547
submitted 1 month ago by Beaver@lemmy.ca to c/politics@lemmy.world
all 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 130 points 1 month ago

Or...

The president can just order the DOJ to imprison him for actions against the US government and outright treason.

And it would be totally legal

But he won't, because he doesn't take the threat of fascism serious.

[-] DogPeePoo@lemm.ee 41 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Joe Biden is acting like a complete pussy following milquetoast Merrick’s lead

[-] Maeve@kbin.earth 17 points 1 month ago

"Nothing will fundamentally change."

[-] ProIsh@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago

Toss him in jail for one day and you'd see all this shit stop.

Add the owner of fox in the same cell. You'd be amazed how quickly things would clean themselves up.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 46 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Took one bullet to stop 1/6.

Fascists are usually cowards, but they'll always keep pushing till there's consequences.

Biden will not fucking give them consequences. They gave him the power to, and dude immediately announced publicly that he'd never do it.

Like, that alone should be disqualifying.

Biden treats this personal, it's him vs trump. But this is so much bigger and so much more important than either of those old rich men.

[-] ProIsh@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago

Yup. I keep drifting back to RGB and how much she screwed us. (obv it's Republicans fault in the end, but she could have played that a bit different)

[-] blazeknave@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Bullies on a bigger scale

[-] shalafi@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

You'll have to extract Rupert Murdoch from Australia.

[-] krashmo@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

I'm pretty sure we could find some Australians willing to hand him over

[-] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Any not in his pay

Tbh I expect they’d thank us if we set ST6 on him like bin Laden. Genuinely, Murdoch has had just as profound and negative of an effect on society, but also enriched himself enormously in the process. Dude is one evil motherfucker.

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago

I don't believe the recent court ruling would actually allow that because suspending court justices isn't a regular part of the president's duty.

The best king example I've seen is that the president would be within the law if they shot the director of homeland security - the president is allowed to control who is in that position, they can remove them at will - the SC ruling means that the method they chose to remove that person is now unimpeachable... if they chose to suspend them by freeing them of their mortal coil they're "acting within official duties".

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 18 points 1 month ago

I don’t believe the recent court ruling would actually allow that because suspending court justices isn’t a regular part of the president’s duty.

Directing the DOJ is

So Biden can direct them to arrest someone, and throw them in gitmo.

His motivations can't be investigated. And directing the DOJ is within a presidents power

[-] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago

It might be illegal for the DOJ personnel to follow that order, but he can just tell them he'll pardon them for any crimes they're charged with for following his order and that he'll murder them if they don't follow his order, and all of that is totally legal

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago

It might be illegal

But we'll never know, because looking into his motivations is literally forbidden.

All he can be tried for is the action in a vacuum. And if it was explicitly within his powers. He's good

Literally anything that goes thru an agency is automatically cool.

That's why it's so dangerous to half ass this election and for Biden to just ignore all the power he has.

[-] negativenull@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

The president can pardon people for unspecified things (proven by Trump). He can pardon anyone for "following orders"

[-] jaybone@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

If he cared about protecting the country from fascism, he wouldn’t be running.

[-] Bridger@sh.itjust.works 81 points 1 month ago
[-] Pistcow@lemm.ee 44 points 1 month ago

Fucking shoot Clarence Thomas into the sun.

[-] dactylotheca@suppo.fi 16 points 1 month ago

Shooting him into the sun would be a waste of delta-v. Shoot him out of the solar system.

[-] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

It might take more delta v but it would be worth it

[-] dactylotheca@suppo.fi 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Been a while since my Kerbal days when I read a bit about all this orbital mechanics crap and I remember that there was something counterintuitive about the delta-v required to hit the sun vs escape the solar system; I think compared to escaping, if you start from Earth you need almost 3x the delta-v to hit the sun, but I can't remember why. Something to do with the huge gravity well, because it got worse the closer you are to the sun

edit: lol I totally misread you, but also I found a video and duh yeah the reason was obvious: it's because we're moving around the sun at ~30km/s and to hit the sun you need to use that much delta-v to slow down to make your orbit tight enough to actually hit the sun instead of getting slingshotted / staying in orbit: https://youtu.be/LHvR1fRTW8g?si=1eIyeeqWR61wRu08. Escape velocity for the solar system is ~10km/s

[-] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 4 points 1 month ago

The regular kind will suffice.

[-] psvrh@lemmy.ca 52 points 1 month ago

We knew he was a garbage human being during the Anita Hill hearings.

That he's still a garbage human being now that he had even more power shouldn't be a surprise to anyone with any understanding of how people work.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

We knew he was a garbage human being during the Anita Hill hearings

Man, if only the head of that committee was a real leader. One willing to stand up for what is right, defend the victim, keep decorum, and allow the multiple other woman with similar complaints to testify...

Imagine if Clarance could have been kept off the court

I guess it would be pointless to look up who that was, it was 30 years ago and the Senator would have already been pretty senior to head that committee...

I'm sure he's far a way from modern politics by now, hell, he'd have to be like 81 years old now!

No reason to disturb his likely retirement enjoying his time with his family.

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 21 points 1 month ago

Thank god we learned from that and haven't confirmed any other justices with credible allegations of sexual assault against them. Imagine where we'd be if we confirmed that clown who regularly boofed beer.

[-] Maeve@kbin.earth 0 points 1 month ago

Yeah, not like he's POTUS or anything...

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Four hours without someone feeling the need to explain the joke...

[-] samus12345@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

I vividly remember a newspaper clipping about the Anita Hill hearings being displayed at my school in 10th grade. If only I knew that POS would not only still be there 33 years later, but would be actively trying to destroy democracy.

[-] _sideffect@lemmy.world 29 points 1 month ago

This dude needs to have been kicked out decades ago

[-] snooggums@midwest.social 38 points 1 month ago

He shouldn't have made it to the bench with the nomination hearings exposing his sexual harassement. Same with Kavanaugh.

[-] samus12345@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

Turns out, he was ahead of his time.

[-] Wytch@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 month ago
[-] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago
[-] samus12345@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Probably both.

[-] Suavevillain@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago

Get that professional sugarbaby off the court.

[-] xploit@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

How has nobody offered him a yacht holiday and then extracted the ship's crew in the middle of nowhere in Pacific.
That would be pretty hilarious

[-] Awesomematter@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

John Oliver offered him $1mil a year to retire and a brand new Winnebago yet upon the highest court he still reigns with that shifty ass smirk across his face

[-] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Which is proof he already gets more

[-] knobbysideup@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago
[-] snooggums@midwest.social 17 points 1 month ago

Stil worth doing even if it is just used as a way to support future efforts to reform SCOTUS.

[-] itsgroundhogdayagain@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago

Now that there isn't any time left to do anything...

[-] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Nah, he's immune. He's part of the supremes.

this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2024
547 points (98.9% liked)

politics

18601 readers
4327 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS