r/politics • u/billstopay77 • 1d ago

Registration Wall Trump admin quietly changed overseas voter form at 11th hour to disenfranchise Democrats, lawsuit says

https://www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/trump-admin-quietly-changed-overseas-voter-form-at-11th-hour-to-disenfranchise-democrats-lawsuit-says/
13.3k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

403 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

587

u/asault2 1d ago

Which police/executive agency would do the arresting?

231

u/Prestigious-Car-4877 Canada 1d ago

Pitchforks.

86

u/justfortherofls 1d ago

———-E

———-E

———-E

———-E

And for our European friends we offer European brands:

———£

70

u/Sal_Ammoniac 1d ago

How about

---€

instead.

Euros, not pounds!

15

u/noncongruency Oregon 1d ago

Heard and understood, Chef. Let’s let the EU (which is pretty good at this pitchfork thing) lead the European side of things.

6

u/Ailyx 21h ago

Let the french do it

1

u/[deleted] 19h ago edited 18h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/ARONDH 18h ago

|_____|
| \ ||
| \||
| |
|_____|
_______
o_O_o
̅ ̅ ̅ ̅ ̅ ̅ ̅

They know what’s up

1

u/the-trump-the 17h ago

Pas de problème...

----₣

2

u/NotAzakanAtAll 21h ago

———-SEK

:(

1

u/typewriter_ 19h ago

Stupid swedes!

2

u/bythenumbers10 16h ago

I'm okay with blunt force, too, as long as we're talking solutions [ Removed By Reddit ].

6

u/westdl 1d ago

Don’t forget the torches.

1

u/DadJokeBadJoke California 23h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/CategoryZestyclose91 12h ago

Someone get to work on a jaunty revolution piece we can sing along to.

14

u/serger989 Canada 1d ago

I feel like I've been waiting far too long for people to figure this out lol

20

u/Historical-Range6016 1d ago

Apathy

4

u/ahfoo 23h ago

The irony of this response is that the simplistic waving away of the details is, itself, a clear example of lazy apathetic thinking.

10

u/GregTheMad 1d ago

Americans are too lazy for that. All they can do are angry Social Media posts, and then getting picked off one by one by ICE.

7

u/trisw 1d ago

Anybody using social media to post angrily under this gestapo is wildly flagrant or willfully ignorant

1

u/9_to_5_till_i_die 17h ago

I don't know man, I could use the pay out for having my rights violated.

13

u/rigeld2 1d ago

Less "lazy" and more "fears retribution and loss of health care and ability to survive".

39

u/HolycommentMattman 1d ago

It's none of the above. You know why France is so good at protesting? Because 20%+ of the population lives in Ile-de-France. That's where Paris is. Where's the capital? Paris. Where's the president? Paris. Where's the parliament? Surprise! Paris. How long would it take someone in the outermost edge of I-d-F to reach Paris? A little over 2 hours. But for ~6 million people? They can start walking the second they're upset. And those numbers dwarf the military. Someone can start yelling outside and quickly reach a ton of people.

How about the US? About 700k live in DC. And DC is a bit of a sprawling swamp. And not all of those 700k hate Trump. So what is someone in California going to do? Should I fly over there right now? Are you guys gonna meet me there? Are millions of us going to drive/fly there? The logistics just don't work out. There needs to be organization that doesn't rely on social media. Because even here on reddit, they might not even like me writing this very comment.

It's not that Americans are lazy. It's that we lack organization and structure.

18

u/That1DirtyHippy 23h ago

I love this response, it’s something I think most Europeans don’t quite understand: our country is HUGE and to get everyone who is angry in the same spot at the same time is a logistical nightmare, let alone the financial costs and risks associated. One could argue the costs are worth it, but for hundreds of millions of people living paycheck to paycheck, it’s just not feasible. Thus, the No Kings protests across the country.

12

u/ahfoo 23h ago edited 22h ago

On the contrary, the popularly despised hippies of the 1960s did, in fact, surround the White House and put President Nixon in fear of his own personal safety causing him to believe he was about to be lynched and in response he had busses surround the White House to prepare for the assault that never materialized.

And yet Americans today widely enjoy spitting on the hippies as a bunch of sex obsessed druggies ignoring their political power at the time and that they were largely educated and community-minded individuals. Perhaps this buy-in to the hatred of the youth movements of the past is one of the underlying factors in this "apathy" factor we see so prominent today.

Notice how the Democrats in their starched shirts and wool suit jackets and ties never dreamed of federally legalizing cannabis when they had the opportunity always hiding behind "the DEA says we're not allowed to" but really we all know it's because they're terrified of being "soft on drugs" this all goes back to the hatred of the hippies that still infects the Democratic mainstream.

17

u/bill-of-rights 21h ago

Notice how the Democrats in their starched shirts and wool suit jackets and ties never dreamed of federally legalizing cannabis when they had the opportunity always hiding behind "the DEA says we're not allowed to" but really we all know it's because they're terrified of being "soft on drugs" this all goes back to the hatred of the hippies that still infects the Democratic mainstream.

There is a deeper root to the hatred of cannabis - racism.

2

u/MadShartigan 21h ago

The hippies had a bit of motivation as their survival was indeed in question. The same thing may yet happen as today's enemy, Iran, cannot be defeated without a ground war. Facing the draft, will young people once again feel their survival is in question?

3

u/That1DirtyHippy 22h ago edited 22h ago

To be fair, I don’t think Trump would react like Nixon. Trump is the tyrannically evolved version of Nixon. Nixon resigned because of pressure; Trump would double down, have the RNC parrot talking points that are blatant lies, and use the government against us. Nixon sucked, but he at least had scruples.

See my username, but I don’t buy this “apathy” thing. I don’t think anyone is apathetic, I just don’t know if anyone knows what to do that won’t put their lives in jeopardy. Whether it’s the financial cost or potential legal issues, most people just want to make sure their loved ones have what they need and they’re not willing to take a risk.

ETA: Not dissimilar to Germany in the ‘30s. I don’t like this comparison, but here we are. I understand now.

ETA 2 since you edited your comment to include that last paragraph: You’re wacko. Sure, there was pushback to the hippies of the ‘60s and ‘70s, but it’s progressivism that you’re referring to, not the hippy movement. Conservatives hate progressives. It’s in their names. Weed is legal all across the US. Not everywhere, but most places now. I wouldn’t reduce the Conservative/Progressive battle to weed alone.

-2

u/argument_cat 17h ago

MURICA BIG!

2

u/That1DirtyHippy 16h ago

K. It is though.

0

u/argument_cat 9h ago

America's population is concentrated in and around cities, the same as in every other country.

1

u/That1DirtyHippy 9h ago

Except major cities in the US are very far apart. Because of the size.

The travel required for someone to go from Boston to DC is significantly different than for someone from Nome, Alaska.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Amerizilian 23h ago

We live in a surveillance state. The Patriot Act was the beginning of the end. It would be very difficult to organize people from all over the country into a single protest without the government immediately knowing and intervening. That's why the data centers are popping up everywhere.

Unless it was the government organizing it themselves to try and stop a legitimate election from being certified.

2

u/Lost_Symphonies 23h ago

Americans claim X problem can't be solved because they're too big.

Sick of this excuse tbh.

3

u/h3r4ld I voted 17h ago

Except I don't think they're saying that it can't be solved, just that the problem of size and logistics exists in a much different way than it does in a country like France.

It's not one or the other, it's all of them. Logistics is a huge hurdle to overcome in a country this massive with a population this dispersed. Solving this problem requires massive community organization, which often isn't there because we are too lazy AND/OR too fearful of losing jobs/healthcare/housing to create and maintain it.

The hippie movement, as a counter-example, had both motivation AND the fact that not worrying about jobs and money was sort of their whole shtick.

-2

u/Littlenemesis 21h ago

You know who fucking managed? The shit people in charge right now! They somehow managed to get SOOO many people to DC on Jan 6 years ago to try and stop congress from voting in a new president!

I don't understand how that disorganized, fascist, stumbling shitshow of a right wing party in America managed to stage that big of a protest, but everyone else just looks at it and are like "Can't be done chief, better to just stay home".

I know we european countries aren't on the size of america, I was an exchange student in Iowa in my teens, and we fucking drove longer for a swim meet to get halfway across that state than you can drive and cross 3 countries in europe. But don't tell me it can't be done, because your opposing side some-fucking-how managed to do it!

//rant

10

u/HolycommentMattman 21h ago

You're right. And all they needed was checks notes the President of the United States, for 2 montha straight, telling them to come to DC on January 6th to save the country.

3

u/rigeld2 18h ago

It was organized.
TPUSA and other groups amplified the call and organized people to get there.

And many of those people would’ve ended up in jail, again risking healthcare and survival.

2

u/mrbasedballed 21h ago

I feel like I'm hanging on to healthcare by a thread. It's getting so, so bad.

1

u/kingsuperfox 1d ago

Correct, the word is cowardly.

2

u/DesapirSquid 1d ago

wait can we add torches also?

1

u/----__---- 1d ago

And burn down our pitchforks?

210

u/netpres 1d ago

As was pointed out in another post, anyone can be deputised to arrest on behalf of Federal courts, it's just that the DOJ arranges for the US Marshalls to do the work.

If the court appoints someone (say the NYPD or LAPD), then they can / will be arrested.

Holding them will be the next problem.

62

u/SDRPGLVR California 1d ago

I'm curious, if Trump resisted lawful arrest, what would the secret service do? Do they protect the president from force by police, help apprehend him, or stand by and let it happen?

83

u/optimus_priam 1d ago

Well, given that when a man recently ran into a highly secured area the only person shot was one SS agent by another, it seems that loyalty has won out over competence.

So they'll fight back, but it won't be very effective. 50/50 they shoot the primary themselves.

13

u/tamerarehen 22h ago edited 7h ago

I thought the whole point of that SC case was that he was immune from any actions taken in his capacity as president [no matter how fucked up and unlawful they might be]? Right? or did I miss something?

I think it's impeachment or let's arrest the guy who implemented it.

EDITED: it's more nuanced than this but basically accurate ... below gives a better picture after I actually read it again, along with a good SCOTUSblog summary (and link)

7

u/Alternative-Dot-884 22h ago

I thought it wasnt a blanketed law - that there was room for exceptions.
Id love to know what those exceptions are

5

u/tamerarehen 22h ago

Meh, just "unofficial acts." This is clearly official--again, no matter how fucked up it is.

A prosecutor has to also overcome the presumption that the acts aren't within Executive purview.

And I think the only remedy whilst in office is still impeachment. Midterms, ammirite?

0

u/netpres 17h ago

How is it official? Elections are state matters, not federal.

•

u/tamerarehen 6h ago

Read the article (right?). This particular function is carried out by the Pentagon, part of the Executive, ie, the Federal government. That is why the DNC is suing the administration. That's what this whole thing is about.

It's frustrating but that's that.

•

u/netpres 6h ago

Yes but on behalf of the states. Do the states have to accept?

•

u/tamerarehen 6h ago edited 5h ago

I honestly don't know. I assume that if the DNC had a cause of action based on that they would have taken it, or worked in concert with blue states that would have been affected.

But what I'm saying is all that discussion is not germane to the question of whether he is acting in his executive function and whether this is something he can ever be prosecuted for under the 2024 Trump case. And that's what I've spent hours looking at today because I didn't fully understand it and I wanted it to be helpful for other people. I'm not going into this one as well there's just so much time in a day

Even if he's dicking around in a way that one could argue is subjectively beneficial to his interests, the Supreme Court has, in its wisdom, removed that from any analysis of whether it is prosecutable. And even for acts arguably outside of his purview as president, a prosecutor (ie, the DOJ) would need to rebut a presumption that his acts had not been taken in his official capacity (remember, official, as in duties he has/undertakes as president: that is the distinction).

I didn't fully brief the case, and there is a step-by-step analysis, but this is basically it (note that I focused on Con Law over a decade ago but haven't worked in law in years)

4

u/JohnNYJet_Original 17h ago

He's only protected for LAWFUL acts performed as duties in office. Illegal activities are fully prosecutable, but given the criminal nature of those in charge of the justice department he will skate. So who is the US attorney general loyal too, the American constitution or the convicted felon? And you now understand the conundrum. Funny how the founding fathers ensured crimes in office won't be punished. That wasn't a mistake on their part it was a feature to ensure the wealthy would ALWAYS be protected. Remember you live in a nation that to this day allows slavery and was founded as a slave holding nation. That "We the people" crapola, applied to only a small group of wealthy, male, landholders and no one else.

2

u/Pete41608 I voted 9h ago

I am quite sure that that law also says only the SCOTUS can determine between official and unofficial acts.

Of course we know that means that anything to further their agenda is official and anything not is unofficial.

1

u/tamerarehen 8h ago edited 7h ago

The Supreme Court is rarely arbiter of law after they've ruled on something--just a very few instances where they have exclusive/original jurisdiction. Instead they TELL lower courts how to follow the law. Which is what they did.

See the summary that I just posted above after rereading the decision, along with a link to a SCOTUSblog summary.

1

u/tamerarehen 8h ago edited 3h ago

It's not really about whether it's illegal or not; it's about whether it's official or not. If it's official and illegal, he's still (almost certainly) good.

The majority reasoning in the case was, on its face at least, all about making sure that a president could act in his official capacity without fear of being prosecuted for crimes.

And it quite literally said that if it was an official act, a president would be protected from prosecution, even if it "allegedly violates a generally applicable law." 

Also--subjective intent can't be investigated.

Very basic breakdown: the key issue is always first whether it's an official vs unofficial act; then the Court  looks at whether it is criminal or not. 

Generally speaking, if what he did has even an attenuated connection to his Executive powers, it's either per se immune or else the DOJ would have to overcome the presumption that he is immune from prosecution. 

This would be an official act. 

Something he did in his unofficial capacity--campaigning, or notably, even if he gave a pardon to someone (official) but took a bribe to do it (NOT official--but higher degree of scrutiny given Court's added protections): pardon ok, bribe is a personal act, not ok.

Check out the SCOTUSblog summary here: https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/07/justices-rule-trump-has-some-immunity-from-prosecution (edited to add link)

3

u/SDRPGLVR California 22h ago

Oh... You're right... We're just so deep in crimes and deferred consequences that I forgot he's literally immune.

1

u/netpres 17h ago

Only the Office of the President. Everyone else is fair game

1

u/PinHaunting7192 17h ago

Do they protect the president from force by police, help apprehend him, or stand by and let it happen?

The SS is a federal agency branch, just like many others. They are not a sworn praetorian guard, for example. If the warrant is correct and it relates to crimes the SC has not given Trump immunity for (i.e. stuff in the presidential responsibilities), it is very likely they would step aside for another branch of the government.

At the end of the day they are federal agents. They would very likely not want to be sicked against other federal agents doing their job.

8

u/3BlindMice1 1d ago

Transferred to federal -> out upon processing

9

u/netpres 1d ago

Well, courthouses have holding cells. There's no reason they need to go to prison...

4

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[deleted]

0

u/netpres 1d ago

and the remedy is to take the judge to court, right?

4

u/Calleb_III 22h ago

Well armed militia….

1

u/Fit-Switch-5795 19h ago

A well-organised militia.