this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2024
552 points (98.8% liked)

politics

19244 readers
2226 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Bronzebeard@lemm.ee 236 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Lock the child rapist up.

Why is this even an argument? Republicans are disgusting sickos, letting this piece of shit roam around, actively protecting him.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 117 points 3 days ago (5 children)

I mean, he paid minors to cross state lines for sex...

That's a federal thing and Biden's AG could bring charges.

We have another month before Republicans are the only ones who can hold him accountable. But I'm not expecting much, even tho child trafficking should be an obvious charge and evidence already uncovered.

I just don't think Biden's admin has it in them to do anything about this. They'll ignore it and then later complain when Republicans do the same thing.

Neither party is really interested in politicians ever being held accountable, if not, Biden would have done something about trump in the last four years.

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 29 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

I just don't think Biden's admin has it in them to do anything about this. They'll ignore it and then later complain when Republicans do the same thing.

Really going to both-sides this? Merrick Garland is a heel-dragging clown, but even if Biden replaced him with the most aggressive and seasoned prosecutor on Earth today, how the absolute fucking fuck would you expect them to try this case in 28 days?

That is a federal thing, and Biden could bring federal charges; good job, cookie for you. What would he be doing by bringing these? Oh, just casually getting him indicted and either not having enough time to start the trial or, if the trial does somehow start, creating jeopardy and thereby disallowing future prosecution when Trump inevitably drops the case. Good thinking. Too bad you're not running the country with this 5D political calculus.


Edit: so actually, there's technically no risk of double jeopardy, because what the OP is describing is completely impossible anyway:

"Unless the defendant consents in writing to the contrary, the trial shall not commence less than thirty days from the date on which the defendant first appears through counsel or expressly waives counsel and elects to proceed pro se."

Thus you'll never reach a jury being impaneled or a witness being sworn, because the trial will never happen. So bravo, I guess; that risk isn't there. What you have instead is a DOA case that simply goes absolutely nowhere.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 18 points 3 days ago (9 children)

Merrick Garland is a heel-dragging clown,

And Biden appointed him after Trump tried to steal an election...

Do you think Biden is stupid and thought Merrick wouldnt be a "heel dragging clown"? Or do you think he knew and that's why he was picked?

Is Biden incompetent or intentionally maintaining the status quo where the rich and politically connected are above the law?

Like...

even if Biden replaced him with the most aggressive and seasoned prosecutor on Earth today, how the absolute fucking fuck would you expect them to try this case in 28 days?

Is this the first time you noticed Merrick was a waste of a pick? Do you think up until now he's been doing a fine job?

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today 9 points 3 days ago (7 children)

but even if Biden replaced him with the most aggressive and seasoned prosecutor on Earth today, how the absolute fucking fuck would you expect them to try this case in 28 days?

We've known about Gaetz' child sex trafficking ring for about 18 months now.

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 10 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Lol the people arguing about "evidence" and "investigations" are completely missing the real point, IMO.

If you or I were up on these charges, investigation, trial, and sentencing would be carried out in less than a month without hesitation or issue as far as the government is concerned.

The ONLY reason it's taking longer than that is because of who it is.

Full stop.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] a9cx34udP4ZZ0@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

We’ve known about Gaetz’ child sex trafficking ring for about 18 months now.

Initial reports, and rock-solid evidence to bring to court to try an elected sitting congressman are two VERY different things. 18 months is rarely enough time to do discovery and complete a trial for a murder with multiple eye-witnesses.

Hell, the Parkland Shooting, where he admitted to doing it and pleaded guilty took over 3 YEARS to come to conclusion. Gaetz would have been fighting tooth and nail to ride it out to the next administration who would promptly try to drop the case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkland_high_school_shooting

The Parkland high school shooting was a mass shooting that occurred on February 14, 2018 On October 20, 2021, Cruz pleaded guilty to all charges and apologized for his crimes. The prosecution sought the death penalty, and a four-month death penalty trial was expected to commence in January 2022.

[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Initial reports, and rock-solid evidence to bring to court to try an elected sitting congressman are two VERY different things. 18 months is rarely enough time to do discovery and complete a trial for a murder with multiple eye-witnesses.

We literally saw the venmo transaction lol

I've seen people charged, tried, and prosecuted for soliciting sex in a weekend.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

This was all well known years ago. Waiting on a congressional report was always a cop out.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 20 points 3 days ago

They could have charged him any time in the last several years. Don't hold your breath.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

he paid minors to cross state lines for sex

The report specifically says he did not. One minor and he didn't move her across state lines. However, 17 is statutory rape in Florida.

[–] DrunkEngineer@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

Paying a minor for sex alone is a violation of the Federal sex trafficking statute, no transportation across state lines required.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] snekerpimp@lemmy.world 90 points 3 days ago (8 children)

And nothing will happen, and he will spend the next ten years being the “special guest speaker” at colleges all over the country making hundreds of thousands per speech. And the pieces of shit win again.

[–] gsfraley@lemmy.world 30 points 3 days ago

Unfortunately you're probably right. Anything even remotely connected to politics has gotten so cult-like that "nuh uh" has become a valid defense for most.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 54 points 3 days ago (1 children)

So turns out the child-fucker is indeed a child-fucker. I could give a shit about the drug use, other than the typical qon hypocrisy there.

People with those "Pedophiles for Trump" signs need to update it to "Pedophiles for Republicans" to be more accurate and more inclusive.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 17 points 3 days ago (1 children)

You were fine until you used the word inclusive. Now you're woke.

[–] psud@aussie.zone 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

They were fine until they said "I could give a fuck" when they meant "I couldn't give a fuck"

Oh, yep, you're right.

[–] mdurell@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

Does anyone else remember a timeline where this would ruin a politician for life?

[–] collapse_already@lemmy.ml 67 points 3 days ago

The Luigi solution to lack of accountability seems to be all that remains.

[–] whotookkarl@lemmy.world 28 points 3 days ago

Everyday he's not in cuffs is another day Congress condones statutory rape

[–] dugmeup@lemmy.world 64 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Rape is against the law?!?!

Sorry officer I didn't know I couldn't do that

[–] zephorah@lemm.ee 24 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (4 children)

Not for these guys.

Remember, there’s lots of images with Trump and Epstein over time. There’s reports of Trump walking into the dressing room during Miss Teen USA. And Trump is convicted of sexual assault.

The press did bring up the Miss Teen USA thing but back in 2016. They’ve largely ignored both that piece and the Epstein & Trump connection. Though that kid from his base tried to shoot him because of the Epstein thing. Again, largely ignored by the press.

Here’s my conspiracy theory. Gaetz didn’t play ball with someone over in DC so he’s been thrown to wolves by simply revealing the truth about him.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The last time he was threatened with release, he resigned. The threat was to leave the government or the report is released. When he planned to become AG, the report release was on the table. Then he dropped his Attorney General position so they weren't going to be released. Then he said he was going to take the vacated Senate seat so it was released.

[–] zephorah@lemm.ee 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Still raises the question of why him? Being a smarmy asshole isn’t the reason, there’s lots of that going around in DC.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Nougat@fedia.io 4 points 3 days ago

Not convicted. He was found to have committed sexual assault as a finding of fact in a civil defamation case.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] tired_n_bored@lemmy.world 21 points 3 days ago

🤯🤯🤯 raping a minor is against the law now? And what will be punished after? Murder? That's very inconsiderate.

[–] JovialMicrobial@lemm.ee 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I genuinely wish someone could get funding to conduct a large scale study with a statistically relevant sample size of individuals examining why there are so many pedophiles, rapists, and generally sexually violent individuals affiliated with the republican party and conservatism. Then have multiple unaffiliated research groups replicate it and aggregate the results.

Like wtf is going on there? It's clearly a huge social problem and I genuinely want to know, I'm sure others do too.

Also Matt Gaetz is soulless husk being kept moist and alive by his own shit. Please go back to the abandoned septic tank you came from.

[–] TomMasz@lemmy.world 40 points 3 days ago (1 children)

He's threatened to expose more creeps in the GOP if the report was released, so I guess we'll see if he follows through.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 17 points 3 days ago (1 children)

He’s threatened to expose more creeps in the GOP if the report was released, so I guess we’ll see if he follows through.

Let's not pretend it will matter if he does.

Doubt he will. Cawthorne did and he got primaried.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 39 points 3 days ago

"The Committee determined there is substantial evidence that Representative Gaetz violated House Rules and other standards of conduct prohibiting prostitution, statutory rape, illicit drug use, impermissible gifts, special favors or privileges, and obstruction of Congress," the 37-page report concludes.

Also US and state laws...

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 22 points 3 days ago

"Victim A said that she did not inform Representative Gaetz that she was under 18 at the time, nor did he ask her age."

Ignorance ( *cough* willful) of the law isn't a valid defence especially a legal adult vs a minor. Even if she had been legal, the vast difference in ages is gross.

[–] xc2215x@lemmy.world 18 points 3 days ago

Time for him to go to jail then.

[–] bender223@lemmy.today 7 points 3 days ago

Oh wut? No way!

/s

[–] Th3D3k0y@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago

Color me surprised, illegal things break laws? What is this county coming to?!? What is next, greed causes suffering?

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

He's perfect for the turnips "clean swamp"

load more comments
view more: next ›