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
These judges like Wallace are people too, with families who cannot hide behind anonymity like a high profile jury in a mob case. They've seen what Trump's Brown Shirts will do to those they don't like: anything from incessant threatening phone calls to attempted murder with a hammer. What an impossible position to be in: serve justice, or risk your family being stalk and possibly assaulted.
This is how democracy dies. It takes very brave people in power to stand up to someone like Trump.
Judges take that risk every time they take a criminal case on. That criminal could always have friends who plot revenge on the judge. And it does happen and judges are aware of it. So that's a poor excuse.
I also don't believe ruling against him will lead to a civil war or anything like that. Not when January 6th was a complete failure. Most Americans, even Trump supporters, aren't interested in picking up a gun and getting on the front lines.
Not at the level of Trump, they don't.
What makes Trump unique is that he is the leader of a massive cult. Our retaliation and intimidation laws don't work so well against those kinds of people because they don't give direct messages to make something happen. They give public statements and weaponise the wackos who 'took things the wrong way'.
These wackos had the balls to storm the capitol. They won't think much about a judge's home.
Cults, mafias, and terrorist organizations have been doing the "troublesome priest" routine for forever, and prosecutors judges and juries have been able to see through their bullshit and apply laws anyway. It isn't easy, and there's certainly lots of times those organizations (mafias in particular) have been able to corrupt or intimidate people, but it got done and it can be done again.
This isn't like those. None of those even come close. Those have the power to maybe get someone, maybe even a few people, murdered. Trump's useful idiots were prepared to storm the capital and upend democracy in the USA, and they very nearly succeeded.
Trump doesn't operate like a traditional cult. There are no official cult power structures or communication channels. He just has to hold a press conference and let the mainstream media do its thing. He just needs to say 'we need to fight for our rights' and then mention a target in the vein of 'this person is a corrupt individual who undermines democracy' and they'll be at that person's house in thousands.
Which is why I wish they were much harsher on him when it came to violating gag orders.
Sure, they might be able to trace back evidence to pin on him. Years after the judge is dead.
You are giving them way too much power.
These are the same people that stormed the capitol and the same people a single member of which stormed a US senator's house and fucked up her husband with a hammer simply because Trump constantly shit talked about her.
No I am not giving these people too much power. They are dangerous and they don't know limits. They've proven this much.
The last time a cult tried anything approaching this level of magnitude, they ended up coining the term 'drinking the kool-aid'
Most of those people who stormed the capital were all Infowars listeners following Alex Jones. Once Alex Jones saw that they were committing violence he immediately retreated and claimed they were all antifa. In many other rallies since then very few people show up. I think most of them are all talk hiding at the other end of a phone line. In the meantime any and all non-trump supporters should be armies up for self-defense.
Of course he did. Alex Jones was a pawn, not a man in the know. He was already in deep shit over his Sandy Hook bullshit.
Jones never knew where the line between inciting mob action and keeping his ass covered lay. He frequently crossed it. Shit, he would frequently get into fights himself.
And yeah, relatively few people showed up to further rallies afterwards, but then even Trump knew it'd be fucking suicide to pull that shit again any time soon. Trump had to disown the actions of his mobs, something he had never done in the past. He did so because he knew he was in deep shit if he didn't.
But there are still millions that hang onto his every word, and chances are there are still thousands that will commit violence for it. And Trump is fighting for his life here.
Heck, he doesn't even have to do anything. Trump could disappear for good and I bet his followers would come to their own conclusions and pull some shit.
Only takes a few in the crowd to break through. Imagine if one or a few of them got as far as Ashli Babbit did. The outcome of the riots could have been very different.
True, but that's no reason to be complacent. This could easily become a 'lessons learned' aspect for the Trump family too. They might do more to ensure that someone turns up armed and at the right spot, which will also be a lot easier for a judge's house than the Capitol building.
The difference here is scale, they don't usually have to worry about a third of the country hating their guts for making a decision
Nor is there a certainty in most cases that criminals will have people who want to harm a judge, unlike with Trump
Yes it's a threat they see often, but it's nowhere near the usual level they see it at and it's very understandable why someone might be legitimately terrified of the situation
Judges can recuse themselves if that's how they feel. They don't have to be there if they don't want to be.
Understandable, but giving into terror is only going to bring more of it on you and everyone else too.
Also, I wonder if every soldier who ever got their life threatened or taken serving our military felt terror, and why their terror would be any less worthy than what these judges are feeling. Those judges took an oath to defend our country in their own way, and they need to make good on it.
This isn't easy, but it isn't complicated either.
You either fight now or you fight later.
It's going to SCOTUS anyway, no matter what the ruling is; why should a lower judge put themselves at grave personal risk?