#Rule Of Law

[liketwoswansinbalance]

I've been thinking about this dilemma for so long, so I decided to make a poll.

All I can say for now is that I fall into the "situational" category. In my opinion, unless I've forgotten some critical, concrete evidence, it's so hard to tell, to the point that I think it must be nuanced and situational, or simply a non-explicitly-addressed point in canon.

We've nearly always seen him in a position of authority and he's a disciplined character, so we could say "rule-follower." Why would he sabotage his own rules, even if he had authority to supersede them as their creator. So, yes, he is (even tentatively) pro-rules or potentially pro-rule-of-law because of how he wields authority. Indeed, he is kind of a walking rulebook.

But that's no fun. Let's complicate matters, shall we?: he deserts the School in Rise. A notable exception.

(His Monrovia Prison prison-break doesn't count at the moment because that "had to be done," in the spirit of self-preservation.)

Then, what of others' rules?

Maybe he'd follow them only at his convenience? Because he's used to being the authority in every room?

Any rule that doesn't make sense, that would seem beneath him, or just wouldn't fly—he wouldn't follow or allow it.

But... isn't he also intentionally a contrarian over 50% of the time? So, maybe he'd flout the rules just because he can, or, i.e., because he (usually) has immunity from them in his authoritative position.

Yet, if he didn't have that position, would he still rebel? Hard to say.

If he already benefited, he'd have little to no reason to rebel for others' sakes, even if they were suffering, so he's no classic, rebel protagonist vs. a dystopian government. Seems too idealistic for his character.

If he were on the oppressed side of a society, what would he do?

Perhaps, just game the system for himself and himself only, climb the ladder for status, to reach a position of power and erase all evidence of his formerly being oppressed. Bury the old identity, supplant a dictator? (This hypothetical brings to mind Coriolanus Snow, haha.)

How do I know? Or how would I speculate that this would happen in the dystopian scenario?:

1. This "elevating himself" course of action would be the route of least resistance and the least effort, logically. No messy overturning of society as he's just one person. You can make a case for one person, if that person can prove they're "deserving" of more.

2. Canonically, he was willing to install himself in a position of power while others weren't impacted or were negatively impacted, by his conscious-or-not choices.

With sorcery, I feel as if his being oppressed couldn't happen believably. (Search up the logistical problem with the "oppressed mages trope" and you'll probably see a few world-building articles, if you don't know what I'm talking about.)

Ok, then, moving on, there'd still be evidence, internal evidence, in his mind that he was once in some form of some low (social) position (not even referring to Nevers in-narrative, no, I mean as a hypothetical).

Just take the oppressed fantasy class trope—like the Grisha (they are sorcerers/witches, to a degree, and the Small Sciences are nearly indistinguishable from magic, right?).

What would he do there?

Well, I'm tempted to say he'd be like the Darkling, side with those in power (Tsar) and just... grant himself every advantage, secure rights for his own kind (magic-users).

The problem: he may not even reach Darkling levels of "selflessness" or solidarity. At least, he wouldn't view himself as lesser-than, which feels impossible by default, given his ego.

But, we're still left with the question, and I guess the answer is just situational. That's all.

So, the best, approximate answer I have (now) is that he is a rule-follower—until something affects him and his own self-interest personally.

I don't think he could be the rebel-without-a-cause type, but that's already unspecific and a useless categorization.

I view him as a loophole abuser or exploiter (of the literal) because of the one, weight-in-gold, Man-Wolf-involved, Rufius-death scene from Fall.

Classic trickster archetype, as I tend to label him, or The Man of Exact Words and Clauses. And that's within the rules! Of language!

Thus, I'm (currently—you're welcome to try to change my mind) compelled to say: rule-follower at heart, with a rebellious streak, given extenuating circumstances.

Or, alternatively, True Neutral (literally his apathy) in most cases, with a self-serving streak and a severe case of monotropism/one-track mind.

Does any motive or incentive to dismantle anything, systems(?), lurk in the shadows of his mind? Possibly. Well—for anything that serves him (and his causes).

See the problem? Caveats to everything.

Any thoughts or more condemning-or-not judgments, anyone?

[cynicalclassicist]

Trump seems to have more powers than most Kings have. They want a dictator.

Republicans are all buying into a near 80 year-old fraud rapist as ruler. All the fighting for rights and sacrifice of generations given to the least deserving: Doanld Trump.

Republicans know Trump could never run a company, but they want him to be President of White Supremacy forever.

[reality-detective]

Day 1 - No Time Wasted 🤔

[jurph]

[originalleftist]

There are really just two issues that matter this election:

One is climate- Biden put us on a path to halve carbon emissions in 6 years and reach net zero by 2050. Harris will continue that. Trump will actually increase use of fossil fuels while gutting regulations.

Every person on Earth will be harmed and endangered by that, regardless of your identity, location, or views.

The other issue is the peaceful transfer of power. Whatever problems you may have with Harris, she'll leave peaceably in 4 or 8 years. Trump will not. This is not fear mongering or hyperbole. He has said that if he wins we'll never need to vote again. He met his last electoral defeat by inciting and enabling a violent insurrection. Sure, he's an old man, but he's surrounded by young men who share the same contempt for democracy and the rule of law- like his Vice Presidential nominee, JD Vance, who will assume power if he dies in office.

We were lucky to get him out once, barely. His people are much more prepared for a coup now, he'll have broad legal immunity now thanks to SCOTUS, and he's openly vowed to become "a dictator on day one" and deploy troops on American streets.

Any issue with Harris is a temporary problem, and you can try again in 4 or 8 years. With Trump, you can't.

THE ONLY REASON TO ELECT TRUMP IS IF YOU ACTIVELY WANT THE WORLD TO BURN. And don't care how many actual people burn in the process. And if that is your position, then by your own choice you are an enemy of all humanity.

[alwaysbewoke]

[wangxianficrecs]

Follower Recs

~*~

hi I'd like to submit a fic rec, don't know if it's been recommended yet! A post CQL canon fic, where Chief Cultivator LWJ, with LJY's help, calls for proposals from cultivators to create a code of rules for cultivation society. It's so short, but *such* a richly written fic. With each rule that the cultivators submit, the author does a close study of plot and characters, that also considers the larger concerns of cultivation society & gentry. I read it, and then immediately reread it again and again. I've always enjoyed the care and insight that this author takes with their fics and this is another stunning one! @potatokunst

Rule of Law

by Deastar (@youhideastar)

T, 2k, Wangxian

Summary: Lan Jingyi shuffles into the office looking as if he’s eaten something unpleasant. “Hanguang-jun,” he says, with some trepidation. “I can’t believe I’m about to say this, but… I think what the cultivation world needs is a—a code of rules. Written down.”

~*~

(Please REBLOG as a signal boost for this hard-working author if you like – or think others might like – this story.)

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Morten Morland :: @mortenmorland on :: @thetimes – political cartoon gallery in London

+

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

January 20, 2025

Heather Cox Richardson

Jan 21, 2025

The tone for the inauguration of Donald J. Trump as the 47th president of the United States at noon today was set on Friday, when Trump, who once trashed cryptocurrency as “based on thin air,” launched his own cryptocurrency. By Sunday morning it had made more than $50 billion on paper. Felix Salmon of Axios reported that “a financial asset that didn’t exist on Friday afternoon—now accounts for about 89% of Donald Trump’s net worth.”

As Salmon noted, “The emoluments clause of the Constitution,” which prohibits any person holding a government office from accepting any gift or title from a foreign leader or government, “written in 1787, hardly envisaged a world where a president could conjure billions of dollars of wealth out of nowhere just by endorsing a meme.” Salmon also pointed out that there is no way to track the purchases of this coin, meaning it will be a way for those who want something from Trump to transfer money directly to him.

Former Trump official Anthony Scaramucci posted that “anyone in the world can essentially deposit money” into the bank account of the president of the United States.

On Sunday, Trump’s wife Melania launched her own coin. It took the wind out of the sales of Trump’s coin, although both coins have disclaimers saying that the coins are “an expression of support for and engagement with the values embodied by” the Trumps, and are not intended to be “an investment opportunity, investment contract, or security of any type.” Her cryptocurrency was worth more than $5 billion within two hours.

CNN noted that the release of the meme coin had raised “serious ethics concerns,” but those who participate in the industry were less gentle. One wrote: “Trump’s sh*tcoin release has caused possibly the greatest overnight loss of credibility in presidential history. He made $60B. Great for Trump family, terrible for this country and hopes we had for the Trump presidency.”

Walter Schaub, former head of the Office of Government Ethics under Trump in his first administration, who left after criticizing Trump’s unwillingness to divest himself of his businesses, wrote to CNN: “America voted for corruption, and that’s what Trump is delivering…. Trump’s corruption and naked profiteering is so open, extreme and pervasive this time around that to comment on any one aspect of it would be to lose the forest for the trees. The very idea of government ethics is now a smoldering crater.”

At a rally Sunday night at the Capital One Arena in Washington, Trump highlighted the performance side of his public persona. He teased the next day’s events and let his audience in on a secret that echoed the “neokayfabe” of professional wrestling by leaving people wondering if it was true or a lie. After praising Elon Musk, he told the crowd “He was very effective. He knows those computers better than anybody. Those vote counting computers. And we ended up winning Pennsylvania like in a landslide. So it was pretty good…. Thank you to Elon.”

This morning, hours before he left office, President Joe Biden pardoned several of the targets of MAGA Republicans, including "General Mark A. Milley, Anthony S. Fauci, the Members of Congress and staff who served on the Select Committee, and the U.S. Capitol and D.C. Metropolitan police officers who testified before the Select Committee.” Biden clarified that the pardons “should not be mistaken as an acknowledgment that any individual engaged in any wrongdoing, nor should acceptance be misconstrued as an admission of guilt for any offense.” He noted, “Our nation owes these public servants a debt of gratitude for their tireless commitment to our country.”

But, he said, "These are exceptional circumstances, and I cannot in good conscience do nothing. Even when individuals have done nothing wrong—and in fact have done the right thing—and will ultimately be exonerated, the mere fact of being investigated or prosecuted can irreparably damage reputations and finances." He later pardoned his siblings and their spouses to protect them from persecution by the incoming president.

Before he left office, Biden posted on social media: Scripture says: “I have been young and now I’m old yet I have never seen the righteous forsaken.” After all these years serving you, the American people, I have not seen the righteous forsaken. I love you all. May you keep the faith. And may God bless you all.”

This morning, members of the far-right paramilitary organization the Proud Boys marched through the capital carrying a banner that read “Congratulations President Trump” and chanting: “Whose streets? Our streets!”

Two days ago, Trump moved his inauguration into the Capitol Rotunda, where his supporters had rioted on January 6, 2021, because of cold temperatures expected in Washington, D.C. Even with his supporters excluded, the space was cramped, but prime spots went to billionaires: Meta chief executive officer Mark Zuckerberg, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, Apple chief executive officer Tim Cook, Google chief Sundar Pichai, TikTok chief executive officer Shou Zi Chew, and Tesla and SpaceX chief executive owner Elon Musk, who appeared to be stoned.

Right-wing media mogul Rupert Murdoch, who launched the Fox News Channel in 1996, was there, as were popular podcaster Joe Rogan and founder of Turning Point USA Charlie Kirk.

Although foreign leaders are not normally invited to presidential inaugurations, far-right foreign leaders President Javier Milei of Argentina and Italian prime minister Giorgia Meloni were there, along with a close ally of Chinese president Xi Jinping.

The streets were largely empty as Trump traveled to the U.S. Capitol. Supporters watched from Capital One Arena as Trump took the oath of office, apparently forgetting to put his hand on the Bibles his wife held. After Vice President–elect J.D. Vance had taken the oath of office, sworn in by Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts had sworn in Trump, the new president delivered his inaugural address.

While inaugural addresses are traditionally an attempt to put the harsh rhetoric of campaigns behind and to emphasize national unity, Trump’s inaugural address rehashed the themes of his campaign rallies. Speaking in the low monotone he uses when he reads from a teleprompter, he delivered an address that repeated the lies on which he built his 2024 presidential campaign.

He said that the Justice Department has been “weaponized,” that Biden’s administration “cannot manage even a simple crisis at home while at the same time stumbling into a continuing catalog of catastrophic events abroad,” that the U.S. has provided “sanctuary and protection for dangerous criminals,” that the government has “treated so badly” the storm victims in North Carolina,” and so on.

Fact-checkers at The Guardian noted the speech was full of “false and misleading claims.”

Trump went on to promise a series of executive orders to address the crises he claimed during his campaign. He would “declare a national emergency at our southern border,” he said, and “begin the process of returning millions and millions of criminal aliens back to the places from which they came.” (Border crossings are lower now than they were at the end of Trump’s last term.) He promised to tell his cabinet members to bring down inflation (it peaked in 2022 and is now close to the Fed’s target of 2%), bring back manufacturing (the Biden administration brought more than 700,000 new manufacturing jobs to the U.S.), end investments in green energy (which has attracted significant private investment, especially in Republican-dominated states), and make foreign countries fund the U.S. government through tariffs (which are, in fact, paid by American consumers).

He also vowed to take the Panama Canal back from Panama, prompting Panama’s president José Raúl Mulino to “fully reject the statements made by” Trump, and Panamanian protesters to burn the American flag.

With a declaration about the Pennsylvania shooting that bloodied his ear, Trump declared that he believes he is on a divine mission. “I felt then, and believe even more so now, that my life was saved for a reason. I was saved by God to make America great again.”

After his inaugural address, former president Biden and former first lady Dr. Jill Biden left, and Trump delivered a much more animated speech to prominent supporters in which CNN’s Daniel Dale said he returned to his “lie-a-minute style.” He rehashed the events of January 6, 2021, and claimed that then–House speaker Nancy Pelosi is “guilty as hell…that’s a criminal offense.”

But the bigger story came in the afternoon, when Trump held a rally at the Capitol One Arena in place of the traditional presidential parade. Supporters there had watched the inauguration on a jumbotron screen, booing Biden and jumping to their feet to cheer at Trump’s declaration that he had been saved by God. In the afternoon, Elon Musk spoke to the crowd, throwing two salutes that right-wing extremists, including neo-Nazis, interpreted as Nazi salutes.

Trump and his family arrived after 5:00 for the inaugural parade. The new president spoke again in rally mode after six, and then staged a demonstration that he was changing the country by holding a public signing of executive orders. Those appeared to be designed, as he promised, to retaliate against those he feels have wronged him. Among other executive orders, he withdrew the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement, drawing approving roars from the crowd.

As Jonathan Swan of the New York Times noted, “Signing executive orders and pardons are two of the parts of the job that Trump loves most. They are unilateral, instantaneous displays of power and authority.” After signing a few executive orders for the crowd, Trump threw the signing sharpies into the crowd, and then he and his family left abruptly.

Back at the White House, retaliation continued. Trump pardoned or commuted the sentences of all of the January 6 rioters who had been convicted of crimes related to the attempt to overthrow the results of the 2020 presidential election, including Enrico Tarrio, the former leader of the Proud Boys who was serving 22 years for seditious conspiracy to overthrow the government of the United States.

His pardon also included Daniel Rodriguez, who was sentenced to 12 and a half years in prison after pleading guilty to tasing Metropolitan Police Officer Michael Fanone, who suffered cardiac arrest and a traumatic brain injury. “Omg I did so much f---ing s--- r[ight] n[ow] and got away,” he texted to his gang. “Tazzed the f--- out of the blue[.]”

Trump signed an executive order that withdraws the U.S. from the World Health Organization, another that tries to establish that there are only two sexes in the United States, and yet another that seeks to end the birthright citizenship established by the Fourteenth Amendment. He signed one intending to strip the security clearances from 51 people whom he accuses of election interference related to Hunter Biden’s laptop, and has ordered that an undisclosed list of Trump appointees immediately be granted the highest levels of security clearance without undergoing background checks. He also signed one ordering officials “to deliver emergency price relief.”

Behind the scenes today, officials in the Trump administration fired the acting head of the U.S. immigration court system as well as other leaders of that system, and cancelled the CBP One app, an online lottery system through which asylum seekers could schedule appointments with border agents, leaving asylum seekers who had scheduled appointments three weeks ago stranded. Trump officials have also taken down a government website that helped women find health care and understand their rights. They have also removed the official portrait of former chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley from the hallway with the portraits of all the former chairs…now all minus one.

But for all their claims to be hitting the ground running, lawyers noted that some of the executive orders were poorly crafted to accomplish what they claimed—an observer called one “bizarre legal fanfic not really intended for judicial interpretation”—and lawsuits challenging them are already being filed. Others are purely performative, like ordering officials to lower prices.

Further, CNN national security correspondent Natasha Bertrand reported that almost an hour after Trump became president, “current and former Pentagon officials say they don’t know who is currently in charge of the Defense Department,” a key position to maintain U.S. security against adversaries who might take advantage of transition moments to push against American defenses.

Bertrand reported that the Trump transition team had trouble finding someone to serve as acting secretary until the Senate confirms a replacement for Biden’s Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. Trump’s nominee, former Fox News Channel weekend host Pete Hegseth has had trouble getting the votes he needs, although tonight the Senate Armed Services Committee approved him by a straight party line vote.

Bertrand notes that two senior department officials declined to take on the position. The Trump administration swore in Robert Salesses, deputy director of the branch of the Pentagon that focuses on human resources, facilities, and resource management—who has already been confirmed by the Senate in that position—as acting Defense Secretary.

Beginning tomorrow, the Republicans will have to deal with the fact that the Treasury will hit the debt ceiling and will have to use extraordinary measures to pay the obligations of the United States government.

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[mapsontheweb]

Ranking by Rule Of Law

[davidaugust]

“I am calling for a constitutional amendment called the No One Is Above the Law Amendment.”

“I support a system in which the president would appoint a justice every two years to spend 18 years in active service on the Supreme Court.”

“I’m calling for a binding code of conduct for the Supreme Court.”

Yes please.

Gift link to President Biden’s proposal: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/07/29/joe-biden-reform-supreme-court-presidential-immunity-plan-announcement/?pwapi_token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJyZWFzb24iOiJnaWZ0IiwibmJmIjoxNzIyMjI1NjAwLCJpc3MiOiJzdWJzY3JpcHRpb25zIiwiZXhwIjoxNzIzNjA3OTk5LCJpYXQiOjE3MjIyMjU2MDAsImp0aSI6IjI5ODkwY2VjLTYwZTItNDZmZi1hOWZkLWQwOTJjZmI5MGNjMSIsInVybCI6Imh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lndhc2hpbmd0b25wb3N0LmNvbS9vcGluaW9ucy8yMDI0LzA3LzI5L2pvZS1iaWRlbi1yZWZvcm0tc3VwcmVtZS1jb3VydC1wcmVzaWRlbnRpYWwtaW1tdW5pdHktcGxhbi1hbm5vdW5jZW1lbnQvIn0.ZjQ4R9u8pwlIKd0l230VD0f20mb0V140Kw3gTFopyfM

[isaacsapphire]

Perp walk for Mangione was a show of force in support of the rule of law. Everyone knows murder for profit is wrong. Apparently it’s a matter of public debate whether it’s ok to murder an individual deemed symbolically responsible for a systemic problem which he did not personally cause and could not have personally solved.

Rule of law? I understand what you’re saying, but rule of law includes presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial, which both were impinged upon by that perp walk.

Luigi has plead not guilty, and for all I know all the evidence was planted and he’s just a slightly loopy guy who would fit in here and was on an American walkabout when the cops decided to frame him because they needed a perp in custody asap.

And yes, the overall public reaction to the killing has been somewhere between joy and the arguably mild approval of the “we aren’t going to try to help solve this one” from various investigative subreddits, to people arguing about the true cause of the health care crisis in the United States.

The aggression of the response to both Luigi and Boston really doesn’t feel like equality under the law, because the same offenses are treated differently when the victims are regular people.

[reality-detective]

American History You Were Never Taught! 🤔

[asm5129]

My videos on the 1st Amendment and free speech are going to be really important in the next few weeks as claims of censorship, acts of domestic terrorism and incitement of it, and billionaires controlling the flow of information and misinformation become more and more prevalent. Please please PLEASE watch them, I designed them to be very accessible so anyone should be able to understand them and learn from them. It’s gonna be really, really important to know law and history around these topics in the coming days and weeks—Even more than it has been.

In Part I, we explore the history of the 1st Amendment, the legal rights we do and don't have, and how modern approaches to 1st amendment law have resulted in the threat known as Stochastic Terrorism.

In Part II, we explore Monetary Politics, break down who controls modern expression and how, and then discuss ways to begin addressing the threats modern speech issues have introduced.