politics

19150 readers

2029 users here now

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

• 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

[email protected]

166

Sen. Katie Britt Responds to Criticisms of Misleading Mexican Immigration Anecdote (www.vanityfair.com)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The Republican response focused on a brutal story of sex trafficking, which actually took during George W. Bush’s presidency.

…

Independent journalist Jonathan Katz put out a viral TikTok video on Saturday scrutinizing the anecdote, in which he reported discovering that the person Britt was referring to was a woman named Karla Jacinto Romero, an activist who has spoken publicly for many years about her experience being sex trafficked and forced to work in Mexican brothels. But Romero was never brought across the southern border against her will, as Britt seemed to imply, and her horrific experiences in Mexico took place between the years of 2004 and 2008, when George W. Bush was president, The Washington Post confirmed.

Britt spokesman Sean Ross confirmed that the Senator was indeed speaking about Romero, whom she met at the southern border in 2023, but denied that her speech was misleading, saying in a statement that the story “was 100 percent correct” and that “there are more innocent victims of that kind of disgusting, brutal trafficking by the cartels than ever before right now.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 30 points 8 months ago (1 children)

denied that her speech was misleading, saying in a statement that the story “was 100 percent correct” and that “there are more innocent victims of that kind of disgusting, brutal trafficking by the cartels than ever before right now.”

She more than implied that the story was Biden's fault and a problem for the US when it happened twenty years ago in another country. Yes, that stuff still happens, and it's terrible, but what does it have to do with Biden? If anything, letting people like her have sanctuary in the US would help, but the Republicans don't want that.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

If anything, letting people like her have sanctuary in the US would help, but the Republicans don't want that.

You just pointed out another reason why her using this story to score political points is so disgusting. These are the people whom the asylum program is supposed to help, and the Republicans actively work against helping.

If there's a hell, she's going to it. She deserves it.