this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2024
312 points (95.9% liked)

politics

19097 readers
4125 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) 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 69 points 4 months ago

I said it before and I’ll say it again. I’ll fucking believe it when I see it.

So far all I’ve seen is someone blatantly breaking the law and only ever getting a finger wagged in their general direction. Our government has never looked so impotent.

[–] [email protected] 58 points 4 months ago (6 children)

Biden apparently has the power to just have Trump, the SCOTUS judges, and every other piece of shit taking this country right down the fucking toilet put to death and this ruling has made me wish he would do it.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 43 points 4 months ago
[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago

Ah. Nevertheless,

[–] [email protected] 31 points 4 months ago

We've probably already seen the major stuff from the house committees investigation. If this does anything, it will only make it a little more fresh

[–] [email protected] 81 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I hope that's true, but I have my doubts.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 months ago (1 children)

This particular trial covers events that happened during his presidency. Unless she says "Fuck it!" and declares most of his actions to be unofficial (which Trump will appeal) then there's going to be some serious gaps in evidence.

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

This particular kind of hearing might not necessarily need to conclude before the election to be impactful. Trump's lawyers arguing with a straight face that his alleged attempt at subverting the election was actually an official act just before the election could be fairly damaging on their own.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›