636
Show cause why I shouldn't throw your ass in the klink. That's what happens to the rest of us if we ignore a court order.
He can’t be charged with a crime while in office or for anything he does in office. So, that’s why.
so arrest everyone in the department that did it. EVERYONE. secretary of [thing], and everyone who might have so much as seen the command moving down the chain.
that's what a law that wasn't just an excuse to punish poor people would do.
or just fucking arrest him anyway, fuck it, if laws don't mean things, laws don't mean things. that includes his special protection.
I don’t disagree with you, but I think we both know how this will play out. Get ready to hide in the attic.
yeah. fuck my life. taking bets on how long I last before they kill me. ill have betting tables up in the morning.
Hmmm… what color are you? Could be a matter of months… (hopefully not)
I think I count as 'swarthy' and white depending on the century.
but also I'm visibly queer and very loud about lefty politics.
Hmm. Do you live in a blue state? I hope so. You might be able to blend. Can you—is this the fucking 90s?—“butch up” for the gestapo long enough to slip away? I’m having flashbacks of the Midwest.
For me, I’m a man married to a man. I’m on a list. I’m somewhat nervous about that, but I’m white like milk an own a lot of polos and chinos, so I will have some warning before the shit hits me. Fingers crossed.
butch up
well I have tits, so I'm not sure that would help.
I'm more worried about a neighbor reporting me.
Oh, you’re fine. They love girl on girl. (Joke)
It’s always the fucking neighbors.
The more they let them act without any consequences for their actions shows us that the constitution means nothing nowadays. Throw him or the enablers in jail, but doing nothing means checks and balances are useless. I fear for the regular people. Power has gone to the fascists and oligarchs.
...nowadays?
And the "just following orders" folks?
I’m in the guillotine crowd, so I say “everyone,” but I’m not holding my breath there will be any.
So the second amendment is our only option?
Unless you’ve got another option….
You guys are maybe being a little hasty... Many other members of the Trump administration can get forcibly hauled into court even if Trump has "immunity."
Let me know when that happens.
And let me know when you second amendment types actually do something. 👍
You mean the people who wish death on people who are absolutely destroying humanity? Or, gun people? Because, I don’t own a gun. 🤷♂️
Both. I just think the "oh well we must immediately escalate to bloodshed" people are only serving to worsen the situation because it skips over all the other legitimate ways we have of fighting back, like protest and the courts. Ways that a bigger portion of the populace is willing to participate in (currently). And right now we need everyone who's reasonable resisting in any way they can.
I seriously hope you’re right. I’d rather not see a bunch of people die. But I haven’t seen anything at all to suggest the usual ways are gonna work, and by the time we realize that it will be too late (if it’s not already).
Give me hope, tell me something that is actually going to stop them and is likely to work.
So just to be clear, this is within the domain of “constitutional crisis” that the vast majority of Americans who graduated from high school will have certainly been taught about at some point. But precisely zero major news networks or newspapers are calling it as such.
Evidently a comically dismaying proportion of us unitedstatesians need to be told when our own fucking house is on fire. And even then, 30ish% of us will deny it as the flesh melts off their own bones.
What are you on about?
- https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/supreme-court-john-roberts-trump-constitutional-crisis-rcna196940
- https://time.com/7268948/deportation-surgeon-constitutional-crisis/
- https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-latest-deportation-venezuelans-sets-up-potential-constitutional-clash-2025-03-17/
- https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/17/politics/constitutional-crisis-courts-trump-executive-power-what-matters/index.html
- https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/10/us/politics/trump-constitutional-crisis.html
You know what.
That's sadder.
30% of us probably are okay with burning alive. It’s less work than living.
He shouldn't be letting those attorneys leave the courtroom free men. Hold them in contempt and issue bench warrants for administration officials and anyone carrying out these illegal orders.
This is the only correct response, any other response means that the federal government does not in practice have checks and balances
It also forces Trump's hand. Either publicly reveal, right now that he is an all-out dictator instead of slow-rolling it, or fold and lose any momentum he has.
If a violent revolution is needed to take him down, the sooner everyone knows about it, the better.
The same laws that make him President, are the same law in which we allow it
I believe they thought they could ignore the order because they could ignore the order.
A federal judge criticized a Trump administration Justice Department lawyer
If this is the only consequence of having done it- I’d say they didn’t think they could, they knew they could.
Note Rubio saying they aren't going to stop, when explicitly told to by a judge. That's called sedition last I knew.
And if there’s no one willing to stop them, it may as well be legal.
people would be willing if they could ever get the message out.
The US is in a constitutional crisis with situations like this, and so many people just don't seem to care or want to acknowledge that it's at that point.
I think the seeds for this were sown in the post 9/11 secret court system, in which the US govt authorized itself to break national and international law.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2025
636 points (100.0% liked)
politics
21970 readers
4312 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS