this post was submitted on 06 Apr 2026
110 points (97.4% liked)

politics

29286 readers
1923 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
top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Manjushri@piefed.social 10 points 9 hours ago

The dicey record appears to stem from several issues in court, including a jury pool that has lost trust in the Trump administration, the FBI and the Justice Department

I think that the main issue is that the jury pool has finally woken up and realized that the DoJ and police consistently lie to the public and the courts and their testimony cannot be trusted.

[–] jtrek@startrek.website 34 points 12 hours ago

Mistrust and anger with the federal government appears to have contributed to a willingness of some of the jurors to nullify, meaning they refused to side with prosecutors to send a larger message, people familiar with the jury’s deliberations told CNN.

Good. Nullify everything these assholes do.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 58 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Prior prosecution rates were high because they'd only prosecute clearly guilty people.

trump just prosecutes who he doesn't like, because the trial itself is being used as a punishment.

Doesn't matter if you're innocent with a clear alibi, they're gonna make you go thru a trial

[–] TryingToBeGood@reddthat.com 19 points 13 hours ago

Well, and D.C. went something like 95% for Harris. Jurors in D.C. are not buying any of this administration’s shit.

[–] kylie_kraft@lemmy.world 26 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Hey Donald, another woman for you to fire

[–] frustrated_phagocytosis@fedia.io 9 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

You'd need to remind him she exists. He's probably like, why'd they get rid of that judge I like on Fox News? What a stupid decision!

[–] BillyClark@piefed.social 8 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Pirro is of Middle Eastern descent, and she's a woman. Trump, on the other hand, has a history of racism and sexism. Something tells me that if he had to tell the difference between a photo of Jeanine Pirro and one of Kamala Harris, he wouldn't immediately be able to say who is who.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 4 points 12 hours ago

She's Lebanese, and her stance as comprador is despicable.

[–] frustrated_phagocytosis@fedia.io 4 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I believe he failed to recognize his own wife standing next to him yesterday

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 12 points 13 hours ago

during the trial, he had confused E.J. Carrol (a woman he raped,) for his wife. (probably also a woman he raped.)