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 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Then if someone were to be caught with classified records in the bathrooms and poolside storage rooms at Mar a Lago, they'd be facing some serious legal consequences, right? No one is above the law, right, Kash?
That's not what they're looking for...
The only reason they'd raid Bolton is if they thought he might be holding onto an "insurance policy", likely Epstein related.
I think a lot of people who worked around the Epstein shit is gonna start getting raided.
They want to release their doctored version, and they're trying to make sure no one has what they've redacted before they release it.
Logically, there aren't many other reasons for this...
Remove tinfoil before opening mouth.
This is much simpler: Bolton opposed Trump, therefore he is an enemy of Trump, therefore an enemy of the state, therefore a legitimate target for harassment through law enforcement. Same way if in Russia someone opposes Putin he will have goons come after him. It all discourages any kind of opposition, because most opponents will go away if you just trash their house or beat them up a bit.
Exactly. This was sending a message, not to Democrats, but to Traditional Republicans who might be considering opposing the MAGA takeover. There is no Republican Party, it's the MAGA PARTY now, so get on board, or else!
It's right out of the autocracy handbook. The orange is intimidating and soon getting rid of his opposition one raid at a time. And every raid sends a clear message to his enemies and allies: "Do not oppose the Czar."
You think as much as trump is freaking out about Epstein...
That he's just going after random people who aren't actively causing him problems?
He's simple minded, and there's a lot of pressure to release more info. If he releases something, and says it's everything, anyone that might have retained information from prior to Joe Biden's presidency is a threat.
Bolton could have literal.proof about what the government had prior to Biden, saying that's the likely motivation isn't "tinfoil" it's Occam's razor.
This is like all conspiracy theories: you've got a pet idea that would be exciting if it were true and so you're minded to ignore any alternative explanations for the facts.
What's to prevent him from saying they've fabricated it?
Because ever since Kissinger the national security advisor has been the conduit between the president and intelligence agencies. And Bolton was in that position when the FBI opened the safe at Epstein's place. The one filled with video and electronic files that somehow "disappeared".
If I said a rectangle was a square, would you say that's only possible if every rectangle was a square?
Reality...
Now, one question for you:
Come the fuck on...
If you don't understand still, nothing else I ever say will help you. Best of luck.
The "conduit"? Correct me if I'm wrong but the National Security Advisor isn't out kicking in doors when the FBI go on raids. The FBI is not an intelligence agency (it has an intelligence branch) and being the "conduit" doesn't mean he has the ability, inclination, foresight or skullduggery to gather such "insurance policies."
If you said that on a specific day the sun rose because you had prayed really hard for it to pray the previous day, I would be asking you what about all the other days when it rose without your apparent intervention.
Not good enough.
I'm calling out your conspiracy theory thinking. Target John Bolton with an FBI investigation is a conspiracy, is a fascist abuse of power and is not, in any way, giving Trump "the benefit of the doubt." But it's not conspiracy theory thinking, because there's no super secret bullshit that only a select few are smart enough to work out - it's the regular kind of secret stuff that we can infer based on facts and evidence.
To believe your story I have to believe that there's a high chance John Bolton has "the Epstein list" and has kept it as insurance. You have given me no reason to believe this except that Bolton was head of - not the FBI, not the DoJ, but the National Security Council. So what? On the basis of such weak evidence you'd be saying that thousands of government officials have Epstein related "insurance".
You're not, though, because you're not actually basing this on any thought process which takes evidence into account.
Bro. What do you gain when you investigate? Intelligence, you're being obtuse.
Why are you joining this comment thread to do something other than offer an actual reason to believe that Bolton has an Epstein-based insurance policy, when this investigation is adequately explained the same way all of Trump's other retaliatory abuses of power are explained?
Yes
What would Bolton have had to do with the Epstein materials? He was National Security Advisor.
Epstein being Mossad would be national security related
Some of you have gone off the deep end.
With this administration, anything is possible.
I think what he's saying is that the simpler explanation is that Trump hates people not sucking his dick and regurgitating his bullshit statements. Bolton has been doing the rounds and not following the trump line. So now trump hates him, which means the regime hates him.
More than one thing can be true at the same time.
"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
Rules for thee