Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trump fires Pam Bondi as attorney general

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 127 posts

Re: Trump fires Pam Bondi as attorney general

#31

Post by swivelmaster »

legitster wrote: post #24
mykowebhn wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That the Citizens United Supreme Court ruling may have been the single worst thing to happen to the US.

??? People bring this up regularly, but I don't think it's that relevant. Studies regularly show that campaign contributions actually have very low influence on elections. Trump notably had much smaller campaign budgets than his opponents in both winning elections, not even including the massive amounts of brazen fraud he used to pay himself with the money. Fundamentally, it's presidential democracy that is flawed. W…

Yes, it's possible to win with less money than your opponent, but why would anyone want to take that risk?

The problem with money in politics is not that money guarantees a win, but that the presence of large donations distorts the entire incentive structure of campaigning and governing: Courting big donations means spending time with big donors (who expect access in exchange for their money) and when it comes time to govern, studies have shown that campaign contributions and lobbying are dramatically more influential to what gets proposed and passed than the preferences of the general public.

Focusing on the problems with presidential campaigns re: money in politics is missing the forest for the trees: All politicians have limited time to spend between campaigning and governing, and if they're constantly raising money the governing gets delegated to lobbyists.

(This is why people are always so shocked when politicians who don't accept corporate PAC contributions have drastically different priorities than those who do. Of course they do! They don't have to spend all their time hanging out with corporate lobbyists!)

Re: Trump fires Pam Bondi as attorney general

#32

Post by quickthrowman »

cosmicgadget wrote: post #8

The timing coincides with her office getting embarrassed in front of the Supreme Court, with Trump in artendance. P2025 had a plan but it was always going to struggle against the president's personality issues.

Trying to argue the 14th amendment doesn’t read as plainly as it does was a no-win situation. The government would have to argue it does not have jurisdiction (subject to the jurisdiction thereof) over illegal immigrants which would seemingly (IANAL) mean they’re immune to prosecution for any crime.

You could probably find a hair splitting argument that the child must be born in an actual ‘State’, but aside from that, jus soli citizenship is pretty clearly part of the constitution.

That being said, Pam Bondi was very bad at her job.

Re: Trump fires Pam Bondi as attorney general

#34

Post by alecbz »

legitster wrote: post #24
mykowebhn wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That the Citizens United Supreme Court ruling may have been the single worst thing to happen to the US.

??? People bring this up regularly, but I don't think it's that relevant. Studies regularly show that campaign contributions actually have very low influence on elections. Trump notably had much smaller campaign budgets than his opponents in both winning elections, not even including the massive amounts of brazen fraud he used to pay himself with the money. Fundamentally, it's presidential democracy that is flawed. W…

> if enough people want to willing vote in a corrupt president

Why do people do this though? Maybe it's inevitable, but I think there was a lot of pent up frustration with the government that led a lot of people to just say "fuck it". Not really excusing it (especially for his second term), but I feel like we're reaping years and years of a dysfunctional and ineffectual congress. Not that that's an especially easy problem to solve either.

I think this also explains a lot of the frustration with SCOTUS. In-theory, SCOTUS is supposed to just interpret and flesh out the policies decided on by congress. In practice, congress doesn't really do anything, and people started depending on SCOTUS's ability and willingness to make far-reaching and impactful decisions. Now a more conservative SCOTUS isn't doing that.

Re: Trump fires Pam Bondi as attorney general

#35

Post by fhdkweig »

helterskelter wrote: post #11

Let's hope she doesn't get a pardon before he leaves office.

If she broke any state laws anywhere, that won't help her. Presidential pardons don't affect state crimes, and state pardons don't affect federal crimes. It is the closest thing to a check and balance on the power.

Re: Trump fires Pam Bondi as attorney general

#36

Post by salawat »

happytoexplain wrote: post #26
helterskelter wrote: post #11

Let's hope she doesn't get a pardon before he leaves office.

Trump's abuse of the presidential pardon is so hideous, I wouldn't be surprised if this power granted by the original US Constitution is amended after he leaves, in response to his unprecedented lack of respect for it. However, I also wouldn't be surprised if nobody in power ever possesses the strength of character or simple morality to do so.

I don't think we should change it. I think we as a nation need to understand the person we put in that office has that power, and choose accordingly. It's there for a reason. Sometimes, it's perfectly acceptable for the President to say "fuck this shit" for the good of the Nation. With that power though, comes the responsibility to wield it with respect. This country put the man abusing it in power. No one had second bloody thoughts. No one listened. No one looked ahead. Changing the system won't fix that. Only changing ourselves will. Now you have an undeniable example of the destructive potential of a truly, unrepentantly, criminally inclined President. Consider yourselves lucky if we actually have a peaceful transition of power out of this Administration. Then don't fuck up again. The stakes of statecraft are high. It's about damn time we started acting like it.

Re: Trump fires Pam Bondi as attorney general

#39

Post by BigTTYGothGF »

sizzzzlerz wrote: post #13
josefritzishere wrote: post #3

If there are still history books in the future... what will they think of all this?

Chapter 3 - United States of America b. July 4, 1776, d. January 20, 2024. It was good while it lasted.

> January 20, 2024

Everybody loves a good off-by-one error.

Re: Trump fires Pam Bondi as attorney general

#40

Post by legitster »

swivelmaster wrote: post #31
legitster wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

??? People bring this up regularly, but I don't think it's that relevant. Studies regularly show that campaign contributions actually have very low influence on elections. Trump notably had much smaller campaign budgets than his opponents in both winning elections, not even including the massive amounts of brazen fraud he used to pay himself with the money. Fundamentally, it's presidential democracy that is flawed. W…

Yes, it's possible to win with less money than your opponent, but why would anyone want to take that risk? The problem with money in politics is not that money guarantees a win, but that the presence of large donations distorts the entire incentive structure of campaigning and governing: Courting big donations means spending time with big donors (who expect access in exchange for their money) and when it comes time t…

This doesn't really speak to Citizens United though. The nature of Dark Money is that no one knows where it comes from, so politicians cozying up to their donors is not actually the particular concern here.

(Also, there has been the opposite trend, which is that more money than ever comes from private donations from billionaires and other wealth.)

Post reply on HN