this post was submitted on 16 Mar 2026
187 points (97.5% liked)

politics

28910 readers
1702 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Le has centered her platform around immigration reform, noting that she “witnessed firsthand the complexities of our immigration and legal systems.”

Yeah, the collaborator who had no moral qualm with what she was doing, just upset that he's workload was to heavy has a plan to fix things.

No thanks and I wish her no luck in her endeavor.

top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] devolution@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago
[–] Akh@lemmy.world 6 points 5 hours ago

She should be in jail for lying to judges

[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 129 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

and she is running against Ilhan Omar who is one of the most progressive representatives in the house. lol, lmao, get fucked chud.

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 17 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah I could believe people change. Maybe she was ignorant when she got into it and wanted to right the wrongs she committed. But then to run against someone who is already fighting against ICE? It feels more like opportunism than redemption. Maybe put in some pro-bono work for a few years and then come back if you really mean it.

[–] z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 hours ago

Yeah this is the Democrats' wet dream though. I see nowhere in this article her mentioning abolishing ICE. Meanwhile Omar has called for abolishing ICE, which is what definitely should happen period, no compromises at fucking all there.

So it's pretty easy to see why the Democrats want her instead of Omar. Again, the Democrats want to reform ICE, not abolish it. Fuck that. All of ICE deserves to be hung by the neck until dead like the Nazis they are.

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 44 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

I know the person I trust most with immigration reform is someone whose job it was to cover for the Gestapo and ~~quit~~ gave up in front of the judge and was fired because that became too hard for her.

If she wants to help heal the system, she could work pro bono for ICE's kidnapping victims. But I guess the obvious alternative is to try unseating someone who already advocates meaningful reform.

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 16 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I'm pretty sure she was fired before quitting.

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 9 points 9 hours ago

True. I misremembered. Thanks.

[–] SoloPhoenyx@lemmy.world 29 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I wish her nothing but loss and endless shame.

[–] imacatnotaman@lemmy.ml 14 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

and bed bugs. those sound horrible.

[–] ickplant@lemmy.world 9 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

I also wish her some wet socks and dog hairs in her bra.

[–] ArmoredThirteen@lemmy.zip 2 points 6 hours ago

Wet socks in a bra sounds really awkward how would you even explain that to someone

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 7 hours ago

And stepping barefoot on Lego

[–] inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world 15 points 9 hours ago

Ex-ice

is disqualifying all by itself.