245
top 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 88 points 1 year ago

Ever seen that scene from Liar, Liar where Jim Carey objects, and says "Because it's devastating to my case!"?

This is that scene, but actually being attempted in a real courtroom. This has got to be the most desperate thing I have ever seen.

[-] MdRuckus@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Maybe they'll find him in the restroom saying, "I'm kicking my ass!"

[-] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

That was Don Jr.

[-] ZooGuru@lemmy.world 74 points 1 year ago

Arguing for rights of an individual running for president (as it is not defined at all to my knowledge) is an interesting strategy and does seem like something worth defining. By that I mean for it to be defined that if you're running for president, you have no additional rights. Get out of here. You're just another citizen. Quit making the "i'm special" legal challenge. Get bent.

[-] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago

If he's successful here, I'm declaring my candidacy for President as a Republican. Since Republican candidates for President apparently can't be prosecuted, I figure I've got an 18 month crime spree ahead of me.....

Be back soon.......

[-] onionbaggage@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

Then declare again right after the election to renew your immunity for 4 more years.

[-] wolfpack86@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

But I think this is the appropriate response via civil disobedience. Go through the proper channels to declare as a presidential candidate and then do fairly mild shit to prove a point, en masse. Speeding tickets, jay walking, etc.

They're left with two options: limit who can run, which is antithetical to the whole fucking system and founding principles... Or ensure that they don't have special rights... Or permit anarchy.

[-] Captain_Patchy@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If he’s successful here, I’m declaring my candidacy for President as a Republican. Since Republican candidates for President apparently can’t be prosecuted, I figure I’ve got an 18 month crime spree ahead of me…

You, me and every other person that can't bring themselves to be actual prosperity televangelists, I mean we have SOME morals eh?

[-] AfricanExpansionist@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

Yeah that's the thing, anybody can claim to be running for president. It's 2023, there's no general election for mort than a year. Even IF you're on a ballot I think that doesn't make you above the law... Else we'd suddenly have a bunch of crooks getting on ballots to avoid facing legal repercussions

[-] Zeppo@sh.itjust.works 29 points 1 year ago

”It is one thing to indict a ham sandwich. To indict the mustard-stained napkin that it once sat on is quite another,” the lawyers wrote.

Devastating legal argument, and beautifully written.

[-] Boddhisatva@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago

It's one thing to indict a hamberder. To indict the ketchup stained wall it was thrown against is quite another.

[-] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

How does this analogy even help them? Doesn't the mustard stain put the napkin at the scene of the crime with the ham sandwich?

[-] transmatrix@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I don't quite get how this statement applies to their argument? Their argument appears to be that the DA doesn't have "authority"?

[-] Zeppo@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I couldn't really figure out what they meant, but apparently it is a reference to a famous statement made by a former Chief Judge of the New York Court of Appeals, Sol Wachtler, who said a DA could get a Grand Jury to 'indict a ham sandwich'.

[-] flipht@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

The grand jury system is generally a joke. It's just a smoke screen for prosecutorial discretion. The DA can present whatever they want (and leave out whatever they don't want) and there's no due process to the defendant since they haven't actually been indicted at that point.

That said, I hope every grand jury and regular jury viewing evidence against trump does their individual responsibility and throws the book at him.

[-] akai@kbin.social 28 points 1 year ago

Did Trump's lawyer call him a mustard-stained napkin ? 🤣

[-] TehWorld@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

I think I’ll use this thread to announce my candidacy for the presidency of the United States. I hereby declare that I am now immune to all prosecution until after the election. Donations will be accepted in cash or gold bullion.

[-] flipht@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

Silly, they've moved on from cash and hard currency. It's all about the NFT churn mill now.

[-] TehWorld@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I’ll be releasing my own “illegal things I’ve done” NFR (Not For Release) so they’re even RARER than NFTs soon.

[-] Raphael@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Take a cue from us and make him ineligible. Trust us, we've defeated the other Trump.

[-] o_O@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

He lives in his own world, where He expects what ever He says should happen.

[-] bibliotectress@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Unrelated, but I love your username. It surprised a smile out of me. Thank you!

[-] o_O@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago
[-] kingthrillgore@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

What frightens me is that he is still very capable of becoming President.

[-] skellener@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

🤣🤣🤣 He’s scrambling. Prison soon fucker!

[-] i_had_name@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

I also want all the damaging things in my life stricken from the record.

[-] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2023
245 points (96.6% liked)

politics

19097 readers
4191 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