There's also a report that Trump wants to repeal the First Amendment.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/prie…

This is what American voters want. Or at least, the Americans who bothered to vote. This is merely a reflection of what the (electoral) majority wants our country to be.

@6,
Most people don't vote at all, so the majority of this country simply doesn't give a shit what the government does. At least, they don't give enough of a shit to drive to a voting booth for a half hour once every two to four years.

Gerrymandering and voter suppression notwithstanding, the majority of this country are too lazy to care about anyone or anything but themselves.

@2: It's so tiring that whenever silly people in the executive branch make noises that are clearly unconstitutional, the media goes extrapolates it into needless worry. To amend the constitution requires it being proposed by a member of Congress. You'd be hard pressed to find any member, R or D, that would go before her or his colleagues to propose such an amendment. You could argue it's possible, but definitely not probable.

@13 but to even suggest it....

@12,
Yeah, of the people who vote, most are against it. And yet, here we are. It's almost like voting doesn't matter... it's like there's something else out there that's really running the country. Hmmmm... what could it be....

/yeah that's a sarcastic rhetorical comment

'Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them.' - Margaret Atwood.

@14: Yes - that's a good point.

Sea @2: Those wacky Tea-Party types! So much for their deep belief in strict constructionist interpretation of the Constitution. But I guess radically changing the Constitution would be the only way for them to modernize the allowable interpretation, right?

UF @15: Sadly, I agree with you. I say "sadly" because I am a patriot, a veteran, and an incurable optimist. I still want to believe that the USA represents a sustainable long-term model of representative democracy, and that our example will inspire future leaders in places around the world that are currently far less democratic. I thought we were well on our way back toward that ideal during the Obama Presidency. But ever since the Citizens United decision in the Supreme Court ("corporations are people"), and especially since last year's elections (both the pre-ordained coronation of HRC over the people's choice, and the disastrous election of Donald Trump which followed as naturally as night from day after the Dems made that fatal error), I've felt like we are rapidly transitioning from a democracy into a plutocracy. We dutifully elect representatives who go to Washington with great intentions, but they are quickly either corrupted by the money flow, or marginalized by all the others who have been corrupted by the money flow. I honestly don't know how the pendulum swings back the other way from here, but I hope it happens sooner rather than later.

I don't know why the Alton Sterling shooting must boil down to "racist pigs murdered innocent black man" vs. "murder-minded black terrorist killed by heroic public servants." I don't think it's that simple. The article is wrong, though; Alton Sterling was armed.

Now, there's no questioned Walter Scott was straight-up murdered, and his murderer deserves life behind bars. Philando Castile was also murdered, although the relative lack of malice and deliberation makes that seem more like a rock-solid Manslaughter case. The boy in Balch Springs was also murdered, be it actual Murder or Manslaughter.

Alton Sterling, tho, was resisting arrest, was armed, and his movements in the video could be interpreted as an attempt to retrieve his gun. I don't know what I would have done in the place of those cops, but not shooting would have been a high-stakes gamble...maybe a deadly one. Would I have bet my actual life on being able to prevent Sterling from getting hold of his gun? Idaknow. I would assume that if he's trying to get it while resisting arrest, then he must want it for a reason that's very not good for me!

Not every police shooting caught on camera is a bad one just because it's on camera and the justification seems less than plainly conclusive to the viewer. It might not be justified in such a case...but maybe it is.

@ 18,

Sad US timeline:

1980s - Kakistocracy
1990s - Plutocracy
2000s - Oligarchy
2016 to present - Neofascist kleptocracy

OA @22, sad indeed.

@18, 19:

"The rich and powerful get their policies adopted, even if opposed by most voters"

https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/…

I am disappointed -- the facts in the laughing case aren't exactly as I understood them to be when I first read Mr. Savage's comments. Protesting at the Capitol has long been limited. Can't fight this administration with half-truths and lies. They are MUCH better at lying than we are. 18 months to midterm elections. Remind your representative.

The NYT story is here https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/03/us/co…

Guys, lets pretend to be real. Police aren't killing black folks because they think they can get away with it, or because they're looking for any excuse to kill black people; but because they're generally poorly trained and they're conditioned to be afraid of black people - by overly white police forces, by the media, and the reality that black people live in neighborhoods that are significantly more dangerous than white ones (regardless of why). Watch the Phil Castillo video - that cop is scared shitless. It's not an excuse, and it's a direct product of racism, but stubbornly failing to understand why something happens is the simplest way to make sure it keeps happening. If getting your anger/blame jollies off is more important than change, at least be honest with everyone else about it.

Meanwhile, this laughing prosecution is a joke.

...

So...laughing and holding up a placard is disorderly conduct punishable by fine and/or jail time? Yet, DJT telling his supporters that they should beat up protestors was okay (at a different time and event)? WTF happened to our First Amendment? Was it repealed when I was sleeping?

The article quoted started with, "It is hard to believe this is happening,..."

Actually, those of us who resisted The Stranger's constant delegitimization of Hillary COULD believe that this would be our future, and we said so wish every article tearing her apart and repeating every half-truth and manipulation of fact.

Do you feel AT ALL responsible for this woman's problems? Would it have happened if not for Trump? Even if so, would Hillary have assisted in this malpractice of law?

Oops.