this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2023
153 points (98.1% liked)

politics

19125 readers
4293 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 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.
  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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. 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.
  4. 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 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

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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Vice.com

top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 39 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Walk into any military common room and watch Fox news or Newsmax.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

The worst that I saw 20 years ago is just our command telling us to vote... but suggesting that we vote Republican. (It was supposedly about getting paid more or some shit like that.)

[–] [email protected] 33 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That's such a clear violation of DoD Directive 1344.10 (equivalent of the Hatch Act), holy shit.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, it was stupid and we knew it. (I clarified my wording above slightly, btw. However, a military command "suggesting" something is meant to mean that "you gunna do it".)

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago

Even suggesting it is a violation.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago (1 children)

No they haven't. Even if you report them to the FBI, they will get referred to the military's counterintelligence commands, like the Army's 902nd military intelligence group. These are mostly the right leaning folk who joined the military to be cops. In one of my interviews with the counterintelligence agents he basically started answering his own questions and then just told me he was going to get somebody to vouch for the person. My identity was apparently leaked because multiple people know, including the commander, the investigator, the other people who work in the office where the person being reported also works. I'm sure I'll find out later that he knows as well. It's all a shell game. The exception to FBI policy was specifically built so that the military could hide these things. Giving commanders the ability to look the other way on crimes gives them a special power over people and a special knowledge of how to get away with illegal acts. The people they want to succeed can get away with anything and the people that are the wrong race or religion or whatever. Just get to deal with some dude that joined the army and now has power over him. The rules were written this way on purpose.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

Thanks for the info. Sorry that happened to you.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Wonder if these folks meant to apply to the 🛑ctagon...Probably a better fit culturally and intellectually

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

For all the Pentagon's bluster and supposed might, simple math proves the octagon is at least three stronger.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago

In light of your comment I'm formally declaring Uncle