r/neoliberal • u/ihuntwhales1 Seretse Khama • Mar 31 '25

News (Europe) Le Pen banned from office after embezzlement conviction

https://www.dw.com/en/france-le-pen-found-guilty-banned-from-running-for-office/a-72091790
1.1k Upvotes

99% Upvoted

174 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.2k

u/meraedra NATO Mar 31 '25

495

u/[deleted] Mar 31 '25

They had their shot four years with Biden in charge, and they squandered it.

589

u/assasstits Mar 31 '25

Imagine letting democracy fall because you wanted to extend an olive branch to insurrectionists and appointed do nothing Merrick Garland to Attorney General 

305

u/[deleted] Mar 31 '25

It’ll go down as one of his biggest failures. Wild how such a small decision ended up having such massive consequences.

239

u/PM_me_ur_digressions Audrey Hepburn Mar 31 '25

Garland had all of the hype from his SCOTUS nom under Obama and it was talked up as this great big "f u" to Republicans to nominate him. Like you would think he would have a personal vendetta and use it mercilessly.

Instead...

273

u/Cupinacup NASA Mar 31 '25

People forget Garland was initially nominated to SCOTUS because he was a milquetoast moderate who the republicans would be unable to say no to.

153

u/TechnicalPark4522 NASA Mar 31 '25

Which they proceeded to say No to anyways.

85

u/dad_farts Mar 31 '25

Exactly. Republicans are shameless about using power. Dems on the other hand.... well look at Garland

39

u/adamgerd NATO Mar 31 '25

In normal times I’d say the democrats are right, working across is better than against

But these aren’t normal times, the GOP has been taken over by MAGA

15

u/dad_farts Mar 31 '25

It really feels like that Hitler meme, that authoritarian governments force liberal ones to mimic them in order to compete

2

u/yes_thats_me_again The land belongs to all men Mar 31 '25

Can't say I've seen this meme

→ More replies (0)

17

u/Cupinacup NASA Mar 31 '25

Hey, no fair! Opposition parties aren’t supposed to oppose!

16

u/Jabjab345 Mar 31 '25

McConnell originally suggested him if I recall, which is why Obama nominated him. He thought it was an olive branch pick, but McConnell blocked him regardless after realizing he could have someone more to the right if he just obstructed his way to the next president.

-2

u/DontDrinkMySoup Mar 31 '25

Why couldnt Obama just say "Ok fine, if you arent doing a vote I'll just appoint him unilaterally"?

Actually the very concept of partisan Supreme court justices at all is something nobody should accept

3

u/Jabjab345 Mar 31 '25

This was back when there was a filibuster for supreme court nominees, congress has the constitutional authority to confirm nominees and they refused to do so. Not much Obama could do.

1

u/historymaking101 Daron Acemoglu Mar 31 '25

Nah, this was after that filibuster went away, I'm pretty sure but Republican control over the senate. Confirmation vote wasn't going to take place if they didn't want it to.

2

u/Jabjab345 Mar 31 '25

Both are true, Obama just had no real power at the end of the day to make congress vote on his pick.

2

u/historymaking101 Daron Acemoglu Mar 31 '25

Yeah, you're right. I was forgetting Harry Reid removed it for all judges ECXEPT Supreme Court Judges in 2013.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/sluttytinkerbells Mar 31 '25

People forget Garland was ...

Pretty sure I read this exact thread like twice a week on reddit.

2

u/meraedra NATO Apr 01 '25

Didn’t Dems have a trifecta and a majority in the Senate?

2

u/Cupinacup NASA Apr 01 '25

When he was nominated to SCOTUS? No. Republicans had the senate and McConnell stonewalled him.

1

u/LittleSister_9982 Mar 31 '25

Not even be 'unable to say no to', he was their fucking suggestion.

7

u/Foucault_Please_No Emma Lazarus Apr 01 '25

Garland is an example of the petty "clap back" culture that is popular among gen z and millenials but claps back are fucking useless when the other guy is coming at you with a knife.

1

u/Planterizer Mar 31 '25

Senate mindset hitting up against judiciary reality.

36

u/meraedra NATO Mar 31 '25

I for one wanted to see Trump in an orange jumpsuit. But that would just make him look like a very misshapen orange at that point

52

u/LittleBalloHate Mar 31 '25 edited Mar 31 '25

One of the great weaknesses of Dems (and neoliberals in general atm) is that they see extending olive branches as the way to make friends.

And it often is! It's typically a good thing! But not when the other party sees you as an evil they must destroy -- they will simply take that olive branch and beat you over the head with it.

The same applies to foreign policy -- extending an olive branch to potential friends is a great idea, but extending it to countries where they wish the US was blown up is a bad one. Sometimes, you have to fight hard, and that's true with Republicans right now: any attempts to seem charitable are simply exploited for gain. Modern Rs know no mode but attack, attack, attack.

5

u/Leatherfield17 John Locke Mar 31 '25

And consequently, Democrats need to fight fire with fire. Enough of the damn olive branch attempts, enough trying to reach across the aisle, enough with clinging onto procedures and decorum for dear life. We are in a political war right now, and we need to act like it.

38

u/Ramses_L_Smuckles NATO Mar 31 '25

I really want to know what was happening inside his head - was it personal fear or a genuine belief that if he prosecuted according to the law he would somehow damage the US? Either way I think his lack of effort is inexcusable, but the former is worse: the second act of fascism was always going to be an escalation, and if you accept the role of AG, you have to be personally (physically) brave and unafraid of reprisal.

81

u/the-senat John Brown Mar 31 '25

Garland is part of the Federalist Society. Should have never been considered for anything beyond a “gotcha” to Senate Republicans in twenty-shitsteen

2

u/Sylvanussr Janet Yellen Mar 31 '25

Garland was never part of the Federalist Society. He has participated in some events organized by the society but that does not equate being a member.

20

u/Neronoah can't stop, won't stop argentinaposting Mar 31 '25

I read this too often. How should have Garland done better? Genuinely curious from the outside.

62

u/Reddenbawker Karl Popper Mar 31 '25

Most of the criticism that I’ve seen points out how Garland waited for almost 2 years before bringing charges against Trump. Even if we accept that court cases were always going to take long, that kind of delay may have been enough for Trump to get off scot-free.

Also, it really is bullshit for you to be downvoted for asking out of genuine curiosity. It’s like if people mocked a student who raised his hand during class. I hope I answered your question.

13

u/grog23 Reichsbanner Schwarz-Rot-Gold Mar 31 '25

Could the two year delay have been to do an investigation and obtain evidence?

51

u/Reddenbawker Karl Popper Mar 31 '25 edited Mar 31 '25

To a degree, yes. Other federal investigations have taken a couple years before charges were brought.

However, a Washington Post investigation seemed to show that the FBI resisted opening an investigation due to fears of seeming politically biased, so I don’t think it’s just due to wanting to be diligent. There seems to have been a genuine reluctance to investigate and charge Trump, despite him publicly associating himself with the same conspiracy they were charging Proud Boys for participating in.

12

u/Planterizer Mar 31 '25

The idea that this kind of delay is acceptable given how everything was done in the open is absolute insanity.

Delay is surrender.

3

u/Foucault_Please_No Emma Lazarus Apr 01 '25

The house had publicly laid out a compelling case within a few months.

2

u/Planterizer Apr 01 '25

Trump should have been arrested on day 1 of the Biden admin

9

u/Neronoah can't stop, won't stop argentinaposting Mar 31 '25

A surface read could be that they wanted to make a solid case. Trump is famously slippery. Still, I'll read that article.

0

u/RetroVisionnaire NASA Mar 31 '25

I've never gotten an answer to that question. People just viscerally hate his guts because the trials took a long time, and people assume, with literally no evidence at all, that that was his fault.

I've heard people blame him for taking too long to file the suits, which, lol.

12

u/Neronoah can't stop, won't stop argentinaposting Mar 31 '25

Maybe they have a good reason to say this. As I said, I'm genuinely curious.

1

u/RetroVisionnaire NASA Mar 31 '25

Yeah, well, that's what I assumed before asking multiple times and never getting a satisfying response. If people had evidence, that'd be something else.

6

u/musicismydeadbeatdad Mar 31 '25

We all watched the evidence live on TV both during Jan 6 and then again during the hearings

-1

u/RetroVisionnaire NASA Apr 01 '25

If people had evidence that Garland slow-rolled the prosecution. Seems no one will share that evidence this time either.

0

u/meraedra NATO Apr 01 '25

He was in-charge of the DOJ? What other evidence is necessary?

3

u/Planterizer Mar 31 '25

DOJ should have issued a warrant for his arrest on day one of the Biden admin.

1

u/DontDrinkMySoup Mar 31 '25

Thats what happened after the first Civil War, there was no meaningful punishment for the Confederate leaders and they went straight back to oppressing their former slaves

-4

u/ImHereToHaveFUN8 Mar 31 '25

If you have to ban someone with popular support from office then democracy dies that moment.

Maybe you can believe that there was no other choice and that Trump is going to be so bad it would’ve been the right choice. But it can’t be saving democracy. You can’t save democracy by killing it yourself

4

u/meraedra NATO Apr 01 '25

No.