368
Trump skips FBI background checks for controversial cabinet picks – report
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2024
368 points (99.5% liked)
News
23287 readers
3817 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
How much corruption can we take before he's even installed? For real. This is way fucken nuttier than last time. It seems so malicious.
We will take whatever he gives. The US voters approved him. They want this. They chose this, and everything that comes from it.
This is why we’re supposed to have separation of powers. Any competent senate, even if the same party would insist in this before confirming. A senate full of sycophants on the other hand ….
This. There is no authority above the authoritarian. His word is law now. Whatever Our Glorious Cheeto wishes is now US doctrine.
Void help us all.
I tried. I can't do anything.
Thats not true. There are at least 71 million people here who voted against it. Thats a lot of people.
He won the popular vote, and the electoral college. Majority rules. (Unfortunately)
Also people who didn't vote at all, are at minimum fine with Trump and not against him.
The 4 years of Trumpsanity isn't starting in January, it's starting right now. For fucks sake, I'm not ready yet. I need to start stockpiling popcorn and booze. Except this time I'll probably need less popcorn and more booze because I don't think it's going to be as stupid funny as last time. It's already not funny, it's been nosediving into "could it get any worse?" and so far the answer has been "Yes!".
I guess he was being honest about all that revenge talk, eh? I mean, it is actively and onerously malicious, but just like last time, everyone's just gonna let Trump steamroll them, because the federal government has long had hesitance to hold figures like presidents, senators, and supreme court justices to account, and this is just an extension of that.
I mean, we didn't prosecute Bush and Cheney for war crimes. Hillary Clinton was proud of her friendship with Henry Kissinger. Kamala Harris was proud of her endorsement by Dick Cheney.
"It's a big club and we ain't in it," but Trump and co. don't feel the need to put up the facade anymore.
Bingo. Instead of "hiring" (paying off) politicians, they're just doing it themselves. They've lost any and all care about keeping up appearances. After all, what are we going to do? Sue them?
Because if they start holding others in similar offices to account, they might have to hold themselves as well, and that ain't happening.
He called Putin for a reason