this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2024
88 points (96.8% liked)

politics

19221 readers
2555 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
top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jordanlund 28 points 6 days ago (3 children)

I noted this before, but it's worth reminding people that ICE feels they can act with impunity within 100 miles of "the border", and, oh yeah, they consider the coastline to be "the border".

https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone

Bonus: 100 miles of international airports too!

[–] Nightwingdragon 9 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

This is the incoming Trump administration. Just paint the whole damn map red. Laws don't really matter when the ones who enforce those laws can do what they want based on the legal theory of "because fuck you, that's why."

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago

I might be mistaken, but I swear the corrupt ass hell Supreme Court made this true?

Like, I thought those fucks do, in face, now have impunity to do whatever they want within those boundaries?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Don't they also consider international airports a border?

[–] jordanlund 1 points 6 days ago

Yup, noted above!

[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

Trump finally going after his longtime foe, Quasimodo.


Seriously, though, let's see how the Evangelicals feel about their churches no longer being safe spaces, because the Feds can just bust in and do whatever, now. Trump has no love for religion other than using it to control.

How long until another Waco? Faces, meet Leopards.

[–] StinkyOnions 9 points 6 days ago

They'll love it because it's going after brown people. Wait until it's their turn that's when the screeching will begin.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

The Evangelicals want this. The white evangelicals don't want brown and black ones in their churches. Hell, the white ones would turn in their own church members if it made it less colorful.

[–] WoodScientist 11 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Crazy idea: let's bring back old Anglo-Saxon church sanctuary laws and apply it to all crimes. You just can't be arrested in a church period. Make the world more whimsical. Let's bring back criminals of all sorts running into churches yelling, "sanctuary! sanctuary!"

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

Running to a church would be safer than a McDonalds

[–] Rapidcreek 11 points 6 days ago

As always in a Trump administration, fear and cruelty are the the points.