this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2024
206 points (98.6% liked)

politics

19089 readers
4079 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
 

The Court’s decision could potentially undermine over 300 January 6 prosecutions, including Trump’s.

According to the Justice Department, Joseph Fischer texted his boss before the January 6 insurrection to tell him that he might need to post bail. The accused insurrectionist also allegedly warned that the protest at the US Capitol “might get violent,” and he allegedly wrote that “they should storm the capital and drag all the democrates [sic] into the street and have a mob trial.” 

When the day of the insurrection came, Fischer allegedly yelled “Charge!” before running and crashing into a line of police inside the Capitol. The Justice Department says that video footage “shows at least one police officer on the ground after [Fischer’s] assault.” Fischer was only in the Capitol for four minutes, according to the DOJ, before he was “forcibly removed.” 

Fischer was arrested after the FBI identified him based on a video he posted on Facebook that showed him inside the Capitol on January 6.

More than three years later, however, Fischer has yet to be tried. The criminal proceeding against him has been tied up in appeals after a Trump-appointed trial judge ruled that one of the criminal laws Fischer is charged with violating must be read very narrowly. That ruling is now being reviewed by the Supreme Court, in a case called Fischer v. United States.

The Supreme Court will hear this case next month.

top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 106 points 7 months ago (2 children)

And let me guess, the seditionist’s husband is not going to recuse himself.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

He was offered a $1*million/year for life if he retired. It's not about the money, it's about the corruption he is able to provide to his rich "friends"...

[–] [email protected] 17 points 7 months ago

Nah, it's about the money. One million a year is not enough for that greedy fuck.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Sorry, it's not an RV. It's a motorcoach

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

You should hear this in John's voice: "is it though"

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago

He's exactly where he wants to be. Why would he voluntarily relinquish power?

[–] [email protected] 51 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Handing this case to a blatantly partisan SCOTUS is the thing that can go wrong, and now it has.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 7 months ago

Let’s just call it what it is— it’s whatever Ginni Thomas decides.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

They hand it to themselves, that's how Cert works

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago

Lower courts have their collaborators tho

[–] [email protected] 32 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I think I'm missing something. So the insurrectionists, yell "charge" as if in battle and say to pull all the Democrats out into the street and have a mob trial, but what they're being charged with is interfering with a government proceeding? Like that's the only thing wrong here?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

You're missing something. He's being charged with breaking multiple laws, not just "interfering with a government proceeding."

The criminal proceeding against him has been tied up in appeals after a Trump-appointed trial judge ruled that one of the criminal laws Fischer is charged with violating must be read very narrowly.

But only one of those charges is being contested. The Supreme Court gets to decide if he'll be tried on that charge, but it sounds like he'll be tied on the other charges regardless of what the Supreme Court decides. The headline is sensational, but what else would you expect from Vox?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Copy that. Thanks. I did read the whole thing but must have missed that line. Or maybe dozed.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

I don't blame you, the article really overplayed that one charge. I bet they had great "engagement," though.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 7 months ago

The corrupt trump judge's reading of the statute in focus here is such overly-obvious bullshit. Also, not even his reading I'm sure (did someone follow the paper trail that shows how the federalist society likely fed him his "thoughts" on this to pave the path to the conflict of interest laden Supreme Court?

This is serious, but none of it is sincere. 250 years to fully confront the fact that the US founding principles of government are built on "gentlemen's agreements" and an assumption of minimum level of real/performative integrity (and a fear of tarnished legacy after death) - our way of government is helpless if those core assumptions aren't in place. Now we're just left here to watch an obvious slow moving train intentionally crushing line after line of school children and ultimately headed towards a cliff.

Plenty of warning time, but nobody can move the children or stop the train.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago

It would suck if he got off (and many others by association) but is this the only charge levied against him? They should've got him on trespassing, inciting a riot, and possibly vandalism. I would hope those things combined would be at least a 5 year sentence.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (3 children)

I think it is funny that this image keeps getting used. The dude in blue being Jon Schaffer from the band Iced Earth.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

Used to love that band, their concept album about the early years of superhero Spawn was dope. Can't stand to listen to them now knowing that terrorist was a major part of it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

So he's a nobody?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

Isn't that the band Richard Christy played with for a while before he did Charred Walls of the Damned?