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 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
On which, that the Chinese effort wasn't as effective on the general American populace as the Russian campaign, or the Chinese police stations? For the latter it's related to the Safeguard report release in 2016 of which multiple governments confirmed the grand diaspora government program had created hundreds of non embassy 'service stations" that just happened to be related to credible reports of tracking and intimidation. Of which a dude was just convicted in the US for, when they went after him, him and his partner started burning shit like they were a Russian embassy.
Or the ineffective but present propoganda efforts by the prc that resulted in multiple news agencies being required to register as foreign agents in 2018 and an increase in IRA style social media campaigns around the covid pandemic.
I don't trust any American government agency or their reports. Do you?
Always take it with a grain of salt! Don't gotta trust us American pig dogs too much, you got French, English, German, Dutch. Man you name it they got it on the creepy NGO Chinese police "service stations".
None of this is to say the Americans don't do the same shit and worse, the American government mad at foreign interference by Chinese and Russians is like the fucking Spiderman meme.
No, they don't.
Maybe you should have taken more than a grain.
Oooh, one Canadian senator did a speech with no link to the actual report, bet you had to dig to find this one!
Do you know what the RCMP are, lol?
The mounties right, dudley do right? Where's the RCMP report this Canadian senator is talking about. Just because the Canadian investigation didn't rise to criminality, but what did the Canadian investigation say, do the RCMP stand by doing the investigation in the first place?
A commentary by one senator as the only positive thing you can say is pretty weak.
Yeah. The federal police. Weird that you're trying to downplay the feds in an investigation of such importance.
Oooh, masterful question dodge!
I make it a point to disrespect all police agencies as part of the governmental monopoly on violence.
Your questions aren't worth answering.
Nice, that's super convenient for you!
?? The federal police disgare with your initial assertion, lol.
So you're saying you know better than the federal Canadian investigation beaureau. Surely you must have irrefutive proof, then.
Taking another bite at this apple, huh?
Yeah, should be easy to prove right?
You literally dodged multiple questions from me about this exact topic earlier and said I wasnt worth answering, now you're commenting again on an earlier thread acting like you hit me with a gotcha? I love that!
No, I didn't. I'm literally asking you to provide proof for your nonsensical beliefs. Any proof will do. Prove it to me baby.
Sure Jan.
I am literally begging you to prove your original statement. Nothing before this matters. Prove your original statement, for anyone in the future reading this thread.
You dodging my questions then telling I'm not worth answering:
You jumping in on an earlier thread to try and uno reverso me:
How can I beg harder? Do you not know how to read, lol? Are we speaking in a different language? Prove it.
Tell you what, you go back an answer my questions, I'll engage with yours in good faith rather than whatever you think you are doing.
Lmao ok, I'll start digging right now! Digging your circular rhetoric!
You just quoting yourself? That's bold. I also have one!
So, no answer?
None that you wouldn't give me!