‘I think the bigger problem are the people from within, we have some very bad people, sick people, radical left lunatics,’ Republican candidate tells Fox’s Maria Bartiromo

“And it should be easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard, or if really necessary, by the military,” he said.

“I think the bigger problem is the enemy from within. Not even the people who have come in, who are destroying our country.”

It isn’t clear under what circumstances Trump would view it justifiable to call in US troops against his own countrymen.

But his comments mark a baseless attack and a particularly hollow one coming from someone whose supporters violently attacked the US Capitol in an attempt to stop him from being thrown out of office three years ago.


🗳️ Register to vote: https://vote.gov/

  • graphene@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    2 days ago

    So like, when was the last time someone said they needed to handle the “enemy within”?

    Oh wait

    A famous image of Joseph Goebbels, nazi propaganda minister

    I remember this from history class!

    • piccolo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Them “stop calling everyone you disagree with a nazi!”

      Reasonable people: “then stop suggesting nazi shit?”

    • TriflingToad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      I took World History Honors in Florida 2 years ago, pretty much learned nothing about the coming up of the Nazis. It was mostly memorizing the causes/effects of stuff like the industrial revolution or King Henry the 8th. However the teacher DID wear a Roman dress with a helmet and shield for the test day of the Roman empire so that was cool.

      Also completely unrelated but we only had to memorize the places of iirc 13 European countries and the big ones like Russia/China/India and that’s it.

  • bitjunkie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    84
    ·
    2 days ago

    The guy’s a nutjob and the fact that his candidacy is still being framed as having any air of legitimacy by the media is fucking disgusting.

    • Disgracefulone@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Edit: any reason I got downvoted into the dirt for asking for a source on real polling numbers because I didn’t have time to do my own digging right at that moment?

      Not that downvotes generally bother me but JeeZe. Wasn’t even expressing an opinion just looking for clarification. And thanks to those who provided it.

      ORIGINAL

      All the polls I can find show them damn near dead even now.

      That was a 20 second search though do you have a source?

      • BCsven@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        Are the polls landline calls? If so you are going to get mostly boomers that still have a landline

        • TehWorld@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          2 days ago

          Almost all reputable polling groups have an all-the-above strategy. They also attempt to adjust for errors in polling due to things like the aforementioned “only old people have landlines” issue. Turnout is what ACTUALLY wins elections, and there are a LOT of people who will turn out for the orange turd, so we all need to make sure that we are turning out everyone we can too.

          • hydrospanner@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 days ago

            I’ve long felt that regardless of the levels of “we factored that into our results” that pollsters can accomplish, at the end of the day, these polls can only survey that demographic of “people who agreed to be polled”.

            That being said, I feel that Trump gets a slight advantage in any advanced polling thanks to his cult of personality: between Trump and any opponent thus far, a greater percentage of Trump’s followers are more likely to be “loud and proud” enough to want to have their voice heard by a pollster.

            I feel this effect is even more pronounced now, with a significant portion of the voting public falling into the camp of “conservative, but put off by Jan. 6th”. People who voted for Trump twice but who won’t this year. These people are also less likely to want to participate in polls.

            Where I feel this effect may have tricky implications is whether they stick to their beliefs in the polling booth or just cave in the final moment and still vote Trump…or if they simply don’t vote at the top of the ticket (or vote 3rd party)…but still vote for Republicans down-ticket.

            While I’m no pollster, I would not be surprised to find that Trump underperforms vs projections, even as the GOP overperforms in House and Senate elections.

            • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              In most research on this topic, democrats are more likely to participate in election polling. Nevertheless, modern polling weights their polls accordingly. They also do significantly more statistical weighting to correct for various types of effects that would increase polling errors.

              The biggest aspect to pay attention to this season is the use of “weighting on recalled vote.” It is the primary reason you’re seeing two distinct sets of polling results. Regardless of which set you look at, all highly rated polls show the election within the margin of error.

            • TehWorld@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              I pray you’re right, and fear that you might be wrong. The “red wave” that was supposed to happen and was wrong last time gives me a small amount of hope.

              • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                That’s largely been corrected for. The “red wave” phenomenon was largely the result of democrats fretting about internal polling which is consistently biased toward the campaign of which it is “internal.”

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    “dictator day one”

    “prosecute my opposition”

    “prosecute my critics”

    It seems insane to think people are shooting at him because they’re listening to democrats (something the MSM largely does not do) and not because people are just listening to the things he’s saying he’ll do.

    • OlinOfTheHillPeople@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      It seems insane to think people are shooting at him because they’re listening to democrats

      I’m confused by this sentence. What do Democrats have to do with any of this?

      • Furbag@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Trump has had multiple assassination attempts on him this year, and each time it happens Trump blames Democratic rhetoric as the motivating force.

        Of course, anybody who took even a cursory look into the motives of each would-be assassin (and let’s be frank, it’s a big stretch to call some of these guys assassins - getting caught with a loaded weapon near where Trump is located is apparently enough to be considered an assassination attempt, even if Trump was never in any danger) they are often Republicans who absolutely hate the Democrats, so they wouldn’t be listening to their political rhetoric anyway which has been nothing short of “Political violence is not the solution, let’s win at the ballot box in November.”

        Meanwhile, Trump is promising to be a dictator on day one, promoting eugenics, deploying the armed forces to deport legal residents, threatening to prosecute and jail his political opponents and revoke the 1st amendment rights of his critics, but refuses to answer calls to “turn the temperature down”.

      • dch82@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I don’t know, some republicans think Democrats have something to do with this?

  • ChronosTriggerWarning@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    71
    ·
    2 days ago

    “I think the bigger problem are the people from within, we have some very bad people, sick people, radical left lunatics."

    Yeah Don, we know. They even wear a red hat to help identify themselves.

  • TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    So that’s how he plans to make the economy better, to force his opposition to leave the country and appropriate their wealth and property. Who did Nazi that coming?

  • LANIK2000@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    61
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Oh hey, treason man is yet again announcing publicly that he’s a treasonous piece of shit and that he plans to continue committing treason? Wow, what shocking news. /s

  • nifty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    2 days ago

    This rhetoric is meant for voter intimidation because they know Republicans always lose when Democrats turn out to vote.

    The polls are meaningless because they could be manipulated or manufactured, we don’t know who’s being polled. People just need to cast their vote and not let this be a close election.

    • LaunchesKayaks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      I will never express my opinions in places where I can be easily identified unless I am among people I know and trust. I will vote and keep my leftist ideology to myself amongst strangers irl. I rather like living without being bothered.

      • nifty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        There’s no such thing as living without being bothered in an autocratic regime, doesn’t matter who you are. You could be the most ardent supporter and you’d still be shit out of luck for any reason. Stalin used to have his own cabinet members routinely disposed of

        • LaunchesKayaks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          2 days ago

          I meant being bothered as in strangers harassing me for my beliefs lol. I live in a grossly red part of my state and I keep a low profile out of what I feel is necessity

          • Shark_Ra_Thanos@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            I do too but idgaf and start shit with anyone stupid enough to try with me. I made the religious sign holders leave Pride fest by simply talking absolute fucking nonsense with adamant of a mood. They left shortly thereafter. I was a volunteer for the event wearing the shirt and all.

            • LaunchesKayaks@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 days ago

              I had a sign in my yard that said “support trans kids” someone peeled into my driveway, leaving huge ruts in the gravel/mud, and stole the sign one day when I wasn’t home. That’s when I decided to not voice my opinion openly like that anymore.

              • Shark_Ra_Thanos@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                Oh I would post it only when I was ready to fish for evidence and…well…yeah. Once we caught them, fry them for dinner

  • mkwt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    277
    ·
    2 days ago

    This is a reminder to American service members:

    Your oath of allegiance is to the United States, not to Donald Trump, Joe Biden, or Kamala Harris. You have a duty to obey lawful orders issued under the authority of the commander in chief. But it is your duty to disobey unlawful orders.

    • rc__buggy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      146
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      The oath is actually to the Constitution of the United States. So it’s not even the country or the government but the idea, the founding document.

      • masterofn001@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        77
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        Is it the current one, or the originalist one, or the supreme court interpretation one, or the cherry picked and misunderstood one, or?

          • Billiam@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            67
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            2 days ago

            No, it’s a very serious question. What happens when Trump gives an illegal order, a soldier refuses to obey it, and is arrested? What do you think John Roberts’ SCOTUS will say? You think it’s too far-fetched for a 6-3 ruling saying “Well, the Constitution says that the President is the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces therefore there exists no mechanism nor rationale for any member of the armed services to disobey” to happen?

            • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              31
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 days ago

              Hell, what do people think will happen if, let’s say hypothetically:

              1. Trump organizes a civilian militia to attack the country
              2. Trump actively refuses to order the military to protect people from said militia
              3. Said militia isolate and attempt to murder basically everyone else in the government who can provide those orders

              But nah, that would NEVER happen. And people totally wouldn’t brag about the military waiting to see how things shake out was their god given duty.

              • Billiam@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                14
                ·
                2 days ago
                1. Trump actively refuses to order the military to protect people from said militia

                Actually, it could be even worse than that. Trump could theoretically order the military to not interfere at all.

            • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              2 days ago

              In a context where the checks and balances and norms around separation of powers and jurisdiction functioned as intended instead of being undermined and co-opted, the SC normally does not intrude into UCMJ matters. But I’m also quite sure that won’t stop the Tribunal of Six, so who fuckin’ knows.

              • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 days ago

                The Supreme Court already sent us back there.

                The problem is that the current admin that was just given the power, thinks they’ll set a bad example if they actually use it. A more charitable take could be that, maybe they think if they don’t talk about it the orange moron will forget he’ll have the power too (he won’t).

            • Gigasser@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              Lol, civil war then? Imagine trying to arrest the ones with the guns. I’d imagine a big, although still a minority, chunk of troops would immediately defect and form an insurgency under such actions.

              • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                16
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                No, they’re saying that any law asking people to disobey the institutions propped up by that same law in case of them being unjust will always ring hollow, because the courts that decide if that point of legitimacy has been reached will be staffed by the very same people you’d be disobeying.

                No court will rule that rebellion against the state is justified. It’s either ‘not legitimate yet, because other options are available’, or it’s too late, because independent courts have been abolished.

    • Asafum@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      39
      ·
      2 days ago

      Heritage Foundation: Hold my beer, SCOTUS ASSEMBLE! You know what to do.

      SCOTUS: it’s legal now.

    • njm1314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      2 days ago

      The military has never had any hesitancy at all in murdering American citizens when told to. They will not stand up.

  • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    98
    ·
    2 days ago

    And polls continue to call the race a tie.

    At some point we have to acknowledge that roughly 30% of our population are just evil, fascist monsters. Having lived in those states, this isn’t a surprise.

          • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            2 days ago

            The system in question:

            https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-10-02-0065

            There was one difficulty however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of the Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to fewest objections.

            The south has a massive advantage in the electoral college because they demanded to be able to launder slave votes.

            • tmyakal@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              2 days ago

              The bigger problem is that the number of seats in the House has been frozen for about a hundred years. Our population exploded, but our number of representatives stayed static, so places with the most people actually get less representation in congress.

              On top of this, the number of electors a state has its equal to the number of representatives that state has in the Senate and the House combined. So more populated states also get underrepresented in the presidential election.

              The Three-Fifths Compromise was absolutely fucked, but it’s not what is deadlocking the House now and its not what is letting a people lose the popular vote and still go on to be president in 21st century elections.

              • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                If we took away the at large electoral seats, and the senate, that would get us halfway to fixing the representation problem.

                The house would be next, but that’s a more moderate problem compared to the other half.

      • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        2 days ago

        Been in their churches, you hear the chorus loud and clear when he talks about ‘taking the country back from the powers of satan and other elitists’. He doesn’t mean Olympic athletes.

        • mostdubious@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          exactly. we have to stop them from voting. i don’t care how it gets done, but we really don’t have a choice. they have to be stopped.

    • Raiderkev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’d say 20% are just absolute morons that watched ancient aliens and garbage like that back in the day then fell for every dumbass psyop conspiracy theory on the Internet. Now they are willfully ignorant of facts and truth.

      • Asafum@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        Ughh you described my dad, except he’s still watching shit like that and skinwalker ranch… And yes he’s a full blown Magoo. :(

      • mostdubious@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        i don’t think it matters what their problem is. the solution is just to remove their ability to have a say in democracy.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    164
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    It isn’t clear under what circumstances Trump would view it justifiable to call in US troops against his own countrymen.

    Isn’t it though? He would view it justifiable to call them in for literally any reason.

    • floofloof@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      The media, as usual, talks as if they’re trying to discern his secret, rational plan. Even when he spouts fascist threats of mass oppression and murder, they discuss him as if he’s just another politician with policy proposals. It’s unclear under what circumstances he’d call in troops against Americans because he’s psychologically chaotic, fragile and highly volatile. Anything could trigger him to do so. The only thing that’s consistent is he threatens retribution against immigrants, trans people, Black people, women, and anyone who doesn’t worship him enough.

  • BigMacHole@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    This is EXACTLY what the Founders Intended! George Washington LITERALLY said that the US Military should be used on US Citizens and that Children should be Gunned Down in School!

    • spauldo@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      George Washington literally led the army against American civilians in the Whiskey Rebellion, so that’s probably not the best example.

    • Raiderkev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      This guy in my discord I got into an argument with recently was going on about how he’s voting for Trump because he cares about the constitution. You can’t win with these clowns