this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2025
389 points (98.5% liked)

politics

19335 readers
2156 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
 

Summary

Special Counsel Jack Smith's report concluded that Donald Trump avoided prosecution for January 6-related charges due to his reelection.

The DOJ determined that prosecuting a sitting president violated constitutional protections, despite evidence strong enough to secure a conviction.

Smith noted that Trump's return to office directly halted legal action and criticized existing DOJ policies and judicial interpretations, which shielded presidents from accountability.

The report underscores how voters, by reinstating Trump, indirectly prevented his criminal prosecution for actions threatening democratic institutions.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 minutes ago

Democrats and blaming voters name a better combination.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

In the US, if you have money and power, you can get away with anything. Land of the free (If you're rich).

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

Since finding this 17 year old song linked somewhere on the fediverse awhile back I continue to be amazed how it just gets right to the root of nearly every problem we have. Start to finish, if you are angry at the current state of things (and not a maga), pretty good chance this song nails it for you.

Welcome to the United Snakes

Land of the thief home of the slave

The grand imperial guard where the dollar is sacred and power is God

(and it turned me into a bit of a Brother Ali fan)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

Thank you for sharing this song. It really hits hard right now

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

For the report it links to WaPo which is behind a paywall (and shit). I get annoyed by articles that don't link the full thing that they are discussing.

If you want to read the full report then here is an article that links to it.

Alternatively: direct link to report

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

Wrong. His LIES, Russia, China, Iran, nutcases and the corrupt Republican party save him.

[–] [email protected] 78 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

The fact that they didn't secure a conviction for four years tells you all you need to know. Complete sham. Guilty as sin, but they wouldn't put him in jail.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

To be fair, that was not jack smith's fault. He did his job exactly as well as he was allowed. Blame the system, but in this instance, do not blame the man.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Bullshit. The Dems wanted to run against Trump while he was being prosecuted and slow rolled the investigations because they thought they'd win.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

And thats not smiths fault. He did his job. The failure is above that. Pay attention to the bigger picture.

[–] Corkyskog 4 points 3 hours ago

What about Garland, can we blame him?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Why not? He folded up everything as soon as the election was over. What the hell kind of integrity is that?

[–] Soulg 3 points 1 hour ago

Because it was obvious that it would all be thrown out and he would be fired. Nothing would have changed if he kept going. Garland is at fault for waiting years to even appoint Smith.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 9 hours ago

He had a job. He did the job. His run down of how things go does not exist in a vacvuum. Where do his responsibilities start and where do they stop?

He did his job right. The follow-up is on someone else. And they failed. On epic levels. But dont blame him. He already paid the piper. The man gets credit for what he did. His report being ignored is no fault of his own.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

God stfu. Him getting elected means nothing. He was getting away with everything either way

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 hours ago

True, if anything he somehow would have dragged everything out until he was bed-ridden at which point he would have gotten house arrest which is laughable considering the size of his mansions.

[–] candyman337 140 points 17 hours ago (5 children)

This is insane, it shouldn't matter, he did the crimes. I hate this country

[–] [email protected] 45 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

We don't elect presidents anymore. We elect short(-ish) term kings

[–] [email protected] 17 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

short(-ish) term

That's optimistic.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Fat fuck will be dead inside of 4 years.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 31 minutes ago) (1 children)

~~That’s missing the point.~~ He’s an authoritarian and will destroy everything with what time he has left.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Your point is orthogonal to the comment to which I replied. Not that I disagree.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 32 minutes ago

You’re right.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 15 hours ago

If it makes you feel any better, they would've found some other reason if he lost the election.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (4 children)

I think there is some deeply cynical logic, or a horrifying game of chicken, being played by Democratic leaders here.

Let's say Jack Smith is given the go-ahead to investigate and prosecute Trump as fast as he possibly could (while building a bullet-proof case for conviction). With all the legal resources (not to mention Republican-friendly judges) available for Trump to leverage, it's safe to say that Smith certainly would not have been able to complete a full trial and secure a conviction before the 2024 election. But perhaps one could have been under-way.

A Trump trial for election interference in the middle of 2024 would have been a galvanizing force for his base, and likely cause his popularity among like-minded folks to surge and likely help his polling numbers. After all, conservatives love their persecution complexes and already live in a hazy fantasy world where their guy can do no wrong. So this doesn't help Democrats.

If Trump were to be acquitted, this would obviously be credibility kryptonite for Democrats, so that's a bad outcome. And if Trump were to be convicted, I believe there is genuine concern among top Democrats that all the armed crazies (including those in the police, government positions and military) might do a real insurrection this time as opposed to the world's shittiest flash mob.

So what's a cynical Democratic operator to do? Have Smith slow-walk the investigation and take his time to make it immaculate. Have the election without using litigation to get in Trump's way and hope that people don't make a shitty choice. If they do, they'll get what they paid for: another four years of ridiculous chaos. These would represent setbacks and lost ground for Democratic causes, but their patrons will figure out how to make it profitable in the meantime and be there to fund a comeback when the American people become exhausted by the bullshit. Let him burn himself out in the spotlight, further expose himself as a corrupt fool, letting his support curdle naturally rather than fighting him and his supporters at their strongest.

This scenario presumes several deeply horrifying and risky ideas:

  1. No one who matters will get hurt in the next four years. Are you rich? Are you a middle-class cis-het-white person? Do you not live in Palestine, Ukraine or Taiwan? You'll ride this out. The poor and the queers have nowhere else to turn, so they'll eat shit and be right back on the Democrat's side next time around (unless they have money, of course).

  2. Trump and his cronies will be too inept to dismantle American democracy before the next election.

I'm no card player, but this all seems like a terrible gamble to me.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago

Or, do the right thing and prosecute him, even if it's bad for them politically.

Now it's terrible for them politically and terrible for the country and the world.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

The first half here doesn't really track because Trump's numbers didn't really change. He had a similar amount of voters as usual, and the Democrats came up short. I don't think there could have been a substantial boost for him, his people are solid regardless of whatever he says or goes through.

The second half, yeah that makes sense, but now we see happens when Democrats "play by the rules" or try to play it safe... They lose. It's less about trump and more that they didn't capture voters. We needed Kamala to distance herself from Biden but she wanted to be "nice". People are struggling, no one feels the economy is great, they left progressives behind, and here we are now. Even if progressives are only 10-20% of the party, you NEED them to win

[–] [email protected] 4 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I've had similar thoughts myself.

Basically, you can't use a legal process to dispose of someone that the voting public want to be president.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 hours ago

Only because we apparently hold politicians to no real standards. Incoming rapists alert, but hey who really cares because there is no law against it and convictions are hard to come by. I mean at this point Aotus probably won't consider you unless you are a confirmed rapist. Birds of a feather.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 hours ago

Y'all think there's a lot more order to the world than there really is. Really it's just a simple combination of people not wanting to step in front of the moving train, and those that do didn't have the power to stop it. People like Merrick Garland and Robert Mueller are likely the most responsible without being complicit. They refused to be leaders. They were trying as hard as they could to downplay current events and keep some odd kind of status quo.

I understand that they wanted the government of the United States to seem stable and democratic. They wanted stay out of everything as hard as they could, and they failed to do their jobs in the process.

Most everyone else did what they felt they could do without destabilizing the government and while respecting the vote of the people. It's unclear if things go better or worse for the country if Biden takes drastic action. It's really hard to say "just this one time" to removing the president-elect from his office. Though I think a Vance presidency would have been better for all involved.

It's not some grand conspiracy. It's mostly a failure of the American public.

[–] [email protected] 49 points 17 hours ago

I hate this timeline.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

And by “voters” he means democratic city polling place bomb threats, Elon Musk & Starlink, and a 2 year Merrick Garland delay.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

...and yet there won't be thousands of people protesting his inauguration or anything the fuck else.

The people in this country have been broken, and now they're just gonna lay over and take it.

We're a long way from February 15th, 2003.

Face it, American citizens, we're fucking cooked.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 hours ago

A protest without a backing of a threat of violence if demands are not met is just a fitness walk.

[–] pelespirit 22 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

Face it, American citizens, we’re fucking cooked.

Some of us are and some of us aren't. Help your neighbors if you're one of the lucky ones who aren't.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

I'll do my best but considering I have cancer and can't afford my meds without the ACA, I'm probably one of the ones who is pretty fucking cooked.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I'm safe, I'll pick up your slack fam.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 16 hours ago

I knew billywitchdoctor.com would come through for me.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Why'd you bypass the largest protest in the country's history? Black Lives Matter was just four years ago and included people actually fighting with cops, not just walking along prescribed routes holding signs. We're a lot closer to a break than we ever were in 2003.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 14 hours ago (4 children)

People weren’t fighting cops, it was just cops doing what they do best.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 15 hours ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

Don’t forget the MAGA faction of SCOTUS who also chose to delay as much as possible

[–] [email protected] 6 points 13 hours ago

It’s the voters’ collective fault.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 12 hours ago

I'm glad to hear this guy skates because a whole lot of low-info voters made protest votes, sat out, or even voted for donvict because "both sides" or other stupid narratives.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 16 hours ago

aka mob rules above actual justice.

load more comments
view more: next ›