It's not necessarily defeatist mentality. Personally I think that it is folly to expect a broken system to save people from that same broken system. It is my belief that actions like this lull citizenry into a false sense of comfort and assurance that something is being done. Comments like this serve as a reminder to me of how broken the system is and to keep resisting and to not expect others to do the fighting for me.

Whaaaaaat? Being surrounded loyalist yesmen does not produce an environment for truthful feedback? I, for one, am shocked. Shocked I tell you!

So a military parade is going to be ordered for Trump's birthday. Got it.

I edited none of my comments in this conversation. Maybe you misread the original?

I appreciate you pointing out what you think that I am getting wrong, but you have yet to provide any information or resources that would refute my current understanding. As a result, I regret to say that I have not considered any of your replies to be a correction.

You say that my "misunderstanding is that there are THREE branches of government, and the separation of powers is starkly and explicitly stated". Are there not 3 branches? If not how many are there? Are their roles and powers not defined?

Again, I am not trying to argumentative. These are honest questions. If I have incorrect information then I would like to correct it.

I would also like to apologize if you feel like I am complaining. The part of my responses address your behavior has been an attempt to correct what I see as hostile behavior that is an impediment to an open discourse. I am attempting to address this behavior by patiently explaining why I think it is wrong, how it can improved on, and by providing an example of civil discourse to the best of my ability. I understand this may have been misinterpreted and could be taken in a manner that you find upsetting. Please know that this is not nor has it ever been my intent to upset anybody and I hope that we can move forward in a more amicable and productive manner.

There is clearly a breakdown of communication here. I never claimed that the executive branch decided things. I said that the executive branch enforces laws (those laws being made by the legislative branch) and enforces the decisions passed by the judicial branch in their capacity to interpret the laws. Perhaps I could have been more clear in my wording.

The perceived insulting behavior was your decision to draw attention to out my lack of knowledge on the topic. Especially when comparing time and effort of that part of your response to the three words you used to respond to my questions.

I appreciate that you do not believe that your response was insulting, and maybe most people would agree that it was not, but at the minimum it was disparaging and could discourage others from asking questions.

Thank you for the response.

I am honestly asking how the ruling is supposed to be enforced and you insult me instead of answering the question? That was unnecessarily rude.

I am always happy to be educated if you would care to actually answer the question. How does the judiciary enforce their decisions, especially against another branch of the government that chooses to ignore the ruling?

Arrested by whom? Isn't it the executive branch that controls the enforcement of laws and judicial decisions?

Serious question. What power does the judiciary have to enforce their rulings.

I have no experience nor done any research into this topic but I would think that a gun to the temple is easier to mess up resulting in either a slow death or a non-lethal shot with a life altering disability or disfigurment.

Gun in the mouth is more guaranteed a kill shot. Under the chin would probably be even more guaranteed. Just be sure to aim up and not back.

He should quickly blanket pardon himself so the Republicans push to codify that a president cannot pardon himself.

Then he should arrest and seize the property of all members of the opposition party under some BS national security claim. The Supreme Court has already granted immunity for this sort of actions by presidents so no need for another pardon.

Global News did an experiment a while back. The men wore the same thing, on-air, for a week. Then the women did the same thing on the following week. Wanna guess what the results of this experiment were?

Instagram post on it

I am starting to think about that Trump just learned what a tariff is during this election cycle. Still has no idea how they work, what their purpose is, when they should be used, nor how they impact local and global economies but, gosh darn it, if he isn't excited to show off his new knowledge.

Maybe if they have him write out the word "TARRIF" on a piece of paper and put that paper on the white house fridge, he can be proud of it everyday and be able to move on to his next vocabulary word.

Umm, isn't Banksy's entire career centered around helping himself to others property without asking permission?

I'm honestly confused if he is using this display to advance his subversive messaging or if he is upset that he is the one being subverted.

Because the reason oil companies have been making record profits is because production was not cheaper?

Is that the argument being made? Oil faced with higher costs = higher profits,therefore lower costs = lower profits?

Well, they wrote some letters. There's nothing more the nations law makers can do to protect citizens from corporate greed and price gouging. /s

Misleading title. He never blamed the media for their losses.

He was asked "how he can get everyone in the locker room to keep believing in their team and season" and his answer was basically to not listen to negative press which I would agree as being a great first step in trying to keep spirits high.