unconsequential

Absolutely the Kennedys have skeletons in their closet. You’re referring to Rosemary his sister. She was actually institutionalized until her death in my home state. Another fun fact, Stalin’s daughter also died in my home state. We keep all the skeletons in our closet. We also have some of the most notorious serial killers ever.

I mean you’re absolutely wrong. Muckraker journalism and intelligence was very alive and well in the 60’s and decades following. It’s wild to say otherwise. They all knew and they knew a lot. No one was covering for him raping women or diddling kids. Flat out. Full stop. He wasn’t even known to be particularly deviant, just slutty.

His own socialite wife didn’t shy from making public wry remarks about her husband’s affairs and the public discussed it constantly. And these women’s accounts are very different in tone from the victims of Trump and the eye witness accounts of MEN surrounding Trump about his behavior.

A fuckboy vs a pedophile (potentially incestuous) and multiple-time accused predator are not the same and whataboutism around that is pretty wild. It is a very disingenuous comparison.

JFK was no saint, but he’s nothing to the level of Trump. And Epstein’s child trafficking ring is not the same as the 1950’s and 60’s mob’s prostitution activities. Some families didn’t even dabble in prostitution at all. And you can’t even compare them to today’s mob. Old families even into the 70’s and 80’s had certain standards of conduct. You can’t even start to compare them to modern global traffickers.

Hate on JFK all you want but pretending there’s some magical missing evidence on him is such a stretch and goes against a lot of evidence of his actual conduct. His haters are many and his life is thoroughly documented. Every juicy lead followed to exhaustion in his time and after.

Meanwhile Trump gives even his best buddies the heebie jeebies.

To my knowledge none of JFKs affairs were non-consensual, with minors, nor with non-compensated women.

Trump was friends with, and likely using his businesses to help, known child sex traffickers, raped children himself, pissed off his adult prostitutes and brags publicly and privately about his various sexual assaults.

I mean call JFK a whore but adult sex workers and consenting movie stars really aren’t comparable. And who gives a shit about the mob? Let’s not pretend morality aligns with the law. Not all puppies and rainbows but they’re not the same.

And I would say there was a lot of blackmail in the day. They certainly got MLK Jr. and all the JFK women talked, there were even hearings. His scandals weren’t exactly quiet. In fact they were rather well known.

“This is a worldwide problem. The people on the, you know, on the extremes, the Islamists, the radical Islamists, and their union with the ultra-progressives.” Netanyahu Sep 11 2025 remarks on Charlie Kirk’s death in Utah

What an interesting coincidence… even had mock WMD!! maybe now people won’t laugh at poor little Bibi so much. Thank goodness. /s

Good for Poland. Fuck YT.

He said Qatar remained committed to working with the United States and Egypt to reach a ceasefire... However, he said the Israeli strike… represented “an attack on the principle of mediation itself.”

“This attack can only be described as state terrorism, an approach pursued by the current extremist Israeli government, which flouts international law,” the minister said.

Sheikh Mohammed stressed the moment had come for consequences to Israel’s attacks in the wider Middle East. “It is time for the international community to stop applying double standards and punish Israel for all the crimes it has committed,” …

Meanwhile… leaders of Arab and Islamic states will warn that Israel's strike on Qatar and other "hostile acts" pose a threat to regional attempts to normalise relations and peace.

These actions threaten “everything that has been achieved on the path of normalising ties with Israel, including current agreements and future ones,” according to the draft.

…Arab League Secretary-General Ahmed Aboul Gheit separately criticised Israel and warned that “silence in the face of a crime ... paves the way for more crimes.”

How much more of a thrashing are these countries willing to take? It’s embarrassing they think they’ll be spared by playing ball with racists. In the end, they’re Arab non-Judeo-Christians, not white westerners, and no amount of money will change that for Netanyahu and Trump’s regimes. They perceive themselves to be better than Palestinians but they’re not. Especially not in the eyes of their “friendly” adversaries.

Yes, I think the bypassing of due process and putting the control in the hands of the State Department is the key issue here.

You’re right those are established legal terms inside the courts, but they want to step it outside of the courts, a place where protections and legal definitions are strong, and into an administrative close-doored process. Something that’s “ripe for abuse” as you put it.

the Secretary determines has knowingly aided, assisted, abetted, or otherwise provided material support to an organization the Secretary has designated as a foreign terrorist

So, while you’re right material support is defined, I think the concern is “aided, assisted, abetted” are rather vague. Is writing a social media post in support of an organization helping immigrants hide from ICE or in support of Palestinians “assisting” a FTO? Is sharing a link for donations?

Is just talking badly about the adversary, say Israel or ICE or US actions against alleged cartels boats, of an FTO enough to be “aiding and abetting” said organization? It kind of sounds like it’s up to Rubio to decide that. Then it’s on you to prove beyond a reasonable doubt in a hearing (not a criminal court case) that he and his cronies got it wrong. But meanwhile you can’t go anywhere while they figure out how else to screw you.

Also, the issue is moving the control all into the Secretary of State’s hands. He basically gets to decide what the interpretation is here and the mere accusation strips you of your rights.

And the question is, once they pass this one shifting power to the Secretary of State, who already decides what constitutes as an FTO, what other powers can they pass away from the courts?

Granted, there’s a clause for the freedom of speech, but you’re already moving the whole process away from the judicial branch where those protections are strongest. Someone can try and fight their charges but they’re going to need a lot of money and time.

I would say in a normal political climate your reasoning would stand but vagueness seems to have a purpose in this instance, why else amend it?

I wish they were “going rogue” but this feels pretty on brand. They repeatedly violate neighbors’ sovereignty and are on a campaign of regional expansionism currently. The US supports this fully and Qatar likes cash (above or below the table).

Israel also isn’t above strong arming allies and foes alike. They make it very clear they are above everyone and everything— a natural conclusion to a fascist supremacist state.

First, I am not a lawyer or really eligible to interpret this at all but here I go anyway…

• “(a) INELIGIBILITY.—
  • “(1) ISSUANCE.—Subject to subsection (b), the Secretary of State shall refuse to issue a passport to any individual who—
    • “(A) has been charged with or convicted of a violation of…

“has been charged with…” So, if I’m understanding this correctly, they can just ramp up some charges on you and keep you in legal limbo. They only have to accuse you and you could be locked in an endless cycle of appeals or pushed off court dates. Each one an opportunity to jail you for failure to appear etc.

• “(B) the Secretary determines has knowingly aided, assisted, abetted, or otherwise provided material support to an organization the Secretary has designated as a foreign terrorist organization pursuant to section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189).

So here is the list of current FTOs. Mind you they just sanctioned some Palestinian aid organizations for allegedly aiding some of the ones on the list. Does that mean you’ll be charged if you give to an NGO that may or may not be tangled up with this list? Do they even really need to make a strong case of the accusations to charge you and strip you of your passport?

And the question stands, what happens when they add an NGO Aid Organization to this list? I fear what’s happening in the UK to Palestine Action is just a tiny taste of what the US is willing to do. Your concerns about what could be added to that list under this administration is well founded in my opinion.

Also…

the Secretary determines has knowingly aided, assisted, abetted, or otherwise provided material support to an organization the Secretary has designated as a foreign terrorist

Does this bypass the court system? Who gets to call the shots on this? The Secretary of State? So Mr. Marco Rubio himself? He can just be like, “yeah, I think x organization is giving money to y organization and you gave money x so give me your passport.” And then all of the burden of proof lands on the person to try and fight Rubio and the executive branch… which… I mean they seem honest, right?

I focused on Palestine examples because I think that’s what they’re most after with this but they could use it for literally anything and I think the most concerning is the sneaky bypass of the courts upfront. You can fight it but it’s shifting the initial steps away from courts and to closed door determinations. As it stands now you have to be convicted of something and then and only then they might restrict your movement, but it’s largely a judicial decision not an executive one. This changes the starting point to…

Guilty until proven innocent.

And how many wounded officers?

Finished with the US. Off to destabilize the UK.