this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2025
1034 points (99.6% liked)

politics

21978 readers
5483 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Minnesota Republican state Sen. Justin Eichorn, who introduced a bill classifying "Trump Derangement Syndrome" as a mental illness, was arrested for allegedly soliciting sex from a minor.

Police say Eichorn believed he was meeting a 16-year-old girl but was actually texting undercover officers. His arrest came just a day after he and four other Republican senators introduced the controversial bill.

Eichorn, who is married with four children, was booked into jail and will be transferred to the Hennepin County Adult Detention Center.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Freshparsnip@lemm.ee 10 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

Isn't one of the goals of Project 2025 to implement the death penalty for pedophiles?

[–] TheLowestStone@lemmy.world 25 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Yes but they'll define pedophiles as trans people.

[–] samus12345@lemm.ee 6 points 19 hours ago

Also gay people.

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."

The law will not be used the way you think.

[–] Freshparsnip@lemm.ee 9 points 21 hours ago

Well I know the REAL intent is to target LGBTQ people

[–] peoplebeproblems@midwest.social 4 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (3 children)

What's so strange about it is that it's impossible to be protected, yet unbound, by the law.

The only way it works is if a collective agree that someone is above the law. That would be what we call a "tyrant."

But the collective, can, at anypoint, decide "you know, why does the tyrant get to be above the law?" In ye-olden days, the Tyrant was often actually a strong man. A decorated military leader. Someone who could force others to do his bidding. But even Caesar would fall to the blades of the Senate.

It only works if somehow a person becomes so detached from reality that they truly believe they are somehow superior than all others. With modern medicine, we call that a delusion of grandeur. So, no matter what laws conservatives make, they will inevitably be bound by it, because they are still mortal humans.

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 18 hours ago

There is a book that I wish I could remember the title of because it deconstructs fascism. The goal isn't fascism but cronyism. The in group is a concentric circle that gets smaller and smaller as you reach the top. Once power is concentrated, you dole out power based on your influence with the person at the top.

But because the in group is so small, you are more likely to have coups. It's why fascism often doesn't stay in power long because someone more power hungry will come along.

Putin's days are numbered. He will be deposed either by his death or through a coup. He can only escape one of those.

[–] ploot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 18 hours ago

Someone has to be able and willing to enforce the law though. And the people have to be able and willing to remove officials who won't.

[–] samus12345@lemm.ee 2 points 19 hours ago

...Unless they're the president, according to the SCROTUS.