Trump’s Latest Scheme to Beat Harris May Have Crossed Legal Lines
He may not be in office, but Donald Trump has been speaking with the powers that be about Israel’s war on Gaza—but it’s not in an effort to end the genocide.
Instead, Trump has allegedly been talking with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to avert a cease-fire deal, fearing that doing so could help Vice President Kamala Harris win in November, according to PBS.
“The reporting is that former President Trump is on the phone with the Prime Minister of Israel, urging him not to cut a deal right now, because it’s believed that would help the Harris campaign,” said PBS’s Judy Woodruff Monday night. “So, I don’t know where—who knows whether that will come about or not, but I have to think that the Harris campaign would like for President Biden to do what presidents do, and that’s to work on that one.”
Everyone who says "They're both equally bad. I refuse to vote for either candidate because they both support genocide" can shut the fuck up now.
I strongly suspect most of the people pushing that particular line aren't eligible to vote... in American elections, that is.
I don't, I know what it was like to be an optimistic young adult. I understand the allure of holding strong to an ethical code while others' compromises seem to make the progress all too slow.
The truth is that this shit takes time and requires a lot of pressure - and that's a fucking bitter pill to swallow.
I understand what you're saying and I want to sympathize, but I feel like we're so far outside the norm here that some of this falls a bit flat to me. Like we aren't talking about being swayed by a wolf in sheep's clothing here, Trump is a an entire pack of wolves loudly shouting "the wolves have arrived, fuck all you sheep!"
I think there was a point what you say rang true, but I can't help but feel like we're so off-course at this point that if you haven't seen Trump for what he is yet it must be because you are WILLFULLY evading that reality.
I find it genuinely difficult to believe that anyone touting the "both sides are the same narrative" still, today, about Trump, can possibly truly believe that. I genuinely think you are only hearing from the mouths of charlatans, foreign agents, intentional accelerationists, and the absolute most genuinely ignorant of people. Maybe I'm jaded, but the alternative is legitimately incomprehensible to me at this point.
There is something to this; however, there are historical examples of rather quick progress. FDR for one (public work projects and infrastructure, financial reforms, regulations, social security, etc.), when old and young, the president, government employees, the whole general public (with some exceptions), held to popular principles of egalitarian fairness against the few unconscionably rich. A time of tasty pills.
Aren't 70+ years enough time though? Those people are done. You can't ask them to swallow bitter pills for that long of a time while also telling them to shut up because "you are enabling the enemy". They have valid criticisms that some key people from the Democratic side are far too happy to ignore. Honest question...how do you compromise with an ongoing genocide in an apartheid state?
Same way we compromised with the UK and France in WW1, or the Soviet Union in WW2, or Turkiye during the Cold War, or Saudi Arabia in the modern day.
When there are some 200 countries in the world, all with their own squabbles that affect their region and themselves, taking no sides is still taking sides - and no side is clean. The idea that there's some ideal option where no one gets hurt is just not the reality of things. Not every conflict is like this - not every conflict will continue to be like this. We can make a better world. But not by sitting on our hands now in an attempt to keep them 'clean'. Short of quite literally conquering the entire world, all of our choices are necessarily limited by the need to take a side in most conflicts, in which both sides are often pretty gruesome.
That being said, fuck Israel. Revoke everything. Side with Palestine.
We didnt give it 70 years. 40 years ago we had Ronald Fucking Reagan gutting the federal government like a fish, and we go back to that party like a pendulum every 4 to 8 years.
Some of them no doubt, a lot of them are younger voters that are just sick of their country never having been sliding down into more and more blatant evil for their entire lives.
Or ones who don't understand propaganda when they see it
They could have also shut the fuck up at any point previous, but we’ll accept “now” as well.
THANK YOU. Jesus fucking Christ thank you. I'm so sick of this shit
Ah yes, Texas-Oblast-Barbecuing-Joint next to famous warm water port, right?
Da. His Name is Alexejohn Smith
One is supporting genocide, but the other is actually doing it.
Id prefer not to support the side that says "finish the job"
I'd prefer neither, and in any case I'd still refuse to promise my vote to a party before the election. If Harris wants my guaranteed support she'll have to start acting like it.
Now is the best time to push the party left, and genocide is the one issue I absolutely refuse to compromise on.
Any vote not for Harris is a vote for Trump because of how our system works. You would be actively pushing closer to the final annihilation of Gaza by not doing everything in your p-
Oh fuck it. You fucking morons will never understand at this rate. I just hate seeing you pretend you actually give a single fuck about those poor people when you're just using them to virtue signal
I'm not saying not to vote, I'm saying not to make yourself ignorable. If the DNC knows they have your vote they won't have any reason to try and earn it.
In a perfect world maybe, but not how it actually works. Please vote for your best interests. A not vote is that same a vote against your own interests.
I'm not saying not to vote, I'm saying not to make yourself ignorable. If the DNC knows they have your vote they won't have any reason to try and earn it.
You said you can’t garauntee you’ll vote for Kamala and that she needs to earn your vote. Also that you shouldn’t be ignored.
What are you saying? Are you saying there’s a possibility you’ll vote for trump? Because that’s the only other option… unless you don’t vote.
I guess I’m just confused about how are going to get these people to see you. How are you going to not be ignored? The whole no confidence vote already happened, and the next vote is the only one left
If Trump was able to convince me that he'd stop America's support for genocide then I would.
And until Harris can do the same, the Democrats do not have my fealty.
That is precisely the risk that the Democrat party is taking. If there is no option for voting against genocide, then people like me might not feel enthusiastic about getting out of the house on voting day.
The same as any organization, public opinion polling:
The party is well aware that the fraction of their base that wants to stay the course on America's national support for genocide is a minority.
That they have not already changed their stance is evidence that they do not see a need to do so. They must be confident that they can win the election without the support of uncommitted voters.
Bet.
First off, the only one asking for fealty is the republicans. Second, trump already said “finish the job” so obviously he’s not in favor of a cease fire.
Now we’re right back to voting against your own interests. A not vote for Kamala is a vote for Trump(in a tight race like this)…. who supports the genocide fully… “finish the job”
You have two options.
vote for an administration that has called for a cease fire and is working to get it. Not doing a great job at it but the alternative is…
Vote for the administration that has said “finish the job” fully supporting the genocide and not calling for a cease fire.
How are you going to not be ignored? If trump wins because people like you don’t vote you’re definitely getting ignored lol. Actually that mother fucker might thank you for helping him get elected.
“If these people won’t do exactly I want then I’m going to make sure I get exactly what I don’t want!” - that’s you, that’s how you sound
Even the poll you just posted shows dems are more in favor of a mutually beneficial outcome, as opposed to(not to beat a dead horse but) “finish the job.
You want to be seen and heard? get out and protest and vote for your best interests. You want to be ignored? Don’t vote. Not voting gives you literally no skin in the game to complain later
Edit:grammar
Incorrect. Democrats have been the only ones demanding my vote. Republicans don't bother trying to convince a "commie queer" like myself.
Likewise, the Democrats who pretend to support a ceasefire but keep authorizing weapons shipments anyway.
There's those demands for fealty again.
Like this. You're failing to ignore me right now.
"If these people don't stop asking the Democrats to represent their interests then I'm going to blame them for Trump's second term" - that's you, that's how you sound.
It's as if you've already given up on this election and are looking for some "other" to blame so you don't have to accept the fact that the DNC would rather lose an election than to stop arming Israel.
And yet, the Democrats would rather stay the course than to do the thing that would net them more votes. By your own logic, the party is not doing everything it can to maximize its chances in the election.
I'm doing exactly that. You're responding to my protest now. We have an opportunity for productive dialogue and you risk squandering it with manipulative rhetoric. It is not possible to guilt a single-issue anti-genocide voter into tolerating genocide, but it might be possible to convince your political party that it needs to take a more principled stance on the topic.
Telling people I'm not going to vote has resulted in far more productive and nuanced conversations like this than a promise to vote ever has.
On the contrary, voters are the ones with no standing to complain, because they voted for it. Only the non-voting majority of Americans can claim that they are not represented by the political establishment.
Funny enough it’s seems I ignored you lol
Democrats demanding you vote… for your own best interests. The last part is the kicker. If you feel that’s Trump fine. A non vote is still using your vote, and if doesn’t get you what you want…
Genocide isn't in my best interests.
If there is no option on the ballot to stop sponsoring genocide then I'm not getting what I want regardless of how I vote.
If the Democrats feel that Trump is a threatening-enough stick that they don't need to offer a carrot, then that's their problem.
I'm really tired of Trump not being in prison.
Yes, but I'm more tired of realizing he will never be in prison. There's not a judge in the country that seems willing to do more than make him fork over a little of his pocket lint. And if it's ever more than that, it's still going to be an ankle bracelet and a 1% lifestyle.
One justice system for the rich and powerful, another for the rest of us.
If Trump were ever facing real jail time, he would hie himself off to Russia or Saudi Arabia. Which would be better than nothing, to be sure.
It would be great if nature took its course because the legal system never fucking will.
Merrick Garland is such a disappointment.
Assuming the election goes in a positive direction, this might be the feds just letting him make his own bed… and hopefully, they throw the book at him afterwards. It’s of course a moot point if he wins, for a lot of reasons.
Edit: fwiw I don’t disagree with the pessimism. Justice delayed is justice denied.
It's also moot if he dies. I'm really tired of the feds just letting him make his own bed.
Yeah, I agree, the amount of pussyfooting is un-fucking-believable
what book? The supreme court just ruled that presidents have immunity from criminal prosecution for anything that can be considered “official acts.” So nixon wouldn’t have to worry if he were president now.
This is the same genre as the people who insisted that Merrick Garland was just dotting his i's and crossing his t's before nailing Trump.
Oh please, 6they seem to be waiting for Trump to walk right into a prison cellt, lock himself in and throw away the key
This bs excuse has been peddled since 2016
If the election goes the right way we can have another 4 years of ccourthouse drama l. After which we will b back where we r today.
Oh fuck no that's not it.
I’m tired of him not being in Hell.
I think the last Republican presidential candidate to sabotage peace talks to help his own campaign was Richard Nixon in the Vietnam War, so Trump is just continuing their tradition of killing innocents for personal gain.
Reagan sabotaged the Iran hostages deal
So it is rumored
And those are only the ones we know of; dealing in death is pretty standard fare for people high up in Washington
It's not rumors anymore. It's a settled fact.
https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a43368900/reagan-iran-hostages/
It's gonna be awesome in 20 years to hear of Reagans impeachment while the crops and natural world are collapsing. Progress!
Bruh. Reagan.
Throwback to Reagan’s team intentionally sabotaging negotiations for the Iran hostage crisis, so it would make Jimmy Carter look bad right before the election.
With Roger fucken Stone lurking in the background in both situations.
Also Nixon sabotaging the Vietnam peace talks.
Yeah, Nixon got the presidency for it when it should’ve gotten him the rope. I don’t think trump will get either out of this
Yhe gop needs to be banned.
How did that not get him insta-arrested for treason.
The "genocide Joe" crowd is deafeningly silent on this development, i see. How surprising.
Dachau Donald? Treblinka Trump?
Terezin Trump is probably more appropriate, given the fakeness of both.
Not sure why you would expect them to be going nuts on this. This is just one more in a long line of terrible things Trump supports, but he is not going to change stance on this for a bunch of people not in his party complaining online.
Genocide Joe has run its course, in my opinion. Biden is no longer the nominee, and despite all the hand wringing about foreign shills by people who see Russian manipulation in their own shadows, polls seem to indicate this was an overwhelmingly positive move for the Democrats. Harris is not my ideal candidate, but the Genocide Joe moniker was part of a campaign during primary season and leading up to the nomination to not have Biden as the nominee, and it accomplished this.
This is just some weak what aboutism from sore losers. No shit Trump has worse stances on this issue than Biden, but I can't vote in primaries other than my registered party in my state, and the GOP was never going to replace him as nominee over this issue anyway.
Bro the absolute denialism that Genocide Joe wasn't being pushed by GOP and their international subversives...
I wouldn't deny that they may have thought it was helpful to push at the time, but there are plenty of people who used it that just wanted either a change in stance from Biden, or a different candidate. "Russian shill" has just become the go to line for anyone who wholeheartedly sticks to the Democratic party line to shut down any and all discussion. Criticize your own party's prospective candidate at the time without first denouncing every bad take Trump has? Russian shill. Don't agree that the statistics showing the economy is doing great reflect the actual experience of many people? KGB plant. Supermarket is out of your favorite brand of cereal? Putin's fault. It's ridiculous.
Genocide Joe crowd knows Biden was a better choice than Trump. They know Kamala is a better choice than Trump. In every metric there is.
Having said that just because they r the better choice doesnt give them free reign in colluding with genocidal foreign countries who are directly and indirectly trying to influence the election. Just because they r not our enemy doesnt mean they r allowed any and every infraction they wish to do.
They just want to be heard that they don't support Israel ignoring the genocide it is perpetrating in Gaza and the US's role in it.
You don't seem to understand the frustration they r feeling having this binary choice. If push comes to shove n they vote they will vote Kamala.
Their continued silence in the ha6ve of Trump's alleged interference is proof that they don't give two shits about Palestine or genocide. They're just pushing an agenda.
You're just talking out of your ass. Obviously we oppose trump trying to sabotage a ceasefire deal. But of course I'm not a true scotsman so nuh uh.
Speak for yourself, as you've just laid down the one single acknowledgement of Trump's interference I've seen since the story broke.
How would you even know, are you checking the posting history of every reply to see who has also criticized Biden?
You're just assuming that everyone else is anti-genocide when it helps trump but is totally cool when it's Biden approving another weapons shipment.
Which weapon shipment? The one that won't arrive until 2026? Biden is in office and has responsibility for his actions involving Israel. He's also trying to get a ceasefire deal, whereas Trump is interfering in the deal for political gain.
I can acknowledge Biden's hands aren't clean. Can you acknowledge that Trump interfering is far worse..?
Buddy, I understand the frustration. We are all feeling that frustration. It's just that most of us understand the reality of the situation.
I like to think that people like you are either concern trolls, or naive first time voters. Because anything else is fucking depressing.
This genocide has been going on for literal decades, but suddenly "progressives" such as yourself care enough to possibly spoil the most important election in history, and hand the reins to someone who will literally be 1000x worse for Palestine. What a convenient time to grow a conscience (and/or bother doing a modicum of research into one of the longest, ongoing conflicts in modern history).
If you actually give a shit about these people, you will vote for Harris. Otherwise, you're just talk, and your actions (or inaction if you refuse to vote) will be directly responsible for what happens next if Trump wins. You will be explicitly complicit in Israel's inevitable ramping up of the genocide, and the blood of the millions of Palestinians that will die because of it will be on your hands.
Just remember that when you wake up Nov. 5th.
The "genocide Joe" crowd are, for the most part, well aware that Trump is just as bad for Gaza as Joe is. They're not arguing for supporting Trump, they're arguing that both choices are bad.
This is not a rational position, obviously, because if you care about protecting Palestine you're still better off supporting the Dems to avoid the worse option of Trump, but for a lot of people it's hard to stomach the idea of voting for a murderer, no matter what the justification is. The not entirely unreasonable argument is that voting for the Dems to avoid the worse option basically encourages the Dems to be more shitty because they know they can always throw the threat of the GOP in everyone's faces when they're called out. I don't agree with this argument, but I see how it's compelling to people.
They're not Trump supporters - at least, not intentionally - they're just sick of the whole dicochtomy of being asked to choose between bad and worse. I can understand their frustration, even if I don't agree with the choice they're making.
Trump is not "as bad" as Biden. Trump is significantly worse. Trump has said he wants to ramp things up, and for Israel to "finish the job." There is no "as bad" here. There won't be any Gazans left under Trump most likely. There certainly won't be a Gaza separate from Israel at least.
Why are we still defending Biden vs Trump? Harris "won't stay silent" about Palestine.
Yeah, I don't know. I was baited into it I guess. Biden sint running anymore. I don't know if it's best to just ignore these people or still refute them though. Maybe it's best to just tell them Biden isn't running?
Didn't we just send them more 'aid' while they continue to massacre children? Did she speak up and oppose that? Israel is going to commit their atrocities and eradicate Palestine and neither party will oppose it. Arguing about dumb shit Trump says is just a distraction from the actual actions of Democrats. I'm so sick of Democrats telling me that I have to vote for them because otherwise Republicans will do what they are doing but worse.
Here's what she said: https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/25/politics/harris-netanyahu-israel-hamas-ceasefire/index.html
I agree, for the most part. However, i do believe a lot of them are Trump supporters, willingly.
Except the ones which are saying it simply to encourage people to stop voting. They do that to dem voters only though suspiciously
There is no comparison between the two. Trump is unimaginably worse. The only thing anyone has against Biden is his son (which isn't anything to do with him) and Israel, which Biden is likely trying to get a ceasefire in the background
I'm sitting here in Australia as he's telling you guys exactly how he is going to fuck you over.. He's dropping hints constantly that he won't leave power and introduce laws to extend his term if he wins
He's definitely going to pardon more criminals. It's scary to think of how much damage he'll do on a second term internationally, as he's done plenty the first time.
If Trump ends his term knowing he's going to jail, don't be surprised if he leaks all the classified information to everyone to make it seem like he's fighting for freedom and try to get more power
Are there any Republicans on Lemmy that you'd like us to address? Where?
This is completely baseless speculation at best, and essentially a conspiracy theory at worst. Biden has given consistent, unconditional support to Israel throughout the current genocide and through his entire decades long career.
Reasonable speculation, based on recent and past behavior, would suggest that what's actually happening in the background is that Biden and Netanyahu are operating in lockstep, and any contrary statements they make are keyfabe, with private assurances that there will be no disruption of material aid. On the other hand, we could not rely on speculation at all and just look at the facts, that Biden has been completely behind Netanyahu on anything that actually matters, materially.
Did you want a list of dogshit that Trump has done? Nobody has time to write that list (the "good" things he's done are mostly limited though, so that is quick). The list is totally opposite for Biden.. Before Trump a bj in the oval office was considered bad. Now we discover new worse stuff on a weekly basis
Trump literally told the proud boys to "stand Back and stand by".. Publicly... In front of everyone.. In case you need a reminder of what a bunch of fuckwits they are, refer to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proud_Boys . **That's indesputable proof that trump supports bigotry. **
You have to be blind at this point to call a convicted rapist who cheats on taxes and abuses everyone (whose own staff WARNS the general public about), to Biden, who hasn't supported the israel war publicly (oh, but for some reason it's "reasonable speculation" when it's YOUR opinion). Trump can't even get an endorsement from his former VP (that's how little he can be trusted)
I'm sitting here in Australia, and I'm watching similar shit go down similar to the insurrection.. YET AGAIN!!!! As we get closer, he'll ramp the rhetoric up and start saying it's rigged, and dropping "truth bombs" which don't have any evidence against them (but no evidence supporting them).
He tries to gain power through hate.. Biden did not. Kamala and Walz do not.
They are not the same...
Nobody said they are the same, we just said we're not going to vote for somebody we don't support. If Trump is so terrifyingly bad then maybe the Democratic platform should try to get more voters. I'm sick of terrorist style voting tactics where Trump being bad is the only reason to vote for Democrats, but the Democrats are barely different on the issue I care about.
It's why you have to pointlessly ramble on about various crap Trump did instead of defending the Democratic platform or stay on topic
A vote for no one is claiming they're the same. This is exactly on topic. You want a list though: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/02/02/joe-biden-30-policy-things-you-might-have-missed-00139046
Trump is Hitler 2.0. If your freedom is something you don't care about, and you don't have any female friends or family, then I guess it is easy to sit on the fence..
The reason everyone talks about Trump's shitiness, is because he voting for him is like giving a promotion to your high school bully. It's irrational for anyone to vote for a guy who hates you. Biden isn't even the candidate at the moment either, so the difference is even more glaring now what a prick Trump is
Not really. It implies that neither are good enough, not that they are the same.
Is it freedom when I have to vote at the threat of Hitler 2.0 every year? Am I not allowed to pull politicians back to my positions when they get too far out of whack? Why are you blaming your fellow
Americansclassmen for not electing your candidate, instead of asking your candidate to be more electable? Nevermind you; how about the candidate themselves, scolding people for not electing them?How do you know the entire democratic platform isn't just empty platitudes? Roe V Wade/ Dobbs happened on Democrats' watch. In fact, everything the supreme court is doing is happening on Biden's watch, as he didn't do much more than float adding justices to make it less partisan. Everything with the economy, food prices, housing, healthcare, and the gaslighting instead of action on those fronts, is on their watch. They've completely given up on opposing the anti-immigration narratives coming from the right...
We're tired of democrats running on being controlled opposition to the republicans. They need to do more than just imply or let us assume they're going to do things because it opposes what the other guy is doing. They need to reach deep and find some policy positions of their own and earn votes because they're actually popular. Not because they're not the other guy.
I'd like to vote for Kamala in November but I also think it's important to hold out until I personally find her platform compelling on its own merits, not on any pressure campaign or the implied lack of anyone else's. Change and progress don't happen by being passive and letting people shout you down.
Oh yeah? What if the other guy is worse!?
Imagine, for a moment, that there is no democratic party. Trump is the furthest left you can go, the closest you can get to progress, and the other guy is promising to take you backwards. This is not bizarro world, Trump will take you backwards too, and will still tell the world that anyone to the left of him is a radical, including you. Just not as bad as the other guy.
Just humor me. You'd be irrational not to vote for Trump, no? Even though he hates you? Even to make him squirm a little bit and win some concessions?
You'd vote for the other guy, just because he's not Trump? Cause that guy hates you too, probably worse. Not vote? Well obviously that's a vote for the other guy. Sorry, I don't make the rules. I just vote for the people that do.
No, I'm well aware of it.
It's very funny to me that you're defending Biden by talking about Trump when Biden isn't even running anymore. There is no longer any "lesser evil" argument for you to hide behind. Trump is completely irrelevant to Biden's record and I won't acknowledge a word about that in that context.
Before Biden became the Democratic nominee in 2020, it was perfectly acceptable to criticize him and call a spade a spade. He's one of the architects of mass incarceration, and of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, he's an irredeemable monster with the blood of hundreds of thousands of innocent people on his hands. But once he was up against Trump, all you people choose to willfully deceive yourselves into this fantasy that he's some kind of progressive figure. And now, the reason for that self-deception is gone, but you're still deluding yourself and licking his boots. It's pathetic.
I'm not willing to lie to myself or anyone else for the sake of helping some war criminal win an election that I don't even have a voice in, seeing as I don't live in a swing state. But it's even worse for you to do it not even having a vote here at all. You're lieing to yourself for the sake of these horrible people when it doesn't even help them in any way.
Yes, because my speculation comes from facts and evidence, not wishful thinking. As I said though, no speculation is actually necessary.
What does this even mean? Leftists want an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza. The only way that happens is if the US stops funding their genocide campaign. If Biden (or Harris/Trump as the next president) had any interest, they could just do that. They won't, but they could.
If you think leftists want Trump to sabotage the minute possibility that Biden will finally do the right thing, then you fundamentally misunderstand the situation.
It means that those that were referring to Joe Biden as "Genocide Joe" because of his continued support to Israel, haven't said peep about Trump actively sabotaging a peace deal for his own personal and political gain. Like it was all in bad faith or something.
Weird.
Yeah, weird. Let me get our "Genocide Joe" CEO to make a statement about this extremely recent news that most people haven't heard yet.
It's so disappointing watching liberals continue to rally behind this old, rotten bastard and defend his rampant and wildly unpopular complicity of an actual genocide when he's not even the one running for reelection. Bad faith? Wanting our money to stop funding the wholesale slaughter of innocent people is acting in bad faith because you don't like the nickname? If the mere association of Biden's name with the result of his own foreign policy sounds so bad that Democrats are afraid it will make his VP lose the election, maybe he should take the fucking hint and change his policy. If the party doesn't like the name "Genocide Joe" then just stop committing genocide. Very fucking simple.
And if you want my opinion on Trump, he should be in prison several times over, including for this exact reason. Why would anyone wanting an end to war think otherwise? You absolute clown.
Where have i defended Biden, as you imply? This isn't binary, me pointing out hypocrisy ISN'T A DEFENSE of anyone else, you muppet.
I'm still waiting to hear any of you accusing ME of defending Biden to
CONDEMN TRUMP FOR INTERFERING IN A CEASEFIRE DEAL.
You're framing this as if specifically those critical of Biden over his arms deals with Israel are secretly pleased Trump is making shit worse. Nobody on the left thinks that Trump getting involved will somehow be a positive influence to end the genocide in Gaza. Can we just take a minute and recognize that? If you've seen otherwise, call that shit out by all means. But your initial comment reads like a smear campaign.
Lol, nope, that's how you'd like me to frame it.
I'm still waiting for all them that were screaming about genocide Joe sending military aid to a genocide, which is bad, to call out Trump for interfering in a ceasefire deal, WHICH IS WORSE. But so far? Nada but crickets.
"Trump fucking bad. Trump fucking stop." That's apparently harder than "Genocide Joe."
Is it ok for Democrats to continue financing a genocide because Trump said he'd do it, too?
Biden isn't even in the race anymore. Why are you still trying to defend him?
It's amazing to miss the point so hard
The point being what? People who are trying to push Biden to stop a genocide aren't bothering with Trump because they know he's a lost cause?
That's an interesting point indeed. Yet that is not the typical sentiment I see/hear. But what I still don't understand is, why would anyone vote for a lost cause in order to stick it to someone (Biden) who chooses (I disagree with him) not to budge? Will that make things better? Won't it be worse?
Who's voting for Trump? I haven't met anyone on the left who is voting for Trump because of Palestine.
Any who are, idk, perhaps they are accelerationists who believe that by bringing contradictions to the forefront faster theyll be resolved faster.
Example: the slow genocide is carrying on without anyone stepping in. Maybe they hope Trump's idea for a faster genocide will draw a reaction from other countries.
I'm not one of these people though and know none though so I can only speculate.
Hey, lookit that, I'm learning how to summon them!
Who defended Biden? I pointed out how y'all seem exceedingly quiet on the matter, and what's your response? "Buh-buh-buh-Biden buh-buh-buh-bad!" I'll give ya one thing, you're as predictable as a Swiss watch.
Yes, you typically get responses from people when you bring them up.
Who's silent on this? Of course it's evil, it's expected though and everyone recognizes that it's evil.
We speak about genocide Joe because we have hope that the Democratic party will listen, like Obama said last night,
Who did i name in this thread? I mentioned the genocide Joe crowd, and someone said "here." So, perhaps they felt called out..? Dunno, can't say.
I think he was questioning why biden gets it but trump has no need of defense in this much more specific action.
Does anyone on this site think Trump isn't routinely criticized for his foreign policy?
Biden's the current president. He approved $20B in military spending for Israel just last week
That's why he's at the front of the line for this outcry.
And Trump is trying to STOP A CEASE FIRE for his own personal gain. But mum's the word, apparently.
And Trump is not even a public official and still calling the President of Israel trying to keep the conflict going.
to be fair neither was reagan when he did his thing with iran.
Okay, let's not vote for Reagan either.
its not about criticism in general its about the same group quickly jumping on and criticizing for their one issue with trump similar to how they do with biden. In particular given that this is trump trying to make it worse rather than just not taking action to make it better.
Because it's expected for Trump to be a genocidal monster and nobody expects to win him or Republicana in general over.
Right? Pretty sus that we're suddenly not allowed to be anti-genocide... because Trump is pro-genocide?
Yeah let me join the downvote crowd. The most powerful military and the largest economy in the world is unable to stop its vassal state from carrying out a genocide for 10 months. But if I vote for this cop and her soldier friend instead of a real estate guy, we'll magically change our ways and the bombs will stop falling. I have a bridge to sell you.
K let me try and put this as simply as I can, so that you fucking acorns can understand:
Joe Biden is working towards a cease-fire. That is a fact.
Donald Trump is actively discouraging Netanyahu from agreeing to a cease-fire. That is a fact. No bridges there.
You people are condemning Joe Biden, the guy now actively working towards a cease-fire.
You people are not condemning Donald Trump, the guy actively interfering with a cease-fire.
To reiterate, Donald Trump is actively, publicly, and aggressively supporting genocide, and Joe Biden is trying to get a cease-fire enacted, yet you Genocide Joe sycophants can't see past your own biases to realize that.
He just sent them $20B in new arms exports.
FFS, Americans are the most propagandized people on earth. You'll believe absolutely anything, except the truth.
For jets that will not be delivered before 2029.
And Trump is interfering with a ceasefire. You don't give two shits about Palestinians or genocide.
Netanyahu has not demonstrated any interest in a ceasefire. Blaming this on Trump deflects the strong Israeli support for further genocide of the Gaza people.
Trump is on Netanyahu's side regarding a cease-fire. If you have a problem with Netanyahu not entertaining a cease fire, you should have a problem with Trump trying to scuttle it.
That is, if your problem is actually with the genocide, and not just a weird personal vendetta against Joe Biden.
Again, do you realize who is currently holding office?
Again, do you realize who isn't currently holding office, has no responsibility or need to be involved in the situation, and is inserting themselves into the situation in an attempted to make sure the genocide continues?
And this person actively trying to make sure the genocide continues wants to hold office.
This you?
So, the person actually running the country that's committing the genocide you're so against has less culpability than an ally that's NOT committing genocide? Did i follow those mental gymnastics correctly?
Netanyahu > Biden > every other nationally elected leader on good terms with Israel > Howard Kor and Elliot Brandt > Jamie Dimon > a long list of senators and governors > Lachlan Murdoch > Ben Shapiro > Donald Trump
A guy pushing for a cease fire.
You know who's the subject of the article in the OP? Donald Trump, the guy actively trying to prevent a cease fire.
If you live in a state in which your vote will not matter anyway, you are better off voting for a candidate who actually wants a ceasefire. Jill Stein will secure more funding for the Green party if she breaches the 5% threshold. This bickering over which corporate oligarch party is less genocidal will get us nowhere.
Excuses excuses. Brotherhood of the traveling goalposts. Your bias is showing.
The vast bulk of that deal is a contract for 50 F-15s, which are estimated to be delivered in 2029. He did not "just send them $20B in new arms exports".
FTFY
If the cop and her soldier friend don't win the race, the person who will win is a rapist insurrectionist, he will facilitate the further erosion into total fascism, he will ramp up the genocide in Gaza and Ukraine, he will further remove human rights from our neighbors. The article is literally about this guy violating the law in attempt to prolong the genocide. For personal gain. Or you could throw your ballot in the trash, I guess.
Jill Stein needs 5% to get the Greens increased federal funding. I live in a state where my blue vote wouldn't matter. Seems pretty simple to me.
Oh. A completely different goalpost from what you originally wrote.
Lol. Enjoy your goal posts, soccer friend.
Did you people not read the link at all?
"Trump made a call to Netanyahu to tell him to do the things he was going to do anyway. This is possibly illegal (but he won't be prosecuted for it so it isn't illegal in an tangible sense)."
Trump is actively trying to stop a ceasefire. A ceasefire that you ostensibly would support. So, why no criticism...?
Netanyahu has expressed no support for a ceasefire, going so far as to greenlight the assassination of the lead Palestinian diplomat.
So "Genocide Ben?" "Genocide Don?" No? Just genocide Joe? Still waiting for any kind of condemnation. Lacking that, it looks like you support this.
What do Trump and Netanyahu have to do with the Democrats' position on genocide? Do they have some sort of control over the party or are you just playing "whataboutism" so you don't have to talk about the DNC?
What does Democrats position on genocide have to do with the person running the country, committing the genocide?
If they opposed the commission of such crimes against humanity, then they would not assist in their perpetuation.
They didn't jail Nixon or that shitbag kissenger for the same shit, doubt anything will be done about this. Hell, both of those asshats got to live out their years rubbing elbows and "advising" the political elite of both parties.
Nor Reagan
Didn't Nixon do the same thing with the Vietnam war?
And Regan with Iran hostages. It's almost like Republicans always pull this shit and never get in trouble for it...
Sabotaged the Paris peace talks that traitor, self-serving bastard.
Woohoo maybe this time there will be consequences since he is not president and it can't be an official act ...
How has that worked out so far?
Let's find out in 5 years.
To spoil his legacy like this, he must be so ashamed.
Spoil his legacy? Like, if someone treads in a huge, perfectly formed, steaming hot dog turd? That kind of spoilt legacy?
And shame? The man is a weapons-grade narcissistic arsehole. He doesn't know the meaning of the word.
Wow, if only there was something we could do about people crossing legal lines. Alas, we have tried nothing and are out of ideas.
If only we had, like, books or documents with laws written down in them, so we could know for certain when legal lines are crossed. That way headlines could just say "Trump broke the law", instead of "Trump may have broken the law. We're not sure, but yeah probably. We think. Maybe? Who knows?"
I mean they have tried a few things, republicans keep blocking it.
The Logan Act was passed in 1799. A grand total of two people were charged with violating it, and none were convicted.
Those fun facts are never going to change. Prosecutors should find something else to charge Trump with, it won't be hard.
We can always change the traditions
One reason that it's never used is that a lot of lawyers suspect banning negotiation with anyone, even a foreign power, violates the First Amendment.
And if it's used against the Trump then the SCOTUS will surely agree.
In that respect, I don't disagree with them. Though they're right for very much the wrong reason.
The trouble with prosecuting Trump under the Logan Act is that, technically, the ceasefire would not be an agreement between the US and a foreign government. It would be an agreement between Israel and Hamas. Here's the text of the act:
Now, I would argue that brokering a ceasefire counts as "measures of the United States," but it's not a slam dunk legal argument. Trump put a fuckton of sympathetic activist judges on the bench, including three Supreme Court Justices, so I don't have any faith that he will be held accountable.
While judicial corruption is a real risk, this sort of assumed helplessness just lets them implement it without actually doing the corruption and putting their credibility on the line. And it could be applied to literally anything. Once you assume the Court will always act corruptly, it doesn't matter whether a legal question exists, they'll do it anyway.
He probably won't be held accountable, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be initiating court cases for every violation of the law. They can die in the Supreme Court and be added to the list of reasons for why extreme reforms are necessary.
I agree with you completely, but also keep in mind that every corrupt ruling from the current federal and supreme courts is a precedent that must be later replaced if/when we get reasonable judges in place. Not only do we need to win, but we need the court to hear a case where a former president is charged with a crime and the "official acts" bullshit is thrown out. That, or the legislature passes a constitutional amendment. Until either one of those happens, presidents have immunity from prosecution.
My first thought is that the US is trying to broker a cease fire, so that should definitely count as a measure of the US.
The founding fathers weren't unaware of international affairs and that countries do things that are not in relation to their own country. So that last clause seems to specifically address those other things.
I agree with you, but I doubt very much that Trump's judges will rule against him.
How about the media stop using caveats like "may have" when shit is entirely 100% clear.
There are laws on the books regarding things like this. There is no may have. It's cut and fucking dried.
Because they don’t want to be sued.
It's only libel if it's not true. If he threatens to sue, grow some balls, call his bluff and make him prove it's not true in court.
Threatening to sue, effectively forcing the media to back down because it would too inconvenient to deal with a suit is how Trump keeps getting away with his bullshit.
No, it's about access. They don't want to lose access.
Also trump is above the law so the headline is pointless
There is the Logan Act, but he likely would not be prosecuted under it, let alone convicted. From Wikipedia:
The Logan Act gets talked about much more than it has ever been used. There's also a debate as to whether the Logan Act is even unconstitutional.
Well from your own Wikipedia source, it's never been used successfully.
Yup, that's the point. The journalist who wrote OP's article should know better. The Logan Act is functionally dead. As much as I hate Trump, it would be a bad thing if he was prosecuted under it because it would clearly be a case of selective prosecution.
They really can't say "has" because it's possible he wins the case in court. It should be something like "seems to have" though. "May have" means there'd a chance. It should be something that means "it is likely."
Sorry, but no.
The presumption of innocence doesn’t work that way. It’s a legal fiction imposed upon the courts and justice system as a means of (poorly) protecting the civil rights and liberties of those who are accused.
On that, it’s a very important “fiction”- don’t get me wrong.
What it does not do, however, is change historical reality. If Jackass murders a homeless woman, Jackass is a murderer- even if that woman’s murder was never properly investigated, and he was never suspected/indicted/arraigned/convicted for murder.
One’s guilt at having committed a crime does not, in fact, change based on the outcome of a trial. After all the officers of the court, and the jury, are all human and prone to errors. They get it wrong. Sometimes that means guilty people go free, and sometimes that means innocent people are convicted.
But the truth of that guilt is established when one commits a crime.
So I’ll say it: Trump is a mass murderer.
As president, he had a legal, moral and ethical obligation to act to protect Americans from harm during moments of crisis
This includes from things like COVID. He had a moral, ethical, and legal obligation to voice sound medical guidance like “hey folks, I know it’s tough and it looks a little silly, but we need you to stay home if you can, and if you can’t, wear a mask. A real mask.”
He failed us in that moment of crisis and as a direct consequence of his rampant bullshit; millions of Americans needlessly died.
There has been no consequences to his actions so of course he is going to do whatever he wants.
He's got what, 34 federal crime convictions?
He's still running around and the media is still treating him like some random dude running for president, oh look what crazy don said seven times today!
Shits ridiculous
No, a random dude would have been in prison years ago for doing a fraction of the shit this man has done.
Low level bureaucrats working in municipal government are subject to much stricter ethics rules. It's absurd.
34 felony convictions for fraudulently interfering in the 2016 election that made him President.
You know, the guy who accuses others of stealing elections from him — and getting people killed over it btw — after he already committed fraud to help win an election.
Every accusation from the right is a confession in disguise.
Wouldn't be the first time he has 'crossed legal lines'.
However, wouldn't it be great if it was the last time?
Just wait and see: all it takes is for a judge to tell him not to do it - ten consecutive times, THEN threaten with actual consequences, and THEN you may or may not see him become more circumspect about his transgressions in order to skirt the legal line a tiny bit less obviously!
After all: everyone is equal before the law!*
*Unless you bought the highest judges and make them declare you an absolute ruler immune to criminal law.
Netanyahu revealing which part of the US he's really an "ally" of. Maybe stop giving blank checks to a foreign power destabilizing your country
while you only hand out loans and debt to Ukraine?First of all, there aren’t any blank checks. Foreign aid isn’t a lump sum of money just given to a country. We allocate it to a spending purse and they can choose to spend it on specific items the US agrees upon, which is usually weapons. We don’t just give them cash.
Second, which debt? The US hasn’t issued any debt to Ukraine since the war started, except for possibly private companies.
I agree with your sentiment, just not the facts.
I might be wrong about the loans and debt to Ukraine, just tried to double check it and couldn't so I don't know where I got that idea. I'm glad then if this isn't the case. Thanks for the callout on that.
But I was aware of how Israel receives aid, and while calling it a blank check might be an exaggeration, that point still stands. The fact that they receive it as credit for offensive wide area weapons probably encourages them more to use said weapons with destructive consequences to their civilian population, and that Israel might say to the US that it will consider a two state solution while they condemn, accuse of antisemitism, and break ties who recognize those who would recognize the Palestine state says they are definitely being duplicitous at best. What is happening in the West Bank speaks for Israel's true intent: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqK3_n6pdDY
I appreciate your willingness to correct the record.
As for the aid to Israel, I agree that the nature of the assistance and how it's used is a critical issue. I completely agree with your points and now understand your usage of “blank check”.
He's been campaigning for Republicans since Romney ran in 2012.
nail him for treason
and nothing will happen, like every other time he "crossed legal lines"
Yeah, people are crazy if they think he'll ever be charged, much less convicted of a single crime. What would Republicans even do then, adopt the slogan "I'm voting for the convicted felon"? Lmao, as if. Ridiculous to even imagine. What next, I bet someone tries to tell me that this already happened? The fools...
You actually almost had me there in the first half. Well done.
I'll believe it when he's in jail. This orange turd is practically made of as slipperonium.
Trump could punt a baby across a field and nothing would happen.
Supreme court: "To ensure that babies are put in their place, former presidents must enjoy total infant punting immunity."
To be fair, some babies yearn the yeet.
You know how we throw a baby in the air for fun? Trump doesn’t catch back, just walks away and lets them fall on the floor
So THAT'S what happened to Eric!
nah there's no way he touched Eric
You get it
In other words Trump wants to have a quick genocide. That is the only way to stop the killing, without having a ceasefire. Even Biden was a hell of a lot better then this.
"Mr.Trump which is worse of the following: 100,000 dead in 12 minutes or 100,000 dead in 12 months?"
"Time is money, people! Obviously a quick genocide is more efficient!"
Alternate title: “Donald Trump DEFINITELY broke the law. You won’t BELIEVE what happened next!”
You underestimate my ability to believe
oh the old reagan october surprise countermeasure.
Can y'all merkins just throw that conman in to the clink? The rest of the world is tired of his bullshit.
Merkin problems
that photo says:"handjob is done"
If anybody deserves to be locked up for being a clear and present danger to society, it's this guy. At the very least, he should be forbidden from using a phone, then locked up when he eventually breaks that rule because he thinks that none of the rules apply to him. The way he's treated, the government is basically encouraging that.
I've had this crazy theory that ever since Clinton's second term, the presidents have been playing out in reverse order and politics:
-Bush was the anti George H Bush
-Obama was the anti-Reagan
-Trump was the anti-Carter
-Biden was the anti-Ford
This feels like the anti-Iran contra play, anti-Carter working with Israelis to prevent hostages from being released until after the election.
Trump was also the anti-Obama in so many figurative and literal ways.
If Trump lives long enough, he'll eventually be the antebellum.
My mother's sister disliked the period between the 1850's and 1860's. I guess you could say auntie was anti antebellum.
Also if you are religious trump is the anti-christ lol
Pretty sure i just heard the ghost of Henry Kissinger slaping himself in a hurried facepalm.
As Israel is in conflict with Palestine, not the United States; would that even be covered by the logan act?
Then there's actually proving this negotiation took place and isn't hearsay; from a legal perspective...
Somehow, I don't forsee this being acted on.
Whenever he does (the tiniest of) fists, I instantly realize there’s nothing to gain from reading/watching further. That accounts for 99.9% of times and why I set a high standard on fist measurements, although I live in EU and US politics only concern as far as influence goes, which reaches way deep here
::: spoiler New Republic - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report) Information for New Republic:
::: spoiler Search topics on Ground.News https://newrepublic.com/post/185076/donald-trump-scheme-beat-kamala-harris-benjamin-netanyahu-ceasefire ::: Media Bias Fact Check | bot support
How's that work? Oh right is an obvious false statement.
Edit: Well it has been 3 days since this post. Rest in peace to all 1.8 million people at the humanitarian zone who having no water died of thirst after 3 days in the desert.
It's ridiculous to blame Trump for the lack of a ceasefire between Palestine and Israel. Why not just blame Trump for the war in Ukraine as well or the stolen election in Venezuela.
He’s literally calling the prime minister and asking him not to do it with of course the perceived benefit of kickbacks from Trump if he were to win.
Do you have Trump cum in your brain from sucking him off so hard? Is that where your critical faculties went?
I've heard more than one Lemmy-ite make this claim. Of course, I've also heard any criticism of the Israel genocide is the product of Russian botnets and Iranian sleeper agents.
The scapegoating is off the charts. Anything I don't want to think about is due to a nefarious foreigners and their kompromat fifth columnists at home.
Mask-off moment.