News

36557 readers

2398 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.

Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.

7. No duplicate posts.

If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.

All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

JonsJava@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

374

Trump threatens to block ExxonMobil from Venezuela after CEO calls country ‘uninvestable’ (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 2 months ago by HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works to c/news@lemmy.world

88 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Donald Trump has said he might block ExxonMobil from investing in Venezuela after the oil company’s chief executive called the country “uninvestable” during a White House meeting last week.

Darren Woods told the US president that Venezuela would need to change its laws before it could be an attractive investment opportunity, during the high-profile meeting on Friday with at least 17 other oil executives.

Woods’ sceptical remarks quickly emerged as the dominant headline, undercutting the White House’s hopes of building momentum from its engagement with the world’s most prominent oil executives.

"I didn’t like Exxon’s response,” Trump told reporters on Air Force One on his way back to Washington on Sunday. “I’ll probably be inclined to keep Exxon out. I didn’t like their response. They’re playing too cute.”

Exxon did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] ClownStatue@piefed.social 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Note that I said “enough” voters. Of course it’s not the only reason, but considering an incredibly boring and too-old candidate in Joe Biden beat him while two qualified women lost to him (especially the second time where we knew what we were signing up for), I think it has to be taken into account.

[–] glimse@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It was such a minor factor both losses but it's the #1 thing that constantly gets brought up when either election is discussed. A woman running a good campaign would have won but both Clinton and Harris sucked.

Election interference had a significantly bigger impact than the gender of either candidate but we've just stopped talking about that for some reason.

[–] rhymeswithduck@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

And now people are using it as an excuse for never running another female candidate for president ever again. Women as a whole are suddenly unelectable because we tried it twice with two terrible options, thus "proving" that people won't vote for a woman president. It's maddening.

[–] glimse@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

I didn't even think of that but now I'm pissed about it, too. We need a new party