politics
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
view the rest of the comments
We were always told the framers of the Constitution were old timey genius's, but they couldn't foresee a corrupt piece of shit selling pardons? It's ridiculous and should never have been a presidential power. They fucked up.
They expected that voters/citizens and other branches of govt wouldn't stand for it.
Instead they're either in on it or too cowardly to do anything.
In all fairness, they never could have prepared for the impact the internet has on politics.
Exactly. Many were historians and Christians.
They already had the previous example of the sale of indulgences within the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages. Even American colonial revolutionaries were offered pardons by King George III to stop fighting.
Commenter below cites the fact that the expectation was that the congress would step in if popular sentiment was outraged by this sort of thing, but this state of affairs was foreseeable.
They ended up with a powerful executive even though they believed previous kings had too much power. e.g. “His Excellency” George Washington refused the title of King.
Also of note is that there were relatively few voters and they were privileged and generally well educated and informed members of the public. White men with land.
On they're trying to go back to the only white men with land thing again.