-2 points

How many states till we can stop pretending a vote not for Biden is a vote for Trump?

permalink
report
reply
4 points

At least 11 but no more than 40

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

Uhg. Why is this even a question? WE ALL SAW WHAT HE DID JAN 6TH

permalink
report
reply
2 points

But it was the FBI and ANTIFA and George Soros is the architect of the whole thing. They took a beautiful peaceful walk through the Capital and turned it into violence. Free the J6 hostages, they didn’t do anything wrong.

I’m tired of all the double speak bullshit defending that attack on the Constitution.

A single term president has caused long term harm to the Republic that will likely last for decades until it does crumble under the fist of a fascist.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Narcissistic word salad is how Donnie used to win lawsuits, and he’s hoping it’ll work with the Jan 6th thing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
67 points

SCotUS: States are free to regulate their elections how they see fit.

States: Republicans are actually subject to the rule of law and responsible for the crimes they commit

SCotUS: No not like that

permalink
report
reply
183 points

So, just to be certain, when USA today keeps giving Trump the benefit of the doubt and uses words in this article like, riot, and alleged role, they’re carrying water for him right? The man has been found to have had a role andtaken part in an insurrection in multiple cases now. They should just say it.

permalink
report
reply
25 points

alleged role,

Until he’s been criminally convicted for it, it’s “alleged” in order to avoid defamation and libel cases.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

He was found by a trial and state supreme Court to have engaged in an insurrection. It’s not alleged.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

He was found by a trial and state supreme Court to have engaged in an insurrection. It’s not alleged.

If you want to be safe from libel and defamation cases, it’s “alleged” until you’ve been found guilty/liable at trial, and that hasn’t happened to Trump yet.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-21 points

When was he convicted of insurrection or anything related to that?

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Here you go happy reading: https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/Supreme_Court/Opinions/2023/23SA300.pdf

You will find section G. Titled “President Trump engaged in an insurrection” to be of interest.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-16 points

So a judge did an unjust thing and you want me to accept that as something that as okay?

Are you guys aware of what his happening right now with trump and all these cases and how its targeted prosecution? I am not even going to vote for him, but its pretty obvious what is happening, and I fear how this will end.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

I watched it on TV. Doesn’t take a genius to watch the days events of January 6th unfold, and the months prior to know he attempted a coup to stay in power. Why it failed, I don’t have any insider knowledge.

But it’s come out that it was a lot more coordinated behind the scenes than what we all witnessed on Jan. 6th. We don’t need a jury for that (although there is an ongoing criminal investigation for it)

permalink
report
parent
reply
-31 points

Literally the FBI said it wasnt at all coordinated. But that is a separate question to if Trump was responsible for what happened in any way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points
-13 points

Its paywalled, but does it talk about him being convicted of insurrection?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
-12 points

Just dumb. Did I miss the part he was convicted of insurrection?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Removed, keep it civil.

permalink
report
parent
reply
51 points
*

Man is guilty as sin but just to play devil’s advocate for the press: they are subject to libel laws and cannot make definitive statements of guilt/non guilt or else risk being sued.

So on the one hand it’s dumb that they aren’t telling it like it is but on the other hand I sympathize that they don’t want to put their finances on the line to pay the Donald Trump legal fund if he decides to sue.

permalink
report
parent
reply
47 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

They can definitively state that he was found guilty for his hand in the insurrection, as per the multiple cases. There’s no room for libel there, it’s a fact. He was found guilty.

Did I miss a case? AFAIK, to date he hasn’t been found guilty of anything because that would imply he’s been through a criminal trial to completion and we should be talking about his sentencing.

To the best of my knowledge he’s been found liable in a couple of civil cases and owes a buttload of damages as a consequence, but still hasn’t been found guilty of any crime, yet.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

To my knowledge he hasn’t been found guilty in trial court yet, has he? Courts keep kicking the can down the road because the US justice system is a sham. If he was found guilty already, he’d be behind bars.

Basically, there are differences between the recommendations of investigation committees, eligibility to run for office, and a conviction. Just because some determination was made by a court or by a legal body doesn’t necessarily mean he was found guilty of the crime. Not yet at least.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

You would think journalism would be subject to libel laws, but after seeing Fox and company blast lies for decades, I don’t have that confidence.

Yes, Fox finally got hit with one major lawsuit for one massive lie, but given all the lies they’ve run, it shows how far past the line you need to go.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points
*

And only because they lied about a massive corporation who then turned around and sued them. Not everyone they lie about has a legal team on retainer ready to defend them. In this case, Trump can’t find lawyers willing to defend him at this point, but Fox News would never paint Trump in a bad light, it would alienate their viewer base

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Yes and I would agree if he were before the court for the first time, but multiple judges have already made a determination in those things.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

They are just pussies.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Greedy, don’t forget greedy

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

That’s how these people are taking advantage of our open, democratic system. They’re acting in bad faith, but our system has to play along and treat them “fairly” to avoid giving them any potential out or ammunition for them say they’re being discriminated against or treated improperly. It’s such BS though, we’re having to bend over backwards to treat these people with kid gloves while they run roughshod over our democratic system and they will literally not treat others fairly when they get power. This man and all his enablers in Congress/Scotus need to be in shackles already, they’re a shit stain on history and they’re getting people killed in Ukraine by holding up US aid.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-10 points

Just like the Democrats do for israel.

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points

They don’t want to be on the bad side of the possible future dictator of America.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

You mean their Republican donors?

permalink
report
parent
reply
60 points

Here comes a ruling from Trump’s illegitimate SCOTUS in 3…2…

permalink
report
reply
20 points

I am less concerned with the SCOTUS ruling that a national party nominee is disqualified from a ballot in a state he’ll almost certainly lose than I am with a ruling that some court in Florida or Arizona or Georgia can pull the same shit on Biden.

Very easy to see this become one more trick one-party states can pull to remove popular opponents from the ballot in close election years. And I would be very concerned if an Alito court authored an opinion in which this kind of thing was normalized.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

What would the argument be for eliminating Biden though? Biden hasn’t committed insurrection. Trump has.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

They don’t need facts. They’ll say failing to secure the border is equivalent to an insurrection, or some such bullshit

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

It might be prudent to require an actual conviction of one of a specific lists of crimes, but that leaves Trump in for a bit longer

I don’t know what grounds they used but I don’t think Trump has been convicted yet

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

The point is, I think, to try and falsely equivocate the two things so they appear similar enough that people won’t raise too big of a fuss if Biden is removed for illegitimate reasons, because they somehow believe the same thing happened with trump.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

And so we decide to let tyrants through so that their party doesn’t have made up and twisted precedent to try to disqualify qualified candidates? It’s not like the GOP need or care about precedent anyway. If they want to try and do it they’ll try and do it. Booting someone like trump who has done what trump has done is a legitimate implementation of the law and the right thing to do.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-10 points

And so we decide to let tyrants through

We don’t decide. A few Ivy League JDs in robes get to decide. The decision on whether to list a particular candidate on the ballot is, inherently, undemocratic.

If they want to try and do it they’ll try and do it.

State governments don’t need any more tools in the chest to decide who can and cannot appear on a ballot.

Booting someone like trump who has done what trump has done is a legitimate implementation of the law and the right thing to do.

I agree. But he’s not the only one who will get booted off under this rule. We both know it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points

I’m not afraid of bad faith attempts to ruin democracy as backlash from this decision because bad faith attempts to ruin democracy are coming regardless of the outcome of this particular case

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

I have no doubt. But I’m not in a rush to open a new can of worms, when there’s no discernible benefit.

Let me know if a court in Michigan or Ohio or Pennsylvania yanks Trump off the ballot. Then we can talk.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Exactly. This constant handwringing is so tiresome.

They WILL try it, regardless of precedent.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

To rephrase the excellent point made: Its short sighted to think suffering no consequences for crimes will encourage the MAGA criminals to not do more bad faith crimes.

We either legitimize their actions by witholding consequences or we attempt to give them consequences and they claim their next scheme is retaliation for the consequences rather than retaliation for something entirely fabricated (ex: “stolen election” bullshit)

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

1 ½… 1 ⅓… 1 ¼…

They’re gonna slow walk all the appeals responses so it doesn’t matter which way they rule.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

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

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 450K

    Comments