Monday, September 30, 2024

Good news

May be temporary.



Matt Gaetz is still a disgusting prick


We have to reject this

This is what Trump and MAGA are doing to our country:


UPDATE 10/01/2024:



Finally

At long last, some serious people are saying out loud that the GOP is at its core a racist party.  This is an excellent discussion from the start, but the talk about the GOP comes nearer the end.



Sunday, September 29, 2024

Sad!


And he said there were 40 or 50 thousand people outside.  LOL.

Contrast...Kamala in Nevada today...





Elon Musk is still a despicable person


...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

What's the deal?


In two previous rallies, he admitted he lost "by a whisker".  Well, "we" lost.  What's going on?  Surely this helps Jack Smith in Judge Chutkan's court.  What are his followers thinking, now that he caused so many of them to end up in jail for believing him when he said the election was stolen?

UPDATE 09/30/2024:



UPDATE 10/03/2024:  Now he's back to saying he won in 2020.



Because it is


Not good


Close to Hungary and Viktor Orban.  Hitler was Austrian.  Just saying.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

It's Sunday


Proposal for SCOTUS reform

The legislation by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) is one of the most ambitious proposals to remake a high court.

[...]

He said he hopes to get parts of the bill passed, even if the whole package is not embraced by lawmakers.

[...]

The bill’s most significant measure would increase the number of justices from nine to 15 over the course of 12 years. The staggered format over two or three administrations is aimed at diminishing the chance that one political party would pack the courts with its nominees.

During the rollout, each president would approve justices in the first and third year of their terms.

The bill would also require a ruling by two-thirds of the high court and the circuit courts of appeals, rather than a simple majority, to overturn a law passed by Congress.

[...]

The legislation would also require Supreme Court nominees to be automatically scheduled for a vote in the Senate if their nominations have lingered in committee for more than 180 days.

[...]

Another provision in Wyden’s bill would expand the number of federal judicial circuits from 13 to 15, adding more than 100 district court judges and more than 60 appellate-level judges.

Supreme Court justices must report income, dividends, property sales and gifts, among other things, but the bill would bolster financial checks, disclosures and other transparency measures. It would require the IRS to initiate an audit of the justices’ tax returns each year, release the results and make the tax filings public. Nominees to the court would have to disclose three years of tax returns.

Another measure would allow a two-thirds vote of the court to force a fellow justice to recuse from a case.

Each justice would be required to publicly release their opinions and disclose how they voted on issues considered on an emergency basis, sometimes referred to as the shadow docket.

  WaPo
Do it.
Other bills introduced by Democrats recently would add teeth to the Supreme Court’s ethics code, which has been widely criticized for lacking an enforcement mechanism. Another would cap gifts justices can receive at $50, the same limit members of Congress must abide by. Others would establish 18-year term limits for justices and try to drain politics from nominations to the high court.

Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) reintroduced a bill Wednesday that would give Congress greater latitude to check Supreme Court rulings.

[...]

Wyden’s bill, like others introduced by Democrats to bring changes to the Supreme Court, faces long odds of passing. Republicans, who control the House, say the bills aren’t about reform but politics.

[...]

Liberal Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson have said publicly they support a binding ethics code, but Gorsuch has expressed skepticism. The other justices have not made their opinions known.
They don't have to. I think we can surmise.
A Gallup opinion poll from July showed public approval of the Supreme Court at near-record lows, with only 43 percent of Americans approving and 53 percent disapproving.

Polls have found that there is significant support for some Supreme Court overhauls. A USA Today/Ipsos poll from August found that 75 percent of Americans supported a binding ethics code for justices and that 61 percent supported 18-year time limits. The poll found that only 40 percent approved of expanding the court from nine to 15 justices.

Saturday, September 28, 2024

Prepping for the possibility of a Trump win


It's a crying shame that we've come to this, but it's also a shame that it won't pass.

Unless, of course, the country flips the House and holds the Senate in November.  Then, maybe it has a chance.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Yes, please

A day after filing a sealed brief seeking to justify his superseding indictment against Donald Trump, special counsel Jack Smith is pushing to file a public version of the brief that includes "substantive" summaries of what investigators learned from witnesses in the former president's federal election interference case.

[...]

In their filing Friday, prosecutors argued that releasing a version of the brief that removes the names of witnesses other than Vice President Mike Pence -- and also redacts nonpublic information sources -- would respect the court's orders and serve the public's interest in the case.

[...]

If permitted by U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, the public filing could shed new light on the government's sweeping case against Trump by making public the summaries of information obtained from witness interviews, grand jury testimony, and search warrants.

[...]

"For example, the unredacted substance of what a witness said is more important, for purposes of public access, than the redacted identity of the specific person who said it."

[...]

Judge Chutkan ordered Trump's lawyers to file their objections to the proposed redactions on Tuesday.

A response from the prosecutors is due on Oct 10, meaning the material could possibly become public in mid-October.

  ABC
Yes, please.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Climate change is a hoax


Tennessee and North Carolina are also experiencing immense devastation from Hurricane Helene.  And Project 2025 will devastate FEMA.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Nice

Been seeing several Instagram and TikTok posts of people showing up to local hearings to show up the absurdity of the "conservative" proposals.  Here's one on school book banning:


...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE 09/29/2024: Mocking MAGA in Springfield, Ohio...



Musk for Trump


Aside from any monetary benefit Musk will get with a Trump election, he's expecting (as Trump has indicated) a position in the administration.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Stupid mistake


I would have expected them to do it 91 days out.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Friday, September 27, 2024

What in the world????


...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE 09/28/2024:  Good grief.



UPDATE :  He's just getting worse and worse.






Look at some of the other posts in that thread.  He's truly nuts.

UPDATE 09/29/2024:  Nuts and truly despicable.




Trump's Revenge Tour Plan on display


Paranoid much?

I forget.  Why does he hate Google?

BTW, none of what he said in that screed is true.  Other than if he becomes president he'll "request" their prosecution.



...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Get it while you can



Red states are going to hurt if Trump takes office.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Rubbing America's face in it


Full speed ahead



...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Israel-Lebanon in a nutshell

I'll say it again: Never argue with Mehdi Hasan. He knows what he's talking about.  


Down ballot Dems get a boost


Along with Kamala Harris' campaign coffers, adding $10 million to the pot, they're spending big in the hopes of flipping the House and holding the Senate.
Kamala Harris’ campaign and the Democratic National Committee said Tuesday they are sending nearly $25 million to support down-ballot Democrats — an earlier investment and far more money than the top of the ticket has sent in past election years.

The funding in part reflects the Harris operation’s ability to spread money around after record fundraising over the past six weeks. But it is also a recognition of the importance of this year’s down-ballot races.

[...]

The newly announced funds come from both the Harris campaign and the DNC, with a total of $10 million each going to committees supporting Democratic candidates for House and Senate, along with $2.5 million to a national Democratic group supporting state legislative candidates and $1 million each for groups backing Democratic gubernatorial and attorney general candidates.

“The vice president believes that this race is about mobilizing the entire country, in races at every level, to fight for our freedoms and our economic opportunity,” Harris campaign chair Jen O’Malley Dillon said in a statement.

  Politico
The vice president is right.
“That’s why the vice president has made the decision to invest a historic sum into electing Democrats up and down the ballot.”

[...]

The transfers also reflect a recognition that achieving many of Harris’ stated priorities will require not only keeping the Senate — a difficult task, as the party is defending three seats in states won by Trump in 2020 — but also flipping back the House.

[...]

Harris’ campaign and the DNC are positioned to transfer more money this cycle due to a massive surge in fundraising after President Joe Biden dropped out of the race in July.


Thursday, September 26, 2024

Fox!


Grifting on


The speed of new rollout grifts seems to be increasing lately.

As long as there's a MAGA supporter with a dime left in his pocket, Trump will continue conning it from them.

And, oh my...


...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE 03:54 pm:  But wait!  There's more...


No native English speaker wrote that.   But it's interesting that it doesn't say the watch contains his signature.   Those two things together make me think these are going to be $99.99 watches (which cost Trump $9.99 to have made).




Holy shit!  Who is the intended market for that?  Even the $799 watch is beyond the average MAGA cultist.  Or is Trump trying to clean out their savings (if they have any) now before he loses the election and they all desert him?




Ah, yes.  Of course. Another money laundering scheme.


I wonder if the dupes are reading the FAQs.

He gets a cut of each sale as part of the license, right?

UPDATE 09/28/2024:


(AI imagery still has some bugs.)

Good, but...


...when was the last time Rudy did any lawyering?


The wheels of justice grind slowly, and in cases like this, a lot of damage can be done in the meantime.