this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2024
877 points (99.1% liked)

politics

19143 readers
3057 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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
 

I assume the story itself will be updated as they go through those thousands of pages

See the documents below

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67656604/united-states-v-trump/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dohpaz42 227 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The courts have at least 1,889 pages of evidence of election interference, and yet they will still leave him on the ballots for the highest office in the country.

This right here is the very definition of lip service when it comes to justice. It’s time for America to nut up or shut up. Either way, I’m damned tired of this bullshit.

[–] [email protected] 92 points 1 month ago (3 children)

As much as I hate it, it would be much worse if you could just accuse someone of a crime to keep them off the ballot. Someone like Trump would abuse it to accuse his opponents of crimes to have them removed. It needs to go through the court first. The issue is that's taken far too long, and the time it takes has been increased by certain people with a bias.

[–] [email protected] 47 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I agree that the problem is not with him being on the ballot, the problem is that it seems an enormous portion of the population of the USA are willing to vote for him.

[–] pingveno 9 points 1 month ago

Yup, can't get rid of someone like Trump if enough of the population is either willing or eager to go along with him.

[–] dohpaz42 25 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The issue is that's taken far too long, and the time it takes has been increased by certain people with a bias.

That was the basis of my second paragraph. This should’ve been priority #1 from the get go. And the fact that people with obvious bias has been able to derail the process is another problem that needs to be dealt with as well.

[–] Makhno 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

And the fact that people with obvious bias has been able to derail the process is another problem that needs to be dealt with as well.

Heads need to roll for any real change ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[–] dohpaz42 8 points 1 month ago

I don’t disagree.

[–] Feathercrown 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

We need to criminalize government employees intentionally delaying or entirely ignoring doing their jobs

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Start with SCOTUS

[–] stoly 11 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Due process exists for both the innocent and the worst out there. You want that to be there to protect you and everyone else.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The Toupee is already a convicted felon. Due process would not permit him to leave the state where he was convicted, let alone run for office.

[–] stoly 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I don’t deny that there is preferential behavior going on but people are also commonly out while awaiting sentencing with or without travel restrictions. Due process means he gets a fair trial and a fair sentence. So far that is happening.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

Except that the sentencing keeps getting postponed.

[–] RestrictedAccount 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

He went through due process and was adjudicated unfit by the Supreme Court of Colorado to be on the ballot in Colorado because insurrectionists are bannned. The Supreme Court of the Republican Party Bigfooted it and said he had to be on the ballot anyway

[–] stoly 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

These are different situations. And even though the SCOTUS is filled with idiots, due process did occur there.

[–] bitjunkie 7 points 1 month ago

Calling them idiots is giving them a pass. They know exactly what they're doing, they're just evil.

[–] RestrictedAccount 1 points 1 month ago