this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2024
345 points (94.8% liked)

politics

19223 readers
2866 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Protecting Trump’s enemies from prosecution just reinforces the idea of politics as retribution. Instead, Democrats should be defending his most vulnerable targets.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] gAlienLifeform 10 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Here's a straightforward thing the Biden administration could do without Congress to protect migrants

In the period between now and Inauguration Day, on January 20th, the Biden Administration could still give immigrants additional layers of protection before Trump takes office. One of the most obvious possibilities is to expand T.P.S. for Nicaraguans [and other migrants]... So far, however, the Administration appears unwilling to do so, just as it remains opposed to renewing parole for those who entered through Biden’s “pathways.” Trump almost certainly will revoke parole. Either way, the senior congressional staffer told me, “parole is a weak protection compared to T.P.S.”

When Trump tried to end T.P.S. for certain nationalities in his first term, federal courts blocked him on the grounds that he had a “predetermined presidential agenda” that betrayed a racial “animus.” According to a former Biden Administration official with knowledge of current talks, the State Department supports expanding T.P.S. for Nicaraguans, based on a straightforward analysis of what’s happening in the country, but Mayorkas, at D.H.S., is opposed. (A D.H.S. spokesperson said that this was false and that “no decision has been made.”) “Extending T.P.S. used to be one of the easiest things Democrats supported,” the senior congressional staffer told me. But the Administration’s approach is now constrained by anxieties that it might seem brash or opportunistic on its way out. “It’s becoming evident that they believe immigration was one of the main factors in the electoral defeat,” the staffer said. “They don’t want to take actions that would double down on what they believe is a failed political strategy.”

[–] Maggoty 3 points 1 week ago

Lmao, they think taking the Republican line loudly and proudly failed so they're refusing to to double down by taking the democratic line from a decade ago? I'm not saying I don't believe the staffer, the Save America Pod interview made it clear they're completely detached from reality, it's just hilarious to me.

[–] ZK686 -4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

But we're talking about ILLEGAL MIGRANTS... are you morphing the two together?

[–] gAlienLifeform 1 points 1 week ago

We're talking about the same people, Biden could and should extend TPS protections to all of them to clear up any bullshit immigration officials are trying to pull