this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2024
57 points (95.2% liked)

politics

19233 readers
3809 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] AFKBRBChocolate 33 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Strange that the article doesn't mention that, since Biden claimed executive privilege, Garland can't turn the audio over.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Well, they seem focused on the absurdity of this whole thing. And of course, it's a Florida-woman trying to out batshit crazy everyone else.

I just read a little bit about her and she's basically a female George Santos. i.e lied about almost every aspect of her life to become a representative.

Gross.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 months ago

Are we sure she isn't George Santos?

[–] frickineh 9 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Funny how I knew it was Anna Paulina Luna just from that description. She's a nutjob.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago (3 children)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago

Sarah Palin was really a trend setter for congesional Republican women.

[–] officermike 8 points 5 months ago

To be fair, the description included "Florida-woman" so that alone disqualified those other two nutjobs.

[–] frickineh 2 points 5 months ago

Not necessarily in terms of sheer craziness, but the lying about every part of her background is pretty identifying.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago

Cool, cool, cool - Jim Jordan, too, right?

[–] billiam0202 7 points 5 months ago

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember hearing once that even if this were to happen, Congress can't hold him longer than the end of this Congressional term.

More political grandstanding from the party that is bereft of any ideals beyond give the rich more money and worship Trump.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago

So Congress has one man, with a particular set of skills, tasked with apprehending targets and bringing them to the House floor.

Sounds like a movie idea.

[–] Burn_The_Right 1 points 5 months ago

I wonder if Garland regrets waiting two years before prosecuting the top Republican insurrectionist. He'll never stop being a conservative, but maybe he'll stop being a Republican.