this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2024
1086 points (98.7% liked)

News

23301 readers
3811 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Joe Biden has moved to correct a “great injustice” by pardoning thousands of US veterans convicted over six decades under a military law that banned gay sex.

The presidential proclamation, which comes during Pride month and an election year, allows LGBTQ+ service members convicted of crimes based solely on their sexual orientation to apply for a certificate of pardon that will help them receive withheld benefits.

It grants clemency to service members convicted under Uniform Code of Military Justice article 125 – which criminalised sodomy, including between consenting adults – between 1951 and 2013, when it was rewritten by Congress.

That includes victims of the 1950s “lavender scare”, a witch-hunt in which many LGBTQ+ people employed by the federal government were viewed as security risks amid fears their sexual orientation made them vulnerable to blackmail. Thousands were investigated and fired or denied employment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 25 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (14 children)

No. This is clemency for prosecution of criminal misconduct and (potential) reinstatement of "honorable discharge" status. If you got fucked financially by a military that lured you in and then crapped you back out again, you'll have to get in line for Biden's debt forgiveness plan.

Also, should note that we changed the law in 2013 and then sat on this for four full years until Obama turned the keys over to Trump. Then retook the White House and waited an additional four years to grant clemency.

Very frustrating to see Presidents implement these policies out of desperation in the middle of a tight election season rather than rolling them out ASAP.

[–] InternetUser2012@midwest.social 5 points 4 months ago (4 children)

I'm sure there were a few more pressing matters to deal with. I mean, our country was run by a vengeful wanna be dictator man child for four years. The fact he even got to this is great. It's not like a republikkklown would have done anything with it, besides, what votes is this going to help with? The only people that are going to appreciate this are already voting for Biden.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

I’m sure there were a few more pressing matters to deal with

That's always the excuse. And then you lose by 40,000 votes because your candidate reeks of sleeze and entitlement. What could Obama, Biden, and Hilary have done differently back in 2016?

How about doing the right thing?

[–] InternetUser2012@midwest.social 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

What could they have done differently??? They could have fought the Russian influence, that would have put an end to this shit before it started. The democrats didn't vote because it was laughable tRump would win. Now they know how serious it is because tRump is a man child, and will vote.

My response was to yours about doing this now for the votes. My point stands, it makes zero difference on votes. You respond like a bot/troll. Which is it?

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

They could have fought the Russian influence

How much more money do we need to spend on the NSA and CIA to say we did that?

The democrats didn’t vote because it was laughable tRump would win

Democrats turned out in droves for Obama in 2008, despite the fact that McCain was one of the weakest candidates of my lifetime. The decline in 2012 was in direct response to a federal government that had thrown in the towel and a party that only knew how to compromise with the most greedy and cynical conservatives in their own party. But by 2016, they'd hit their functional floor. Hillary only lost 100,000 votes relative to Obama, four years earlier.

Do you think more democrats would have turned out against a John Kasich or Macro Rubio because they were less laughable? Do you think democrats would have turned out against a Low Energy Jeb campaign?

No. The problem democrats had in 2016 was an enormous surge in Republican turnout. 2M more Republicans climbed aboard the Trump train than Mitt Romney had. Four years later, Trump had accumulated an extra 12M votes. He crested Obama's 2008 total by 9M votes. Trump won by tapping into the American fascist Id.

You respond like a bot/troll.

So I'm either a formulaic mechanical pre-generated response or a slick, sarcastic human being trying to get your goat?

Real "my enemy is both weak and strong" hours. No wonder they call it Blue MAGA.

[–] InternetUser2012@midwest.social 1 points 4 months ago

That's a lot of words to say you're a troll.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)