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
view the rest of the comments
From what I’ve heard/read (this story is so fucking worthless. If we’re going after rich nepo kids Hunter is on that list but not the top. It definitely doesn’t deserve this much attention…) the judge was, in effect, actually helping Hunter here. The law he was agreeing to plea guilty to in order to get this agreement is (according to this judge) untested and possibly unconstitutional. Her “concern” was he might be pleading guilty and sentenced and then held to that agreement (legally speaking) even if that law is thrown out. She wants to make sure Hunter understands if the law is thrown out he is still legally required to abide by any agreements made using that law… but the judge is also kind of recognizing that this sets up a situation where Hunter or the court are entering into an agreement willingly around a law they both don’t think will stand for much longer… something like that. Not a lawyer, etc.
Long story short, he’s probably still gonna get a light or favorable sentence compared to the minimums/what was charged/what evidence that exists of his crimes. It might even be more favorable. Hard to tell. (most of his crimes that can be proven are drug usage which should not be a crime which is why I don’t really care. Yes he obviously received money, jobs, perks based on his last name but in comparison to like Jared Kushner… I mean…)
Thanks for the informed take!