acargitz

That’s a bad headline. Watch his video, he makes a much more nuanced argument.

I thought your laws for example had standards about news vs entertainment, which is why the idiots at Fox keep getting away with misinformation.

There should be a law for owners of media being kept at arm’s length.

What’s his beef with The Onion? Why is he trying to run them out of business?

So Harris should pander better. Otherwise she’s clearly not taking the seriousness of a Trump win seriously enough. Pander better.

I don’t understand why it is taken for granted that if Stein wasn’t a candidate the people who vote for her would be voting for the Democrats instead. Just as likely they would not vote at all or vote for some other protest candidate.

I wonder what excuse conservatives in the west are going to use for climate inaction now that the “it doesn’t matter what we do, China has more emissions” line is going to become irrelevant.

I’ve heard that the young’uns call “ohio” things that are weird and cringey.

Does that include Israeli Americans? Because I don’t think it does.

Edit: unless they happen to be you know left wing ones protesting apartheid. Then they’re fair game.

Are you actually claiming there was no media coverage of the murdered hostages?

There is a very good argument that the role of non mainstream news sources, like the Intercept, it to shed light on the news that mainstream media doesn’t raise.

If the CNN was blasting 24 hours the news about this American being shot, I’m pretty sure the Intercept would not bother either.

Harris needs to bring this up in the debate. Have him confess to breaking the Logan Act on live TV. Show us those prosecutor chops!

Only one person cares about these ratings, and he hates this.

And then called him a two bit union buster. She was on fire 🔥🔥🔥

I would think that it is more likely for Netanyahu to do something desperately stupid before the US election to try to change the conversation. Like start a war with Iran as the October surprise…

Yes, I’ve argued elsewhere that the Americans need to relearn federalism. Canada, Switzerland, the EU, all have more modern and better functioning federal or federal-like institutions (with their own problems of course, but nowhere near as broken as in the US). Hell, India has a mandatory retirement age for supreme court justices.

Never has been. I’m just pointing out the underlying antisemitism here. They’re never picking on Warren Buffet or Melinda Gates, arguably much more outspoken Democrats. They’re picking on the jewish guy.

It’s so weird that they always fixate on one billionaire’s (Soros) political activities and ignore the political activities of other much richer millionnaires (Musk, Cochs, etc). It’s almost as if the guy they fixate on and try to demonize is Jewish or something.

Americans, take a look at how the European Court of Justice is staffed:

The Court of Justice consists of 27 Judges who are assisted by 11 Advocates-General. The Judges and Advocates-General are appointed by common accord of the governments of the member states[7] and hold office for a renewable term of six years. The treaties require that they are chosen from legal experts whose independence is “beyond doubt” and who possess the qualifications required for appointment to the highest judicial offices in their respective countries or who are of recognised competence.[7] In practice, each member state nominates a judge whose nomination is then ratified by all other member states.[8]

The Court can sit in plenary session, as a Grand Chamber of fifteen judges (including the president and vice-president), or in chambers of three or five judges. Plenary sittings are now very rare, and the court mostly sits in chambers of three or five judges.[19] Each chamber elects its own president who is elected for a term of three years in the case of the five-judge chambers or one year in the case of three-judge chambers.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Court_of_Justice

Not to mention that there are more than one “supreme courts” with different types of expertise.

There is the General Court, the Civil Service Tribunal, and of course very importantly the European Court of Human Rights.

Spread the hazard of hyper-concentration as thin as possible.

This is the kind of person who would subsequently propose coming up with a more efficient way of killing the prisoners without using so many bullets and without traumatizing so many soldiers. Maybe some kind of gas in some kind of chamber, you know.

Fascists just can’t fucking help themselves.

The right question to ask is whether the president can decide to assassinate a supreme court justice. Then it becomes plenty clear to the supreme court fucks how obviously insane the rationale is.