260

Huh, I guess it's TACO Thursday unfortunately.

top 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] wirebeads@lemmy.ca 82 points 2 weeks ago

I hope BBC goes after him regardless. Bring it all out in the open on that loser rapist flesh rot

[-] Gork@sopuli.xyz 47 points 2 weeks ago
[-] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 25 points 2 weeks ago

He just couldn't grasp the BBC hard enough with his tiny ligitious hands.

[-] artyom@piefed.social 4 points 2 weeks ago

He can't handle anything because he's a moron. He probably had a dozen people tell him this was a bad idea.

As usual, the primary intention was never necessarily to win, only to intimidate.

[-] Monument@piefed.world 3 points 2 weeks ago
[-] YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 3 points 2 weeks ago

No, we're pretty sure he did grab him.

[-] CaptDust@sh.itjust.works 41 points 2 weeks ago

Ha no. Fuck that, he don't get taco out of this. Can BBC counter sue now? How do we get this discovery rolling?

[-] chaogomu@lemmy.world 59 points 2 weeks ago

BBC already filed a motion to oppose Trump's filing.

[-] DanceMomsSavedMe@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 weeks ago

The judge who gets to decide if motions stay or not was appointed by Trump during his first term.

[-] chaogomu@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago

A bunch of Trump appointed judges have ruled against him.

I'd put them as more lawful evil, and less likely to be fans of Trump's chaotic evil.

[-] Dultas@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

A surprise to be sure, but a welcome one.

[-] EvilHankVenture@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

I mean some lawful neutral judges might have slipped past as well. Trump is incompetent if they aren't actively doing good he may not realize they aren't evil.

[-] davidagain@lemmy.world 36 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

The telegraph is a Conservative Newspaper with a paywall. The Guardian is a more "centre left"/progressive newspaper (pro universal healthcare, facts matter etc) and it doesn't have a paywall, it has a cancelable "please consider subscribing".

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/06/trump-bbc-libel-lawsuit

[-] black0ut@pawb.social 3 points 2 weeks ago
[-] davidagain@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Sorry, I see that as a cookie wall, not a pay wall.

So yes, you have to accept cookies to read the article, but you don't have to give them your credit card info, and American sites just set cookies anyway.

You should use a browser that lets you burn tabs' cookies if you're worried about it. (That's what I do.) Alternatively get an ad blocker. My browser does its own ad blocking. It lets "sponsored" articles through, and similarly spoken ads included by the author in podcasts and videos but I don't see Google's ads on YouTube with it.

Browser fingerprinting is real and google and other advertisers track you whether you allow cookies or not.

[-] Sc00ter@lemmy.zip 34 points 2 weeks ago

"They caused me financial harm!"

"Ok show us your financials so we can determine how much."

"Oh... uh... you wanna see my totally legit financials?? Uhhh nevermind i take it back."

[-] ikidd@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 2 weeks ago

Oh, did the subpoenas suddenly get too real? Guess turning over his books on all his corruption schemes, I mean, businesses, wasn't to his taste.

[-] anon_8675309@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago
[-] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago

Very little legitimate income and lots of fraudulent income.

[-] nialv7@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago
[-] FluidBeef@quokk.au 6 points 2 weeks ago

BBC1, BBC2, BBC3, BBC4, BBC5, BBC6, BBC7, BBC Heaven!

[-] fizzle@quokk.au 5 points 2 weeks ago

Pathetic loser. What an embarrassment.

[-] lemmy_at_em@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago

What? I didn't know it was Taco Tuesday!

[-] eurodyne@piefed.world 4 points 2 weeks ago
[-] PRIMEcavitationfetishist@quokk.au 4 points 2 weeks ago

Should he have business?

this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2026
260 points (100.0% liked)

politics

30930 readers
1650 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