this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2023
383 points (98.0% liked)

politics

19097 readers
3063 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. 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.
  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
 

Special counsel Jack Smith took a meeting with attorneys representing former President Donald Trump earlier this year and reportedly sat in stone-cold silence while they pleaded with him not to indict their client.

Politico reports that ABC News reporter Jonathan Karl's new book on Trump's post-presidential life claims that Trump lawyers Trump attorneys Todd Blanche and John Lauro met with Smith's team over the summer and gave them a list of reasons why charging Trump with crimes related to his efforts to illegally remain in power would be a mistake.

According to Karl, Smith sat through through the presentation without saying a word.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

Subway? Naw. Jack smith has standards

I’m going to imagine a made-at-home Dagwood’s-esque beauty.

That, or he has an induction burner and he pan seared a giant porterhouse. Maybe fry off some country potatoes and asparagus.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

It’s reference to a weird news article a while back about him being seen getting subway for lunch

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

It was one of the first times (if not the first) Jack Smith was shown on camera since being named Special Prosecutor and not an older press photo. He was pointedly ignoring reporters' questions while he walked to the courthouse from the subway across the street, sandwich bag in hand.

He no doubt has great taste, but is also very practical. Potatos would get soggy if he prepared them in the morning, maybe induction cooktop wasn't available, and as a distance runner (or cyclist, I forget) he needed a little cardio, so down the street to the subway! 👍

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Well, Jules didn't really choose what was 'served'.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I am going with organic no added sugars peanut butter on whole wheat. His wife is concerned about the results of his last checkup and according to Jack there is only one person on earth you should be afraid of, Mrs. Smith.

So he sits there silently eating his nutritious lunch dreaming of a nice fried egg sandwich.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

That, or he has an induction burner and he pan seared a giant porterhouse. Maybe fry off some country potatoes and asparagus.

I can just see him holding eye contact as he slams a slab of meat onto a hot pan