politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
This is him attempting to call the judge’s bluff. Following the order, he also posted calling the judge biased. He’s exploring to see if the judge will let him get away with it. He’ll slowly ramp up the posts until the judge tells him to cut it out again, and then he’ll know where the line is. At that point, he’ll simply toe the line and cry “but it wasn’t a problem before” if she tries to cut down on it later.
He believes the judge is afraid to hold him in contempt, and thus far he has been correct. But this is a direct violation of the judge’s order, and the judge shouldn’t let it slide. If she treats this with leniency, he’ll only take it as tacit approval and continue getting more inflammatory. The only reason I can see for the judge allowing it to continue is to give him more rope to hang himself with. One violation of the order is bad, but if she lets it continue and he racks up a bunch of evidence, she may have better justification to hold him and expedite the trial.
Different case. (Can we pause for a moment to recognize how bonkers it is that a former president has so many criminal cases either in process or pending that it's getting hard to keep track?)
The judge who ordered him not to engage in any witness tampering is overseeing the federal case against him for trying to overturn the election in 2020. In this particular instance, he appears to have threatened a witness in the Fulton County, Georgia case, for which an indictment is expected soon.
Would it make a difference? Threatening a witness in one trial when you have several others ongoing and in such a public fashion would have a chilling effect on witness testimony for all trails, or so I would think.
It might. I'm no lawyer, but it's conceivable that the order will be interpreted as targeted specifically to witnesses in the federal trial.
That said, threatening people is illegal all on its own, so who knows...
@kescusay @there1snospoon
20 Year Maximum in Federal Prison for making a social media post. Only TFG would do something so stupid.
https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1729-protection-government-processes-tampering-victims-witnesses-or#:~:text=Section%201512%20of%20Title%2018,a%20witness%2C%20victim%20or%20informant.
I was testing mastodon with this post. Success.
Not necessarily. If it's just a political threat, that's fine. And like a lot of what Trump says, this is just borderline enough to not explicitly threaten physical violence to the point of criminality. It really needs the witness tampering to become criminal. If he says that he will cause political consequences if Jeff Duncan testifies, that would let the prosecution slap witness tampering on to the rest of the case. Hell, he could be convicted on that alone.
That charge is already on the docket.
Right, my point was that his threats were not criminal due to being political threats alone, but due to being associated with testifying.
I hate to say it, but Trump is correct: he could literally murder the judge in this (or any) case on live TV and get away with it. why? because they let him. they refuse to hold him accountable for anything, and that’s why he keeps doing this shit— and getting away with it.
the problem is: HE NEVER GETS HUNG WITH THE ROPE. he just gets away with everything, time and time again. fines are meaningless to him because he just gets his idiot supporters to pay for it.
And lets stop pretending that any level of discourse is going to reach the remaining trump cult, we could literally have a video of him raping their mothers and they would still vote for him, so its time to give up on those people they are never coming back no matter how much evidence we have or how many charges there are.
They would. They would call the video 'fake news' and find it easier to assume their mother was lying than admit their false prophet is capable of any wrongdoing. They've built their entire identities around their unwavering confirmation bias. The vast majority of people who ever successfully disconnect from a cult do so only posthumously.
Its worse that that, they would consider it an honor that trump chose to rape the women in their family. Its koolaide time and we all know its coming
MAGA cultists: Our moms should be honored that Trump likes them!
Also MAGA cultists: Dems caused our moms to get raped!
And of course trump is sooo incredible STUpid that he doesnt know how to use the phrase, 'one more than we need' instead he says 'one more than we have', which insinuates that he has only 11779 votes to begin with!!! GAWD HES SO DUMB!!!
And if they had given him 11780 votes for some reason, he would then be 1 vote ahead of Biden in that race which would have triggered and automatic recount. Man if your going to ask people find votes for you, ASK FOR LIKE 20,000 IDIOT!!!
This user election frauds
I believe under U.S. Law they have to arrest him again and post no bail. This is a blatant disregard for the law. To not act is an injustice to the history of common law going back 800+ years.
I can’t even tell if you’re joking. that’s how much of a shitshow joke our justice system has become.
Not joking, it goes back to the Magna Carta and the origins of common law. In fact it is Clause 39 of the Great Charter of June 1215 CE and a case before Pope Innocent III and ordeals of fire and water. It's interesting but it is the origin of jury trials and witness tampering laws.
Ok but the Magna Carta isn't really a thing over here, and I'm sure the common law precedents for witness/jury tampering have been superceded by new legislation.
great. now I’m sad.
well, more sad.
its Jesse "He can't keep getting away with this!" but in real life
He could walk into court fully erect shouting "Yes! I did it motherfuckers, I am guilty, I am death!" and the judge would still let him roll up in her crib, take a shit, dress up like Santa and take pictures with her kids.
This is for the Georgia case which hasn't gone to a judge yet, he's just trying to get ahead of things before he gets a gag order here too... which this will be used as evidence for...
But you're right, there's enough going on that it's hard to tell the players without a program, so I made this:
This seemed to be popular information when I posted it (ahem) "elsewhere". Thought it might be welcome to have here.
If you're trying to keep track of where we're at in the Trump prosecutions:
Updated 8/10/2023
Washington, D.C. - 4 felonies, January 6th Election Interference
Investigation
Indictment
Arrest <- You Are Here
(DOJ lawyer Jack Smith has requested a trial date of 1/2/2024, Trump lawyers have yet to supply a counter date. The judge will announce a final date on 8/28)
Trial
Conviction
Sentencing
Georgia - Election Interference
Investigation <- You Are Here
2 new grand juries impaneled 7/11/2023.
Indictment - July 11th to September 1st.
(Grand Jury work expected July 31 to Aug. 18)
(Streets around the Fulton County courthouse will be closed from 8/7 to 8/18.)
Arrest
Trial
Conviction
Sentencing
New York State - 34 felonies, Stormy Daniels Payoff
Investigation
Indictment
Arrest <- You Are Here
Trial - March 25th, 2024
Conviction
Sentencing
Florida - 40 felonies, Federal documents charges
Investigation
Indictment
Original indictment was for 37 felonies.
3 new felonies were added on July 27, 2023.
Arrest <- You Are Here
Trial - May 20, 2024
Conviction
Sentencing
Other grand juries, such as for the documents at Bedminster, have not been announced.
The E. Jean Carroll trial for sexual assault and defamation where Trump was found liable and ordered to pay $5 million before immediately defaming her again resulting in a demand for $10 million is not listed as it's a civil case and not a crimimal one.
2 more indictments and he gets a free sub.
One prison term and he gets free footlongs for life. 😯
I appreciate you.
I don't know that I'd attribute any actual strategy to this.
I think that's a mistake that everyone had made about Trump from the beginning.
"Oh, he's a marketing genius!"
Why? Because he put his name on everything? Maybe there's a simple explanation: he's a raging narcissist who likes putting his name on everything. The fact that his name is synonymous with being the top, or besting something is just his sheer dumb luck.
The fact is, every single thing he's ever done can be explained as being an expression of his narcissism and impulse control problems, combined with the fact that he faces zero consequences for his behavior no matter how awful.
So, no, I don't think he was testing the judge. I think he was just mindlessly attacking anyone who is a threat to him like he has always done in every situation.
His grandfather changed the family name from Drumpf to Trump, so his family chose to name themselves as 'on top' intentionally. He just inherited the narcissism.
It's sad, really because if ever there was a person to match the sound "Drumpf", it's that sack of shit.
That kind of anglicization was very common for immigrants of all types a century ago. Like my own g'g'grandmother.
There are plenty of reasons to dislike that whole family, that's not one I hold against them, or anybody else for that matter.
He'll just continue to say what he's always said, that this judge or that attorney or whoever is against him and this, that, and the other is rigged against him. As far as he's concerned, it's him vs the world.
Did you hear him the other day when he told people at his rally, "I'm being indicted for you." Like he's the second coming of Jesus and he died for his supportters' sins.
As long as his supporters are on board, he'll say whatever shit to make him look like the victim. And his supporters will be all for it.
How much rope does one man get? He has already been given the entire rope store, distribution center, and manufacturing plant. He has so much rope he'd have to fall all the way to mars before he reached the end. He has more rope than he could ever use. At some point the hangman needs to do his job.
If you give someone more than enough rope to hang themselves with, they can hang one end from the ceiling, put the other around their neck and be standing solidly on the floor harm-free.
The man thinks that getting locked up helps him, and that it will fundraise for him. He’s delusional to think that he’ll magically be elected next year and then pardon himself and walk out of jail.