this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2024
359 points (96.1% liked)

politics

19223 readers
3304 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
 

Summary

Sen. Mitch McConnell warned that Donald Trump’s presidency places Americans in a “very, very dangerous world,” likening Trump’s isolationist policies to pre-World War II “America First” rhetoric.

McConnell, a staunch interventionist, criticized the GOP’s growing resistance to U.S. global engagement, particularly Trump’s stance on reducing aid to Ukraine.

While he voted for Trump in November, McConnell expressed concerns over Trump’s influence and the party’s direction.

Recently stepping down as Senate GOP leader, McConnell plans to focus his final term on countering isolationism within his party.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dhork@lemmy.world 32 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

I think McConnell vastly underestimated to what extent those judges were going to be supporting Trump over the country. I distinctly recall that when McConnell voted against the second impeachment, he said something to the effect that it was up to the Courts to apply any punishment. Well, guess what? The Courts have said that it was up to Congress all along*! I thinking in the fleeting moments of clarity in between episodes, he really wants that vote back.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 45 points 6 days ago

I thinking in the fleeting moments of clarity in between episodes, he really wants that vote back.

No he doesn't. It was classic McConnell hypocrisy. He will say one thing and do the opposite when it's for his team.

He'll vote for Trump's plans in Congress while pretending to be the reasonable politician to manipulate opinion.

[–] DrFistington@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago

I mean, based on those supreme court ruling, Biden would be able to just 'remove' the conservative justices and have trump and his co-conspirators tried for treason by the military as an official act due to national security concerns. The judges would have to take their case to the supreme court that they would no longer be sitting on. The most reasonable ruling would be that due to the previous precident that was just set, Biden would have immunity for that official act, and so he violated no law/precident at the time, but that moving forward presidents would not be immune from prosecution. The judges are still out of the SC, and Trump wouldn't be president. Declare martial law until a new election can be held and pack the court with recess appointments before the next election.

Given that Trump is a massive national security concern, and has previously requested that our advisaries interfere with our elections, as well as personally interfering with our elections, oh and he also paid for the travel and hotel rooms of the main organizers of the January 6th Insurrection, which would definitely be considered providing material support to people trying to overthrow the US government.

The people who were worried about violence if Trump lost don't seem to really understand the gravity of whats happening. There was always going to be violence