• Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    Trump is 100% going to blame this loser when he fucks the election up, and the following insurrection attempt.

    • WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      If Trump loses in November he’ll be in jail by January. The sentencing has already been scheduled. If the election is going to be stolen it’ll have to be stolen when the votes are cast or counted, not when the election is certified.

      • prof_wafflez@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        he’ll be in jail by January.

        Sigh - no he won’t, so can we stop pretending like he will ever face punishment for anything?

        • Notyou@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          I would believe a “house arrest” at Maralago. A house arrest where he gets to pick his security and visitors like Columbia did with Escobar.

          • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            I would believe a “house arrest” at Maralago.

            I would too, unless Congress revokes his Secret Service detail. Secret Service protection is what makes imprisoning him difficult, it’s either house arrest or they rededicate an entire prison wing to just him.

            I wouldn’t let him pick his security and restrict his visitors though. And absolutely no internet or social media. It’s supposed to be a punishment, after all.

          • The Snark Urge@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            I think he’d just ditch to someplace with no extradition so he can keep gassing up domestic terrorists from abroad.

  • snf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    I expect he’s going to say he didn’t mean that he fabricated the story, but instead meant that he “created the story” in the sense of bringing it to the media’s attention

    • bitwolf@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      He did say exactly that in the interview when called out. It’s in the twitter thread linked, let me mirror it here.

  • Liz@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    He should definitely resign from the Senate. I’m not sure if he’s legally allowed to back out of the VP nomination.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      He can’t be forced to serve but it may be too late to get his name off of ballots. I’m pretty sure the rules for that vary by state, though. We’ve already then through this once this year with RFK.

    • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      No one who voted or will vote for him gives a shit anyway though, so the only way he’s going to go is if R does the right thing which, we know how that will play out.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    I’ll never quit! First attempt… I’ll never leave his side! Second attempt… Oh shit this is real! Fuck that! Yeah Haitians are nice people I shouldn’t have lied! I’m sorry. I’m subjugating, quitting, resigning, whatever you want!

    Oh that’s it, just the two? Yeah I’m never leaving his side! Even if Haitians eat all my cats.

    • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      Can he be swapped? I thought the reason Biden got swapped is because he wasn’t locked in yet, but now the candidates are locked in.

      • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        I’m not so sure that he can be. He was nominated by Trump, and the party as a whole voted on both Trump and Vance, together. Would they need a new convention in order to select a new VP? I don’t know. I don’t think that anything like that has ever happened before, so it would be uncharted territory. Much like if the VP died in office.

        • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          They could always say that JD is officially on the ticket, but he is going to resign day 1 and let RFK Jr. have the job…

          • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            I’m not entirely sure that the president can simply appoint a new VP once they’re in office, since VP is an elected position.

            It’s a fascinating question, and I hope that there’s never any reason to see it answered.

            • bitchkat@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 days ago

              Agnew resigned. Nixon nominated Ford to replace. Congress approved the nomination. Ford became vp and became president when Nixon resigned. Ford repeated the process FOR whomever he selected for VP.

            • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              VP can resign at any time though. I’d have to double check, but I don’t think there is a line if succession for the VP, since the President is over the VP, they can just select a new VP, although Congress may have to have a majority vote to accept the appointment.

              Now to go check how good my HS government class was almost 20 years ago…

              Edit : 25th Amendment, Section 2

              Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

              I actually can’t find anything (quickly) about when/how the VP can resign, but I assume they would have to formally submit their resignation in writing, or verbally and directly to the President, who would accept the resignation. As far as I can tell, the VP could resign right after being sworn in.

              • skibidi@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 days ago

                If the VP spot is vacant, the president selects a new VP who must then be confirmed by the House and Senate; per the 25th amendment:

                Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

  • rustydrd@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    The crazy thing is: If he hadn’t admitted this, there wouldn’t have been calls for his resignation. The Republican party is fine with spreading harmful misinformation, but admitting to it is a no-go.

    • RedAggroBest@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      The people calling for it want him to resign as I’mSenator. It’s not really resigning if they just pick a new VP nominee

    • BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      Or, and I know it’s going to sound like a conspiracy theory, Trump picked JD because JD is so weird, and he knew that JD would tank. So when Trump drops JD it’ll give him a boost, like the one the democrats got when Biden dropped out. Trump has repeatedly kept lowering people’s expectations, to the point that if he somehow managed to put the round peg in the round hole, it would be a success. So imagine the boost Trump would get, for making the obvious decision to drop JD.

      But that plan requires that Trump is able to play the long game, and stay quiet about it. Two things we know isn’t plausible.

      • linearchaos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        They have so many people stacked at the polls and swing states that they’re not worried about actually winning by performance.

      • Thebeardedsinglemalt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        There were theories that when RFK jr flipped they wanted him at the VP candidate hard, but they were already stuck with Vance. Conspiracy theory time…they’re purposely tanking the already wildly unpopular Vance so it wouldn’t seem like such a fickle move.

      • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        If there is any conspiracy here, I would be more likely to believe the one where JD Vance was a plant whose goal is to sabotage Trump’s campaign.

        Although, I still think it’s most likely that they are just incompetent idiots, and aren’t sabotaging themselves on purpose at all.

        • BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          Oh I totally think you’re right in applying Hanlon’s razor here. The opposite would spell doom.

          But sometimes you’ve got to wonder how incompetent can they be. And at those times “they’re not babbling buffoons, it’s a clever ruse” seems a plausible explanation. I mean Trump parading his mistress on the campaign trail, what the actual fuck?

  • bean@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    “If I have to create stories so that the American media actually has to pay attention to the suffering of American people, then that’s what I’m going to do,” said Vance, a U.S. Senator representing Ohio.

    Ironically, Vance’s attempt to point out imagined “suffering” has led to actual suffering by his own constituents.

    Wow. What a horrible piece of shit. I knew he was ‘bad news’. But like. God damn. You’re a fucking moron. A perfect Trump pick for VP.

    If my eyes rolled back any further I’d go blind.

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    I’ve been saying for a while now the easiest way for trump to regain the upper hand is to kill JD Vance. I hope he doesn’t do it, but he killed a border security bill because he thought he’d be able to run on it. (Its a wasteful, racist bill, but for the people who accept the corporate media framing on immigration, it would have eased their concerns)

  • RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    Cool. So fucking arrest him. He’s a public figure that knowingly and willingly endangered an entire population. Throw the book at his big fat eyelined face.

      • dil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        My pet theory is that it’s a reaction to the couch fucker thing. The left made up and ran with a story, and this is them trying to do the same thing. Obvious problem being that it’s racist, dangerous, and not funny, but that’s the right for you.

        • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yelling “Fire!” in a crowded venue is not protected under Free Speech.

          I know that’s the famous example, but you’re actually wrong. It’s only not protected if there’s no fire, the person yelling it believes there is no fire, and the person yelling it is doing so to cause a panic or imminent lawless action. Speech protections in the US are extremely broad, and most of the exact lines and contours have been defined in court, often in cases involving the UCLA, the KK, or both (specifically in the form of the UCLA defending the KKK, which is where many of the lines as regards protests were determined).

        • Serinus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 days ago

          This isn’t even close to the other, actual stochastic terrorism they’ve done before.

          If they were going to get charged for it, it shouldn’t be this one.

          Now, whoever runs the Libertarian Party of New Hampshire account, that feels like an actual crime.

          The cat thing should disqualify him as president because he’s blatantly lying. But it’s not a crime.

        • newfie@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          Name the criminal statute he should be charged with violating.

          Agreed that he likely does not have a 1st amendment defense. But you still need a specific criminal statute to charge him with. I am unaware of any that he has likely violated with his xenophobic remarks

          Demagoguery that targets a marginalized group is an American tradition. It is unlikely that he committed any crime

            • newfie@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 days ago

              What are the enumerated elements of that per the statute, and how did Vance violate them?

          • cogman@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            Ohio could possibly sue him civilly because of the bomb threats that caused them to shut down schools. That’s the best I got.

            If anyone is hurt over this, then they likely have standing for a civil suit (see Alex Jones).

            Criminal it’s definitely more tricky. Trump will likely get away with telling his followers to storm the capitol, so I doubt “eating cats and dogs” comes close to the same standard.

            Once upon a time, admitting to something like this would have been an impeachable offense. But that’s long sailed as something Congress would fairly enforce.

            • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 days ago

              Trump will likely get away with telling his followers to storm the capitol

              Because he didn’t. He very carefully didn’t. And 1A protections are extremely broad and extremely strong. Pretty much anything short of “You guys, go storm the capitol right now and overturn the election!” is going to be protected speech, and he didn’t say that. He carefully avoided saying that, intentionally.

              What they’ll get him on as far as the attack (if anything) will be if he was involved in planning and staging it on the back end - if for example he was coordinating with people who were directly instrumental in shifting it from a protest at the steps of the capitol to an attack on the capitol in the hours, days, or weeks beforehand. Because his speech was definitely 1A protected.