this post was submitted on 13 May 2025
96 points (99.0% liked)

politics

25103 readers
2688 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
 

The aircraft would need to be torn down and rebuilt from the inside out — including overhauling electrical wiring, avionics and power systems — to install secure presidential communications, self-defense tech and electromagnetic shielding.

top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ThePantser@sh.itjust.works 23 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Exactly what I have been saying. It doesn't have the same tech as the real AFO. It will probably cost the tax payers a few billion dollars to retrofit. The last planes cost in total around 4 billion and they had the tech installed at time of construction so it's cheaper to install.

[–] Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de 19 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

The AFO replacement was never meant to be taken seriously, it was just to make the bribery less obvious to his cult. It's the classic seed of doubt that fascists like to spread, so their gullible supporters and enablers can calm themselves down before the cognitive dissonance that they actually just support/enable fascism sets in. All it was is a ruse, the aircraft was always meant to go to Trump's "personal library after Jan 2029".

[–] notabot@lemm.ee 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Would it though? Would it really? Couldn't we just let trump have it as it is and see what happened? It's bound to be ok, isn't it?

[–] OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

It's already more secure than their Signal chat. I'm sure it'll be fine.

[–] NABDad@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Accept the plane, say thanks, then sell it.