443
Trump admin may have already broken the law in Comey indictment: national security expert
(www.rawstory.com)
this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2025
443 points (99.6% liked)
politics
25872 readers
3360 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
LOL. How exactly do you expect a politician to address "the billionaire problem"?
Well, in a perfect world, where the POTUS is immune from prosecution when executing official acts, they could seize their assets. Would it ever happen? The only way I could envision is if the vast majority of the population supports (or is indifferent to) such an action. But hey, we currently have a $200b secret police force roaming the land, so maybe there's a chance!
But seriously, an extreme wealth tax would be a step in the right direction.
What's Mario's brother's name? Politicians have more access than us regular folks.
I'm a dingus replying to the wrong comment! Look at me go! Now I've come back to edit it to this!
[Edited]
I'm literally advocating for the assassination of billionaires. I don't understand your comment at all.
Oh sorry, I meant to reply to the comment you were replying to. My bad.
You're doing a "the perfect is the enemy of the good".
Wealth tax, banning people from owning more than two investment properties. Have laws that put a ratio on the highest paid in companies to the lowest paid.
"It's too difficult and politicians are too complicit already, so don't complain" just isn't a good contribution. You either support that billionaires are a problem or you don't.
Nah. I'm just doing a "not completely naive".
It's possible to simultaneously acknowledge that wealth inequality is a problem and that it's not going to be addressed.
In the American context:
https://www.reddit.com/r/law/comments/1nrcrez/video_the_legal_strategy_that_renders_citizens/
That's an inaccurate perception of what you did, you didn't acknowledge the problem and now you're pushing your assumption that "nothing can or will be done".
ALL you're doing is dampening the possibility and providing the billionaire class cultural comfort by providing apathy for the masses.
It's not about truth, it's about possibility. Had a cultural comfort girl like yourself been in Luigi Mangione's position you would have laid down and died unnoticed.
You're the problem. People who claim to be "just seeking the truth" but are actually giving false assumptions as if they're certainties are the problem.
Give possibility, give hope. In this, the cultural space you're giving "billionaire boot licker", and I think that might be your own choice and what you actually want.
You're a stability and truth is better than equality, hope and cultural change kind of person.
You even started with "LOL" like a smug rich movie villain. Then to pretend you agreed it was a problem and gave truth? No you gave your own emotionally informed cultural defeatism.
You comfort billionaires and tell them to keep pissing, that's your choice. Your cope. Your pushing of apathy.
LOL. Cry more, maybe the billionaires will stop existing.
LOL, they're not gonna give you money just because you're willing to blow them.
ROFLMAO ... but I sucked so much dweeb to get where I am.
You only wanna be the best that you can...