edit: I have changed my title to match the new NYTimes headline. Sorry about the all caps, I guess they are really excited about this lol

Also shoutout to @[email protected] who shared a gift article link in the comments. I hope you don’t mind but I kinda stole it and updated the post

  • donuts
    link
    fedilink
    1496 months ago

    This is only the tip of the iceberg. Trump is a fucking convicted felon and a serial rapist. Fuck him. Now on to sentencing.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1176 months ago

    If he is guilty on even a single count, the former president and the presumptive republican nominee for the White House will not be able to vote for himself

    What a shit show the Republican party has become.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      20
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Lock her him up!

      We even have signs that will work for this occasion with a slight modification.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    636 months ago

    One way or the other, it will be historic. This is much faster than I expected the Jury to deliberate.

      • Lemminary
        link
        fedilink
        36 months ago

        Sorry but what is “kagis”? I tried looking it up and found nothing.

      • Schadrach
        link
        fedilink
        English
        26 months ago

        I suppose the only questions there are whether or not her state allowed women to vote for president, and whether or not a candidate who cannot legally hold the office counts (since she was under 35). Because it wasn’t just blanket illegal for women to vote prior to the 19th Amendment, it was up to the individual states and like anything up to the individual states it was all over the place depending on which state we’re talking about. For example, New Jersey allowed anyone who had the equivalent of 50 British pounds of wealth to vote regardless of sex (and there are recorded examples of women voting there) - at least until they embraced Jacksonian democracy and removed the wealth requirement and added a sex one. By the time the 19th Amendment passed, women could vote in at least some elections in most states.

          • Schadrach
            link
            fedilink
            English
            16 months ago

            Wyoming wasn’t the first state to allow women to vote for President. At the very least women could vote in New Jersey as early as 1790, presuming they had the equivalent of 50 British pounds of wealth (because the wealth requirement was the only requirement). Women later lost the right to vote in New Jersey when New Jersey embraced Jacksonian democracy and extended the right to vote to all white men of age, regardless of wealth.

            But again, women’s right to vote was a state issue prior to the 19th Amendment and as such it was kinda all over the place with some states allowing women to vote but only in some elections (often different rules for municipal, county, state and federal elections).

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      166 months ago

      They passed a constitutional amendment in Florida to let felons vote, a couple years ago. The legislature tried to backpeddle it as much as they could in order to prevent black people from voting, but the main mechanism is forcing the felons to pay a bunch of money, which isn’t a problem for Trump.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        106 months ago

        Florida also defers to the voting rights in the state where the judgment happened for convictions outside of Florida. And New York lets felons vote. Therefore, Trump can vote in Florida under Florida election law.

      • Schadrach
        link
        fedilink
        English
        66 months ago

        The legislature tried to backpeddle it as much as they could in order to prevent black people from voting, but the main mechanism is forcing the felons to pay a bunch of money, which isn’t a problem for Trump.

        To be exact, the “backpedaling” was that if the courts assigned you fines and prison time you had to complete both before you had “completed your sentence” and thus could vote.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        36 months ago

        There may be a component that felons have to have finished their sentence which could exclude Trump.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        17
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        You can never have too much Riker….(the 14 year old girl who was me, waiting impatiently for TNG to come on…for the sci-fi…and the Riker).

        I met Jonathan Frakes at a con once and told him I had the biggest crush on him when I was a teenager. He said, “Well what changed?”

        Riker gonna Riker lol

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            3
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            I really didn’t have an answer because I wasn’t expecting the question, lol, but I kind of managed to come up with something like “Well….the show ended and you went away. You just kinda left.”

            It was lame but all I could manage to think of on the fly. He just kind of laughed. It was a good experience, all of the main TNG bridge crew were there except for Jean-Luc and Wesley (who were originally supposed to be, that was a disappointment, but it was still fun).

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      216 months ago

      This is going to give a lot of GOP Senators a fig leaf.

      If someone puts a motion in Congress to make it illegal for him to run, a lot of them will vote for it.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        bad law. I’d much rather a law where the candidate has to describe the nature of their past convictions in a written statement submitted with their filing paperwork to run and explain why each one doesn’t affect their ability to run the country.

        Aka reflecting on one’s crimes.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          16 months ago

          Except assholes like trump see themselves as victims of a witch-hunt and he would write that out , sorry: he will have a lawyer write that out for every one of them. I doubt he has the attention span for it.

      • andyburke
        link
        fedilink
        16 months ago

        How do you propose such a bill be advanced through the GOP controlled house?

      • norbert
        link
        fedilink
        106 months ago

        He’ll be able to work some sort of grift off of it for sure but I feel like this definitely gives some Republicans an “out.”

        Now they just have to take it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      106 months ago

      It gives us something new to troll those miserable asshats over. “Interesting argument, but have you considered the fact that your candidate is a convicted felon?”

    • Flying Squid
      link
      fedilink
      96 months ago

      Before all this started, people did make claims that they wouldn’t vote for him if he was convicted.

      But then they also said they wouldn’t vote for him even if Nikki Haley conceded.

      So we’ll see, I guess. But I’m not optimistic.

    • Riskable
      link
      fedilink
      English
      66 months ago

      Yes: To them this demonstrates that the justice system is corrupt and they think only Trump can fix it.

      They will believe this even though Trump isn’t running for any office in New York 🤣

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      66 months ago

      Some, but they’ll never tell the others.

      Ladies you don’t have to tell your husband you voted for Biden.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      66 months ago

      Tucker Carlson responded to today’s verdict in what can only be described as an apocalyptic tone, stating on X that the jury’s decision marked “the end of the fairest justice system in the world.” The former Fox News host said that Trump would still win the election “if he’s not killed first,” and closed by saying that “anyone who defends this verdict is a danger to you and your family.”

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      46 months ago

      It will most matter for undecided voters who required a guilty verdict to decide, althoigh I’m not sure that is a large number in swing states.

      It won’t matter for his base that already ignore reality.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      26 months ago

      It’s reductive to think of his supporters as a single bloq.

      It will certainly matter to at least some of them.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    23
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    The GOP could have gotten off this wild ride at so many points in the last 8 years, yet here we are. A republican presidential nominee who has been convicted of felonies.

    Edit: And with Biden’s poll numbers they could have run literally anybody else and won.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    196 months ago

    Today is a very good day.

    Now on the downside, convicted felons are still legally allowed to run for office. Not being able to vote for himself is delicious schadenfreude, but this doesn’t suddenly save democracy. However, I would expect Biden’s administration will push this hard, and I don’t think undecided voters want a felon in the White House.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      16 months ago

      As other have said, Banning felons from voting is a tool that can be used by oppressors to block their political rivals from standing against them.

      Which ironically is something the Republicans are probably wanting to do at some point in the future.