• funkajunk@lemm.eeEnglish
      8·
      4 months ago

      At first I naively thought “why is that a bad thing?”, but then realized who exactly decides what these “national interests” are?

      Definitely using some “weasel words” in their policy to get away with some shady shit.

      • pacmondo@sh.itjust.works
        7·
        4 months ago

        Any law that you see that you think “Wow, no way they can enforce that! That would get EVERYBODY in trouble” is a law that is intended to be selectively enforced against unwanted people

          • irreticent@lemmy.world
            2·
            4 months ago

            “You guys literally just claim things without any evidence”

            How ironic…

            You, just a few comments ago:

            “that is not how I interpret it or how they intended it”

            If you’re so sure of their intent then where is your evidence?

            You’re doing the exact same thing you accused the other commenter of; you literally just claimed something without any evidence.

      • TJDetweiler@lemmy.ca
        5·
        4 months ago

        If something is against “national interest” and your president is trying to become an autocrat, that means they can essentially pick and choose what national interest is. This should be setting off alarm bells in EVERYONE’S head as an obvious grab for power.

        I’m not american, so I don’t have direct skin in the game, but everyone on both sides of the political spectrum who don’t self identify as fascist should be against this.

        If you don’t interpret this as something extremely dangerous, you need to have a sit down and really think about the implications.