528
Meanwhile the newspapers: "FACT CHECK: It is incorrect to associate project 2025 with the Trump campaign" 🙄
Besides fox News and the like, who said that?
Saving everyone a click
THE FACTS: Trump has said he doesn’t know about Project 2025, a controversial blueprint for another Republican presidential administration.
The plan was written up by many of his former aides and allies, but Trump has never said he’ll implement the roughly 900-page guide if he’s elected again. He has said it’s not related to his campaign.
That's everything they said. Those are quite literally the facts which they can report on: what Trump says.
Sure, but doing a fact check at all is very strongly suggesting that the person making the claim is lying in a way that would be materially significant.
It just seems wrong to report that well technically, the candidate himself didn't say those exact words (while ignoring that he communicates like a mafia don), and fit it in amongst other fact-checks where the candidate is literally libelling an entire community with things that are absolutely bare-faced lies with very very racist underpinnings?
load more comments
(1 replies)
Nope. Not what you're saying it is. They call out its origin even.
The plan was written up by many of his former aides and allies,
They also briefly mention what he claims. That is in no way corroborating it. They are simply trying to avoid seeming biased. The other time "2025" appears in that page, it's a quote from Harris about how dangerous it is.
This is normal and decent journalism.
Well that's the article my boss used to "prove" to me that trump wasn't associated with it. It'd be nice if honest reporting wasn't immediately cast out as being leftist.
He read the sentence he wanted, essentially summarizing Trump's claim, and ignored everything else. What is AP supposed to do about that kind of idiocy? You could do that with practically any source of information
facts have a left-leaning bias
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(15 replies)
I find this “retribution” thing very quaint…
“Retribution” for being held to the same standards as the rest of us. “Retribution” for being punished for violating the rules we’re all under. “Retribution” for being called to account for acting like awful people.
There is nothing that has been done to them that does not stem from their own, poor behavior—a completely self-fixable concern.
It's projection. They do witch hunts against others, so naturally they assume any investigation of them is a witch hunt.
Our only hope is if Project 2025 ends up not being implemented in full because of its one fatal flaw: Donald Trump didn't think of it first. He might ignore parts of it out of spite, just to make sure the Heritage Foundation understands that it is not President.
Yeah, I also suspect he may be dumb enough to do something like dissolve the IRS. Which would more or less destroy all forms of federal governmental power both soft and hard. Its something rhe sovcits have wanted for decades and I would not be surprised in the least if he got convinced by one.
No more IRS? Looks like I'm not going to allow any federal tax to be withheld from my paycheck.
Its actually a bit dumber than just that. The sovcits want the sheriff's to collect taxes, im pretty sure my county sheriff would sooner kill themselves rather than even think about such a suicidal idea.
Trump is really bad at following through.
Other than the millions of deaths and the bad economy, which are weirdly short-term things, what did he actually accomplish first term aside from fucking up the judiciary? And even that was really more of a McConnel accomplishment from the Obama era.
Didn't he implement something like 2/3rds of the Heritage Foundation's policy proposals in his first term?
MAGAS are incapable of associating anything bad with their dear leader. Hold them accountable.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Right. The cons and the Republican Party are pathological liars. The "liberal media" would do well to remember that and be sure to point it out as often as possible instead of playing their bullshit bothsiderist game.
The problem is this leopard is going to eat all of our faces...
They won't be able to implement half of it just due to the bureaucracy of the system fighting against any kind of big change. The part they do manage to ram through will be damaging enough, though.
Do you know what Project 2025 is? Part of the plan involves removing the bureaucracy and replacing them with Trump loyalists and sycophants
That's if they replace them at all, as in many cases they will be eliminating regulatory agencies entirely.
I hope things like NPR can survive when their funds are finally cut entirely, as at this point the larger stations have enough donors to stay afloat. I hope.
load more comments
(11 replies)
They have control of all three branches of government. No checks. No balances.
All 3 branches, Trump will have all yes men in his administration, and this time he benefits from his 4 prior years of stacking the courts.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Isn't part of it about firing anyone that gets in their way? Schedule F provisions?
The people saying there are protections to prevent this don't understand just how bad this is. They co trol everything. The United States just became a 1 party country because assholes stayed home to protest shit that is only going to get exponentially worse under trump. They forgot the lessons of his first term.
shit bouta be wild
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2024
528 points (98.5% liked)
politics
19144 readers
1787 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