343
Political storm in Wyoming as far-right activist caught handing checks to lawmakers
(www.theguardian.com)
And nothing will actually happen.
this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2026
343 points (99.7% liked)
politics
28602 readers
2502 users here now
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
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Pfft. Amateur.
“Handing checks to lawmakers” is a weird fucking way to say bribe
But is it a bribe or a gratuity?
Yes
A gratuity is just a bribe after the fact
“good job voting my way. keep it up and there will be more checks like this”
just because a packed court said gratuities are fine doesn’t mean it’s fine
Y'all know about libel?
And the legal definition of bribe is not what it used to be.
Assuming they're Americans talking, it's basically impossible to get convicted of defamation against a politician here. Like, it's genuinely impressive that Candice Owens is managing it. It requires you make statements that are defamatory to them, presented as clear statements of fact, and display reckless disregard for the truth. And in edge cases courts tend to lean with free speech over defamation. That's just for any public figure, for politicians the courts are even more cautious to avoid chilling political speech.
Is it libel if there’s a picture of the deed?
When was the vote they were being reimbursed for? Believe it or not, that matters. If they got a check before a vote that's a bribe, and a big no-no. But if they got it after the fact, that's a gratuity, and A-OK, according to the Supreme Court
There's always a next vote. That must have slipped the minds of 6/9 of the court.
Eh more like that decision was the supreme court's version of a valet standing around and saying "ahem" before taking your car away
i mean afterwards seems worse. you could still not vote their way if they do before.
Hm, "political storm".
How some imprisonment?
“These legislators, myself included, are now guilty until we can prove that we’re innocent. How is that right in this country? Isn’t that a little bit backwards?”
It really is.
This dude was so close to accidentally having empathy for immigrants.
This should be a regular practice for the GAO against politicians. If i have to spam test email at work, they can be tested for bribe susceptibility. If they accept, they are expelled from their position. Who's with me?
I'm with you. It'd be better than the current system where if they take the bribe they get a position in the Trump administration.
The White House stood behind "border czar" Tom Homan on Monday following reports that he had accepted $50,000 from undercover agents posing as business people during an undercover FBI operation last year, leading to a bribery investigation that was shut down by the Trump administration Justice Department.
American politicians lining their pockets. What’s so suddenly unique about that?
The fact that they think they don't need to hide it anymore.
That's what's new. And the consequences for everyone else are pretty fucking dire. Before, they had to pretend to be honest, and some were, if only because they feared repercussions, like a big investigation that would kill their reelection. And a federal investigation would likely mean actual jail time. It's happened before, not often, but it has happened.
The threat of a federal investigation is gone, so any hesitancy to rob the public coffers is also gone.
Jesus Christ, not even decent enough to hide it in a folder, or a McDonald's bag
c'mon everyone he was just handing a check to someone. that's the proper wording to describe this event, absolutely.
absolutely fucking egregious and shameful that they would do this without first passing it through the middlemen that make it legal. what will become of the PACs and lobbyists if we allow this?