this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2026
872 points (98.8% liked)

News

36043 readers
2915 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Support among House Democrats for impeaching Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem is skyrocketing, nearly doubling in the last week to 100 co-sponsors.

That's an unprecedented level of support for an impeachment effort during President Trump's second term, with lawmakers who have bristled at the topic in the past now warming to the idea.

Kelly is urging Republicans to get on board with her efforts — even as no GOP lawmaker has come close to expressing support for Noem's impeachment.

"As Secretary Noem continues to lie, obstruct Congress, and violate people's civil rights, the support for her impeachment only grows," she said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

But if we apply this logic then Democrats should never oppose Trump or any other Republican, and where does that leave us?

I respectfully disagree on this point, and this point only. They attempted to impeach him twice. A third time, after he is out of office, wouldn't have really done anything beneficial. Without a conviction in the senate, he would still have been eligible to run in 2024, and his base would've been even more fired up. It would be seen as more liberal virtue signaling and another witch hunt.

It was quite clear by that point what game the Republicans were playing...another impeachment would have played right into that hand. Having the cooperation of a not-insignificant portion of the media who only played up the victim rhetoric was also a big factor.

The legal system, which is supposed to be apolitical, was the best course of action. And continues to be the best course of action, because the majority of both houses continues to be Trump loyalists. Drown them in lawsuits, a million papercuts, etc.

It's far from a perfect solution, though, due to the aforementioned blocking of lower-court appointments, Merrick Garland (who, like, bullshit, I agree, should've fought harder), and then RBG dying at a very inopportune time, leading to a vulgar show of hypocrisy on the right and another weak resistance on the left.

And, it plays into the continued "weaponizing the justice system" rhetoric. Like, dude...it's not "weaponizing the justice system" if you're continually doing unlawful and even unconstitutional things. But good luck explaining that to the 33% of the country who would struggle to get a D on a 6th grade Civics test.

I do agree that Democrat's are really sucking as "The Resistance". The biggest thing they need to work on is messaging and having a united front.

But honestly, what can they do, really? The American People have spoken, and this is what they asked for, by the democratically instilled laws of our country.

There is no way to win, inside the system, by continuing to play by the rules. But, as long as Republicans hold the trifecta and the fourth-estate, any attempt to break the rules will not be cast in their favor.

The only way, I think, starts with finding an effective antidote to their koolaid.

[–] CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

They attempted to impeach him twice. A third time, after he is out of office, wouldn't have really done anything beneficial. Without a conviction in the senate, he would still have been eligible to run in 2024, and his base would've been even more fired up. It would be seen as more liberal virtue signaling and another witch hunt.

This just happened in June

And then again in December...

I dont really care if it succeeds. At least it's concrete action far beyond angry letters and tweets.

[–] CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They attempted to impeach him twice. A third time, after he is out of office, wouldn't have really done anything beneficial. Without a conviction in the senate, he would still have been eligible to run in 2024, and his base would've been even more fired up. It would be seen as more liberal virtue signaling and another witch hunt.

This just happened in June

And then again a few weeks ago in December...

I dont really care if it succeeds. At least it's concrete action far beyond angry letters and tweets.

[–] DougHolland@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

An "opposition party" that won't even make an effort to oppose.

[–] CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

They attempted to impeach him twice. A third time, after he is out of office, wouldn't have really done anything beneficial. Without a conviction in the senate, he would still have been eligible to run in 2024, and his base would've been even more fired up. It would be seen as more liberal virtue signaling and another witch hunt.

This just happened in June

And then again a few weeks ago in December...

I dont really care if it succeeds. At least it's concrete action far beyond angry letters and tweets.