this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2023
138 points (97.9% liked)

politics

19090 readers
2767 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Democratic U.S. Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey defiantly pushed back against federal corruption charges on Monday, saying cash authorities found in his home was from his savings account and was on hand for emergencies, it wasn’t bribe proceeds.

He said he believed that he’d be exonerated and that prosecutors sometimes get the facts wrong.

“I recognize this will be the biggest fight yet, but as I have stated throughout this whole process, I firmly believe that when all the facts are presented, not only will I be exonerated, but I still will be the New Jersey’s senior senator,” Menendez said at Hudson County Community College’s campus in Union City, where he grew up. He did not respond to questions and did not address whether he will seek reelection next year.

Addressing allegations in the indictment unsealed Friday that authorities found cash stuffed in envelopes and clothing at his home, Menendez said the funds were draw from his personal savings account and stemmed his parents fear of confiscation of funds from their time in Cuba.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 38 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Yeah, I usually spread half a million of savings around the house. Safer than abank.Who does he think is buying this?

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

And what better way to store them than to stuff them in envelopes and clothing?

[–] justastranger@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

I also enjoy making sure the DNA of those ~~bribing me~~ helping me distribute my "savings" around the house is on the cash

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Chuck Schumer might not believe it, but he's still not holding this guy accountable

[–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Schumer does not need to make a public statement. Neither does Biden for that matter. They are not defending, so that's the message. It's up to the rule of law and the voters.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

So, you think Schumer has never called for someone to resign?

Rather than wait for you to lie, go ahead and read this

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/363682-schumer-called-met-with-franken-and-told-him-to-resign-report/

[–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He didn't cause Al resign, and he won't cause Menendez to resign either. Menendez is going to try to hang on, and there is not much Schumer can do about it. I predict though, that he will resign in a couple of weeks.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What?

Franken resigned because party leadership (including Schumer) told him the only way he'd get an investigation to clear his name was to resign immediately.

After he resigned, they said there was no reason to investigate.

And you're changing the topic.

The article says Schumer hasn't called on him to resign.

You said Schumer wouldn't call for anyone to resign.

So I linked him kneecapping a rising progressive.

You don't have to keep replying if you can't defend Schumer, no one is asking you to, or wants you to for that matter.

[–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sigh. Gillibrand was trying to make a name for herself and get some power. She marshaled the women of the Senate aga8nst AL and called for an investigation into the workplace. Al, for his part, got tired of the BS and resigned. He could have fought it, and probably would have won, but it just wasn't worth it, I guess.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

There's just no thread of logical consistency here...

We're talking about when Schumer calls for someone to resign.

You keep jumping to different topics.

And you're just flat out lying about what happened to Franken, or you have no idea what you're talking about.

Same result, gibberish