this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2023
728 points (96.9% liked)

politics

18933 readers
3292 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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
[–] Zombiepirate@lemmy.world 213 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

The full quote is much more enlightening IMO:

What I’m asking you to do is to say it was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republican congressmen.

[–] ATQ@lemm.ee 99 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Frankly, I’m surprised that the current slate of indictments haven’t extended to MTG, Boebert, Gaetz, and the rest of their traitor caucus compatriots.

[–] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 71 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So there is a really real discussion within the Federal Government if Trump supporters in the Govt should be subject to a security review to have their clearances revoked for Anti-American sentiments and activities.

[–] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 47 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Wait. Hold on a fucking minute.

I cant even have a security review to have clearance before I get a job that requires it (and then what happens if you don't?) but these people aren't even reviewed?

Fuck, you want to talk about compromised information, that's a fuckload of security risks

[–] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Review used to be every five to ten years, but the Biden Administration changed it to five last year for all clearances. What's being discussed is if MAGA supporters should be reviewed deeper as they are a threat to National Security. Generally speaking how someone votes has not been an issue for clearance unless you were a member of the Communist party. The problem now is that being a member of the Republican Party doesn't mean you support Trump but if you do support him you lable yourself as a threat. It's a slippery slope. Security clearance checks scan your entire internet history going back seven years. We are seeing clearances denied due to Xbox conservations, loads for social media comments. The Security form you fill out requires you list every online handle you used over the last seven years. To not list one would be a criminal offense. So it's become a problem that MAGA is running into, their online history is creating red flags. The discussion is do they start treating MAGA like Communists and blanket ban them from public service.

[–] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

every online handle over 7 years?

oh well, guess I'm really not going into DoD work now. I probably have a dozen or so that I don't even have the username saved for.

[–] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yeah, that was new to the form. They review your finances, every location you traveled, every address you lived at, interview neighbors, coworkers, they will pull logs from social media like FB, Twitter, Reddit, Playstation and Xbox, the pull phone records and GPS data, text records, ISP records, etc. That is why people with a TS clearance should not be on social media at all. That form gives the Federal Government full access to your entire history for that seven year period to determine if you are trustworthy.

For a normal security clearance they don't go as deep, usually just financial and review for any police reports, but all give the govt the right to search everything if need be.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] dhork@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think it would be very hard to prosecute, because the Constitution gives direct protection to Members of Congress who are discussing matters at the Capitol in their official capacity, in the Speech and Debate clause. And since validating the Electoral College count is expressly spelled out in the Constitution as a thing Congress does, it will be hard to argue that the Speech and Debate Clause doesn't apply.

MTG passed out pictures of Hunter's penis in Congress, after all, and is not likely to face any repercussions at all. (If she does, it will be because she tweeted it, too.,..)

[–] neptune@dmv.social 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think it all really depends on what you have evidence they said, saw and knew.

Yeah, I agree it will be impossible to convict a congressional rep for voting against certification. BUT if you have evidence that person was attending meetings where a criminal conspiracy was taking place and especially if you have evidence they were directed to stall, and especially if they knew what was to happen after the vote failed..... Then idk maybe they can be charged as part of a conspiracy. But just voting NO on it? I don't think that's criminal in and of itself.

[–] PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Or took people on tours so they knew where to go when they broke into one of our biggest buildings of power and tried to murder at least our vice president.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Not every tool is used for every job

[–] ghostface@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Especially since the propaganda machine is working on the current round of charges.

Once Trump goes down the rest will follow

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ATQ@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I agree. But I’m also not particularly opposed to a hammer being used in place of a screwdriver in this specific instance.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Since we're sure we would rather have rule of law Instead of a tyrant, we don't get to make exceptions or pick when the rules apply. That we barely get a say in the rules is beside the point.

Anyway my only point here was actually more about how I'm not even sure Boebs was guilty enough of these charges. The prosecutors have a strong incentive to advance only the charges they can make stick, or the whole case could fail.

[–] Hazdaz@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I want to see his goddamn kids also thrown in jail.

Nothing will hurt him more than if Ivanka is roped into his corruption.

But I guarantee you it won't happen.

[–] half_fiction@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Really, you think so? Trump strikes me as a person who ultimately doesn't give a fuck about anyone but himself when backed into a corner.

I mean, don't get me wrong, I want to see them in jail, too, but I think just about any negative repercussions to his own life would hurt him more than seeing his kids suffer consequences. Push comes to shove, I can see him throwing those kids under a bus, even Ivanka.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DirkMcCallahan@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 year ago

Yep. Don't let them get away with pinning everything on Trump. The rest of the GOP is just as complicit.

[–] Hazdaz@lemmy.world 161 points 1 year ago (40 children)

I'm so sick of these headlines.

They remind me of the endless headlines over the years (decades, actually) of how the Republican party is ready to collapse or implode or explode or insert-other-ominous-word-here.

As with all those failed predictions of the GOP going the way of the dodo bird, until I see Trump in an orange jumpsuit I won't believe any of the shit they claim will happen.

[–] monsterlynn@kbin.social 47 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@Hazdaz I kind of feel like the GOP has imploded, though. Since Trump especially (and really I think this strain of anti-democracy conservativism dates back to the 2000 election where they saw that they could just bully their way into stealing elections), there doesn't seem to be much of the Republican Party that preceeded him left. Now it's all antidemocratic fascists and nutjobs. Just because they call themselves Republicans and win elections doesn't mean their politics really has anything to do with what their party stands for on paper.

I think it's more a case of being careful what you wish for. Yes, they imploded. Yes, they don't really exist anymore. What has supplanted them is so much worse

@YoBuckStopsHere

[–] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 56 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (9 children)

I really hate this perspective. It's just plain wrong.

Trump DID NOT change the Republican party. He only made them think the mask was no longer necessary. They've been pro war, pro tax cuts, pro business, pro rich, pro racism, and anti-democracy... for literally decades.

Now that they're not using platitudes and not couching their rhetoric in obvious lies it's suddenly evil?!

[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Trump did not change the Republican party

Hell, he wasn't even the first time they rioted after losing an election. That happened in 2000, when paid republican operatives disrupted the recount that would have confirmed al gore as president long enough for the supreme court to step in and award the state (and, therefore, the presidency) to dubya without counting the votes at all. Google 'brooks brothers riot', several Republican staffers openly acknowledge that they were there to use violence in order to stop the votes from being counted despite initial claims that they were only there to observe the process and ensure that it was fair. This includes congressman John Sweeney, who said "What I essential told my people was 'You've got to stop them.'" Trump thought he could get away with this because Bush already had gotten away with it. They even planned copycat riots in Arizona and Nevada in 2020 because it worked the first time.

In the last 30 years Republicans have won the presidency 3 times despite having only gotten more votes than the other guy once. They have had two riots after elections, one of which successfully delayed counting votes long enough for the Republican to be installed as president, and one which failed to delay certification long enough to install the Republican. They are against democracy and in favor of violence. They consistently act with those values in mind. They are enemies of democracy and freedom.

[–] appel@lemmy.ml 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That happened in 2000, when paid republican operatives disrupted the recount that would have confirmed al gore as president long enough for the supreme court to step in and award the state (and, therefore, the presidency) to dubya without counting the votes at all. Google 'brooks brothers riot'

It just completely blows my mind that this happened and, more so, that it was allowed to stand after the fact. I think I read somewhere that Gore decided not to contest it in order to not mess with the peaceful transfer of power, but man...

Just imagine how world events had played out if Al Gore had been president on and after September 11th, 2001. Imagine the progress we could have made on climate change 24 years ago. I understand that it's pure speculation, that he could have been a lukewarm president. But come on, he would have been loads better that GWB even if all he did was twirl his fingers.

[–] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

MLK Jr DID warn everyone about the complacency of the comfortable... Too bad people suck at listening to difficult but good advice.

[–] Isthisreddit@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Absolutely based post. I've recognized what they truly were 20 years ago. There is a slight distinction - the republican party always had 4 stools (people used to say three stools but I never agreed).

First stool is the wealthy just wanting to make more money (tax cuts, tax welfare, regulation capture, etc). This is the true stool in power pulling the strings of all the other stools. They know they can never win a popular vote (why would the workers vote to lower their own wages?). They ride the Santa sled with the big bag of money, the reigns are connected to the lesser stools, and they ride that sled into the bank

Second stool is the religious vote - really captured by Reagan I believe with the invention of the abortion issue, but they go as far back as Goldwater I believe, because he warned about them. These are the reindeer of the money sled

Third stool is the racists, the KKK types in the south. These are also the reindeer

Fourth stool is what I consider the conspiracy theory crowd - they sort of share the stool with the uneducated morons who can't seem to figure out what their best interests are ("get gobernment off my Medicare, vote republican"). This stool might fall under the "undecided" crowd by some metrics, but they fall victim to the usual right wing lies and propaganda all the fucking time, so I don't see why we can't just label them as they truly are, the useful idiot voters of the republican propaganda arm

As a whole, these groups are the same pieces of shit that love Trump because he's talks to them with a bullhorn, not through dog whistles like previous republicans, that's the difference some of you might not appreciate

Edit - one distinction I think is needed is the people who fell for the dog whistles were usually of the authoritarian/fascist type. For example, There were pretty decent religious people or business people who felt the wrong message was being presented by the republican party, but the authoritarians/fascists always fell in line behind the republicans/conservatives. Still the case today

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] chem_bpy@lemmy.world 38 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The countless headlines of trump being indicted?

This past few weeks were the first time he is actually having any legal consequences. Nothing like the headlines of old.

[–] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And yet, he still walks free and his allies still sit in power.

Do not mistake the shadenfreud for actual justice being served. That ship sailed years ago.

[–] UristMcHolland@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He is not as free as you might think. For example: If attempted to leave the country right now, he would be arrested. He cannot go anywhere without a secret service detail and he isn't legally allowed to drive himself anymore. He is being watched and monitored all day, every day.

Hopefully, when he sentenced he will actually be put behind bars and not on "house arrest" in a mansion.

[–] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

He is more free and privileged than any person in the entire country who works a job and pays rent. House arrest for him is a vacation to 98% of Americans.

That should never be acceptable so long as anyone else would suffer in a cement cell prison until they were executed for this.

[–] SCB@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The GOP absolutely imploded. That's why they went from "compassionate conservative" to full on fash.

[–] Hazdaz@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (14 children)

They were never compassionate about anything other than money, guns and jebus.

Just because they have shifted their branding doesn't mean squat about them supposedly imploding. That couldn't be further from the truth.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] WarmSoda@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago

They kinda did though. The tea party wackos took it over.

load more comments (36 replies)
[–] LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world 141 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Entire Republican Party needs to be held accountable. Not just DJT. Every elected official who objected certifying 2020 election needs to be put on trial for perpetrating the lie and harming the democracy.

[–] A_A@lemmy.world 60 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Just an appetizer before the real thing 🥳

[–] Chainweasel@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Don't forget the end of that quote:
"and the Republican congressmen"

[–] monsterlynn@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago

@Chainweasel Remember the January 6 rioters that got into the Senate chamber rifling through senator's desks? How when they came upon Ted Cruz's desk they started reading the speech he had left there, got all riled up about it, then one of the rioters stops them and says something to the effect of "this is Ted Cruz - it's okay. He's with us"?

@YoBuckStopsHere

[–] CaptainHowdy@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It would be so fantastic is he actually did go to prison, but I just really don't think it will happen. I hope I'm wrong and they throw MTG and Ted Zodiac Cruz in there with him for good measure.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

So, armchair pundits...what are your thoughts on the fact they're trying to get this moved to a federal court?

[–] tburkhol@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

Fundamental Trump legal strategy: sue over everything, appeal when you lose, hope the other side runs out of time, money, or patience. Sue over the evidence in the indictment. Sue over the venue. Sue over the prosecutor. Sue over the trial date. Sue over the jury. Sue over the courtroom lights...

[–] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It won't happen. Voting laws are a state issue and not a Federal issue.

[–] LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Funny how you haven’t heard republicans screaming “StAteS RigHTS!!!!!!!” in a while.

Somehow those rights were extremely important when it came to forcing women to give birth.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›