this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2024
874 points (99.0% liked)

politics

19126 readers
2596 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 4) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

US presidents acting in their official capacity were always immune to prosecution for murder. Johnson and Nixon wiped out entire villages in Vietnam, never held accountable.

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

I'm honestly not sure why he doesn't just have all of SCOTUS murdered, and if anyone in Congress moves against him, have then eliminated as well. Do Trump in, whole he's at it. Full on blood bath.

Tell me why not?

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I highly recommend the following book: "On Tyranny: twenty lessons from the Twenty Century"

There's also reading of it by the author on YouTube.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 112 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Earlier today I was writing about how we are in a full blown constitutional crisis now. Then I realized that we aren’t. The crisis is over and the Supreme Court chose to abandon the constitution. The crisis was happening before this decision was made, but very few people were aware or alarmed about it. We are now in a state where I doubt there’s any legal recourse. We’ve moved on to another stage and that terrifies me.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago (2 children)

How well would a constitutional amendment fly? (I'm not a USian)

Could a states' rights pitch be made for enshrining some legal limitation on presidential action?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Constitutional amendment(s) could fix things, but there needs to be enough people in Congress willing to pass it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Well yea, which would be the point. The Other parts of the country's government using their power to impose a limitation (congress and the states).

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 4 months ago (1 children)

How can Biden use this for good? Healthcare? Marijuana legalization? Reinstate abortion? Guns? Income inequality?

We're in unmarked territory and all I can think of are the abuses. Does somebody have a little hope they can spare?

[–] [email protected] 30 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Problem is, it’s up to the courts to decide what is and isn’t “official us business”. As of now, everything Trump does will be “official”, and nothing Biden does would be “official”.

Doesn’t matter what is fair and even cause Republicans don’t play by that game.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Could an Executive Order be given? It's hard to argue that's not official.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 4 months ago

The Supreme Court isn't really interested in arguments, it seems. They're starting at conclusions and working backwards. In a sane world, you're probably right with the logic. But in a sane world we wouldn't have made it to this point to begin with.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›