this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2024
614 points (98.1% liked)

politics

18073 readers
5716 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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!
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

"Any foreign adversary seeking to buy a President knows the price," warns Rep. Sean Casten

A Democrat who sits on the House Financial Services Committee warned that former President Donald Trump’s inability to secure a bond for his $464 million fraud judgment makes him a “massive national security risk.”

Trump’s lawyers in a filing on Monday told a New York appeals court that he cannot secure a bond after approaching 30 underwriters.

“The amount of the judgment, with interest, exceeds $464 million, and very few bonding companies will consider a bond of anything approaching that magnitude,” the attorneys wrote.

The filing quoted an insurance broker who signed an affidavit stating that securing the bond is a “practical impossibility.”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] homesweethomeMrL 150 points 3 months ago (2 children)

more of a national security risk. Right, he’s already selling secrets.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Gotta hush all those girls he pees on in Russian hotels.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago (5 children)

Nah mate, he paid them to pee on a bed where Obama's family once slept.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] FuglyDuck 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

this is past tense, isn't it? like, he doesn't ave more secrets to sell, and he's sold the ones he already had....

[–] 0110010001100010 23 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Unless he ends up in the white house again...then plenty more secrets to sell!

I can't believe that's actually a possibility....

[–] FuglyDuck 11 points 3 months ago

I can’t believe that’s actually a possibility…

me neither. I really want to wake up and find out the last 8 years have been one long, fucked up dream.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago

As the GOP nominee he will begin to receive some intelligence briefings even before the elections, as early as July. It was recently reported that the White House, caught in a "damned if you damned if you don't scenario" that is synonymous with Trump, sided to go with tradition & allow Trump access to these, even while he fights a classified documents mishandling case in court. This wouldn't make any sense in a Jack Ryan novel & yet ...

[–] [email protected] 102 points 3 months ago (9 children)

When I got my security clearance, one of the things they drove home was reporting people who were having money problems because, as this points out, having money problems makes you prone to being bribed, and thus a threat.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] xantoxis 54 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Lmao, as if there was ever a legitimate and legal way for him to get this money. "What if I sell secrets to somebody rich" was his default strategy before he even entered the white house. This doesn't make him any more of a security risk because he's already maxed out that metric many times over.

[–] clutchtwopointzero 25 points 3 months ago

And yet nothing happens becuz he's running fah office

[–] Tronn4 48 points 3 months ago (2 children)

He is a security threat first and foremost with his previous debt he should never had had a security clearance. His outside connections make him the exact person people with clearances are trained to spot and bring up.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] acetanilide 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It would be very interesting if a president was actually denied a security clearance

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago

The president doesn't actually hold a security clearance. Kushner was almost denied if I remember right, and definitely should have been.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 3 months ago (8 children)

I wonder what would happen if Putin straight up offered to cover his debts? I expect Trump would actually accept that offer and his idiot base would see nothing wrong with it if he did.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 36 points 3 months ago

Which is exactly why we should drop all the lawsuits against him and proactively bribe him with patriot-money! /s

The s stands for both sarcasm and sadness...

[–] Kushan 26 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Wow, guess the Saudis overpaid with that $1billion, they must be kicking themselves

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago

He already spent it. Probably on gold plating his own turds.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Honestly, I kinda want Putin to personally secure it for him. It would be a test of the system. It would let us know what needs to be done.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Are we sure that Putin is good for it?

[–] Zippy 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Well he could fly over here and deliver it on person. Hopefully that route passes over Ukraine.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] eran_morad 17 points 3 months ago
[–] TokenBoomer 14 points 3 months ago

Jail it is then.

[–] Son_of_dad 8 points 3 months ago

The thumbnail looks like he just barfed on the back windshield of the car

[–] blazera 7 points 3 months ago

risk? He was already working with Russia to subvert the 2016 election. He was bought a long time ago and has been transparently working for Russian interests since.

load more comments
view more: next ›