275
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 10 Nov 2024
275 points (98.6% liked)
politics
19145 readers
1909 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Yeah, we know. I am particularly interested in seeing if he will go the extra mile and try the self-pardon, though. If he does that, and the courts uphold it, then we know we've officially crossed the line to dictatorship.
If he doesn't, it will only be because people tell him the courts won't back him on that.
OTOH, there is always the tiny, tiny chance that the self-pardon is a step too far, and convince Republicans to finally impeach his ass.
There is no way a self pardon will be the line too far. Democrats expect it and the Republican electorate would cheer him on.
If he crosses a line it will be fucking with other Republican's money.
We already know that.
Don't be so sure. It is well documented that the Founders felt that no person should be their own judge. But, more importantly, letting the President self-pardon gives that person an enormous advantage that the other branches can't put in check. It subordinates the other branches.
Congress and the courts will, of course, go along with Trump's priorities. But will they go along with diminishing their own power? Recall that even with the immunity decision, the courts left to themselves what is covered under that, so still kept some power in all that.
SCOTUS: Hold my beer
Pardons are an official act.
But a self-pardon can be argued to contradict other parts of the Constitution. It definitely is contrary to the founder's intent.
Pretty sure absolute criminal immunity for the president would be as well.
Haha, good one.
let's hope the dems get the house and a supermajority in the senate in the midterms (they won't)
Right? Dude sends a crowd of rowdies into the Capitol building to hang the vice president for not lying but, self-pardoning is too far
Plan B or maybe it is plan A is do a money grab, hand over the presidency to Vance, and have Vance do all the pardons, and he walks free.
That would require Trump to trust Vance. The absolute split second that Trump is out of power, everyone will turn on him. There's no such thing as loyalty, just self interest.
Let's all meet back here in a year and see how it all played out.
kinda makes me wish that !RemindMe bot was a thing here.
A custom bot service could make bank here.
I suspect he doesn't pardon himself day-1. No matter how he leaves office, there will be warning (or he'll be dead). He'll pardon himself as late as possible so he can tell people that he hasn't (yet). There's zero benefit to doing it early.
That said, he's really fucking stupid, so I'm tired of predicting what he'll do.
lol the Rs will never impeach dear leader man
Does he need to yet?
It's not like he can be impeached and most of the cases will pause by default as he's a sitting president. If any don't he'll have a tame Attorney General to kill them for him. State level charges could have a theoretical shot, but what state will take that fight?
The window to hold him accountable was 2020-2024 and the people responsible dropped the ball, sometimes with obvious intention, sometimes from naivité or incompetence
The problem as usual is that the Democrats bring Debate Club weapons to a knife fight