this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2024
89 points (96.8% liked)

Politics

373 readers
592 users here now

For civil discussion of US politics. Be excellent to each other.

Rule 1: Posts have the following requirements:
▪️ Post articles about the US only

▪️ Title must match the article headline

▪️ Recent (Past 30 Days)

▪️ No Screenshots/links to other social media sites or link shorteners

Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. One or two small paragraphs are okay.

Rule 3: Articles based on opinion (unless clearly marked and from a serious publication-No Fox News or equal), misinformation or propaganda will be removed.

Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, ableist, will be removed.

Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a jerk. It’s not acceptable to say another user is a jerk. Cussing is fine.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

USAfacts.org

The Alt-Right Playbook

Media owners, CEOs and/or board members

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] False 39 points 2 months ago

Maybe he should have had a second debate with her if he wanted people to see her raw and uncut.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

The worst part is that even if he loses the election he's still going to make damn sure there's a huge shit show afterwards.

$10b in damages? Come on. This should have been instantly thrown out.

Edit. Oh shit! He got the idea from Putin with that ridiculous Google lawsuit! Lmao!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

Wait, that Putin thing was real?

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Literally there is no case. The filing fails to name single real person of harm and fails to establish any real material harm.

Additionally it is using a consumer protection law and citing an FCC ruling, of all things, to establish cause, which is insane.

This entire filing is like what law student would write as a joke. I mean they could have save some pages by just writing, “CBS is a big meanie and I don’t know who, but I’m pretty sure someone lost $5 for some reason because of them being so mean! I am asking for $30 decillion in judgement.”

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

For calling my lawsuit a joke, I'm suing you under the alien and sedition act! - Trump

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So what’s the angle here?

Are they saying CBS omitted something? Or cut in a different response?

This could easily be solved by viewing the raw footage.

I dunno, sounds like more “lying media” bullshit to me

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 months ago

The purpose is not for merit. The purpose is to punish. His power to do that is limited to this nuisance right now, hopefully permanently, although we’ll see.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago

What about free speech? What about the "free market"?

No, both those things are dead because trump's feelings got burnt.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The complaint, filed in federal court in the Northern District of Texas, alleges that the network aired two different responses from Harris responding to a question about the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza.

The version that aired during the "60 Minutes" program on Oct. 6 did not include what the lawsuit calls a "word salad" response from Harris about the Biden administration's influence on Israel's conduct of the war.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

He knows that normally interviewers try to clean stuff up to remove misspeaks and other things that disrupt the flow of the discussion (unless they serve some meaningful purpose)?

I'm sure if Trump said something coherent by accident, that would be part of their streamlined interview of him. They can't be responsible for the fact that he isn't capable.

[–] itsathursday 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Even if it was moderated, it sounds pretty reasonable for a president or candidate to care about how the language they use may impact the citizens and beyond that it’s also fair to expect that any communication by a president or candidate is likely going to be heavily curated to some degree in any medium.

Let’s fuck off Twitter brain snaps and have more responsible government representatives.

This is not to be confused with changing historical documents or amending public records. Addresses to the public via media publications however should have some editorial quality to them for fact checking etc

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

....something, something, boy who cried wolf, something, something..../s JFC