Martell Spy Posted March 1, 2023 Share Posted March 1, 2023 Opinion | Rupert Murdoch Rides the Trump Tiger — and Gets Eaten The Dominion lawsuit has exposed the powerlessness of the Fox News titan. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/03/01/rupert-murdoch-fox-trump-voting-00084839 Quote Far from being a media superpower, as his foes would describe him, Murdoch comes off as trapped by the craven choices he made to serve as Trump’s supplicant and protector. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteGabriel Posted March 1, 2023 Share Posted March 1, 2023 4 hours ago, Martell Spy said: Opinion | Rupert Murdoch Rides the Trump Tiger — and Gets Eaten The Dominion lawsuit has exposed the powerlessness of the Fox News titan. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/03/01/rupert-murdoch-fox-trump-voting-00084839 Remember when Fox News debased themselves by using "fact checkers" to try to counteract Trump's stream of bullshit in the 2016 primaries? Ah, such innocent times, when Murdoch's barrel still had a bottom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted March 1, 2023 Author Share Posted March 1, 2023 AG: White Supremacists Are The ‘Most Dangerous and Most Lethal’ Domestic Terrorists https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/ag-white-supremacists-are-the-most-dangerous-and-most-lethal-domestic-terrorists Quote Attorney General Merrick Garland said on Wednesday that white supremacists are currently the “most dangerous and most lethal” domestic terror group in the United States, an assessment that falls in line with recent reports on the threat that far-right extremists present. During the hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Garland braced questions on multiple topics, as Republicans on the panel seized the opportunity to elevate right-wing criticism of the DOJ. Questions were focused on, among other things, the Justice Department’s investigation(s) into former president Donald Trump, the rising fentanyl crisis, Fox News’ grievances about the U.S.-Mexico border, and attacks on pregnancy centers and abortion clinics. After Garland was accused by Republicans of “selective prosecution on abortion issues,” Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI) stepped in to defend the AG, arguing that anti-abortion extremists have been responsible for “11 murders, 26 attempted murders, 42 bombings, 194 arsons, and thousands of other criminal incidents” since 1977. She then asked Garland whether the DOJ’s prosecutorial focus should be on “the most violent acts.” To this, the attorney general agreed, noting that the Justice Department prosecutes violent acts “without respect to ideology.” The Hawaii Democrat then presented two recent reports on domestic terrorism. The first, released on Nov. 16 by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, stated that far-right extremism has become an active threat to national security. “This increase in domestic terror attacks has been predominantly perpetrated by white supremacist and anti-government extremist individuals and groups,” the report states. The second, released by the Department of Homeland Security about two weeks later, said that the U.S. “remains in a heightened threat environment,” and lists churches, the LGBTQ community, schools, and racial and religious minorities as possible targets for extremist violence. Garland agreed with these assessments. “…[R]acially-motivated violent extremists as a group are the most dangerous of the domestic violent extremist groups,” he told the senator, “and within that the white supremacists are the most dangerous and most lethal.” This falls in line with another recent report put out by the Anti-Defamation League’s Center on Extremism, which found that right-wing extremists committed every ideologically-driven mass killing in the U.S. throughout 2022. .... OK Garland. So then, when are you going to indict their boss(es)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted March 1, 2023 Author Share Posted March 1, 2023 https://dailymontanan.com/2023/02/27/bill-banning-vaccinated-blood-donations-would-decimate-blood-supply-opponents-say/ Bill text; it concerns more than just blood -- whole blood, plasma, blood products, blood derivatives, human tissue, organs, or bones. Sections 2-3 worth noting. https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2023/billpdf/HB0645.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A True Kaniggit Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 So President Biden will finally do his first veto? Yay! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 1 hour ago, Zorral said: https://dailymontanan.com/2023/02/27/bill-banning-vaccinated-blood-donations-would-decimate-blood-supply-opponents-say/ Bill text; it concerns more than just blood -- whole blood, plasma, blood products, blood derivatives, human tissue, organs, or bones. Sections 2-3 worth noting. https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2023/billpdf/HB0645.pdf My lord, I thought my SiL was demented… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 50 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said: My lord, I thought my SiL was demented… It's rather amazing how self-destructive Republicans are willing to be to fight culture wars, especially when the evidence across the board goes against what they're advocating for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 4 hours ago, DanteGabriel said: Remember when Fox News debased themselves by using "fact checkers" to try to counteract Trump's stream of bullshit in the 2016 primaries? Ah, such innocent times, when Murdoch's barrel still had a bottom. Yeah, what was he doing, trying to support Jeb Bush at the time? He seems to pick a lot of losers, he also supported Romney. 2 hours ago, A True Kaniggit said: So President Biden will finally do his first veto? Yay! Possibly two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ants Posted March 3, 2023 Share Posted March 3, 2023 On 3/2/2023 at 1:34 PM, Martell Spy said: Yeah, what was he doing, trying to support Jeb Bush at the time? He seems to pick a lot of losers, he also supported Romney. Fox was initially for anyone who was against Trump. They switched when it was hurting them with viewers. What this has really shown is that the lunatics are in charge of the asylum. Although its clear from Rupert's testimony and emails (as if it ever wasn't) they push push push the right, but it's also clear that nowadays they can only influence and not control the narrative. And if the base wants to believe X, they cater to that regardless. They're less of a news provider than a right leaning circle jerk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted March 3, 2023 Share Posted March 3, 2023 16 minutes ago, ants said: Fox was initially for anyone who was against Trump. They switched when it was hurting them with viewers. What this has really shown is that the lunatics are in charge of the asylum. Although its clear from Rupert's testimony and emails (as if it ever wasn't) they push push push the right, but it's also clear that nowadays they can only influence and not control the narrative. And if the base wants to believe X, they cater to that regardless. They're less of a news provider than a right leaning circle jerk. They haven't been a news organization for decades. Perhaps they never were outside of a few small pockets. It needs to be stated unequivocally and in no uncertain terms, over and over and over again that Rupert Murdoch is one of the worst human beings to have ever lived, a traitor to multiple countries and responsible for probably an incalculable amount of deaths and suffering. I hope he drops dead tomorrow and no amount of punishment can ever balance out the atrocities he's committed against humanity. The only way a sliver of justice can be extracted from this is if he spends the rest of his natural life, with the best medical care provided to him, sitting in solitude forced to watch MSNBC, CNN (and his international rivals, sorry for not knowing all of them) 24 hours a day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted March 3, 2023 Share Posted March 3, 2023 52 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: They haven't been a news organization for decades. Perhaps they never were outside of a few small pockets. It needs to be stated unequivocally and in no uncertain terms, over and over and over again that Rupert Murdoch is one of the worst human beings to have ever lived, a traitor to multiple countries and responsible for probably an incalculable amount of deaths and suffering. I hope he drops dead tomorrow and no amount of punishment can ever balance out the atrocities he's committed against humanity. The only way a sliver of justice can be extracted from this is if he spends the rest of his natural life, with the best medical care provided to him, sitting in solitude forced to watch MSNBC, CNN (and his international rivals, sorry for not knowing all of them) 24 hours a day. And the Council of Nines said that I was cruel and unusual... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted March 3, 2023 Share Posted March 3, 2023 20 minutes ago, Secretary of Eumenes said: And the Council of Nines said that I was cruel and unusual... Fine, let him play pickleball, shuffleboard or bingo for an hour a day, what have you, but the screen still has to be on at all times, broadcasting for everyone to see how pathetic he is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted March 3, 2023 Share Posted March 3, 2023 4 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: Fine, let him play pickleball, shuffleboard or bingo for an hour a day, what have you, but the screen still has to be on at all times, broadcasting for everyone to see how pathetic he is. Goddammit! Just my luck that I finally created the perfect instrument of henchman-ey destruction at the same time I turn Good. What kinda universe is this??? booooooo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted March 3, 2023 Share Posted March 3, 2023 Under “Citizens United” the US Supreme Court held that a Corporation using money to support a particular cadidate is a flow through of its shareholder’s free speech rights and as such then existing limits on such corporate spending violated the shareholders rights to free speech. I heard about efforts to ban what is called “ESG Investing” or considering broader implications than mere profit in investing. If using money to support political candidates is speech why wouldn’t using your money to invest… ethically… also not be free speech? As such how could any Government ban “ESG Investing” without restricting free Speech? https://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonytellez/2023/02/28/what-is-esg-investing-and-why-republicans-are-trying-to-ban-it-from-retirement-funds/amp/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted March 3, 2023 Share Posted March 3, 2023 11 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Under “Citizens United” the US Supreme Court held that a Corporation using money to support a particular cadidate is a flow through of its shareholder’s free speech rights and as such then existing limits on such corporate spending violated the shareholders rights to free speech. I heard about efforts to ban what is called “ESG Investing” or considering broader implications than mere profit in investing. If using money to support political candidates is speech why wouldn’t using your money to invest… ethically… also not be free speech? As such how could any Government ban “ESG Investing” without restricting free Speech? https://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonytellez/2023/02/28/what-is-esg-investing-and-why-republicans-are-trying-to-ban-it-from-retirement-funds/amp/ I believe the distinction is that it's not your money. Anyone can invest their own money in anything, including a green energy ETF or whatever. But traditional retirement funds are what you invest in if you what you care about is maximizing your investment. And for a long time the managers of such funds were required to maximize returns to their best ability; a rules which was originally in place to prevent managers from basically just directing funds to things they had their own stake in. Now the Feds have passed a rule saying fund managers can also consider ESG factors when investing peoples' funds, and Republicans are big mad. Personally, I still think its bullshit. If someone doesn't want their money going into ESG investing they could always find a fund that explicitly promises not to do it. That's what the free market is all about after all. But it isn't quite as cut-and-dry as blocking people from spending their own money how they want; Republicans want to block how fund managers are using other people's money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted March 3, 2023 Share Posted March 3, 2023 1 hour ago, Fez said: I believe the distinction is that it's not your money. Anyone can invest their own money in anything, including a green energy ETF or whatever. But traditional retirement funds are what you invest in if you what you care about is maximizing your investment. And for a long time the managers of such funds were required to maximize returns to their best ability; a rules which was originally in place to prevent managers from basically just directing funds to things they had their own stake in. Now the Feds have passed a rule saying fund managers can also consider ESG factors when investing peoples' funds, and Republicans are big mad. Personally, I still think its bullshit. If someone doesn't want their money going into ESG investing they could always find a fund that explicitly promises not to do it. That's what the free market is all about after all. But it isn't quite as cut-and-dry as blocking people from spending their own money how they want; Republicans want to block how fund managers are using other people's money. But that’s my point. The SCOTUS says that the shareholder’s free speech rights flow through to the corporation they own. Why wouldn’t the same be true of Investors in ESG Funds… more so… because they are buying into ESG Funds specifically because they are choosing elements other than mere profit… CU… seems to be a clear analogy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derfel Cadarn Posted March 4, 2023 Share Posted March 4, 2023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted March 4, 2023 Author Share Posted March 4, 2023 Here is censorship of free speech -- criminalization of free speech -- in reality, up close and personal. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/04/opinion/desantis-florida-free-speech-bill.html Quote A homeowner gets angry at a county commission over a zoning dispute and writes a Facebook post accusing a local buildings official of being in the pocket of developers. A right-wing broadcaster criticizing border policies accuses the secretary of homeland security of being a traitor. A parent upset about the removal of a gay-themed book from library shelves goes to a school board meeting and calls the board chair a bigot and a homophobe. All three are examples of Americans engaging in clamorous but perfectly legal speech about public figures that is broadly protected by the Constitution. The Supreme Court, in a case that dates back nearly 60 years, ruled that even if that speech might be damaging or include errors, it should generally be protected against claims of libel and slander. All three would lose that protection — and be subject to ruinous defamation lawsuits — under a bill that is moving through the Florida House and is based on longstanding goals of Gov. Ron DeSantis. [See here: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/10/business/media/ron-desantis-media-journalists.html ] The bill represents a dangerous threat to free expression in the United States, not only for the news media, but for all Americans, whatever their political beliefs. There’s still time for Florida lawmakers to reject this crude pandering and ensure that their constituents retain the right to free speech. “This isn’t just a press issue,” said Bobby Block, executive director of Florida’s First Amendment Foundation. “This is a death-to-public-discourse bill. Everyone, even conservatives, would have to second-guess themselves whenever they open their mouths to speak or sit in front of a keyboard.” The bill is an explicit effort to eviscerate a 1964 Supreme Court decision, The New York Times Company v. Sullivan. This bulwark of First Amendment law requires public figures to prove a news organization engaged in what the court called “actual malice” to win a defamation case. By preventing lawsuits based on unintentional mistakes, the decision freed news organizations to pursue vigorous reporting about public officials without fear of paying damages. The decision has even been applied by lower courts to bloggers and other speakers who make allegations about public figures. .... Not to mention that in FL it is essentially criminal to mention the history of slavery in the USA, even -- nay, particularly! -- in the context of history education and libraries, or even the word, 'gay.' How canceling is this anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted March 4, 2023 Share Posted March 4, 2023 The Trump world-Fox News war gets nasty Relations have been rocky before. But the punches being thrown now are particularly aggressive. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/03/03/the-trump-world-fox-news-war-gets-nasty-00085506 Quote Ten minutes in, Bannon went after the network again, rousing the audience to their feet as he called out Fox for not having Trump on since he announced his campaign in November. He called out Rupert Murdoch, the News Corp. founder who sits atop the media empire. “Murdoch, you’ve deemed Trump’s not going to be president,” Bannon continued as the crowd roared with applause. “But we deem that you’re not going to have a network, because we’re going to fight you every step of the way.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DireWolfSpirit Posted March 4, 2023 Share Posted March 4, 2023 On 3/2/2023 at 10:07 PM, Tywin et al. said: They haven't been a news organization for decades. Perhaps they never were outside of a few small pockets. It needs to be stated unequivocally and in no uncertain terms, over and over and over again that Rupert Murdoch is one of the worst human beings to have ever lived, a traitor to multiple countries and responsible for probably an incalculable amount of deaths and suffering. I hope he drops dead tomorrow and no amount of punishment can ever balance out the atrocities he's committed against humanity. The only way a sliver of justice can be extracted from this is if he spends the rest of his natural life, with the best medical care provided to him, sitting in solitude forced to watch MSNBC, CNN (and his international rivals, sorry for not knowing all of them) 24 hours a day. He should be anchor dragged back to Australia and buried under a reef. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.