Trump breaks his own law.

(3) Offense involving digital forgeries.-- (A) Involving adults.–Except as provided in subparagraph ©, it shall be unlawful for any person, in interstate or foreign commerce, to use an interactive computer service to knowingly publish a digital forgery of an identifiable individual who is not a minor if– (i) the digital forgery was published without the consent of the identifiable individual; (ii) what is depicted was not voluntarily exposed by the identifiable individual in a public or commercial setting; (iii) what is depicted is not a matter of public concern; and (iv) publication of the digital forgery– (I) is intended to cause harm; or (II) causes harm, including psychological, financial, or reputational harm, to the identifiable individual.

  • lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    65
    ·
    4 days ago

    So, since this is a clear and flagrant violation of law, at least one prosecutor somewhere is going to sign an arrest warrant.

    Right???

      • IndiBrony@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        I don’t know how people keep forgetting this. Man could literally rape a child in the street or - as he put it - gun down someone on the streets of NYC and nobody can do a thing about it. Literally the only thing that could get him out of office right now is death. It can’t be explained any easier than that.

        Good luck impeaching the bastard as well. People hoping for Democrats to get enough asses on seats are living in a fantasy world. We’ve already seen that they’re willing to cancel democratic elections to keep themselves in power. The only way he leaves office is in a coffin.

        By all means come back to this in December 2028 and tell me I was wrong. I’d love to have this settled in a democratic manner, but that’s not going to happen. We’ve had little over 6 months of his dictatorship. We still have 7/8ths of his term left to go.

        • cosmicrookie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          4 days ago

          Well… the thing is, its not only him. All future Presidents have the same power and there will be a lot more corrupt politicians who will try to get this kind of power (especially for criminals).

          The whole thing needs to be changed because it has been broken beyond repair

          • AA5B@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            We have to start by voting in a more ethical government before we have any chance of persuading them to get this under control.

            We’re asking them to curtail their own powers which will never happen with a narcissistic, corrupt authoritarian.

            Actually it’s worse: this presumption of being above the law was enshrined by a sycophant Supreme Court. We’ll need a court of interested in upholding human rights, the constitution and checks and balances. Well probably also need an ethical Congress to pass laws curtailing the power of a colorist President, for an ethical court to rule on

          • IndiBrony@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 days ago

            I understand that bit. At the moment there’s nothing we can do about that, it’s not like the current administration is going to do anything at all to reverse that ruling.

            I can see, however, that this is going to be an extremely difficult power to wrestle out of the hands of any future presidents as well. Nobody is going to want to give up that sort of power, and it would take huge pressure from the public for them to even consider it.

            The irony is that I’m sure if the Democrats do get in, the same MAGA types who love this ruling for Trump will suddenly find it very troubling in someone else’s hands. “One rule for thee” and whatnot.

            • cosmicrookie@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              3 days ago

              Any power or freedom that politicians give themselves is very difficult to take back

              I live in a very socialistic country where we don’t mind paying s lot of tax, but politicians get special treatment when it comes to social welfare and especially pensions.

              They have all campaigned to limit this bun none have done anything when they finally got into power. And this is in a fairly legit country where things seem to be pretty democratic

  • half_fiction@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    4 days ago

    No plausible deniability, either. There’s no way he could even argue that he thought it was true, but of course that doesn’t really matter at this point. His base is so fucking cooked if they believe this happened at all but especially without anyone else reporting on it.

  • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    4 days ago

    Seems like some people have already forgotten recent Supreme Court precedent.

    It’s not illegal when he does it.

  • peregrin5@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    4 days ago

    it’s only illegal if people deepfake trump and friends. everyone else, especially Democrats are fair game

  • shalafi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 days ago

    Is it illegal?

    unlawful for any person, in interstate or foreign commerce

    What’s that bit mean in this case?

    • Jhex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Trump is a rapist, convicted felon, and most likely a pedophile… does any one really care he broke this law?

      • shalafi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        I was asking about this particular case, well aware of his other crimes.

        Not sure what that clause means. Anyone?

  • RunJun@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    4 days ago

    lol y’all misunderstanding the intention here. It’s to clearly state that this law does not bind them.