this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2024
449 points (98.5% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2541 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
(page 2) 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Likely prosecution roadmap. Trump is going to die in Federal custody.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 9 months ago (2 children)

TIL that I am as smart as a Federal Judge.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago

No this case was just that dumb.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 35 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Hey everybody! Guess what it's time for?

I seriously need to save this image so I don't have to download it each time.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 9 months ago

Just remember to rename it so it's easily searchable, especially on mobile. Otherwise you'll end up with 20 copies of the same pic/gif

Source: me, and my many many hard drives.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

But, then you'll have saved that image. 🥹

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

What you say is rational and is something I should do. And yet...

(Actually, I just bookmarked it.)

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That image shows up as a lemmy.world URL for me. Does Lemmy cache images somehow?

I would love to have Lemmy host a copy of a Biden "I Did That!" Sticker for every time we hear about the economy doing better.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

Yes, it caches them. I should probably just save that URL. I'm lazy.

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

LOL did you scrub the episode and get a new frame this time?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 88 points 9 months ago (6 children)
[–] [email protected] 32 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (10 children)

Excerpt:

For the purpose of this criminal case, former President Trump has become citizen Trump, with all of the defenses of any other criminal defendant. But any executive immunity that may have protected him while he served as President no longer protects him against this prosecution.

Well worth skimming the ruling if you ask me. And up vote parent comment for visibility please.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Also:

In relevant part, the district court rejected Trump’s claim of executive immunity from criminal prosecution, holding that “[f]ormer Presidents enjoy no special conditions on their federal criminal liability.” United States v. Trump,


F. Supp. 3d ---, 2023 WL 8359833, at *3 (D.D.C. Dec. 1, 2023). It concluded that “[t]he Constitution’s text, structure, and history do not support” the existence of such an immunity, id., and that it “would betray the public interest” to grant a former President “a categorical exemption from criminal liability” for allegedly “attempting to usurp the reins of government.” Id. at *12.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 9 months ago

^ Everyone upvote this for visibility please. People need to read this.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago

Interesting they used Nixon as precedent.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

About damn time.

[–] [email protected] 91 points 9 months ago (9 children)

What the hell is the argument for immunity? Even if presidents can't be charged for doing their job, stealing an election and walking away with nuclear secrets is not part of the job.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago

The tactic is to delay the inevitable in hopes that he can lead another, better coup attempt later, install himself as president for life and then pardon himself for all crimes, past and future

[–] [email protected] 15 points 9 months ago (3 children)

The dumbass interpretation of "Separation of powers" means that the judiciary doesn't have jurisdiction over any executive branch official, for anything, ever. Corollaries being that congress can't pass laws that apply to judges, and the Department of Justice can't investigate Congresspeople. Instead of checks-and-balances, they want independent kingdoms.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago

The argument is that Trump gave all these judges some really cushy lifetime jobs, and he thought they would deliver some payback.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago

It was a somewhat successful delay tactic.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The argument is that it's hurting Trump's feelings and that's why he should be able to do whatever he wants without question.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 70 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What the hell is the argument for immunity?

It's the well-established "throw shit at wall, hope it sticks" principle of legal argumentation.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 9 months ago

I started typing a joke comment about how the "term of art" was "kitchen sink defense," but then I remembered that it actually is a bit of a term of art.

I trolled myself and am not sure how to feel about this.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 9 months ago (1 children)

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has ruled that Donald Trump does not enjoy broad immunity from federal prosecution, a major legal setback for the former president who almost certainly will appeal.

The ruling comes a month after lawyers for Trump argued made sweeping claims that he enjoyed immunity from federal prosecution, claims that lawyers for the special counsel said would "undermine democracy" and give presidents license to commit crimes while in the White House, such as accepting bribes for directing government contracts or selling nuclear secrets to a foreign adversary.

That's quite a beating, President Drink Bleach was administered. The article is with the read. The judges gave excellent examples of why presidents shouldn't, you know, be criminals.

He'll appeal as much as he can. But I cannot see him succeeding beyond delaying.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 9 months ago

Delay is success.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 9 months ago (3 children)

There was never a possibility it would rule any other way. Now we just gotta wait for the inevitable stupid appeal to SCOTUS, and have it done with.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

I didn't share your faith in the outcome. But I'm glad they ruled as they should.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

Ah yes. History is inevitable.

Except that its not and they absolutely could have ruled some other way.

Nothing is guaranteed.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

Now we just gotta wait for the inevitable stupid appeal to SCOTUS, and have it done with.

I believe he can request an en banc hearing (a hearing in front of all the circuit judges, as opposed to a three-judge panel), which he definitely will, because it will delay the proceedings further.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The three judge panel anticipated that these arguments are primarily delay tactics. They have said in the decision they will stay their ruling only for an appeal accepted directly to the supreme court. If he appeals to the en banc panel first, then the trial can go ahead while that appeal plays out, so it can't be used as a delay tactic. Only the Supreme Court can delay it further now.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago (5 children)

I assume that certain elements on the Supreme Court will attempt to delay it (Thomas, Alito, and probably Gorsuch, I’m looking at you). How much can they realistically delay the trial?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 9 months ago (1 children)

He can request it, but the good thing about those is the appeals court can deny the request. He can appeal to the Supreme Court and they could either deny it or take it up to smack down the argument. If they side with his argument the country is over (along with all of the court's own power) as they would have ruled that the President is functionally an absolute monarch.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

they would have ruled that the President is functionally an absolute monarch.

And then Dark Brandon activates Seal Team Six for elephant hunting season.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago

Hopefully, the court will deny the request with prejudice. It's such a goddamn dumb argument.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Circuit has ruled that Donald Trump does not enjoy broad immunity from federal prosecution, a major legal setback for the former president who almost certainly will appeal.

The ruling comes a month after lawyers for Trump argued made sweeping claims that he enjoyed immunity from federal prosecution, claims that lawyers for the special counsel said would "undermine democracy" and give presidents license to commit crimes while in the White House, such as accepting bribes for directing government contracts or selling nuclear secrets to a foreign adversary.

Circuit judges, Florence Pan, pressed Trump attorney D. John Sauer at the oral argument about whether a president might sell pardons or nuclear secrets, or even order a Navy SEAL team to kill a political opponent, and still evade criminal prosecution under his theory of the case.

Trump has pleaded not guilty to four felony counts that accuse him of leading a conspiracy to cling to power and disenfranchise millions of voters in 2020.

Prosecutors say that this culminated in violence at the U.S. Capitol three years ago that injured 140 law enforcement officers and shook the foundations of American democracy.

The former president has signaled that he could seek to dismiss the federal cases against him in the District of Columbia and Florida if he regains the White House.


The original article contains 369 words, the summary contains 216 words. Saved 41%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›