183
Why would he even bother to comment, when doing nothing and being the better man requires literally no effort?
It also gives them no ammo to say this is all some liberal attack. Even though they'll still keep saying it is. Reality doesn't often play a part in the cult of his followers.
Exactly. Let Trump continue to hoist himself by his own petard. Every new embarrassment results in him dropping in the polls.
Alright. Honest question.
Wtf is a petard? And why would somenody hoist somebody on one?
Grenade. It's a saying meaning blown into the air by your own hand grenade.
It's from Shakespeare. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoist_with_his_own_petard
The answer is pretty interesting- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoist_with_his_own_petard
okay, that makes more sense than my assumption.
It also would be a bit inappropriate I think, given that it’s his Executive branch that’s prosecuting him in a number of these cases. Even though it sure seems like he’s maintaining distance from the Justice dept and allowing them their independence (unlike his predecessor), the optics of a President using the Justice dept to attack a political opponent, then using it in political campaign attacks would look kinda bad. The Georgia case though I think would be fair game, but better to just let that case speak for itself and not potentially influence it.
I agree. Pretty much everybody knows about the cases by now, and you're either sane and are looking at the very least waiting to see how this plays out in court or you're a trump supporter and assume the system's rigged against him anyway. I see more of a chance of it backfiring by trying to capitalize in the indictments than getting more people on his side.
We all know trump would take the high road and not talk about an opponent’s legal issues either!
how many times will Trump mention Hunter?
More times than he could count.
So, greater than 10?
This really goes to show the precariousness of the system...the Justice Department theoretically controlled by the President is investigating someone running against him. One more reason Biden is showing himself as up for the job, this takes some tact.
But I don't know what the alternative system is. If the Justice Dept is fully independent (like, another branch of government) then it prevents the conflict of interest to some extent but you can still get Supreme Court style ideological takeover that could be biased or accused of bias. In some states the AG is a stepping stone to higher office, certainly the AG could run for President and there would still be a conflict.
There's a constitutional reason the justice department falls under the president. It is a function of the executive branch, from Article 2, Section 3 of the Constitution: "...shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed...". The DoJ is the enforcement arm of the executive branch.
I mean yes? The question is should the President comment on those functions.
Member that time when Al Gore said yeah we don’t want Bill Clinton to campaign for us?
Man if I was trying to pop enough republiQan heads in whatever states, I’d be harping on Don the Con non-stop. 100 different ads about what a lying, low-life loser he is.
Member when they went low and we went high? Red America is so far down the sewer, pretending they’re not is just a flat-out mistake. My 2¢.
Why? The MEGA lot are not a bunch of people who are known for thinking skills. Trump is their Messiah, they're not going to listen to anything Biden has to say.
The people who think that Trump is an idiot already think he's an idiot and continuously pointing this out won't change anything.
I guess the risk is galvanizing the already red-faced cult that exists in support of Trump. Would it be worth convincing those conservatives left of the MAGAts to drop the Trump train if it meant giving the cult all the red meat it could ever want?
Well yeah, of course not. Neither he nor any of his staff will mention it. It would be improper and likely illegal.
Focusing in on the Trump campaign would just detract from their main audience, so they might as well leave it be. Everybody knows what's going on with him anyways
Yeah that dude makes enough noise by himself.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Joe Biden’s re-election campaign isn’t going to focus on Donald Trump's legal woes, co-chair Cedric Richmond said Sunday, as the president continues to refrain from talking directly about his predecessor's four criminal indictments.
“The president has said from the beginning that he wanted an independent Justice Department, and we have to do just that,” Richmond, who previously was a top aide to Biden in the White House, said in an interview on ABC News' "This Week."
As Trump traveled to the Fulton County Jail in Atlanta on Thursday night to surrender on charges related to his attempts to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia, a battleground state, Biden posted a link to donate to his campaign on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter.
Trump was also indicted this month, along with 18 co-defendants, on felony state charges in connection with alleged efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election in Georgia.
“It was really the most amazing part of the debate to me, was the idea that, you know, the majority of my competitors believe that you can have a convicted felon as our nominee for president and that they’d support that and that he could win,” Christie said.
Meanwhile, an attorney for Trump denied that his team has concerns over the mounting criminal charges, which it has dismissed as a political hit job.
The original article contains 724 words, the summary contains 229 words. Saved 68%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
guessing we'll see about that in a few months when the commercials really start to ramp up
this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2023
183 points (96.4% liked)
politics
18075 readers
2685 users here now
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.
- 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!
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- 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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS