this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2025
175 points (96.8% liked)

politics

23170 readers
3053 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
 

The Wall Street Journal reported on the defense secretary's hissy fit amid growing chaos.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reportedly teed off on a high-ranking official he suspected of a leak, lewdly threatening him with a lie detector test.

The Wall Street Journal on Thursday divulged the alleged details of the embattled Hegseth’s tantrum. When word got out Hegseth was setting up a classified briefing for Elon Musk on China last month, Donald Trump got angry amid Pentagon concerns over the DOGE leader’s business connections to China, the Journal wrote.

That’s when Hegseth lost it.

“I’ll hook you up to a fucking polygraph!” Hegseth blared at Navy Admiral Christopher Grady, two people familiar with the exchange told WSJ.

top 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 52 points 2 days ago (4 children)

...lewdly threatening him with a lie detector test.

Lewdly? I wouldn't call threatening to, hook someone up to a "fucking" polygraph, lewd. I mean, unless they have some really freaky polygraphs at the pentagon made for really hardcore games of Truth of Dare.

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 15 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Yeah, I spotted that, too. It was stupid, but "lewd?" Who writes this stuff? Is it ALL AI these days?

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's lewd because it's dirty, in the sense that it has no scientific basis whatsoever.

What could be dirtier than the intelligence head threatening staff with a fake test that can be easily doctored to portrait whatever you want about them?

[–] tempest@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago

It isn't wrong, it's just the less common usage in 2025 which is why it reeks of AI.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

I'm arguing for no huffpo links. this is another reason why.

[–] Psaldorn@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago

It's a fucking polygraph. They hook you up, then you have to get it on. For the baseline.

[–] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

You’ve clearly never been treated to a polygraph by me. It’s a sensual polygraph experience and baby girl, you’ll be telling me everything like the orca I tend to at the San Antonio SeaWorld.

I got lectured about not using the sarcasm tag the other day. So, /completely serious

/s

[–] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

baby girl

*Looks down at beard and moobs, shrugs*

Okay, let's do this. I think I can role-play an orca. Sounds fun.

[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 2 points 2 days ago

"lewd" describes behavior, speech, or material that is sexually crude, obscene, or indecent. It works perfectly here unless you have online porn brain, then it sticks out.

[–] archonet@lemy.lol 47 points 2 days ago

my god it really is like the Nazi high command eating each other because "fuck that guy and his ambitions, I've got my own"

this would be positively hilarious to watch if I weren't American, neurodivergent, and gay.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 34 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Did somebody point out it was probably him and his signal buddies?

[–] Grimtuck@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

They're just following his lead

[–] Kronusdark@lemmy.world 27 points 2 days ago

My favorite part is we are hearing about this through another leak. 🤣

…that he himself was the source of.

[–] vegeta@lemmy.world 26 points 2 days ago
[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The thing I hate most about conservatives is their obsession with pseudo science.

Hey asshole! If a polygraph actually worked everyone would be hooked up to one during court hearings or major business deals. Byt they'd rather believe there is this magic technology that we don't use because it wouldn't be fair or some other imagined bullshit.

[–] Bwaz@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

A red flag of undereducated people in authority over anything is if they think polygraphs indicate anything about whether someone is lying. It's entirely fraudulent pseudo-science.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago

Gosh he seemed so competent and professional though.

[–] RedditIsDeddit@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago

is the Russian asset mad that he sucks at his job?

[–] TomMasz@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Cut him some slack, he's doing as well as can be expected given his blood alcohol content.

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 6 points 2 days ago

A little hair of the dog'll fix him right up.

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 days ago

Nice job Mr. WhiskeyLeaks.

[–] SlippiHUD@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] samus12345@lemm.ee 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yes, but it really hurt her feelings.

[–] SlippiHUD@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

The screaming america map in the background is chefs kiss