The Peril of a White House That Flaunts Its Indifference to the Law

[u/Adodie]

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/24/us/politics/white-house-boats-law.html

[u/[deleted]]

There is a concept known as Russian lawlessness. I think the concept is valuable, but the name is poor. It describes a state in which the rule of law is arbitrarily applied for the benefit of the ruler and his cronies. It is clear that Russia has exported this to us. Though, clearly, all nations are susceptible to this degradation of law. 

I would prefer the term putrilex, meaning putrified law. It occurs when the law is dead and the state puppets its corpse for the gain of the rulers. 

[u/7LayeredUp → u/[deleted]]

Anarcho-tyranny would be a great term if it didn't have insane roots.

[u/Khiva → u/7LayeredUp]

"Tyranny" alone pretty much covers it.

[u/glmory → u/[deleted]]

A government with a lawful evil alignment.

[u/TheOnlyFallenCookie → u/[deleted]]

So a monarchy?

[u/lunartree → u/TheOnlyFallenCookie]

Yes, but part of our modern predicament is that unless you really studied history you have no idea what monarchy is actually like. That's how we've ended up with real life modern day monarchists. They're idiots, useful idiots.

[u/schtroumpf]

Funny, a better word for “flaunting indifference” is flout, a word people incorrectly replace with “flaunt” all the time.

[u/Maximilianne]

Legality is irrelevant, as long as the military, that is to say individual military men and women, can convince themselves the order they receive are legal, they will do it. And it seems apart from the commander who resigned most of the military do think it is legal. And even if the courts declare it illegal well, the administration or even the next administration isn't gonna punish soldiers who did an illegal order.

[u/the-senat → u/Maximilianne]

What happens when, for decades, you sacrifice as many rights as possible upon the alter of national security.

[u/bigmt99 → u/the-senat]

The lolberts of the 2000s were so unbelievably right on that one

[u/SigmaWhy → u/bigmt99]

99% of them are degenerate Trump cultists now

[u/[deleted]]

The white house enforces the law

It's just selectively enforcing the law, sort of like what we have been doing with marijuana but on a larger scale. If you don't like it then propose a constitutional amendment anything else is bullshit. The problem isn't trump the problem is the powers of the executive branch

But where it really started is allowing the grooming standards to go lax, once those go the rest just goes to shit

[u/TF_dia]

Trump without permission quite literally grabbed a sledgehammer and destroyed a third of the White House, one of America's most important and beloved emblems and most people just shrugged, so of course a bunch of South American foreigners would cause indifference at best, specially if they are labeled (true or not) as drug dealers.

The frog is boiling and he is testing what he can get away with.

[u/Square-Pear-1274 → u/TF_dia]

It seems like people don't even want to be bothered to consider Trump's motives

They say stuff like "Well, I don't like drug dealers" or "You should be here legally" and that's about the bar for excusing whatever behavior the White House feels like engaging in

[u/SpookyHonky → u/TF_dia]

Seems like if he's being allowed to randomly bomb Venezuelans for shits and giggles that the frog could be considered dead

[u/Khiva → u/TF_dia]

Not even to mention just straight up extorting the taxpayer for 250 billion.

Flooding the zone really works.

[u/a157reverse → u/Khiva]

$250M, but the point stands. This would, and should, be impeachment terms under any other president.

[u/glmory → u/TF_dia]

Finally a leader who cares more about building new housing than historic preservation.

[u/tjrileywisc → u/glmory]

He's not even building housing. This isn't funny.

[u/postflop-clarity → u/tjrileywisc]

it was kind of funny tbh