506
submitted 1 year ago by Nusm@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 10 points 1 year ago

could someone [in the court process] request a mental evaluation to determine if he is even competent to be found guilty? hes clearly off his rocker, and a potential danger to himself and others!

[-] ubermeisters@lemmy.world 34 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No. There ~~will~~ should be NO easy outs for this fuckwad. He needs to be made a serious example of. He should be sent to Gitmo.

i was really just thinking it would be funny if the prosecutors called for this at every one of his trials, just to make him lose his mind.

[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

I think it would set a precedent for the office. Mental health check.

[-] ubermeisters@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Our officials should be held to a higher standard than we are, and that absolutely should include mental health checkups before and during tenure. But we also need to recognize that would be a convinient system for opponents to weaponize. We can't even manage to have an impartial Supreme Court, let alone mental health examiners. Idk what we do about it.

[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

We can apply the “but who makes the rules” fear to everything. But inaction is just as bad. I think we need to understand that nothing has changed in politics, we just have more awareness of it because of the internet. The supreme court has always been corrupt. The idea of impartiality was drilled into us like the pledge of allegiance. We’ve all been brainwashed, but a lot more of us are waking up.

[-] RubberStuntBaby@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm pretty sure that the most we can hope for is house arrest. The courts won't want a former president getting stabbed in the showers, being bullied into giving up national secrets or the bureaucratic mess of him having a security detail inside, as fitting as any of that would be.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

They already did that and he passed it with flying colors! "Person, woman, man, camera, TV."

[-] grabyourmotherskeys@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

This will happen if sentencing involves jail time.

this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2023
506 points (97.9% liked)

politics

19145 readers
4637 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