It is a well document thing that Trump forces many of his employees, down to the lowest levels, to sign non-disclosure agreements and also agree to never say anything negative about Trump, the Trump Organization, or the Trump family, for all time. In essence, if you write your autobiography 50 years in the future, and mention Trump, he or his estate could come in and sue you. Whether such a suit would be successful is beside the point because the threat of lawyers to a low-income person effectively silences them.
Now that Trump is about to become our Fearless Leader, I wonder if he will be requiring similar agreements to all his staff? Perhaps in time it will be a more general thing that all Federal Employees will have to agree to? I wonder what the legality of any of this would be. Any thoughts?
Note, this being not legal is not a sign Trump won’t try it.
What happens if Trump refuses to acknowledge his loss, and makes a call to action from his supporters, either overtly, or in the “you know what I mean” sort of code
Suppose his supporters then start taking terroristic actions, either individually or in larger groups? Suppose the violence increases to the point of an insurgency?
What short of charges might Trump himself be bringing upon himself if he screams out loudly even as the violence begins and escalates?
How far would Trump have to go before law enforcement action has to be taken against him?
I hope we never have to find out.
Lately, I’ve been hearing some Trump supports claim that Trump is not “Fascist”, but is rather a “Populist”. This is because the word Fascist has negative connotations that bring to mind such terrible dictators as Mussolini and even Hitler. Populist brings forth such popular and good leaders as Franklin Roosevelt.
However, fascists are sometimes also populists. It is not a binary, one or the other, black or white, one or zero kind of choice. Hither and Mussolini were both populists, at least in their rhetoric. Both addressed large groups of loud screaming fans who thought their hero was sent to save their nations, or at least save them. Their appeal was more of a pseudo-populism rather than a real-populism in that their words did not match their deeds.
So too is Trump a blend of fascist as well as pseudo-populism. Trump has a history of going out and saying whatever he thinks will get the crowd’s attention, as though this were just a scene in an unreality TV Show.
To be a both a fascist a populist, or pseudo-populist, is not mutually exclusive.
This is a video I made. I interviewed attendees at the 2016 California Democratic State Convention and asked them “why have conventions” and got some interesting answers. Take a look, and share this video. Thank you,