434
all 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ZeroCool@vger.social 144 points 5 months ago

That headline is golden. But boy is it depressing that this is where we're at as a nation. And it's all because the GOP has been taken over by fascists and their army of useful idiots in tacky red hats.

[-] MartianRecon@lemmus.org 70 points 5 months ago

What's depressing is if literally any of our institutions acted how they were supposed to, this wouldn't be an issue.

The 4th estate is failing the country because they've been bought by oligarchs.

The judicial apparatus is failing because it's been bought by oligarchs.

The political apparatus is failing because it's been bought by oligarchs.

Man I wish we could put our finger on the reason why everything is coming down around us...

[-] barsquid@lemmy.world 35 points 5 months ago

It's awesome how we can trace so much evil back to Southern Strategy and Reaganomics.

[-] MartianRecon@lemmus.org 21 points 5 months ago

It's very frustrating, yeah. All the progress this country was making was thwarted by a bunch of butt-hurt southerners and racists.

[-] Archelon@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

Hell, you can take it further back to the failure of Reconstruction and the resulting propaganda wave creating a massive reactionary base.

[-] ZagamTheVile@lemmy.world 63 points 5 months ago

Remember when Dean had to drop out because he showed excitement about doing well?

[-] ZeroCool@vger.social 28 points 5 months ago
[-] echo@lemmings.world 17 points 5 months ago

Incredible, isn't it? Dean continues to be eviscerated.

[-] FaceDeer@fedia.io 20 points 5 months ago

To be fair, his campaign was already on the rocks at that point. It wasn't the scream alone that did him in.

[-] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 8 points 5 months ago

Tobefaaaaair.
He sucked anyways.

[-] commandar@lemmy.world 12 points 5 months ago

He came to suck years later.

At the time he was considerably farther to the left than the rest of the field short of Dennis Kucinich. Opposition to the Iraq war was central to his campaign when half the party was still trying to justify it. He wanted to push universal healthcare before that was a common position within the party. He was on the cutting edge of promoting gay rights and was extremely popular in the gay community when that community didn't have the voice it does now. His stint as DNC chair built real party infrastructure and helped set the stage for Obama's 2008 run.

The country -- and the Democratic Party -- were considerably more conservative 20 years ago and he definitely helped push things toward where we are now.

That said, he's absolutely said and done some things in recent year that make it pretty clear he's not the progressive vanguard he was back then. He's stood still, and arguably regressed, while the country kept moving. It's unfortunate. But I think it's also a mistake to dismiss him outright; he was a pretty important figure in getting the party to where it is now.

[-] NielsBohron@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

🎵To Be Fay-aaah🎵

[-] treefrog@lemm.ee 8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

It's golden and also inaccurate.

Probation officers aren't assigned until somebody has been sentenced. This is a pre-sentencing investigation to see if he is eligible for probation.

If he's not, he doesn't meet with his probation officer until after he gets out of jail.

[-] troglodytis@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

So.... Trump met with a probation officer that is assigned to his case currently. Right? So.... His probation officer.

Super curious. What about this hair makes you think you needed to split it(and edit your error without acknowledging its correction)?

[-] treefrog@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The article title implies that he's already been sentenced and is on probation. That's what that string of words means. The probation officer he met with is doing a presentence investigation. They aren't assigned to him.

I.e. not his probation officer because he's not on probation because this is still pre-sentencing.

I edited italics for clarity. Don't be an ass.

Edit I also edited this post for clarity. Twice!

[-] troglodytis@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Well just under the headline the article states "pre-sentencing"

So you didn't take the time to understand the article, didn't take the opportunity to realize your lack of understanding of the various roles and duties of a New York probation officer, and still haven't, even though multiple inaccuracies in your statements have been pointed out to you.

Obtuse throughout.

Edit: engaging has been my mistake. I thought your original comment was in regards to the headline. This makes clear you are speaking to the article. Had I understood that, I would have not replied, as there would be little point.

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 70 points 5 months ago

Gotta admit, posted for the headline.

[-] dogsnest@lemmy.world 19 points 5 months ago

Shame on you!! Shame on you!! Shame on you!!

You beat me to it!

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 50 points 5 months ago

When the headline isn't coming from the onion:

[-] hperrin@lemmy.world 39 points 5 months ago

All those chants of “lock her up” for almost a decade, without even one shred of tact or civility, were all building up to this glorious headline.

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 23 points 5 months ago

"It was a big, beautiful meeting... everyone is saying how great I handled it.

Men -- big, strong, patriotic men with tears in their eyes, straight out of Central Casting -- came running up to me saying "Sir, we've been to millions of probation meetings, but we've never been to one handled so amazingly as you did".

[-] thefartographer@lemm.ee 7 points 5 months ago
[-] HWK_290@lemmy.world 19 points 5 months ago

“I’m living the American nightmare!”

Alas, where I and the Trump campaign agree... Just not on the details

[-] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 16 points 5 months ago

Trump appears to be fundraising off of his hush-money pre-sentencing interview on Monday

Republicans are stupid. Unfortunately, they're not quite too stupid to live. They might drag us all down with them, though.

[-] Whirling_Cloudburst@lemmy.world 11 points 5 months ago

Republicans probably: Its not gay to be sodomized if we do it to own the Libs.

[-] aphlamingphoenix@lemm.ee 16 points 5 months ago

Gavin McInnes stuck a plug up his ass to own the libs. Anytime you think you're inventing something so ridiculous the right can't possibly have done it, you're probably wrong.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

I must have missed this one. He did what now?

[-] aphlamingphoenix@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago
[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Well, that tracks. The whole thing seemed very, very homoerotic - makes sense if the founder is a closet case. Aren't they named after something in a play?

[-] Snapz@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Convicted felon AND presumptive...

[-] A_Filthy_Weeaboo@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Any mirrors? Can't read without signing up....

this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2024
434 points (98.0% liked)

politics

19097 readers
5108 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