then just fuckin' do it! She damn well knew that she was breaking the law, so hold her to account! they don't give a damn about your empty threats.
DO SOMETHING!
this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2025
610 points (99.0% liked)
politics
27074 readers
2873 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
That's not how democrats work.
First, they give a verbal warning: "we are very disappointed".
Then, comes a written warning: "we are really really disappointed now"
And then they flip and flop and don't do anything.
You missed the part where they blast/slam them.
You forgot the protest video where they listen to the Hamilton soundtrack in solidarity with all the people starving and being abducted to concentration camps.
While kneeling in African garments.
load more comments
(2 replies)
They then point out how hypocritical the known hypocrites are.
democrats "work"?
load more comments
(4 replies)
Considering the Dems don't control the House, Senate, or White House, the only power they do have currently is promising future prosecution if they take back one of the branches of government. The Republican-led congress and White House are obviously not going to do anything.
What a ridiculous system. So basically politicians in the ruling government can't be held responsible and prosecuted according to the law if they hold power in the government?
I mean, I already knew the American legal system was a fucking joke when Trump got away with all his crimes and then he pardoned a ton of other criminals. Even though he shouldn't have this kind of power, he's the President.
But now you're saying that certain other people in the government cannot be prosecuted either? WTF?!
I'm no big fan of the Democrats, but historically they are willing to get rid of their own when even accused of wrongdoing. See Senator Al Franken for the silliest example of this.
Republicans will not, in the vast majority of cases, do the same.
load more comments
(1 replies)
So basically politicians in the ruling government
Well yes and no. If you are thinking of it like a parliamentary system don't. We don't require the formation of a government through a majority party of coalition.
Each representative is elected to an existing body and they have to figure it out.
So theoretically you can have multiple combinations on which party controls the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the presidency. Honestly we don't even have to have parties you could have every seat filled by politically unaligned independents.
Currently all elected offices in the federal government are controlled by the Republicans. They will not remove their own party's president.
But theoretically in the mid terms the democratic party could become the majority in the House and the Senate. The president would of course still be the same. But they could then attempt to remove him from office through impeachment.
It's a confusing mess, but yeah that's the US system
The problem is that you have a majority on the Supreme Court that are blatantly abusing their power and ignoring the law when it advances their side's agenda, including just declaring the president to be above the law.
This would be the kind of thing that should lead to impeachment, but that requires a supermajority in the senate (because you don't want whichever party has a majority to be able to easily abuse the impeachment process) but that won't happen because every single republican with even a hint of integrity has been pushed out by Trump over the past decade. And even if there were Republicans that weren't entirely corrupt, dismantling your own Supreme Court majority would be a tough sell politically. And even if they did remove the existing justices, it would just mean that Trump would get to appoint new ones that would be much worse and with many more years ahead of them.
And with Trump filling the executive branch with the worst scumbags he can find, chosen specifically for their willingness to be loyal sycophants who won't let ethics or laws get in the way of doing his bidding, you aren't going to get any help there. Again, this is exactly why the senate has to approve appointments but they are also scumbags right now. And for the same reason, the impeachment that should be happening for basically every member of this administration are not coming.
All that being said, there is resistance coming from both the executive and judicial branches. This administration has been firing people illegally in part because it can't get them to do the illegal shit they want them to do. And those illegal actions and the related illegal firings have been taken to court and the administration has lost nearly 95% off the time. Sometimes the Supreme Court has stepped in to bail them out, but in most cases the ruling stands and the administration has eventually complied.
All of which is to say that, while there are many flaws both big and small in the American system, it isn't the system itself that is at fault here, it's the elected officials and the corrupt assholes they appointed. There is no system that will work when every branch of government is in the hands of people who ignore their ethical and legal obligations.
So it is the system's fault for allowing this. Why not make the system so that the president or the ruling party alone cannot appoint the supreme court justices.
I mean I only spent 5 minutes thinking about this, but why not make the appointments work the same way they vote for laws? I.e. both parties, not individuals, have to vote and get a majority to appoint, and only in emergency situations could anyone appoint a justice without a vote.
The same should be done for appointing the highest attorneys in the country.
How fucking stupid is it to allow the ruling party to control the justice system. It's just asking to be abused by fascists.
Law should be politically impartial.
No system will long survive players acting in bad faith. There's no system you can come up with that is immune to conservatives and capitalists fucking with it. It might take them years, but they will never stop. They are the worst people on earth. If you could thanos-snap away conservatives, the world would become a better place overnight. Every problem we're facing is either their fault, or made worse by them.
And we're never going to get rid of conservatives. There are always going to be shitty humans who believe their in-group needs to be protected and the out-group needs to be bound. Shitty, scared, little shit bags that will blame brown people or queers or whatever, anything, so they can think down familiar paths and avoid any hard introspection.
So I don't know. You don't stop building a home because the elements are always trying to tear it down. But you can't punch the wind in the fucking throat so hard they cry and vomit at the same time, so maybe it's not quite the same as a maga hat.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
I thought the deadline was yesterday. Did we give a new deadline? What makes them think this deadline would be any different?
Edit: the article is from yesterday.
This article is from yesterday, presumably before the 11:59pm deadline and before the (highly redacted) files were released.
They have not released all of the files
They haven't really released any of the files (other than pictures of Bill Clinton of course).
Yeah, sorry for not being quick on the draw. Got in from a long flight and conked out.
It should be "will face prosecution", not "could"
Anytime anyone mentions the files she just keeps asking “Pardon Me?"
She's not going deaf. She's just reminding Trump to hold up his end of the bargain
Democrats will do nothing, even if they do Pam won't face any ramifications, this is all performative.
yep. it's like watching ants fight.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Could means won’t. Stop pretending.
"Could" is the operative word here.
Pigs could grow wings and fly starting tomorrow too
Face prosection from who exactly? Pam Bondi controls indictments for tampering with evidence and Congressional contempt actions are referred to the DOJ which then go to... Pam Bondi.
The problem with playing pat a cake with fascists while they consolidate power is that by the time you want to be taken seriously they have stripped whatever power you once had.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Hence the "Pardon Me?" bit.
I guess it's just a strange thing to threaten: "watch out or you'll be in trouble with yourself"
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
“Let me be very clear, we need a full release,” Khanna said.
Hehehehehehehe
load more comments
(1 replies)
It's actually a request. She wants a pardon for... Stuff
What are they gonna do, write a strongly worded letter to her? I'm sick of all the talk.
Prosecution by whom? Point to the person who will be prosecuting any of these fucks.
Congress has the power to seek appointment of a special prosecutor.
And who exactly in congress has both the will, and the means to prosecute her?
load more comments
(3 replies)
Maybe she's just polite like that?
Yawn "could" is doing so much heavy lifting it's probably doing steroids. This isn't even news. I'll believe in consequences when we fucking see some.
Get back to me when they are saying "will"
A bunch of files just got inexplicably deleted. I wonder why 🥸
I'll believe it when it happens and even then I'll expect her to get off with no punishment
Look, the only crime that white people get prosecuted for is if they harm a richer white person.
She's safe.
Just release another random hundred pages of blacked out text with the appropriate headers. Would be the same as releasing the files, nobody would be able to tell the difference. Nothing of substance will be given to the public.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›