this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2024
613 points (98.1% liked)

politics

19105 readers
2804 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] xenomor 220 points 5 months ago (5 children)

As an organization, they are actively and intentionally interfering with electoral politics. Their lifetime appointments were designed to remove them from that dynamic, but they have decided to bypass that principle. The structure of our federal government is designed to deal with problems like this by having the other branches check them when they step out of line like this. Unfortunately, neither of the other branches have shown any desire to take action. As a result we are currently caught in a self-reinforcing death spiral of anti-democratic corruption that will eventually undo the union unless something changes. What a time to be alive.

[–] Sanctus 84 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I think we are supposed to be that something that changes it.

[–] PunnyName 46 points 5 months ago (18 children)

Peaceful protesting only works for so long.

[–] [email protected] 46 points 5 months ago (4 children)

That's where the second amendment actually does come in for once

[–] [email protected] 25 points 5 months ago (8 children)

If you don't have enough people to win the war by picking up pens and voting, you definitely don't have enough to win by picking up guns and shooting.

[–] PunnyName 13 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Depends. You might not even need to shoot. Those anti mask fuckers got what they wanted by protesting while armed to the teeth.

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

If they lose by less than the margin of Covid deaths that's going to be hilarious. Until they realize that it was a conspiracy all along and they were tricked into not masking.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago

It’s the literal reason for the 2nd amendment, there is no arguing that fact.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] cmoney 126 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

How can we word this so tRump gets his way but also so Biden doesn't get immunity and when will I get another luxury vacation or motorhome?

Clarence Thomas probably.

[–] PunnyName 25 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago

Stephen from Django

[–] Andonyx 8 points 4 months ago

Obligatory: Uncle Tom was actually a good guy. The idea that he was some kind of traitor or such comes from a crappy adaptation of the book. In the actual book he dies to save some other slaves.

[–] Maggoty 10 points 5 months ago

Oh no it's just straight delaying his trial until after the election. They have no problem writing a 100 percent ironclad opinion on presidential immunity and then denying that immunity to Biden for reasons pulled out of a fever dream.

[–] Maggoty 75 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I don't know why anyone is surprised. All of the court watchers who aren't MAGA told us SCOTUS would sit on this as long as they possibly could. Which, assuming they're still coloring inside the rules, means the last ruling of the season. And they'll drag out all the other cases too so it doesn't look weird. In fact on Strict Scrutiny they've been warning that the court is dropping a bunch of no contest decisions because they're expecting one big drop with shitty partisan decisions that have no logic beyond the personal politics of the majority.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 4 months ago (2 children)

That the charges weren't made until late last year is also a failure, the whole process has been unreasonable long.

[–] Maggoty 7 points 4 months ago (7 children)

That was part of the game though. If any part of that process was sped up for him the Republicans would have ammo in their accusations about the trial. And rich people have long made sure the justice system goes slowly.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 months ago

I mean the reasons exist but if the system cannot rapidly respond to attempts to destroy it then those attempts will succeed.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] randon31415 69 points 5 months ago (2 children)

MAGA SCOTUS justices in this case, MAGA judge in the classified docs case, MAGA prosecutor in the Georgia case ... good thing we hit him with four cases at the same time.

[–] [email protected] 55 points 5 months ago

Fucking seriously. How stupid are we that people would see exactly what you laid out and just say "hmmm, oh well the justice system is just slow or something." Except its only with his cases that are in front of Republican appointed "judges."

[–] btaf45 13 points 5 months ago

In the case of the supreme court it is painfully obvious. It's because Thomas likes to live like a billionaire and Alito hates gays.

[–] [email protected] 62 points 4 months ago (9 children)

Lula's Brazil had Bolsonaro handled within six months. Banned him from running until 2030 over his January 8th coup attempt in 2023.

The failure to respond in 2021 doomed us all.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 months ago

The system doesn't want to save it's self, we are on a clear path towards fascism.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] slickgoat 62 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Subpoena them one by one and confront them about specific issues. For instance Thomas and all those billionaire friends who keep dropping money in his lap. Congress committees have the power to do this.

Let sunlight into the dirty little acts of corruption and impeach. Hit them instead of just complaining all the damn time. Also, six or seven year term limits. Then every single president will get a chance to appoint a couple and the bench makeup will be more balanced.

[–] eric5949 32 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Congressional subpoenas mean absolutely nothing after Trump's term though. They'll just ignore then and what, you expect Merrick Garland to arrest a Supreme Court Justice for contempt of Congress? If it even gets that far.

[–] slickgoat 17 points 5 months ago (6 children)

Not so, I believe that Steve Bannon is going to the lockup for ignoring his in a week or so. I don't fancy that the supremes will want to risk that. It just takes will to apply the law. That's it.

Of course, the Dems will huff and puff and do nothing.

[–] eric5949 18 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Of course, the Dems will huff and puff and do nothing

That's my point, Merrick Garland of all people, Mr I don't want to appear political so I'll slow walk trump, isnt going to arrest a Supreme Court Justice mere months before an election if he ever would in the first place.

[–] slickgoat 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I think that arresting a Supreme isn't going to happen. For a start the legal machinations and appeals will take at least two years. But, a subpoena is at least fighting back, and a threat. What is the alternative? Hand wringing?

The Conservatives wake up each and every day actively trying to destroy the American republic. Do you think that overturning Roe was just luck? That was a 25 year process. I'm not advocating violence, but just not taking it when your balls get stomped. There are shocking things that can be done. Boosting the bench to overcome the current bias, bringing in terms limits, and subpoenas for corruption. The subpoena won't necessarily lead to impeachment or arrest, but it will bring out every little dirty detail in public. Do you think that's not a threat to a dirty bench?

[–] Maggoty 6 points 5 months ago

People need to go listen to the confirmation hearings of the older judges where they said they considered Roe v Wade settled law that would take quite a lot to over turn. And then read the opinion that places medieval catholic church law above our Constitution. It should be required. With highlights and margin notes in comic sans red marker because apparently that's fun and attention grabbing.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Chainweasel 19 points 5 months ago (1 children)

If Gym Jordan doesn't have to comply with a congressional subpoena, what makes you think Clarence Thomas will?

[–] slickgoat 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm not sure of the person you refer to (sorry, not American) but surely that's the problem. Not applying the law equally. Can a common murderer or thief decide that a legal direction doesn't apply to them?

[–] Chainweasel 13 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Jim Jordan (Gym is a nickname from years ago when he allowed students to get molested by a school doctor) is a representative from the state of Ohio who was involved with the January 6th plot to overthrow the government.
When they investigated it, they subpoenaed him and he refused to show up. So far it's been 3 years and no action has been taken whatsoever.
He helped plot a coup, he's STILL in power, and he ignored a subpoena from Congress with no consequences whatsoever.
He ranks considerably lower than the Supreme Court does in the grand scheme of things and if they're not going to force him to comply, they won't force any of the federal justices to comply.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] DevCat 52 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Instead of "rotten", the title should use "completely predictable".

[–] [email protected] 20 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Like leaving a mayonnaise container to age in the sun.

[–] snausagesinablanket 7 points 5 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago

This country will not.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Rapidcreek 27 points 5 months ago

The “hand is not hidden”. It’s out in public with a raised middle finger to democracy and our way of life.

[–] AshMan85 27 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Cause the coup has not ended yet.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It won't end until they succeed. This isn't stopping with trump they will continue until they have permanent control. They can see the writing on the wall and that the numbers don't look good for their future in government so they need to solidify that control.

[–] AshMan85 9 points 5 months ago

Yeah, typical fascists.

[–] Kaput 22 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Please USA, don't go full Nazi. That would be quite inconvenient for your neighbors, and the world probably.

[–] Burn_The_Right 10 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You have been permanently banned from c/Conservative.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CharlesDarwin 19 points 4 months ago

Yeah, it's a real mystery.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 5 months ago

Why should we be surprised? As a nation, we've shown the justices that there are no consequences. It seems they are not beholden to anybody.

[–] FuglyDuck 13 points 5 months ago

It’s intentional specifically to buy the orange turd as much time as they possibly can, maybe delay the trial until after the election.

Which is incredibly stupid.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


For those looking for the hidden hand of politics in what the Supreme Court does, there’s plenty of reason for suspicion on Donald Trump’s as-yet-undecided immunity case given its urgency.

But it’s considerably more drawn out than the schedule the court established earlier this year on a challenge from Colorado after that state took Mr. Trump off its presidential primary ballot.

The court is a busy place, though the justices are completing decisions at the second slowest rate since the 1946 term, according to a recent article in The Wall Street Journal.

And yet Mr. Trump’s lawyers continued to take the untenable position, in response to questioning, that a president who orders the assassination of a political rival could not face criminal charges (absent impeachment by the House and conviction in the Senate).

In 1974, the Watergate special prosecutor squared off against President Richard Nixon over his refusal to release Oval Office tape recordings of his conversations with aides.

Even if presidents enjoy some immunity for official acts, plotting to remain in office while continuing to question the results of an election they clearly lost isn’t one of them.


The original article contains 1,151 words, the summary contains 189 words. Saved 84%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments
view more: next ›