this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2024
656 points (99.5% liked)

politics

19062 readers
3799 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.
  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
 

I assume the story itself will be updated as they go through those thousands of pages

See the documents below

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67656604/united-states-v-trump/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] joel1974@lemmy.world 11 points 3 hours ago

His followers will only support him more. They like that he is above the law.

[–] unemployedclaquer@sopuli.xyz 25 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

also include a heavily redacted transcript from a January 6 Committee interview of Rusty Bowers, in which the then-Arizona House Speaker described hanging up on Trump after turning down his request to ignore the state's Biden electors and install electors for Trump instead.

"That's exactly what I did," Bowers told committee member Adam Schiff during the June 19, 2022 interview. "I disconnected us. I hung up on him."

Bucket list item: hang up the phone on Trump. But not angrily. I just want him to hear that dial tone... oh that doesn't exist anymore

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 13 points 3 hours ago (1 children)
[–] thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works 14 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Being handed the opportunity to appoint three Supreme Court judges prior to committing the act, takes it from treason to ‘sparkling presidential acts’..

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Nope. That ruling doesn't apply here because he was acting as a candidate for the Presidency at the time.

A President cannot act on behalf of their campaign in an official capacity.

[–] Veneroso@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago

Or just declare it an official act prior .....

[–] robocall@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

Would love to see him release his medical records or tax returns

[–] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 7 points 4 hours ago

Just lock him up. The man has been on pounds of cocaine. If he had a tiny bit of weed, he would have been in prison already.

[–] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 21 points 6 hours ago

This is all part of the democratic agenda to influence elections with fact instead of the feelings the founders intended elections to be about.

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 55 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Can someone make a supercut of all the far-right dumbasses saying we cannot have a president who is under investigation? Might have to go back to 2016 to get clips, I don't think they say that any longer.

[–] AndrewZabar@lemmy.world 8 points 2 hours ago

Hell, go back to the nineties when they were ready to hang Bill Clinton for having sex.

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 32 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

"Trump judge" makes it sound like Aileen Cannon.

[–] pingveno@lemmy.world 7 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

Everything she does will be timed to coincide with the heat death of the universe.

[–] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 136 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

The courts have at least 1,889 pages of evidence of election interference, and yet they will still leave him on the ballots for the highest office in the country.

This right here is the very definition of lip service when it comes to justice. It’s time for America to nut up or shut up. Either way, I’m damned tired of this bullshit.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 62 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

As much as I hate it, it would be much worse if you could just accuse someone of a crime to keep them off the ballot. Someone like Trump would abuse it to accuse his opponents of crimes to have them removed. It needs to go through the court first. The issue is that's taken far too long, and the time it takes has been increased by certain people with a bias.

[–] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 13 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

The issue is that's taken far too long, and the time it takes has been increased by certain people with a bias.

That was the basis of my second paragraph. This should’ve been priority #1 from the get go. And the fact that people with obvious bias has been able to derail the process is another problem that needs to be dealt with as well.

[–] Makhno@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

And the fact that people with obvious bias has been able to derail the process is another problem that needs to be dealt with as well.

Heads need to roll for any real change ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[–] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago

I don’t disagree.

[–] m0darn@lemmy.ca 34 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I agree that the problem is not with him being on the ballot, the problem is that it seems an enormous portion of the population of the USA are willing to vote for him.

[–] pingveno@lemmy.world 5 points 7 hours ago

Yup, can't get rid of someone like Trump if enough of the population is either willing or eager to go along with him.

[–] stoly@lemmy.world 5 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Due process exists for both the innocent and the worst out there. You want that to be there to protect you and everyone else.

[–] BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world 5 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

The Toupee is already a convicted felon. Due process would not permit him to leave the state where he was convicted, let alone run for office.

[–] stoly@lemmy.world 0 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

I don’t deny that there is preferential behavior going on but people are also commonly out while awaiting sentencing with or without travel restrictions. Due process means he gets a fair trial and a fair sentence. So far that is happening.

[–] medgremlin@midwest.social 2 points 2 hours ago

Except that the sentencing keeps getting postponed.

[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago

not that it matters much after all thats come out and did nothing.

[–] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 36 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

That Judge's niece is friends with someone who Donated to Biden so OBVIOUSLY we need to INVESTIGATE the JUDGE for Corruption!

-Republicans who LOVE Eileen Cannon and the Supreme Court!

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 5 points 9 hours ago

Honestly, there's a much higher chance of some Trumper trying to kill the judge than anything.

[–] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 11 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

One-thousand eight hundred eighty nine pages. One-thousand eight hundred eighty nine (I'm not going to parody the rest of the song this is a lot)

[–] tektite@slrpnk.net 8 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

...how do you measure a year in Trump's life?

In golf games? In rubles? In lawsuits? In twitter postings?

In rallies, incitement.. in terror, in strife?

[–] P1nkman@lemmy.world 5 points 7 hours ago (1 children)
[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 4 points 6 hours ago

La vie Boheme!

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 114 points 13 hours ago (22 children)

Real question here is will this be enough to move the news cycle.

I don't think his voters care.

[–] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 104 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

cant reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into

thanks for the correction

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 27 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I think you mean "can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into".

But yes.

[–] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 18 points 13 hours ago

yes thank you

[–] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 31 points 12 hours ago (3 children)

I think there's a chance swaying a little more people than we might think - even if it's a small percentage overall that can be swayed

Look for instances at the audience reactions to his lies about January 6th at his Univision Townhall. They show visable disgust

https://xcancel.com/MeidasTouch/status/1846746612980199817

Even if it's not enough to make them vote the opposite way, it might be enough to make them not show up to vote against harris. Turnout changes in single digit percentages matters a lot

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] _bcron_@lemmy.world 17 points 12 hours ago

They redacted like 95% of the stuff so doubftul. Most of the pages are just blank

[–] satanmat@lemmy.world 8 points 10 hours ago

Correct, when “facts” come from TD they matter; otherwise your”facts” are safe to ignore

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] runiq@feddit.org 41 points 12 hours ago

Thanks for providing a direct link to the documents, OP. Much appreciated :)

[–] Spitzspot@lemmings.world 36 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

We got him! It's over, we can all wake up now right?

load more comments
view more: next ›