this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2024
780 points (99.0% liked)

politics

19107 readers
3062 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A distinguished group of retired four-star generals and admirals from the U.S. military have argued in a brief filed in the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday that Donald Trump’s claims of absolute “presidential immunity” from criminal prosecution tied to Jan. 6 is an “assault” on the “foundational commitments” underpinning democracy and if his argument is allowed to succeed before them later this month, it threatens “to subvert the careful balance between the executive and legislative branches struck in the Constitution.”

The 38-page amicus brief features 19 authors, all of them decorated retired admirals, generals or secretaries from branches of the U.S. Army, Navy and Air Force respectively. On April 25, the high court is poised to hear Trump’s question of immunity against prosecution for his alleged criminal conspiracy to subvert the results of the 2020 election. and according to the brief, these are arguments that should be approached with extreme caution.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

You don't think if people stop just standing by the sidelines watching, but instead participate, specifically pushing back on their Representatives and their Senators, asking for change, that things wouldn't change? At all?

Congress does what it does because we all sit on our asses and do nothing about it, except maybe go vote every once in awhile.

They have no respect for us, because they don't see us as participating in the system, only companies that give them money are seen in their eyes to be participating.

"Democracy already failed." is total bullshit, plain and simple, and it's rhetoric that doesn't help solve any problems.

Participate.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -2 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The deck is stacked and the game is rigged.

First link is about someone on parole voting, when they can't.

Second link is about someone who got caught when trying to do fraudulent voting activities.

The third link is a person with a prior felony conviction (that she pleaded guilty to), that is ineligible to seek office, trying to seek office/vote.

Those are three one-offs, in the margins. None of those prevent the system from working overall.

You're grasping at straws.

Participate.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You’re grasping at straws.

I question whether you've ever actually participated in an election before.

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I question whether you’ve ever actually participated in an election before.

Actually, I've voted in every election I was asked to.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -2 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Extreme Weasel Word Phrasing

How so?