this post was submitted on 30 Mar 2026
710 points (99.6% liked)

politics

29181 readers
2470 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://yall.theatl.social/post/9683582

From the Atlanta Tribune:

Previously Unseen Docs Reveal That Susie Wiles Witnessed Trump Showing a Classified Map to Unnamed Plane Passengers, and President Took Sensitive Document Accessible to Only Six People in the U.S. Government Washington, D.C. (March 25, 2026)—Rep. Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi demanding urgent […]The post New documents reveal Trump stole classified documents to advance his business interests appeared first on Atlanta Tribune.

#Atlanta #AtlantaTribune #theATLBot

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 62 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

This is actually a bigger deal than just a "No shit, Sherlock," only not in the direction of exposing what Trump did. We ALL fucking know he hoovered up whatever he thought he could sell on the international elite markets. That's no surprise; that's not even news.

But for those of us who waited all last year for Special Counsel Jack Smith's report to be released publicly, only to see it suppressed by Trump's favorite judge in Florida, Aileen Cannon, this is a big deal. It's sort of an Epstein Files, Part Duh.

Special Counsel Jack Smith is the guy who, along with a number of career (read: not partisan aligned) prosecutors, assembled two cases against Trump: the 2020 election interference, and the documents handling. The documents case is the one Aileen Cannon delayed until she could throw it out, and then when the report was due to be released, as they almost all are, she ordered that suppressed as well, along with all the evidence assembled backing it.

This gag order imposed on Jack Smith, specifically, is so unusually extreme and all-encompassing that Smith was legally barred from testifying to Congress on his own report's specific contents when subpoenaed to appear in a deposition by the House Judiciary Committee.

But with the same nimble political dexterity they have handled the Epstein files, Trump and his butt sniffers on the House Judiciary Committee have been trying like hell to smear Jack Smith: the report is apparently so incendiary they all live in fear of it coming out, so they have been working overtime to get ahead of the inevitable leak or release by using it to disparage Jack Smith and by extension his evidence.

In pursuit of this goal of somehow maligning Jack Smith, the House Judiciary Committee has been using that report like a menu to request materials about the original case from the DoJ. And they've been getting them -- including materials that either include or make detailed mention of the specific information that Judge Cannon specifically embargoed in her order suppressing Smith's report and any discussion of it, including Smith's Congressional testimony:

This particular production contained a memorandum detailing non-public information about the classified documents Trump stole when leaving office. The newly produced materials offer a startling view of evidence gathered by Special Counsel Jack Smith during his investigations into the criminal activity of President Trump, even as DOJ continues to suppress Volume II of his final report.

Rep. Jamie Raskin, the ranking (non-butt-sniffing) member of the House Judiciary Committee, saw this for what it is and fired off a letter to Pam Bondi, detailing what was obviously being hidden and demanding answers, specifically, "on who accessed the materials, what they contained, and whether any foreign actors were able to access or exploit the information. He also called for the release of all remaining investigative files, including the full, unredacted Special Counsel report."

This is also directly relevant to the war in Iran:

“If this map is related to our military posture in the Middle East, and it was in fact shown to any foreign official, Saudi or otherwise, that would amount to an unforgiveable betrayal of our men and women in uniform who are currently valiantly fighting in President Trump’s disastrous war against Iran,” wrote Ranking Member Raskin.

This is the upshot (emphasis mine):

DOJ’s hypocrisy in gagging Jack Smith is underscored by this latest disclosure. Special Counsel Smith remains barred from sharing information with Congress under a sweeping gag order imposed by Justice Cannon, at the request of Donald Trump, and enforced by DOJ. At the same time, DOJ has produced cherry-picked documents to aid Chairman Jordan’s vindictive campaign against Special Counsel Smith and his team, including some documents that appear to violate Judge Cannon’s order. DOJ appears to view the judicial order as rules for thee—Jack Smith—but not for me. However, it appears that the evidence against Donald Trump collected by Jack Smith and memorialized in his records is so damning, that even DOJ’s carefully curated production cannot fully excise findings that the President sold out national security to advance his own business interests.

[–] Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works 28 points 2 days ago (2 children)

He rapes kids and everybody knows it, idk how any document could ever matter at this point

[–] ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 28 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I don't believe in giving that asshole a pass on ANYTHING, and I would suggest the same strategy to you, especially since what they believe he passed along was related to current US troop safety in the region.

I don't believe in the war, but I also don't believe in cannon fodder. It's not Barron who's going to bleed for this.

I say hold that piece of shit responsible for ALL of it.

I say hold that piece of shit responsible for anything lol, yeah i agree with you he should have gotten prison for life or even the death penalty back in the 1970s for his crimes, but im not in charge man. All i can do is go to protests and hold a sign that says trump rapes kids. I guess what im saying is ive been hearing for ten years now new documents proving trump did another thing that is punishable by death, a new document is never gonna do anything until congress or the military or someone with power actually holds him to account.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I get the sentiment, but are you suggesting we not care about stories like this?

[–] Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes, i dont care about the millionth document showing trump is a treacherous child rapist. This just plays into him, media companies make money everytime they unveil a new crime or whatever and the world keeps turning.

I care about him heing stopped! idc about going over his history of crimes for the millionth time without any actions being taken against him.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

That's certainly a take. I don't see how you think media covering his crimes helps him or how stopping doing so would help justice ever being enacted.

Also this was a new story and had nothing to do with his pedophilia. So did you even skim the post title before reacting this way?

[–] Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

It normalizes his behavior, "oh no typical trump stealing and raping again". Then they run an editorial "this is why we had to invade iran" blah blah blah.

Like what are you waiting for? You need some more articles published before you take more action against him?

If not, then why do you care about the next document published about him??

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Literally what are you talking about? You realize the entire concept of news is 'something abnormal happened '. Further I've no clue why you think I'm responsible for jailing trump.

You didn't even attempt to answer any of my questions. Probably because you realize there's nothing rational about your take. You just know you're tired of being depressed by it. Fair enough. Take a break from news, because news won't stop being reported for you.

[–] Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works -1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Im talking about how it helps trump when people share these articles. It normalizes his behavior.

Your question was inane, yes i read the article and i still have the same conclusion. This is not news, and it helps trump by normalizing his behavior while continuing his immunity to accountability.

I never said anything about you being responsible for anything. Im asking you, what did this article change for you? What will you do next week when the next article comes out describing another trump crime? Is anything in the world different now that jack smith published this?? Why should we care about this, because i said we shouldn't and you said that's wrong.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 1 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

Thank you for letting me know that you're unreachable. Now I know for sure. For the record, everyone reading this knows it's a beyond dumb assertion to say reporting on crime increases crime. Which by the way you once again failed to address because you know it's an irrational and incorrect idea that makes no sense whatsoever.

[–] Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works 1 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Alright good job you won the argument you're smarter than me have a nice life

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 2 points 15 hours ago

I apologize for the tone I took here. I don't think you're unintelligent, rather I think you're fed up and being a bit stubborn. We are all hurting right now. I hope the future leads us all to hurt less.