12
   

Monitoring Biden and other Contemporary Events

 
 
snood
 
  4  
Reply Thu 16 Feb, 2023 07:29 am
@blatham,
It ain’t working like it’s supposed to. If the representatives did the bidding of the constituents, we could do things like enact nationwide universal background checks. Initiatives that have wide popular support, but always die in Congress because the representatives are doing the bidding of the highest bidders.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Thu 16 Feb, 2023 07:47 am
What we have to do is get to where it is one person...one vote.

The votes are so skewed in favor of the radical minority...that they get their way most of the time.

And unfortunately, their representatives do the worst job...because their representatives are attempting to appeal to the dumbest voters.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  4  
Reply Thu 16 Feb, 2023 07:48 am
@snood,
Donations by corporate special interests are a problem both sides of the Atlantic, but what makes America stand out is the sheer amount of glitz and glamour at functions, and the amount of advertising.

It takes a small fortune to run for office meaning politicians are always vulnerable to corporate finance.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Thu 16 Feb, 2023 08:41 am
@spunkybrewster,
Quote:
This world is never going to change until it is learned that "We the People" run this Country and get back to the basics.

Um, the "world" has not ratified the US constitution.

And what does "get back to the basics" even mean?

Quote:
We need to take back our Country and run it the way we want it run or forever lose our right to have a say in anything.

And how are we going to do that – by electing the "politicians" you're complaining about!

BTW, "country" is not a proper noun; it doesn't need to be capitalized. We learned that in grammar school.
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Feb, 2023 08:59 am
@hightor,
"We the People" is a majority term. There are far more democrats than republicans in the USA, by far! The republicans have learned and practiced minority rule from the beginnings of this country's history. In fact, the Constitution was bent to acknowledge this fact!

It has pleased me greatly that democrats have decided to become more involved in local and state elections. Also, to become more involved in the selection of Judges at all levels. Yes, "We the People" need to take over the reigns of America - again; but, not in the way Brewster is implying. However, as I have stipulated in this writing is the way Spunky intended, then, please excuse me - I would back him/her fully.
revelette1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Feb, 2023 09:45 am
Special counsel is locked in at least 8 secret court battles in Trump investigations
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Feb, 2023 11:01 am
@snood,
Sure. I was just pointing out that the fellow's grasp of political fundamentals is a tad weak.
0 Replies
 
hingehead
 
  4  
Reply Thu 16 Feb, 2023 05:02 pm
@BillW,
Hi Bill - just wondering you were specifically referring to when you wrote:

Quote:
The republicans have learned and practiced minority rule from the beginnings of this country's history. In fact, the Constitution was bent to acknowledge this fact!


My knowledge American history isn't superlative, but I do know there was no Republican party when the US constitution was written, so it must be about an amendment, after 1854 - and I couldn't see one that fitted https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Fri 17 Feb, 2023 05:01 am
Quote:
A legal filing today in the case of Dominion Voting Systems against the Fox News Corporation provides a window into the role of disinformation and money in the movement to deny that President Joe Biden won the 2020 presidential election.

Dominion Voting Systems is suing FNC for defamation after FNC personalities repeatedly claimed that the company’s voting machines had corrupted the final tallies in the 2020 election. The filing today shows that those same personalities didn’t believe what they were telling their viewers, and suggests that they made those groundless accusations because they worried their viewers were abandoning them to go to channels that told them what they wanted to hear: that Trump had won the election.

The quotes in the filing are eye-popping:

On November 10, 2020, Trump advisor Steven Bannon wrote to FNC personality Maria Bartiromo: “71 million voters will never accept Biden. This process is to destroy his presidency before it even starts; IF it even starts…. We either close on Trumps [sic] victory or del[e]gitimize Biden…. THE PLAN.”

FNC’s internal fact checks on November 13 and November 20 called accusations of irregularities in the voting “Incorrect” and said there was “not evidence of widespread fraud.”

On November 15, Laura Ingraham wrote to Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity: “Sidney Power is a bit nuts. Sorry, but she is.”

On November 16, Carlson wrote to his producer, Alex Pfeiffer, “Sidney Powell is lying.”

On November 19, FNC chair Rupert Murdoch wrote: “Really crazy stuff.”

Hannity later testified: “[T]hat whole narrative that Sidney was pushing. I did not believe it for one second.”

Fox Politics Editor Chris Stirewalt later testified, “[N]o reasonable person would have thought that,” when asked if it was true that Dominion rigged the election.

The filing claims that FNC peddled a false narrative of election fraud to its viewers because its pro-Trump audience had jumped ship after the network had been the first to call Arizona for Biden, and its ratings were plummeting as Trump loyalists jumped to Newsmax. “I’ve never seen a reaction like this, to any media company,” Carlson wrote to Suzanne Scott, chief executive officer of Fox News, on November 9. “Kills me to watch it.” On November 12, Hannity told Carlson and Ingraham, “In one week and one debate they destroyed a brand that took 25 years to build and the damage is incalculable.”

They went to “war footing” to “protect the brand.” For example, when FNC reporter Jacqui Heinrich accurately fact checked a Trump tweet, correcting him by saying that “top election infrastructure officials” said that “[t]here is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised,” Carlson told Hannity: “Please get her fired. Seriously…. What the f*ck? I’m actually shocked…. It needs to stop immediately, like tonight. It’s measurably hurting the company. The stock price is down. Not a joke.”

Heinrich deleted her tweet.

The filing says that not a single witness from FNC testified they believed any of the allegations they were making about Dominion. An FNC spokesperson today said, “Dominion has mischaracterized the record, cherry-picked quotes stripped of key context and spilled considerable ink on facts that are irrelevant under black-letter principles of defamation law.”

Today, part of the report of the special purpose grand jury investigating possible criminal interference in the 2020 election in Georgia was released under court order. It explained that 26 Fulton County, Georgia, residents, three of whom were alternates, made up the grand jury, and 16 of them made up a quorum, enabling the jury to conduct business. Beginning on June 1, 2022, the grand jury heard testimony from or involving 75 witnesses, almost all of it in person and under oath. It also heard testimony from investigators and got digital and physical media.

The grand jury found “by a unanimous vote that no widespread fraud took place in the Georgia 2022 presidential election.” It also reported that “[a] majority of the Grand Jury believes that perjury may have been committed by one or more witnesses testifying before it,” and it asked the district attorney to “seek appropriate indictments for such crimes where the evidence is compelling.”

Also today, in the wake of the inauspicious first hearing of the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government on November 9, a bipartisan group of 28 former officials who were part of the Church Committee wrote an open letter to Representative Jim Jordan (R-OH). Republicans have claimed Jordan’s new subcommittee is a modern version of the 1975–1976 committee, chaired by Senator Frank Church (D-ID), that discovered illegal wiretapping of U.S. citizens, CIA operations to assassinate foreign leaders, drug testing on government personnel, discrediting of civil rights and anti-war activists, and so on.

The letter’s authors reminded Jordan that while the chair of the committee had been a Democrat, its work had been carefully bipartisan, and its members investigated both Republican and Democratic administrations. They had rigorously reported facts in context, “resisting political temptations to assemble misleading mosaics from isolated tidbits.” They had also protected ongoing intelligence and law enforcement operations.

The committee’s 2,700 pages of exhaustive research were also bipartisan and resulted in the creation of Senate and House intelligence committees to provide congressional oversight of intelligence, as well as the establishment of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

The former staffers of the Church Committee advised Jordan to follow the model he claimed, remaining objective, grounding the committee’s findings in relevant evidence and applicable laws.” They urged the subcommittee to “consider in good faith whether [Trump attorney general William] Barr and [John] Durham,” whom Barr appointed to discredit the investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russian operatives, “themselves may have strayed into such weaponization.”

The Church Committee staffers warned Jordan that if he wanted to claim the mantle of that committee, he would need to move forward with the “same spirit of cooperation and bipartisanship.”

hcr
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 17 Feb, 2023 05:12 am
@snood,
snood wrote:
It ain't working like it's supposed to. If the representatives did the bidding of the constituents, we could do things like enact nationwide universal background checks. Initiatives that have wide popular support, but always die in Congress because the representatives are doing the bidding of the highest bidders.

Wrong. Your nutcase gun proposals are blocked because people oppose them. Ever heard of the NRA?
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Fri 17 Feb, 2023 05:22 am
@hingehead,
hingehead wrote:

Hi Bill - just wondering you were specifically referring to when you wrote:

Quote:
The republicans have learned and practiced minority rule from the beginnings of this country's history. In fact, the Constitution was bent to acknowledge this fact!


My knowledge American history isn't superlative, but I do know there was no Republican party when the US constitution was written, so it must be about an amendment, after 1854 - and I couldn't see one that fitted https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution



Yeah, that comment stopped me short when I read it. But almost immediately, I came to the conclusion that Bill had used an inappropriate choice of words to actually say, "Conservatives have learned and practiced minority rule from the beginnings of this country's history. In fact, the Constitution was bent to acknowledge this fact!"

I had no trouble understanding the comment after making the substitution...and agree with it in that form.
BillW
 
  3  
Reply Fri 17 Feb, 2023 08:24 am
@Frank Apisa,
Exactly! A modern day term for an age old belief. I'm not even sure they recognized "conservative" back then. "Tory" maybe more appropriate?
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  2  
Reply Fri 17 Feb, 2023 08:48 am
I freely admit that I have vice and I am not too apologetic about it. I love Anne Rice books, I re-read them a thousand and one times. So when republicans started with this book ban thing, I immediately thought, who knows where this will lead to? So I started buying old actual books (not kindle ones) of Anne Rice. Well, I better to get looking around for the rest of them if I still want to read them in the future. When I said that to my kids they thought I was getting carried away, well, maybe not.


Republicans take aim at risque jokes and romance novels with anti-sex bills
BillW
 
  2  
Reply Fri 17 Feb, 2023 08:55 am
@revelette1,
"Banning Books" - who would have "thunk" it in America?
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Fri 17 Feb, 2023 09:49 am
@BillW,
I think the last book banned over here was Lady Chatterley's Lover.

There was a celebrated obscenity trial, and it was allowed to go on sale.

This is a news report for when it first went on sale.



The people queuing up are all asked why they're buying it.

All goes well, the usual response being wanting to know what the fuss was all about, or something similar. That is until one old bloke appears, desperate to hide his face.

It's like a teenage boy's worst nightmare, not only being caught buying pornography, but having it filmed and shown, not once, but every time the subject of obscene publications comes up on the news.

He should have brazened it out and said he's buying it because he's almost forgotten was sex is and is hoping to have his first successful wank since the Boer War.

As it is he's immortalised as the Chatterley wanker.


Certain books are banned, ones that provide material support for terrorists, books on making pipe bombs for example.

Mame
 
  4  
Reply Fri 17 Feb, 2023 04:47 pm
@izzythepush,
That subhuman sub-group of Americans are getting crazier every day. Look at the NYT today.
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  2  
Reply Fri 17 Feb, 2023 04:55 pm
@izzythepush,
From Wikipedia:

Banning books is not a common practice in Canada at the current time.
This is a short list of books once challenged by various libraries in Canada.

The Hoax of the Twentieth Century[1]
Lethal Marriage[1]
Lolita[2]
The Naked and the Dead[3]
Mein Kampf
Cities of the Red Night
Peyton Place[2]
The Turner Diaries[1]
White Niggers of America[4]

Just checked at my library and three of them aren't available in my city. It doesn't mean they're banned, just not available. They don't have a lot of other authors' works, either, like Rex Stout, Catherine Cookson, etc, etc. Too old, I guess, or out of print. Can't always rely on Wikipedia!
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 17 Feb, 2023 05:07 pm
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:
Certain books are banned, ones that provide material support for terrorists, books on making pipe bombs for example.

You don't need a book to build a pipe bomb. They are incredibly simple devices. All you need to do is stop up both ends of the pipe and fill it with something that builds up pressure. When the pressure exceeds the strength of the pipe materials, boom.

I knew the UK treats their citizens as serfs. But if they are preventing people from even having basic scientific knowledge, things are worse than I thought over there.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Sat 18 Feb, 2023 02:06 am
This WP reporting is lengthy but critically important.

Quote:
Fox News feared losing viewers by airing truth about election, documents show

‘Everything at stake here,’ billionaire founder Rupert Murdoch wrote to a top executive in November 2020, part of a cache of internal communications revealed in a $1.6 billion defamation suit.

By Sarah Ellison, Paul Farhi and Jeremy Barr
February 17, 2023 at 7:22 p.m. EST

In the weeks after the 2020 election, Fox News faced an existential crisis. The top-rated cable news network had alienated its Donald Trump-loving viewers with an accurate election night prediction for Joe Biden and was facing a terrifying ratings slide, not to mention the ire of a once-loyal president.

Concern came from the very top: “Everything at stake here,” Rupert Murdoch messaged Fox News CEO Suzanne Scott.

The billionaire founder was eager to see the Republican candidate prevail in the coming Senate runoff in Georgia — “helping any way we can,” he wrote. But he also advised Scott to keep an eye on the uptick in ratings for a smaller, more conservative channel whose election skepticism suddenly seemed to be resonating with pro-Trump viewers.

Newly released messages show Fox executives fretting that month over an uncomfortable revelation: that if they told their audience the truth about the election, it could destroy their business model.

“Getting creamed by CNN!” Murdoch wrote to Scott on Nov. 8, a day after most news organizations declared that Biden had won. “Guess our viewers don’t want to watch it.”

What Fox’s loyal viewers wanted to watch — and what Fox News was willing to do to keep them — emerged this week as a central question in a $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit brought against the network by Dominion Voting Systems.

A stunning cache of internal correspondence and deposition testimony obtained by the software company and made public on Thursday in a Delaware court filing showed high-level Fox executives and on-air stars privately agonizing over the wild and false claims of a stolen election that Trump allies promoted on Fox airwaves in the weeks after the 2020 election. “Sidney Powell is lying,” prime-time star Tucker Carlson wrote to his producer about a Trump lawyer who had appeared on Fox and spewed baseless accusations. “There is NO evidence of fraud,” anchor Bret Baier wrote to one of his bosses.

The plaintiff’s lawyers argue that such messages prove Fox brass knew the claims that Dominion had “flipped” votes from Trump to Biden were untrue — but “spread and endorsed” them anyway.

But the Dominion filing also lends ammunition to their long-held argument: that Fox allowed the false claims to air because it was fearful of losing viewers to Newsmax, an ever more pro-Trump news channel.

“The texts and emails support [Dominion’s] claim that Fox was more concerned about its audience and market share than the truth concerning the 2020 presidential election,” said Timothy Zick, a professor at William & Mary Law School who specializes in the First Amendment and called the breadth of the internal communications “extraordinary.”

In a statement, a Fox spokesperson said: “There will be a lot of noise and confusion generated by Dominion and their opportunistic private equity owners, but the core of this case remains about freedom of the press and freedom of speech, which are fundamental rights afforded by the Constitution and protected by New York Times v. Sullivan.”

Some exchanges showed Fox executives raising an alarm when journalists attempted to counter false claims from the Trump team.

On a Nov. 9 broadcast, news anchor Neil Cavuto cut away from a live briefing by White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany, warning viewers that she was making unsubstantiated claims of fraud. “Whoa, whoa, whoa,” he said on air. “Unless she has more details to back that up, I can’t in good countenance continue to show this.”

Executives took notice: Cavuto’s actions were communicated to senior leadership at parent company Fox Corp. as a “Brand Threat.”

Meanwhile, they kept a close eye on ratings.

“The Newsmax surge is a bit troubling — truly is an alternative universe when you watch, but it can’t be ignored,” one message from Fox News President Jay Wallace to his CEO read. “Trying to get everyone to comprehend we are on war footing.”

Later that month, Fox broadcast the entirety of a news conference featuring Powell and fellow Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani outlining their unsubstantiated case for election fraud — a performance that Murdoch dubbed “really crazy stuff,” in an email, “and damaging.”

But when Fox host Dana Perino speculated that such claims could draw a lawsuit from Dominion, Scott expressed concern in an email, saying on-air personalities couldn’t afford to “give the crazies an inch right now … they are looking for and blowing up all appearances of disrespect to the audience.”

In another message, Scott noted, “The audience feels like we crapped on [them] and we have damaged their trust and belief in us … We can fix this but we cannot smirk at our viewers any longer.”

The ratings concerns turned out to be warranted. In January 2021, for the first time in 20 years, the cable network reported monthly ratings that fell behind both of its main cable news competitors, CNN and MSNBC.

As Trump refused to let up on his election fraud claims, Murdoch suggested that Fox might have the clout to push back. In early January 2021, he relayed in a message to Scott a suggestion that their three biggest prime-time stars — Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham — “should independently or together say something like ‘the election is over and Joe Biden won.’” Murdoch passed on the suggestion that such a move “would go a long way to stop the Trump myth that the election stolen.”

But such a coordinated announcement never came. In forwarding his email to her staff, Scott added, “we need to be careful about using the shows and p---ing off the viewers.”

Within Fox, the messages show, many worried that the network had been hurt by two key incidents: a debate in which some conservatives believed Fox anchor Chris Wallace lobbed unfair questions to Trump; and Fox’s election night prediction that Biden would win the hotly contested state of Arizona.

Hannity wrote to Carlson and Ingraham on Nov. 12 that the combination “destroyed a brand that took 25 years to build and the damage is incalculable.”

“It’s vandalism,” Carlson responded.

In a message to a colleague, Scott complained that Bill Sammon, then the head of the network’s Washington bureau, did not understand “the impact to the brand and the arrogance in calling AZ.” In a separate message, to Fox Corp. executive chair and CEO Lachlan Murdoch, she wrote that: “Viewers going through the 5 stages of grief. It’s a question of trust — the AZ [call] was damaging but we will highlight our stars and plant flags letting the viewers know we hear them and respect them.”

“Yes,” Murdoch replied. “But needs constant rebuilding without any missteps.


In another message, Ron Mitchell, the network executive in charge of prime-time programming and analytics, warned that Newsmax’s brand of “conspiratorial reporting might be exactly what the disgruntled [Fox News Channel] viewer is looking for.” As a result, he added, Fox should not “ever give viewers a reason to turn us off. Every topic and guest must perform.”

Mitchell continued: “‘No unforced errors’ in content — example: Abruptly turning away from a Trump campaign news conference.”
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  -3  
Reply Sat 18 Feb, 2023 04:29 am
Republican Scooter Libby is Kamala Harris’ Chief of Staff.

Of course, he is.

Because Kamala and Joe are Republicans.

And everyone here who supports them are Scooter Libby Republicans.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.17 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 12:14:25