• 0 Posts
  • 376 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: September 2nd, 2023

help-circle
  • I think that would depend on the judge that the next cases land on, if it’s a maga judge then doing justice won’t be a priority. Jones seems to be playing for time and appears to hope that Trump’s next government can change the playing field for him.

    Why justice will become less apolitical in the USA: Maga is fascist and fascism is a totalitarian form of government. In totalitarianism there is no room for an independent judiciary. The USA is only at the beginning of it’s maga era, so it still has a mostly independent judiciary, but dismantling that independence is already a part of the plan. And that dismantling can go fast, in Poland it only took a few years to do so. After their 2015 election, the polish Law and Justice party (aka pis) rushed the process with a series of illegal coups to get it done asap, I think their reforms were mostly finished by 2018.

    In other words, I wouldn’t count out Alex Jones just yet.



  • I’d imagine that a conservative professor of ethics would be the one telling doctors in training that when faced with the dilemma of saving the life of the mother or that of her unborn child, that they must then save the life of the child because it is without sin.

    This was taught in a Catholic university near me to doctors of my parents generation, but I suspect they stopped doing that here since about the 1990s. In other places of the world the Catholic church is still at it though.




  • I have never eaten beignets like that, where I’m from it’s always a recognizable apple before it gets battered and fried (in thick slices if it’s large or whole if small).

    If I search for beignets aux pommes, the 1st, 2nd and 4th result is without compotes, just apple slices like I know them. The 3rd looks to be the compote version. Adding compote to the query finds recipes for “beignets a la compote de pommes”, so I suspect that it’s a regional thing that those are called apple beignets.





  • I had been using YouTube for years without being presented rightwing propaganda in my suggestions. I mostly just watched strategy gaming, history, technology channels and some peculiar travelling blogs. And my suggested was just mostly those things.

    Then one day I used my YouTube account to cast kid shows for my niece for the first time. After that I was suggested more kid shows which didn’t interest me personally, but I also started getting suggested cat videos, which I obviously clicked. And the week after that half my suggested feed was rightwing misogynist/racist/culture war misinformation, and it took a lot of “do not recommend channel” to clean it up again.

    So now I believe that there is a concerted effort by some malicious actors to train Google’s algorithm to assume that if someone is interested in cat videos, that they would then also be open to becoming a misogynist racist prick.


  • I remember from an older article that it’s a very small college and the new republican dean/president/chairman (I forgot what he was) is being paid $ 700 000 per year, about $1000 per student. I’m certain that he isn’t the only person making bank from this. It seems to be a grift to funnel tax money into the pockets of friends and sycophants, and while the college board tries to make itself relevant in the eyes of their maga public, the future of the students appears to not be a consideration, because they’re not the ones paying for this circus.

    Apparently fighting the republican culture war is very profitable for republican grifters.








  • They don’t have to prove that someone is not a qualified elector to disenfranchise them, throwing up barriers to make it very hard / impossible to vote is enough. In the past the federal government could intervene if something like that happened, but that’s not really possible anymore thanks to the current scotus, so it’s up to the states.

    And this state is now laying the legal groundwork: If “every” persons with xxx qualifications has the right the vote by law and new measures get implemented that make it practically impossible to vote for certain people that fit those qualifications, then those people had a right withheld from them.

    If “only” persons with xxx qualifications have the right to vote by law and new measures get implemented that make it impossible to vote for certain people that fit those qualifications, then … nothing. That’s the difference between “every” and “only”. Changing the wording to “only” allows the state to legally pile on extra requirements and barriers.

    Examples of groups of people that I’ve seen disenfranchised by state actions: Prisoners, felons who have done their time, college students, minorities, inner city people, military abroad. Some of these news articles will have been attempts that were not (yet) successful.

    I haven’t read the full wiki article, but I expect those examples to be in here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_suppression_in_the_United_States



  • I’ve got the impression that Tucker Carlson is going after Alex Jones his audience. Tucker Carlson peddling crazy conspiracy theories right when the chickens are coming home to roost for Alex Jones, imo that’s no coincidence. Tucker never was stupid, he just has no morals, so he never had a problem with publicly stating stuff that he personally didn’t believe in. Grifters gonna grift.