You're not doing anyone any good by talking about the stuff you're supposed to not be watching.
0 Members and 19 Guests are viewing this topic.
https://twitter.com/WSDAgov/status/1286793892713570304
President Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer was released Friday after a judge ruled that he had been sent back to prison from home confinement as retaliation for his plan to release a book critical of Trump before November’s election.Michael Cohen walked out of a federal prison in New York on Friday afternoon, his lawyer Danya Perry told The Associated Press, a day after U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein ruled that his First Amendment rights were violated when he was ordered back to prison on July 9.Probation authorities said Cohen was sent back to prison because he refused to sign a form banning him from publishing the book or communicating with the media or public, Hellerstein said during a telephone conference.“Mr. Cohen is extremely gratified that the court upheld his fundamental constitutional right to speak freely and publicly,” his lawyer said in a statement on Friday following his release.
Free seeds man
https://twitter.com/aclu/status/1285408390106304512QuotePresident Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer was released Friday after a judge ruled that he had been sent back to prison from home confinement as retaliation for his plan to release a book critical of Trump before November’s election.Michael Cohen walked out of a federal prison in New York on Friday afternoon, his lawyer Danya Perry told The Associated Press, a day after U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein ruled that his First Amendment rights were violated when he was ordered back to prison on July 9.Probation authorities said Cohen was sent back to prison because he refused to sign a form banning him from publishing the book or communicating with the media or public, Hellerstein said during a telephone conference.“Mr. Cohen is extremely gratified that the court upheld his fundamental constitutional right to speak freely and publicly,” his lawyer said in a statement on Friday following his release.
(Image removed from quote.)Squatters
God why couldn't Rand Paul's neighbor have finished the job
It worked for Tina Fey's Sarah Palin for a little, but that's when there was novelty to Palin's word salad. We're five years into saturation coverage of Trump's schtick.edit: they should still have gone with Darrell Hammond instead of Baldwin, though.
Evil never dies
https://twitter.com/mattdelong/status/1287388915784089600
https://twitter.com/pttrn_ntgrty/status/1287284095286796291Carlin was always spitting the truth, people just didn't listen
70% wage replacement + expanding the moratorium on evictions is way better than just letting everything expire but it really pummels the lower classes in a way that has up to now been forestalled. In electoral terms I doubt there's much of a difference (everyone's still going to be pissed off) so it doesn't make sense politically except as a continuation of 2020's pupangu party incompetence
We're getting another check
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1287473390899560448Let them eat wear hats
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said Sunday that he would only vote for a U.S. Supreme Court nominee who believes the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which found access to abortion to be part of the constitutional right to privacy, was incorrectly decided.“I will vote only for those Supreme Court nominees who have explicitly acknowledged that Roe v. Wade is wrongly decided. By explicitly acknowledged, I mean on the record and before they were nominated,” Hawley, who has not yet had the opportunity to vote on a nominee to the high court since his election in 2018, told The Washington Post.“I don’t want private assurances from candidates. I don’t want to hear about their personal views, one way or another. I’m not looking for forecasts about how they may vote in the future or predications. I don’t want any of that,” he added. “I want to see on the record, as part of their record, that they have acknowledged in some forum that Roe v. Wade, as a legal matter, is wrongly decided.”
“This standard, for me, applies to Supreme Court nominees, whether they’re a sitting judge or whatever,” Hawley said. “If there is no indication in their record that at any time they have acknowledged that Roe was wrong at the time it was decided, then I’m not going to vote for them — and I don’t care who nominates them.”
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/509102-hawley-will-only-back-supreme-court-picks-that-have-said-roe-v-wade-wasQuoteSen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said Sunday that he would only vote for a U.S. Supreme Court nominee who believes the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which found access to abortion to be part of the constitutional right to privacy, was incorrectly decided.“I will vote only for those Supreme Court nominees who have explicitly acknowledged that Roe v. Wade is wrongly decided. By explicitly acknowledged, I mean on the record and before they were nominated,” Hawley, who has not yet had the opportunity to vote on a nominee to the high court since his election in 2018, told The Washington Post.“I don’t want private assurances from candidates. I don’t want to hear about their personal views, one way or another. I’m not looking for forecasts about how they may vote in the future or predications. I don’t want any of that,” he added. “I want to see on the record, as part of their record, that they have acknowledged in some forum that Roe v. Wade, as a legal matter, is wrongly decided.”Quote“This standard, for me, applies to Supreme Court nominees, whether they’re a sitting judge or whatever,” Hawley said. “If there is no indication in their record that at any time they have acknowledged that Roe was wrong at the time it was decided, then I’m not going to vote for them — and I don’t care who nominates them.”
I wonder why it's so difficult for certain types of white people to acknowledge this country really fucked over non-whites (particularly natives and blacks, but certainly not limited to those groups) for centuries and the impact is still evident in those communities and on society as a whole. Like....it's not hard to admit this nation before it was even a nation was designed by white people for white people and treated non-whites as inferior to detestable (and at times even whites who weren't the right kind of white, that's how deep it goes), even the greatest and most lionized in our mythology, and you know, that's pretty fucked up. They don't even have to give anything up to acknowledge and admit that. Saying something like "our founding fathers were fucked up too, but we can and must be better" doesn't mean blacks and natives get the deed to your house. White people don't even have to give up their privilege that admit to benefiting from white privilege. You still get to benefit from it the rest of your life, bro.
I wonder why it's so difficult for certain types of white people to acknowledge this country really fucked over non-whites (particularly natives and blacks, but certainly not limited to those groups) for centuries and the impact is still evident in those communities and on society as a whole. Like....it's not hard to admit
https://twitter.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1287803773423882243
agreed but that only kicks in 60 days later, so for the moment they're still getting boosted benefits
