262
Trump's Lawyer Says It'd Be 'Unfair' to Make Him Face Consequences Before Election
(www.rollingstone.com)
this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2024
262 points (96.5% liked)
politics
18651 readers
3281 users here now
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.
- 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.
- 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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Also take a look at the recent Special Counsel investigations. Democratic AGs gave wide berths to the investigations into Clinton and Biden, and those reports exonerated the people involved, but had nasty editorial asides that did permanent damage to both campaigns.
Meanwhile, the investigation into Trump found serious issues, but Barr massaged the thing so that Trump could say it "totally exonerated" him.
If playing by the rules gives you a stark disadvantage, but breaking the rules brings no punishment, then the only reason to follow rules is your internal moral code. Republicans seem to conveniently ignore their self-professed morals whenever they need to gain an advantage.
Oh yeah, I remember the Clinton investigation. Literally the only thing they could get him on was perjury over something that should never been a public issue. They kept looking and looking until they found something to "get him" on and wasted fuck knows how much money and resources doing it.
I'm really hoping (but not expecting) the dems to grow some metaphorical balls and after this election (assuming Biden wins) they go even deeper into the shit the right has been doing for decades and lock as many as them up or at least get them barred from politics, law, whatever for eternity.
I was thinking of the other Clinton, though, and her buttery males. That investigation ended in a finger wag, yet it was instrumental in her defeat. (Well, that, and the fact she has the charisma of plain cheerios which have sat in the milk for too long.)
Oh yeah, I guess that one was so inconsequential that I forgot about it for a minute. It really was stupid, yes, she was wrong and security is important but she wasn't and isn't the only one not focused on security.
They're just fucking lying. Let's not church it up by pretending they have standards. They just say shit they don't mean because it sounds right. They make no effort whatsoever toward consistency. Their stated ideals are ad-hoc justifications.
And they think that's all we're doing, because they think that's all there is.