325
Pelosi Wants FBI to Investigate Pro-Palestine Protesters for Financial Ties to Russia
(www.rollingstone.com)
this post was submitted on 28 Jan 2024
325 points (93.1% liked)
politics
19089 readers
4231 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Imagine how out-of-touch you have to be to represent San Francisco and not realize sincere antiwar protesters exist.
Here is my completely nonpartisan hot take. We should pass a constitutional amendment that ties the maximum age to hold public office (including judges) to the Social Security "Normal Retirement Age" at the time of passing. That is currently 67 years old. You can do whatever you want past 67, but you can't hold public office.
Do you want them to make the retirements age 90? I’d rather not give those assholes a perverse incentive to reduce benefits.
I did state "at time of passage" but we might as well say "at time of drafting" to avoid shenanigans.
In a lot of a states you can bring forward laws to ballots that amend the state constitutions with enough public signatures. I think in our modern day lack of a useful government officials we should use this tool far more often to attempt to ensure a healthier government.
What difference will that make? Also, what happens if/when life extension/age reversal becomes an everyday thing? Government regulations often move at a glacial pace, why fix something in place now that will be hard to remove when it's completely irrelevant. We are even still saddled with the stupid EC and the idea that states all get 2 senators, no matter their population size. How long would it take to remove a rule like this that quickly becomes obviously ridiculous in the near future?
Young politicians will always have an incentive to consider raising the age limit. This isn't a system that leads to irreversible change when and if the time arises where the limit is no longer appropriate.
She represents San Francisco's billionaires. She has nothing to do with people making median incomes.
So in her world, support for Israel is a universally shared opinion
Having said that, it is in Russias interest to highlight the very real genocide in Gaza. By demonstrating the obvious hypocrisy of the Western "rules-based" order, they will make it easier for Russia to commit further atrocities in Ukraine. And for China to invade Taiwan. And America's ability to credibly resist those efforts will be diminished - after all, the US enabled Israel's genocide of the Palestinians despite international condemnation, so who is America now to object to the murder of Ukrainians or the annexation of Taiwan?
Aren't you actually proving her point?
You're saying that among protesters there are sincere ones.
A call for investigation means that there is a belief that among sincere ones there are also insincere ones trying to spin shit up.
Edit: of course downvotes. It isn't even a secret https://www.mei.edu/publications/essential-questions-about-russia-hamas-link-evidence-and-its-implications
It's an easy way to silence people you don't want to hear. Someone who believes there's sincerity in the sentiment doesn't start off with: "For them to call for a ceasefire is Mr Putin's message. Make no mistake. This is directly connected to what he would like to see."
It doesn't really matter what you justify it with afterward, you're still essentially saying opposing "war" in Gaza is supporting Putin.
It also implies that anti-war protesting is something that is problematic and should be looked into. Or, rather than being pro-Palestine is wrong, and that it's a sentiment that has to be caused by foreign influence.
Enough with the Hamas sideshow bullshit. You don't have to be a Hamas supporter to be upset that Israel is indiscriminately killing Palestinians. At this point, anything Hamas did on 10/7 pales in comparison to Israel's response.
It's no secret that there are corrupt politicians either. I think we should investigate this ghoul and her financial ties to supporting genocide first before we use the secret police on citizens expressing a desire for peace.
If she was calling for both pro-Palestine and pro-Israel protest groups to be investigated for potential monetary ties to Russia, then I'd consider her claim to be more valid.