this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2025
784 points (99.2% liked)

News

28635 readers
4571 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 right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


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.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


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 or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. 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.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


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
 

The commander of the base wrote, "I do not presume to understand current politics, but what I do know is the concerns of the US administration discussed by Vice-President Vance on Friday are not reflective of Pituffik Space Base." in an email and was thus dismissed. In dismissing her, the Pentagon stated this reason. "Actions [that] undermine the chain of command or to subvert President [Donald] Trump's agenda will not be tolerated at the Department of Defense."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Jaysyn@lemmy.world 213 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (4 children)

JD Vance exudes weakness.

The patron saint of yes-men.

[–] Xtallll@lemmy.blahaj.zone 41 points 3 days ago (2 children)
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

I heard he recently hit it off with a chaise lahegaounge

Edit: I’m so, so torn on whether to put those last two words into an imagegen

[–] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Save us and the planet, fuck gen ai

More like a human footrest

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago

Who’s the snowflake now?

[–] CalipherJones@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

Only thing good about these traitors is I'll have something to celebrate in the future.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 6 points 3 days ago (3 children)

I mean, if you're the Vice President, it's kind of hard to put much pressure on the President. The Vice President has virtually no power or formal responsibilities other than what the President chooses to delegate to him. I mean, if he annoys the President, the President can very readily leave him with nothing other than a bit of prestige and a tie-breaking vote in the Senate.

Though the President can't actually remove the Vice President, no matter how unhappy with him he is.

[–] Jaysyn@lemmy.world 22 points 3 days ago

There's supportive & then there is mewling sycophant.

Vance is the latter.

[–] sporkler@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

So what you're saying is that he's possibly the one person in the country that can tell the fascist fartknocker the truth and not be removed from office? Poor guy, I'm glad he's doing the right thing instead.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Well, he might not be removed from office, but how much is holding the office actually worth if it has no political power?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Nance_Garner

John Nance Garner III (November 22, 1868 – November 7, 1967), known among his contemporaries as "Cactus Jack", was the 32nd vice president of the United States, serving from 1933 to 1941, under President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Like most vice presidents in this era, Garner had little to do and little influence on the president's policies. He famously described the vice presidency as being "not worth a bucket of warm piss" (for many years, this quote was bowdlerized as "warm spit").

[–] sporkler@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

This is America, there is a wage associated with the position, when paired with a lack of expectation that is pure opportunity, but I suspect you weren't being as literal as all that. The position could be extremely valuable when the topic is broached, but it could also not be worth shit, there's no way of knowing until the attempt is made. Vance is less of a person and a politician for not trying.

/IMHO

[–] Anti_Iridium@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Alternatively, the President can't actually remove the Vice President, no matter how unhappy with him he is.

[–] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

He can be impeached, especially with a house that is under the president's thumb.

It does create an odd situation in the senate about voting him out. I think dems would refuse a farce impeachment, even against the opposing party, but either way its a win for them.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

It does create an odd situation in the senate about voting him out.

Sounds like there's a bunch of unresolved constitutional law questions there too. There's apparently a literalist reading of the Constitution that the Vice President should preside over his own impeachment trial. Normally, the Vice President presides over the Senate. The Constitution explicitly says says that the Chief Justice rather than the Vice President presides if the President is being tried; but has no special exception in the text for if the Vice President himself is being impeached.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vice_President_of_the_United_States

In their capacity as president of the Senate, the vice president may preside over most impeachment trials of federal officers, although the Constitution does not specifically require it. However, whenever the president of the United States is on trial, the Constitution requires that the chief justice of the United States must preside. This stipulation was designed to avoid the possible conflict of interest in having the vice president preside over the trial for the removal of the one official standing between them and the presidency.[49] In contrast, the Constitution is silent about which federal official would preside were the vice president on trial by the Senate.[13][50] No vice president has ever been impeached, thus leaving it unclear whether an impeached vice president could, as president of the Senate, preside at their own impeachment trial.

Then the process involves a vote in the Senate. On two occasions in the past, the Senate has in fact tied:

https://theconversation.com/the-senate-has-actually-tied-in-an-impeachment-trial-twice-130939

The Senate has actually tied in an impeachment trial – twice

The Vice President...holds a tie-breaking vote in the Senate.

https://www.legbranch.org/can-the-vice-president-vote-in-a-presidential-impeachment-trial/

In other words, the Constitution designates the Vice President the President of the Senate and gives the Vice President the power to cast tie-breaking votes. Yet the Constitution only designates the Chief Justice the presiding officer in presidential impeachment trials. The Constitution does not designate the Chief Justice the President of the Senate, nor does it give the Chief Justice the power to cast tie-breaking votes. This suggests that the Vice President retains the power to cast tie-breaking votes in presidential impeachment trials.

For bonus points, Vance is a lawyer, and I suppose could represent himself as well.

Anti-Vance Senator: "And, Mr. President, was that the point where the Vice President committed the treasonous crime requiring his impeachment and removal from office?"

Trump: "Yes, and..."

Vance (acting as Vance's attorney): "Objection!"

Vance (acting as presiding officer over Vance's trial): "Sustained. The court orders the statement to be stricken from the record and, further, observes that the witness is a whiny bitch."

Vance (acting as holder of tie-breaking Senate vote): "Given that there seems to be a lack of evidence, I'm just going to come out right now and say that I don't think that I can vote against the defendant."

Vance (acting as defendant): "Woohoo! Score!"

EDIT: I don't actually know whether the presiding officer when the Senate is acting as a court uses regular judicial procedure


could probably go dig up transcripts of past impeachments to find out


so the above phrasing may not be correct, but it's still a pretty zany hypothetical.

EDIT2:

Trump: "This trial is a farce!"

Vance (acting as presiding officer over Vance's trial): begins slamming Senate gavel "Order! Order! The witness will be silent!"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbols_of_the_United_States_Senate

The gavel deteriorated during the 1940s, and in 1952 silver pieces were attached to try to limit further damage. However, in 1954, Then-Vice President Richard Nixon pounded it during a heated debate over atomic energy, and it completely came apart. Officials wanted to recreate the gavel exactly, but not enough ivory was available commercially; Senate officials therefore contacted the government of India for help in sourcing the correct amount of ivory. On November 17, 1954, the Vice-President of India, Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, presented the assembled Senate with a replacement gavel, which is still in use today.

Senate gavel comes apart again

Vance (acting as presiding officer over Vance's trial): "Damn. Finding more elephants these days is going to be a pain."

Trump: "I'll say whatever I feel like!"

Vance (acting as presiding officer over Vance's trial): "The sergeant at arms will remove the unruly witness!"

Jennifer Hemmingway: "Let's go, Mr. President."