He may not be in office, but Donald Trump has been speaking with the powers that be about Israel’s war on Gaza—but it’s not in an effort to end the genocide.

Instead, Trump has allegedly been talking with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to avert a cease-fire deal, fearing that doing so could help Vice President Kamala Harris win in November, according to PBS.

“The reporting is that former President Trump is on the phone with the Prime Minister of Israel, urging him not to cut a deal right now, because it’s believed that would help the Harris campaign,” said PBS’s Judy Woodruff Monday night. “So, I don’t know where—who knows whether that will come about or not, but I have to think that the Harris campaign would like for President Biden to do what presidents do, and that’s to work on that one.”

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

    As Israel is in conflict with Palestine, not the United States; would that even be covered by the logan act?

    The Logan Act (1 Stat. 613, 18 U.S.C. § 953, enacted January 30, 1799) is a United States federal law that criminalizes the negotiation of a dispute between the United States and a foreign government by an unauthorized American citizen.

    Then there’s actually proving this negotiation took place and isn’t hearsay; from a legal perspective…

    Somehow, I don’t forsee this being acted on.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    4810 months ago

    There has been no consequences to his actions so of course he is going to do whatever he wants.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      34
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      He’s got what, 34 federal crime convictions?

      He’s still running around and the media is still treating him like some random dude running for president, oh look what crazy don said seven times today!

      Shits ridiculous

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        510 months ago

        No, a random dude would have been in prison years ago for doing a fraction of the shit this man has done.

        Low level bureaucrats working in municipal government are subject to much stricter ethics rules. It’s absurd.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        510 months ago

        34 felony convictions for fraudulently interfering in the 2016 election that made him President.

        You know, the guy who accuses others of stealing elections from him — and getting people killed over it btw — after he already committed fraud to help win an election.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4510 months ago

    Wouldn’t be the first time he has ‘crossed legal lines’.

    However, wouldn’t it be great if it was the last time?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      810 months ago

      Just wait and see: all it takes is for a judge to tell him not to do it - ten consecutive times, THEN threaten with actual consequences, and THEN you may or may not see him become more circumspect about his transgressions in order to skirt the legal line a tiny bit less obviously!

      After all: everyone is equal before the law!*

      *Unless you bought the highest judges and make them declare you an absolute ruler immune to criminal law.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1410 months ago

    Can y’all merkins just throw that conman in to the clink? The rest of the world is tired of his bullshit.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    11
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    If anybody deserves to be locked up for being a clear and present danger to society, it’s this guy. At the very least, he should be forbidden from using a phone, then locked up when he eventually breaks that rule because he thinks that none of the rules apply to him. The way he’s treated, the government is basically encouraging that.

  • Hemingways_Shotgun
    link
    fedilink
    English
    5010 months ago

    How about the media stop using caveats like “may have” when shit is entirely 100% clear.

    There are laws on the books regarding things like this. There is no may have. It’s cut and fucking dried.

    • Cethin
      link
      fedilink
      English
      110 months ago

      They really can’t say “has” because it’s possible he wins the case in court. It should be something like “seems to have” though. “May have” means there’d a chance. It should be something that means “it is likely.”

      • FuglyDuck
        link
        fedilink
        English
        310 months ago

        Sorry, but no.

        The presumption of innocence doesn’t work that way. It’s a legal fiction imposed upon the courts and justice system as a means of (poorly) protecting the civil rights and liberties of those who are accused.

        On that, it’s a very important “fiction”- don’t get me wrong.

        What it does not do, however, is change historical reality. If Jackass murders a homeless woman, Jackass is a murderer- even if that woman’s murder was never properly investigated, and he was never suspected/indicted/arraigned/convicted for murder.

        One’s guilt at having committed a crime does not, in fact, change based on the outcome of a trial. After all the officers of the court, and the jury, are all human and prone to errors. They get it wrong. Sometimes that means guilty people go free, and sometimes that means innocent people are convicted.

        But the truth of that guilt is established when one commits a crime.

        So I’ll say it: Trump is a mass murderer.

        As president, he had a legal, moral and ethical obligation to act to protect Americans from harm during moments of crisis

        This includes from things like COVID. He had a moral, ethical, and legal obligation to voice sound medical guidance like “hey folks, I know it’s tough and it looks a little silly, but we need you to stay home if you can, and if you can’t, wear a mask. A real mask.”

        He failed us in that moment of crisis and as a direct consequence of his rampant bullshit; millions of Americans needlessly died.

      • Hemingways_Shotgun
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1610 months ago

        It’s only libel if it’s not true. If he threatens to sue, grow some balls, call his bluff and make him prove it’s not true in court.

        Threatening to sue, effectively forcing the media to back down because it would too inconvenient to deal with a suit is how Trump keeps getting away with his bullshit.

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

      There is the Logan Act, but he likely would not be prosecuted under it, let alone convicted. From Wikipedia:

      Only two people have ever been indicted on charges of violating the Act, one in 1802 and the other in 1852. Neither was convicted.

      The Logan Act gets talked about much more than it has ever been used. There’s also a debate as to whether the Logan Act is even unconstitutional.

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

          Yup, that’s the point. The journalist who wrote OP’s article should know better. The Logan Act is functionally dead. As much as I hate Trump, it would be a bad thing if he was prosecuted under it because it would clearly be a case of selective prosecution.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    36310 months ago

    Everyone who says “They’re both equally bad. I refuse to vote for either candidate because they both support genocide” can shut the fuck up now.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3110 months ago

      What are you talking about? My close friend from Texas Oblast who owns a barbecuing shop says this all the time!

        • knightly the Sneptaur
          link
          fedilink
          710 months ago

          I’d prefer neither, and in any case I’d still refuse to promise my vote to a party before the election. If Harris wants my guaranteed support she’ll have to start acting like it.

          Now is the best time to push the party left, and genocide is the one issue I absolutely refuse to compromise on.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            1410 months ago

            Any vote not for Harris is a vote for Trump because of how our system works. You would be actively pushing closer to the final annihilation of Gaza by not doing everything in your p-

            Oh fuck it. You fucking morons will never understand at this rate. I just hate seeing you pretend you actually give a single fuck about those poor people when you’re just using them to virtue signal

            • knightly the Sneptaur
              link
              fedilink
              310 months ago

              I’m not saying not to vote, I’m saying not to make yourself ignorable. If the DNC knows they have your vote they won’t have any reason to try and earn it.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            710 months ago

            In a perfect world maybe, but not how it actually works. Please vote for your best interests. A not vote is that same a vote against your own interests.

            • knightly the Sneptaur
              link
              fedilink
              210 months ago

              I’m not saying not to vote, I’m saying not to make yourself ignorable. If the DNC knows they have your vote they won’t have any reason to try and earn it.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                110 months ago

                You said you can’t garauntee you’ll vote for Kamala and that she needs to earn your vote. Also that you shouldn’t be ignored.

                What are you saying? Are you saying there’s a possibility you’ll vote for trump? Because that’s the only other option… unless you don’t vote.

                I guess I’m just confused about how are going to get these people to see you. How are you going to not be ignored? The whole no confidence vote already happened, and the next vote is the only one left

                • knightly the Sneptaur
                  link
                  fedilink
                  110 months ago

                  What are you saying? Are you saying there’s a possibility you’ll vote for trump?

                  If Trump was able to convince me that he’d stop America’s support for genocide then I would.

                  And until Harris can do the same, the Democrats do not have my fealty.

                  that’s the only other option… unless you don’t vote.

                  That is precisely the risk that the Democrat party is taking. If there is no option for voting against genocide, then people like me might not feel enthusiastic about getting out of the house on voting day.

                  I guess I’m just confused about how are going to get these people to see you.

                  The same as any organization, public opinion polling:

                  The party is well aware that the fraction of their base that wants to stay the course on America’s national support for genocide is a minority.

                  That they have not already changed their stance is evidence that they do not see a need to do so. They must be confident that they can win the election without the support of uncommitted voters.

                  Bet.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      6610 months ago

      They could have also shut the fuck up at any point previous, but we’ll accept “now” as well.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13910 months ago

      I strongly suspect most of the people pushing that particular line aren’t eligible to vote… in American elections, that is.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        6110 months ago

        I don’t, I know what it was like to be an optimistic young adult. I understand the allure of holding strong to an ethical code while others’ compromises seem to make the progress all too slow.

        The truth is that this shit takes time and requires a lot of pressure - and that’s a fucking bitter pill to swallow.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          610 months ago

          Aren’t 70+ years enough time though? Those people are done. You can’t ask them to swallow bitter pills for that long of a time while also telling them to shut up because “you are enabling the enemy”. They have valid criticisms that some key people from the Democratic side are far too happy to ignore. Honest question…how do you compromise with an ongoing genocide in an apartheid state?

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

            Honest question…how do you compromise with an ongoing genocide in an apartheid state?

            Same way we compromised with the UK and France in WW1, or the Soviet Union in WW2, or Turkiye during the Cold War, or Saudi Arabia in the modern day.

            When there are some 200 countries in the world, all with their own squabbles that affect their region and themselves, taking no sides is still taking sides - and no side is clean. The idea that there’s some ideal option where no one gets hurt is just not the reality of things. Not every conflict is like this - not every conflict will continue to be like this. We can make a better world. But not by sitting on our hands now in an attempt to keep them ‘clean’. Short of quite literally conquering the entire world, all of our choices are necessarily limited by the need to take a side in most conflicts, in which both sides are often pretty gruesome.

            That being said, fuck Israel. Revoke everything. Side with Palestine.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            210 months ago

            We didnt give it 70 years. 40 years ago we had Ronald Fucking Reagan gutting the federal government like a fish, and we go back to that party like a pendulum every 4 to 8 years.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          410 months ago

          There is something to this; however, there are historical examples of rather quick progress. FDR for one (public work projects and infrastructure, financial reforms, regulations, social security, etc.), when old and young, the president, government employees, the whole general public (with some exceptions), held to popular principles of egalitarian fairness against the few unconscionably rich. A time of tasty pills.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          410 months ago

          I understand what you’re saying and I want to sympathize, but I feel like we’re so far outside the norm here that some of this falls a bit flat to me. Like we aren’t talking about being swayed by a wolf in sheep’s clothing here, Trump is a an entire pack of wolves loudly shouting “the wolves have arrived, fuck all you sheep!”

          I think there was a point what you say rang true, but I can’t help but feel like we’re so off-course at this point that if you haven’t seen Trump for what he is yet it must be because you are WILLFULLY evading that reality.
          I find it genuinely difficult to believe that anyone touting the “both sides are the same narrative” still, today, about Trump, can possibly truly believe that. I genuinely think you are only hearing from the mouths of charlatans, foreign agents, intentional accelerationists, and the absolute most genuinely ignorant of people. Maybe I’m jaded, but the alternative is legitimately incomprehensible to me at this point.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        3510 months ago

        Some of them no doubt, a lot of them are younger voters that are just sick of their country never having been sliding down into more and more blatant evil for their entire lives.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    47
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Netanyahu revealing which part of the US he’s really an “ally” of. Maybe stop giving blank checks to a foreign power destabilizing your country while you only hand out loans and debt to Ukraine?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1310 months ago

      First of all, there aren’t any blank checks. Foreign aid isn’t a lump sum of money just given to a country. We allocate it to a spending purse and they can choose to spend it on specific items the US agrees upon, which is usually weapons. We don’t just give them cash.

      Second, which debt? The US hasn’t issued any debt to Ukraine since the war started, except for possibly private companies.

      I agree with your sentiment, just not the facts.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        310 months ago

        I might be wrong about the loans and debt to Ukraine, just tried to double check it and couldn’t so I don’t know where I got that idea. I’m glad then if this isn’t the case. Thanks for the callout on that.

        But I was aware of how Israel receives aid, and while calling it a blank check might be an exaggeration, that point still stands. The fact that they receive it as credit for offensive wide area weapons probably encourages them more to use said weapons with destructive consequences to their civilian population, and that Israel might say to the US that it will consider a two state solution while they condemn, accuse of antisemitism, and break ties who recognize those who would recognize the Palestine state says they are definitely being duplicitous at best. What is happening in the West Bank speaks for Israel’s true intent: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqK3_n6pdDY

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          210 months ago

          I appreciate your willingness to correct the record.

          As for the aid to Israel, I agree that the nature of the assistance and how it’s used is a critical issue. I completely agree with your points and now understand your usage of “blank check”.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2210 months ago

    “I did encourage him to get this over with. You want to get it over with fast. Have victory, get your victory, and get it over with. It has to stop, the killing has to stop,” Trump said at a New Jersey press conference on Thursday, referring to their meeting at Mar-a-Lago last month. But he also criticized cease-fire demands.

    In other words Trump wants to have a quick genocide. That is the only way to stop the killing, without having a ceasefire. Even Biden was a hell of a lot better then this.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1110 months ago

      “Mr.Trump which is worse of the following: 100,000 dead in 12 minutes or 100,000 dead in 12 months?”

      “Time is money, people! Obviously a quick genocide is more efficient!”

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1410 months ago

    I’ve had this crazy theory that ever since Clinton’s second term, the presidents have been playing out in reverse order and politics:

    -Bush was the anti George H Bush

    -Obama was the anti-Reagan

    -Trump was the anti-Carter

    -Biden was the anti-Ford

    This feels like the anti-Iran contra play, anti-Carter working with Israelis to prevent hostages from being released until after the election.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    110 months ago

    Whenever he does (the tiniest of) fists, I instantly realize there’s nothing to gain from reading/watching further. That accounts for 99.9% of times and why I set a high standard on fist measurements, although I live in EU and US politics only concern as far as influence goes, which reaches way deep here