this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2025
290 points (100.0% liked)

politics

25872 readers
3437 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
top 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com 131 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Trump broke the law and nothing happened? A tale as old as time...

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 22 points 5 days ago

"Nothing we can do, it's the other branch of government's problem"

[–] AreaKode@lemmy.world 8 points 5 days ago

True as it can be

Barely even friends

Then somebody bends

Unexpectedly

[–] Flamekebab@piefed.social 54 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Why even bother hearing the case if you're not going to do anything about it regardless of the outcome? To waste everyone's time?

[–] DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

Well, they can probably get the one month pay they lost out on. They just can't get their jobs back.

That being said, I both agree and disagree with this ruling. I disagree that there is no irreparable harm by Trump not providing a reason. The law requires it to create transparency and accountability. However, I agree that technically, the inspectors general are not the people harmed by this. So it shouldn't have been them suing Trump, it should have been democrat congressmen and congresswomen who are owed an explanation.

[–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 0 points 5 days ago (3 children)

It's on a record he broke law. Can't do anything while he has presidential immunity. He won't have presidential immunity forever.

[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Oh sweer summer child, hes never facing consequences if he didnt in the 4 years he wasnt president after starting a coup.

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 7 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

This, they have shown they are afraid of Luigi and Tyler.

That shows us how they think they will be held accountable

[–] astronaut_sloth@mander.xyz 4 points 5 days ago

But there is something the courts can do that doesn't involve punishment: simply order the administration to re-hire the IGs with back pay and scrub the termination from the record. That's the actual legal remedy in this situation.

[–] Jaysyn@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

If Trump makes it to 2026 I'll be mildly surprised.

[–] Blackfeathr@lemmy.world 49 points 5 days ago (1 children)

"Judge finds Trump violated law" has been the headline for like a decade now.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 29 points 5 days ago

as well as the whole "does nothing about it" part.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 38 points 5 days ago (1 children)

How many fucking instances are there of this convicted felon doing X, but paying NO CONSEQUENCES whatsoever?

[–] FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca 7 points 5 days ago

He has the ultimate get out of jail free card

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 32 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Trust in the system bro, it’s got checks and balances.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 16 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Checks and balances!*

*The checks and balances have now been replaced with criminals and pedophiles. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

[–] mp3@lemmy.ca 12 points 5 days ago

More like cheques and account balances.

[–] fluxion@lemmy.world 26 points 5 days ago

What the fuck?

[–] Triumph@fedia.io 24 points 5 days ago

“Even assuming that the IGA comports with Article II, Plaintiffs’ inability to perform their duties for 30 days is not irreparable harm. Moreover, if the IGs were reinstated, the President could lawfully remove them after 30 days by providing the required notice and rationale to Congress.

The "irreparable harm" is that the president is being allowed to break the law without consequence. Reinstate them, and if he wants to fire them again, make him do it.

[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Do the courts not see how continuing to declare this man guilty but impose no consequences is begging for vigilante violence? Perhaps once the violence is directed at the courts they'll care.

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 days ago

The whole idea is the erosion of institutions. Oligarchs need the government to be ineffectual, hypocritical, and incompetent. Destroying public service and replacing with private markets is one of the few areas of extraction left.

An ineffectual, hypocritical, and incompetent government makes the unregulated company town run and the factories with slave labor seem better in comparison. They're still worse, but that'll change with enough anti-government in the government.

The land of no consequences.

[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 15 points 5 days ago
[–] Jaysyn@lemmy.world 7 points 5 days ago

Great, another coward judge.

[–] nocturne@slrpnk.net 6 points 5 days ago

Judge finds Trump violated law

Authoritarians can have a little ignoring of the laws, as a treat

[–] FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 days ago

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

I have no words left