this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2026
465 points (98.7% liked)

Political Videos

391 readers
18 users here now

For sharing interesting / important political videos from around the Web! Rules

  1. Videos only (aside from meta posts flagged with [META])
  2. Follow the global Mastodon.World rules and the Lemmy.World TOS while posting and commenting.
  3. Don't be a jerk
  4. No advertising
  5. Non-political videos should go to !videos@lemmy.world
  6. Avoid clickbait titles. (Tip: Use dearrow)
  7. Link directly to the video source and not for example an embedded video in an article or tracked sharing link.
  8. Duplicate posts may be removed
  9. AI generated content must be tagged with "[AI] …" ^Discussion^

Note: bans may apply to both !videos@lemmy.world and !politicalvideos@lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
qaz@lemmy.world
Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
qaz@sh.itjust.works
465
The president of America appears to poop his pants and immediately ends a press conference (Forbes video that doesn't mention the pooping, but you hear it on mic) (youtu.be)
submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) by givesomefucks@lemmy.world to c/politicalvideos@lemmy.world
82 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Echolynx@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 days ago (2 children)

And what of appointed officials, like Supreme Court justices?

[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I just had a look at the equivalent of the US suppreme court here, "Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen", and the officers of the court serve until retirement.

Seems resonable to me.

[–] Echolynx@lemmy.zip 7 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

It is the same here. But they often decide to "retire" at death, i.e., lifelong tenure.

[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yeah, forced retirement at the national retirement age?

[–] Echolynx@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 days ago

Oh my bad, I misread earlier. Yeah, it should be forced, but here it is not.

[–] Aljernon@lemmy.today 2 points 2 days ago

I think SC justices should have terms. Make em long terms if you'd like but still limits. And again, no one over 65.