Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
He had a supreme court order to do so. Sounds like Trump is in contempt of court. DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Lock his ass up for 1 week. No comms.
JD can take over for a week. At least show a little power. Who am I kidding though? Supreme Court is a fucking joke.
The trouble is the same Supreme Court gave him criminal immunity for official acts (even corrupt ones), which this certainly is. Impeachment and removal is probably the only remaining legal pathway to enforce compliance, and the political will isn't there.
It's probably somewhat intentional that he provoked a conflict of this sort early using an issue few elected Republicans will risk their positions over. The next one will be bigger, and he wants the pattern established.
Then jail everyone involved in the deportation for kidnapping. Sure, you can't get Trump - get everyone else. The chilling effect should be immediate.
Who's going to prosecute it? The DOJ certainly isn't. State prosecutors would be unsuccessful due to the supremacy clause. Congress could appoint a special prosecutor, but then we're back to political will.
What judges can have prosecuted without the DOJ's cooperation is contempt of court, and they do have the power to appoint special prosecutors themselves in that case (but not for ordinary crimes like kidnapping).
The state that he was taken in should file charges, the states that he flew over should file charges, the state where he was put on a plane to El Salvador should file charges. Simply the states should charge those involved since the federal doj won't do it.
As I said in the previous comment, state prosecutors would be unsuccessful due to the supremacy clause. State kidnapping laws cannot punish Federal officials for deporting foreigners in accordance with Federal law, or with a good faith belief that they are enforcing Federal law.
Federal court orders can, of course make a deportation illegal, and did in this case. Still, criminal contempt would only apply to officials who knew about the court order, which has not been alleged with regard to the initial decision to deport Abrego Garcia. There was, however a separate order from judge Boasberg to turn the planes around. As yet unnamed officials who knew about that order and had the ability to carry it out discussed it and decided not to obey. They are guilty of criminal contempt.
These fuckers know they're the brown shirts.
I'm pretty sure the supreme court ruling was carefully worded to not require them to bring him back, but 'fascilitate' his return, which gave them enough wiggle room to say they wouldn't stop his return, so they were in conpliance. It was a lower court tgat required his return, the supreme court ruling overrode that.
The system serves itself.
The fact that every american in a nation with more guns than people seems totally willing to let this fascist keep destroying the balance of power their whole country was founded on is honesty pathetic, and I lose respect for them every day it goes on. What the fuck was the right to bear arms in that dusty old paper even for, if not this?
Big talk for someone who also isn't about to throw their life away to take potshots at the local police station.
Government agitators: "God why are leftists such little babies! Oh you're not a little baby? You don't need a nappy? Well prove it! Commit a violent crime at a peaceful protest RIGHT NOW! Yeah, right into that camera. Great. That's perfect. Thank you."
I’m not american and my culture has no history of stockpiling weapons to fantasize about using them when the government takes our rights, so don’t try to paint me as a hypocrite for calling this out as an outside observer.
Also, please show me where I even implied people should shoot at local cops or turn protests violent? If there was any advocation of violence in my comment (for legal purposes this is an if) it had one clear target, and wasn’t specifically addressed to leftists. I don’t blame you for wanting reasons to write off what I said, cuz I can’t imagine being american right now - not a figure of speech, I literally cannot and I feel for you dudes - but please don’t resort to strawman and false equivalency fallacies to do it.
If you think gun culture was ever about "fighting to uphold your rights" you're as dumb as the average American that buys a gun and says that same thing.
It's about profiting off of peoples fear. Fear that grows with every new school shooting or "dangerous immigrant" story. It's always been about fear of the "other". All the way from freed slaves to Venezuelan immigrants.
Are you really shocked the average American gun owner isn't storming the capital to "save democracy" from the guy that most of them voted for?
The few of us gun owners in the US that are actually leftist are organizing locally to resist ICE in our neighborhoods. With the full knowledge right now that use of a weapon in self defense is just going to get you killed. (Which may be your best option).
We're focusing on having quick communication to resist ICE. Early warning of their presence so their target can avoid that altercation altogether.
So, I'm sorry. But you're just disconnected if you think the average American ever gave a shit about "rights". They give a shit about white supremacy and there is absolutely no threat to that right now that would make them take up arms.
It was always for state militias, before we had a national army. That dusty paper literally says that.
Allowing the President to activate the National Guard was a big mistake. They were our last option against militaristic takeover.
Exactly: non-fascist-controlled states should've been mobilizing their militias against the fascist thugs by now.
The State militias (State Guards/State Defense Forces) have mostly been abolished and have been almost completely replaced by National Guard and the rest of DOD. The remaining State Guards/State Defense forces have been so thoroughly neutered and atrophied as to be essentially adult versions of boy scouts, but with less activities.
The States should restart their State Defense Forces and take them seriously as a real and legitimate military forces, not unarmed disaster response organizations.
People will say they aren't but the national gaurd listens more to the federal government than the state when it all comes down to it.
I wish more people understood how far away Washington DC is from the bulk of the US.
It’s an 18 hour drive, even if I could afford it, and I only live half way to the other coast.
What the fuck was the right to bear arms in that dusty old paper even for,
It's for murdering people who aren't "white". Always has been.
For school shootings, of course. Just like the founders wanted.
I wish reporters would bait him with questions like "you aren't powerful enough to do that? why not? I thought you and the United States were so bigly and powerful? Are you saying you are too weak?" and "you say you CAN do it, but why don't you show us?" and "you say you won't do it, is that because you are AFRAID to admit that you were wrong about him?"
Also, watching that interview where he could not even fucking admit his "evidence" was Photoshop....straight out of Orwell.
How many fingers Winston?
tell him we are going to ask president musk about this.
intentions? English is not my first language but doesn't "intention" mean that you plan to do something but haven't yet?
tRump has actively defied the court from step one
Intent comes from a root word meaning "to stretch," which became metaphorically to stretch one's mind in a particular direction.
One can say "This is my intent, that was my intent, it's my intent to continue with this, that was intended - all of those are my intentions, were my intentions and will be my intentions."
Double down-do the thing again.
Fascist gonna fash.
Does this mean the thin mask is coming off and he is openly fascist now? More so than he already was?
This is more like fascist confirmation #4,213,211.
as a citizen of the United States of Fuckery, could someone please tell me something useful i can do against less than 31% of the population?
Make that percentage number get smaller?
wait what
Is he saying he "won't admit to a mistake?"