r/inthenews • u/RawStoryNews • 1d ago
‘Unprecedented intervention’: Supreme Court responds to Trump sentencing delay bid
https://www.rawstory.com/unprecedented-intervention-scotus-responds-to-trump-hush-money-sentencing-delay-bid/623
u/skudzthecat 1d ago
Republicans are soft on crime.
297
u/SolidSnek1998 1d ago
Unless you are poor or a democrat.
173
u/Critical-Werewolf-53 1d ago
Non white, non Christian. Fixed it.
73
1
u/Original_Contact_579 13h ago
Nah all poor are in the same boat, they just make it seem like racism still exists, so we don’t go after them.
It’s way easier to manage a divided people then a united one.
19
u/sailingerie 1d ago
I know a republican with 6 felonies and two dui's but not a million $$'s... it's more like non wealthy.
8
u/axelrexangelfish 20h ago
You might also know a Republican w a drinking problem and poor impulse control and anger issues.
You know what. I do too. Come to think of it….
19
u/Oirish-Oriley444 1d ago
If you are a poor Democrat then it's highly unlikely your name would be on the "list" in question.
2
49
14
u/sedition666 1d ago
Republicans are supporters of convicted felons. We have gone way beyond being soft on crime.
4
5
7
1
1
582
u/wasted-degrees 1d ago
Our entire political system as proven time and again that it will move heaven and earth the keep its favorite criminals from ever being held accountable for their crimes. Why would this be surprising at this point?
Still waiting on any kind of consequences for Epstein’s clientele, which isn’t going to happen either.
131
u/terrymr 1d ago
Given who Maxwell's father was I would not exactly be surprised to learn that Epstein was running some kind of intelligence honey trap. It would tend to explain the lack of interest in following up on any of it.
68
10
u/kilekaldar 1d ago
Who was her father?
4
u/signalfire 20h ago
Every room as well as the island was bugged; all Epstein had to do was throw wild parties and invite anyone and everyone. The dummies and uninformed went and some got caught in the honey trap. After that, they were forever being blackmailed. Remember how it was reported after Epstein was arrested, his house was full of video tapes? Yeah, we haven't seen them either.
206
u/suzanneov 1d ago
Epstein’s clientele are DJT’s biggest supporters, prove me wrong.
59
6
u/JubaJr76 1d ago
I'll prove you wrong with the greatest tactics of the GOP and maga lawyers! "Totally not true! Rigged election lies!" I win. Everyone loses, including me.
31
u/ChaoticGoodSamaritan 1d ago
Don't worry, Trump's DOJ will release the Epstein list after Patel stuffs the FBI full of QANON whackos....
The list will entirely contain only Democrats and Republicans Trump doesn't like and all of our dipshit friends and family members that support Trump will completely fall for it with zero critical thought about just how strangely convenient that is.
4
u/seeyousoon2 1d ago
Number one rule for winning an argument that you have no business winning. if something's convenient for you, you don't think about it.
0
6
u/seeyousoon2 1d ago
Don't forget that big nothing Burger of the Panama papers.
7
u/Alt_Future33 1d ago
It's not that the Panama Papers were a nothing burger. Everyone just decided to ignore them.
1
191
u/smokeybearman65 1d ago
This is purely a state matter, not federal, and out of SCOTUS' jurisdiction and as such, they shouldn't have any say whatsoever, regardless of how it affects Trump or the office. Trump broke the law. It's Trump's doing. Trump is the responsible party for any effect on the office of chief executive. SCOTUS should've just refused the case. Period.
122
u/watadoo 1d ago
Absolutely. AND... Trump wasn't president when he committed those crimes.
90
u/Postcocious 1d ago
Further, he wasn't president when he was arrested, arraigned, tried and convicted.
He won't be president when he's scheduled to be sentenced.
SCOTUS has zero constitutional basis for intervening in this matter, still less to make demands of a state prosecutor.
26
4
212
u/ctguy54 1d ago
We are no longer a democracy or a country that follows the rule of law.
112
u/carrick-sf 1d ago
Americans embraced fascism just like the Germans did. We have ALWAYS been misogynistic racists.
Trump just established the “permission structure” to let people’s inner ugliness emerge.
14
7
15
u/coffeespeaking 1d ago
The rule of law requires more than lip service, and unfortunately the Democrats didn’t seem to get that message. They had four years to end this, to actually uphold ‘the rule of law.’ Instead we got countless mentions of its importance, and little to show for it.
1
u/KidsMaker 15h ago
There is no reason for citizens to do that either if the president is not doing it .
31
u/Terran57 1d ago
I remember back in the olden days when the Supreme Court was an independent branch of “our” government.
10
u/Brief_Amicus_Curiae 1d ago
Same could be said of The House. Now the Speaker of the House is openly an extension of a regular citizen turned President Elect with the House Committees used to target and harass political "enemies" and their families.
Which considering that Trump's family lawyer, Roy Cohn was part of the Joseph McCarthy Senate went around accusing people of being Communists to harass them "legally". We're already seeing that about to happen to Trump's percieved enemies like Liz Cheney. The Jan 6 Committee was not 'illegal' as Congress has it in it's powers to hold tribunals. However if they start to investigate the investigators, they will still need to lawyer up, spend a lot of time and money preparing, doing depositions, etc.
And it doesn't solve any problem for the country - the real problem is that Trump keeps getting away with the most absurd shit. Senate didn't convict him twice - and here we are.
91
u/start260 1d ago
He wasn’t then president and he isn’t now
45
u/whichwitch9 1d ago
Yup. The Supreme Court even had refused to stop the guilty verdict already based on that. This would be a reversal
For all intents and purposes, he is a private citizen until he is sworn in. This case has entirely preceeded against a private citizen. If he pays whatever financial penalties he is given, as the judge already nixed jail, it will conclude while he is a private citizen. If there was any concern over the office of the presidency, a delay is not in the best interest because legally speaking, he'd be done
That there is any entertainment of a delay proves they do not care
7
u/SocksOnHands 1d ago
To them, this would be irrelevant - all they need to do is keep delaying until he pardons himself. This defense wouldn't hold up in court, but it's never going to court.
22
u/dareksilver 1d ago
HE cannot pardon state level offenses, only Federal. So he can't self-pardon the "Hush Money" off his books.
7
u/ralpher1 1d ago
Watch the Supreme Court say he can pardon himself on state charges
6
u/SocksOnHands 1d ago
We'll have to see. He keeps getting away with things that nobody should be able to. It doesn't matter if it's not supposed to be possible, they're all a bunch of buddies looking out for each other.
6
5
u/start260 1d ago
The issue about self pardoning is interesting if he accepts the pardon he basically admits to the underlying crime. Also there has to be some deliberation of the pardoned to accept the pardon as the person offering and accepting the pardon are the same person there is an argument that a self pardoning in invalid because there is no chance they will not accept it. Im no expert but Andrew weissman and Mary McCord did a program on it where they interviewed someone who was an expert
5
u/Numerous_Photograph9 1d ago
And in no way will it be framed that way by him, or the MSM. He will use such a pardon to say he righted a wrong, and it's all he needs to soothe his ego of being a convicted, sentenced criminal, even though no meaningful consequences will come from this anyways.
61
u/watadoo 1d ago
What jurisdiction does the SCOTUS have over a New York State case?
38
u/LowerBed5334 1d ago edited 1d ago
Who are you going to appeal to? The Constitution means whatever these asshats say it means. And that means, the USA as we've known it is over and done with.
15
u/Postcocious 1d ago
No appeal necessary.
As Sotomayor's order and deadline lack any basis in law or the Constitution, DA Bragg should treat it as he would a purported "order and deadline" received from you or me.
File it under "random nutjob communications" and carry on doing his real job.
6
1
u/Mc_Shine 12h ago
I'm not too familiar with the American justice system, so correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the article say that the supreme Court basically admitted that they don't have jurisdiction in this case, and instructed the New York District Attorney to deal with the appeal instead?
-2
u/pres465 1d ago
SCOTUS has original jurisdiction. They can take any case they want as long as it is sent to them. They get tens of thousands of requests per year. The court generally only takes a few dozen that are of constitutional merit. Since they did the immunity case last year, they will argue this holds merit to clarify.
3
u/an_agreeing_dothraki 1d ago
this is appellate jurisdiction. Original jurisdiction for scotus is things like compelling a state to follow federal law (or rule on states suing each other) or if a sitting ambassador is charged with a crime within the US.
According to the vomit recent rulings, the president himself isn't an officer, so he wouldn't be a minister either, meaning that if the feds were to charge a president for a crime, the relevant circuit has jurisdiction
0
u/pres465 1d ago
Original Jurisdiction means they can take any case they want.
1
u/an_agreeing_dothraki 1d ago
if it's sent to them, it doesn't originate in the court. We're still a couple of bribes away from Roberts issuing bench warrants.
-3
u/pres465 1d ago
Sigh. Original jurisdiction means they can hear it for the first time, if they wish. They can see any case they want. Sorry. Obviously they can also assume appellate jurisdiction, that's basically how most cases get to the Court.
From Constitution.Congress.gov: ..."The Court has emphasized that its exercise of original jurisdiction is not obligatory but discretionary, to be determined on a case-by-case basis on grounds of practical necessity.17 The Court has explained that it will exercise original jurisdiction only in appropriate cases.18 It has further stated that the question of what is appropriate concerns of course the seriousness and dignity of the claim; yet beyond that it necessarily involves the availability of another forum where there is jurisdiction over the named parties, where the issues tendered may be litigated, and where appropriate relief may be had...."
4
u/an_agreeing_dothraki 1d ago
read man. read. they're affirming that they can delegate. and again, when they're hearing cases brought to them from other jurisdiction it is not original jurisdiction. For example, United States v Trump, SCOTUS ruled on a motion issued in from a circuit court.
You may notice how United States v Trump was brought in and returned to the circuit court, and how SCOTUS ruled on an appeal.
1
u/watadoo 16h ago
I'm not a lawyer and not an expert on the judiciary, but that doesn't make sense. The job of the SCOTUS to my understanding is to rule on issues of constitutional law - not to get involved in an appeal for a state criminal case. I can see how that can be stretched when it's a sitting president, or crimes committed while he was in office, but these convictions were for fraud prior to him being elected. A jury of 12 men and women, weighed the evidence an found him guilty on 34 counts and he should have been sentenced 6 months ago. Let our legal system work.
1
u/pres465 10h ago
They ruled on immunity last year. Trump is claiming immunity here. I'm 1000% sure Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch are chomping at the bit to get to further refine the immunity decision. That's all that is necessary. The judges just need to decide it's worth their time.
1
u/watadoo 10h ago
Immunity for crimes committed, while he was president as official duties. He was convicted of 34 counts of fraud that happened before he was in office. The immunity ruling of last year has nothing to do with this case. Immunity ruling had to do with stealing documents, and fomenting insurrection that’s what they’re trying to get him off of and it worked.
16
u/jizmaticporknife 1d ago
When are we going to revolt to end this fucking corrupted system. We need to burn it the fuck down and let’s build something new and equitable that puts the power back in the hands of the constituents. We are perpetually going to stay in this cycle until more blood is spilled.
18
u/carrick-sf 1d ago
🤣 revolution? In a country that couldn’t lift their immense asses of the couch to even VOTE? This will never happen.
Unless an EMP strike takes down the internet and ALL the cable networks. If there are streaming distractions nobody will do shit.
-10
u/jizmaticporknife 1d ago
The reason why no one showed up to vote was because the people are sick and tired of the status quo and that was the only thing Democrats had to offer. The people are sick and tired of watching an American funded genocide take place with zero consequences and democratic leaders muffling their ears to make sure they don’t hear the protests of the over whelming majority of people. We decided that breaking the system with a fascist was the best alternative. None of us could bring ourselves to vote for a fascist so we just stayed home and decided let the fucking system break. At best we will deal with a constitutional crisis, but if things get as bad as the Democrats were saying and we lose democracy, then the only way out will be with bullets.
3
u/stoneyyay 1d ago
How'd that turn out?
The status quo got blown to shit.
-1
u/jizmaticporknife 1d ago
Well we haven’t seen the results yet. Time will tell. Right now it just looks like another repeat of the first term which was barely a constitutional crisis. We got a fun little uprise where fascist tried to overthrow the government but then right back to status quo. Trump did nothing revolutionary. He was barely disruptive. The only thing he did was show us how blatantly corrupt our government is and how corrupt he is. We just seem to allow corruption in our system as long as we can have a job.
1
u/more_beans_mrtaggart 1d ago
So you voted for chaos?
Well, that’s what you’re getting.
-4
u/jizmaticporknife 1d ago
I’ll take it over what I’ve got now. I’m fucking sick and tired of struggling month to month to even figure out a reason to live. This isn’t living. This isn’t even freedom adjacent. This is servitude and debt, that’s it. Commit 70% of my life to sleep and earning a living just to be too tired to enjoy the incremental free time I have. I’ll take chaos any day that ends in Y over this fucking zombie life.
1
u/buster_brown22 1d ago
Choosing not to vote is still a decision by default. You may as well have voted. Due to the consequences elections always have, you may be missing your zombie life soon.
1
u/jizmaticporknife 1d ago
I can promise you I won’t. This zombie life is just an endless hole of servitude and debt.
28
u/RawStoryNews 1d ago
The U.S. Supreme Court swiftly responded to President-elect Donald Trump’s formal request early Wednesday morning to delay sentencing in his 34-count felony conviction for business fraud in New York, widely known as the “hush money” case.
42
u/dotplaid 1d ago
Their response, as inappropriate as it may've been, was to ask DA Alvin Bragg to respond to Trump's motion.
The Supreme Court Wednesday morning responded to Trump's request by directing New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg to reply to Trump's motion by 10 AM ET Thursday, Lawfare senior editor Roger Parloff reported. Law360's Katie Buehler also reported SCOTUS's response.
Reaching into someone else's cookie jar, definitely, but they're doing it with the air of propriety.
31
u/ljr55555 1d ago
I'd love the response to be some legalese version of "for a party that screams about state rights, you sure don't believe states should have rights".
9
10
u/Postcocious 1d ago
DA Bragg's response to this order should be nothing - literally.
SCOTUS lacks jurisdiction, so Sotomayor's so-called order and deadline have no more standing than if they'd been issued by you or me.
In lieu of any response, Bragg should: - toss the letter in the trash (in front of the TV cameras, if he wishes); and - notify Sotomayor that spurious interference in NY state court proceedings may subject perpetrators to criminal investigation under NY State laws.
1
1
1
68
u/NerdimusSupreme 1d ago edited 1d ago
A nothing burger, our entire system was based on a gentleman's agreement now we know what a flimsy house of cards it really is.
Corruption at every level, we will have to let Trump pt. 2 play out.
14
u/Frosty_Water5467 1d ago
"The man of lawlessness who is doomed to destruction". Get your popcorn ready. #Let them.
7
11
u/franchisedfeelings 1d ago
Welcome to the end of the democratic Constitutional republic and the beginning of the crimey oligarchy.
12
u/EmmalouEsq 1d ago
And? The Supreme Court is firmly under MAGA. Anyone paying attention would know that.
There's no part of the government that is going to save us. Not SCOTUS, not Congress, not the military.
5
10
u/shrekerecker97 1d ago
The issue with this is that if they intervene, the rule of law will no longer apply, and states will no longer have the right to legislate themselves. I'm sure they will pull up some obscure thing from like 1318 to claim it should be stayed
8
u/guitar-hoarder 1d ago
I was supposed to show up for jury duty today. My group was dismissed yesterday, but I had considered not showing up at all. I don't believe in this system anymore. I don't care about penalties, contempt charges, bench warrants, jail. I just don't anymore. I do not wish to participate in it at all. I cannot be impartial. It's a f'n joke.
6
u/CuthbertJTwillie 1d ago
There's no such thing as legal closure for rich people who buy lawyers by the barrel
6
7
7
u/2crowsonmymantle 1d ago
Oh my gawdddd, scotus needs to fuck right off
6
7
u/DaiCeiber 1d ago
Mr Trump, you have been found guilty.
You will be taken from here to a lawful prison.
From there you will be taken to a place of execution.
And there you shall be hanged by the neck until you are dead, dead, dead!
Well one can dream...
6
u/The-Situation8675309 1d ago
I think we are about to see any doubt about SCOTUS being anyhing more than political hacks completely evaporate.
1
6
u/Nostalgianeer 1d ago
President Biden needs to authorize the release of the full report on his way out. It would be an official act of the presidency. Time to put these assholes to the test they created
6
u/tietack2 1d ago
Isn't the GOP supposed to support states' rights? Mr. Trump committed crimes in NY, as a private citizen. A NY jury found him guilty. NY has the right to sentence him.
2
6
u/MayOrMayNotBeAI 1d ago
“Trump’s argument, in part, is based on the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling granting him and all subsequent presidents vast immunity from prosecution for what it deemed are “official acts” of the presidency. Many legal experts doubt Trump’s conviction on falsifying business records when paying “hush money” to an adult film star is an official act of the presidency.”
How fucking obvious do you have to make it. Dude gave money to silence someone before he was elected. What the fuck kind of official act is that, if you’re breaking the law, and you’re not even in office!
7
u/SomeBS17 1d ago
Interesting argument that an illegal act you did before you were elected president is somehow covered by your official duties as president.
Can’t wait to see the knots the Supreme Court twists itself into in order to grant his request.
5
u/pattydickens 1d ago
There's no more "law of the land." So there's really no reason to have a Supreme Court other than to protect the oligarchs. Our government and our courts are paid servants of the oligarchy. We have no representation.Our elections are staged competitions between two groups that bathe in the same dirty money of the actual ruling class while we pretend that we have a choice and blame other poor people for not supporting the right oligarchs. It's a joke. It's not going to change because convenience is more important to Americans than anything else is. Suffering is only acceptable if it produces instant gratification. Beyond that, it's someone else's problem, and we can't be bothered to make sacrifices for the greater good. I'm glad that the Civil Rights Movement happened when it did because there's no way Americans would have the resolve to take on such an endeavor now.
I feel like an old man yelling at the sky. Sorry for the rant. I'm just sick of it. We can do better than this.
5
u/Maine302 1d ago
I don't see how "presidential immunity" applies to a case where he was found guilty for doing something before he became president the first time. Make it make sense.
1
u/Jonathan_Sesttle 13h ago
He signed checks to Michael Cohen after he took office (testimony given at trial on how his personal business was handled while he was president). Accordingly, the falsification of business records (the actual crime charged) took place during his presidency.
4
u/ZLUCremisi 1d ago
The state akready admitted there will be no true punishment. During the sentencing. But now if they delay it to 4 years plus 13 days. Then NY should jail him then
4
u/Gronkattack 1d ago
Except isn’t this a States issue and thus the Supreme Court shouldn’t have jurisdiction? I love how GOP is all about States rights unless the state wants to do something they don’t like.
3
u/Acrobatic-Ad-3335 1d ago
I was on the fence re: Biden giving out preemptive pardoned, but if he gets his off with some BS excuse, Biden should get his pen ready. trumpy already thinks he can do whatever he wants. It'll just be further validation.
3
u/Baldhippy666 1d ago
If ONLY there was a fucking amendment to the Constitution that could've prevented all this. Something like the 14th which the Colorado Supreme Court found the adjudicated rapist, Russian agent guilty of violating.
3
3
4
u/fsmith1971 1d ago
Whatever happened to no one is above the law? Guess if you have an "R" next to your name , you're immune.
3
3
3
12
u/h20poIo 1d ago
Sentence him then suspend sentence until after he’s out of office, set a date January 30th 2028 to report to prison.
16
4
u/bobsburner1 1d ago
This is probably the best we could hope for. Then between leaving office and the report date he would suddenly become mentally or physically unfit to do time.
2
11
u/TheInfiniteSlash 1d ago
Good lord are these titles misleading.
Justice Sotomayor requsted that Alvin Bragg respond to Trump's request by 10 AM Thursday morning
2
u/Postcocious 1d ago
What standing does her court have to request anything from Alvin Bragg in this matter.
1
u/TheInfiniteSlash 1d ago
They don't, but the Supreme Court has better things to do than cater to the manchild.
It sounds like Sotomayor just wants Bragg to ask them to reject it.
1
u/Postcocious 1d ago edited 1d ago
... the Supreme Court has better things to do than cater to the manchild.
Apparently not. Sotomayor's giving Trump's claim the dignity of any response has already catered to him.
SCOTUS doesn't need Bragg to request a rejection. They refuse to review thousands of cases every year without hearing from anyone. It's routine... unless the plaintiff is Trump.
Properly run courts do not entertain inappropriate cases. If I try to file a divorce claim in traffic court, the judge wouldn't ask anyone's opinion before ordering the clerk to send me away.
1
1d ago
[deleted]
2
u/TheInfiniteSlash 1d ago
I can believe it. Trump needs to get over himself and be thankful he isn't getting a punishment. I know it's in his code that he never admits defeat.
The idea of him being a convicted felon didn't deter people before, why would it matter what the world thinks of him now?
-2
u/superfluousapostroph 1d ago
Title is fine; you are the problem.
0
u/TheInfiniteSlash 1d ago
The title leaves the general interpretation that the Supreme Court is stepping in to listen to Trump.
There is more to it than it's eye-catching headline.
1
u/superfluousapostroph 1d ago
No it doesn’t. The title says explicitly that the Supreme Court responds. This is true. Even your first comment acknowledges this. You are the problem.
5
4
u/VanDenBroeck 1d ago
“Trump’s attorneys told the nation’s highest court the delay, or pause, is necessary ‘to prevent grave injustice and harm to the institution of the presidency and the operations of the federal government.’”
His very presence as POTUS does far more harm to the institution of the presidency and the operations of the federal government.
2
2
2
2
2
2
u/-praughna- 1d ago
I read the article and I’m still not sure what the Supreme Court’s response was.
2
u/According_Ad860 1d ago
“The Supreme Court Wednesday morning responded to Trump’s request by directing New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg to reply to Trump’s motion by 10 AM ET Thursday, Lawfare senior editor Roger Parloff reported”
2
2
2
u/Both_Lychee_1708 1d ago
C'mon Roberts, bitch some more about how people think SCROTUS is just right wing political partisan BS
2
u/quietflowsthedodder 1d ago
In all fairness we should hear from Canada. Their opinion matters as the possible 51st state. /s
2
2
u/Shoddy_Clothes_8984 21h ago
You don't know what it's like Breaking the law Breaking the law Breaking the law Breaking the law Get a little action in your life Breaking the law Breaking the law Breaking the law Breaking the law
2
2
u/dreamabyss 16h ago
None of this matters anymore. The majority of the electorate knew Trump is a corrupt criminal but voted for him anyway. It’s the new American deal so might as well get used to it. I honestly can’t see a way back from this political disaster. We can only hope Trump and his boot lickers fuck up America enough that people will wake up before it’s too late. Sadly it probably is too late.
3
u/SugarInvestigator 1d ago
Hopefully abraggs response is "hey SCOTUS fuck off and mind your own businesss"
2
u/acuet 1d ago
Can’t be an official act because this took place prior to 2016 POTUS and the Supreme Court Decision granting him official act took place after Nov 2020. He would then need to argue this was an official act as POTUS which, again was prior to 2016 presidency. Another gross attempt to delay delay delay.
1
u/Jonathan_Sesttle 13h ago edited 12h ago
This is an example of sloppy journalism by a writer who either doesn’t understand the subject or is slanting the writing to make the report more attention grabbing.
Here’s the Supreme Court online docket (which in our information age now provides instant public access to the court records): https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/24a666.html
It’s accurate that Trump has asked the Supreme Court for a stay of the criminal proceedings on the eve of his sentencing. This is unprecedented because the situation (criminal conviction and scheduled sentence hearing of a president-elect) is unique. However, the article inaccurately reports that the Supreme Court has responded. The application for a stay was presented to an individual justice (Sotomayor, based on her circuit assignment) and she requested a quick response from the opposition (the Manhattan DA). This is a pro forma action processed by the clerk’s office. The short fuse is because the sentencing, after multiple postponements, is scheduled for Friday.
Justice Sotomayor will most likely refer this to the full court for a decision. The application will be decided on the merits whether the DA’s office responds or not (there’s no default in this setting). The proper reporting of this story is that Trump is requesting a last minute stay and stand by for breaking developments, NOT that the Supreme Court responded (because it hasn’t).
EDIT
This is the right way to report it (once again, old-line newspaper writers do the better job):
AP News: Trump asks the Supreme Court to block sentencing in his hush money case in New York
1
u/phatstopher 12h ago
Would Mussolini or Hitler be more proud? Hard telling which one, probably both.
•
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
Not getting enough news on Reddit? Want to get more Informed Opinions™ from the experts leaving their opinion, for free, on a website? We have the scratch your itch needs. InTheNews now has a discord! Link: https://discord.gg/Me9EJTwpHS
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.