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
If an adult family member of a significant political figure commits a crime, then there's 2 big reasons why that case deserves extra scrutiny: 1) to check whether or not the family member is treated in a fair manner by the persecution and justice system (which could go both ways, they could escape justice because of their family connections, but they could also be extra persecuted for political reasons). 2) To keep track of whether or not the political figure their integrity remains intact.
If Tyler Boebert's mother wasn't a prominent republican politician, would he have escaped a prison sentence for his litany of crimes? Personally, I doubt it. And because he keeps escaping consequences, he keeps doing stupid things.
No.
If it’s like nepotism or fraud related to their position of power, yeah.
But this sounds like domestic trouble not instigated by the politician themself. Bad shit happens in families; I don’t feel comfortable looking at that with a magnifying glass unless they want to share (or, again, it veers into abuse of power), and that includes checking if they’re leaning on police.
To put it in another perspective, let’s say you are a wholesome politician with a daughter in an abusive relationship. Her partner gets her into drugs. You think that should be plastered all over daily beast or breitbart?
What if you had a younger kid in trouble? Would you want the entire world breathing down their neck and publicizing every single interaction with law enforcement under a microscope?
I don’t think stuff like that should be public, even if the cost is missing some political pressure; politicians are human, that’s just an unreasonable expectation of transparency. And if that is the expectation, the only candidates you’ll get are liars and crooks used to skeletons in the closet.
In your example the daughter has committed no crimes and made no victims, and she could even be considered a victim herself. Tyler Boubert has already made many victims and will continue to make new victims because his mother's political clout is protecting him.
The morally right thing to do, would be to protect the victim(s) and bring the perpetrator(s) to justice. In the example of the daughter, the daughter is a victim and she and her family should get the time and space needed to heal. In Tyler Boebert's cases, Tyler was never the victim, but always a/the perpetrator, with his mother enabling him. With the Boebert family, the morally right thing to do, is to decrease the odds of Tyler making new victims, which gives journalists a moral imperative to consider every new crime of Tyler, to be news worthy.
Where are you getting that from!? The tabloid article, which lists off crimes like a wreck, a messy theft ring involving drug use, and an apparent case of abuse from his own father, which have plausible but lenient punishments.
This isn't some giant crypto con or insider trading from the Trump kids, it sounds more like a struggling young adult to me.
What if Tyler's mom wasn't a politician, but, I dunno, a high level, highly paid engineer? Should his screw ups be under a microscope with "a moral imperative to consider every new crime of Tyler, to be news worthy" just because of what his mom does? And the possibility she used her weight to try and help him? Attention like that is a great way to screw up a struggling adult's life.
Your omissions and alterations are interesting.
The article doesn't just mention "a wreck", it says "In September 2022, Tyler flipped his father’s SUV while driving, leaving his passenger with multiple concussions and sever lacerations, according to reports." If Tyler was driving recklessly (and he was), then the passenger was the victim and the driver the perpetrator. If you're interested in hearing the story of the passenger: https://www.rawstory.com/lauren-boebert-car-crash/ The tldr: "If I did what he did, I'd still be in jail."
The "theft ring involving drug use" doesn't mention drugs in the article. And it being theft, means that there were victims of theft. Including apparently a broke woman with a brain tumor.
And also in the case of child abuse there was a victim (the child in case it isn't obvious).
I don't get how you can't recognize the victims in these stories.