this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2026
101 points (100.0% liked)

politics

31107 readers
1893 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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

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
 

According to the Journal, an intelligence community whistleblower filed a highly-classified complaint with the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG), an independent watchdog office, in May 2025. Among the allegations was a claim that Gabbard’s office blocked the proper distribution of the complaint for eight months — including to Congress — for political reasons. Another alleged that lawyers, presumably from the DNI’s Office of General Counsel, failed to refer a potential crime to the Justice Department for political reasons.

We don’t know the substance of the intelligence report underlying the whistleblower complaint, but the government claims it is “exquisitely” classified, which raises an immediate problem: That’s not a real classification level. The report apparently involves an intelligence service intercepting a conversation between two foreign nationals about Iran and Jared Kushner’s influence on his father-in-law, the president. At the time, the Trump administration was considering a strike on Iran, which in fact occurred at the end of June 2025.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I’m perplexed at how someone who looks so fucking evil was ever hiding it. It’s not the skunk stripe, per se, but it’s the whole vibe.

She looks like the person who comes to tell you that your body’s been selected for secondment (getting get outed, basically) by the musk type character, and not to worry, your family will be given a generous settlement and now your body can be used to do great things.

[–] justsomeguy@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago (2 children)

She looks like she'd force children to give up their puppies so she can put them in the puppy crushing machine as the sound of their little snapping bones is the only thing that helps with her headaches.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

so she can put them in the puppy crushing machine

operated by kristi noem.

[–] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

Exactly! And then she’d condescendingly explain that crying really doesn’t help her headache, so unless you have another puppy or aren’t especially attached to your younger sister…

[–] starik@lemmy.zip 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Personally I think she looks good. Too bad she’s insane. She was raised in a real cult in Hawaii.

[–] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

She does look good (unless you mean morally). Just very scary polished, like someone who works for someone rich enough to bury you alive.

To be fair, I guess she does.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

she isn't chock-fulla-plastic like so many of the other trump acolytes.

otherwise she's pretty gross but ymmv, everyone has their own fetishes

tho, Valentina Allegra de Fontaine vibes I can get.