this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2025
634 points (99.1% liked)

Actually Infuriating

771 readers
1 users here now

Community Rules:

Be CivilPlease treat others with decency. No bigotry (disparaging comments about any race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexuality, nationality, ability, age, etc). Personal attacks and bad-faith argumentation are not allowed.

Content should be actually infuriatingPolitics and news are allowed, as well as everyday life. However, please consider posting in partner communities below if it is a better fit.

Mark NSFW/NSFL postsPlease mark anything distressing (death, gore, etc.) as NSFW and clearly label it in the title.

Keep it Legal and MoralNo promoting violence, DOXXing, brigading, harassment, misinformation, spam, etc.

Partner Communities

founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] owenfromcanada@lemmy.ca 14 points 4 days ago

The Republicans have been playing fast and loose with legality for pretty much ever.

Fortunately, the majority of Americans seem to know this message is a steaming pile of horseshit.

[–] DioramaOfShit@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I for one am looking forward to civil war 2. Im so tired of going to work.

Who's going to tell him?

im saving this to show my great great grandk- wait lol I'm not having children in this shithole

arguably. there are exemptions in the hatch act for senate-confirmed appointees. the secretary of agriculture seems like it would be one such appointee with hatch act exemptions. they could potentially make a case that these messages are communications from the secretary of agriculture, not from any actual experts or public servants. if it is meant to be a communication from the secretary of agriculture, one could argue there is an exemption in the hatch act for this specific activity (even though the actual communication goes through other non-senate-approved government employees/appointeed, many if not most of whom do not have exemptions to the hatch act, but do you punish the gun or the entity that pulled the trigger? (yes both would be nice but let's play a different game instead)

this seems to be what i've picked up on reading

Who's donating to enforce the Hatch act? Are they outbidding the Project 2025 folks?

That's all that matters anymore. Government for the highest bidder.

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 4 points 3 days ago

Laws only matter if someone enforces them

The collateral damage of dick measuring contests.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›