this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2024
396 points (96.0% liked)

politics

19089 readers
4078 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
[–] Son_of_dad@lemmy.world 23 points 10 months ago (5 children)

This is reminding me of Muller and how it was all talk that amounted to nothing

[–] CaptDust@sh.itjust.works 65 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (3 children)

"Amounted to nothing"? Did you read the report? There was plenty of evidence that Mueller put forward that should have amounted to a case. The only remaining questions were if Trump was even aware he was being assisted and actively colluding, and if a sitting president could be prosecuted. Mueller decided he had to be impeached and removed before action could be taken, and his cult protected him.

That's not "all talk", that's Republicans putting their own interests over the country.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 33 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Muller's report was like... Yo, this guy did some things that definitely could be considered crimes. As an investigator, I referred them to the DoJ, as bringing a case against the president was not part of my mandate.

That then Bill Barr was like... Eh, he's white and rich and he's forwarding a christofacist agenda, so I don't think we need to charge him with anything.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 20 points 10 months ago

There was plenty of evidence that Mueller put forward that should have amounted to a case.

"Should have" is all we ever deal in.

[–] eestileib@sh.itjust.works 11 points 10 months ago

And Garland decided not to use it when he had the chance at the beginning of the Biden administration.

[–] ristoril_zip@lemmy.zip 34 points 10 months ago (1 children)

People went to jail because of Mueller's good work. Is that what your mean by "nothing"?

You may have wanted Trump to go to jail or be forced out of office but there was no chance of either of those given that Trump was President.

[–] MonsiuerPatEBrown@reddthat.com 20 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

https://abcnews.go.com/US/fbi-counterintelligence-chief-charles-mcgonigal-sentencing-begin/story?id=105642391

Yeah, that guy.

That head guy at the FBI that said Trump was fine after reviewing the report ... that guy is now in prison for being a Russian asset.

[–] zoostation@lemmy.world 32 points 10 months ago

It was profitable, 34 people and 3 companies were indicted, and it substantiated election interference.