this post was submitted on 09 Jun 2025
219 points (99.5% liked)

politics

24062 readers
3789 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 28 points 1 day ago (1 children)

We require all posts match the original headline with no editorializing:

"‘Wildly underprepared’: National Guard troops seen sleeping on floors in exclusive photos"

Please correct or we'll have to remove it.

[–] JuBe@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don’t know what the original title was, but it looks like they’ve fixed it, so I’m going to dismiss the report.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Previous headline was "They can't even do fascism right."

[–] JuBe@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 4 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

I always give folks time to fix it instead of just removing it. If we tell them "hey, fix it" and it's been hours and they're making other posts and comments? Yeah, yank it.

I always assume "Well, maybe they're at work, or maybe they're asleep..." but if there's other activity that's not an excuse.

[–] JuBe@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

Good point and totally agree!

[–] beejboytyson@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

Doing God's work, thank you for your service

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

They're proud to live in squalor, for Dear Leader.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 3 points 13 hours ago

Not only wildly underprepared, but completely unwelcome.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 65 points 1 day ago (3 children)

In before "We are asking all patriotic Americans to open their homes to our brave soldiers restoring order to the unlawful Democrat hellhole that is Los Angeles!"

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-3/

Third Amendment

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

[–] Xanthobilly@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago

Yah, good call. They’re really wiping their asses all over the constitution.

[–] match@pawb.social 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I wonder if they have a checklist of amendments to violate

Yup. Its just the printed out constitution

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

And here are the words that concern me.

First, I don't want to hear "This would be a bridge too far even for the Trump administration! ______ would not let that happen! _____ would not allow Trump to get away with this!". My rebuttal would be to simply gesture broadly. Because he's been getting away with it for the past six months and counting. Every time was expected to put up resistance to the Trump administration, that entity has simply rolled over and died at the first hint of political pressure. Right now, the law is whatever Trump says it is until someone finally stands up. And I haven't seen anybody willing to get their asses out of their seat yet.

"Nor in time of war"

This is a problem easily rectified in the Trump administration by declaring a "war on immigration", and then justify it by saying that the Constitution doesn't require us being at war with an actual country. Given the other justifications Trump has gotten away with using, this would probably be more than enough for the GOP, rank-and-file MAGA voters, and probably even some courts.

"but in a manner to be prescribed by law."

Guess who's making the law right now? I don't care about the whole legal process. Right now, and until the GOP and the court system grows a collective spine, the law is whatever the last EO Trump signed says it is. And there's nothing stopping him from saying "Raid the houses, deport the illegals *, and use their homes to shelter the troops.". I will guarantee you that Trump's MAGA base would absolutely eat that up and ask for seconds.

  • (Definition of "illegals": Undocumented immigrants, along with anyone else too brown for Trump's liking.)

Depending on who's doing the interpreting, the 3rd amendment could just as easily be used as a sword or a shield. And right now, I don't like who gets to do the interpreting.

[–] AmazingAwesomator@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago

thank you, third amendment. do not quarter these troops - they are here to harm citizens.

[–] BigBenis@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

How did their commander in chief put it? Suckers and losers?

They could be sleeping comfortably in their own beds but instead they're sleeping on a hard floor in a place devoid of any charm at the whim of a tyrant to do his bidding.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The protestors really need to get the CANG to switch sides and face off against the police. Low key convinced that’s a real possibility if orangeboi or Hesgeth tries to order them to do something really beyond the pale.

[–] brandon@piefed.social 4 points 1 day ago

I empathize with the hope that the national guard would side with protesters in violation of their orders, but is there any historical precedent for that?

On the other hand, there have been plenty of historical confrontations where the national guard has engaged in violence against demonstrators.

Maybe it can be different this time, but I don't know.

[–] SpicyLizards@reddthat.com 4 points 1 day ago

Maybe they should all just go home then