• BillCheddar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 day ago

    That’s the secret to Conservative power in America.

    Step 1: Make everything illegal

    Step 2: Accept bribes to overlook crimes of allies

    Step 3: Punish the shit out of your opponents.

    Congrats! America is now Russia, with better food and shittier fascists.

  • Formfiller@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    17 hours ago

    He’s been doing multiple crimes a day for most of his life. The thing about a “law” is that unless it’s enforced it doesn’t mean shit

  • nanometer1625@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    23 hours ago

    No, it’s not legal, but at this point there are no federal officials left who are willing to enforce the law when Republicans break it.

    • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Two centuries ago, a somewhat obscure Scotsman named Tytler made this profound observation: ‘A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy.’

  • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 day ago

    It’s hilarious that everyone here is assuming he’s not just straight up lying about giving that money to everyone and not just the people who vote Republican.

    They are very interested in state voter information.

  • BradleyUffner@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    2 days ago

    They won’t even let you stand outside a polling place and hand out water bottles to people waiting in line.

  • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Step 1: Have money.

    Step 2: Rape children (and adults).

    Step 3: Put an “R” next to your name.

    Congrats, you are now immune from consequences.

  • tired_n_bored@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    I hate the orange turd but your comparison is not 100% right. He’d gift 5000$ to everyone, not just who voted for him. I think that’s still illegal tho

    • DrQuickbeam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      It’s not illegal. He gave out those COVID dividend checks and it was the most popular thing he’s ever done. It’s just a gross incentive for votes. The government needs that money for governance activities. It’s like ripping the bathtub out of someone’s house and gifting it to them “for free!”

      • DrQuickbeam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        I mean it’s probably not typically allowed under any normal laws and regulations, but they can always find a loop hole to do something like that in a legalish manner (like under a state of emergency, or with an executive order SCOTUS upholds, or hijacking a program meant for something else).

    • TheNextMuon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I hate the orange turd and your observation is about 100% wrong. He will not pay anyone. He will keep the money himself.

      • tired_n_bored@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        I didn’t mean he’d give a dime to anybody given the fact that he’s a pathological liar but he didn’t say “I will give 5000$ to those who vote for me” but “I will give 5000$ to everyone”. And since I’m not a lawyer I don’t know if that’s illegal to say, as opposed to give “gifts” to only those who vote for a certain party

  • Anti_Iridium@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 days ago

    It’s also legal to give someone money after the fact for a job well done, and it’s definitely not a bribe.

    • TheNextMuon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      He will not give the money. He makes a promise. He breaks the promise. Please people - don’t be stupid. Do not believe this idiot.

    • stringere@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      2 days ago

      From June 26 2024:

      The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that a federal anti-bribery law does not make it a crime for state and local officials to accept a gratuity for acts that they have already taken.

  • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 🇮 @pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    157
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    It’s still illegal; it’s just that nobody will enforce the law against the orange bastard. The motherfucker was literally convicted of 34 felonies and hasn’t paid any fines or faced a minute of jail time, FFS.

    • kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      2 days ago

      He had a whole goddamn sentencing hearing where they sentenced him to nothing. Explicitly.

    • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      101
      ·
      3 days ago

      Was it illegal for Bernie Sanders to campaign on free medical and college?

      Rather than tilt and rave let’s approach this from another angle: Trump promised funds from DOGE and balanced budgets on multiple occasions and you’re never going to see any of it. He is a liar.

      • Was it illegal for Bernie Sanders to campaign on free medical and college?

        No because that would have been done through normal policy change and actually a thing an elected official should try and do. What Trump is doing (even if it is a lie) is bribery. It’s not even remotely the same, and it speaks volumes of your character that you would even try and equate them.

        • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          65
          ·
          3 days ago

          Trump’s and Bernie’s plans would both require congress because the president literally has no access to funds without it.

          I worry about people spreading these lies because it is in fact a great policy stance.

          • PapaStevesy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 days ago

            If it’s a great policy stance, they should do it now when they know they have control of both legislatures. Why wait?

          • Lasherz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            20
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            Your suposition is that the power of the purse still applies here. Trump has operated the executive as a collective slush fund, many times using horrible arguments that fail in court and then proceeding anyways. Also he’s allocated money from military coup projects like Venezuala to funds not under congressional control illegally.

            Bernies plan is to first expand Medicare to all ages. Going off Trump’s logic this would be done by directing CMS by executive order to adjust the rates, the treasury department to allocate the necessary trust fund expenditures, the IRS to apply the necessary taxes, and the justice department to aggressively target every single possible violation in the private health insurance industry. Bernie’s actual plan is to use the bully pulpit as intended to pressure congress to act in accordance with those changes ahead of time, completely different. That’s because Trump moves to erode government into the pockets of the rich and Bernie seeks to build it stronger to benefit everyone. Executive overreach expansion has only been applied to benefit the rich effectively where everywhere else it had failed.

            • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              2 days ago

              The DHS and especially ICE also lost funding and shut down a lot of offices for over a month until the GOP passed a reconciliation bill.

              Even if overreach is occuring he is not going to pull 1.5 Trillion Dollars out of his ass.

        • Akasazh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          The guy is a huge troll, I have tagged them thusly and he has continued to live up to that moniker

          • 9bananas@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            my tag just says “moron”

            they’re not smart enough go earn the troll tag ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

            • Akasazh@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              I do agree, when I tagged the person it wasn’t so clear to me, but they seem very consistent.

      • spankysalmon@fedinsfw.app
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        3 days ago

        rofl imagine being the fucking clown pretending free medicsl and college would be a bad thing.

        Again: Fucking. Clown.

  • shittydwarf@piefed.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    93
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Americans refuse to apply the law to trump for some reason

    Edit: Y’all acting like he’s been POTUS his whole life. Dude is a career conman-rapist-fraudster

    • jtrek@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      55
      ·
      3 days ago

      Conservatism is entirely about the laws applying differently to different people. The king is special. The nobles are a little less special. The peasants are trash. The slaves are worse. That’s the conservative world. Hierarchy. So of course they don’t want to apply rules to their chief.

      They are worse than children.

      • BurgerBaron@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’m unwilling to post the rules for thee quotes anymore because it doesn’t seem to get through to people.

    • Triumph@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      How do you expect that to happen when the fascists own and operate all three branches of government and are hands on with DoJ?

      Americans have no choice in the matter, if we’re talking about legal channels.

      • athatet@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        For real. Like yeah, lemme just waltz my ass on over there and issue a citizens arrest. That will go over splendidly.

        • FreeAZ@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          All the idiots who say this shit think they would be the one to kill Hitler if they were born in Nazi Germany. There’s a reason it took a foreign military invading to push him to do it himself.

          I’ve even heard dipshits say “Well America had a Civil War in the past” as if that war was declared by the people and not their governments and fought by their militaries.

    • Snowclone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 days ago

      there’s a major error in that the president, according to legal experts, can’t be arrested by anyone but congress and the house, which makes no sense. he should simply be president from a poison at this point.

    • isleepinahammock@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      No. It’s just moronic to argue that this is or should be illegal. For fuck’s sake, people in this thread are arguing it should be illegal for politicians for run for office promising to establish new government programs or give people money. They’re letting their campist impulses cloud their judgment.

  • thatOneGuy@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    Technically, the equivalent would be you standing outside a polling place with a sign saying “I will give every adult in the area $500 if Candidate X wins”.

    Ostensibly, you could just be lying (just like Trump) - and that would probably be covered under your 1st Amendment rights.

    It’s stupid, but there is enough of a disconnect between action and reward that it might skirt past.

    • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      No, that’s not how that works.

      18 U.S.C. § 597 - U.S. Code - Unannotated Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 597.

      Whoever makes or offers to make an expenditure to any person, either to vote or withhold his vote, or to vote for or against any candidate; and

      Whoever solicits, accepts, or receives any such expenditure in consideration of his vote or the withholding of his vote—

      Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if the violation was willful, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

      • elDalvini@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 days ago

        “I will give you money if you vote for me”

        Is different from

        “I will give everyone money if I win”

        The first is paying someone to vote and is outlawed by the law you cited. The second has a disconnect between the money and the vote. Everyone gets the money, even those that voted for the other guy. Thus it might be legal.

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

          Sounds to me like this has to be tried in court (unless it has not already) for a legal president to be made, and thus decided if it is legal or not. IANAL

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

          Whoever makes or offers to make an expenditure to any person, either to vote or withhold his vote, or to vote for or against any candidate;

          “I will give everyone money if I win” is offering money to people for voting. Voting for the candidate is implied, yes, but offering to pay everyone is still offering money to people for voting.

          • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            In the description of the law, how is that meaningfully different from promising tax policy changes?

            It’s not telling people to vote, not vote, or to vote for anyone in particular, and is just a notification of something they’ll do if elected.
            The implication is that you should vote for them, but you didn’t make the offer conditional.

            Bribery is easier if you’re using other people’s money because rather than paying people to do what you want you can make a blanket promise to everyone and let them work through the implications.

        • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Oh I’m REALLY playing devil’s advocate on this one

          Promising everyone, no exceptions, 5k if you win, is kind of a campaign promise rather than a bribe.

          I’m going to shower for 2 hours to get the stench off me now

      • melsaskca@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        That seems pretty straightforward. So the law is correct, it’s just useless because the system founded on these laws is broken.

        • isleepinahammock@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          I didn’t realize Ayn Rand’s ghost had a lemmy account.

          This isn’t broken at all. Unless you think every form of government social spending should be illegal, then you shouldn’t try to make it a felony for politicians to run for office promising to establish government programs or give people money through acts of Congress. You’re advocating for full on libertarianism.

          • melsaskca@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            I think you are confusing paying someone a direct bribe for their vote, with infrastructure spending. When you say it isn’t broken at all, are you saying that an imperfect dystopia based on power and money is the utopian goal that we all seek? I say a lot is working, but a lot is broken. When you say ‘not broken at all’ then I cannot believe you have a good understanding of the societal wherewithal.

      • thatOneGuy@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I should look forward to Trump getting charged with that, then?

        But more seriously, there would be countless lawyers happy to argue that a general statement such as “$500 to every adult in the county if John Smith wins” does not technically break that particular law because it’s not explicitly targeted at any one individual recipient, nor is it contingent on them participating in an election whatsoever.

        Just as I’m also sure there would be more than one sympathetic Trump-appointed judge to side with the defendant too.

        US laws mean nothing if they aren’t actively being followed.

        • Sackett@thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          2 days ago

          People in this thread forget that the Supreme Court already gave Trump immunity from prosecution.

      • Devial@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Though this becomes wishy with politicians/parties. You offering to pay for people’s healthcare costs if they vote for your favourite candidate would probably be illegal, but a candidate promising to institute universal healthcare is just a campaign promise, so this law leaves a very legitimate open question of when something a candidate says stops being a campaign promise and starts being a legally problematic bribe, because ultimately all campaign promises boil down to “vote for me and I will do something good for you/something you like”.

        You could very much argue that a candidate promising UBI is effectively not very different from what Trump promised.