this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2025
810 points (98.2% liked)

politics

24347 readers
5288 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
 

Useless. Time for the Social Democrats to form their own party.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bluemellophone@lemmy.world 12 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

Their stance is Trump came out of his two impeachments politically stronger than he went into them, and unless 14 GOP Senators decide to switch their allegiance all of a sudden the act of impeachment is practically useless.

[–] Quetzalcutlass@lemmy.world 7 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

Plus since the proceedings were guaranteed to fail (even setting aside the party votes, while Trump has committed many constitutional violations, this one is shared by several of his predecessors and was an especially stupid thing to hinge an impeachment vote on - doubly so because it's not technically a violation until 60 days have passed), all they'd accomplish is burning a substantial amount of political will (something the Democratic party is severely lacking in) to... accomplish nothing but making Donald even worse? He already attacks Democratic states that have shown relatively minor opposition; if their representatives supported impeachment then life could suddenly become a lot harder for their constituents. Unless you're an accelerationist it was a bad idea all around.

(I should note I don't support this rationale - cowardly appeasement has never worked - but I can understand it, at least in theory. I'm mostly pissed that they pulled this stunt on such a flimsy pretext when there were plenty of rock-solid justifications to base an impeachment on)

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 3 points 3 hours ago

He needs to be impeached for his flagrant violations of the Posse Commitatus act, but that was more than a week ago, so nobody remembers.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)
  1. It takes 67 Senators to remove.
[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 3 points 3 hours ago

It takes 2/3 of voting senators to remove him. That doesn't need to be 67 if some of them abstain, resign, are recalled, or are otherwise unwilling or incapable of casting a vote.