296
Maybe putting raging alcoholics in charge of major government agencies wasn't such a great idea.
Hegseth ?
Which alcoholic loser again?
And yet it makes everything funnier.
It'd be funny if it weren't so damn sad
If your goal is sabotage, it is a great idea.
This is 100% going to be one of those things where undercovers bullied someone into going along with a plan or even just being reasonably aware of a plan but not snitching.
It's just way more likely they invented a threat than they stopped a legitimate one.
Yep, first thought was ‘three undercovers and two informants got rounded up which is why no identifying details will be shared.’
The attackers showed up days after the event. That’s not much of an attack.
Lol, like the WKUK civil war episodes where they keep showing up late after battles
Or just found someone mentally ill or disabled enough to exploit. Status quo.
As much as it sucks, yeah, that was implied.
Even just for minor drug deals, Undercovers target children with learning disabilities because they're often the most trusting.
Once they have them for a minor buy, they'll send them straight to real dealers wearing a wire.
Like you said, status quo
Kash Patel ~~may have~~ has flouted legal constraints and the FBI’s disciplinary code in prematurely divulging arrests in an alleged plot to attack this month’s Ultimate Fighting Championship bout at the White House, bureau veterans ~~have alleged~~ report.
If there's no doubt that he DID publicly publish nonpublic details of an ongoing investigation, there's no doubt that he broke the law and FBI rules either.
Stating one with certainty and "alleging" the other is the equivalent of saying "man who without a doubt murdered his neighbor might have broken the law, former prosecutor opines"
News reporting is such shit now
If I had a dog with a face like his I’d shave its ass and make it walk backwards!
It subsequently emerged the inquiry was sealed by a court order, theoretically constraining Patel from publicly disclosing it.
[…]
Patel has previously invoked court orders sealing grand jury testimony as justification for the FBI’s inability to release many of its files on Jeffrey Epstein.
There's no contradiction here. Everyone should move along.
I saw his ugly face and automatically read "draws a flask"
This is the most normal looking photo I have ever seen of this pile of shit with goggly eyes.
He really does look like there is just NOTHING going on in that head. Just a moth dawdling around in there that occasionally bumps into a nerve and makes him move and talk.
Indian people everywhere must be so pissed at him for how profoundly stupid he is on a global level.
Until Mamdani, there just haven't been any decent Indian American politicians.
Ro Khanna's all right.
0.0 - Krashout Patel's resting face
Every photo of Kash Patel looks like it’s from an Onion story where he has slowly backed into the folded arms of a looming, muscular henchman who is only visible from the neck down
He's literally just Tom from Parks and Recreation
Tom proved to actually have a heart. This guy is empty all the way through.
Cause they're both smaller Indian guys! I get it!
Because Tom's an obsessive self-promoter who never does any real work
I mean sure, that's another barely important commonality, but there's about a billion other and more prominent issues with Kash Patel that have nothing to do with Tom Haverford.
Someone’s gonna Bondi him right out the door after he answers a few questions.
If the goal was to make himself look good, it didn't work. He still looks like a snivelling asshole.
Probably wanted to click on Cancel but clicked on Release because his eyes were battling that day.
this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2026
296 points (99.3% liked)
politics
30374 readers
2474 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS