272

Wow...this is bonkers.

top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] celsiustimeline@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 21 hours ago

That's rich, coming from the guy who could have stopped minors from being sexually assaulted but chose not to and actively covered it up.

[-] undercrust@lemmy.ca 81 points 1 day ago

Jim Jordan is absolute human trash. The living embodiment of a loose bowel movement.

Lina Khan seems fucking awesome though, damn.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago

The lawmakers added that while the FTC is in charge of enforcing the 1974 Equal Credit Opportunity Act, “that authority to challenge conduct under the ECOA does not accordingly permit the FTC to separately challenge conduct as 'unfair discrimination' pursuant to the FTC Act.”

As the late Antonin Scalia (may he roast in piss) would have said: pure applesauce.

[-] evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world 4 points 22 hours ago

I'm trying to wrap my head around the logic, and I just can't get it to connect. Are they trying to say that although the ECOA gives them the responsibility, it doesn't give them the power? Like paying someone to mow your lawn, and then saying they aren't allowed on your property?

Or are they saying that the ECOA gives the FTC the power to challenge companies that discriminate by not giving credit to minorities, but not the power to challenge companies that discriminate by giving bad credit terms to minorities?

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago

are they saying that the ECOA gives the FTC the power to challenge companies that discriminate by not giving credit to minorities, but not the power to challenge companies that discriminate by giving bad credit terms to minorities?

Probably, yeah. It's clear that they rely on their voters not paying attention to what they say and do.

The corporations and industries they ACTUALLY work for don't care as long as they avoid or at least delay accountability for them, after all, so they have no incentive to even TRY to make sense.

[-] frickineh@lemmy.world 38 points 1 day ago

"You have to enforce a law that says creditors can't discriminate, but you can't talk about discrimination." Sure, Gym. How about shut the fuck up for once in your life. We already know you're a tire fire in human form, you don't have to keep proving it.

[-] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

Gym Jordan trying to hide someone fucking over people with less power? That's suuuuuuuuuuuper new and different for him.

[-] toiletobserver@lemmy.world 38 points 1 day ago

Shut your mouth, gym

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago

Somebody investigate bribes made by stupid-car-dealer-asshole. I'm sure there's something.... "interesting" there.

[-] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Aw his little pouty bitch face.

this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2024
272 points (99.6% liked)

politics

19022 readers
3834 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.
  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 1 year ago
MODERATORS