this post was submitted on 28 May 2026
132 points (99.3% liked)

politics

31071 readers
2605 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 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.
  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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] iknewitwhenisawit@fedinsfw.app 29 points 3 months ago (6 children)

Is she going to be able to get some of that $1,776 million slush fund for people attacked by a weaponized justice department?

[–] Zephorah@discuss.online 18 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Say billion. Don’t reframe it.

[–] 4grams@awful.systems 10 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

The reframe has already worked. The number keeps being reported as 1.8 billion dollars when it was specifically 1.776 billion, 1776 being red meat for his base. That number means something to them and covering it up is providing cover for the motivation and intent of the fund.

The 1,776 million number contains more useful info than saying 1.8 billion, so I’m cool with that framing.

[–] ramble81@lemmy.zip 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It actually helped me realize that it was a purely made up amount too and that it’s exactly pandering to his base with “1776”

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

The irony being that all of his jackbooted thug fans would be Tories and ache for a Big Daddy/King to rule America again.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

There's no number in the "settlement." Drumpf just handed himself a blank check to be paid by the taxpayers

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)