Just look into anyone that received or requested a presidential pardon from Trump.
this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2024
563 points (99.5% liked)
politics
19107 readers
3031 users here now
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. 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.
- 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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I did not read the article. However, the headline really makes it sound like I'm supposed to think that paying for sex is a bad thing. Don't get me wrong, Matt Geetz is a fucker and should probably be in prison, but we live in current year. It should absolutely be ok to hire someone to get your rocks off.
Hard agree, but it's a rather "progressive" view for the political party hell bent on deconstructing reproductive services and eroding privacy to access porn.
It is also still illegal I believe? The lack of any consequence just highlights its a dumb law, demonstrates it only serves as a poor tax, and exposes all their theocratic preaching as just rules for thee and not for me to strip away freedoms.
Today's vocab word is: licentious. Or if he is actually paying a boatload, profligacy.
How else is he supposed to get it? His personality?
I think this is just part of the republican playbook now. They all seem as scummy as humans can possibly be. tRump was right, it is swamp....filled with conservative scum
Knowing Matt I am not shocked.
She should have gotten hazard pay on top of her usual rate.
While I don't oppose sex work it is funny that the people trying to legislate these idealized catholic values are all weirdo sex perverts who are willing to spend a lot of money for sex as entertainment.
In The Handmaid's Tale (book), the Captain took his wife's handmaid to a sex club.
Classic transference.
I only skimmed the opening but it didn't appear to suggest that anyone underage / non-consensual was paid. I have no problem with selling / buying sex between consenting adults. He's a scumbag and I want him gone, but consensual sex for money shouldn't be illegal. If they're underage, that's a different story.
I agree that paying an adult for consensual sex shouldn't be illegal but, it is. So, the "party of law and order" should be held to their own shitty standards.
A fair point, but not one that will win any arguments or concessions from his supporters. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.
Yet. He paid a minor for sex. It was confirmed by his co-conspirator and the women who was a minor at the time. His co-conspirator is in prison partially for that rape/payment.
The DOJ dropped its investigation because Gaetz is a powerful ally of the former president, comes from a Florida politcal dynasty, his convicted co-conspirator has credibility issues from past lies about politicians, and because the rape victim refused to testify.
None of the above mean that he didnt rape that women, it just means the DOJ are wimps that wont take a case if its hard to win.
the DOJ are wimps that wont take a case if its hard to win
Taking on losing cases is a waste of time and resources. There isn't even a moral victory to be had in a loss. Even if the accused was actually guilty, their win will be used as vindication and often proof that they did not do the crime. It's a bad idea all around.
Pursuing justice is never a bad idea. What you have here is the DOJ being afraid to do that because of politics, and because they want to keep their 90%+ conviction rate.
The fact that he committed the crime isn't even really in dispute. It will just be hard to overcome the politics, so they gave up.
view more: next ›