this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2025
291 points (99.3% liked)

politics

25340 readers
2646 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] slate@sh.itjust.works 109 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Struck down due to the 8th amendment, which reads, in its entirety:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

He was fined what he profitted from fraud that the judges agree he committed, plus interest. In what world is that excessive?

So, if you're going to steal, steal $500 million or more, because then the government can't take it back since that would be an excessive fine.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 74 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

He was fined what he profitted from fraud that the judges agree he committed, plus interest. In what world is that excessive?

Wow... i saw the headlines but didn't realize this was the case. Not even punitive fines. Literally this is the ABSOLUTE MINIMUM it could be without fraud being profitable.

[–] Auntievenim@lemmy.world 31 points 1 day ago (1 children)

In the 323-page decision, Judge Moulton said that American voters had “obviously rendered a verdict” on Trump’s political career.

“This bench today unanimously derails the effort to destroy his business,” the judge wrote.

Judge says voters gave him that money fair and square

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 21 points 1 day ago

“This bench today unanimously derails the effort to destroy his business,” the judge wrote.

The entire business was fraudulent, top to bottom, it SHOULD be dismantled. That's like a judge whining that it's unfair to put Al Capone out of business.

without fraud being profitable.

Actually... scratch that.

With this fine, it actually was profitable. Interest is always lower than what someone could actually earn on the funds if they just dropped it into some broad market ETF, or reinvested it to commit more fraud.

[–] blattrules@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It’s great that our bill of rights only applies to the rich now.

[–] PunnyName@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago
[–] PhAzE@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's ok, they just set a precident that if you steal $100 million or more, you won't have to pay it back because ots more than your worth, and is excessive. Cool, anyone up to rob a bank?

[–] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago

You need to rob the banking system, not just one bank.