this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2026
525 points (99.2% liked)

politics

30851 readers
2596 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

One of the documents describes Putin and senior officials overseeing proxy efforts to spread claims that Biden, as vice president, engaged in criminal activity in his dealings with Ukraine and Burisma. The document says operatives affiliated with the Russian government advanced these narratives with U.S. officials and other prominent figures, through personal interactions as well as audio and documentary releases via U.S. and Ukrainian outlets.

It goes on to say these figures were conspiring to intensify their efforts as the election approached, aiming to “orchestrate a high-profile corruption scandal” implicating Biden and the Democratic Party in order to help Trump win.

The document describes an intelligence assessment that Russian government-linked proxies were working to damage Biden’s candidacy ahead of the vote, relying in part on U.S. officials and other prominent people to amplify the narratives, though many of the people involved remain redacted in the public version.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mrmisses@lemmy.world 94 points 1 month ago (2 children)

So if the Dems ever get on control they can look at these unredacted files and arrest the traitors. Right? And Biden didn't do that because?

[–] Asafum@lemmy.world 93 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Because Merrick Garland absofuckinglutly needs to go down as the biggest fucking coward in this nations history.

He sat on his hands for 2 fucking years because he "didn't want to look political." Which of course gave Trump enough time to have his pet "Judge" Alieen Cannon delay delay delay delay until he won the election.

[–] decolo@piefed.social 52 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

Well Merrick is a conservative - he's a member of the Federalist society. He is certainly not an outright shithead like Alito, but don't mistake fascist sympathies for cowardice.

Granted he may also be a coward separately.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 27 points 1 month ago (2 children)

And Biden knew that but appointed him anyway.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 13 points 1 month ago (2 children)

One of several reasons that will get him permanently ranked among the bottom 15 of presidents.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Looking at this without context in my inbox, I thought you were being extremely generous to Trump.

Putting Biden in the bottom 15 is harsh, but fair. Fucker's gonna be remembered the same as Neville Chamberlain.

[–] amorpheus@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

We're only talking about the bottom third, I'd even be a bit harsher. Depends on the aftermath of what's going on right now, we won't be able to gauge the true impact for years if not decades.

[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 1 points 1 month ago

I would consider Biden to be a bundle deal with Trump. He isn't the bullshit itself, but he was certainly the bull that made the pile.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 13igTyme@piefed.social 7 points 1 month ago

100% of fascists are cowards.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Triumph@fedia.io 6 points 1 month ago

Garland would have been a good Justice, but in a position where rapid action is required, not so much.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 85 points 1 month ago (5 children)

So, by his own account - Trump is guilty of treason. The current president of the United States of America has admitted to/provided evidence showing he has committed treason in order to become your commander-in-cheif.

How does that make you feel America? Are you actually going to do something about it now?

[To be clear, this is addressed to ALL of americas citizens - Including military and police personnel. Ofc average citizens would be afraid to do much more than protest when these people are protected by law enforcement, but will law enforcement continue to protect these people now, is the real question.]

[–] gdog05@lemmy.world 45 points 1 month ago (2 children)

will law enforcement continue to protect these people now, is the real question.

Yes

[–] obviouspornalt@fedinsfw.app 21 points 1 month ago

this has been another episode of "straightforward answers to simple questions."

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Steve@startrek.website 11 points 1 month ago (2 children)

By his own account, and many many others. Too bad you can only execute a motherfucker once.

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

No reason not to try more than once though.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 1 points 1 month ago

You can get close a whole bunch of times first though. That would be unpleasant.

[–] fizzle@quokk.au 5 points 1 month ago

Obligatory "if any other president did this..."

[–] D_C@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago

"...to do much more than protest..."
It'd be great if they would protest the orange child rapist.

Yeah, sure, when their Gestapo kill people there are a few small protests. However the protests about the demented wobbling bag of syphilis are severely lacking.

[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 2 points 1 month ago

At this point, I am almost hoping for a civil war. We seriously need to clean house and overhaul everything to prevent this bullshit for the next couple of centuries.

[–] Clutter@sh.itjust.works 47 points 1 month ago (4 children)

He and his handlers know: they can literally release the truth, maga won't read it anyway. And will believe his spoken lies and not the printed truth.

Because they have accepted the last part: do not believe the evidence of your eyes. Just listen and obey the the sect leader.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 9 points 1 month ago

Like when they handed a reporter a giant binder on camera, and claimed it was the health care plan they intended to release "in two weeks?"

Later, the journalist looked at the pages in the binder, and those that weren't simply blank pages, were nothing but printed out documents and emails. None of it was any kind of a health care plan. It was like someone grabbed a random binder off a shelf, and said "Give them this, and tell them it's a health care plan."

Apparently, they didn't care that the journalist would later expose the binder as a fraud, they got the visual of the hefty "health care plan" being handed to a journalist, and that was good enough.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Mulligrubs@lemmy.world 34 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Russia, like China and the USA and Saudi Arabia and Israel, spend money and time on every Presidential election, whichever candidate they think will suit their interests more (as they always do).

We were aware of this when we allowed "Super PACs" to funnel money directly to bOtH pArTiEs without that pesky middleman (the law). So... of course we have President Trump, he is the end result of our own party's unlimited greed.

When your government is for sale, you get what they pay for. I'd wager Musk and Bezos spent much more money on the last campaign than Russia, this is a "red herring".

[–] spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works 23 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

We did what now?

Super PACs became possible due to the Supreme Court's disastrous Citizen's United decision. "We" had nothing to do with it, just like "we" had nothing to do with the overturning of Roe vs. Wade.

We do desperately need another 5 SC justices.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I used to believe we needed to add 3-5 additional justices, but I no longer believe that.

Now I believe we need to add 20 additional justices. The composition of the court shouldn't be so tight that one bad-faith president can manipulate the system to negatively influence American society for the next 50 years.

We need 29 justices, with rolling term limits so that every president can appoint a few, but not enough to fundamentally change the direction of the court.

A country as big and influential as ours, needs to be responsible to our citizens and the world in keeping our political policies under control and trustworthy. How can any other nation make deals with America, when they know the very people they dealt with may change their minds tomorrow - literally. Nobody can trust such a capricious government, and nobody will work with us.

It is already happening, and America is starting to feel the results of permanent trade shifts away from American goods and markets. That is a direct result of recklessly fickle governmental policy at every level - trade, military, judicial, Congressional, presidential, etc. None of our systems can be trusted anymore.

Adding 20 justices to SCOTUS would be a big step in the right direction in taking true control of this country.

[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I don't think additional justices are enough.

The bullet points of what I have in mind:

  • More justices, preferably from each branch of government. Outside branches can't select the justices of another branch.

  • Term limits.

  • The president can't have more than 1 justice, and that justice leaves with their president.

IMO, what I put there is a temporary solution - we actually need regional governments and presidents, who add their respective governmental branch justices to a portion of the national government. This would make it harder for justices to be sourced from a single location or ideology. This would hopefully make it harder for corruption to become ingrained into the national court.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

YES - expand the court. it's needed beyond this corrupt cabal; the sitting court can't handle the caseload. expand the court and refigure the circuit courts instead of this mishmash - it's beyond time to remedy this one part of our judiciary, and it's something congress (blue wave) could do in short order.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/circuitAssignments.aspx

[–] aarch0x40@piefed.social 23 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Trump's supporters would be furious if they could read

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

They would only be furious that reality exists

[–] pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I mean I already knew. Surprised it took this long. Yet, republicans probably disregard this

[–] cecinestpasunecommunication@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Huh. I wonder why he was never punished for this shit under the biden admin

[–] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Four years of "Merrick Garland is a professional and he is just making sure all the i's are dotted and t's are crossed before prosecuting trump".

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 4 points 1 month ago

The fact that he was Republican had nothing to do with it.

That's right, Biden appointed a Republican to investigate the Republicans. One more reason why he will be permanently ranked among the bottom 15 of American presidents. If he hadn't done a great job with Covid and the Trump Economic Crash, he'd be in the bottom 5.

[–] Smoogs@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

we have to call out people more on stalling and kick out the people who legitimately believe such flimsy excuses for being shit managers.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] green_goglin@thelemmy.club 13 points 1 month ago

🌍 🧑‍🚀 🔫 🧑‍🚀

[–] unemployedclaquer@sopuli.xyz 11 points 1 month ago

Omg who could have an interest in influencing USA elections?

Is it Russia, China, Canada, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, various other petro states, blah blah, Israel! Yes it's Israel for fuck sake

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

RuSsIa hOAx tHo

[–] FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Good. Now what's going to be done about it?

[–] WhatsHerBucket@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

lol. Next you’ll ask if the upcoming election will happen (fairly). :D

[–] Caption@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

So does this mean the claims were true?

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Just look at what he does, and ignore the noises coming out of his hamberder-hole. He's serving up everything Putin wants on a schlocky gold-plated platter.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nao@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Is this when the maga base will drop their support, will the not care or will they just never hear about it

[–] EpeeGnome@feddit.online 9 points 1 month ago (2 children)

On the off chance they do hear about it, they will immediately dismiss it as deep-state lies. No further thoughts on the matter will be needed.

[–] Spot@startrek.website 4 points 1 month ago

Sadly, this is probably exactly what they will do. I still have a FB to connect with older relatives, locating yardsales or neighbors that belong to the pet running down the road.
Our local neighborhood area's group is either all bots or total idiots. Regular use of 'fake media' or 'demonrat propaganda' on anything that dares to question their dear leader.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 1 points 1 month ago

AI is the denialist's best friend. Now they just declare it AI, and that's the end of the discussion. Not their stuff though, that's totally real.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 1 points 1 month ago

I do occasional business with a guy who is a hard core MAGA, and always has a TV on next to his desk, tuned to Fox News. I've been doing business with him for years, and that TV has NEVER been on a different channel.

He ONLY knows what Fox News tells him. Anything else from any other source is fake news.

I'd take my business elsewhere, but we have a good business relationship, and it's good to know a few MAGAs so you can touch base with the delusion, and stay in touch with what's going on.

[–] Rothe@piefed.social 1 points 1 month ago

Why would they? They like Putin, and they want his interference in US politics. They just don't like it to be publicly known.

load more comments
view more: next ›