view the rest of the comments
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
In order to convince me that the "both sides" argument has any merit whatsoever, I'd have to see some examples of something on the left that is similar to: Pizzagate, Qanon, or the amount of stupid denialism during and after Covid when it comes to things like vaccines.
In fact, I see an insane amount of the right wing, right now, giving themselves cramps from clapping their own backs over their claim that "the only difference between a conspiracy theory and conspiracy fact is six months" kind of thinking over the Epstein Files and Pizzagate/Qanon, FFS.
I mean, LOLOLOL, everyone knew about Epstein, if they were paying attention. The guy went to prison the first time, before Obama even took office. Eight years later, the Pizzagate bullshit started up.
That doesn't vindicate any of the Pizzagate or Qanon bullshit, at all. Their claims revolved around Hillary and company running a child sex ring out of the basement of a pizza parlor with no basement. But seriously, you'll see the right wing going around congratulating each other on being right, LOL - meanwhile, almost no one went to prison.
And that's without going into the insane rabbit hole the right went down during Covid over things like Fauci, masks, vaccines and various nostrums like Ivermection and HCQ. I'd love to see where the equivalent to anything even close to this exists on the left.
I don’t think you understand what I am saying. I am not making a both sides are the same argument. I’m saying how they argue sounds the same. Im saying that if you take some of the arguments from that original video link, swap the context to be Miller and it could easily have been the left making those moments.
That is literally exactly what you fucking said. Are you for real right now? We can all read it.
Oh, I would agree that one could easily erase all the relevant context, and point at two groups of people objecting to the pleading of the Fifth and say it's virtually the same argument.