this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2024
201 points (97.2% liked)

politics

19097 readers
3170 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago

Man, they used to be able to hang guys for things like this because those same guys would claim that hanging the opposition was legitimate. Now it's just money all the way down.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 8 months ago (2 children)

you only need 4 to hear the case, and I'm pretty sure I know who the 4 are.

they're taking the case, not to reverse the decision but to stall the cases, hopefully past the election where trump would win and moot out these cases.

and in that situation, watch them rule 9-0 after trump is sworn in that the immunity trump says he has doesn't exist.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

You're assuming Trump is going to win. He isn't.

Edit: downvoted by misinformation agents.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm assuming nothing. but if he did win, a ruling like that would not surprise me at all.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago

Sure. But he won't win.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

watch them rule 9-0 after trump is sworn in that the immunity trump says he has doesn't exist

lol as if Clarence Thomas would do any such thing. That wouldn't trigger the libs.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

no, but it would stop biden from doing official acts as president such as calling up seal team 6 and having them terminate with extreme prejudice certain key individuals to ensure he stays in office.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

Honestly, just start putting politicians in jail until they agree to make an amendment saying he isn't a king.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 8 months ago (3 children)

FTA, a decision is expected at the end of June (end of their term for the year, I think).

That means if they reject the claim of immunity, trials can restart after that. And with delays, that lines up a wonderful October Surprise (TM), of course. I hate this system so much.

At least he's not immune from any of the state crimes... /s

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

There are still three months of pretrial.

If SCOTUS rules in late June, the trial cannot be finished before inauguration.

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

October surprise? Those dastardly globalists did it again!

/s

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That’s only if everything goes to plan. If it does not, it will be close to or after the election that we get any of these cases back and then we’d really be screwed. Basically if he’s succeeded in delaying the cases this far out already, what makes you think he can’t delay another month somehow? This year is about to be really really ugly.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

He's already delayed it enough. Ruling in July. Three months of pretrial, trial begins October. Two months of trial, ends in December. That leaves less time before inauguration than the minimum time that must pass between conviction and sentencing.

By law, Trump cannot be sentenced before inauguration day.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 8 months ago (2 children)

If they say he's immune from crimes and abuse of power as president, doesn't that mean he's saying Biden is now legally allowed to do the crimes and put Trump in jail without trial?

[–] [email protected] 29 points 8 months ago (3 children)

For the debate of this decision, Biden should sit in the audience with a baseball bat and just stare at Alito.

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

Weird way to spell .30-06.

Murica

[–] [email protected] 11 points 8 months ago (1 children)

He could clean house and pick all new justices!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

Yup. And if anyone tried to impeach him, they could get the same treatment.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago

This guy gets it.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago

Doesn’t matter, and this narrative is tired af. Democrats will not go after him in that way.

load more comments
view more: next ›