this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2026
139 points (99.3% liked)

politics

28770 readers
2417 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
 

Noem decided the contracts instead of allowing a competitive bidding process for the jobs, according to three administration officials and internal communications reviewed by NBC News

Kristi Noem handpicked contractors to lead a $100 million campaign to recruit Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers instead of allowing competitive bidding for the jobs, according to three administration officials and internal communications reviewed by NBC News.

Typically, multiple companies are allowed to bid on a contract and officials who handle government procurement — not the leaders of departments — decide based on who can do the best job for the lowest price.

Donald Trump announced in a social media post Thursday that Noem would leave office effective March 31. Her place in the administration became increasingly unstable following the killing of U.S. citizens during immigration operations in Minneapolis; her fraying relationship with the U.S. Coast Guard, the only branch of the military under her command; and her comments this week in a Congress hearing that rankled Trump.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 13 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Imagine being so corrupt, that even Donald Trump wants to distance himself from you.

[–] DokPsy@lemmy.world 3 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

I assumed it was more that she brought him into it by name dropping him instead of letting him have the first word on it

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 6 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

It was also what she was trying to do. She was trying to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to some unnamed political operative, that she personally chose for the job...and he started the company that was going to be running the ad campaign, like a week before getting the contract.

The whole thing was so shady that even Republicans were calling her out on how obviously shady it was. That's why they were asking her if Donald Trump knew about it...and more specifically, did he actually sign off on it. She lied of course, and said that he knew, when apparently he didn't...and that's how she got fired.

The entire project was just one giant embezzlement scam. It might have produced some ads, highlighting mostly herself...but it seems like the entire thing was set up so that she could just funnel hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funds, to a friend of hers.

[–] DokPsy@lemmy.world 4 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Embezzlement isn't as much of a concern, I don't think. Considering how much trump has been funneling into his own coffers

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

That's what I meant when I said she was so corrupt, even Trump had to get rid of her. It's not really about the fact that she was doing it, but more how obvious she was being about it. Not only was she already being called out for hundreds of millions in "expenses" since she took the job, but this latest scam was too much for even Republican lawmakers to ignore.

For all his own obviously corrupt behavior, Trump still tries to "appear" like he's not. And not firing her, would make that just that much more difficult for him. It's easier to just throw her under the bus, than it is to try and explain why he's once again looking the other way, when someone near him is caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

I'm actually surprised he kept her this long, given all the negative press she's brought in, over the last few months. I guess this was the straw that finally broke the camel's back.

[–] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

He is far more corrupt. She was loud and stupid about it and from his point of view his is automated by children lackies and yesmen. So in his eyes she is stupid and loud and needs to go. Its just more mafia shit.

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 hours ago

I think you hit the nail square on the head, with that analysis.

[–] ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago

I don't think it's that impressive. He'd do anything to help himself. Most of the people around him would, too.