politics
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
view the rest of the comments
Yeah they’re trying to go after Platner for alleged sexting too. Still trying to Anthony Weiner style cancel these politicians, when we literally have Mr. “grab em by the pussy”, convicted and not just hearsay mind you, elected twice. The moral right is as ridiculous as it is hypocritical, who gives a shit.
If their partners have a problem with it then that’s between them to figure out, I don’t see how it affects their politics at all. Certainly didn’t matter for notorious playboy JFK, and doesn’t matter with convicted orange rapist either.
Just because I'm an absolute stickler for stuff like this... He was not, technically. "Convicted" means that he was found guilty in a criminal (government accused you of a crime) trial, beyond a reasonable doubt (that is, if the jury thought a defense could be reasonable, even if not totally likely, they must find the defendant not guilty).
The only sex-related trial Trump has gone through was the E Jean Carroll case. That was a civil case, where the defendant may or may not be found liable based on a preponderance of evidence (that is, jury found something was more likely than not the case and doubts that say otherwise are ok). The jury in that case found that yes, Trump sexually assaulted her and the actions that followed constituted defamation. Worth noting too that the jury found (by that same standard) that what he did was not rape her, although the judge later clarified that the actions constituted rape.
The reason I bring this up is that the jury had a much lower bar here than they would need for a conviction. They could have been 60% sure and that would fly for the trial he was in, but not for a criminal trial.
You’re right. Appreciate the technical accuracy, but yeah I opted for brevity and convenience in that comment.