• SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    193
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    Why aren’t these guys in jail? Seriously. I mean, I know the theory of the rule of law and all, but even our widely-acclaimed greatest president suspended habeas corpus when insurgent seditionists tried to overthrow the Union.

    • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      16 days ago

      Throughout human history, laws have never stopped conservatism. Jails have never stopped conservatism. Pacifism has never stopped conservatism. Only force has ever stopped conservatism. Only force.

        • barsquid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          16 days ago

          People get called that when they’re pretending to be far left while urging everyone to take the exact actions the Repubs want them to take.

            • barsquid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              16 days ago

              It’s code for “antifascist” “leftists” who are urging people to do the exact same things that the Republican party wants them to do.

                • barsquid@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  16 days ago

                  If you’re upset about being called a tankie, you could cross-reference what you are urging people to do with what the Republican party wants people to do. And then stop that.

                  In general I would recommend being antifascist in a way that isn’t the exact same actions as overt fascism with the only difference being the rhetoric justifying the actions.

            • Censored@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              16 days ago

              Tankie is the pro-authoritarian left. The Stalinists essentially. The ones who think it’s appropriate to send in the tanks to quell a socialist or communist uprising because it has a tint of democracy in it, which may cause their strong leader to lose dictatorial power.

        • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          16 days ago

          Tankies these days are conservatives wrapped in an authoritarian shell. Instead of just being supportive of their own authoritarian government they try to destabilize other governments for their gain.

        • Pips@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          16 days ago

          Tankies are literal authoritarians. People say they’re “authoritarian communists,” which ignores they’re mostly Maoists or Stalinists, both of whom were closer to fascism than the left. It sort of ignores the basic premise of communism or even socialism to have a single authoritarian ruler. Kind of like how the Nazis called themselves socialists. I guess they were a workers’ party to start, but I don’t think you can reasonably conflate their ideology with the tenets of socialism.

          • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            16 days ago

            The Nazis only used the label socialists to deceive the working class. They said so plenty of times when meeting with the industrialists whose bidding they were doing. They never were a workers party and they knew that it was only in name to be more palatable. This deception now has been replaced with “owning the libs” and whatever the local version of neoliberal, conservative or fascist ideology you have around the world.

          • nyctre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            16 days ago

            No, you don’t understand. The problem is that those people haven’t had enough time to bring upon real communism. Real communism hasn’t been reached yet. They want to let the Maos and Stalins of the world have enough time to reach communism. Things will surely be different with the next guy.

            • Dkarma@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              16 days ago

              Trump is just Stalin and mai with less power.

              There is no difference between authoritarianism at either end of the spectrum.

              The issue with authoritarianism isn’t “communism or fascism” it’s a symptom of shitty PEOPLE NOT TYPE OF GOVERNMENT.

              STalin wasn’t a shithead BECAUSE he was commumist, but in spite of it.

      • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 days ago

        I’m not sure if I’m joking. In any case, the writ of habeas corpus is the legal tool that a court can theoretically use to compel the appearance of a prisoner before it. It is the legal doctrine that underlies the right to trial, and I say “theoretically” because courts rarely need to issue one; it’s just standard procedure to bring people to court to face charges.

        By suspending it, Abraham Lincoln could detain those people he deemed dangerous seditionists indefinitely, because the detainees would have to go to court to challenge their detention, and there was no way to get to court. The effect of suspending it again is that it wouldn’t matter that Baboon (autocorrect and I’m leaving it) and Stone were pardoned, or that there were even criminal charges.

        Lincoln did it, George W. Bush did it. Barack Obama did it. The Constitution contains a clause which allows it to be suspended due to rebellion or threats to public safety. It’s a dangerous thing to allow a president to do, but the MAGA danger might be greater.

        • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          16 days ago

          In other words the US is neither a state of law nor is it a democracy as separation of power can be overturned whenever the president feels like it.

          • Censored@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            16 days ago

            Emergency powers are in most constitutions because people generally understand that during war things have to operate a little differently. You can’t allow the enemy, who is attacking you physically, to go and publish propaganda that attacks you rhetorically and turns the populace’s loyalty towards the other side. The problem we have now is the constant use of emergency powers. That needs to be shut down. Emergency powers should be limited to a certain timeframe, and reviewed by congress after that. Not these multi decade states of emergency.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          16 days ago

          Worth noting that, historically speaking, if a state official wanted to punish someone without going through the court system he could always just turn the prisoner over to a lynch mob.

          So while suspending habeaus corpus is a danger to democracy, it is not a singular method by which mayors, governors, or Presidents have disposed of political opponents.

      • CraigeryTheKid@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        82
        ·
        16 days ago

        it’s still unfathomable that trump was “allowed” (I know it was “legal”, don’t point that out) to pardon his literal partners-in-crime. He basically has already self-pardoned himself by proxy by allowing these traitors to walk free.

        • takeda@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          16 days ago

          We messed up when we allowed Ford’s pardon of Nixon before he was convicted. We should only allow pardons after the person was convicted. That created all kinds of paradoxes:

          • creating a blanket pardon “from any crime that we don’t know yet about”
          • possible pocket pardon, where a president could pardon themselves secretly
          • hiring thugs on president benefit and giving pardon right before leaving office. They know they can do anything and will receive a blanket pardon. If president had to wait for conviction then there was no guarantee he would be there to pardon them. So it would make whole escapade more risky
          • total immunity which trump is arguing about would be even less likely if there was no blanket and pocket pardon and he had to wait until being convicted before being able to be pardoned
        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          16 days ago

          Ford pardoned Nixon.

          Bush Jr pardoned Scooter Libby.

          Governor Abbott pardoned a pedophile for shooting a black girl’s white boyfriend

          Why is this even remotely surprising?

    • Prandom_returns@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      Huh? Why would anyone with power go to jail in an oligarchy? Unless you upset the more powerful oligarch.

      • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        16 days ago

        As in my other reply, the Constitution allows the suspension of habeas corpus in cases of rebellion or threats to public safety, and without that writ, charges and sentences are irrelevant.

        • rsuri@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          16 days ago

          The Supreme Court has held that the Constitution contains a right to habeas corpus in Boumedine v. Bush. The Lincoln thing was never fully litigated and was probably unconstitutional.

          • hglman@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            15 days ago

            The Constitution doesn’t empower the court to interpret the constitution. If the executive chose to ignore the court it would be perfectly legal.

            • rsuri@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              15 days ago

              Well that’s an even older decision:

              Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that established the principle of judicial review, meaning that American courts have the power to strike down laws and statutes they find to violate the Constitution of the United States. Decided in 1803, Marbury is regarded as the single most important decision in American constitutional law.

              • hglman@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                15 days ago

                Yes, the supreme Court gave itself that power. To that end the other branches could justifiably choose to not find that to be valid.

    • Censored@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      Roger Stone’s been to jail a number of times. He really doesn’t care because he knows he’ll get pardoned. Also he’s basically a mafia don, so I imagine he gets a lot of respect in prison from republicans.

      • beetlejuice0001@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        16 days ago

        In what capacity does he resemble the mafia? He’s a snake. These guys want to desperately be associated with the mafia but they’re just con men. The Mafia were intelligent criminals.

        Everyone needs to remember this guy shaking hands with world leaders during his years in office. In every single picture he is smiling like a pig in shit. It is only after the indictment photo he is attempting to rebrand himself as some sort of tough guy criminal instead of a slimy, smug con artist.

  • Hikermick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    16 days ago

    Same thing happened with Bannon before the 2020 election. It won’t make a difference to the cult

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    16 days ago

    “That may not be necessary,” Stone continued. “There are technical, legal steps we have to take to try to have a more honest election.”

    Fixed it: “That may not be necessary,” Stone continued. “There are technical, legal steps we have to take to try to have the appearance of a more honest election.”

    Stone noted during the conversation that the Trump campaign is attempting to change state voting laws and plans to immediately file a number of lawsuits seeking to change the results should the former president lose again, as Trump allies did in Michigan and several other states in 2020.

    This is looking grim. We might have to actually fight on this one. Sigh…

    • The Snark Urge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      It’s the newest ARG, a Get Out / The Purge crossover where half the population pretends laws don’t exist and the other half has to try to keep their democratic institutions! Hijinks will ensue in this surreal tragicomedy Asshole Reality Game, brought to you by Koch Brothers ©!

    • hglman@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      15 days ago

      By Jan 2025 the only outcomes are Trump has won without conflict or the election is a contested mess and congress is deadlocked on certification and they will have moved to the vote by state in the house. In which case trump will be elected.

  • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    86
    ·
    16 days ago

    I wonder if they’re actually dumb enough to try the false electors scheme twice in a row?

    They got caught are being convicted right now for doing it in 2020, and everybody is expecting it now.

    • eestileib@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      58
      ·
      16 days ago

      The trials are being sandbagged by republican judges, nobody is actually getting punished for trying to steal the election. They’re gonna do it again.

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        16 days ago

        That’s happening more with The classified documents case, not with the fake electors.

        Good news, The fake elector charges and trials are actually going through without a hitch, have a lot of defendants informing on co-defendants. Several defendants have already pled guilty, participants are being arrested, more charges are coming, there’s actually a lot going on with this case.

        • eestileib@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          16 days ago

          What about the one in DC run by Judge Chutkan that’s on indefinite hold thanks to the Supreme Court?

          What about the one in Georgia that is on indefinite hold thanks to the Georgia Supreme Court?

          Those seem pretty hitched to me.

          • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            16 days ago

            As far as I’m aware, the supreme Court we’re not indefinite.

            The supreme Court is a piece of s*** don’t get me wrong, but I’m pretty sure that trial is still going on.

            And Trump’s lawyer admitted that “private acts of a sitting president are not entitled to immunity”.

            Yeah, so that’s going well.

            Georgia, that one is currently on hold, but it doesn’t negate all of the other ongoing cases against him and none of the charges are going away.

        • Censored@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          16 days ago

          But who is the defendant in the fake electors trial? This isn’t one where Trump himself is on the docket, right?

          • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            16 days ago

            It would be strange if he wasn’t eventually charged since he was definitely part of the plot.

            This is a case that goes across eight states with dozens of defendants, some have already pled guilty, many are working with the prosecutors to provide testimony against peer and higher co-defendants.

            Trump hasn’t been charged yet, but people are still getting charged for the fake electors scheme every month, and since he was on the phone with these people convincing them to forge and mail in the documents, I can’t see why he wouldn’t be charged.

            It’s being investigated right now as to how to charge Trump, since he was personally involved in this scheme.

            He’ll probably be one of the last people charged.

            Especially now that he was already convicted once and it isn’t taboo or anything to charge him with felonies.

            There are so many defendants, this was such a huge conspiracy that most of the trial still haven’t started, and several defendants haven’t been arraigned.

            But it’s going forward!

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        16 days ago

        Uh… If you don’t want your election stolen, you, uh, you gotta vote. Vote so hard they can’t steal it. Make your friends vote. Make your friends’ friends vote.

        Because if we don’t win this year, we don’t get to have any more elections. No more voting. We’re getting rid of it because your don’t vote good.

    • m13@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      64
      ·
      16 days ago

      Whatever the result they’re going to keep trying again. Why wouldn’t they when there are virtually no consequences? Fascists don’t give a damn about what election results say, they’re always going to try to gain power by any means necessary.

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 days ago

        Well that’s what I mean.

        There are so far very severe consequences. Lawyers have been disbarred, dozens of people have been charged, the trials are ongoing right now and more charges are occurring from more agencies. there are a whole lot of legal consequences which is why i am wondering if they’re going to do it again.

        They don’t care about election results, but they do care about legal consequences.

        • Censored@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          16 days ago

          They only care about the legal consequences that affect THEM. There’s always another idiot lawyer ready to get disbarred.

          • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            16 days ago

            Right, that’s the nice part about legal consequences for them. They care about those legal consequences.

    • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      No. Instead they’re gonna have state legislature throw out the results of the election. Which they can probably do, Constitutionally-speaking.

      The State legislature pick the electors. Just because they all use a popular vote to do it doesn’t mean they can’t change the law in between the voting in November and the actual election in December.

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        16 days ago

        Ha, I’ve answered that two or three times to other people here!

        I agree that changing or interpreting the law to pick stricty conservative electors is their next strategy, but I don’t think it’s going to be as simple or successful as they imagine.

        Sort of like how they didn’t realize sending in forged documents was very likely to fail.

        • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          16 days ago

          Forged documents are illegal. Changing laws regarding how electors are selected isn’t.

          Heck - way back in 2000 the Supreme Court hinted at the tactic in the majority opinion in Bush v Gore, saying that the Florida legislature probably could have just selected electors directly after the vote.

          • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            15 days ago

            Actually, a lot of the fake electors tried to use the defense that there’s no specific law against fake elector documents.

            Colorado just signed a law that says fake electors are illegal.

            Landscape’s a lot turnier then it looks

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        16 days ago

        Sure. But there are less idiotic and more effective ways to try to seize power.

        Literally forging documents and sending them in two institutions that verify documents is pretty dumb.

        Resulting in legal consequences already.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          16 days ago

          You’re still assuming those bodies operate in good faith. Democrats must win the house and senate to ensure that.

          • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            16 days ago

            Nope, I’m not assuming these bodies operate in good faith.

            I’m taking what happened before into account and the outrage and legal culpability for a large scale, lazy conspiracy, and making a prediction based on that.

    • rayyy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      16 days ago

      They are dumb enough to try a bunch of other stuff, including violence, again though.

    • Scotty_Trees@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      They will. And they’ll take it to the Supreme Court, where <checks notes> they’ll just install Trump as the winner of the election. Mark my words.

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        16 days ago

        Humbug. I take cynicism lightly.

        They didn’t get past mailing in the forged documents last time, and they have a worse chance this time.

        They’d have to do something different, like state legislatures passing laws that say they don’t have to listen to appointed electors.

        That’s already failed, but that’s the tack I think they’ll try to refine, since they’re approaching it so poorly right now and direct forgeries don’t work

        • Asafum@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          16 days ago

          I would think that failure just exposes points of improvement. They failed before, but now they know how to succeed. :(

          • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            16 days ago

            I think that’s just distant fatalism.

            It’s not like they can forge the documents better this time.

            They’ll have to try completely different, like changing State legislatures to somehow ignore election results or claim that the state can use their own electors.

            Most of the people who forged the documents or participated in the conspiracy the last time are going to be pretty busy in trial or testifying in trials.

            Dozens of people, anyone significantly involved in the fake electors scheme is facing charges or will be facing charges soon, many of them have already pled guilty.

    • Censored@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      16 days ago

      Who is being convicted? It sounds like nobody’s been convicted yet, so they’re wiling to try it again. Also who cares if some false elector goes to jail? Not Trump. Not the dirty ratfucker.

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        16 days ago

        Well, as a personal conspirator in this game, dumps is certainly liable.

        He’s been indicted in Georgia. And by the doj, so dumps will have to fight those charges of conspiracy.

        This is such a huge case investigated by so many agencies that everyone isn’t even charged yet 4 years later.

        So the convictions will take time, but at least eight people, including chesebro and other planning-level agents, have actively been working with every investigation testify to the involvement of the others.

        The trials and convictions are still ongoing, but a few trials have finished.

        I only know about the ones that have pled guilty and are informing on others. But none of this is halted or not happening, it’s just that the trials and sentencing are still going on.

    • Zahille7@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      I wouldn’t call locking them in a kneeled position while people throw rotten food at them “violent,” necessarily.

      But I’d love to see it happen anyway.

  • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 days ago

    Stone looks like the bad guy from Star Trek: Generations on a prosperity gospel infomercial trying to sell you on a scam.

  • BigMacHole@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    80
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    16 days ago

    I’m a Republican that does their own Research and even though the election hasn’t happened yet I ALREADY KNOW TRUMP LOST UNFAIRLY because of Sleepy Joe Biden being UNFAIR!