this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2026
237 points (97.6% liked)

politics

29239 readers
1762 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A new memo from the Justice Department says President Donald Trump no longer has to follow a Watergate-era law barring him from holding on to presidential records when he leaves office.

It is the latest action by the administration to stymie transparency, government watchdog groups say, and yet another Trump swipe at the National Archives after its role in prompting the criminal case he faced for allegedly mishandling national defense materials.

The DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel – which gives legal advice to the executive branch – issued an opinion Thursday that said the Presidential Records Act is unconstitutional.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MerryJaneDoe@piefed.world 46 points 1 day ago (5 children)

This is interesting.

This memo is only relevant if Trump plans on staying in office past 2028, or installing another MAGA sycophant.

I mean, Trump knows that if a Democrat takes office, the DOJ will first clean house and then go after him for this shit. Yet he telegraphs his intention to break the law. Why?

The truly insane rarely think of their own ends.

[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It’s apparently a legal defense for government officials if the action was okayed by legal counsel. They are playing into this by putting only yes-men into power.

[–] Mirshe@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

Generally, "I did illegal thing because my lawyer advised me to do illegal thing (also I have power to compel my legal team to say whatever I want)" is not a GREAT defense.

[–] Nastybutler@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

Imagine thinking you won't be disbarred and/or prosecuted as a MAGA lawyer for signing off on this shit. Once the orange shit stain is no longer in office, he can't save you even if he wanted to.

[–] foodandart@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Dementia.

Everyone thinks it means all of the sudden you stand in the corner mumbling at the walls and wearing your underpants above your clothes.. but it starts oftentimes years ahead of diagnosis with irrational, defiant, rash decisions that are put down to stubbornness and age.

Also, Trump IS terrified of ending up like his father, so in keeping with what he learned from Roy Cohn, it's about keeping everyone around him off-balance so they can't tell if it's really mental impairment, or some "5D chess" move he's making.

Ultimately, he probably at this point, doesn't know himself. Part malignant narcissist, part desperate terror, part dementia and part self-delusiuon.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

but it starts oftentimes years ahead of diagnosis with irrational, defiant, rash decisions that are put down to stubbornness and age.

We've lived thru a decade straight of the president showing clear signs of dementia...

If any American can't recognize the signs of brain damage (specifically dementia) by now, they haven't been paying attention or theyve got something of their own going on.

[–] foodandart@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I think a lot of people also forget that there was a gamut of immune response to Covid.. It ranged from no issues at all to dropping dead within a few weeks. At what point did the low oxygenation in those made just ill enough from Covid to end up with breating problems, also get a touch of mental decline from that as well?

I know a lot of people that seemed much quicker on the uptake and had more mental acuity before Covid.. and historically I'd be the first one to take the position that I don't know shit and usually have my head up my ass. Now, I'm the one that seems to have my shit together when so many no longer do.

WTF?

[–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

The people that pull the strings (AIPAC) own both the democrats and republicans, you won't see any consequences come from most of this stuff.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

AIPAC has diminishing influence, while it isn't gone by far there a solid chance they may be ignored by 2028. Assuming the US doesn't go into total economic collapse due to Trump before then since at this point I'm pretty sure that'd be the nail in coffin of the US continued existence.

[–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Pretending Israel doesn't control America right now is a very braindead take when you look at the turmoil occuring right now FOR Israel

Diminishing influence doesn't mean no influence nor the potential for collapse of said influence. The influence of Rome was diminishing by Constantine but the last holdout of Rome did not fall till the 1400s. Regardless we live in interesting and ever changing times, meaning any view of the future is basically just guess work based on current events.

[–] Xaphanos@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Death is his personal immunity. But if precedence is set, all dictatorial successors will benefit.