861

Trump judge releases 1,889 pages of election interference evidence against the former president (www.businessinsider.com)

submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml to c/politics@lemmy.world

89 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I assume the story itself will be updated as they go through those thousands of pages

See the documents below

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67656604/united-states-v-trump/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 221 points 1 month ago

The courts have at least 1,889 pages of evidence of election interference, and yet they will still leave him on the ballots for the highest office in the country.

This right here is the very definition of lip service when it comes to justice. It’s time for America to nut up or shut up. Either way, I’m damned tired of this bullshit.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 96 points 1 month ago

As much as I hate it, it would be much worse if you could just accuse someone of a crime to keep them off the ballot. Someone like Trump would abuse it to accuse his opponents of crimes to have them removed. It needs to go through the court first. The issue is that's taken far too long, and the time it takes has been increased by certain people with a bias.

[-] m0darn@lemmy.ca 47 points 1 month ago

I agree that the problem is not with him being on the ballot, the problem is that it seems an enormous portion of the population of the USA are willing to vote for him.

[-] pingveno@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

Yup, can't get rid of someone like Trump if enough of the population is either willing or eager to go along with him.

[-] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 25 points 1 month ago

The issue is that's taken far too long, and the time it takes has been increased by certain people with a bias.

That was the basis of my second paragraph. This should’ve been priority #1 from the get go. And the fact that people with obvious bias has been able to derail the process is another problem that needs to be dealt with as well.

[-] Makhno@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago

And the fact that people with obvious bias has been able to derail the process is another problem that needs to be dealt with as well.

Heads need to roll for any real change ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[-] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

I don’t disagree.

[-] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 14 points 4 weeks ago

We need to criminalize government employees intentionally delaying or entirely ignoring doing their jobs

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] stoly@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago

Due process exists for both the innocent and the worst out there. You want that to be there to protect you and everyone else.

[-] BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world 14 points 1 month ago

The Toupee is already a convicted felon. Due process would not permit him to leave the state where he was convicted, let alone run for office.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (4 replies)

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 135 points 1 month ago

Real question here is will this be enough to move the news cycle.

I don't think his voters care.

[-] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 116 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

cant reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into

thanks for the correction

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 29 points 1 month ago

I think you mean "can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into".

But yes.

[-] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago

yes thank you

[-] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 39 points 1 month ago

I think there's a chance swaying a little more people than we might think - even if it's a small percentage overall that can be swayed

Look for instances at the audience reactions to his lies about January 6th at his Univision Townhall. They show visable disgust

https://xcancel.com/MeidasTouch/status/1846746612980199817

Even if it's not enough to make them vote the opposite way, it might be enough to make them not show up to vote against harris. Turnout changes in single digit percentages matters a lot

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] _bcron_@lemmy.world 20 points 1 month ago

They redacted like 95% of the stuff so doubftul. Most of the pages are just blank

[-] WrenFeathers@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago

I’d imagine there’s still quite a lot of undecided voters out there. This might move them.

[-] jonne@infosec.pub 24 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Who's the type of person that's still undecided but would be swayed by some new relevation on Trump? At this stage you either don't know anything because you don't follow the news, you already know he's a criminal and a piece of shit, or you just think the media is making stuff up because "they're out to get him".

There's no piece of news that could possibly change things at this stage, besides him dying or something.

[-] WrenFeathers@lemmy.world 24 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I’d like to agree with this. But the fact is- we live in a reality in which not only a 34x convicted criminal/rapist is allowed to run for president, but has an actual chance to win.

If this can happen, then so too can there be undecided voters.

[-] can@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 month ago

You make a frighteningly good point.

[-] wildncrazyguy138@fedia.io 17 points 1 month ago

This may not sway them to vote Kamala, but it absolutely may sway them to abstain from voting.

I mean, think about all of those Michiganders who are staying out this year due to Gaza.

Negative press absolutely can sway voters, even this late in the game.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 month ago

Keep in mind it also gives people canvasing to lower-information voters something to mention

As an example, I was talking to someone undecided a bit ago who didn't follow news super closely and said education was their top issue. They looked completely taken a back when I mentioned how Trump has said he wants shut down the department of education (both from him directly and it's Project 2025)

load more comments (8 replies)

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] satanmat@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

Correct, when “facts” come from TD they matter; otherwise your”facts” are safe to ignore

[-] barsquid@lemmy.world 80 points 1 month ago

Can someone make a supercut of all the far-right dumbasses saying we cannot have a president who is under investigation? Might have to go back to 2016 to get clips, I don't think they say that any longer.

[-] AndrewZabar@lemmy.world 26 points 1 month ago

Hell, go back to the nineties when they were ready to hang Bill Clinton for having sex.

[-] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 11 points 4 weeks ago

Bill Clinton was not impeached for having sex. He was impeached for committing perjury while testifying as the defendant in a sexual harassment inquiry. The blowjob is just the thing he was lying about when he perjured himself. If he'd been convicted maybe it would be easier to hold presidents accountable today.

[-] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 8 points 4 weeks ago

Further, Bill Clinton was the President while Monica Lewinsky was an intern. There was a major power imbalance between then two.

[-] unemployedclaquer@sopuli.xyz 56 points 1 month ago

also include a heavily redacted transcript from a January 6 Committee interview of Rusty Bowers, in which the then-Arizona House Speaker described hanging up on Trump after turning down his request to ignore the state's Biden electors and install electors for Trump instead.

"That's exactly what I did," Bowers told committee member Adam Schiff during the June 19, 2022 interview. "I disconnected us. I hung up on him."

Bucket list item: hang up the phone on Trump. But not angrily. I just want him to hear that dial tone... oh that doesn't exist anymore

[-] SupraMario@lemmy.world 30 points 1 month ago

How is this not treason?

[-] thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works 39 points 1 month ago

Being handed the opportunity to appoint three Supreme Court judges prior to committing the act, takes it from treason to ‘sparkling presidential acts’..

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

Nope. That ruling doesn't apply here because he was acting as a candidate for the Presidency at the time.

A President cannot act on behalf of their campaign in an official capacity.

load more comments (4 replies)

[-] billwashere@lemmy.world 9 points 4 weeks ago

It is. Shh don’t tell anybody.

load more comments (8 replies)

[-] runiq@feddit.org 49 points 1 month ago

Thanks for providing a direct link to the documents, OP. Much appreciated :)

[-] joel1974@lemmy.world 46 points 1 month ago

His followers will only support him more. They like that he is above the law.

[-] auzy@lemmy.world 10 points 4 weeks ago

You're not wrong.

A lot of them seem to be super dodgy too legally

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 40 points 1 month ago

That Judge's niece is friends with someone who Donated to Biden so OBVIOUSLY we need to INVESTIGATE the JUDGE for Corruption!

-Republicans who LOVE Eileen Cannon and the Supreme Court!

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 33 points 1 month ago

"Trump judge" makes it sound like Aileen Cannon.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 30 points 1 month ago

This is all part of the democratic agenda to influence elections with fact instead of the feelings the founders intended elections to be about.

[-] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago

Just lock him up. The man has been on pounds of cocaine. If he had a tiny bit of weed, he would have been in prison already.

[-] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago

One-thousand eight hundred eighty nine pages. One-thousand eight hundred eighty nine (I'm not going to parody the rest of the song this is a lot)

[-] tektite@slrpnk.net 9 points 1 month ago

...how do you measure a year in Trump's life?

In golf games? In rubles? In lawsuits? In twitter postings?

In rallies, incitement.. in terror, in strife?

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments

this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2024

861 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19104 readers

2192 users here now

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

• 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