2755
TRUMP GUILTY ON ALL 34 COUNTS
(www.bbc.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 May 2024
2755 points (99.3% liked)
News
23655 readers
3645 users here now
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. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. 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.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Can you elaborate? My knee-jerk reaction is to be against it, but I haven’t thought about it a whole lot and I’d be interested to know why you have decided on the opposite.
It means if there was an actual politically motivated prosecution, that wouldn't stop someone from winning. ie. If Trump had managed to make some fake charge against Biden stick in 2020, if the people still wanted Biden to be president, he could be.
I think it's a powerful statement that - despite all the structural checks & balances and systems of appeal - we consider political charges and kangaroo courts a realistic possibility. It's not just Alito's flags - this is a long simmering loss of faith.
Having been a plaintiff in a civil case, with thankfully only money on the line, it was a real eye opener for me of how little the jurors actually get to see, and how much power a single judge has (read: a LOT). It really made me reflect on how absolutely awful and terrifying it must be to have your freedom on the line, and to witness something like I did that felt horrifyingly unfair, and know you could go to jail for it. And I know it happens, a lot, and disproportionately to black and brown folk no less.
I wonder if that is part of it. As the country has gotten less white, we hear (or maybe care) more about bias-induced injustice, and it's harder for the declining majority to be complacent when "blame the Black guy" gets a court to give you what you want. Local, elected judges have always been a partisan nightmare, but I feel like it's really the last 10 years, since they eliminated the filibuster for federal judges, and especially since 2017 for SCOTUS, that national courts have lost credibility.
Let us know how you get from “politically motivated prosecution” to 12 jurors (some of which are Trump supporters) finding guilt. Convicted felons by jury trial should not be public servants and most state Constitutions clearly state that (Florida for example).
Which is, of course, the unsubstantiated claim that Trump has been making.
Despite this entire trial not being under the jurisdiction or control of his political rival.
In this case it seems easy to be against it because a widely unpopular candidate is the one being prosecuted.
However, allowing felons to run for office precludes the ability for the government to silence political dissidents by making up laws/falsifying evidence that they can be imprisoned for.
The risk of a Trump presidency is still on the table, but the US can avoid situations like what happened to Navalny in Russia as well.
In the 1920 election, Eugene Debs campaigned as the socialist nominee for president from prison, having been imprisoned for advocating draft dodging. That is the sort of candidate I would still support, even from behind bars.
Just because you're a felon doesn't mean you're not a citizen and part of the country. As such, you should be able to partake in democracy in all possible ways as well.
I really dislike this punitive mindset of completely ruining someone's life for being convicted of a crime. People make mistakes, but we don't want to exclude them from society, we want to reform them and bring them back in. So yeah, I think, even excluding all this political bs, that no person should have their right to vote or run taken from them.
Oh yeah, I agree with you. I certainly think felons should have a vote. Hadn’t really occurred to me to include running for office in the same category.