339
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2023
339 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19136 readers
3471 users here now
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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I'd suggest reading the article. It's here in the comments several times. The video of the hearing is well worth watching and pretty significant. That video is also here in the comments.
What's also significant is the extreme lack of evidence for any of the claims being made.
But this guy says another guy told him he knows guys that have worked on the UFOs! That's practically proof of aliens!
There's totes magotes aliens, bro. Swearsies.
It's true. I know a guy, who talked to a guy, who overheard a guy telling a dude he heard from a guy that it's true.
The hearing was never about presenting evidence. It is about creating a safe and transparent process for reporting unidentified flying objects. Then and only then could we have an actual discussion on anything further regarding the potential of extraterrestrials if credible evidence exists.
It was a guy chatting absolute shit, getting egged on by republican morons, that will amount to nothing.
TIL Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a "republican moron"
The republicans organised the whole thing, AOC was just there, doing her job. But yes, for her part in this I do view her as more of a moron than I used to.
Hey you're definitely ignorant of the hearing, and making a take based on a headline, but at least you're consistent.
lmao, sure thing pal.
If you'd watched the hearing you'd have heard both her line of questioning and her insistence on follow-up hearings, and wouldn't have played it off as "just doing her job"
Why even lie about such a simple thing?
lmao, bro I really don't care about this moronic bullshit.
That's why it's weird you'd lie.
lmao holy shit, the only one lying here is fuckin' Grusch. And if he's not lying, he's a gullible fucking idiot.
Huh
Yes a person specifically employed to find information who then reports said information is 100% the same as dumb shit you said on a playground.
Exactly the same.
Huh
You have definitely not seen the hearing and it is beyond weird that you'd pretend otherwise on the internet.
Huh
The evidence and witness info provided have the committee members calling for a select committee with subpoena powers.
When Grusch said "I can't say that here" that was never going to be the end of that discussion
Huh
A select committee is not "every committee by default." A select committee is a specific committee.
Also you may want to revisit the last sentence of paragraph 1.
And no, the entire hearing was credible.
Frankly if it's nothing, you don't have to give a shit. The members of Congress think it's something, and I agree with them.
Huh
Ohhh you wanna bet? What can we bet?
Loser posts a pic of them eating a pie! We can call it a "humble pie" bet.
Does Lemmy have remindmebot?
Fair warning tho: I'll consider "Congress uncovers public/private embezzlement scheme" as a win too.
Huh
I consider you signed up and am excited to watch you eat pie