318

Says the man who is the 2nd man on the ticket of the man borrowing Epsdein's plane.

Somebody, please, make it make sense......

top 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 117 points 2 months ago

I would throw all the money at just one reporter who asks JD Vance point blank "Sir, isn't the man you're campaigning with actually borrowing Mr. Epstein's plane right now?" live on the air. The squirming would be glorious.

[-] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 58 points 2 months ago

They never will. They want to protect their access to the candidates and don't want the death threats. I guarantee none of these milquetoast reporters are willing to do that.

Maybe someone like Robert Evens would do it, but he's probably on a "kick out on sight" list for such things.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 36 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Edited just in case it wasn't clear enough:

The plane was liquidated, bought by some random charter plane company, and then Trump hired a charter plane. It's as much news as if I hired a taxi, and the physical car that came over was previously owned by Epstein (bought by that taxi company in a liquidation).

That's what this particular plane issue is. It's nothing. Attack Trump's actual connection to Epstein. Hiring a charter plane that was previously owned by someone else is not that.

[-] Empricorn@feddit.nl 7 points 2 months ago

If that was the only issue... sure. But Trump was literally friends with the sex trafficker, and there's photos of them together to prove it!

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago

That. Is. Not. This. Plane. Issue.

[-] whostosay@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago
[-] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

No idea why you're in the negatives. Not only that, but it was just one of J.E.'s private planes, of which there are a finite supply of in the country. It's a nothingburger other than the fact that it maybe illustrates just how big of a guy Epstein was

[-] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

It also proves that Trump's team just doesn't look into anything that the media might consider an issue and use to attack him. Given his drama-laden reactions to some things, I don't think that's a conscious choice but rather incompetence. They just don't consider what might be used to attack him which is also why they always react liktheyve been caught with their pants down, because they are. All the time.

It isn't a real issue, but a lot of media doesn't give a shit about real issues, they make whatever they can an issue because that brings in viewers which in turn means advertising revenue. It used to be that the staff and campaigns would vet suppliers for this type of thing, no matter how tangential, because it could be used against them.

If there's anything the Republicans have mastered over the last 50+ years, it's how to make something that literally isn't an issue to anyone, an issue to their base. One would think with that mastery they would try to limit that exposure themselves.

[-] Doom@ttrpg.network 34 points 2 months ago

Fuck that even the dude HUNG THE FUCK OUT WITH HIM

I might use Hitler's headphones cause he dead now and they mine, don't mean we friends. Trump literally was this dudes good ass fuckin friend

[-] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago

I can’t wait for you to see how headphone technology has improved in the last 80 years

[-] hakunawazo@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Now I'd like to see some diesel-powered metal headphones with flames from Castle Wolfenstein to compare ;)

[-] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Yeah, they've got batteries that can die and they constantly lose signal now. Plus all the lag.

[-] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 108 points 2 months ago
[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 35 points 2 months ago

Weird how every time they win it's fair, every time those lose it's fake.

[-] 5C5C5C@programming.dev 33 points 2 months ago

Not quite, even when Trump won in 2016, he insisted there was election fraud and that he should've won by a larger margin.

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

Yeah, that's a good point

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 24 points 2 months ago

Republicans aren't sending their best.

Wait...

Yes.

Yes they are.

[-] ikidd@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago

Couch it in terms we can understand, JD.

[-] owenfromcanada@lemmy.world 16 points 2 months ago
[-] Myxomatosis@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago

Please keep running your mouth until Election Day, JD.

[-] eestileib@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 months ago

There's a sadness in those eyes now that all the eyeliner in the world can't hide.

[-] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 9 points 2 months ago
[-] Hayduke@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Maybe he's full of it. Maybe it's Maybelline.

[-] marx2k@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

"wildly compares ?

[-] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Why is he so beautiful? 😆. More eyeliner dude!

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

“Giving Kamala Harris control over inflation policy, it’s like giving Jeffrey Epstein control over human trafficking policy,” Vance told host Shannon Bream.

[-] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago

I really wish there was a way to filter posts using specific words. I'm so tired of Trump, Vance, Biden, and Harris. There's still months to go off then always being in the news, too.

[-] skye@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

(at least on Sync) if you go in settings > filters, you can hide posts by certain keywords

[-] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago

I just use my browser. Thank you though

[-] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Good, good.

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

The Daily Boulder - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for The Daily Boulder:

MBFC: Questionable - Credibility: Low - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://dailyboulder.com/jd-vance-wildly-compares-harris-to-jeffrey-epstein-slams-polls-showing-trump-losing-as-fake/?
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2024
318 points (95.7% liked)

politics

19088 readers
1976 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