298
Lots of shit gets published without consent from the subjects. That’s how news works. If we had to get consent from the subjects on everything, it’d be propaganda.
it’d be propaganda
Which is exactly what they want. Make it illegal to publish anything about any GOP politician without their permission.
I want this to go to court so the defendant can cite the precedential case Finders v. Keepers
Tuberville is the dumbest person in Congress, and that's a very tight race since Gohmert retired.
Remember when Bob Menendez hid their ill-begotten gold bars from Egypt in their jacket embroidered with the name "Bob Menendez"...
How about arrest his ass for voting in Florida when he lived in Alabama...shut that ignorant asshole up
I dislike this turd as much as the next guy but honestly, the newspaper shouldn't have published and it's fair enough he sent a cease and desist notice.
If it were AOC's private information being published in this way you'd be outraged.
A cease and desist says stop fucking around or I'll take legal action.
Everyone has emailed the wrong thing to the wrong person before.
If someone sends you something by mistake then if you're unable to disregard it completely then the bare minimum standard is to contact them or their representative and ensure they're aware.
Have you seen how conservative propaganda handled Hunter Biden (not a public figure or politician) and the private files on his private computer?
This right here. There are no rules for them.
If AOC had emailed her tax info out you know damn well that Fox, Newsmax and the rest of the GOP propaganda machine would not have hesitated to publish every detail and it would be her own damned fault. The idea that the Republicans would ever abide by anything resembling a political golden rule is credulous at best and it is one of the things that has created the right wing control of all three branches of government .
Tuberville is the very incarnation of stupid, created his own problem and deserves every bit of it. Now he's going to learn about the Streisand Effect and he'll deserve that too.
There is no legal action to be taken - the cease and desist is an empty threat. If the tax returns were sent by him to the newspaper, they can report on them.
An equivalent story is the guy from the Atlantic being added to the signal group chat.
Many politicians voluntarily release their tax returns. Doing so accidentally is obviously not great, but threatening legal action to prevent reporting on them is a red flag.
Nah, fuck that. If you are stupid enough to send sensitive information to the literal body who's job it is to post information, then this is how it works.
If it were AOC, I would absolutely believe they should be posted. I think it should be required that every individual that holds an elected position in government should be required to share this information publicly. I extra agree with it for people that are the shittiest.
Tuberville is a cunt, and he should have not been an idiot. Cease and desist means fuck all when someone voluntarily hands over information.
Hard disagree. Politicians represent the people, their finances - including investments - should be transparent and immediately available.
That is the only way to ensure corruption is reduced.
Yep. Politicians' (and candidates') tax returns should be public ... and so should ALL their financial information as well. We should be looking at any politician's bank statements and stock transactions and credit card transactions and utility bills anytime we want, available instantly, as soon as they happen. They should be required to report how much cash is in their wallet on a daily basis. We should be able to tell whether or not they're subscribed to Netflix and where they stopped for breakfast this morning. And if you don't want that huge invasion of privacy: no problem -- just don't run for office.
No, that's fucking stupid. People, even politicians should be allowed a level of privacy. It doesn't matter to you at all if they have netflix, and if it does, go see a therapist.
Tax statements and any trade information should absolutely be public knowledge. Monitoring someone's cash and credit card statements is some predator level shit.
You’re acting like becoming a politician isn’t an active choice.
Just because it's a choice doesn't mean every single detail of their lives needs to be public. Why should you or the public care at all if an elected official has Netflix? Why does it matter if they have $500 cash in their wallet? Do you need to know every time they take a shit and what time they go to sleep? No. None of that is information that matters at all.
There absolutely needs to be more transparency, but asking for literally everything is fucking dumb.
People, even politicians should be allowed a level of privacy.
No, not politicians. They should have to sacrifice their privacy in return for power. Because the risk of corruption is too high. Leave nowhere for it to hide, nowhere at all.
Yes, corruption via their Netflix subscription. Dumb take.
You also want cameras in their bathrooms so they aren't making secret deals while they shit? Gotta cover all your creepy bases.
Why collect taxes either? Before you know it they’ll just take 100% of your paycheck!
You see how stupid the slippery slope fallacy is as a rhetorical device?
What does this have to do at all with what I said? There are things that should be transparent, and others that don't matter. If someone has Netflix, that doesn't matter. This isn't about slippery slopes, it's about common sense privacy that every person is entitled to.
Just in case, because you keep referencing it, the listing that we should be able to peek in their wallet and whether they have Netflix are likely illustrative of the granularity of inspection rather than actual, strict metrics for checking a politician's financial transparency.
As an actually metric, I would say that politicians should not be able to move funds larger than a $1000 without reporting on it.
That's fair. I have stated and agree that there needs transparency. The original comment I responded to was very specific about Netflix and cash in wallets. After I said no, they followed up and clarified that that's exactly what they meant.
I'm not being hyperbolic. I'm directly responding to those statements, because that sort of monitoring is insane.
A cease and desist says stop fucking around or I’ll take legal action.
Take what legal action? The news outlet violated no laws here.
this post was submitted on 09 Jun 2026
298 points (100.0% liked)
politics
30038 readers
2103 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS