politics
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
view the rest of the comments
He faces 91 felony count. No offence directly to you but I see this comment a lot. This is plenty of "evidence" that he is about to pay, saying otherwise is basically denial at this point. Sure it could fail, anything can happen. But saying there is no evidence is pretending this is similar to being denounced by the media, or congress, or a civil lawsuit. This is the most concrete, evidency thing that could possibly be happening right now, in this timeline. He's being smited by the country judicial power.
I think the thing that makes people think that is he's still running around the country, amping up his cult with the wounded lamb routine. Anyone else facing 91 counts would already be behind bars. Justice had been coming for so long, most of us don't think it will ever get to the station.
It is a staggering number, but since none are for violent crimes, I wouldn't expect him to be jailed pending trial. Heck, they let Elizabeth Holmes stay out for quite a while after her conviction.
Pure speculation, but I think they're giving him rope on purpose. Rule #1 in a trial is to shut up because it makes your case harder otherwise. Intimidating the witness is definitely something that can play in his favour, but he's doing it overtly on the internet, on top of saying crazy shit that has is absolutely helping the prosecution for free.
Sure, but whether he wait in jail or not has little impact on the final verdict. People think that this is a sign of a sympathetic judge, but really the reason why they're so prudent, why it took so long, and why they're making such grand efforts to go easy on him is because they want to take absolutely 0 risks. It is all coldly planned, they're patient and he's gonna end up in a cell (not in general pop prison, but in a cell regardless, with a bed and a toilet.)
I mean, I can't tell the future, but I think I've had a good track record about trump so far. To me, it seems obvious that his power and influence already failed him. Influent people get away from it all by avoiding investigations, and/or avoiding prosecution by a sympathetic AG, and/or by making a deal with the DOJ, and/or by having the case dismissed. None of this is happening, and short of SCOTUS saving his ass (won't happen), he's out at the mercy of the jurors. There is no way out of 91 criminal charges, it is absolutely overkill.
I hope you're right. I'm generally an optimistic person, but in this, it's difficult to maintain a positive outlook anymore.
Call me when he goes to jail. That is the only thing that can possibly count as a consequence.
It's a long walk from charged to convicted, and another long walk to serving a sentence. I've seen enough 'ordinary' politicians not convicted, overturned on appeal, or otherwise nullified to have confidence that a Trump-level cult leader, with literal militia backing, will sit in a prison cell before he dies.
I'm hoping. I'm shopping for a celebration bottle. But I'm not betting my 401k.
As a group, world leaders (even former world leaders), don’t tend to face serious consequences for their actions, except, ironically enough, in the case of violent coups.
What it seems like we normally see is that they’re either put on house arrest or they leave the country and live out the rest of their years in exile. Genocidal madmen seem to get away with murder. I think Trump will, at worst, be put on house arrest. I would love nothing more for him to face serious prison time, but given how world leaders are usually treated with kid gloves, I doubt it.
Nobody can read the future, but I wonder if those put on house arrest typically face this deluge of criminal charges, or criminal charges at all. I have a feeling other members of the ruling class are not accepting trump as one of them. He's treated with kid gloves because of his supporters, not because they're protrcting him.
I think he’s saying he hasn’t seen any evidence that his past activities have lead to any repercussions for him. Not that the evidence against him now is invalid.