this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2026
793 points (99.4% liked)

politics

31201 readers
1555 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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Donald Trump’s use of his second presidency to grow his personal fortune has alarmed legal and ethics experts and congressional Democrats as he has reaped an “unprecedented” $2.2bn in 2025 revenues by amassing big cryptocurrency holdings, benefiting from wealthy foreign interests, expanding his Truth Social business and more, while federal oversight of his actions has waned.

Trump last year raked in at least $1.4bn from his crypto ventures according to financial disclosure forms he filed in June. Simultaneously, about one million investors in a Trump crypto scheme suffered almost $3.8bn in losses as their volatile crypto holdings tanked in value.

Monetizing his presidency further this summer, Trump’s Truth Social media business is pushing a new scheme that offers wealthy buyers special early access to his posts for a fee of $100,000 a month, which top Democrats and public interest groups say pose serious conflict of interest and corruption issues.

This is some of why at least some Americans probably wish the Iran plot succeeded

Do you hear the people sing? Singing the song of angry men.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dudeface@lemmy.world 36 points 1 month ago (7 children)

How do any remaining supporters justify this?

[–] bunnybunny@lemmy.zip 37 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They don’t, they will just scream ‘fake news!’

[–] danc4498@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

They only trust the news that reports the things they want to hear.

I think there’s others that think the things he does for the country are good. And they take the good with the bad. Like lowering taxes (even though mostly the rich benefitted from that). Or whatever the fuck DOGE claimed to do. Or brain worm measles you.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com 30 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They believe that everyone does it, and that Trump is just better at it.

That's why if you point out something corrupt they point to someone else who the think did something corrupt, instead of saying both should be investigated and punished if actually guilty.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Exactly: "Hunter Biden and his laptop! And Hunter sold art, can you even believe it? Hillary's emails! Bill Clinton gets speaking fees, how is that even possible?"

[–] artyom@piefed.social 17 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Lol remember when Hillary's emails was this years-long scandal? And we just rolled over Signalgate in a couple weeks.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Was it even weeks? Also, how many magaferbrainz even know about Signalgate, I wonder?

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 month ago

The double standard is criminal

Yeah the problem I have with it is I can't tell how many of them are just excusing peoples crimes because others commit crimes or excusing their crimes because they would do the same thing if they could, and point to others doing potentially other crimes as a "well anyone would do it" type of shit. ,

[–] jaaake@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)

"Look at what a good businessman he is!"

"If it was actually illegal, he'd be in prison!"

"He's so savvy to not pay for things when payment is due. Why would you pay if you didn't have to?"

"He's made more money while president than any other president because he's the first non-politician president."

[–] Malyca@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 month ago

My personal favorite: "he donates his salary, that proves he isn't in it to make money. That's why we elected him!"

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 1 month ago

They don't have to.

They'll never hear about it, and will tell you it's fake when you show them

[–] superglue@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 month ago

The response you will get is "This is nothing new! Bill Clinton was worse..."

[–] newton@feddit.online 2 points 1 month ago

He's GOD ,so 💩

Easy, if you weren't such a mark and smart, you wouldn't have this happen to you. They fully believe these actions are worth merit, even salvation.