this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2024
497 points (97.9% liked)

politics

19107 readers
3270 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The main one that he couldn’t avoid at that point was the Stormy Daniels hush money case.

If Trump had exited without a fight, my guess is that most of the momentum for that would have died out. Yes it was a crime, but I think most would have just wanted to put Trump in the rear view mirror and forget about him and focus on the future for better or worse.

[–] Zeppo@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Possibly. That would be basically agreeing with his claim that it was politically motivated prosecution, though. Seems to me like he really pissed off some people in New York and they may have done it anyway.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Possibly. That would be basically agreeing with his claim that it was politically motivated prosecution, though.

I disagree with your conclusion.

As an example, Nixon committed worse crimes than Trump's New York state crimes, and Nixon was not prosecuted for his crimes. Had authorities pursued conviction of Nixon that would not have been politically motivated.

[–] Zeppo@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm not saying I agree with Trump saying that in the first place. But to say he's prosecuted because he's running and wouldn't be if he wasn't seems like the definition of politically motivated. In any event, he's being prosecuted because he's guilty.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

When someone in good faith says "This prosecution against me is politically motivated." They are communicating the idea that the charges were manufactured without any underlying crime or possibly the underlying crime is minuscule, but the charges are overblown. Neither of those is the case with Trump.

If you're just using the dictionary definitions of the words, "politically", "motivated", and "prosecuted" then yes it meets that, but then so does a whole bunch of other absurd stuff you don't mean when using the same logic. By that logic a home burglar is the victim of "politically motivate prosecution" because our legal policy is that burglary is a crime and that the burglar is being prosecuted because of it.

[–] dnick@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

That's not a good parallel, it's the politically 'motivated' part he's referring to. If someone is being prosecuted because they're running for office, and you have a legitimate argument that if they had chosen not to run for office the charges would have been dropped, it's legitimate to say it's politically motivated.

On the other hand, if your crime was literally campaign finance crimes and voter manipulation, there's a reasonable argument that 'politically motivated' isn't necessarily a bad thing here. If you did a political crime, and seem likely to continue to be politically motivated to commit more crimes, it kind of makes sense that prosecuting you with a tiny bit of political intent isn't totally unreasonable.