• 11 Posts
  • 188 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 30th, 2023

help-circle
  • So she’s trying to pull a Madison Cawthorn 2.0. She might wanna consider how well that worked out for him.

    With that being said, does this really make sense?

    She’s either lying through her teeth, or Madison Cawthorn was right all along. I’d say the odds here are about 50/50.

    But let’s say she’s right (I know, I know, bear with me…)…doesn’t that just mean that she knows that the GOP are full of the same “groomers” that she has been crusading against for years? And that she’s OK with it, so long as she can use it for political capital? I mean, I get it…pride in the hypocrisy and all that. But how in the name of Jesus’ favorite camel does this make her look good? At all? At best, it means she’s complicit in allowing what would literally be the most powerful pedo ring on the fucking planet to continue to exist, and is perfectly fine with keeping that information from the public as long as it’s in her political best interest or she can use it to advance her own political career.

    And that is her in the best possible light. It only gets worse from there. I just don’t see how this is anywhere close to being beneficial for her unless she’s got the goods. And if she’s got the goods, I have about a hundred million more questions.



  • You’re missing my point slightly.

    Yes, if Trump is dead-set on killing the DOE, we’re fucked. You’re right there. But unlike many of Trump’s other yes-men, Linda McMahon is not known to have the drive to do anything by herself. Go watch any of her WWE footage or any time she’s made a public statement. That woman hasn’t lifted a finger in her life without calling on her assistants to check on her nails. And we all know that Trump has the attention span of a methhead with ADHD. The silver lining is that if Trump decides to set his sights elsewhere, she’ll do little damage on her own, unlike a more ambitious yes-man who will take the initiative.

    Think of it this way. It could have been Boebert. Or MTG. Or Jim Jordan. Plenty of cronies exponentially worse than McMahon if they were chosen, and all of which would have the initiative to do it themselves if Trump’s attention was focused elsewhere.




  • Wrestling fan for over 40 years.

    Honestly, given the options that Trump could dredge up from the 9th circle of hell, this isn’t the worst choice.

    Linda McMahon sat there for 50 or so years and did nothing while her husband committed all sorts of atrocities. And she deserves everything she gets for doing that. All the criticism surrounding that is 100% valid. But I want to point out the key words there. “Did nothing.” Because that’s pretty much Linda McMahon’s resume.

    As CEO, she did nothing. Vince called the shots. She just signed the paperwork – at best. Her position was mainly a figurehead position just to ensure McMahon’s power in the company was that much more entrenched. She has all the charisma and personality of cigarette ash, and her on-air persona was literally to sit in a wheelchair and say nothing because she wasn’t capable of better acting.

    She had a cabinet position during Trump’s first administration, and did a whole lot more nothing.

    I would expect the same thing here. Linda McMahon is an unqualified hack who shouldn’t be in the position, but if there’s a silver lining, it’s this: Left to her own devices, McMahon will likely do nothing. Education won’t get any better, but it won’t get any worse either. She’s smart enough to know when she has no idea what she’s doing, and if the past 50 or so years is any indication, she’ll spend the next four years doing a lot more nothing and hoping nobody notices.

    Yes, she absolutely will follow Trump’s directives to the letter. But Trump’s attention span is worse than Linda McMahon’s acting skills. I hate to say it like this, but if Trump stays focused on removing all the brown people and forcing his cronies to buy his watches, there’s at least the possibility that McMahon could just keep her head down for 4 years and at least not leave the DOE worse off than the way she found it. She’s got a 50 year resume showing her skills at doing nothing. Hopefully she’ll continue that trend.





  • LOL, how cute. You think that still matters.

    Nothing stopping both houses from just reducing the threshhold because fuck you that’s why, getting Trump to sign off on it, then getting backing by the Supreme Court. Sure, that’s completely at odds with the Constitution, but who’s left to enforce it?

    We already know that at least half the states will just blindly go along with it and say it’s to control immigration, or just because MAGA, or because fuck you that’s why. Threaten the rest with withholding of all federal funding until they get on board and watch how many fall in line. Sure, that’s even more highly illegal, but again…who’s going to stop them? Laws don’t mean shit if there is nobody willing or able to enforce them.


  • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.worldtopolitics @lemmy.world"We" didn't vote for this
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Donald Trump won the 2024 Presidential election in a free and fair election. The indisuptable fact is that 10 million or so Democrat voters chose, for whatever reason, to stay home. Your proposal essentially takes the whining that Trump has been spewing for 4 years and puts it on steroids. The 2024 election was not stolen; the American people had the chance to make their voices heard, and 10 million of them chose to say nothing. We as a country elected Trump, and now must start dealing with the consequences of that choice. Just like Trump, we don’t get a do-over if we don’t like the results.


  • Like it or not, he sees the writing on the wall. He knows that the best he can probably hope for under a Trump administration if he doesn’t bend the knee is the end of his career. He is not the first who have bent the knee since the election, and he won’t be the last. Every aspect of society is going to quickly become a lot more favorable to Trump, even if only to avoid his ire. Just check out how much media coverage is now significantly more Trump-friendly. Even the independent Youtube influencers on the left are already taking a much more subdued tone towards Trump.

    Jeff Bezos bent the knee out of fear of Trump retaliation. Judges have been pausing Trump and J6 related cases since he won. And before that, our entire judicial system bent to Trump’s will largely out of fear of violence if they don’t. Senators have been saying for years that they will not speak out publicly against Trump out of fear of retribution. Prominent Republicans have seen the end of their careers, driven out of the party at Trump’s hands. Much of social media have rescinded previous policies about banning disinformation. The two GA election workers that had to go into hiding after being targeted by the Trump Hate Machine. People openly marching in the streets promoting Nazi memorabilia and preaching white supremacy. Take a look up and down mainstream media over the past couple of weeks and see how much of the coverage has suddenly become infinitely more favorable towards Trump.

    There’s a reason for that. Because even the most powerful and well-connected people in the country do not have the power to stand up to him without being run over. Scarborough is just trying to stay out of jail, just like everybody else. The country is now Trump’s, and most people are just trying to find where their place is in TrumpWorld, because the world they lived in before no longer exists, and there is a growing number of people that are saying that they want it this way.

    I mean, you’re still free to stand behind your Constitutional protections and speak out openly against Trump all you want. Feel free to do just that. But when people with infinitely more resources and influence than you or I could ever dream of are having second thoughts and opting to bed the knee instead, you may want to think about why. Constitutional protections don’t mean jack shit if the people charged with enforcing those protections are the ones laughing in your face as they cuff you.

    Fighting a battle you have no chance of winning isn’t bravery. It’s suicide. And for those who are going to rush to the downvote button, remember that youtube is a thing. There is exactly nothing stopping you from going on youtube, speaking against Trump, and trying to rally the troops. Go ahead. I’ll wait.

    At the end of the day, most people are just trying to keep their heads down, make it through the day, and make it through life. Celebrities are no exception. Very few people are going to be willing to sacrifice everything they’ve worked for, and possibly even their freedom, to fight a battle that they cannot win.


  • I do not like this. I do not like this at all.

    The whole auction was basically a continuation of the war between Alex Jones and the families he defamed, as the only two bidders were someone bidding on Jones’ behalf and the Onion, with the backing of the families. There seems to be concerns over if this is in the best interest of Jones, the desires of the Sandy Hook families seems to be being ignored, and there is a very real possibility that this judge could rule (legally or otherwise) that the Onion’s bid is disqualified and since Jones’ associate is the only other bidder, he wins. Jones essentially keeps Infowars, continues on with business as usual, and probably takes a giant shit on the Sandy Hook families as his victory lap.







  • Respectfully, they found a niche and they rolled with it. I do mildly criticize the hyperbole but I accept its something that helps get clicks which id rather they get than basically all the alternatives.

    This is true to some degree. But at the same time, these are all still a bunch of white guys who happened to be born into the wealth needed to create their channels in the first place, so it’s more of which group of rich white dudes is getting the clicks.

    And if that’s the way they want to roll, it’s really none of my business nor concern. Go with it. But just don’t claim that you’re objective and independent when watching about three minutes of your coverage proves otherwise.

    The products are whatever, sometimes I’m glad to hear about whats big and they tend to take on decent quality offerings that I may act on at some point, most of the podcasts and outlets I follow have to do some form of advertising but they all make it fun or minimally intrusive so again I accept that as a function of doing business and being able to continue their work.

    I have no problems with advertising. They have to make money too. But there’s a difference between “Here’s a word from our sponsor” and letting the ad run vs. claiming to like and use a product they’ve clearly never heard of while they’re reading off a script with all of the acting talent of a first grader in a school play. And to some, it begs the question of if they’re willing to peddle this crap and lie to me about it in the process, what else are they lying about to generate revenue?

    I’m sure we couldn’t disagree that the legal analysis and breakdowns are top-notch and quite deep. They’ve made me, a non-lawyer or law student utterly fascinated with the law and how it can all go wrong and where it upholds what it should where it matters

    Oh, this I agree with. Once you dig through the clickbait and hyperbole, the information is quite good. But you’ve got to dig through more than you should have to to get there.


  • If everyone watched MeidasTouch for the political/legal news, America would be far saner and harder to dupe. Its the only media outlet I have any respect or hope for

    I’m going to be honest, I watch a lot of very left-leaning independent media. MeidasTouch, BTC, David Pakman, Jesse Dollemore. I subscribe to BTC. But I’ve got a lot of issues with them, including MeidasTouch, myself.

    • They all use extreme and misleading hyperbole and clickbait in their titles and thumbnails that have a strained-at-best relationship with objective facts and the subject at hand. Saying that Jack Smith is winding down his cases against Trump is not “BIG news on FEDERAL PROSECUTION of TRUMP before inauguration!!!”, for example. BTC is particularly noteworthy for this.

    • They all focus their coverage almost entirely on Trump, to the point where it’s not unreasonable to question what these people would do if Trump really were to just ride off into the sunset, and cover him in such a way where they are clearly profiting off of the outrage.

    • None of them promote new Democrat ideas or give coverage to Democrat politicians unless they are going on the air to speak against Trump. Little to no time is dedicated to left-leaning topics that aren’t somehow heavily tied to Trump and keeping Trump outrage high.

    • With the exception of BTC, they all hock products that nobody has ever heard of, they have never heard of, and by the way they read the script, couldn’t care less about beyond the check they get from the sponsor. David Pakman is particularly egregious with his claims about how long he’s been using the product and is a fan of it, which you can tell is 100% grade-A bullshit by the way he reads the script.

    Don’t get me wrong. At the end of the day, they are still at least giving factual and accurate information even if it’s clouded in hyperbole and clickbait, which is infinitely far more than I can say for Fox, Newsmax, Twitter, Trump Social, or OANN. The products they’re hocking are at least actual products and won’t actively harm consumers, unlike the crypto scams, ads for ivermectin, and whatever other money laundering schemes RAN is peddling this week.

    But at the same time, they are all profiting heavily off of making sure outrage against Trump stays high. They all shy away from covering anything that could be construed as beneficial to Trump out of fear of losing subscribers. They all, with the exception of BTC, lie to their subscribers by claiming they use a product they clearly care nothing about. They all skew their coverage with an extreme left bent. They are far better than what we get from the right, but they are by no means objective, are not above and beyond skewing coverage in a way that they feel is most profitable for them, and would absolutely sell out to the very mainstream media they claim to despise if given the chance.