this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2025
177 points (98.4% liked)

politics

26579 readers
2067 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
 

Donald Trump is starting to grow weary of the ongoing controversies plaguing Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, according to a new report.

While the president has stood by Hegseth in public, he has shown less enthusiasm behind closed doors, The Atlantic reported Friday, citing several unnamed sources familiar with White House discussions.

“[Trump] is starting to tire of the scandals surrounding Hegseth and does not push back when others suggest Hegseth is not up for the job, an outside adviser to the White House and a former senior administration official told us,” The Atlantic reported.

An unnamed senior administration told the outlet it’s been a “rough week for Pete.”

top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 41 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

collapsed inline media

In the raccoon’s defense, he was just trying to give the man CPR.

[–] RePsyche@lemmy.world 15 points 10 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Waiting to see, but they should be checked for diseases. We don't know of kegsbreath bit them.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Aren't raccoons generally too small for rabies (like, if something with rabies got them they're small enough they'd just die instead of briefly recovering and becoming infected) or am I thinking of wombats

[–] Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Probably oppossum, they aren't viable carriers. Size doesn't matter so much AFAIK, even tinier bats can be carriers.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

wait, so why aren't oppossum viable carriers? i'm so confused i thought it was because they got et.

[–] MrShankles@reddthat.com 3 points 4 hours ago

IIRC, opossums aren't viable carriers because their natural body temperature is too low for the virus to thrive

[–] 7112@lemmy.world 32 points 11 hours ago

Is that why he's sleeping all the time?

[–] ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world 30 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Who would have thought hiring one of Fox News' drunkard jesters into a prominent government position would have backfired this badly!

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 6 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

So far it has only gone well for them. If they sentence Hegseth to death... Then I could say it may have went wrong

[–] monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.world 4 points 8 hours ago

Best case scenario really.

[–] EndOfLine@lemmy.world 27 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

It's almost like his decision to appoint loyalists and psychophants instead of qualified personnel was a bad decision.

[–] Broadfern@lemmy.world 11 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

The Venn diagram between competent and sycophant is two separate circles.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 5 points 9 hours ago

Yeah, that was his problem last time. He churned through mildly qualified people

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 15 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Hegseth is so, so much worse than Benedict Arnold.

Literally the Benedict Arnold name should fade to obscurity and be replaced with Pete Hegseth.

Sorry to all the Pete's out there.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 4 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Trump is so much worse than Hegseth, now what?

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

We're gonna have to find a new name for Donald Ducking it (poohing bear?)

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 9 points 4 hours ago

He always chickens out.

[–] Almacca@aussie.zone 8 points 11 hours ago

He's only tired of controversies he's not directly responsible for. 'Pay attention to MEEEE!'

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 8 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Trump tired of controversy? Are we finally getting out of the bad timeline?

[–] RePsyche@lemmy.world 5 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

And then suddenly, surprising absolutely everyone, Trump shifted gears, turned 180 degrees, undid ALL the EOs, and started fiercely governing for the greatest good for All The People.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 3 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Oh, I thought you were going to say he started fiercely defending Pete again after Pete named the death star prototype after him.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

I thought they were going to say "Krasnov finally delivers on his promise of taco trucks on every corner"

[–] Zier@fedia.io 6 points 8 hours ago

Jimmy Kimmel has Pete trashing Pete on this. Completely worth the watch.

collapsed inline mediaPete starts at 4:40