• SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Why aren’t these guys in jail? Seriously. I mean, I know the theory of the rule of law and all, but even our widely-acclaimed greatest president suspended habeas corpus when insurgent seditionists tried to overthrow the Union.

      • CraigeryTheKid@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        it’s still unfathomable that trump was “allowed” (I know it was “legal”, don’t point that out) to pardon his literal partners-in-crime. He basically has already self-pardoned himself by proxy by allowing these traitors to walk free.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Ford pardoned Nixon.

          Bush Jr pardoned Scooter Libby.

          Governor Abbott pardoned a pedophile for shooting a black girl’s white boyfriend

          Why is this even remotely surprising?

      • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’m not sure if I’m joking. In any case, the writ of habeas corpus is the legal tool that a court can theoretically use to compel the appearance of a prisoner before it. It is the legal doctrine that underlies the right to trial, and I say “theoretically” because courts rarely need to issue one; it’s just standard procedure to bring people to court to face charges.

        By suspending it, Abraham Lincoln could detain those people he deemed dangerous seditionists indefinitely, because the detainees would have to go to court to challenge their detention, and there was no way to get to court. The effect of suspending it again is that it wouldn’t matter that Baboon (autocorrect and I’m leaving it) and Stone were pardoned, or that there were even criminal charges.

        Lincoln did it, George W. Bush did it. Barack Obama did it. The Constitution contains a clause which allows it to be suspended due to rebellion or threats to public safety. It’s a dangerous thing to allow a president to do, but the MAGA danger might be greater.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Worth noting that, historically speaking, if a state official wanted to punish someone without going through the court system he could always just turn the prisoner over to a lynch mob.

          So while suspending habeaus corpus is a danger to democracy, it is not a singular method by which mayors, governors, or Presidents have disposed of political opponents.

    • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Throughout human history, laws have never stopped conservatism. Jails have never stopped conservatism. Pacifism has never stopped conservatism. Only force has ever stopped conservatism. Only force.

        • barsquid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          People get called that when they’re pretending to be far left while urging everyone to take the exact actions the Repubs want them to take.

            • pyre@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              that would be people who are essentially voting for trump, so yeah, why not.

            • barsquid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              It’s code for “antifascist” “leftists” who are urging people to do the exact same things that the Republican party wants them to do.

                • barsquid@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  If you’re upset about being called a tankie, you could cross-reference what you are urging people to do with what the Republican party wants people to do. And then stop that.

                  In general I would recommend being antifascist in a way that isn’t the exact same actions as overt fascism with the only difference being the rhetoric justifying the actions.

            • Censored@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Tankie is the pro-authoritarian left. The Stalinists essentially. The ones who think it’s appropriate to send in the tanks to quell a socialist or communist uprising because it has a tint of democracy in it, which may cause their strong leader to lose dictatorial power.

        • Pips@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Tankies are literal authoritarians. People say they’re “authoritarian communists,” which ignores they’re mostly Maoists or Stalinists, both of whom were closer to fascism than the left. It sort of ignores the basic premise of communism or even socialism to have a single authoritarian ruler. Kind of like how the Nazis called themselves socialists. I guess they were a workers’ party to start, but I don’t think you can reasonably conflate their ideology with the tenets of socialism.

  • D1G17AL@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I don’t know if anyone else has pointed this out, in this photo especially, Roger Stone looks like a caricature of Mr. Burns from The Simpsons.

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Roger Stone looks like a caricature of Mr. Burns from The Simpsons.

      Who is himself a caricature of an old and evil rich man. If the shoe fits…

      Btw, remember when he showed up to the inauguration looking like a literal Batman villain?

  • slickgoat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    The Republicans get away with so much despicable action and each time the Dems get pants by the audacity of the attempt. That’s how we are here now.

    The conservatives will try absolutely anything, up to and including armed insurrection. Now with AR15s, and probably with bumpstocks fitted.

    Don’t think that it could never happen. The MAGA element love being underestimated.

    • Facebones@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Democrats like to bitch about Republicans but their platforms are 95% the same. The real enemy is leftists, and they’ll take Trump for 4 terms before they ever give an inch to the left.

      • samus12345@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        their platforms are 95% the same.

        Economically, yes, but socially, no. That social part matters quite a bit.

        • Facebones@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Ehhhhh it matters less than dems want us to think. Social policy doesn’t matter if nobody can make endsmeat. The social policy of dems is just the other wing of our singular corporate party providing the illusion of choice.

          Christofascism or fascism with a pride flag, either way we funnel more of our wealth to the 1% and further disenfranchise everybody else.

          • irreticent@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            fascism with a pride flag

            Wait, what? I’ve never heard anyone claim that those are in in way similar before. That’s a new one for me.

          • IEatAsbestos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            I agree that both sides are just funneling money into wall street and dont care about the average person, but what do you mean by fasciam with a pride flag? The right has been actively undermining freedoms for 8+ years now. At least 8 years in plain view. What has “the left” even done to resemble any kind of fascism in your eyes?

            I used quotes there because i feel its important to keep it clear that the american left in main stage politics is much closer to a center, right leaning party on a grander scale.

            • Facebones@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Democrats are working on half the shit they claim to be protecting us from as we speak. Your first mistake is seeing Democrats as “left” even with quotes. Democrats are mid right to the Republicans far right.

              By “fascism with a pride flag” I mean they’re pushing a lot of the policies they said we have to vote D to prevent, and their blue MAGA accepts and defends it because apparently fascism is perfectly fine so long as we pay lip service to gays.

              (To be clear, I’m super ongoing with lgbtqia rights, but democrats are already wishy washy on trans rights and will go after gays soon enough so long as we keep rewarding them for sprinting further right.)

              • IEatAsbestos@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Did you read the second point i made? I quite literally said that the dems are center right. Anyways, i havent heard of dems authoring or pushing fascist legislation. I have heard of and live through the dems doing fuck all about it though, so my point of view is that i have 2 options. Fascists that push money to wall street, and do-nothings that push money to wall street. If its my only option ill take it. But fuck biden.

    • Hathaway@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      So, I work in a gun store(part time), if you think bump stocks are unethical, look up(or don’t) a binary trigger. Those, as far as I know, have never been banned, and are far more effective when it comes to trying to attempt to increase fire rate.

      To be honest, a lot of gun legislation is really ineffective. The amount of loopholes etc, are kinda insane. If we’re going to talk about gun legislation, it needs to be a helluva lot more than a part ban on “assault style” firearms, until then, it’s just pandering for votes imo.

      (Please don’t assume I am a crazy arsenal wielding person. I actually don’t own any firearms at this moment despite my part time occupation.)

      • slickgoat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I actually looked up the legalisation one time. Congress described a machine gun and gave all the definitions that were forbidden to alter it to make it automatic fire. It was pretty comprehensive, particularly given that it was written in the 80s. However this supreme court said that the magic words ‘bump stock’ wasn’t in the legalisation. Words that didn’t even exist until 2003, or thereabouts. The court ignored the legislative text completely.

        And I don’t believe that you are a gun nut at all. You seem perfectly reasonable and make a good point.

        • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          However this supreme court said that the magic words ‘bump stock’ wasn’t in the legalisation.

          A bump stock doesn’t make a gun automatic fire, therefore a prohibition on modifications to make a gun automatic fire does not include it. It’s a basic “the law says what it says, you don’t get to add things you don’t like and call them close enough” argument. It’s not about the words “bump stock”, but that the law prohibits modifications to make a gun automatic and a bump stock does not make a gun automatic, it merely makes a method for firing a semiautomatic gun faster easier to achieve.

          Bump firing is basically using the recoil from a shot to bounce your finger off the trigger and then pull the trigger again, which increases the rate of fire. It’s even less accurate than automatic fire (because of the way the gun has to literally bounce around), and not quite as fast (but pretty close). You can do it without a bump stock, but it’s easier to achieve, more accurate and more comfortable to do with one. The fact that when bump firing you only fire a single round for each function of the trigger makes it not automatic by definition.

          The binary triggers mentioned earlier in the thread are basically triggers that will fire both when the trigger is pulled and when it is released, which hypothetically doubles the firing rate of a semiautomatic weapon by not requiring you to release the trigger and pull it again to fire another round. Binary triggers basically come down to an argument of what counts as an “function of the trigger” and whether both pulling and releasing the trigger can count as separate functions of the trigger - if they can then it’s not automatic, if they cannot then it is.

          • slickgoat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            So much twaddle and dancing around definitions. You could definitely qualify for a spot on Trump’s Supreme Court.

            All they are a modification to turn a semiautomatic gun into a full automatic weapon. That’s it. All the intricate dribble into the contrary doesn’t change that. Water is wet, sky blue, and modifications allowing automatic fire are machine guns.

            • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              All they are a modification to turn a semiautomatic gun into a full automatic weapon.

              They don’t though. And I went into great detail as to what exactly they do and how it works to explain why they don’t do that.

              An automatic weapon fires more than once per operation of the trigger by definition. Any gun that fires once per operation of the trigger is not automatic by definition.

              A bump stock doesn’t change that, it makes it easier and more accurate to bump.fire, which is basically using the recoil to bounce your finger off the trigger and back onto it to pull it faster than you otherwise would.

              With practice you can bump fire with a regular stock, that doesn’t mean all semiautomatic weapons are actually automatic.

              Like the binary trigger thing - eventually that will be challenged in the courts and the argument won’t be over whether or not the words binary trigger are in the law, but whether or not lifting your finger off the trigger counts as a second operation of the trigger or as part of the previous one because that is what would determine if it fires one or two shots per operation of the trigger and thus whether or not it’s legally automatic and whether or not it is controlled as an automatic weapon.

              The law doesn’t say what you wish it said, and it isn’t exactly vague.

              • slickgoat@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                You went into a ton of detail, thank you. But it is meaningless under the original definition of the act.

                “The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.”

                A bump stock modifies the frame of the gun which converts it into a fully automatic weapon. Don’t just get stuck on the trigger part of the action. The act covers everything, you just can’t cherry pick a single clause and ignore everything else. Otherwise they just might make you into one of Trump’s Supreme Court justices.

                • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  No, it doesn’t. That’s what I’m getting at. Look at how they define a machine gun in the act. It requires that the gun fire more than once per operation of the trigger (this is also what it means for a firearm to be automatic). A bump stock facilitates operating the trigger again more quickly, but does not fire more then once per operation of the trigger.

                  You’re not looking at the definition used in the law but deciding that anything that lets you shoot faster counts.

  • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I wonder if they’re actually dumb enough to try the false electors scheme twice in a row?

    They got caught are being convicted right now for doing it in 2020, and everybody is expecting it now.

    • m13@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Whatever the result they’re going to keep trying again. Why wouldn’t they when there are virtually no consequences? Fascists don’t give a damn about what election results say, they’re always going to try to gain power by any means necessary.

    • eestileib@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      The trials are being sandbagged by republican judges, nobody is actually getting punished for trying to steal the election. They’re gonna do it again.

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        That’s happening more with The classified documents case, not with the fake electors.

        Good news, The fake elector charges and trials are actually going through without a hitch, have a lot of defendants informing on co-defendants. Several defendants have already pled guilty, participants are being arrested, more charges are coming, there’s actually a lot going on with this case.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Uh… If you don’t want your election stolen, you, uh, you gotta vote. Vote so hard they can’t steal it. Make your friends vote. Make your friends’ friends vote.

        Because if we don’t win this year, we don’t get to have any more elections. No more voting. We’re getting rid of it because your don’t vote good.

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    “That may not be necessary,” Stone continued. “There are technical, legal steps we have to take to try to have a more honest election.”

    Fixed it: “That may not be necessary,” Stone continued. “There are technical, legal steps we have to take to try to have the appearance of a more honest election.”

    Stone noted during the conversation that the Trump campaign is attempting to change state voting laws and plans to immediately file a number of lawsuits seeking to change the results should the former president lose again, as Trump allies did in Michigan and several other states in 2020.

    This is looking grim. We might have to actually fight on this one. Sigh…

    • The Snark Urge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It’s the newest ARG, a Get Out / The Purge crossover where half the population pretends laws don’t exist and the other half has to try to keep their democratic institutions! Hijinks will ensue in this surreal tragicomedy Asshole Reality Game, brought to you by Koch Brothers ©!

    • hglman@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      By Jan 2025 the only outcomes are Trump has won without conflict or the election is a contested mess and congress is deadlocked on certification and they will have moved to the vote by state in the house. In which case trump will be elected.

  • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    This shit is going on and yet there’s STILL people whining and suggesting no one vote.

    It blows my mind.

    • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Stone and a significant portion of those people are on the same side. A larger amount are useful idiots who prefer to moralize about what should be instead of doing the base amount to prevent more of the harm they profess to care about.

  • BigMacHole@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m a Republican that does their own Research and even though the election hasn’t happened yet I ALREADY KNOW TRUMP LOST UNFAIRLY because of Sleepy Joe Biden being UNFAIR!