60
then just fuckin' do it! She damn well knew that she was breaking the law, so hold her to account! they don't give a damn about your empty threats.
DO SOMETHING!
That's not how democrats work.
First, they give a verbal warning: "we are very disappointed".
Then, comes a written warning: "we are really really disappointed now"
And then they flip and flop and don't do anything.
You missed the part where they blast/slam them.
it's not blast/slam, it's BLAST/SLAM.
You forgot the protest video where they listen to the Hamilton soundtrack in solidarity with all the people starving and being abducted to concentration camps.
They then point out how hypocritical the known hypocrites are.
Considering the Dems don't control the House, Senate, or White House, the only power they do have currently is promising future prosecution if they take back one of the branches of government. The Republican-led congress and White House are obviously not going to do anything.
What a ridiculous system. So basically politicians in the ruling government can't be held responsible and prosecuted according to the law if they hold power in the government?
I mean, I already knew the American legal system was a fucking joke when Trump got away with all his crimes and then he pardoned a ton of other criminals. Even though he shouldn't have this kind of power, he's the President.
But now you're saying that certain other people in the government cannot be prosecuted either? WTF?!
So basically politicians in the ruling government
Well yes and no. If you are thinking of it like a parliamentary system don't. We don't require the formation of a government through a majority party of coalition.
Each representative is elected to an existing body and they have to figure it out.
So theoretically you can have multiple combinations on which party controls the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the presidency. Honestly we don't even have to have parties you could have every seat filled by politically unaligned independents.
Currently all elected offices in the federal government are controlled by the Republicans. They will not remove their own party's president.
But theoretically in the mid terms the democratic party could become the majority in the House and the Senate. The president would of course still be the same. But they could then attempt to remove him from office through impeachment.
It's a confusing mess, but yeah that's the US system
I'm no big fan of the Democrats, but historically they are willing to get rid of their own when even accused of wrongdoing. See Senator Al Franken for the silliest example of this.
Republicans will not, in the vast majority of cases, do the same.
Hey now, Putin does not approve this. Angry downvote!! /s
The problem is that you have a majority on the Supreme Court that are blatantly abusing their power and ignoring the law when it advances their side's agenda, including just declaring the president to be above the law.
This would be the kind of thing that should lead to impeachment, but that requires a supermajority in the senate (because you don't want whichever party has a majority to be able to easily abuse the impeachment process) but that won't happen because every single republican with even a hint of integrity has been pushed out by Trump over the past decade. And even if there were Republicans that weren't entirely corrupt, dismantling your own Supreme Court majority would be a tough sell politically. And even if they did remove the existing justices, it would just mean that Trump would get to appoint new ones that would be much worse and with many more years ahead of them.
And with Trump filling the executive branch with the worst scumbags he can find, chosen specifically for their willingness to be loyal sycophants who won't let ethics or laws get in the way of doing his bidding, you aren't going to get any help there. Again, this is exactly why the senate has to approve appointments but they are also scumbags right now. And for the same reason, the impeachment that should be happening for basically every member of this administration are not coming.
All that being said, there is resistance coming from both the executive and judicial branches. This administration has been firing people illegally in part because it can't get them to do the illegal shit they want them to do. And those illegal actions and the related illegal firings have been taken to court and the administration has lost nearly 95% off the time. Sometimes the Supreme Court has stepped in to bail them out, but in most cases the ruling stands and the administration has eventually complied.
All of which is to say that, while there are many flaws both big and small in the American system, it isn't the system itself that is at fault here, it's the elected officials and the corrupt assholes they appointed. There is no system that will work when every branch of government is in the hands of people who ignore their ethical and legal obligations.
The problem is that you have a majority on the Supreme Court
That's not a requirement for impeachment and removal. That's an independent power of Congress.
If only I'd posted more than one sentence, maybe I could have addressed the issue of impeachment... even though the comment I was responding to specifically mentioned the legal system, and the point I was making was about how no legal safety mechanism can function when the people in charge of it are corrupt, which is a problem when the people at the top in all the branches of government are corrupt.
The Justice system prosecutes. Political parties don't.
That's how it should be. But it's literally the opposite right now. Trump is issuing orders to prosecute all of his political "enemies" and the actual criminals in the government are not being prosecuted by the justice system at all.
It should be "will face prosecution", not "could"
Look, the only crime that white people get prosecuted for is if they harm a richer white person.
She's safe.
Anytime anyone mentions the files she just keeps asking “Pardon Me?"
She's not going deaf. She's just reminding Trump to hold up his end of the bargain
Haha holy shit wait... For real?
Democrats will do nothing, even if they do Pam won't face any ramifications, this is all performative.
A bunch of files just got inexplicably deleted. I wonder why 🥸
I thought the deadline was yesterday. Did we give a new deadline? What makes them think this deadline would be any different?
Edit: the article is from yesterday.
This article is from yesterday, presumably before the 11:59pm deadline and before the (highly redacted) files were released.
They have not released all of the files
They haven't really released any of the files (other than pictures of Bill Clinton of course).
Please for the love of god throw this idiot in prison for life
Just release another random hundred pages of blacked out text with the appropriate headers. Would be the same as releasing the files, nobody would be able to tell the difference. Nothing of substance will be given to the public.
On █████████, Jeffery Epstein's communications with ████████████ and ██████████ confirmed the █████████ of ████████. In a private █████ exchange, ████████ discussed the █████████ of ████████ for ███████. The ████████ was then scheduled to ██████████ with █████████, and would then meet up with Bill Clinton at the █████████ of ██████████. Flight logs for flight ██████ corroborate the meet up between Bill Clinton and █████████.
Further investigation into ████████ revealed the █████████ with █████████ and Bill Clinton. █████████ Obama ████████████ purchase █████████████ Bill Clinton ████████ and Do███████████████. ████████████████████████
Maybe she's just polite like that?
"Could" is the operative word here.
Pigs could grow wings and fly starting tomorrow too
Face prosection from who exactly? Pam Bondi controls indictments for tampering with evidence and Congressional contempt actions are referred to the DOJ which then go to... Pam Bondi.
“Let me be very clear, we need a full release,” Khanna said.
Hehehehehehehe
[redacted], Bondi replied.
this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2025
60 points (98.4% liked)
politics
29100 readers
440 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