this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2026
219 points (98.7% liked)

politics

31502 readers
2217 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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Lawmakers from both parties criticized Trump's move to lift sanctions on Russia, though Congress appears unlikely to respond quickly.

top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 48 points 5 days ago (3 children)

What counter? An EO isn’t law. Whoever says it is will get a kick in the ‘nards from a judge and they’ll be back in the shit.

It’s just pointless idiocy.

I very much think this was planned. In section 115a of the bill it gave the executive branch the ability to provide written notice and they could pause any part of the bill essentially.

So basically they got votes from Democrats to support the passing of the bill of increasing sanctions on groups by putting Russia in there, and then included a clause for Trump to pull the rug out from under the Russian portion, and added a reminder to his calendar to submit said prefilled out executive order right before it would go into effect on Russia.

(Obviously just my opinion on what happened)

[–] Malica@lemmy.zip 10 points 5 days ago

We're playing pretend with the lives of everyone on the planet. Everyone clap for the demented gibbon that thinks he's presidential.

[–] dudeface@lemmy.world 6 points 5 days ago (3 children)

I can see presidential powers being reduced or controlled more after this clown goes

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 8 points 5 days ago

The problem here is that a weaker presidency can only happen alongside a stronger Congress, because somebody needs to make laws and decide on government policy. The whole reason the presidency grew more powerful was because Congress gradually stopped doing its job. And, of course, Congress can't reassert its authority when it's as gridlocked as it has been these past few decades, so that's the fundamental problem that needs to be solved before anything can be done about the presidency.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 8 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

What will that matter, if a President can ignore the law and do whatever he wants? The President's power (when exercising his core Constitutional duties) is only limited by his imagination. The SCOTUS said so!

[–] chahn.chris@piefed.social 3 points 5 days ago

I say abolish the executive branch. Congress should be the boss, they can appoint a prime minister to run executive things but that executive needs to be on a very short leash.

The military can be commanded by the prime minister but congress should be their ultimate boss.

Right now the executive has way too many guns available to it and a very high bar for removal and that’s the core problem.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago

Presidential powers are reduced as much as Congress and the SCOTUS say so, that’s already in place.

But, y’know, Kamala didn’t support the proletariat enough. So here we are.

[–] mycodesucks@lemmy.world 13 points 5 days ago

Perhaps they can respond with some kind of legislation.

/s

[–] Avicenna@programming.dev 2 points 3 days ago

I wonder for how many of the magats, Russia was the big arch communist evil about a decade ago. They now seem to be quite ok with a president who seems to have lots of strings attached to Putin.

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 8 points 5 days ago (1 children)

In jail...

No hair piece

No dentures

No makeup

No lifts

No baggy suit with an extra long tie

No speechwriter

No adderall

No monthly hand shots

No fake doctors exams

No imaginary scales or height charts

No helicopter noise to confuse listeners

No young blonde zombies to print lies off the internet

No crypto pump and dump

No golf carts to avoid walking

No half empty rallies full of lead poisoned cheerleaders

No more

No more

No more

One day

[–] possumparty@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Thank you for your hopium, here on planet earth he will go completely unpunished and the following president will shake his hand and speak highly of him.

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Oh well... We all died on 9/11 anyway and this is just hell.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Well, the battle on Mageddon already happened, centuries ago, so we are already in the state the bible called hell, essentially, right?

[–] ChaosSpectre@lemmy.zip 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I smell a strongly worded letter from the dems incoming. Surely it will work the hundredth time

[–] olejellylegs@lemmy.zip 0 points 5 days ago

Just like this post!

[–] Tylerdurdon@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago

Did you see Mitch? His right eyebrow twitched. That means he's super mad!!!

[–] Pratai@piefed.ca 3 points 5 days ago

Congress….

You mean those gremlins in his pocket?