An interviewer willing to hold the other person's feet to the fire over their statements and positions and accepting that they might only get the one interview because they pissed off the other person so much that they're not willing to come back for a second is a good way to get actual journalism done.
An interviewer who only lobs softball questions, was handpicked by the person being interviewed and is perfectly happy to nod along agreeably to anything said is how you get propaganda and/or unpaid PR releases.
I can think of no bigger red flag that someone is definitely engaging in tax fraud and/or other illegal financial activities than an attempt to exempt yourself and those around you from financial audits.
If anything that just makes it even more pathetic and worthless since the one who actually did the thing being 'apologized' for isn't the one giving the apology.
Sure, contrition is welcomed. But it’s not quite as welcome when (1) ICE had already disclosed this fact, (2) the DHS continues to post an unwarranted attack on this “activist judge,” and (3) nobody in the government appears willing to act honestly until a court forces them to do it.
If someone's words and their actions conflict trust their actions. They can issue statements about how they are terribly sorry for 'accidentally' putting out a hit-piece on the judge but their actions make clear that the apology is being made in just as much good-faith as the attack.
The regime will only ramp up their attacks on any judge that doesn't bend the knee and kiss the ring so long as judges keep threatening consequences rather than applying them, and if they don't like it they can grow a spine or resign themselves to being beat on the regular.
SCOTUS whining that people increasingly consider them illegitimate and partisan hacks is like someone that's currently running around punching toddlers whining that people are accusing them of being violent.
When you make undeniably clear that you don't consider any law or legal ruling, even your own from mere days back as binding and that your only bedrock is 'the regime always wins' then you deserve nothing but mockery and doubling-down when you complain of people pointing out how openly corrupt you are.
'Your Honor, members of the jury, if you stop putting all your focus on the trail of bodies my client is accused of creating and instead focus on the good he's done in his community you'll see that it is unjust in the extreme to have dragged him into court and condemned him for his alleged crimes.
In closing I urge you to not blame my client for the times he has pushed old ladies into traffic but instead praise him for all the times he hasn't!'
Given how openly corrupt the regime is and how willing they are to lie and engage in political persecution the default assumption should always be that if they're going after a democrat or non-MAGAt the 'charges' are fraudulent until proven otherwise beyond any shred of doubt.
Having the DOJ argue in court that sexual assault is part of the job of president when a republican holds the office is certainly one way to try to get out of paying but I'm not quite sure they understand what that says about them and their boss.
“Because of our relationship with Dunwoody PD as a development partner–meaning we had explicit permission from Dunwoody to use their Flock system for both testing (for product improvement) and demonstration–Flock employees did occasionally access Dunwoody’s devices for those purposes,” Langley added. “I recognize that the choice to use MJCCA, rather than parts of the city, was a poor one on our part. I am cognizant of the additional, well-founded sensitivity of the Jewish community to security concerns at this time. Therefore, I would like to extend a formal apology to you and the entire MJCCA community for this poor decision. Candidly, it is because of the very real security concerns the MJCCA community is feeling that I am so proud of our partnership, and those with Jewish organizations across the country.”
That wasn't in the slightest an apology, that was a 'I'm sorry if you felt that we did something we shouldn't have but we didn't' non-apology that shifts any offense or outrage outwards along with any blame for feeling those things.
Oh I expect that they'll be flipping/exposing their true position a lot sooner due to multiple democrat states deciding to play by the new republican rules.
I fully expect that within the next month or two, or at the latest before the mid-terms SCOTUS will declare that the democrat efforts to gerrymander republican voters out of their voting maps are unconstitutional and must be reverted even as they greenlight republican efforts to do so.
If the NYPD or any other police department is tired of the negative public perception they've earned and the presumption that allegation against officers should be treated as true even if an internal review ends up dismissing it then they have only themselves to blame for refusing to hold their own accountable and ensuring that the 'few bad apples' spoiled the entire barrel.
If they spend even a fraction of time honestly investigating and as appropriate kicking the corrupt and criminal out of their own ranks as they do trying to find and arrest those that aren't cops they'd have solved this problem decades ago and it would be unfair to act as though their entire lot is corrupt and untrustworthy, but they didn't so it is.
The most messed up part? I'm honestly amazed that the US is just barely out of the top third, though I suppose there's still a few more years for the Trump regime to make a play for dead last just like they seem to be doing for everything else like 'economy' and 'international reputation/trust'.
SCOTUS is really going above and beyond in their efforts to make crystal clear that they are the most openly corrupt court in the US, the only thing more horrifying is the thought of what the fifth circuit will do in response to make their case that they deserve the 'title' more.
On this front, she appears to walk a fine line—being skeptical of vaccines and critical of vaccination recommendations, while avoiding overt opposition to them.
Given what happened with Kennedy anyone who's not vocally fully on board with vaccinations having proven to be safe and effective at cutting down infectious diseases both at the point of getting infected and the results of infection has no business being nominated never mind having that nomination confirmed.
One pro-plague 'alternative health' nutjob is already getting enough people infected and killed, the US does not need a second major government position filled with another one.
By 2004, the racial gap in voter registration and turnout had largely disappeared, with minorities registering and voting at levels that sometimes surpassed the majority. Black voters now participate in elections at similar rates as the rest of the electorate, even turning out at higher rates than white voters in two of the five most recent Presidential elections nationwide and in Louisiana.
Even if you took that statement at face value and accepted that as true the question then becomes if that's because racism is gone from the US or because it was previously illegal to racially discriminate against minorities voting and therefore the states had to allow them to or face lawsuits?
Much like the Kavanaugh Stops I foresee a whole lot of silence, whining about how they had nothing to do with that and attempts to change the subject when, not if a whole slew of republican run states now start openly engaging in race-based voter suppression.
If the person you interviewed leaves happy odds are good you've been used
An interviewer willing to hold the other person's feet to the fire over their statements and positions and accepting that they might only get the one interview because they pissed off the other person so much that they're not willing to come back for a second is a good way to get actual journalism done. An interviewer who only lobs softball questions, was handpicked by the person being interviewed and is perfectly happy to nod along agreeably to anything said is how you get propaganda and/or unpaid PR releases.
Thanks for the confession I guess
I can think of no bigger red flag that someone is definitely engaging in tax fraud and/or other illegal financial activities than an attempt to exempt yourself and those around you from financial audits.
'I'm sorry they punched you.' 'They're STILL punching me.' 'I said I'm sorry!'
If anything that just makes it even more pathetic and worthless since the one who actually did the thing being 'apologized' for isn't the one giving the apology.
A bluff only works if the other side believes you can and will follow through
Sure, contrition is welcomed. But it’s not quite as welcome when (1) ICE had already disclosed this fact, (2) the DHS continues to post an unwarranted attack on this “activist judge,” and (3) nobody in the government appears willing to act honestly until a court forces them to do it. If someone's words and their actions conflict trust their actions. They can issue statements about how they are terribly sorry for 'accidentally' putting out a hit-piece on the judge but their actions make clear that the apology is being made in just as much good-faith as the attack. The regime will only ramp up their attacks on any judge that doesn't bend the knee and kiss the ring so long as judges keep threatening consequences rather than applying them, and if they don't like it they can grow a spine or resign themselves to being beat on the regular.
You realize that every time you respond like that it's an admission that what you/they want to happen is illegal, right?
SCOTUS whining that people increasingly consider them illegitimate and partisan hacks is like someone that's currently running around punching toddlers whining that people are accusing them of being violent. When you make undeniably clear that you don't consider any law or legal ruling, even your own from mere days back as binding and that your only bedrock is 'the regime always wins' then you deserve nothing but mockery and doubling-down when you complain of people pointing out how openly corrupt you are.
If you don't like the reputation stop showing it's deserved on the regular
'Your Honor, members of the jury, if you stop putting all your focus on the trail of bodies my client is accused of creating and instead focus on the good he's done in his community you'll see that it is unjust in the extreme to have dragged him into court and condemned him for his alleged crimes. In closing I urge you to not blame my client for the times he has pushed old ladies into traffic but instead praise him for all the times he hasn't!'
'How dare you play by the new rules we started using first!'
Given how openly corrupt the regime is and how willing they are to lie and engage in political persecution the default assumption should always be that if they're going after a democrat or non-MAGAt the 'charges' are fraudulent until proven otherwise beyond any shred of doubt.
It is expected from a republican? Sure. Part of the job? Still no
Having the DOJ argue in court that sexual assault is part of the job of president when a republican holds the office is certainly one way to try to get out of paying but I'm not quite sure they understand what that says about them and their boss.
And what's your alternative, what do you think people should be doing and to avoid confusion be specific.
Not that anyone should need that reminder at this point...
What was it? A reminder yet again that if you want actual news anything CBS related is worse than nothing at all.
Flock externally: 'We're sorry you felt offended' Flock internally: Working as intended
“Because of our relationship with Dunwoody PD as a development partner–meaning we had explicit permission from Dunwoody to use their Flock system for both testing (for product improvement) and demonstration–Flock employees did occasionally access Dunwoody’s devices for those purposes,” Langley added. “I recognize that the choice to use MJCCA, rather than parts of the city, was a poor one on our part. I am cognizant of the additional, well-founded sensitivity of the Jewish community to security concerns at this time. Therefore, I would like to extend a formal apology to you and the entire MJCCA community for this poor decision. Candidly, it is because of the very real security concerns the MJCCA community is feeling that I am so proud of our partnership, and those with Jewish organizations across the country.” That wasn't in the slightest an apology, that was a 'I'm sorry if you felt that we did something we shouldn't have but we didn't' non-apology that shifts any offense or outrage outwards along with any blame for feeling those things.
Oh I expect that they'll be flipping/exposing their true position a lot sooner due to multiple democrat states deciding to play by the new republican rules. I fully expect that within the next month or two, or at the latest before the mid-terms SCOTUS will declare that the democrat efforts to gerrymander republican voters out of their voting maps are unconstitutional and must be reverted even as they greenlight republican efforts to do so.
Nothing but self-inflicted reputational injuries
If the NYPD or any other police department is tired of the negative public perception they've earned and the presumption that allegation against officers should be treated as true even if an internal review ends up dismissing it then they have only themselves to blame for refusing to hold their own accountable and ensuring that the 'few bad apples' spoiled the entire barrel. If they spend even a fraction of time honestly investigating and as appropriate kicking the corrupt and criminal out of their own ranks as they do trying to find and arrest those that aren't cops they'd have solved this problem decades ago and it would be unfair to act as though their entire lot is corrupt and untrustworthy, but they didn't so it is.
'Only 64? We can crack 100 within the next year easy!' -Trump regime
The most messed up part? I'm honestly amazed that the US is just barely out of the top third, though I suppose there's still a few more years for the Trump regime to make a play for dead last just like they seem to be doing for everything else like 'economy' and 'international reputation/trust'.
Out of the frying pan, into the pot filled with boiling acid
And another group finds out that their face is and always was on the menu, and as always it's just as funny this time as it has been before.
It's simple: If it helps republicans it's legal/constitutional. If it helps democrats it isn't.
SCOTUS is really going above and beyond in their efforts to make crystal clear that they are the most openly corrupt court in the US, the only thing more horrifying is the thought of what the fifth circuit will do in response to make their case that they deserve the 'title' more.
Sometimes an empty seat is better than the alternative
On this front, she appears to walk a fine line—being skeptical of vaccines and critical of vaccination recommendations, while avoiding overt opposition to them. Given what happened with Kennedy anyone who's not vocally fully on board with vaccinations having proven to be safe and effective at cutting down infectious diseases both at the point of getting infected and the results of infection has no business being nominated never mind having that nomination confirmed. One pro-plague 'alternative health' nutjob is already getting enough people infected and killed, the US does not need a second major government position filled with another one.
Yeah they really did screw that one up by making it so narrow when it should have applied to federal and state agents.
'We haven't had a lynching in decades!' 'Because it WAS illegal.' 'I fail to see the link.'
By 2004, the racial gap in voter registration and turnout had largely disappeared, with minorities registering and voting at levels that sometimes surpassed the majority. Black voters now participate in elections at similar rates as the rest of the electorate, even turning out at higher rates than white voters in two of the five most recent Presidential elections nationwide and in Louisiana. Even if you took that statement at face value and accepted that as true the question then becomes if that's because racism is gone from the US or because it was previously illegal to racially discriminate against minorities voting and therefore the states had to allow them to or face lawsuits? Much like the Kavanaugh Stops I foresee a whole lot of silence, whining about how they had nothing to do with that and attempts to change the subject when, not if a whole slew of republican run states now start openly engaging in race-based voter suppression.