Or, hear me out here, because I know this is complicated:
Just don't be a nazi
this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2025
839 points (100.0% liked)
Microblog Memes
8264 readers
1792 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Easier said than done. Do you know how hard it was for me to not wear my emotional support red hat all morning?
Just like to shout out an extra FUCK YOU to everyone in their red maga hats today and forever.
Signed, a 49ers fan
The modern brand of Nazis don't even dress snappily, that was their only real appeal.
Tfw I need to leave my job (of selling feet pics)
Good idea maybe the protesters should stop wearing masks to hide from being accountable for their illegal actions.
Protesting isn't illegal, but y'all treating it like it is.
Throwing bricks, looting, and setting cars on fire is tho.
You sure seem more concerned about isolated incidents than the blatant abuse of power.
B-b-but whatabout all the rich people's stuff 👉👈 🥺? Someday, I could have all of that rich people stuff and that could be my stuff on fire and that would make me so sad!
The breakdown of the law is the breakdown of the law who cares who's stuff it is. That's also ignore the brick throwing (also known as assault with a deadly weapon)
You absolutely correct. Breakdown of the law has been a problem in the US since the hard bank right into fascism. But I am way less bothered by throwing bricks at the cosplaying nazis and way more bothered by the unitary executive bullshit. We should have a president, which should be a glorified administrator working for the legislature. Not a king that ignores the law. If we need to burn some of the oligarchy's shit to remind the orange asshole of this, so be it.
The execute bullshit is a legal power granted to the president. The brick throwing is literally assault with a deadly weapon I don't see how u can justify that. It doesn't matter what u think the president should be it matters what the laws of the country state that the president is. What laws are being broken in the case of la (well except the rioters)?
-
deportations by ice without due process in violation of court orders (this is what the people in LA are directly protesting)
-
the president commandeering the national guard for domestic use in absence of an invasion
-
U have been misled. All people deported have already been issued with "final orders of removal" at which point the supreme court agrees you no longer have any right to due process. As that was forfeit when you failed to turn up to ur court appearance. Ie illegal immigrants where told hey ur here illegally come make ur case or ur getting deported. Said illegal immigrants then failed to show up at which point they where issued with "final orders of removal" most of these illegal immigrants where issued this years ago and have simply been illegally in the country ever since.
-
"10 U.S.C. 12406," within Title 10 of the U.S. Code on Armed Services. It allows the president to deploy federal troops in instances of "a rebellion or danger of a rebellion" against the U.S. government. Doesn't need an invasion just needs danger of a rebellion. Attempting to murder federal officers and attempting to directly subvert the will of the federal government is by definition a rebellious act.
-
Untrue. Deportation and detention of American citizens in the second Trump administration.
-
There is no credible danger of rebellion from unarmed protestors. The fatality count stands at zero and the casualties are mostly journalists who have been injured by the police
Not according to the Constitution which grants these powers to the Supreme Court who have stated that what Trump is doing is illegal
"10 U.S.C. 12406," within Title 10 of the U.S. Code on Armed Services. It allows the president to deploy federal troops in instances of "a rebellion or danger of a rebellion" against the U.S. government. Doesn't need an invasion just needs danger of a rebellion. Attempting to murder federal officers and attempting to directly subvert the will of the federal government is by definition a rebellious act.
Where has the supreme court ruled that this deployment is illegal? Can u point me to it please?
Is a riot actually a rebellion? No. Is breaking the law a rebellious act? No.
Was January 6 a riot or a rebellion?
A riot and attempted rebellion. Trump wanted the nation guard their and was blocked by the local govner.
Well that's strange, don't you think? Why did he usurp Newsom's power in CA, but refused to do so in DC? Could it be that he would stand to gain something if the coup succeeded?
load more comments
(1 replies)
The only people who have done anything illegal are the rioters. U might not like what trumps doing but it is entirely within the rule of law
Dude, you're a muppet if you think everything he has done is within the law. The only reason he is getting away with breaking the law is because the only check is the legislature's power of impeachment and it has been captured by the fascists.
Related to la what has he done that's illegal?
10 U.S. Code § 12406 - National Guard In Federal Service
(3): [...] Orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the states
Trump specifically did not engage with Newsom in commandeering CA National Guard troops.
18 U.S. Code § 1385 - Use of Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Space Force as posse comitatus
Whoever, except in cases and under the circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army, the Navy, the Marine Corps, the Air Force, or the Space Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
Using the military for ICE enforcement is against the law.
Want more information? https://youtu.be/zJ7Dfca4_y8
"10 U.S.C. 12406," within Title 10 of the U.S. Code on Armed Services. It allows the president to deploy federal troops in instances of "a rebellion or danger of a rebellion" against the U.S. government. Doesn't need an invasion just needs danger of a rebellion. Attempting to murder federal officers and attempting to directly subvert the will of the federal government is by definition a rebellious act.
Where has the supreme court ruled that this deployment is illegal? Can u point me to it please?
is by definition a rebellious act.
This is conflating "rebellious" with a rebellion. Rebellion is an uprising that resists and is organized against one's government. The scale and degree matter, here. Your definition would turn any civil disobedience into a "rebellion" which is farcical on its face.
load more comments
(2 replies)
10 U.S. Code § 12406 - National Guard In Federal Service
(3): […] Orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the states
Trump specifically did not engage with Newsom in commandeering CA National Guard troops.
You skipped over reading this part.
Maybe a fucking insurrection on Jan 6?
Maybe raping fucking toddlers (Epstein files, which he's starkly refused to release)?
Or, maybe ordering ICE to blockade traffic in order to deliberately incite chaos as an excuse to use the army.
Did u read the part of my comment when I said in relation to la? The ironic thing is that jan6 was more peicful than what's happening lol.
Which is why I included the last link.
And no, anybody that lives in LA can tell you the current protests are more peaceful than J6 even while having more people turning out.
That’s strange, how has he lost so many court cases then (overseen by judges he appointed)
We are talking about la here not his other activity.
Point of order:
"Illegal" isn't always "immoral". "Legal" isn't always "moral".
If one's best defense is "it's not technically illegal", that's a very weak spot to be in.
load more comments
(2 replies)
What is your sentiments on the looting of the capital on January 6th then? By that logic they should all be in jail for life for such a substantial escalation relatively speaking.
That's not a comparison you want made. Maybe life might be a bit harsh but they should all have gotten long sentences. Not to mention that the jan6 rioters where more peaceful than these rioters. Ohh and jan6 happened because trump didn't/was blocked from calling in the national guard to protect the city. So ur right but this doesn't help your case.
Trump wasn't allowed to call the national guard because he wasn't president anymore you moron.
Trump was acting president on January 6th. The event that the insurrectionists were there to stop was the ratification of the election naming Joe Biden as the President starting on January 20th.
Trump made the decision to not call in the National guard to help stop the insurrection which if carried out would have most likely left Trump in power.
How many LAPD officers have been killed so far? Thought so. Peaceful my ass, give yer balls a tug there fella.
load more comments
(1 replies)
So is shooting non-combatant reporters doing their job. You get what you pay for.
load more comments
(1 replies)
May I suggest reading a history book? "Lies My Teacher Told Me" is excellent. "A People's History of the United States" is also great. Or, maybe you would like to understand how you've been manipulated. Well, cool, maybe "Manufacturing Consent."
One of the significant contradictions of democracy in the US is that it was largely shaped by various forms of illegal civil disobedience against entrenched power structures. Such civil disobedience is retrospectively seen as justified, committed by people who are retrospectively seen as heroes. But each successive generation is demanded to believe that any further civil disobedience is unreasonable.
Just a small selection of a long history of US civil disobedience:
- Boston Tea Party
- Great Railroad Strike
- Haymarket affair
- Battle of Blair Mountain - largest armed insurrection in America since the Civil War
- Selma to Montgomery Marches
There is a lot we get to take for granted from our comfortable, privileged perches built with the blood and tears of those who would perform civil disobedience.
Say it louder for those in the back!
Is this rage bait? Has to be.
I too like to believe that people like this can't be serious, keeps my outlook on life higher
Maybe the ICE officers should also stop wearing masks to hide from being accountable for their illegal actions.
Except their actions aren't illegal. And what does accountable mean? Cos from what I've seen accountable means death threats to the individual and their families.
Kinda like what the protesters deal with? Force needs to meets force with equal measures or it is overrun. You don't deal with fascism by laying down and playing dead.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Extraordinary rendition is absolutely illegal, especially when it is done without due process and against a court's order such as the case of Garcia or the dozens of other people flown to CECOT. "Just following orders" isn't a defense. And I'm sorry to say, but as a federal law enforcement officer, they specifically chose to put themselves and their families on the line for their country. That's why they are paid and trained and supplied with all manner of paramilitary equipment. What cowards to hide behind masks. They should be proud of the job they are doing and be recognized for it since it is totally within the confines of the law, right? And even more so, to hide behind their families' "safety" as if that absolves them from their shit behavior. No masks for law enforcement. They are public servants and must follow the law.
view more: next ›