Trump threatens to "send in feds" to Chicago

[ag]

Where are the 3rd amendment people when you need them?

[ag]

The state's rights crowd better speak up now or else I'll send in the Feds.

That shop is closed. There will be no individual or states rights left. And these guys will say that we simply do not get the joke.

[ag]

I am starting to get the feeling things will develop pretty damn fast. It took less than a month for the Reichstag fire to happen. We may be in for something similar.

[ag]

Just kill everyone already and end this sh**t.

He will, just give him time.

A year or two will be enough.

[ag]

Will he have the power to actually do this?

The troops will follow the orders. Whether it will be legal, who knows. But, then, who will care about legality in a month or two?

[ag]

Hm.  I am getting the feeling that the main reason he wants to build the wall is to prevent people from getting out of the US, not in. It also makes sense much more that way: walls of this sort do work if you patrol on the side from which people are trying to cross.

[ag]

I'm for less of my fellow Americans dying.

That ship is gone. You should have prevented Trump's election. Now it is too late.

[ag]

The local government in Chicago has utterly failed to protect its residents.  It's a national disaster there, and absolutely nothing is being done to reverse it.  I wouldn't support the President arbitrarily deploying the feds into Chicago.  There does need to be a national discussion though.  Congress needs to do something. 

How many Chicago residents you want the Feds to kill? Would a couple of million be good? Or would you be fine with a mere 100,000 or so? Clearly, you would not be satisfied with less.

[ag]

I'm for less of my fellow Americans dying.

Then you should oppose any move by Trump to send troops into Chicago to harass people, because that's exactly what will happen.

This exactly.

That goes without saying. But he is, really, trumping: he wants something else.

[ag]

I guess when 700+ more Chicagoans are dead at the end of 2017 we can all shrug our shoulders and ponder what we can do in 2018.

Tell me how sending in federal troops will change this equation.

 The gangs would be crushed.  

As will be a lot of other people.

[ag]

I guess when 700+ more Chicagoans are dead at the end of 2017 we can all shrug our shoulders and ponder what we can do in 2018.

Tell me how sending in federal troops will change this equation.

I think it would undoubtedly decrease the violence.  The gangs would be crushed.

You're not making sense here, Jim.  Take a step back and think about the words you're writing.

He has thought it through. That is why it is so frightening.

[ag]

I guess when 700+ more Chicagoans are dead at the end of 2017 we can all shrug our shoulders and ponder what we can do in 2018.

Kill more of them, of course!

[ag]

How about a compromise, the feds arrest the mayor for covering up a murder by police?

Another month or two and you will be ready for a post in the Trump administration.

[ag]

Will he have the power to actually do this?

The troops will follow the orders. Whether it will be legal, who knows. But, then, who will care about legality in a month or two?

Just think of how that worked for Nicolae Ceausescu.

It did work for more years than you care to think about.

[ag]

That's an insane thing to say,

Unless you quickly dissassociate yourself from that crazy gang, you will be guilty by association. Get out, while it is still not too late!

[ag]

The local government in Chicago has utterly failed to protect its residents.  It's a national disaster there, and absolutely nothing is being done to reverse it.  I wouldn't support the President arbitrarily deploying the feds into Chicago.  There does need to be a national discussion though.  Congress needs to do something. 

How many Chicago residents you want the Feds to kill? Would a couple of million be good? Or would you be fine with a mere 100,000 or so? Clearly, you would not be satisfied with less.

Just enough to make Illinois competitive in 2020.

Why stop there?

[ag]

This mad man is in way over his head.  He needs to be impeached before he permanently damages the country and the world.

It's increasingly apparent that each day that passes where this does not happen is going to seriously harm the global standing of the United States and risk the safety of people both in it and outside of it.

Too late. Millions will die before we are out of this nightmare.

[ag]

How about a compromise, the feds arrest the mayor for covering up a murder by police?

Another month or two and you will be ready for a post in the Trump administration.

Because Trump wants to appoint people who think a mayor should be arrested for covering up a murder by police?

He certainly would like to appoint people who want to have elected mayors arrested. And I doubt he much cares, arrested for what. You will fit well in this administration - with pretty much no violence to your own morals.

[ag]

How about a compromise, the feds arrest the mayor for covering up a murder by police?

Another month or two and you will be ready for a post in the Trump administration.

Because Trump wants to appoint people who think a mayor should be arrested for covering up a murder by police?

He certainly would like to appoint people who want to have elected mayors arrested. And I doubt he much cares, arrested for what. You will fit well in this administration - with pretty much no violence to your own morals.

So mayors are above the law?

No. I just think you would like to arrest them irrespective of the law.

[ag]

At least ag just argues with everyone.

I only argue with people I disagree with Just in the last 24 hours I have made wonderful comments such as "very appropriate", "nice", etc. in response to very intelligent observations by others here.

[ag]

How about a compromise, the feds arrest the mayor for covering up a murder by police?

Another month or two and you will be ready for a post in the Trump administration.

Because Trump wants to appoint people who think a mayor should be arrested for covering up a murder by police?

He certainly would like to appoint people who want to have elected mayors arrested. And I doubt he much cares, arrested for what. You will fit well in this administration - with pretty much no violence to your own morals.

So mayors are above the law?

No. I just think you would like to arrest them irrespective of the law.

So it's OK to shoot people like Laquan Mcdonald?

No.

But neither it is ok to arrest people who had very little to do with it just because you do not like them. It is the desire to arrest people you do not like, irrespective of what the law says, that unites you with Mr. President.

And, BTW, you are personally responsible for electing Mr. Trump. Billions of people will die because of that. Should you be arrested for this after WWIII is over?

[ag]

And the mayor was involved in covering up a murder, which seems like a crime to me.

You are a witness, a prosecutor and a court - all in one. So is Mr. Trump.

Frankly, I do not see any ideological disagreements between you and Mr. President. You are his ideological twin.

[ag]

LOL, I obviously disagree with Trump on most issues.

I still have to find one that matters.

[ag]

LOL, I obviously disagree with Trump on most issues.

I still have to find one that matters.

Matters how? Obviously he's terrible on the environment and xenophobia.

So are you. No difference there.

[ag]

LOL, I obviously disagree with Trump on most issues.

I still have to find one that matters.

Matters how? Obviously he's terrible on the environment and xenophobia.

So are you. No difference there.

LOL, whatever dude.

Happy to see you laughing. I do not have much to laugh about these days.