this post was submitted on 25 Jan 2026
112 points (97.5% liked)

politics

27380 readers
4493 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

"Democrats are putting Illegal Alien Criminals over Taxpaying, Law-Abiding Citizens, and they have created dangerous circumstances for EVERYONE involved," he wrote. "Tragically, two American Citizens have lost their lives as a result of this Democrat ensued chaos."

top 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 hour ago

Very 'look what you made me do' abuser talk of you Pedonald. Did the Democrats make you stick your penis in children too?

[–] superkong47@lemmy.zip 7 points 2 hours ago

Blah, blah, something something Democrats yawn - shut the fuck up diddler, your time is coming

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

More DARVO bullshit.

I wish I'd see the media ask these people questions like, "why do you and your administration use DARVO-style framing for everything?"

I want that and gaslighting to become common currency in public discussions. The term "gaslighting" has started to creep in a bit, just barely.

But make DARVO something everyone knows about

[–] SwingingTheLamp@piefed.zip 8 points 3 hours ago

"Democrats Shit My Pants," says [REDACTED].

There's that old joke about replacing somebody with a short perl script. This loser is so predictable, we could use VisualBasic, instead.

[–] KingGordon@lemmy.world 50 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

That’s rapist talk.

“Shouldn’t have resisted!”

[–] twistypencil@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

Take the wind out of that airbag, stop reporting on what he says, stop clocking on links that report on what he says

[–] Reality_Suit@lemmy.world 22 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Donald J. Trump is a pedophile. Why should I believe what a pedophile is saying?

[–] Greyghoster@aussie.zone 8 points 3 hours ago

He is also the boss and the boss is responsible for the crimes done.

[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 13 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

Minnesota needs to grow a pair.

Say that any incident involving violence and ICE will result in a mandatory 24 hour detainment of involved officers for a basic initial investigation by the state. 24 hours is enough to get videos of the event and a general idea of what happened to either hold someone longer or determine whether it was at least minimally justified.

Police can already detain anyone for 24 hours essentially without cause. Fucking use it.

[–] fizzle@quokk.au 6 points 4 hours ago

Its just a question of accountability.

If they need to wear masks, that's a pretty good indicator they intend to engage in unacceptable and / or unlawful behaviour.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

Literally can't detain federal officers even if the law worked as written.

[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 9 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

You can't just execute people because you want to either. Yet here we are.

Fuck ICE.

Let the courts decide while the murderer waits in jail.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Sure. But states have no legal authority to hold a federal officer, if they did whatever case they were trying for would be exponentially more difficult because they ignored the legal process.

I'm not saying in agree, I'm not arguing it's right, what I am saying is even if the legal system worked as ideally as possible under current law it would be illegal and unwise to hold a federal officer.

[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 3 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Being a federal officer doesn't mean your exempt from state laws. Murder is still a state crime.

So don't detain them, arrest them for it. Have them argue they should maintain their immunity with that video evidence in front of a judge.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 0 points 3 hours ago

No they can't, it was in the line of duty. Off duty maybe but federal officers have supremacy in most matters and they have to be tried federally.

Yes that would have to be done after a warrant and after a waiver of immunity to allow state prosecution.

[–] orclev@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

You absolutely can. Nowhere does it say federal officials are immune to state laws. They normally don't because of mutual respect, but if a federal officer breaks a state law they 100% can be arrested by state officers just like a state officer can be arrested by a federal officer if they break a federal law. Nobody, not even the NSA, is immune from getting arrested, there just might be some interdepartmental jockeying to get them released. If the state cops want to play hard ball though they could absolutely toss the ICE gestapo in jail and let them rot until a judge can be bothered to set bail.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Yes there is it's called the supremacy clause.

Murder is also a federal crime and where federal and state conflict federal wins. All they have to do is say they're investigating it as a federal crime and poof no state charge can survive as a matter of law.

It's why the goode murder is being handled at a federal level not state. The state can investigate on their own as a failsafe but they cannot intercede or interfere.

[–] orclev@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

The supremacy clause just means federal charges supercede state charges, not that federal officers are immune to state charges. If the federal courts want to bring federal murder charges against the ICE agents they could supercede the state ones, but that doesn't stop the state officers from arresting the federal ones either until federal charges are brought or for other state crimes. Police have a long history of throwing everything they can possibly think of at someone knowing most of it won't stick, if they wanted to I'm sure they could come up with a couple dozen state charges with no equivalent federal ones they could use to keep ICE behind state bars pending a federal court date.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

No one said immune. It's a change that can be charged federally, of the state tried they'd take it federal and the state couldn't charge it as a state charge at that point. So no detention, no arrest and moreover no arrest warrant which you would need for an on duty officer.

If they held a rectal officer on duty all they'd be doing is catching federal obstruction charges and the state leo would get arrested instead.

There's no magical state bullet for beating the feds, it just doesn't work that way.

[–] gointhefridge@lemmy.zip 11 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I meaaaaaan…. He’s technically not wrong. Just not in the way he meant. Democrats have done really nothing to stop him, so they are definitely partially to blame.

That said, yeah no they didn’t order “any means necessary” to fulfill his mission to ethnically cleanse the US.

[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

They’re busy pouting because they lost control of all three branches of government.

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 5 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Are they even pouting though? Chuck Schumer and the other usual suspects dont seem to give a shit. They still get their paycheques.

[–] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Excuse me? He has written several letters. Several!

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 0 points 3 hours ago

Yeah exactly.

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 1 points 3 hours ago

Are they even pouting though? Chuck Schumer and the other usual suspects dont seem to give a shit. They still get their paycheques.

[–] breezeblock@lemmy.ca 6 points 4 hours ago

The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. George Orwell, 1984

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 12 points 6 hours ago

Senile dotard says what?

[–] Bonesince1997@lemmy.world 6 points 6 hours ago

Remove the feds, remove your problem.