101–110 of 453 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When a different side takes control of the justice department they may choose to go after all those who broke the law by order of this president. The president might be protected from consequences according to the supreme court, but those answering to the president are not. This administration has set the standard that the justice department can be weaponized against political enemies. The ratchet only goes one way i…
[flagged]
> Tim Rieser, former senior aide to Senator Leahy who wrote the 2011 amendment mandating information gathering, told the BBC the gateway's removal meant the State Department was "clearly ignoring the law". We're in a really bad place... with a servile congress, it turns out there aren't really any laws constraining the executive branch. When everything relies on "independent IGs" for law enforcement inside executive…
> it turns out there aren't really any laws constraining the executive branch There are plenty of laws being ignored. Tariffs being the most obvious.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When a different side takes control of the justice department they may choose to go after all those who broke the law by order of this president. The president might be protected from consequences according to the supreme court, but those answering to the president are not. This administration has set the standard that the justice department can be weaponized against political enemies. The ratchet only goes one way i…
[flagged]
Out of genuine curiosity: what specific actions do you think were 'weaponized' investigations / prosecutions under Biden?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When a different side takes control of the justice department they may choose to go after all those who broke the law by order of this president. The president might be protected from consequences according to the supreme court, but those answering to the president are not. This administration has set the standard that the justice department can be weaponized against political enemies. The ratchet only goes one way i…
> The president might be protected from consequences according to the supreme court, but those answering to the president are not. Unless they are granted a blanket pardon beforehand. Then all you can really do is an "audit" for who did what, from which no charges can be laid.
I’m concerned about human rights, but I’m equally concerned about yellow journalism or coordinated media bias.
From a practical standpoint, this is why Wikileaks matters. Rather than count on the State department to serve that role, we should count on independent journalists like Glen Greenwald and outlets like Wikileaks who are reliably independent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I would think the 'smart evil' thing to do would be keeping it running and just ignoring what you don't like but now people will just send the stuff to WikiLeaks.
It reminds me of a company I used to work for that had a "suggestions box." After the box was full enough, the leadership would just dump it in the trash. Leadership didn't care about employee nor customer opinions. It was just to give people the illusion that their opinion mattered just to placate them.
After thorough evaluation, it so happened that the existing practices of the megacorp was adopted without any modifications.
The next day, the office shredder had been labelled 'Suggestion box'.
Poor sods from head office tried to remove the sign, only to find some miscreant had mixed glass dust in the glue used to affix the nicely engraved sign onto the shredder, making removing it kind of difficult. End result being we got a new shredder.
The spare sign which was engraved just in case now adorns the outhouse at my cottage in the woods.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When a different side takes control of the justice department they may choose to go after all those who broke the law by order of this president. The president might be protected from consequences according to the supreme court, but those answering to the president are not. This administration has set the standard that the justice department can be weaponized against political enemies. The ratchet only goes one way i…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
At least I get to feel vindicated. Many many people, including me, have long asserted that the so-called "conservatives" in the Supreme Court are anything but. Historically their decisions have appealed to a certain kind of conservative political base, but the pretense is really starting to wear thin. Limiting the power of the executive branch in general was never the goal, it was only to limit the power of president…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At least I get to feel vindicated. Many many people, including me, have long asserted that the so-called "conservatives" in the Supreme Court are anything but. Historically their decisions have appealed to a certain kind of conservative political base, but the pretense is really starting to wear thin. Limiting the power of the executive branch in general was never the goal, it was only to limit the power of president…
> have long asserted that the so-called "conservatives" in the Supreme Court are anything but They are conservatives and push for conservative agenda. Conservatives wanted them on the court so that they can make decisions like this.