this post was submitted on 29 Feb 2024
337 points (99.4% liked)

politics

19090 readers
4132 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The former U.N. ambassador has been focusing in on Trump, his legal trouble and the potential general election consequences.

Former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley on Wednesday called on Republican National Committee members to hold an on-the-record vote on a draft resolution that would curb the national party’s ability to direct its funds toward legal fees, including former President Donald Trump's.

“All Americans, and Republicans especially, deserve a vote on the record on that resolution,” Haley said while campaigning here. “We deserve to know how the RNC is going to spend their money and if it’s going to go towards legal fees.”

all 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] herrcaptain@lemmy.ca 107 points 8 months ago (5 children)

As a non-American it's kind of insane to me that a political party can even potentially pay the legal fees of a party member (particularly when the fees are the result of completely personal crimes).

[–] Frozengyro@lemmy.world 53 points 8 months ago (4 children)

Republicans should be outraged about it too, but they apparently don't realize they are being fleeced (again).

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 14 points 8 months ago

wdym they're fully aware they're paying Trump's legal fees. They either love that or are mildly annoyed and won't do anything.

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

They know. They like that it upsets liberals more than them. They, like most people are used to our government constantly failing the people. They just want other people to be failed harder than them. No more, no less. They mistakenly feel that's what everyone else wants as well.

[–] Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 8 months ago

Something something party of fiscal responsibility.

[–] Bipta@kbin.social 2 points 8 months ago

Republicans will suffer in a Trump dictatorship and they're ready to kill for that opportunity.

[–] ech@lemm.ee 31 points 8 months ago (1 children)

(Not so) fun fact: the DNC and RNC aren't any sort of governmental organizations, and are in fact private companies. As such, the limits placed on them by law are pretty minimal in terms of political action they can take, and quite unlikely to change since they both have a stranglehold on who gets nominated into positions that could affect such change.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Which is why if he is found guilty of the coup attempt he would be declared an enemy of the state, and any aid or comfort would be considered treason under penalty of law. The courts have ruled that companies are allotted rights as a person, aka they are guilty of treason if Trump is declared an enemy of the state. Best defense, "we didn't know we were commiting treason as he wasn't found guilty, just several of our members knew it"

[–] HELLZBELLY@lemmy.world 20 points 8 months ago

As an American, I feel the same way.

[–] Chainweasel@lemmy.world 18 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

It's a legal gray area, it could be a campaign finance violation but he could argue some of the cases are campaign related.

The justice system has always been extremely light on Trump, so anything in a legal "gray area" might as well be assumed to be fully in the clear for him.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 15 points 8 months ago

It's because the Supreme Court made a ruling that affirmed that since corporations are people, and money is speech, it is unconstitutional to restrict how much money a corporation spends on political issues.

And what is a political issue? Trump says all of his legal issues are politically motivated. He's lying, but does that (false) statement alone justify unlimited spending on this political issue?

[–] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 79 points 8 months ago (1 children)

And when they completely ignore her request (that she's making knowing full well she has no leverage to make it happen) she'll keep being a member of the Republican party and keep raising funds for them anyway

[–] Blackbeard@lemmy.world 42 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

I wish she'd realize she does have leverage, even if it's not much. She could a) launch an independent bid or b) campaign for Biden in exchange for a cabinet position with him. Either way she'd become a MAJOR problem for the GOP, and I think it stands to argue she could effectively guarantee a Trump loss. The one caveat is that she'd have to agree to effectively turn her back on her party (which she says is committing suicide anyway), and I have absolutely no faith that she'll discover enough moral fortitude to ever do such a thing.

[–] Evilcoleslaw@lemmy.world 23 points 8 months ago

I don't think she will do either of those things. She's shown time and time again she's for every horrible GOP position that Trump is for. The only problems she seems to have are that he's a vindictive loudmouth.

[–] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago (2 children)

If Biden seriously made that offer in b) I would be very strongly tempted to stay home on election day.

People keep lying to themselves and trying to believe that Trump is the problem and that he's not just the most visible symptom of a Republican party that crossed the line way back in the 1960s when they started campaigning to get the KKK's votes and undermining our foreign policy/national security for political wins. Haley, Romney, Cheney, etc. - they are all threats to the country as is anyone who collaborate with any of them.

[–] Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Maybe it’s soft handed liberalism? Too close an examination of the body-politic would make people actually look at themselves and the circles they run with? It might cost you some friends at social events?

It’s not just Trump, though he is the iconoclast. Just like LBJ and Reagan before, a popular(ist) leader will transform the party and nation by shifting the Overton Window of what is ‘normal and accepted’ in the political arena.

[–] Blackbeard@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Good for you. I know people whose very wealthy California family has been deeply connected to the Clinton apparatus for decades, and who are dyed-in-the-wool third way Democrats, and they have said they'd seriously consider Haley over Biden. It's amazing what kind of diverse people you encounter outside of social media echo chambers.

[–] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Oh I'm sure they exist, there's a lot of selfish scumbags in this country unfortunately. Thank goodness they only get one vote no matter how much money they hoard.

[–] Blackbeard@lemmy.world -4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Gosh, I can't for the life of me figure out why progressives have such a hard time winning friends and influencing people....

[–] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I can't for the life of me figure out why I'd want to be friends with scumbags. If we had a democracy in this country we wouldn't have to give a shit what rich weirdos who live vastly different lives than most of us think.

[–] Blackbeard@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

If we had a democracy in this country we wouldn’t have to give a shit what rich weirdos who live vastly different lives than most of us think.

You keep using that word. I do not think you know what that word means.

[–] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

Democracy without any campaign finance laws is like capitalism without progressive taxation and antitrust laws, feudalism with extra steps

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 7 points 8 months ago

If the decision is that the RNC is gonna foot the bill, are they gonna split and make their own conservative party with hookers and booze?

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 6 points 8 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Ambassador Nikki Haley on Wednesday called on Republican National Committee members to hold an on-the-record vote on a draft resolution that would curb the national party’s ability to direct its funds toward legal fees, including former President Donald Trump's.

Haley went on to question if the RNC would end up shifting support from down-ballot Republicans to a “legal slush fund.”

“We brought forth these two resolutions to make sure there is a serious discussion about protecting the primary process while there are still two candidates competing and preventing the RNC from paying the legal bills of any political candidate unrelated to the election cycle,” Barbour said in a statement to NBC News last week.

On the campaign trail ahead of Super Tuesday, March 5, Haley dodged a question from NBC News about whether having leadership teams announced in states past Super Tuesday — for instance, Georgia — meant she could guarantee staying in until that point.

When pressed that voters might want to know how long they’ll have her as an alternative to Trump, she sidestepped again: “No … I want the conversation to be, where are we going in the country?“

Haley also reacted to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s announcement Wednesday that he planned to step down from his leadership position.


The original article contains 457 words, the summary contains 213 words. Saved 53%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Nikki Haley, the only republican with the courage to stand up to Trump. Not bad if you ask me.

Bet that means she's the only republican without a sorted past.

[–] Drusas@kbin.social 3 points 8 months ago
[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 1 points 8 months ago

She only stands up to him when it serves her purpose. Just like Christie, she's happy to kowtow when it serves her purpose too. It's till good it happens as it shows others his power or hold over the party is not as great as they fear. It's just a shame it took them so long to figure it out.