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
A judge they had in their pocket signed off on persecuting one of Trump's political enemies. Sure, ok.
If there were real evidence, this would've happened years ago when she were first running for office. It didn't because this is made up bullshit.
Problem being that if the Justice system can be corrupted like this then the whole system is failed and no warrant should be valid.
Yeah you already said this. That doesn't change the fact that Omar's did nothing wrong
So as a society what do we do if warrants cannot be trusted and in general law enforcement is just a game of who does the government want to go after? You cannot have an Omar did nothing wrong and didn’t deserve this in the same society where any warrant is considered “valid.”
Well yes, her warrant should not be valid, and there should be an investigation into the motivations behind it's issuance. That goes without saying.
This still doesn't change the fact that just because her warrant is politically motivated that doesn't mean suddenly every warrant is no longer valid.
It brings every warrant into question. It isn’t that some wouldn’t be valid in a healthy system but that if the system is so critically flawed that a warrant can be issued based on nothing as you assert, then the warrant process is by definition a fishing expedition that can be led by the government for any reason. That is problematic to the degree that the system as is should not be accepted even if the known “bad apples” are out.
I don't agree with this at all. An institution very well can be legitimate but also have problems with corruption.