this post was submitted on 13 Apr 2026
46 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

1172 readers
206 users here now

For civil discussion of US politics. Be excellent to each other.

Rule 1-3, 6 & 7 No longer applicable

Rule 4: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a jerk. It’s not acceptable to say another user is a jerk. Cussing is fine.

Rule 5: Be excellent to each other. Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, ableist, will be removed.

The Epstein Files: Trump, Trafficking, and the Unraveling Cover-Up

Info Video about techniques used in cults (and politics)

Bookmark Vault of Trump's First Term

USAfacts.org

The Alt-Right Playbook

Media owners, CEOs and/or board members

Video: Macklemore's new song critical of Trump and Musk is facing heavy censorship across major platforms.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The Justice Department said Friday that it would move forward on a proposed $68 million settlement with a Texas land developer it had accused of preying on Hispanic residents, despite a judge’s concerns that the agreement did not do enough to help victims.

During a hearing, U.S. District Judge Alfred H. Bennett questioned why the settlement had no compensation for those who were harmed and grilled a federal prosecutor over $20 million devoted to police and immigration enforcement. He said he was uncomfortable with the provision because the Justice Department’s lawsuit against Colony Ridge, which has massive subdivisions north of Houston, mentioned nothing about public safety or immigration.

“I thought I was dealing with … folks who had been defrauded, with allegations of above-market interest rates, improper foreclosures,” Bennett said, holding up the original lawsuit in his right hand and the settlement in his left. “Now, all of the sudden, I’m being asked to OK increased law enforcement?”

“Who in the settlement room said it would be a good idea to give $20 million to law enforcement?” Bennett asked early in the hearing. “Where did that come from?”

top 2 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 weeks ago

So we're not going to compensate the victims of this crime at all for their troubles; AND we're going to spend the money that should be going to the victims, on new law enforcement in the region to 'reduce crime', presumably because the victims are retaliating against the perpetrators given they've been left with no legal remedy... (hell, I would. I certainly don't blame them, if that's the case.)

[–] decapitae@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago

🤦 Was the white supremist sympathiser trying to spin institutional racism as a good thing in the article? Where is justice? How do victims acquire recompense? What could possibly be just about the outcome?