this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2025
980 points (99.7% liked)

politics

19950 readers
2986 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This is the very essence of the difference that should exist between a President and a King. From Federalist 69:

The President of the United States would be liable to be impeached, tried, and, upon conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes or misdemeanors, removed from office; and would afterwards be liable to prosecution and punishment in the ordinary course of law. The person of the king of Great Britain is sacred and inviolable; there is no constitutional tribunal to which he is amenable; no punishment to which he can be subjected without involving the crisis of a national revolution. In this delicate and important circumstance of personal responsibility, the President of Confederated America would stand upon no better ground than a governor of New York, and upon worse ground than the governors of Maryland and Delaware.

The failure of the Republican party to support this kind of check on Presidential power is why we're having this crisis now.

(page 4) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 52 points 2 days ago (10 children)

Is it time to petition the military to intervene?

[–] [email protected] 32 points 2 days ago (3 children)

When I was little, long before I had a reason to want it to be true, I had this theory that the Secret Service, which is obviously not a secret, was called that because they had a secret mandate: If the President ever gets really out of pocket and goes for dictator powers, it's their job to execute him as a traitor.

Anyway, I doubt it's true, but I've been thinking about it a lot lately.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

i want to do than cross my fingers for this. i wonder what the proper channels really are.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago (8 children)

There's no proper channels for this. Either the military leadership is motivated or they're not.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The Trump administration is not refusing to share power with an opposing party. It is refusing to follow the constitutional limits of a government that its own party controls completely.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

Charles I said something similar. I'm sincerely hoping that it goes as well for Dump as it did for him.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

Anyone know the full quote?

It just quotes the three words "should be allowed".

[–] [email protected] 23 points 2 days ago

And unless someone enforces the rules and consequences for breaking them for the first time in his miserable fucking life, he will be correct.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

Nobody should be surprised

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago

Putin's Sock Puppet is following orders from Moscow to bust up the USA and turn it into another fucking Russia.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)

We have years of people saying he can't do X or he can't do Y and not enough time spent on what happens when he doesn't comply.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'm pretty sure The Judge gets to be the judge of that, not the Executive.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Ah but the executive gets to be the judge of who gets to be a judge and it is judged by those judges it judged to be judges that it will be judged positively.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

it's all smoke and mirrors for "i have a gun. do what i say". the question inevitably is who has the gun?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

I think I see where you are judging this.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago

"Might"

Yeah there is no might anymore...

[–] [email protected] 100 points 2 days ago (9 children)

So, those 2A people being real fuckin quiet now that an actual tyrant is in play.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

they want a hierarchy and the freedom to enforce it. nothing else.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago (3 children)

What are they supposed to say? If they say anything they're gonna have the SS knocking on their door.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 days ago (2 children)

As a leftist who owns firearms, I'm waiting for everything to kick off (in Minecraft obviously)

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago

That’s because their team is the tyrant.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 2 days ago

The objection was always that somebody dark-skinned might be President, or that assets might be expropriated from billionaires, not that tyranny might be an issue.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 157 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This is the step where the cart goes over the top of the hill, you're not coming back if this starts.

Hard to hear, but if goes forward, this does signal that it's breaking windows time. We all have a Luigi line, start really considering where yours is...

Especially if you're young, and they are doing this before you have been able to establish your own career or a family of your own, the rest of the world needs your strength and energy in these moments. Make no mistake, they are threatening you directly, they want to sell your future for a small profit added to the pile they are hoarding. Decide how hard you want to fight against that

[–] [email protected] 89 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Especially if you're older and know that everything you've worked for is at risk. Especially if you're middle aged and your hope of a comfortable old age is being destroyed. Especially if you have family, and know your children's future depends on it.

I know you mean well but fuck ageism, the youth always fight. They don't need a pep talk, older people do.

[–] [email protected] 50 points 2 days ago (4 children)

And then there are the rest of us. Not quite young anymore, but we were robbed of the chance to even have anything to anchor us down. We've been squeezed out of the housing market nearly our entire adult lives. We never could justify having a child, perhaps because of money, perhaps because our consciences wouldn't let us, perhaps because of both. We job-hop every few years already, as it's the only way we've ever received a sizable pay raise.

There is no house, no child, and no job for us to worry about losing. I don't know about y'all, but I've been doing little more than fighting to get by for far too long.

I'm ready to fight for something else.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'm ready to fight for something else.

Then do it. Talk is cheap.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 days ago

wanna live forever? do something memorable.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 days ago

You are not alone, my brother.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 2 days ago

The gears grind slower each rotation, yet we're still surprised when the machine jams. Constitutional guardrails only work if the drivers pretend they exist—a quaint fiction evaporating under the heat of performative strongman politics. We've seen this before: executive overreach dressed as "emergency," norms crumbling like stale bread.

What's novel is the brazenness. Courts are now just another PR obstacle, their rulings reduced to content for the outrage algorithm. Linz warned of dueling mandates, not this farce where one branch swallows the rest whole. The Founders' checks? Dry rot under the floorboards, termites long since victorious.

Democracy cosplay can't hide the scaffolding. When the executive branch treats the judiciary as a nuisance, the only remaining question is how many will still clap as the curtain falls.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›