this post was submitted on 01 Jun 2024
793 points (98.7% liked)

politics

19126 readers
2335 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
[–] jonne@infosec.pub 36 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (4 children)

The hush money one is the first one to actually go to trial, so it's mostly that. The documents case is basically suppressed until they can somehow get rid of this judge, and the other 2 cases are also being held up in places.

The hush money case isn't likely to put him in prison though, I don't think there's any precedent of a politician going to prison for that. And of course there's going to be appeals that can easily push it until past November.

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 12 points 5 months ago (2 children)

There's plenty of precedent for locking people up when the steal classified documents. It doesn't matter if they're a politician.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

By 'this one', I meant the hush money case. I agree that the documents case is the most serious one (and also deliciously ironic given his 2016 criticism of Hillary's classified emails).

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I apologize for misinterpreting your comment.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 8 points 5 months ago

I edited it because it was ambiguous, no need to apologise.

[–] DontRedditMyLemmy@lemmy.world 10 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It's my understanding that there's a pretty ironclad contract between the government and a cleared individual. This is really just a matter of enforcement, and it's hard to see how this isn't one of the most brazen and extensive cases of mishandling classified material. Better people have gone to prison for a lot less, so I say again: no justice.

[–] Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I have known of people getting dishonorable discharges for simply looking at classified information they were not supposed to, careers over due to misunderstanding or picking a document up after an accident.

If someone other than Trump had all these documents they would be gone from the earth. We would never hear from them again as the FBI went through their life to figure out who else was involved and how they got away with boxes of these documents.

[–] DontRedditMyLemmy@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Literally just ready an article this morning that a Navy seaman got 18 years in prison for leaking information after being socially engineered by a foreign agent.

[–] Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I was in for ten years, and a battle buddy of mine was telling me about a soldier in his platoon who got the other than honorable discharge over classified stuff.

Here is what happened: car accident on post, stuff is all over the intersection. The guy is an E5, already deployed once, is by all means upper crust for a career. One of the people in the accident was the G2. The E5 sees there are classified documents. Calls it in, but decides to help out and scoops them all up into a neat little pile and secures them in his vehicle. He then sits in his vehicle so they are secure.

This is entirely against what he should have done as there was no risk the documents would have blown away. The only reason he didn’t get prison time was due to having an ArCom for Valor. But he is gone and his army career was over at that point for mishandling - simply mishandling - classified documents.

Trump has fucking pallets of them, and “oh gosh, what do we do? UwU it’s sooo tricky!!”

[–] DontRedditMyLemmy@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Wait, what did the E5 do wrong? Should have left it out in the intersection?

[–] Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz 1 points 5 months ago

I think the big thing was him being alone in the car with all of it.

I don’t know what to do in that situation to be honest, but it’s probably a “secure the scene and make sure no one goes in or out” type of deal.

[–] eestileib@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago

The Supreme Court may well just decide that Trump has absolute immunity, depending on what their pay masters tell them to do.