this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2024
676 points (97.9% liked)

politics

19148 readers
2397 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
 

Politico reports that it was sent communications from inside the Trump campaign, including Sen. J.D. Vance’s (R-OH) 271-page vetting file, allegedly by an Iranian hacker.

The outlet said that it has been receiving anonymous emails containing internal communications from the Trump campaign. The campaign acknowledged the authenticity of the communications on Saturday, accusing “foreign sources hostile to the United States,” for leaking them.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 135 points 3 months ago (9 children)

The real story is not that Trump had a novel length document of everything wrong with Vance (we know he's basically what you get if Oogy Boogy was filled with empty vapes and paternal disappointment instead of just bugs). No, the real story is that Trump picked him anyway.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

As others have noted Peter Thiel money might have influenced the choice. Given Vance's relationship to Project 2025 (he wrote the foreword to Kevin Roberts's book, remember^[1]) it's also possible he was a strongly pushed Heritage Foundation plant - put in place to ensure the flailing incoherent mess that is Trump's mind is actually implementing Project 2025 properly when elected.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 3 months ago

Was it just a copy of Hillbilly Elegy?

[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Vance had one job - do what Pence wouldn't on Jan 6th.

Then, back in the fucking box.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago
[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Trump can’t read so the briefing they gave him was all pictures

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago

He was confused at seeing the Lovesac catalogue and said "sure! I already have a pillow guy!"

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

Not enough of him or Ivanka clones so he just dozed off and farted

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Tbf all the other candidates are also republicans. I'd pay just to find out how big the dossier of the alternatives would get.

[–] Kecessa 3 points 3 months ago

Pretty sure a vetting document would have both negatives and positives, right?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

But also opposition research is actually normal and prudent. Losing it is obviously not. But do we actually know how damaging the info is?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

It's my understanding that the length is fairly normal. The vetting process for VP is very intense and thorough. They will go through every tiny aspect of your entire life if they're doing their job well.