266
Your highest courts have been stacked in favor of your dictator for some time. Revolt. Loudly and aggressively.
they got the tv, we got the truth
they own the judges, we got the proof
we got hella people, they got helacopters
they got hella bombs, we got the we got the…
I'm beginning to hate the guillotine references while watching little actually get done. Y'all got a long way to go to get to your guillotine moment.
They learned. They put their Bastille in another country.
What was it you said you'd accomplished in your lifetime? Oh right, you vote while your government fucks over the First Nations. What heroism.
Yea you know me now and what I do cause you creeped some comments on an alt account that you didn't even care to read because it's not in line with your fucked up narrative. Fuck off. Just another cultist of a different variety and part of the reason you find yourself ruled by a dictator.
I think it's naive to think that "writing different words" would have any impact.
The only words to write are "Mr. President we find you in contempt of court."
Just keep on holding presidents in contempt until you get someone rational. I think the first stop for that is Rubio.
the legislature cant charge the president with anything while in the official act of his duties. congress has to, and they wont
The Supreme Couet was the one who decided that and if Roe V Wade showed us anything they can undecide that.
But this court already ruled that. You're letting emotion overcome fact
Legislature = congress.
Also I believe the judiciary CAN still hold him in contempt.
This is not the first time that the Executive branch has ignored Supreme Court orders. See Worcester v. Georgia and the dispute between Chief Justice Roger Taney and General Cadwalader.
The problem is that the Executive branch is (theoretically) supposed to uphold the decisions of the Judicial branch, but irl, enforcement of those decisions is easier said than done when the Executive branch disagrees.
It wouldn't have changed their actions, but it would have rid them of any plausible deniability that they had committed contempt of the Supreme Court in doing so. It would have made the constitutional crisis that we ARE in undeniable, and even the idiots at Fox News couldn't pretend that the administration followed the order by "allowing" his return if El Salvador just so happened to send him back. As it is now, you will have many MAGA believing that the administration is in compliance with the court's orders and did nothing wrong. They would have at least had to face the truth if there was no wiggle room, and maybe some would actually acknowledge that the administration is in the wrong about this one thing at least.
And regardless, doing nothing doesn't even meet the low standard of 'facilitating'.
No but doing it officially makes it clear where things sit right now.
The impact would have been to highlight how feckless the checks and balances are.
Can hitmen now claim administrative error and say they didn't realize they wanted a photoshoot?
I for one cannot wait for Trump to die. It can’t come soon enough.
It'll only pause shit for a week if he does. This isn't his playbook.
Be careful what you wish for. No matter how he goes, they'll blame his death on "the left" and martyr him. It could actually make things much worse.
Disagree. I would rather have a dead martyr, than a live Traitor. At least the dead martyr can't directly cause any damage.
Besides, MAGA is a cult of personality. They will never give their full loyalty to anyone else. Once HitlerPig assumes room temperature, it is the beginning of the end for MAGA. Their peak influence will be behind them, and they will lose at least 50% of their power instantly, and then steadily slide into obscurity.
The only way the Supreme Court can save themselves is by ordering the arrest of the President
Samwise Gamgee: " IM PEACH MENT"
this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2025
266 points (98.9% liked)
politics
24937 readers
1094 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS