Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

moondust

(21,257 posts)

15. Do you know for a fact

Reply to onenote (Reply #11)

Wed Dec 28, 2016, 05:08 PM

Dec 2016

that the GOP does not have some legislation up its sleeve to circumvent the first amendment, similar to Article 301 in Turkey, that they believe they can pass with control of all three branches of government? I'm not ruling anything out.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

33 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Get ready for an unpressidented violation of the First Amendment under Trump... [View all] Rollo Dec 2016 OP

Absolutely unconstitutional sharp_stick Dec 2016 #1

Oh yes he would. Clarence is a Republican. Achilleaze Dec 2016 #6

Nope. Even Fat Tony Scalia was almost a First Amendment absolutist. The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2016 #14

It IS satire, No, he can't do it, elleng Dec 2016 #2

Yes, but he can try... Rollo Dec 2016 #3

Congress can't do a damn thing about it. The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2016 #4

All true, but... Rollo Dec 2016 #8

That isn't the role of the AG. onenote Dec 2016 #10

The AG couldn't do that - the Attorney General represents the government The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2016 #12

If Turkey can do it... moondust Dec 2016 #5

Yup Rollo Dec 2016 #9

Sorry, but just because Turkey or some other country can do something onenote Dec 2016 #11

Do you know for a fact moondust Dec 2016 #15

They CAN'T circumvent the Constitution BECAUSE IT'S THE CONSTITUTION! The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2016 #17

What about this... moondust Dec 2016 #19

The Second Amendment has been interpreted in the Heller case as including The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2016 #20

Exactly. moondust Dec 2016 #22

I wonder how... Rollo Dec 2016 #31

Perish the thought. moondust Dec 2016 #32

You may not like that money is speech, but you should be thankful that it is onenote Dec 2016 #26

Simply because moondust Dec 2016 #30

I'm willing to say that I know for a fact that they don't have legislation like 301 in Turkey onenote Dec 2016 #25

We don't have any laws like that. And if Congress managed to pass one, The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2016 #13

Ok, this is from almost a year ago. Glassunion Dec 2016 #7

He talks a big game, but he's not up to the threat brooklynite Dec 2016 #16

Just more bung-blowing cock-strut. Eleanors38 Dec 2016 #18

His I AM THE BOSS approach will cause serious problems. lpbk2713 Dec 2016 #21

Who's going to complain? world wide wally Dec 2016 #23

Oh for fuck's sake X_Digger Dec 2016 #24

Seems to be a lot of confusion about how the whole thing works... The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2016 #27

Americans are about to get a 4 year civics lesson True_Blue Dec 2016 #33

Hillary just called. She wants to know if that is retroactive lol Takket Dec 2016 #28

anyone who thinks they can't doesn't appreciate the lengths to which they will go. unblock Dec 2016 #29