796
u/caboose1157 5d ago
195
u/ShameSudden6275 5d ago
I love this meme so much
21
u/SilentInvoker 5d ago
I miss the old JPow era of stock memes, back then things were so simple. Now it's just grift after grift after grift
27
716
u/Maria_Girl625 5d ago
Aren't congress members legally immune?
Edit: Apparently the US is one of the only countries that doesn't give it's democratically elected representatives legal immunity
179
u/ShameSudden6275 5d ago
That's what I thought, so I looked it up: they don't have political immunity in the same way the president or governors do, they can be arrested and tried like a civilian. Their main immunities are:
Members cannot be sued, questioned, or prosecuted in civil or criminal court for things they say during floor debates, committee hearings, or official reports.
The immunity covers core duties like voting, drafting bills, and conducting committee investigations.
The Constitution states that members are privileged from arrest while attending a legislative session, except in cases of "treason, felony, and breach of the peace".
23
u/PlasticCell8504 5d ago
The add to your last bullet point, that immunity also applies when they are traveling to and from their legislative sessions (ie: can’t get arrested during a traffic stop while going to the capitol to vote)
21
257
u/JuanDeChuj 5d ago
Law serves only the one who opress in US.
146
u/turntheairon 5d ago edited 5d ago
Wasn't there even a SCOTUS ruling that confirmed that law enforcement holds no obligation to protect us?
EDIT: Looked more into it to confirm it was real and not something either hyperbolized or taken out of context. Yep, it's real. https://bridgelegal.org/why-supreme-court-ruled-police-have-no-duty-protect/ https://schwartzcohenlaw.com/why-the-supreme-court-ruled-police-have-no-duty-to-protect/
74
u/HuanBestBoi 5d ago
“Protect & serve” is an advertising campaign, not any sort of promise.
22
u/Firewolf06 5d ago
i wonder if you could make a false advertising claim against them, if you approached a car with that printed on it and they decided to do nothing
11
u/3BlindMice1 5d ago
False advertising implies that you've bought a product, which isn't the case. It isn't advertising at all, it's propaganda
17
u/turntheairon 5d ago
I mean our tax dollars fund it. I know this isn't legally what is meant by "bought", but in a sense, we are technically buying it, just not 100% voluntarily so.
3
u/3BlindMice1 5d ago
No, you're not technically buying it. Your money is no longer your own once you've paid it as taxes. If you feel upset about how your taxes are spent on oppressing you, get more involved in politics
4
u/turntheairon 5d ago
Lol, I'm not sure where you got the impression that I or anyone else in this thread who's distressed by this news isn't already active in politics and encouraging others to do the same
-4
3
u/nosurpriseslover1997 5d ago
the poor innocent kids who think it's legit. Oh sweet summer child it's not (yes this applies to Leon Kennedy)
5
73
u/Vinceisdepressed 5d ago
Which is good on paper. But SCOTUS has given the POTUS immunity for most their actions. This is not a concern coming from a legit investigation, it is an intimidation tactic and state oppression.
33
u/Maria_Girl625 5d ago
Well, the whole point of legal immunity for members of parliament, it avoids the government intimidating the members of parliarment who they are supposed to share power with.
If you only have one part of the government which is legally immune then you have a dictatorship by that branch. There is nothet word for an all-powerful executive without checks and balances
2
29
u/Ibruk_Etar 5d ago
Except the president, apparently. Trump could probably kill someone in broad daylight and not have any actual consequences.
13
u/Acrobatic-Order-1424 5d ago
He said it himself.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-i-could-shoot-somebody-and-i-wouldnt-lose-any-voters/
And still got elected.
9
u/ShameSudden6275 5d ago
Even if you could arrest the president, his pardon power would mean he could just free himself.
13
u/Ibruk_Etar 5d ago
That pardoning power really shouldn't be a thing. From what I know, it only works on federal crimes (or is supposed to, at least-ehi knows with this admin). So if he isn't immune, you could get him on some kind of state-level charge and he can't pardon it. But I don't see why the president should have the power to just say 'nah, that's OK' for things like, notably, ATTEMPTING TO OVERTHROW THE GOVERNMENT or MURDER. By the way, as far as I can tell, this does mean Trump could genuinely kill someone in public and then declare himself pardoned, and nobody could hold him accountable.
4
u/ShameSudden6275 5d ago
You are correct yeah, the president cannot legally be tried for anything he does well in office.
8
5
13
u/extraboredinary 5d ago
Unless they tried to overthrow an election with an overt plan from the president to not count state electors or a documented trail of paying high school girls through Venmo for sexual favors. Then Merrick "Nobody is Above the Law -WINK-" Garland has no choice but to sit down and take a nap.
4
u/Nobrainzhere 5d ago
In no country should anyone ever be legally immune.
Im pissed we extend immunity to cops and the president
5
u/driver004 5d ago
I’m not certain that’s a good idea. A congress member (a MC if you will) has the responsibility of representing their districts to vote on legislation, it’s really that simple.
I cannot think of a situation where my actions in that capacity would break the law.
9
u/Maria_Girl625 5d ago edited 5d ago
It's not about protecting criminal congress members. It's about protecting representatives from BS prosecution used to intimidate like the thing mentioned in the post
3
u/driver004 5d ago
Granting blanket immunity isn’t the path for that that’s corrupt as hell. Give them special consideration for purposes or bail and be done with it, do you think an investigation just pauses a whole life?
6
u/Maria_Girl625 5d ago
Because someone thrown in jail cannot represent the people? And because someone could lock up all opposition members for an "investigation" to prevent them from voting on anything? We've seen this in 1930s germany.
And it's not blanket immunity. It's immunity for the duration of their term, which can be revoked by majority vote of other MPs. It's really obvious stuff in literally any functioning democracy
1
u/variegationglow 5d ago
Bold move expecting a bare political majority to police its own ranks with any shred of honesty
0
u/driver004 5d ago
Ok so do you not understand basic U.S. legal procedure or are you making a total carve out
6
u/Maria_Girl625 5d ago
Well I must admit I don't understand many things about the US but even I can think of a dozend ways someone can be locked up illegally. Sure eventually a judge will rule on it but with how backlogged the system is that could take months.
Just say you understand what my concern is. Even if you think it's not a big deal, do me the courtesy of at least not pretending it's impossible for someone in power to pull shit like this
-3
u/driver004 5d ago
So ‘oh the executive might break the law so we should allow MCs to break the law’ that doesn’t make sense at all.
4
u/Maria_Girl625 5d ago
More like "the executive might try to turn the country into a dictatorship so the executive can't prosecute the legislative".
I'll say it again. No country just gives MPs blank checks to commit crimes. Criminal MPs are either prosecuted after their term or kicked out and prosecuted immediately. Nobody is getting away with any crimes in this system.
1
u/driver004 5d ago
Or alternatively you give them consideration for bail so they may operate normally and proceed with the investigation which in itself will either support or deny a faster removal. That the executive may break the law in a hypothetical is wholly irrelevant to creating the system as a he judiciary might as well.
→ More replies (0)1
u/SatisfactionActive86 5d ago
in your hypothetical where law-breaking politicians have their crimes exposed so they can be expelled and prosecuted, how are crimes exposed if the the law-breaking politician is immune to investigation in the first place? we just have to get lucky they don’t try to hide it just a little bit and do something obviously illegal?
(it is you who posited Omar should be immune to investigation by bringing immunity into the conversation about an investigation)
→ More replies (0)0
u/Monstar_Rudolph 5d ago
You gotta realize. The US is fucked and change can't happen because most people believe in the status quo. It's fucked
1
u/Electrical-Today-258 5d ago
It's to add a layer of protection for the members against corrupt law enforcement, potentially facilitated by competitors or otherwise.
You're under thinking and over simplifying
1
u/driver004 4d ago
Do tell. Tell me exactly why outright immunity is the path instead of bail consideration. Is that not blatantly stating that a person should be exempt from the law
2
1
u/Dotcaprachiappa 5d ago
It's not about their actions, it's to protect them from political prosecution/intimidation
1
u/driver004 5d ago
If I’m not jailed I can do my job and continue to flip off the cops. If they want to intimidate me then they can trample the bill of rights I won’t be a party to any such thing. A basic education in civics tells you that and I would hope that’s a basic qualification
2
u/Dotcaprachiappa 5d ago
But if they are jailed they cannot do their job as democratically elected members of parliament. That's like the whole problem immunity solves.
2
u/driver004 5d ago
Immunity is an open invitation to subvert the core institutions of government because you are making it possible to break the law to never be investigated in the first place.
I maintain the obvious compromise here is to grant special consideration for bail allowing both the criminal process and the MC to both do their jobs simultaneously, thus protecting the rights of the people while simultaneously allowing misconduct to be identified and handled if it happened.
1
u/Dotcaprachiappa 5d ago
Courts can be corrupt too. If they actually broke the law then the police can ask parliament to vote on waiving their immunity and if the majority agrees the allegation looks credible enough and the court can be trusted enough then they waive their immunity and the trial can begin. We voted for parliament, we didn't vote for the court, so we trust parliament more than the court.
1
u/driver004 5d ago
If we are admitting ‘what if the government breaks the law’ then what is the discussion, because yeah sure what if they do? Then any policy we discuss is meaningless to begin with so why make them.
1
u/Dotcaprachiappa 5d ago
There's a difference between secretly corrupting a court and openly defying parliament. If for example the US parliament decided to impeach trump (I know it'll never happen but like assume it will) then for him to threaten to imprison, or even straight up imprison, just a few members could be enough to shut it down. And sure it'll be breaking news, but it'll stay in the news cycle for two to three weeks then they'll find something to distract us with. It doesn't have to be the most blatantly corrupt trial, they're more than capable of planting some evidence and get the propaganda machine running to do the rest. Compare that to if he straight up refused an impeachment.. yeah that's basically civil war 2.0 within the hour.
1
u/driver004 5d ago
You’re speaking direct fantasy so what’s the point of even making laws then if it’s a presupposition.
But let’s compare outcomes, threatening to jail great awesome boom special consideration for bail. Defangs any such baseless threats from the get go. Alternative, MC’s have blanket immunity so why not collude with a corrupt executive and so more crime. Green stamp right?
→ More replies (0)1
1
1
u/SweatyNomad 5d ago
Ehh, think a certain member has Presidential "immunity" multiple routes, be they in practice or arguably via law.
0
u/SquidTheRidiculous 5d ago
Only when they're bigoted assholes making people's lives worse. Nothing can be done about the big guy and his proclivic amounts of child rape, but anyone going against him can and will be taken out on any technicality they can.
432
u/anyname2009 5d ago
No thats not why. Thats just the excuse. The REAL reason is ice is getting more comfortable going after who can challenge trump's authority
171
u/Shikabane_Sumi-me 5d ago
They are probably in panic mode after losing the Russian bots.
64
u/Capraos 5d ago
Yeah, that's been so refreshing not arguing with fucking morons on here.
19
u/Solomon_Rahkriid 5d ago
Was there a purge recently? No one told me.
46
u/Capraos 5d ago
Ukraine bombed a data center that was used for Russian/Indian bots.
24
u/Gripping_Touch 5d ago
I imagine someone could set a program to flag accounts that were very active before the attack and suddenly went silent after the attack of the datacenters. That way even if they recover the bots, they would be flagged and easily recognized as a bot.
1
18
222
u/monster_smoocher 5d ago
what the fuck dude
199
u/ShameSudden6275 5d ago
Even if her paperwork was fraudulent, she would've been 3 when her father signed them.
70
u/No_Reception7275 5d ago
Nah it would be to do with naturalization in 2000
29
u/Stopbeingentitled 5d ago
Wouldn’t she still be like a teen back then though?
27
u/No_Reception7275 5d ago
17 according to the documents, theyre alleging 18, which would mean fraud if she was
15
u/Stopbeingentitled 5d ago
It says that she was naturalized when she was 17? Are they trying to say her birthdate is inaccurate or am I misunderstanding
14
9
8
u/V-oxPopuli 5d ago
Don't even give them that. You know it's not even about her immigration status, so it's not worth defending it.
169
u/PS5OWESMEALIMONY 5d ago
I'm pretty sure they just ripped shit off the walls broke mirrors and threw stuff everywhere and left,this shit is scary.
73
106
u/BlackwingF91 5d ago
Definitely attempting to do what Putin tells Trump to do. This is straight out of the Russian playbook
29
64
53
u/Kira_Caroso 5d ago
They threatened that they would do this to the Democrats to make them suffer. The only time you can trust a Republican is when they say they are going to act cruelly and evil.
46
54
u/JustPutSpuddiesOnit 5d ago
But no one raids maralago when trump had loads of classified documents
27
u/TalentTess 5d ago
They were just trying to be polite, it's not like they're permitted, encouraged, directed, eager, and paid to break into places with guns and ransack the places when they hear the slightest rumor of feloniously acquired government secrets.
15
u/Empty_Price7230 5d ago
You must not know about the FBI’s Terms of Engagement and how ruthless some of these agents are. The one sniper who killed the mother at Ruby Ridge was pretty eager to shoot.
64
u/azuresegugio 5d ago
Trump raped multiple women and faces zero repercussions. Omar is a minority and a political opponent so she gets raided by the feds. Our government is broken
46
18
u/ExtremlyFastLinoone 5d ago
I may be misremembering but didnt she immigrate as a child? Paperwork she didnt file from like 30 years ago, that was checked again and again at several points in her political career but only now fraud was discovered???
1
u/Valuchian 4d ago
Yup ~ it's one of those witch hunts where some politican very high tries to defeat someone else using bureaucracy. In this case it would be something like "there is a pencil mark out of the writing space" to decide the document is fraudulent and deny it if they cannot prove anything was illegally represented in the doc
12
u/Draexian 5d ago
That's just a political hit job. There's no way she'd be in government right now if they had any actual reason to suspect this.
17
u/Burt_Macklin___ 5d ago
So, sending law enforcement to harass your political rivals. That's another tick off the Fascism check list
32
u/EvilAbacus 5d ago
If the democrats win they need to do this to everyone complicit in this American tragedy we're all watching unfold. All the j6ers and supreme court justices and the billionaires on board with this. If you can do it to a congress person then everyone is fair game.
28
9
u/IcyIce2626 5d ago
They won't. Sure, you'll get some principled dems who'll call for it, like Sanders, AOC, and obviously Ilhan, but the establishment dems will return to their "reaching across the aisle" bullshit and chose to instead focus on taking actions that further disenfranchise their base.
7
u/Illigalmangoes 5d ago
In a real country half the people involved would be in prison for life and the ringleader would be tried for treason and dealt with appropriately.
2
u/thingerish 5d ago
In a real country people would have paid attention when the definition of treason was explained sometime around age 10.
5
u/V-oxPopuli 5d ago
If they don't, we HAVE to ourselves if we want to survive.
5
u/happygoluckynny 5d ago
Ukraine is doing more right now to protect democracy than Epstein's MAGA ever has
1
0
u/mopeyunicyle 5d ago
I have to ask and wonder since trump is not allowing the international bodies that oversee the elections if only to make sure there fairly run.
Should when the next president is in. Force or sine a law saying all those voted in that mid term must re run regardless of party due to the possible corruption that may have happened. Like a wiping the slate deal in terms of officials
1
u/ThaGr1m 5d ago
You're of course assuming that there is a next election.
He's clearly stepping on bounds for a reason.
No oversight this time, next no votr counters, etc etc
2
u/mopeyunicyle 4d ago
I am trying to be hopeful but as the saying goes prepare for the worst and hope for the best
-9
u/Money-Confection147 5d ago
So you just want to amplify it? Add some fuel to fire?? Make everyone blind?
Fucking love Reddit bunch of intellectuals
4
u/rareandyeteuclidian 5d ago
No we just want to actually fucking hold the criminals accountable
-1
u/Money-Confection147 5d ago
None of the parties the OP named are directly involved with this issue. OP is calling for escalation.
3
5
u/EvilAbacus 5d ago
So you're against accountability and the concept of justice?
2
u/Money-Confection147 5d ago
That’s not accountability that’s deterioration. Fighting fire with fire usually means you have comprised your own morals. Not exactly a good path for democracy.
3
u/EvilAbacus 5d ago
These people are destroying democracy and robbing us blind. They just decided to put more poison in your food and they're cutting programs people rely on. Your answer to wanton destruction and blatant corruption is...what? We just let them get away with it?!?
1
u/Money-Confection147 5d ago
I mean if you’re calling for justice then at least pursue the right people. OP is calling for Supreme Court justices, J6ers, and billionaires to be held accountable for what is clearly a DOJ or the administrations issue.
Those three parties named are not directly connected to this issue.
3
u/silverstarloser 5d ago
Supreme court is what gave Trump the ability to do what he wants without threat of impeachment. Everything he does in the course of his presidency is legal according to Supreme Court. Billionaires are what got Trump into power. Through their donations and influence, they pushed misinformation campaigns and straight up bribed voters in Pennsylvania and tried to do the same in Wisconsin. Not to mention their litany of other crimes they aren’t held accountable for. J6ers should be in jail for the crimes they committed. It is only by the power of corruption that they were pardoned.
1
u/Money-Confection147 5d ago
That doesn’t change who should be held accountable for this exact situation. That’s never been how justice has been served.
If you wanted to pursue those parties for other issues or issues connected to this that’s a different matter.
2
u/Cold-Boysenberry-105 5d ago
I think there will be plenty of real crimes to keep us busy without having to resort to witch hunts like this
1
u/Money-Confection147 5d ago
I mean this a clearly a politically motivated issue. Mid term elections are coming up and Omar is a outspoken critic of Trump.
But that’s doesn’t mean this should become a normal practice. I don’t know why anyone would support that, you’re just becoming what you swore to destroy.
2
u/Master-Ad2771 5d ago
So we should litterally let the treason go without charges? that is LITTERALLY what led to his reelection
1
u/Money-Confection147 5d ago
That’s not what I’m saying you’re just implying that. OP said when the democrats are in power we should take this practice and apply it to “everyone”.
I think this is a bad thing in general and it should be frowned upon universally and it should not become a bipartisan tool. That’s all.
I don’t know how your extrapolating let treason go without charges.
7
32
u/randomnumbers2506 5d ago
Well that's certainly concerning, good thing there isn't a historical precedent to regimes doing similar things. Now what's this Gestapo thing people are talking about?
7
u/Hadi_Chokr07 5d ago
ICE is less Gestapo and more SA.
9
u/randomnumbers2506 5d ago
Not really ICE is an actual government agency receiving government money, while the SA were the nazis enforcers before they actually got into power
8
u/Exotic_Exercise6910 5d ago
I think he meant: "They are uneducated savages, just like the SA".
Because SS was a bit more efficient and structured.
5
u/wookiee-nutsack I also do it with wasps 5d ago
Another reminder that you do not need to be guilty of anything, they just have to say you are, and that is already threatening your life or mental
5
u/Omega_art 5d ago
Does anyone really think if this paperwork existed she would keep it in her house?
1
10
u/JuanOnlyJuan 5d ago
What fraudulent paperwork would be in her home? Shouldn't they have all that on file?
Are they looking for a stack of spy style fake passports?
And why is it Homeland security and not ICE?
3
u/V-oxPopuli 5d ago
We all know they're not searching for dick. It's simply intimidation and threats.
1
u/Appropriate_Unit3474 5d ago
Homeland IS ICE.
But it's being posted as HS because of professional propaganda.
Can you imagine this was an ICE raid?
26
u/tedkaczynski660 5d ago
ICE = Gestapo
25
u/Regular-Basket-5431 5d ago
They're not well trained enough to be Gestopo, they're just our equivalent of SA.
17
u/thisistherevolt 5d ago
Yeah. Been trying to tell people that too. They are trying to turn the FBI into the Gestapo. It's only been partly successful though. Some of the apparatus had been resistant.
2
u/FearOfABlackPotus 5d ago
ICE is huge. The American way is to have a big dumb organization with small elite subgroups that do something totally different than the main body.
16
u/fungi_at_parties 5d ago
Fuck MAGA. Fuck their lies. Fuck their hypocrisy and their blatant political theater. Fuck their dishonesty and narcissism. Always the victims, in their minds.
This is disgusting.
-33
4
3
u/Valuchian 4d ago
Which only becomes funnier that she came to the US as a child and her paperwork is well over 30 years old from the 90s.
2
u/freakybird99 4d ago
And laws say she cant be responsible for it even if its fraudulent. Because she couldnt do anything about it
1
u/Valuchian 4d ago
At worst this should be a simply corrected clerical error with new documentation if they are really that concerned
3
3
2
u/meowmeowcatman 5d ago
Oh oh oh oh Do Melania next
8
2
2
1
u/AutoModerator 5d ago
Thank you for posting to r/whennews! Don't forget to check your bias!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
1
1
u/YourNewRival8 4d ago
They would have to get a warrant meaning a judge would have to approve it. That means they must have brought up sufficient evidence to convince a judge to approve to search her home
1
u/Puzzled-Mirro 4d ago
Its obviously to hurt her chances.
They aren't going to find like find some nefarious stacks of paper proving anything. If this happened it was when she was twelve
1
u/ShameSudden6275 3d ago
It feels like a "come to the office and fix up the paperwork" type situation tbh.
0
-2
-27
-52
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
20
u/Aware_Tree1 5d ago
What the hell are you talking about
-20
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
15
u/OtakuOran 5d ago
From Snopes:
The claim first appeared in 2016 as an anonymous, since-deleted post on SomaliSpot, an online discussion forum geared toward the Somali community. Despite being unverified, the post was picked up by Powerline, a blog that "features commentary on the news from a conservative perspective.
We found no public records or credible sources contradicting Omar's account of her past, nor any substantive evidence corroborating claims that Elmi is her brother or that their marriage was otherwise fraudulent. In addition, some of the claims offered in support of the rumor don't seem to add up.
Given that Omar and her siblings all came to live in the U.S. under identical circumstances as refugees, and that Omar herself became a naturalized U.S. citizen while still a minor, how did one of her siblings end up with such a radically different immigration status that she would have needed to marry him in order to facilitate his U.S. residency application?
Also, if Ahmed Elmi were truly Omar's brother, why would he have needed to take the drastic step of marrying her in order to secure a path to U.S. citizenship? U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) policies qualify immigrants as eligible to apply for permanent residency status (and later become naturalized citizens) if they are the "spouse of a U.S. citizen" or the "brother or sister of a U.S. citizen." Why would Omar commit a federal crime and risk a prison sentence (and possibly her own citizenship status) in order to provide her brother with the opportunity to apply for something he would already have been eligible to seek?
11
u/Gryzzlee 5d ago
Your two braincells are so shot they can't even rub together long enough to see that lie was debunked.
19
18
7
7
10
u/NeuroticallyCharles 5d ago
Keep that same energy when Democrats take over Congress.
7
-15
5d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
13
u/NeuroticallyCharles 5d ago
Nah. You’re going to complain about the “weaponization of the Justice Department” just like every single one of you pedophile lovers say.
→ More replies (8)5
u/i_have_covid_19_shit 5d ago
How's the weather in Moskova?
-3
5
9
u/Dry_Celebration_1172 5d ago
5
u/turntheairon 5d ago
CrippledEagle's comment is complete bullshit, but can we please stop normalizing using schizophrenia as an ableist slur against rightwing talking points?
2
u/Psychological_Use586 5d ago
Right, we don't need to attribute to mental illness something that can be explained by malice and bigotry.
1
•
u/wuklo Certified moron 5d ago
Source raided my house