News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Wait a moment. I'm not American so I don't understand. In the house there are 213 democrats, so that means more than half of them is thinking that is perfectly fine and normal having someone like her? It doesn't seem like "skyrocketing numbers" to me. I understand that an alternate headline is "majority of House Dems are against impeaching noem"
Thats exactly correct and anyone who tries to say otherwise is either being willfully ignorant or intentionally minimizing this fact. You might also be surprised to learn that many of these Dems voted against impeaching Trump for a third time last year. Their actions speak much louder than words.
They likely gave up because they realized that trying to impeach him is just adding fuel to his bases fire.
You gotta realize that Trump has a third of the country believing that he is a victim of political persecution. The "witch hunt" rhetoric was taken hook, line, and sinker. They sincerely and earnestly believe that Trump is a good man with a righteous vision, who is targeted by "the radical left", which is "weaponizing" the DoJ or the impeachment process.
And unfortunately, that less than 1/3 of the country lives in the right place to make them worth more than half of the seats in the Senate, so impeachment was bound to go nowhere and ultimately hurt the democratic party going into the next elections.
And this plot predates even Trump's first term. Part of the reason this guy is now Teflon is that he installed a lot of court seats. Partly due to Mitch holding back the nomination of Merrick Garland, but he was also holding back a shitload of lower court vacancies so that they could get filled by 45.
I agree that he should have been impeached, tried, and ultimately convicted. Honestly at this point, I feel like he should be hung for treason. But politics, sadly, can't always align with justice.
But if we apply this logic then Democrats should never oppose Trump or any other Republican, and where does that leave us? I find this quite ridiculous as not only does it excuse Democratic inaction but also mandates that they bend over backwards to support him in the future for fear of losing their job (a job that quite literally is to represent the people).
Merrick Garland lost his shot at SCOTUS because instead of fighting back when the law was fully on their side nearly a year before the 2016 election, they arrogantly thought that they were guaranteed to win and Clinton would then get the nomination. They again backed down in 2020 just a month before the election and allowed Republicans to ram a nomination through. They backed down in Texas and allowed the Republican legislature to gerrymander districts and pick up several seats. They backed down on the government shutdown and allowed Republicans to take away our healthcare. They backed down and allowed the passage of the BBB. They're backing down and allowing the capture of a sovereign nation's president. They're backing down and allowing ICE to murder citizens in the streets.
These are all reasons why they're losing elections. They're supposed to be the opposition party yet they refuse to oppose anything and even vote alongside Republicans often enough. Refusing to acknowledge this is why Trump won in 2016. It's why he nearly one again in 2020, and it's why he won in 2024. With each passing day they look more and more like they're all members of the same party because that's the only logical explanation for what's happening. Using the same tired excuses over and over and over only gets you so far before people see right through the BS.
I respectfully disagree on this point, and this point only. They attempted to impeach him twice. A third time, after he is out of office, wouldn't have really done anything beneficial. Without a conviction in the senate, he would still have been eligible to run in 2024, and his base would've been even more fired up. It would be seen as more liberal virtue signaling and another witch hunt.
It was quite clear by that point what game the Republicans were playing...another impeachment would have played right into that hand. Having the cooperation of a not-insignificant portion of the media who only played up the victim rhetoric was also a big factor.
The legal system, which is supposed to be apolitical, was the best course of action. And continues to be the best course of action, because the majority of both houses continues to be Trump loyalists. Drown them in lawsuits, a million papercuts, etc.
It's far from a perfect solution, though, due to the aforementioned blocking of lower-court appointments, Merrick Garland (who, like, bullshit, I agree, should've fought harder), and then RBG dying at a very inopportune time, leading to a vulgar show of hypocrisy on the right and another weak resistance on the left.
And, it plays into the continued "weaponizing the justice system" rhetoric. Like, dude...it's not "weaponizing the justice system" if you're continually doing unlawful and even unconstitutional things. But good luck explaining that to the 33% of the country who would struggle to get a D on a 6th grade Civics test.
I do agree that Democrat's are really sucking as "The Resistance". The biggest thing they need to work on is messaging and having a united front.
But honestly, what can they do, really? The American People have spoken, and this is what they asked for, by the democratically instilled laws of our country.
There is no way to win, inside the system, by continuing to play by the rules. But, as long as Republicans hold the trifecta and the fourth-estate, any attempt to break the rules will not be cast in their favor.
The only way, I think, starts with finding an effective antidote to their koolaid.
This just happened in June
And then again a few weeks ago in December...
I dont really care if it succeeds. At least it's concrete action far beyond angry letters and tweets.
An "opposition party" that won't even make an effort to oppose.
This just happened in June
And then again a few weeks ago in December...
I dont really care if it succeeds. At least it's concrete action far beyond angry letters and tweets.
This just happened in June
And then again in December...
I dont really care if it succeeds. At least it's concrete action far beyond angry letters and tweets.
Lemmy firmly believes that every American is as far left as them, sees things the way the front page sees things, and that Democrats are the real problem. It's naive and self-absorbed, but there it is.
Not exactly.
For context, a bill only needs one sponsor. Most bills have about 2 or 3 cosponsors. Signing a bill as a cosponsor is not the same as voting, which hasn't happened yet.
The impeachment process is complicated and difficult (by design). Congress is split in two parts, the House of Representatives, and the Senate. Anyone in the House can introduce a bill to impeach someone (bring them to trial). But in order for anything to happen, you need a majority vote to adopt that bill. It then gets sent to the Senate, where they have another majority vote to decide if there will be a trial. If and only if there's a trial, you need a 2/3 majority vote in the Senate to convict. This has happened exactly 8 times in the history of the United States, and never for a sitting president.
If you don't have at least a majority in both parts of Congress, it's basically pointless. Introducing an impeachment bill becomes a symbolic gesture. All the voters hear is "Democrats tried to impeach, and failed. Again." This demoralizes Democrat voters and energizes Republican voters.
So, yeah, a lot of Democrat politicians aren't on board because they already know how this will play out.
I don’t know. I find it much more demoralizing when they’re not even willing to make an attempt.
Skyrocketing / exploding numbers doesn't imply a majority.
A number can grow significantly and still be a less than another number.
I AM an American and I don't understand this either.
The sad reality is our democrat party is powered by the same donors and investors as the republican party. They're all the same, the conflict is entirely Kayfabe, a type of vintage American-spawned brainrot from decades ago when people realized you could charm the population with absurd storylines.
If we had a proper opposition party, they would be capitalizing on this massive mandate against people like Noem and sweeping all of Trump's henchmen out of office with huge public spectacles and their own World Wrestling Extreme Politics theater. Instead we get frowns, stern letters and finger-wagging at the masked death-squads and foreign-power kidnapping.
House has to research and pass articles of impeachment
Senate has to hold a trial and convict
It doesn't make it through both; nothing happens.
Senate by the numbers is 53:45:2 Republican:Democrat:Independent.
None of the republicans has so much as mentioned they'd be on board with it.
As seen in many troubling votes, some percentage of our Democrats in both the House and the Senate are probably not playing for the team they say they are.
So, let's say the House decides to impeach to make a point, even though they know they have no chance of changing the outcome. There will be retribution. We have nazi slogans on podiums and Proud Boys policing the streets. On November 20th, the president called for the execution of democratic law makers five months after the democratic leader in Minnesota was executed in June in a politically motivated execution. I don't love it, but I understand their apprehension; they're not that brave.
So we wait until midterms (assuming the president doesn't manage to start a war to avoid them), where there's a good chance the senate will lose enough seats and any questionable democrats get displaced by at least centrists.
Then impeachments will happen and probably can succeed.
even if he starts a war, he can't avoid the midterms. The president has no authority over elections, the states have that authority, overseen by congress. And if states don't elect new congressmen and congresswomen and senators, then when the currently elected people have their terms end, then the states will not be able to just keep them in position, when their term ends they are out per the constitution, and won't have a representative until a special election is performed.
Also... I distinctly remember something from my history classes about how Americans react to being taxed without representation... Or at least they did in Boston in the 1773.
We're using the constitution as toilet paper at the moment. He's not following laws now, why would he start?
If he says we're not going to do it, and the scotus says he's right and half of congress is fine with it, it'll be a problem
I could also see a condition where the votes are "under the protection" of ICE and it comes out as a landslide victory.
I can see them try to place it "under the protection" but the states need to have a chain of custody for every vote, and whoever signed that custody chain is responsible for it. I dealt with this in the Army as an MP. And it would require the state to be complicit as well and I don't think most states want to just hand over all their authority to the federal government and turn themselves into puppets. But we will see...
I'm less worried about a chain of custody as I am with them simply using ICE thugs to scare people away from the polling places.
Not everywhere in the country, but they'll try to use them "for security" in blue, multicultural cities and that'll fuck up the vote.
That's my guess.
Hope is all I've got. Have a family to look after
Me too