this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2024
106 points (93.4% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2595 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
top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Who gives a shit what the perp thinks? Report on the investigation itself, not some fuckwad's reaction to it.

This bullshit is just a way for Newsweek to inject spin without making it seem like an editorial.

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

Ok so based on him being a republican that means he did exactly what they’re accusing him of and more.

Get his ass.

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

Frivolous would be a great name for a 16-year-old girl you fly around and pay for sex.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 5 months ago (1 children)

They only got Hunter Biden because they were frivolously investigating him.

The party of small govt used big brother to investigate a man because his father was president.

At this point we should just be constantly investigating every member of congress/the white house/the scotus.

Cause fuck due process right? You clearly don't need any more evidence than a hunch.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 5 months ago

“Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."

[–] [email protected] 15 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

In other news, Rep. Gaetz is introducing a federal bill to provide vouchers for daycare. When asked about it, Rep. Gaetz said "Inflation is hitting us all. I can haven't been able to find a date in months. Putting your child in day care should be a universal requirement." According to our sources, Former President Trump is fully supporting the bill and asking other members to support it as well.

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

If you supported abortions Matt then your 15 yo dates wouldn't have a kid in the first place.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

He likes to drop off and pick up at the same place. One stop shop

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

Not enough kids in daycare to decide which one to date, gaetz?

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

Has anyone seen Nestor recently?

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

He's MIA for being too old.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago

"rips" "drags" "slams"

What is with the weird word choice for modern news articles?

Lets whip out the thesaurus, use some flowery language! It can still be easy to understand but let's expand past the weird 3 verbs we've been limited to!

"Senator Matt Gaetz forgot that investigations prove innocence too, and lashes out with his comments about a new investigation into his alleged intimate relationships with high schoolers."

Really, if somebody wanted to investigate me about something I knew I was innocent about, I'd say "do your worst" not "ugh why would you investigate me" in a whiny voice.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago

He needs to be locked up behind many, many gatez

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

I don't see why this has to take so long either

[–] [email protected] 30 points 5 months ago (1 children)

He's looking more and more like Jack Nicholson's Joker without the makeup every year.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Since 2021, when the House was controlled by Democrats, the ethics panel has been investigating allegations that Gaetz had "engaged in sexual misconduct and illicit drug use."

Gaetz was also previously investigated by the Department of Justice over allegations that he trafficked and engaged in sex with a minor, although charges against the congressman were later dropped and he has continued to maintain his innocence.

Gaetz on Monday suggested that the Republican-controlled committee had launched new investigations against him in a post to X, formerly Twitter, while predicting that the matter would end in his "exoneration."

Newsweek reached out for comment to the offices of Ethics Committee Chair Michael Guest and the panel's ranking Democrat, Representative Susan Wild, via email on Monday evening.

McCarthy has claimed that Gaetz's motion to vacate the speakership, which resulted in his October 2023 removal, was a "personal thing" motivated by his refusal to end the ethics committee investigation.

Gaetz has been a highly divisive figure in the House, including among his GOP colleagues, some of whom reportedly floated the idea of expelling him from the chamber at the time that he moved to oust McCarthy.


The original article contains 447 words, the summary contains 191 words. Saved 57%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] [email protected] 55 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 5 months ago (1 children)

he certainly violated a few minors

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

That's the joke