this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2025
1317 points (99.5% liked)

politics

22531 readers
3614 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

The Atlantic has published unredacted attack plans (non-paywall link) shared in a Signal group chat of senior Trump officials, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and DNI Tulsi Gabbard.

Editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg released the full texts after officials denied sharing war plans or classified information, arguing transparency was necessary amid accusations of dishonesty.

The leaked messages detailed U.S. military strikes targeting Houthis in Yemen.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 99 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Lying about sleeping with an intern - impeachment

Lying about sharing classified information on an insecure group chat - “he’s just a widdle guy 😢”

[–] Bubbaonthebeach@lemmy.ca 17 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Especially bad when the whole "reason" for that impeachment was about investment fraud or something and only became about sex with intern after they couldn't prove anything else.

[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 18 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Whitewater real estate scandal. Kenneth Starr was investigating him for that and when they couldn’t find anything actionable, they switched to the perjury and sex.

I’m not a fan of a President using their power to have an intern blow them (I don’t think there’s meaningful consent there), but it doesn’t compare to raping multiple women, peeping on teenage girls at Miss Teen America, and making comments about how you’d fuck your daughter if that was an option. The aristocrats!

[–] Weirdfish@lemmy.world -2 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Stop taking away women's agency with this "meaningful consent" bullshit.

At the time I was in the Air Force, and a bunch of us were discussing this. Well over half the women at the table has the attitude of "Are you kidding? Of course, blowing the most powerful man in the world is hot as hell".

Monica was obviously into it and an adult.

[–] bss03@infosec.pub 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

"Sure my boss took advantage of me, but I will always remain firm on this point: it was a consensual relationship," Lewinsky wrote in 2014. "Any 'abuse' came in the aftermath, when I was made a scapegoat in order to protect his powerful position."

Lewinsky says she now sees that her relationship with Clinton was full of "inappropriate abuse of authority, station, and privilege."

"Now, at 44, I’m beginning (just beginning) to consider the implications of the power differentials that were so vast between a president and a White House intern," she wrote. "I’m beginning to entertain the notion that in such a circumstance the idea of consent might well be rendered moot."

-- https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2018/02/26/monica-lewinsky-vanity-fair/375452002/

@andros_rex@lemmy.world didn't take away Lewinski's agency.

[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

“Any ‘abuse’ came in the aftermath, when I was made a scapegoat in order to protect his powerful position.”

And that’s what seals the deal for me. If Clinton gave a shit about Lewinsky, he would have at least tried to protect her somewhat in the fallout. He had fun, she had consequences.

People on the left treated her like shit - I guess it is further evidence that Bill Maher has always been awful. She got played on manipulated on both sides. Her reputation was trashed and she had a hard time finding work after - it destroyed her career and future.

This was a boss that took advantage of his power and authority to get a couple loads out, and then disposed of the person once they became our nation’s designated bearer of the scarlet letter.

I had sex with men who were much older than me when I was in my early twenties. The difference was that they weren’t my boss.

Dan Savage I think had something about “campground rules” too - if you are going to have sexual relations with a legal consenting adult you are significantly older than, it’s on you to use your greater experience to leave that partner better than you found them.

[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Are you a woman? How the fuck do you meaningfully say no to sex with the President?

Go fuck yourself with that “taking away women’s agency” bullshit. Bosses don’t get to sleep with employees. Teachers don’t get to sleep with students.

Monica got treated like shit for decade. That’s not “hot as hell” unless you’re a creepy misogynist that gets off on women being public humiliated.