I hope this case is then used for future RICO cases as precedent for meritless reasons.
this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2025
189 points (99.0% liked)
politics
26563 readers
2611 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I am shocked. Someone protecting a makeup wearing pedophile. Just shocking.
It is without precedent because we don't hold people in power accountable. Being the first time it has been attempted doesn't mean the case doesn't have merit.
Back in 8th grade, me and my classmates were learning material for the Constitution Test. It would be fun to see what my teacher back in those days would think about this. "Not even the president is above the law", lol.
Nor that there is not legal precedent. smh.
Hang this motherfucker too. Sick of these motherfuckers helping fascist get away with their crimes. He should be put against the wall. If we get out from under this fascism we can't forgive and forget.
Agreed
Am I reading this wrong? The article seems to indicate that he's just a civil servant prosecutor? Is there any indication of bias?
This part. The elected republican bit. I'd love to trust that he could be bipartisan but having only received the case on the 17th and then dismissed it is suspect as fuck
Man literally has "scandal" in his name, it's like poetry.
What a shitty article. They only stated the 1st half of his statement providing the reason he dropped the case. It wasn't because the case never should have been brought (as the Trump statement says), but because the case is more suitable as a Federal case like the one Jack Smith was pursuing (and still can, once Trump is no longer president).
Great reasoning.. leave it for when it doesn't matter anymore
He's not exactly wrong, though. Trump pulled the same scam in several states...which automatically makes it a federal matter. However, I disagree that it shouldn't also be prosecuted at the state level.
If they violated state law, they should be held accountable in state court. It would guarantee the guilty parties wouldn't be eligible for a presidential pardon.
It's skandalakis!
I would never expect something like this from Mr. Skandal!
Add them to the list.