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!
- 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
Honestly I can't understand why the "hush money" is all the rage. THIS is the crime that would put ANY other American into a supermax. This isn't justice.
The "hush money" framing is such a cutesy, bullshit spin to neuter the actual repeated and unapologetic fraud here. Basic human and business ethics concerns to side for a moment, It's purely fraud against the American people without remorse and it's actual election interference.
You wouldn't say that a serial killer that stabs and kills their victims is on trial for "night night pokes". How was this allowed to get casually accepted like this without challenge from society?
"My neighbor in Tel Aviv is in jail for murder, or, as we call it, enhanced tickling."
-Colonel Erran Morrad (Sacha baron cohen)
The business records fraud case ("hush money" is misleading what it was) is just the first case that nothing blocked it from proceeding.
Documents case is blocked by Canon, J6 is blocked by SCOTUS, I guess the Georgia case could proceed too, but was maybe more complicated than this one.
Georgia is blocked due to complaints of impropriety between the DA and her special council.
The claim is that the DA selected the special prosecutor because of their personal relationship and het ability to use this relationship to influence the special council.
And that they used money paid to special council for personal stuff. It is bullshit, but afaik they where ordered to pick one. If the DA stays the special council needs to be replaced or vice versa.
The DA was just reelected.. and swapping special council means the new one needs to get up to apeed. Causing more delays. In my opinion, Georgia is also not happening before November regrettably (short of a hilarious twist of faith).
Because the hush money case is the only case that is likely to happen before the election.
The J6 case in DC got screwed by the Supreme Court refusing to take the appeal before waiting for the DC appeals court to rule. It was obvious that the Supreme Court was going to step in and rule, so Jack Smith requested them to just take the case and they declined saying they wanted to let the DC court decide first. Then they took the appeal a month or so later anyways. Now they have held hearings, but even if they rule against Trump, all they have to do is delay until late July and they know that the justice department won’t be able to resume the trial in time.
In the documents case, which is the most fundamentally simple case, Eileen Cannon has ratfucked the whole process to the point that it’s unlikely to start before July. It should be an open and shut case, but she’s entertaining all sorts of crazy legal theories and giving them months to elaborate on them.
It's been 4 fucking years since Trump has left office. A regular person would never get his trial delayed for that long. If a trial can be delayed for 4 fucking years just because the accused is a powerful individual, it means that the rule of law doesn't apply the same to everyone. If powerful people are exempt from the rule of law, democracy is dead.
Justice delayed is justice denied.
Well, that’s Merrick Garland’s fault and there is a lot of blame there. He thought he could take the high road, avoid all this, and let Trump slink off into the shadows like every other failed presidential candidate.
They need to delay until at least November, which is when they know what the Constitutional Originalism says about the case.
But as you just read, this judge has been predictably sabotaging this case.
It was about the falsification of documents. Hush money is legal.
The hush money one is the first one to actually go to trial, so it's mostly that. The documents case is basically suppressed until they can somehow get rid of this judge, and the other 2 cases are also being held up in places.
The hush money case isn't likely to put him in prison though, I don't think there's any precedent of a politician going to prison for that. And of course there's going to be appeals that can easily push it until past November.
There's plenty of precedent for locking people up when the steal classified documents. It doesn't matter if they're a politician.
By 'this one', I meant the hush money case. I agree that the documents case is the most serious one (and also deliciously ironic given his 2016 criticism of Hillary's classified emails).
I apologize for misinterpreting your comment.
I edited it because it was ambiguous, no need to apologise.
It's my understanding that there's a pretty ironclad contract between the government and a cleared individual. This is really just a matter of enforcement, and it's hard to see how this isn't one of the most brazen and extensive cases of mishandling classified material. Better people have gone to prison for a lot less, so I say again: no justice.
it's not hush money. there's literally nothing illegal about paying to kill a story. this case was about election interference, and the media's inability to report that is such a key tell.
trump didn't pay to hush people up, he paid so they wouldn't wreck his campaign. that's where the crimes come from. that and tax evasion.
Now, all that said: I spent nearly a decade in the army. The way he handled sensitive and secret info during his term, and then taking it home after - this shit cannot stand. How can we expect an 18 year old to take their responsibilities seriously while letting this shit slide?
it's fucking bonkers. if anyone else tried this they'd be waiting for their trial in federal prison, they'd never see the light of day etc.
But but but Hillary's email server!!!!! /s
I'm starting to think it's strategic on jack smiths part. He's got to let her dig a hole so deep and make her bias so blatantly clear that the 11th circuit can't do anything but boot her off the case.
Shit they wouldn't put you in supermax, there wouldn't be a trial. You just disappear. Shit, Snowden went to Russia. All he wants in a public trial.
You have to try to commit treason.
It's one of the few crimes explicitly defined in the Constitution.
Unfortunately, I doubt that we'll ever see him charged.
Because it’s the one case that’s likely to happen before the election.