politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
This woman really shit the bed on a slam dunk because she wouldnt look further than down the hall for dick. We have tapes of Trump pressuring election officials, but it doesn't matter because she wanted to pay cash to go on vacation with one out the 3 people in the whole world she wasn't supposed to. Probably 10,000 fine men in her zip code looking for an attractive high powered lawyer and she couldn't look outside her office suite number. Dumb fuckin error.
I don't understand why it matters at all. Seriously. What's the problem?
Its an ethical violation, which aint great, but mostly its fodder for the defense. Its provided the appearance of impropriety, and when you're going after trump you need to be above reproach. Otherwise this shit will happen. Trump slings mud, and while everybody is trying to figure out what's going on he moves on to cause another fire. Because his strategy is never to win, but to outlast. Fanni was supposed to lay siege to the Trump fortress and bring it down, but attacked without paying hede to her own defenses and now a straight forward plan of attack has become a quagmire with a crisis of leadership due to an unforced error.
Why does that matter? These fuckers think that a woman having a job is an impropriety.
I'm dead serious, I just do not get it. It's like a cyclical argument. Why is this prosecution in trouble? Because they did something that gives Trump ammunition to attack the prosecution. What did they do? They gave Trump ammunition to attack the prosecution. What was the "ammunition"? The ammunition was the act of giving Trump ammunition to attack the prosecution. And on and on
If she was dating the person who appointed her to the case, sure. Potential for bias/corruption. If she was dating a defense counsel, sure. If she was dating a witness, sure. She was dating another consultant on her own team. Who gives a flying fuck? Would anyone have a problem with a husband and wife team on the same prosecution? They're working together, there's no potential for bias or corruption or anything.