269
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2026
269 points (97.9% liked)
politics
31574 readers
3278 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 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
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Legally yes.
But professionally there should have existed a courtesy to where the clergy could have been asked if they wanted the photo of them standing next to the dementia riddled rapist felon posted to the wh propaganda channels and maybe been given the ability to say no.
I don't know why they even entertained a meeting with the psychopathic toddler's regime. That was the real mistake.
I agree that agreeing to stand next to the dementia riddled pedophile rapist felon was the obvious thing to avoid.
Can’t believe no one yet has mentioned that it’s not all public. The West Wing, the Oval Office, and private working or living quarters inside the White House are restricted areas where casual photography is prohibited, and access or photography requires special credentials, an invitation, and direct Secret Service supervision.
...was probably the entire point of the exercise, from the regime's perspective, and I can't understand how anyone headed to the White House wouldn't understand this.
WH audiences are a matter of public record. These people weren’t playing with a full deck anyway, but this is some idiocy on their part.
As a world leader you have to strive for diplomacy with everyone, and especially psychopathic toddlers, for the good of your people.
Yeah, that's why Roosevelt and Churchill were so buddy-buddy with Hitler in the late 30s and through the 40s.
Oh, that's right, they weren't.
Part of diplomacy is communicating when there are lines that cannot be crossed without consequences.
"Buddy buddy" and "diplomatic" are not the same thing.
Counterpoint, if there's nothing to be gained besides a loss then don't bother. Frankly speaking we defer far too much to these milksops, Putin and Trump should both be treated with utter and open contempt the type where you snear at them and walk off if they approach. There's nothing respectable about Trump and with the sole exceptions of lower government entities there's nothing to be gained by interacting with him, if you ain't a mayor or governor then the only words he should here from someone is "fuck off".
Frankly speaking he really only deserves to be gunned down the next time he has the gall to visit a foreign power. He has long since waived his right to a trial via his actions.
Geopolitics extends will beyond your city and state.
I'm aware, what I'm saying is that the state and cities are the only ones who should do anything other than ignore this fuckwit at best. Unless you can somehow squize something out of him there's no point in playing nice, so long as it doesn't actively risk actual danger do whatever to him. And given how the US is actively collapsing in on itself I'd argue there's only gains to be made by being antagonistic towards Trump and the US as a whole, frankly with this Iran war shit the rest of the world should be issuing general embargos, denials of port, and bounties from Trump his kin and his kith.