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
Fucking shocker.
https://fortune.com/2025/11/14/pete-skandalakis-trump-georgia-election-interference-case-fani-willis-rudy-giuliani-mark-meadows/
Hang this motherfucker too. Sick of these motherfuckers helping fascist get away with their crimes. He should be put against the wall. If we get out from under this fascism we can't forgive and forget.
Agreed
Am I reading this wrong? The article seems to indicate that he's just a civil servant prosecutor? Is there any indication of bias?
This part. The elected republican bit. I'd love to trust that he could be bipartisan but having only received the case on the 17th and then dismissed it is suspect as fuck
I don't consider mere membership in a political party as very strong evidence of bias. There are only two viable political parties in America and "membership" is nothing more than ticking a box on a form. Even I'm technically a Republican despite being a "woke lefty" because I just wanted to vote against Trump in the 2024 primary election and because it causes the Republican Party to waste money mailing me "get out the vote" campaign material which I immediately throw in the recycle bin.
Civil servants are allowed to have political leanings. This doesn't make them automatically biased. That is Donald Trump-level reasoning. Just like he was wrong to attack the New York prosecutor who happens to be a Democrat, I'm not going to attack this guy just because he happens to be a Republican.
Then you need to start paying attention.
I am deeply offended by that. I worked in a municipal government for several years and I can assure you that there are plenty of Republican civil servants who take their jobs just as seriously and act with as much impartiality as their Democratic counterparts.
Like I said, to dismiss someone as "biased" only because they have the opposite political orientation is Trump-level reasoning.
If that party membership were the "only" evidence of bias, I would agree with you. Heck I've considered signing up for GOPer mail, just to waste their funds, too. With this dismissal, it's clear that there are at least two points of evidence, and they indeed make a direct line which leads to bias. I suspect if one were to look closer a 3rd and 4th linear points towards bias would arise. Prove me wrong.
The Republican party has not been a traditional political party in quite awhile now, Trumpism has fully transformed it into a dangerous cult. Continued affiliation with the Republican party in the current political context is plenty of evidence to know someone is deeply biased and poses a threat the rule of the law.
You're free to do your own trump level reason in this case. No one in good conscious can still support the republican party with all the shit going on.
Not officially. At least in Illinois, civil servants can get in deep shit with the Ethics Act if they start advocating for a political party in their capacity as a civil servant.