Politics Please say rock bottom is getting close

[crandc]

After Maine governor publicly disagreed with Trump's anti trans executive order, a Maine program that automatically enrolled every newborn in Social Security was terminated without notice. Parents now have to bring babies to Social Security offices with hours long wait times. The acting director of Social Security Administration acknowledged he personally ordered this because governor wasn't nice to Trump.

 

[Chris Craig]

After Maine governor publicly disagreed with Trump's anti trans executive order, a Maine program that automatically enrolled every newborn in Social Security was terminated without notice. Parents now have to bring babies to Social Security offices with hours long wait times. The acting director of Social Security Administration acknowledged he personally ordered this because governor wasn't nice to Trump.

That's ridiculous. Should be illegal if it isn't.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Democratic Senators Team Up With MAGA To Hand Trump A Censorship Machine

The exact moment when Donald Trump and his MAGA allies are actively dismantling democratic institutions and working to silence critics, a group of Democratic Senators have decided to collaborate with Trump’s supporters to make it easier to censor speech online.

As reported in The Information (paywalled), several Democratic Senators are teaming up with some of Trump’s strongest Senate allies to repeal Section 230 — the law that both enables content moderation and protects websites from being sued into oblivion for hosting user speech.

They appear to be doing this out of a deep misunderstanding of how the law works combined with an astounding naiveté about how this process will be used by the MAGA faithful. the exact moment when Donald Trump and his MAGA allies are actively dismantling democratic institutions and working to silence critics, a group of Democratic Senators have decided to collaborate with Trump’s supporters to make it easier to censor speech online.

As reported in The Information (paywalled), several Democratic Senators are teaming up with some of Trump’s strongest Senate allies to repeal Section 230 — the law that both enables content moderation and protects websites from being sued into oblivion for hosting user speech.

They appear to be doing this out of a deep misunderstanding of how the law works combined with an astounding naiveté about how this process will be used by the MAGA faithful.



As early as next week, Sen. Dick Durbin, a Democrat, and Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican, plan to introduce a bill that would set an expiration date of Jan. 1, 2027, for Section 230, according to a congressional aide familiar with the bill’s development. The senators have wide-ranging support from their respective parties: Republicans Josh Hawley and Marsha Blackburn and Democrats Sheldon Whitehouse and Amy Klobuchar have agreed to co-sponsor the bill. And two more Democrats, Richard Blumenthal and Peter Welch, have discussed joining as co-sponsors.

If all goes according to plan, Durbin and Graham’s proposal would be the first bipartisan bill introduced in Congress that could repeal what’s often lauded as the 26 words that created the internet.


Read More

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Democratic Senators Team Up With MAGA To Hand Trump A Censorship Machine

The exact moment when Donald Trump and his MAGA allies are actively dismantling democratic institutions and working to silence critics, a group of Democratic Senators have decided to collaborate with Trump’s supporters to make it easier to censor speech online.

As reported in The Information (paywalled), several Democratic Senators are teaming up with some of Trump’s strongest Senate allies to repeal Section 230 — the law that both enables content moderation and protects websites from being sued into oblivion for hosting user speech.

They appear to be doing this out of a deep misunderstanding of how the law works combined with an astounding naiveté about how this process will be used by the MAGA faithful. the exact moment when Donald Trump and his MAGA allies are actively dismantling democratic institutions and working to silence critics, a group of Democratic Senators have decided to collaborate with Trump’s supporters to make it easier to censor speech online.

As reported in The Information (paywalled), several Democratic Senators are teaming up with some of Trump’s strongest Senate allies to repeal Section 230 — the law that both enables content moderation and protects websites from being sued into oblivion for hosting user speech.

They appear to be doing this out of a deep misunderstanding of how the law works combined with an astounding naiveté about how this process will be used by the MAGA faithful.



As early as next week, Sen. Dick Durbin, a Democrat, and Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican, plan to introduce a bill that would set an expiration date of Jan. 1, 2027, for Section 230, according to a congressional aide familiar with the bill’s development. The senators have wide-ranging support from their respective parties: Republicans Josh Hawley and Marsha Blackburn and Democrats Sheldon Whitehouse and Amy Klobuchar have agreed to co-sponsor the bill. And two more Democrats, Richard Blumenthal and Peter Welch, have discussed joining as co-sponsors.

If all goes according to plan, Durbin and Graham’s proposal would be the first bipartisan bill introduced in Congress that could repeal what’s often lauded as the 26 words that created the internet.


Read More

That could really hurt this forum.

 

[Phatguysrule]

That could really hurt this forum.

Exactly. It goes to show how corrupt even Dems are. Or stupid. Which is just as bad as corrupt.

Anybody who can support any of these people do not care about actually fixing anything. These people are evil, stupid, or both.

I wish I could say I'm surprised to see Amy Klobuchar on this list. But I'm not.

 

[Chris Craig]

That could really hurt this forum.

There wouldn't be any political discussions here anymore for sure.

 

[Chris Craig]

Exactly. It goes to show how corrupt even Dems are. Or stupid. Which is just as bad as corrupt.

Anybody who can support any of these people do not care about actually fixing anything. These people are evil, stupid, or both.

I wish I could say I'm surprised to see Amy Klobuchar on this list. But I'm not.

I'm disappointed to see Democrats supporting this.

 

[Sheldon Shape]

Exactly. It goes to show how corrupt even Dems are. Or stupid. Which is just as bad as corrupt.

Anybody who can support any of these people do not care about actually fixing anything. These people are evil, stupid, or both.

I wish I could say I'm surprised to see Amy Klobuchar on this list. But I'm not.

Amy is garbage. She thought she had the VP position locked up, but when that Floyd murder happened on camera her dreams were dashed. She's the one that Chauvin off the hook before that if my memory serves me right.

The letters next to their names are for you, not them. It's all theatre.

 

[Sheldon Shape]

I'm disappointed to see Democrats supporting this.

You can only be disappointed if you're surprised. You can only be surprised if you're living under a rock.

 

[Chris Craig]

You can only be disappointed if you're surprised. You can only be surprised if you're living under a rock.

Not true. I'm not surprised at all. I know Dems are doing this to try and hold social media giants responsible, but they miss the other implications of removing section 230. It might allow them to go after Musk, Zuckerberg, and others, but it will also undermine the right to free speech online. I'm disappointed they aren't taking this into account. Surprised though, no.

 

[Chris Craig]

Also surprised Musk isn't having the Republicans kill the revoking of this bill as it protects him from multiple lawsuits and responsibility for all the hateful shit he may or may not be espousing and /or allowing on his platform. Kind of surprised Republicans want to remove it all. I guess they just want to kill free speech as it is.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Not true. I'm not surprised at all. I know Dems are doing this to try and hold social media giants responsible, but they miss the other implications of removing section 230. It might allow them to go after Musk, Zuckerberg, and others, but it will also undermine the right to free speech online. I'm disappointed they aren't taking this into account. Surprised though, no.

Removing 230 helps media giants. It prevents any startups from ever competing with them.

 

[Phatguysrule]

I'm disappointed to see Democrats supporting this.

It is disappointing. Hopefully people will wake up and start forcing the party to change.

 

[barfo]

She's the one that Chauvin off the hook before that if my memory serves me right.

If you mean legally, that's certainly not correct, since a senator has no power to let anyone off the hook legally.
If you mean she made some ill-advised statement about the case, you might be correct, I don't remember one way or the other.

barfo

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

There wouldn't be any political discussions here anymore for sure.

Maybe thats a good thing? Lots of finger pointing, hate and anger in the Political OT threads.

 

[Chris Craig]

Removing 230 helps media giants. It prevents any startups from ever competing with them.

I guess it does both, and they will take no competition for dealing with some lawsuits.

 

[Phatguysrule]

If you mean legally, that's certainly not correct, since a senator has no power to let anyone off the hook legally.
If you mean she made some ill-advised statement about the case, you might be correct, I don't remember one way or the other.

barfo

Apparently she likes to support evil things that she doesn't know anything about...

 

[barfo]

If you mean legally, that's certainly not correct, since a senator has no power to let anyone off the hook legally.
If you mean she made some ill-advised statement about the case, you might be correct, I don't remember one way or the other.

barfo

Ah, went and looked it up. There was a prior Chauvin case, a police shooting, a week before she was elected to the senate (and thus was still a prosecutor).
The case went to a grand jury under a different prosecutor well after she took office in the Senate, though (and the grand jury declined to charge him).
So - not legitimately Klobuchar's fault, unless there is evidence that she somehow poisoned the case before she left the prosecutors office.

barfo

 

[Sheldon Shape]

If you mean legally, that's certainly not correct, since a senator has no power to let anyone off the hook legally.
If you mean she made some ill-advised statement about the case, you might be correct, I don't remember one way or the other.

barfo

She was the county attorney. https://nypost.com/2020/05/29/amy-klobuchar-previously-declined-to-prosecute-cop/

 

[barfo]

She was the county attorney. https://nypost.com/2020/05/29/amy-klobuchar-previously-declined-to-prosecute-cop/

Did you even read the article? It disagrees with its headline.

Also, the NY Post??? Why not a link to a Joe Rogan podcast or a Truth Social post?

barfo

 

[Sheldon Shape]

Did you even read the article? It disagrees with its headline.

Also, the NY Post??? Why not a link to a Joe Rogan podcast or a Truth Social post?

barfo

You told me you don't like to read or look at evidence so I didn't think the source would matter either way. There are dozens of more if you want to research it for yourself. There's a reason why she didn't become the VP to Biden who was his preference.

From the same article if you bothered to read it...

Klobuchar, who has been floated as a possible VP pick for presumed Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, also did not criminally charge other cops involved in more than two dozen officer-involved fatalities that took place during her time as prosecutor from 1999 to 2006, according to the Star Tribune.

 

[barfo]

You told me you don't like to read or look at evidence so I didn't think the source would matter either way.

No, that's not what I told you, and you know that.
I told you I didn't watch videos. And certainly a video of Netanyahu talking isn't evidence of anything, other than maybe he was alive at the time the video was made.

There are dozens of more if you want to research it for yourself.

I already did, and I already posted my findings. Post #4579.

There's a reason why she didn't become the VP to Biden who was his preference.

There's more than one reason. And her record as a prosecutor I'd guess wasn't the main reason.

barfo

 

[Sheldon Shape]

No, that's not what I told you, and you know that.
I told you I didn't watch videos. And certainly a video of Netanyahu talking isn't evidence of anything, other than maybe he was alive at the time the video was made.



I already did, and I already posted my findings. Post #4579.



There's more than one reason. And her record as a prosecutor I'd guess wasn't the main reason.

barfo

She was the favorite to be VP and then the Floyd murder happened and suddenly she was radioactive. She had a bigger hand in the cops getting off on her watch than you're leading us to believe...

 

[barfo]

She was the favorite to be VP and then the Floyd murder happened and suddenly she was radioactive.

I don't think that's accurate. I doubt she was ever the favorite. Of course none of us really can know for sure.

She had a bigger hand in the cops getting off on her watch than you're leading us to believe...

Cops, yes. Entirely fair to examine her record on that.
That particular cop, no.

barfo

 

[crandc]

Trump guitars, which come in various models including God Bless the USA Guitar, already in hot water for copying copyright Gibson shape, which sell from $1000 to $10,000, are ... Made in China.

No word as to whether tariffs apply.

 

[Sheldon Shape]

I don't think that's accurate. I doubt she was ever the favorite. Of course none of us really can know for sure.



Cops, yes. Entirely fair to examine her record on that.
That particular cop, no.

barfo

He was in trouble before the Floyd murder. Numerous civilian complaints among other things. That's why people say she could have stopped Chauvin before he did what he did.

 

[barfo]

He was in trouble before the Floyd murder. Numerous civilian complaints among other things. That's why people say she could have stopped Chauvin before he did what he did.

Numerous complaints, none of which amounted to anything, in the eyes of the (quite possibly corrupt and/or sloppy) investigators. He got two slaps on the wrist for having a bad attitude, basically.

Nothing that Klobuchar could have prosecuted, or even that would have crossed her desk.

barfo

 

[Sheldon Shape]

Numerous complaints, none of which amounted to anything, in the eyes of the (quite possibly corrupt and/or sloppy) investigators. He got two slaps on the wrist for having a bad attitude, basically.

Nothing that Klobuchar could have prosecuted, or even that would have crossed her desk.

barfo

She couldn't have pushed for prosecution on three separate shootings? I don't believe that. She was part of the corrupt system that allowed Chauvin to murder Floyd when he shouldn't have been out on the streets. As the prosecutor she could have filed charges. But you're always selling me on why a Democrat can't do their job. Always some kind of excuse or complication.

Since December 2012, two of the officers involved in Floyd's death drew a combined 13 complaints, and since 2006, Chauvin had been reviewed for three shootings. The officers were repeatedly accused of treating victims with callousness or indifference, failing to file a report when a crime was alleged and, in at least one case, using an unnecessary amount of force in making an arrest.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Andrew Tate Accused of Choking Woman Two Weeks After Trump Administration Reportedly Helped Him Return to the U.S.

https://www.mediaite.com/crime/andr...tion-reportedly-helped-him-return-to-the-u-s/

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Exclusive: Trump's "pro-Hamas" purge could block foreign students from colleges

https://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/government/ar-AA1BKTfh