this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2024
204 points (94.3% liked)

politics

19158 readers
2268 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
outrageousmatter
aidan
jordanlund
HLMenckenFan
little_cow
204
Trump plans to sue DOJ for $100M over Mar-a-Lago raid: report (www.rawstory.com)
submitted 3 months ago by kescusay to c/politics
44 comments fedilink hide all child comments
all 45 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Nightwingdragon 118 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Edward Snowden compromised national security by stealing and leaking top secret information. He had to immediately flee the country and find the most Rube-Goldberg path available to eventually end up in Russia, where he hides as a wanted fugitive to this day and would spend the rest of his days in ADX-Florence if he were ever caught.

Donald Trump compromised national security by stealing top secret information and storing it in a country club bathroom. Rather than having to flee the country to avoid prosecution, he is able to freely fly around the country and around the world as a free man and is now trying to sue the DOJ for conducting the raid in the first place, despite the DOJ not even being able to confirm they even have all the documents back.

Regardless of your opinion of Edward Snowden and his actions, his case is one of many, many examples of the two-tier system of justice in this country.

And IMO, any lawyer willing to file a case this frivilous and meritless should be at the very least censured if not outright disbarred for making a mockery of the judicial system and wasting the court's time. I get that anyone can sue anyone for anything, but if Trump wants to make a political statement by filing this crap, let him file it his fucking self.

[–] Tujio 76 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Hillary Clinton had classified emails in a private, password-protected server. Conservatives have spent over a decade frothing at the mouth, calling for her head. The DOJ announced that they would investigate her two weeks before the 2016 election, possibly dooming her campaign.

Donald Trump had classified documents in a box in the shitter at his private residence while a Russian envoy was there, and conservatives think that's all cool.

[–] [email protected] 51 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It's easy to understand once you accept a couple of premises about a large part of the republican base:

  1. They're fundamentally uneducated and unintelligent.
  2. They're essentially brainwashed by their media consumption
  3. They approach politics like football: "This is my team, and I love my team. My team is good because it's my team. The other team is bad because it's not my team."
[–] barsquid 4 points 3 months ago

I think there's a more fundamental thing with your item 3. They are fascists. The one thing they value most is white supremacist hierarchy. They do not give a single fuck about truth or integrity if those conflict with supporting the hierarchy.

[–] Mirshe 5 points 3 months ago

You forgot "multiple other envoys and staff there said he would show random visitors said classified documents".

[–] foggy 19 points 3 months ago

More lawyers need to be disbarred.

If you bring cases to the court that outright insult democracy, you should not be able to practice law in this country. Allow for appeals, it take away more lawyers licenses, christ

[–] barsquid 7 points 3 months ago

Donald sold access to those documents to foreign adversaries. He is basically the exact opposite of Snowden on this one.

[–] dogsnest 59 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Speaking of ~~raids~~ rapes....

Katie Johnson - Sworn Testimony (pdf)

"I first met Donald Trump when I was 13. He asked me to give him a hand job. My recruiter told me I had to do it."

"He slapped my hand away and said, 'you need a glove.' And the recruiter ran over and handed me a glove and said, 'no one touches Mr. Trump's penis without a glove.'"

"I gave him a hand job and then immediately after he had an orgasm, he left and I didn't see him again at that particular party."

"Donald Trump knew that I was 13 years old. I believe Tiffany, my recruiter told him. He seemed to take a liking to me because I was so young, and also a virgin."

"He liked getting the whole, you know, white glove treatment, and liked things to be his first before the other guys."

"Jeffrey Epstein is a billionaire friend of Donald Trump that was responsible for throwing the sex parties."

"Donald Trump knew that I was 13. I wore a blonde wig and he specifically asked about me because I remind him of his daughter."

"Tiffany said, "Well, she's 13 as well," so he knew the first time that he saw me. But he took a liking to me because I look like his daughter."

"The reason I'm coming out now is when it happened originally, I just wanted to forget about the whole incident. But I thought it was my responsibility to come out and tell our country what kind of man this person is."

"I don't think that he should even be the dog catcher, let alone running the greatest country in the world."

[–] ThePantser 40 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I wore a blonde wig and he specifically asked about me because I remind him of his daughter."

It all makes sense now

JD reminds him of his daughter.

[–] dogsnest 11 points 3 months ago

It's Anita Cushion.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago

He is anti-trans because he is envious of others getting access to the gender-affirming care he was once denied. We must reach out to him and let him know it's okay, we accept him and it's not too late.

[–] dhork 57 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I hope his lawyers are smart enough to get paid up front

[–] kescusay 44 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I'm pretty sure any lawyers smart enough to demand that are also smart enough not to work for Donald Trump.

[–] worldwidewave 17 points 3 months ago

MAGA: make attorneys get attorneys

[–] dogsnest 11 points 3 months ago

lol, 'his lawyers' & 'smart enough' side-by-side.

[–] vegeta 35 points 3 months ago (5 children)

yeah...good luck with that

[–] [email protected] 23 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Guaranteed the Justice Department got everything in order before raiding a former president's residence. This is just adding to his many public humiliations.

Don't try to sue the Justice Department. They literally don't bring cases that they can lose. Plus they're all top lawyers who can triple their salary elsewhere. Even the FBI is afraid of them.

I know one of these guys. They're very nice but will rip your throat out (rhetorically). They could convict you of a felony and you would end up agreeing with them.

[–] dhork 13 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Trump is not intending to win this. It's purely performative, to give his voters a reason to believe that all of Trump's troubles are politically motivated, and to keep his conversation with them on his terms.

The election is only 3 months away. Either he wins the election, and he can appoint a AG who can make this all go away, or he loses, and is likely going to jail regardless of the outcome of this. So this "lawsuit" only has to live until the election is settled, through all the recounts, whining, and Capitol storming. It doesn't need to reach a conclusion at all.

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

What difference does an airtight case make when you have a litany of judges, all the way up to the supreme court, that will happily twist the law to rule in your favor?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

He doesn't have any of that. These judges are more loyal to the Heritage Foundation, not Trump. He just signed their appointment papers.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Hopefully we get the "bad guy falls in poop...classic element of physical comedy" part in November

For anyone wondering this was from a 4th wall breaking moment in the Brendan Frasier movie George of the Jungle

[–] TonyOstrich 1 points 3 months ago

With the current SCOTUS? I don't think he will need it 😮‍💨

[–] WhyDoYouPersist 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yo what is this from?

[–] AbidanYre 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

George of the Jungle

[–] WhyDoYouPersist 1 points 3 months ago

Oh yeahhh, thanks

[–] ripcord 1 points 3 months ago

One day Jerboa will do gifs. Until then, I will see only that one guy's face staring at me.

[–] kikutwo 28 points 3 months ago

I'm planning on suing Trump for a bajillion dollars for leaving a shit stain on our country.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 3 months ago

It would be neat if we/they could counter sue him for the money wasted from his bullshit lawsuit.

[–] themeatbridge 19 points 3 months ago

Discovery goes both ways.

[–] partial_accumen 15 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Now I'm thinking about Trump's stacked Supreme Court and how they'll try to protect their cult leader.

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

Edit: I was thinking about the wrong "immunity" in this comment (the recently granted Presidential immunity to prosecution, not immunity to prosecution for law enforcement officers). I'll leave the comment for context, but it's not what the original commenter was talking about.

Actually it will be very easy for the Supreme Court to give Trump a win and keep qualified immunity. If Biden didn't directly order the raid on Mar-a-lago, then the immunity they granted doesn't apply.

Remember, these rulings don't need logical consistency because they are bad faith justifications for any actions taken by their team. So when a Republican is in office they can extend the immunity to basically the whole Executive branch, but when a Democrat is in the White House that can shrink to just the President's actions. And even there only those that are "official acts," which only the Supreme Court gets to decide, so they can shrink it to almost nothing.

[–] FlowVoid 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If Biden needs to give a direct order, then most cops won't have qualified immunity. It will take years before the SCOTUS gets another chance to rule on the matter, meanwhile a ton of lawsuits will be unleashed against abusive cops.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

My mistake, I thought by "qualified immunity" the original comment meant the immunity to any prosecution they just gave to Presidents. I wasn't thinking about qualified immunity to law enforcement.

[–] recapitated 12 points 3 months ago

To rephrase; he's suing you and me.

[–] Etterra 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Why do I believe that his entire strategy involves delaying the court date until after the election.

[–] Clent 6 points 3 months ago

Clearly.

He is setting things up so that if he is elected, the DOJ will settle and he gets a payout.

[–] Guy_Fieris_Hair 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

This needs to be every thumbnail for every time there is an article about Trump whining about something.

[–] MediaBiasFactChecker -5 points 3 months ago

Raw Story - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Raw Story:

MBFC: Left - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://www.rawstory.com/trump-doj-lawsuit-mar-a-lago/
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support