this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2024
272 points (96.9% liked)

politics

19127 readers
2412 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The presence of hard-right conspiracy theorist Laura Loomer alongside Donald Trump on the campaign trail in recent days has raised questions, including from some Republicans, about the influence the controversial former congressional candidate may have on him.

Ms Loomer is well-known for her anti-Muslim rhetoric and for spreading conspiracy theories, including that the 9/11 attacks were an "inside job" carried out by the US government.

She joined Trump at an event on Wednesday commemorating the attacks, raising eyebrows and prompting outrage in some US media outlets.

...

Now, she is known for her vocal support of Trump and for promoting a long string of conspiracy theories including claims that Kamala Harris is not black, and that the son of billionaire George Soros was sending cryptic messages calling for Trump's assassination.

These posts led her to be banned from a number of platforms including Facebook, Instagram and even, according to her, Uber and Lyft for making offensive comments about Muslim drivers. She once described herself as a “proud Islamophobe”.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 45 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I am really good at recognizing faces but every time I see a new pic of this lady I’m, "who the fuck is this?"

But the answer seems to be, a racist asshole.

[–] dhork 27 points 2 months ago

I had never heard of her until this week. To me, she looks like they took pictures of every woman Trump is known to have been attracted to in his life, made an AI mashup of all of them, and dyed her hair dark just to throw us all off.

[–] son_named_bort 21 points 2 months ago (2 children)

To be fair, with all the work she's had done she probably does look different every time you see her.

[–] Lobreeze 28 points 2 months ago (1 children)

She's only 31.

Let that sink in.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

That sink won't come in.

It's scared of whatever she did to her face.

[–] homesweethomeMrL 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Her face is fascinatingly odd and . . upsetting.

Born in Arizona in 1993, the self-styled investigative journalist has worked as an activist and commentator for organisations including Project Veritas and Alex Jones's Infowars.

BBC, don’t get played, man. That restraint you show with “self-styled” is just creaking terribly. Personally I would have gone with “considers herself” or “claims to be . . . despite [the obvious]”. Yeah yeah “objective”, look whatever you gotta tell yourself, man.

[–] olympicyes 12 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Self-styled means “that’s what she calls herself”. Otherwise they would not include the qualifier.

[–] homesweethomeMrL 5 points 2 months ago

It’s also a “journalistically accepted” way to say “no she isn’t” while allowing that yes, she may be. My point is that they should lean harder into flat-out saying “no she isn’t”.