...
 

He could not and cannot - indeed no one can - become a dictator, or overthrow an election.

This whole last month has been a warped, embarrassing spectacle - Kubrickian, absurdist. The whole effort was pathetic.

Trump is a mentally ill person. And some would ask if a smarter person could have pulled this off. Here’s the answer: No. I don’t care how diabolical and clever a president might be. Any effort to become a dictator or flip an election is not just stillborn... It’s never even viably conceived. Hence, no threat.

(If I threaten to shoot you with my finger, with magical bullets I claim to have in my hand, am I a threat to you? That’s about as much of a threat of installation of a dictatorship there is, under any president.)

Re: May it please the court...
 

If you want to create a binary alternative between "crazed theories" and 'everything is great,' whatever. My point was that Trump and his supporters have done a lot of damage to our system of government, even without Supreme Court acceptance of crazed theories. For example, a majority of GOP Congressmen and several Senators have endorsed the theory that Congress can reject electoral votes on bogus grounds. That's nuts. It's completely undemocratic, and it paves the way for worse in the future. And it bypasses the Supreme Court.

After the beer hall putsch, Hitler looked silly, didn't he?

Re: May it please the court...
 

Hi buddy, I'm old enough to remember Florida in 2000, when it was clear that the Florida Supreme Court was going to uphold a determination that Gore had more votes, and the Supreme Court discarded its principles of federalism and dictated a Bush victory. In your own state, the legislature has declined to seat a Democrat who won his election. We've had many Republicans insisting that Republican state legislatures should send slates of Trump electors to replace the Biden electors picked by their voters. In Wisconsin, you have a minority of Republicans commanding the legislature through gerrymandering.

You don't seem to have thought very hard about what the threats to democracy are, and that makes it very easy for you to glibly dismiss them.