443
submitted 2 weeks ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/politics@lemmy.world
all 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 113 points 2 weeks ago

No shit. But is there anything that can be done about it?

[-] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 81 points 2 weeks ago

Some lawyer or lawyers need to sue her on behalf of all American voters. We have a right to know whether or not this man committed the crimes he is accused of before we are forced to choose who to vote for in November. Everyone should have standing to sue her for not doing her fucking job.

[-] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 weeks ago

So the solution of a slow process is to do more of the slow process?

I get where you’re coming from but I don’t see that fixing things in time.

[-] Daft_ish@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Most pundits skipped the grieving phase and started commenting on the consequences. It's lame but kicking and screaming goes nowhere, too.

[-] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago

You may well be right, but it's the best idea I've got.

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 58 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Tell the world how much of a tool she is, and create an environment where she experiences social pressure.

[-] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 46 points 2 weeks ago

She probably won't give a shit about social pressure. She was appointed because she is corrupt/corruptable.

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 18 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

She's has a much longer life expectancy than Trump. Break what she's doing into the circles she moves in, and that can change

[-] GiuseppeAndTheYeti@midwest.social 21 points 2 weeks ago

You think that the circles she moves in aren't aware of what she's doing? They encourage it.

[-] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago

If it’s one thing I’ve learned about corrupt people is that they are cowards. So I agree.

[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Conservatives are not able to feel shame. So, this will not work, unfortunately.

[-] Yearly1845@reddthat.com 13 points 2 weeks ago
[-] Bassman1805@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago

Get enough of a majority in congress that she can be impeached (and convicted). Not possible with a 51/50 split in the senate. It'd take damn near 67 dem senators. Maaaaaaybe they can get 1 or 2 Rs to flip but it's a long shot.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Yes. Jack Smith can appeal, but would unlikely succeed in proving partiality.

[-] fluxion@lemmy.world 61 points 2 weeks ago

This should be under /fact not /opinion

[-] eestileib@sh.itjust.works 51 points 2 weeks ago

She's going to be on the Supreme Court.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 24 points 2 weeks ago

Impeach. Of course she's a judge in shithole country so.

this post was submitted on 18 May 2024
443 points (98.9% liked)

politics

17851 readers
2662 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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!
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS