politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
The dude literally said "in my opinion the no has it" slight emphasis on singular no. Everyone laughed. Then the vote was counted correctly without incident. It was a joke, people, and this fucking X (formerly twitter) post is capitalizing on the surface-level intentional malinterpretation for rage bait engagement and at least 276 of you fell for it. Do your research. Investigate Tower Seven.
edit: Noticing a difference in voting patterns between when i posted this last night when they were all positive and when I woke up all negative. I suspect the timezone difference means americans were voting during the day for negatives and europeans voting last night were positives. I have an opinion, but if any of the approximately 2 per hour or so people downvoting would explain why they disagree with the europeans I would be interested to read it.
Are you seriously suggesting that the chairman of a committee miscounted the votes as a joke?
You cannot be for real. Who the fuck upvotes this shit? Does everyone on this site have 14 fucking alts?
Tell me you didn't watch the video without telling me you didn't actually watch the video. The guy calls a recess and then they come back and the vote happens. Timestamp 1:35 for the video in the x post to the relevant claim of "lying" in the presumptive vote count. Incredibly boring government parliamentarian bureaucracy at work. The inner workings of the leviathan exposed to reveal a brief moment of shared humanity, corrupted by a cheap narrative from an anonymous jaggoff capitalizing on the poisonous atmosphere of the child rape scandal. It's a real nothingburger dude. You gettin all huffed up over me observing (not suggesting) some x poster told an easily disprovable lie on the internet for clicks? "cannot be for real" with your ignorant lazy vibes-based-pearl-clutching ass, check your facts next time before you pop off in the comments
You're deluded if you think this was a joke.
He was caught off guard, and made a stupid choice to try to keep following the marching orders, when put on the spot. He's been told that he needs to prevent this exact thing from happening, so when he was blindsided by the vote, he panicked and made a split second decision to continue with the orders despite obviously losing the vote.
You still aint watch the video huh
Also, I thought about it for another ten seconds and what you're saying is even dumber than it looks on the surface. You say he had orders to prevent exactly this- no he didn't this was a surprise move from the democrats and his position does not afford him any power to "prevent this" and there was an internal schism within the republicans, so wrong on at least three counts. You say he got marching orders- where in the video did you get that from? Are you privvy to their private marching orders? Are you sure you didn't just make that up in your head as the thing most likely to go along with what you already believed going into it, what you were primed to believe by the BIG SHOCKING SLAM HEADLINE? You say it wasn't a joke- how do you explain the fucking laughter coming from the people whose votes he supposedly tried to snub? It was a lighthearted moment complete with a natural beat for comedic effect. You can tell he was being flippant by his particular choice use of the singular noun "no" and the singular conjugation "has" that he intended to draw attention to his surprise and dissapointment that one is in fact less than almost a dozen for comedic effect, which it fucking achieved. Surprise and pretended incongruity with reality are notorious sources for humor. At no point did he actually impede the vote.
There are kiddie diddlers, and the people protecting them. They are in office. It is real, it is a conspiracy, and no not everyfuckingthing the light touches belongs to the pedophiles. This guy is just doing his job. He didn't say "In my opinion the no has it [over the obvious chorus of yes]" for attention, you're right that doesn't make sense.
this is how i shoulda known for a fact before even starting typing all that shit that you didnt watch the shit, dont know how a parliamentary procedure works, dont know what you're talking about. You don't count the votes individually unless it's called for. You start by listening to how loud the ayes and nays are, making a call, and then when someone, anyone, not just the chair challenges it, then you go to individual roll call. There's some fuckery you can get up to with this system but this aint it. The system is set up to prevent precisely this kind of lie being baselessly alleged from being possibe to be told. The system worked in this case. You should stop assuming your american public school education prepared you to "understand" this shit cuz its not a 200 year history, this goes back to olde england and arguably ancient greece and by your understanding this is apparently your first time examining this in any detail.
With all that fucking confidence and outrage too. "Are you suggesting-" Take a breath. You'd uncritically go along with literally just any half-baked not-even-tabloid story if it flattered your existing beliefs or confirmed your predetermined narrative. God help any accused who find you on their jury.
Fucking hell, that is so much effort put into not at all understanding something correctly.
okay then explain it all and make it look easy you got it figured so good
No. You’re a brick wall, why would I waste my time? Die stupid for all I care, your point of view isn’t worth validating with an argument.
Difference between us? Both of us talkin shit, only one of us pointing to the video bringing receipts. "brick wall" he says turning to stone
Sure.
lot easier to talk shit than actually say something that means anything huh. i think you said something about 'effort' a minute ago?
Ever heard of pigeon chess? You’re the pigeon.
Look buddy, if you just insist on playing with the grandmasters running this story (specifically, the galaxy brains behind CALL TO ACTIVISM on X (formerly twitter) and exactly no other sources of any variety at all) but god and everyone will know I tried to help you out of this obvious fucking engagement bait you got tangled in your before I left off, so here let me google that shit for you you lazy arrogant projective ungrateful [insert generic unflattering adjective here]: Exactly 0 news outlets are running with the "the chair tried to pull a fast one while literally everyone was watching" angle. The only other source I was able to find was one other video repeating the claims (https://bsky.app/profile/davek67.bsky.social/post/3lurty2bcik27) with suspiciously similar claims and pacing and structure and with the same video source as the X "article" (read: casual plagiarism).
here is pbs news covering the vote with precisely no mention of a lie or stolen vote controversy or anything of the kind: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/house-subcommittee-votes-8-2-to-subpoena-justice-department-for-epstein-files
here is cbs news covering the vote with precisely no mention of a lie or stolen vote controversy or anything of the kind: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/house-committee-votes-to-subpoena-justice-department-for-epstein-files/
here is ap and you'll never guess what their author and editors all forgot to include in their so-called "professional" reporting: https://apnews.com/article/epstein-files-congress-democrats-subpoena-republicans-trump-5d17ea83f7ffeff5784159848b97f38e
I could go on like this for some time but if you don't get it by now you never will. Or, to put it in a metaphor you might more easily understand: at some point I have to stop predigesting your food for you and push you out of the nest or you'll never fledge.
Buddy, you swallowed clickbait. Stop being stubborn and actually check your sources next time.
Just to be clear, you are on the side of people defending rapist, pedophile, child sex traffickers.
Fuck you. Have fun shitting all over the board and declaring victory.
You ignorant wretch, im on your side. I'm not shitting on a chessboard, that twitter post was a fantasy made up for engagement and you fell for it and I'm telling you about it. We're not playing chess. There are no pigeons. It's the internet. People lie for attention. Can we please resume our focus on the actual story? It's good that the epstein files are finally being taken seriously, but I have no faith in this government in any capacity to actually run this investigation due to corruption. The corrupt government is bad enough on its own. You don't have to make up extra bullshit the shit they're already actually doing is evil enough. Fuck off with your boring shit now please or actually dont this is the most human interaction I've had in months.
Yeah, the government is so corrupt that nobody in that position, who would more than likely benefit from that information being withheld, would ever attempt to lie to get their way, right? That would just be ridiculous, right?
Aight look hang on a second. We're both humans. We're both upset about the fact that children are being systematically raped, right? And that their abusers have not only escaped justice but are most probably in the position of administering "justice" themselves now, right? We're on the same page as far as that goes, I'm pretty confident in saying.
So what are we actually arguing about? I think we might actually agree a lot more than either of us realize. I'm not saying this guy is innocent, hand him his halo. I'm saying the specific sketch being attributed to him in this particular instance is unearned. No snark, no heat, no smoke, no sarcasm: I'm just using my eyes looking at this video and I see a guy smiling and sharing a joke with a political rival that made a whole room laugh, not an attempt to lie about the vote. Like, even in the most uncharitable interpretation that he is a completely tactless moron who was literally trying to gavel the single no against a roomful of aye-witnesses including several from his own party: They laughed the attempt down. Honestly, the interaction is actually kind of wholesome like, literally I don't think I've ever seen a more clear example of willing bipartisanship in years, maybe in my entire political lifetime, and that working apparently toward the investigation of the pedo files. The guy they're maligning played a reluctant but willing part as far as I can tell in bringing this subpoena to life. He was clearly opposed to it but I managed to come away from that video with the impression that he was pleased with the way the entire situation unfolded anyway.
There's a lot of stuff going on in this epstein story, and I'm just trying to say this "vote stealing lie" is a manufactured controversy not actually part of that epstein story, and that it's a distraction from the actual legitimate story, and that people need to pay closer attention to their sources, thats it. Thank you for coming to my ted talk.
Probably he was forcing his republican turncoats to have thier names recorded with thier vote. Kinda petty since everyone knew who voted which way, but they are petty people.
No, he was lying and trying to get away with it. If he wanted to count the votes, he would have done what every committee chair has done for (in my understanding) 200+ years, and call for a roll call vote. He wouldn't lie in the face of an 8-2 vote.
I gotta agree with the other guy. He probably did it for some kind of attention one way or another. I don't think he intended to get away with it. That said, I do think such things are deplorable. It just that when you use a popularity contest to choose reps, this is what you get.
I think he was caught off guard, and tried to stick to his marching orders despite it being obvious that they lost the vote.
No way this was a joke or something done for attention. That makes no sense.