I still can’t believe they did a military fly over to intimidate these women. I mean I believe it but I don’t believe it.
this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2025
862 points (99.4% liked)
Political Memes
12106 readers
3223 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
1) Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
2) No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
3) Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
4) No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
5) No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Wait what? I'm ootl
They did a military fly over to intimidate these women during their press conference.
I'm waiting to pass judgment on the flyover. He's totally that petty, but, I don't think he'd plan that far ahead. He's way more reactive than proactive, especially when it comes to stupid stunts.
While it's possible the flyover's purpose was to intimidate the victims, it feels like disinfo or convenient rumor.
It is a restricted airspace so someone ordered it. That being said, there’s a chance it was a flyover for the Polish pilot who crashed and died while practicing for an airshow.
But, keep in mind, it doesn’t have to be Trump personally. He’s not the only person in a position of power with a vested interest to make those women disappear. Plenty of influential scum bags to go around. And once the names are released, regardless of who releases them, blackmail is a lot harder to leverage. And the people leveraging it are not the idiots Trump and his quasi reality tv goons are. They’re more than capable of pulling strings, making “suggestions” and planning ahead. Trump isn’t hard to fool nor drive. The biggest difficulty with him is anyone can steer him; keeping him under singular influence is the challenge.
Your logic is sound and I'm not heavily disagreeing with you. My gut says the claim is hinky. (Obviously, my gut and hinkiness are the gold standard for truth and reason.)
I'm skeptical but you might be right. It's real fucked up that we have to even consider bullshit like this.
Right. Like how many times do we read something off the wall and we can’t even tell if it’s satire or legitimate reporting anymore because absolutely any level of madness is possible.
Recent examples are this whole “President Trump to rebrand Defense Department to Department of War” sounds like a SNL skit setup or “Trump moves Space Command HQ to AL, citing CO mail-in voting” sounds like the onion. There are better examples, but it’s just like every day some new crazy thing. It’s good to stay skeptical because it really is hard to be sure of anything one way or another.
You don’t need to plan military flights ahead of time. That’s like the whole point of a standing army.
Every single citizen should be pissed at the administration for this bullshit
The logical conclusion is that the president of the United States is a pedophile. The charitable conclusion is that he protects pedophiles.
And at every institution and business that hasn’t resisted.
Or guilty
For weeks media reported what Maxwell said even though she is a liar. They reported dutifully that Trump did nothing wrong and was a swell guy. Weeks of this was reported everyday on every new source.
Now that his victims want to speak out suddenly it is a non-story and the media doesn't care. This is beyond sus.
I love the one down vote. Pedo.
Fuck pedo trump and everyone else that took part. I fully support this comics message, buuuut the eyes are killing me, they don't match the movement of the eyebrows at all and are giving me crapy AI vibes. Again fuck all those pedos. Lock them up and let them rot.
That is absolutely a “confused apprehension” pose I’ve seen done before by plenty of human artists. Maybe fuck off wit this dumbass discourse if you don’t even know the signs of AI, instead of accusing artists of being fake. That’s fucked.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Someone translate: the victims are gagged from exercising their freedom of speech? How so?
billionaire media owners will, mostly
Weren't they just aired quite publicly on the media?
Not for decades. Only very, very recently have they gotten any appreciable press because Trumps admin fucked this up so badly.
What stopped them from posting claims publicly on social media or online?
Why do you think you're hearing about it?
Because it was frequently in the press? There's no shortage of links to news reports & stories in the wikipedia articles on the victims, cases, topics.
And how did it get to the press?
Because the reporters did their job? You know these reports started before social media was mainstream, right?
So what is the point of questioning whether these women made their claims on social media or not?
You can read up, can't you? I didn't claim
billionaire media owners will [gag victims from exercising their freedom of speech], mostly
So, I'm asking how that (apparent counterfactual) works. Does it withstand scrutiny?
I'm not saying you claimed anything. I'm asking what relevance there is as to whether the women made their claims on social media or not. I'm genuinely confused by the first comment of yours I replied to.
If anyone can pretty much publicize whatever they want online, then are billionaire media owners gagging their freedom of speech? I'm genuinely confused at your confusion.
The view that major, billionaire-owned journalism companies can gag anyone from exercising their freedom of speech like they're the only game in town seems outmoded when independent online media & journalism (where practically anyone can call themselves journalist) has disrupted that order since a while ago, and anyone can publish their words online in social media. That claim that may have made sense decades ago doesn't fit online media today.
All the media outlets want to hear a statement from the accomplices, for instance Trump, but they aren't talking. The victims would want to talk but aren't getting the platform they should be getting
Thanks, that's a reasonable interpretation. Then not really about the suppression of freedom of speech?
On the face no, but it is more complicated than that. It is known that the government exerts a ton of influence over media and wealthy people exert a ton of control over the government and also own all the major media outlets. It is definitely a conspiracy at this point to control the narrative.
If all of these entities were actually independent like they are supposed to be, this wouldn't be a free speech issue. Unfortunately that is not the world we are living in.
Maybe not explicitly, but pretty much every Trump supporter has told them to stfu, in so many words
load more comments
(8 replies)
You can say whatever you like, but someone can also sue you for any reason at all. Even a completely baseless lawsuit can ruin someone who doesn't already have millions of dollars to fight it in court.
Usually a news organization will guarantee that their lawyers will defend the people they interview in court to encourage them to speak. The large news organizations made millions from increased viewership because they gave Trump hundreds of hours of free screen time beginning from before his first election. Now they aren't interested in putting any of that money to work to get out the truth.
someone can also sue you for any reason at all
That's always been the case. That doesn't mean the suer will prevail. I'm pretty sure there are motions (especially with anti-SLAPP laws) defendants can file to recover all fees of baseless lawsuits.
I'm not sure how you plausibly get that interpretation from the comic: nothing about lawsuits or disparity in economic power is indicated. This other reading of the comic seems more plausible.
view more: next ›