1197
submitted 2 months ago by Sunshine@lemmy.ca to c/politics@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] IHeartBadCode@fedia.io 1 points 2 months ago

can absolutely withhold weapons see leahy

He can't legally, and Republicans in the House would absolutely jump at the chance to impeach Biden and have it carry over into the next session as Democrats did with Trump's second impeachment. It would literally be the train they ride till midterms.

Gosh you are really bad at this.

You clearly confuse words on paper with real world consequences

I don't think you've ever worked for the Government. You are insanely bad at this.

I've given you plenty of opportunity and you're just spewing "nothing means anything anymore!!!" Gosh, it's not like I haven't met countless numbers of you types.

Not once have you managed to identify how the judicial branch can hold a president accountable\

Enjoined. You clearly aren't reading anything, I'm not typing any more. Consider yourself blocked, you are a waste of time.

[-] jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 months ago

snicker oh no! republicans impeachment! whatever will we do. it'll take them longer to run the impeachment trial than he has time left in office! rofl. OH NO! biden will be PUNISHED with.... wait for it.... removal from office. THE HORROR.

  1. vacancies act has no punishment clauses. its toothless.
  2. you're statements about 'failures for coal regulation' were not punishments. they were rejections of changes in policy. fun fact: enforcing leahy would not be a change in policy. its codified law.
  3. presidents have been ignoring the legal law for weed for almost a decade now. why? because presidents have chosen not to enforce it.

your coal example: sigh lets talk about how they were rolled back during biden's term. Why? because biden agreed with the courts and didn't like the policies to begin with. but the courts most certainly didnt force trump to roll them back.

you really dont get how to wield executive power. 90% of it is doing what you want letting people challenge it and by the time it gets through the court you've already accomplished what you wanted. my entire point has been there is 0 negative outcome for a president to exercise flagrant violations of law. israel is a prime example of this in fact.

You're simply dense and can't see the facts through your rose tinged glasses of your belief in law and order. fucking gaza is a straight up example of this. Those who control enforcement control which laws are upheld and there is jack shit courts can do about this. trump abused the fuck out of this.

selective enforcement please read up on it. it applies here.

Enjoined. You clearly aren’t reading anything, I’m not typing any more. Consider yourself blocked, you are a waste of time.

is like your version of congressional impeachment? oh no.... whatever will I do. only reason I was responding to you was so everyone else knows what a load of nonsense your shit was.

this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2024
1197 points (97.6% liked)

politics

19254 readers
3019 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