this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2023
364 points (98.7% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2861 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Sixteen people forged documents and claimed to be "duly elected and qualified electors" for the state of Michigan, Attorney General Dana Nessel said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MicroWave@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The 16 people being charged in Michigan allegedly met in the basement of the state's Republican Party headquarters and signed multiple certificates claiming they were “the duly elected and qualified electors for president and vice president of the United States of America for the state of Michigan,” Nessel said in recorded remarks.

[–] Phlogiston@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

“They may have felt compelled to follow the call to action from a president they held fealty to. They may have even genuinely believed that this was their patriotic duty.” She continued, “But none of those reasons or feelings provide legal justification to violate the law and upend our Constitution and our nation’s traditions of representative government, self-determination, and a government by the people.”

So if their defense ends up being "we were just following orders" does that mean they could flip and become witnesses against trump? How many of them, in how many states, would it take before all these charges land in his lap too?

[–] DontMakeItTim@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’m getting the opposite from that quote.

[–] Phlogiston@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Agreed, its not that they can succeed


the original quote points out that "none of those reasons or feelings provide legal justification to violate the law". What I was wondering is if this is a HINT that perhaps these folks could testify about why they might have felt it was a call to action from the president. Like, did he literally call them and ask them to commit this crime? Would they testify to that in return for, maybe, having this weak ass excuse be accepted and they don't spend time behind bars?

Anyway, thats what I was wondering. (And of course this is a simplification. Probably a few levels between them and Trump)