politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Literally no charges can be made. Fuck this bullshit. Good luck getting a judge to sign off on that.
He's appointed what, 1/4 of the currently sitting judges? It's not gonna be difficult to find one loyal to him.
Exactly this. It's been their plan, all along.
Judges can't just make X charges make Z sense. They still have to justify their actions to not get sued and have it immediately reversed by a higher court, in which case it still doesn't matter, because it still has to make legal sense.
Because a higher court stacked with Republicans would favor the Democrats?
Do you not read the news? Why are you thinking all the courts are stacked with Republican aligned assclowns, and follow up question: why has Trump been losing 90% of court cases of its Republican simos all the way down?
Your understanding of the court system is flawed and wrong.
Fair point. Counter point, they're ignoring court orders when they feel like it.
https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-federal-court-ruling-ignore-b2792939.html
They control the supreme Court. No court higher then that.
Exactly lol, it will be FBI vs govt security detail. They ain't apprehending shit.
They'll stand around a bicker about who has jurisdiction and it will not be the FBI.
... state (and federal) reps don't get a security detail unless there's a present threat. They're not assigned them by default at all. These folks are wholly on their own.
There is literally currently a present threat.
They are not on their own.
There isn't, at least not one that would merit being assigned a security detail. In this context, that's what I'm referring to as being 'on their own', just to be clear. Additionally a state security detail would be directed by either the general assembly or governor of texas, so they'd be a threat to these people even if they'd been assigned initially (and that's ignoring the extremely complex issue of jurisdiction outside of the state they're assigned in, which unless federally assigned they generally do not have and is the reason the FPS exists in the first place).
And, aside from all that, why on earth would the texas state police suddenly side with a bunch of dems? They're notorious psychos.
Like this administration listens to judges who say things they don't want to hear.
Gotta slow boil this stuff. Eventually he'll get ICE to round them up.
They are his Gestapo, after all.