229
So now we're already in the show-trials phase?
Guess they shouldn't have fucked around so much and fucking locked him up. Welp good luck.
They could have had him in prison awaiting trial (or at least house arrest,) from the first day they knew he had taken documents.
It was a rock solid case that was slow walked at virtually every step; either because they were afraid of missing or afraid of retaliation by Trump or because they were in bed with Trump (FBI… I’m looking at you.)
They were hoping he’d just go away with anyone making him. And that’s just not who Trump is.
They had him on the fucking phone asking for votes, like what the fuck? That should be enough right there.
"You come at the king, you best not miss." - Omar Little
Taking too long to fire is a dumb way to miss.
To anyone still trying to live a normal life here, this is just yet another sign we are no longer a democracy. Get involved in protesting if you have not yet.
Was he in the Epstein files? Better release them to be sure
I'm getting weary of this comment appearing in every thread.
You're right - everything is a distraction from the Epstein files.
However, every new thing is another dystopian shit storm.
In this particular case they're prosecuting someone who dared to prosecute the supreme leader.
Gotta get that revenge for him doing his job honestly
Is it because of the Epstein files that his close confidante told him he is in?
There is no integrity in America.
Yes, there is. Republicans are straight up evil though.
Hey! I saw this movie! El Presidente is even rapey on younger blondes
I heard Felon Drink Bleach is in the Epstein files.
Deserved. Let him get whatever is coming to him. The world was depending on Jack Smith and he played business as usual until he rolled over and let himself be silenced. Coward.
Smith, Schiff, Comey, Yates, Vindman, Mueller- make examples of all of them. People will need reminders of what happens when you slow-walk the resistance and play by the rules in the face of fascism.
Jack Smith did nothing wrong, it was Merrick I'm-actually-a-republican Garland's fault.
Jack Smith did nothing at all.
Except maybe immediately surrender
He didn't even get appointed as special counsel until 2 years later (November 18, 2022), Garland wasted two fucking years.
And then the case was overseen by a far-right judge, who just intentionally created more obstacles. Just so you know, criminal trials usually take years, so with an Attorney General that "wanted to look impartial" (aka: helping republicans), and a kangaroo court playing activist judges, and the supreme court also in kahoots, the courts are essentially bouncing the case back and forth like they're playing ping-pong; I doubt Jack Smith could've done any better given the what cards were dealt to him.
If laws mattered in the US those might be semi-valid points.
What’s Jack Smith doing NOW?
Jack Smith doesn't have any legal powers anymore because trump took office. He's just an ordinary citizen now.
So?
Imagine thinking any US laws were going to save you from what’s happening.
Talking about “legal powers” in 2025. Jesus, you’re all so fucked. Do you have any idea how many laws are going to have to be broken in order to end MAGA?
Probably not- because you continue to legitimize them as a political movement and are complicit in allowing them to persist.
Confidently wrong is still being wrong, but everyone kinda wonders if you'll except it. It's not fun for anyone.
Wait... Why Vindman?
What is he doing right now? He has every opportunity (and at one time had the credibility) to be the leader of an actual resistance and is spending his time… making “measured and diplomatic” public statements without any sense of urgency at all.
Why didn't Jack Smith get a pardon?
Lemmy guess: Biden was so busy pardoning his family, he forgor 💀
Don't forget the cash for kids judge!
this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2025
229 points (100.0% liked)
politics
25059 readers
1832 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