Stop warning, start consequenting.
this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2025
127 points (97.7% liked)
politics
22004 readers
4224 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
127
I know, right? Just skip straight to the point.
Much to late for that.
Anyone wanna guess what those "Consequences" are going to be?
- A sternly worded written order DEMANDING compliance, with random words in ALL CAPS to show how serious they are this time.
- A repeat of the orders demanding compliance, but adding the words "OR ELSE" to the end.
- A $1000 fine for the first dozen or so violations, followed by nothing at all.
- A contempt of court charge for Trump that actually can't be enforced because he's the sitting President.
- A press release saying that Trump needs to abide by the court's decisions.
- Absolutely fucking nothing at all.
Makes you wish the shooter had practiced more.
On the one hand, yeah. On the other hand, would it somehow unleash Stephen Miller even more?
No. None of these other chuds had nearly 20 or 30 years of media whitewashing them like Trump had. Stephen Miller is practically date rape incarnate. As Steve Bannon is what alcoholism would be if it were a person.
Last I checked he can’t be charged with anything as sitting President, not that it can’t be enforced. The SC said that as long as he’s acting in the official capacity of President, and they’re the only ones that can define that on a case by case basis, then it’s official and legal. It’ll be his subordinates that’ll be charged.
Edit: even my grasp of the situation here seems flimsy to me, so someone more dialed in or informed feel free to re-educate me on the subject.
Theoretically, you can still sue the office of the President, just not Trump himself.
So, you know. You can cost the taxpayers money, but not the person making the terrible costly decisions
Last I checked he can’t be charged with anything as sitting President, not that it can’t be enforced.
Whichever way it works. The end result is the same.
If the justice system worked the same way for everyone as it did for trump, it would be no different than not existing at all.
If the judiciary didn't exist at all, you know there would be some vigilante justice being meted out on a regular basis.
Just saying.
There's already been a couple attempts on his life, so your theory holds ground.
No attempt that should be taken seriously.
Be the change you wish to see in the world.
They already did. Why is there all these warnings and super warnings and ultimatums. Because there are separate laws for us and them.
Man, if you guys rip on me 14 or 15 more times, I'm outta here
Maybe you would get tons of warnings and no consequences if you broke the law. Have you tried?
Consequences? I don't know the meaning of the word.
-Trump probably
How much could a consequence be? 10 dollars?
-Trump probably
The only Consequences Trump has faced was watching Bob Barker on TV in the 60's.
Remember to spay and neuter your fascists!
lol ok
let it play out. so far the judiciary has been the only administrative bulwark. we will know so much more very shortly and that will dictate what hand is forced next.
edit: not defending the democrats one bit, but they may be looking for judicially adjudicated constitutional overreach by the executive. when that happens, if the dems dont react with leadership and direction, the only thing left is mass street action (bets on this actually getting organized?) and then there will almost certainly be real violence - which may open up the fourth box.
Hopefully, they start chipping away at his staff and administration. But who am I kidding.
I vote Stephen Miller first. Can we do him first?
Finally, trump is really gonna get a stern talking to this time!
The executive thinks it hot shit but tell me corpos wouldn't lose their shit if judges were suddenly hostile towards them.
Seriously, if I were a large company owner that had to pay a settlement right now I wouldn't. I'd just say the executive branch showed the courts aren't a governing body any more. We killed 17 workers? Oops, who cares. Their families? Fuck em
What power do courts actually have to enforce judgements? That'll be the deciding factor. If it's just bailiffs/sheriffs/cops in general, I find it unlikely they'd do anything.
Consequences? As in, sequences of cons? Because I've seen a lot of those already - Trump's whole damn life is a con sequence...
Haha, consequences?
Warnings mean nothing to those people
Ooooooh...another warning...that'll show em.
lol no there won't be