this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2024
301 points (99.0% liked)

News

24318 readers
6151 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 72 points 10 months ago (10 children)

Why are people around this dude are falling like flies, except him? What kind of wizardry is he doing to avoid prison? Or is our system just that fucked?

[–] [email protected] 52 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (7 children)

It's not wizardry, it's that our political/legal system has been avoiding the question of "Can you indict a President (current or former)?" ever since Nixon.

We avoided it when it came to Bush & Cheney's actually verified war crimes, and we're ignoring it for Trump, because the government desperately does not want to set precedent where people might actually be, you know, held accountable for being giant grifting pieces of shit.

This has been going on a long time and they only started prosecuting Trump because he wasn't willing to do the whole "handshake and give the classified documents back" deal. They literally started the classified documents case because he was being so belligerently criminal. Former Presidents "played the game" so to speak and gave back documents with a "slap on the wrist" outcome, because "but they gave them back!" They tried to give Trump the opportunity to do the same but he just can't help being a criminal scumfuck.

They're slow walking every single case because they still don't want this question answered, period. They want it to hang as a question eternally, so Presidents can essentially have immunity while hiding behind "Well we don't know if they do or not because there is no legal case as a basis."

It's literally just that he's a former President. He's stolen plenty of money from other rich people, which is usually the fast way to end up in prison, stealing from other rich people.

[–] DigitalTraveler42 18 points 10 months ago (2 children)

It's not wizardry, it's that our political/legal system has been avoiding the question of "Can you indict a President (current or former)?" ever since Nixon.

I believe we answered this question back in the 1770's when we sent our king a letter telling him to fuck off, then beat his army and sent them packing. Then we re-answered this question in 1812 when we fought off the Brits again and Canada, who burnt down our original white house, but ultimately told the king to fuck off again ans sent his army and allies packing again. Then we told Jefferson Davis and his supporters fuck off when he tried to take over as the unelected "President", aka King/Tyrant/Despot/Dictator, although with all of the Confederate "heritage", flags, statues, and terrorist groups (KKK) that still exist it doesn't seem like we told the Confederates to fuck off hard enough, we probably should have let Sherman tell each and every one of them "fuck off" in person.

Anyway, my point is that we've already had this discussion three times and the answer to every King and wannabe King has been "fuck off" followed by a lot of killing, I'm not so sure we should be going for a forth time, especially not for an orange diaper wearing nepo baby traitor.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I believe we answered this question back in the 1770’s

It has been answered endlessly. Power doesn't care, it just wants power. The fact that the entire political establishment including both parties has been taking this path for literally fifty fucking years (Nixon stepped down in '74) really speaks to the idea that they want to play a game and pretend this question hasn't been answered before.

We need to look forward, not backward.

Obligatory "Thanks, Obama."

[–] DigitalTraveler42 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely

Lord Acton (1887)

The full quote is pretty poignant as well:

“Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority; still more when you superadd the tendency of the certainty of corruption by authority.”

Lord Acton had some pretty good bangers on this topic:

“Despotic power is always accompanied by corruption of morality.”

And:

“Authority that does not exist for Liberty is not authority but force.”

Also:

“Everybody likes to get as much power as circumstances allow, and nobody will vote for a self-denying ordinance.”

Lastly:

“Absolute power demoralizes.”

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago

The tree of liberty and all...

We have no memory.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)