Asklemmy

43932 readers

502 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

-16

What do you think would happen it the Democratic Party in the US made a hard pivot to policies championed by Jill Stein and Bernie Sanders? (lemmy.world)

submitted 5 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) by cheese_greater@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

27 comments fedilink hide all child comments

EDIT: I should clarify, by Jill Stein, I mean what her party's official platform and policies are, as reflected by her statements in interviews

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Achyu@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 4 days ago (1 children)

If there is proof that she is a Russian asset, why did the Democrats not oppose here and use legal measures against it?

[–] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)

probably for the same reason they took no measures against trump when they accused him of the same.

[–] Achyu@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

What is that reason?

[–] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I don't know. But democrats spent the past 8 years accusing trump of being a russian asset, then chose not to bring it up during either impeachment, nor did biden's justice department didn't charge him on that front.

In practice they seem to think that delaying a weapons shipment, or not returning documents to the presidential library were stronger cases to pursue. There's surely a reason for that.

Either the claims about russia are false, or the evidence is not actionable. I can't think of another reasonable explanation for their actions.

[–] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

It's lack of direct evidence. Trump operates like a mafia boss. No paper trail, always use euphemisms for direct action, use intermediaries for voice communication. That's why everyone around him got caught and prosecuted, but he didn't. The entire case would be hearsay interpretations. Federal guidelines wouldn't let a prosecutor take that to trial. Usually in that case they go for intimidation to get a confession, which doesn't work on a megalomaniac narcissist.