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.
- 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.
- 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
I agree, but I don’t have hope.
Nor do I. The judge has already stated prior to the conviction that jail is not a required sentence for these crimes. I doubt he wants to start a holy war even though he should.
I think that if he'd just kept his mouth shut and not violated the gag order so many times, there'd be a 99.9% chance of no prison time. Because he kept attempting to intimidate people and will undoubtedly commit some sort of stochastic terrorism (again) as a result of the 34 guilty verdicts, now I'm not so sure. Were I a betting man, I'd say that's down to about 50% with the other 50% being still pretty tame, probably 1-6 months imprisonment + probation. Because home confinement would actually be something of a reward for him, I'm really hoping that he doesn't just get house arrest where he can watch TV, tweet, and order KFC all day every day.
If the judge allows threats of violence to sway his decision, that's literally letting the terrorists win. Do the right thing. If people act out as a result, so be it. They'll get arrested and charged for their crimes next. My realistic expectation is an aggravated temper tantrum, not an assassination conducted with surgical precision. At worst, some gravy seals might shoot a few people, but probably just random civilians because they're not smart enough to get to anybody specific.