To be fair when your 'reporting' is mostly just PR fluffing for whoever is using you as a mouthpiece at the moment including ads is really just double-dipping and getting paid twice for the same sort of content.
The CDC is, right now, touting its plan to combat measles. On its website, it talks about how it is ramping up its vaccination programs, trying to vaccinate more people, build out surveillance programs to monitor the disease’s spread, and respond quickly to outbreaks. This being the same CDC and website that, unless it's been updated since the last article, is currently claiming that there 'hasn't been enough research' to determine that vaccination doesn't cause autism. When someone's words and their actions clash trust their actions, and the current CDC's actions show that they are not in favor of vaccination to halt or stop preventable diseases, despite what they may claim.
I am absolutely blown away that a bunch of people claiming to be 'murican MAGAts turned out to be liars using trolling for money and entertainment, where could they possibly have picked up such deplorable and dishonest tactics?
“On Friday, Aerospace Industries Association President and CEO Eric Fanning penned an op-ed in the Washington Times arguing that the Senate provision would “cripple innovation” in the defense business.” The only 'innovation' right to repair 'cripples' is how 'innovatively' a company can screw their customers over by forcing them to pay obscene amounts of money to buy a replacement or pay for an official fix that could have been solved for relative pocket-change if the customer could do it, so you'll have to excuse me if I can't seem to muster up any sympathy for all the potential lost 'innovation' right to repair laws would result in.
Honestly I think people are just misunderstanding Kennedy here, he's working overtime to reduce the number of new autistic people by ensuring that the population of new kids is as low as possible, with his method being to drastically increase the number of easily preventable vaccine-related deaths.
Sometimes silence tells you more than words ever could.
Sounds like she's trying the Nixon defense, 'It's not illegal if the president does it', but even then that fails to answer why he threw such a fit over the message reminding US soldiers not to follow illegal orders if Trump isn't giving and/or planning on giving illegal orders.
That’s been particularly true for Trump’s attack on the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), which has done a lot of heavy lifting in recent years when it comes to thwarting security threats, maintaining election cybersecurity, providing useful threat assessments for orgs that can’t afford to do their own, and even deterring the spread of misinformation about government security. Why, I can't possibly imagine why the regime wouldn't consider an agency with those sorts of jobs to be a top priority for funding and keeping staffed with highly trained individuals...
I didn't even catch that on my initial read, that's a very good point. Reminding US soldiers 'You have not just a right but an obligation to ignore illegal orders' is only a threat to his power and authority if the orders they have been, are being, or will be given are illegal, so the fact that he and his cultists thew such a tantrum really gives away the game that they knows his orders, whether past, future or both do not qualify as legal.
But remember, it's the democrats/left that are the violent ones...
The entire regime is filled to the brim with DEI hires (accordingly to their idea of what that means), people who's only qualification for their respective jobs is unquestioning loyalty to Trump with nothing else mattering or even taken into consideration.
Hmm, a very good point. Normally I'm vehemently against such clauses as dodges around the first amendment, but that does seem like it would be the quickest way to get the law torpedoed.
What makes this particularly significant is that the rejection comes from a panel that includes two of Trump’s own judicial appointees. This demolishes the narrative that Trump’s legal failures stem from “biased” courts rather than fundamentally weak cases. You'd think so, but the 'narrative' from the regime these days seems to be that it doesn't matter what a judge's history is or even who gave the position, any judge that rules against Trump has by that action shown themselves to a deranged liberal and therefore not a real conservative or judge.
Gotta admit, it's quite the trick as a company to kill one of your games not just once but twice.
It makes perfect sense really, you just need to think like a member of a brutal dictatorship. Step 1: Frame anyone that protests against you as part of Antifa since clearly no-one else would ever do that. Step 2: Declare that Antifa is a terrorist organization right up there with actual violent criminal organizations. Step 3: Congrats, anyone that protests against you can now be accused of and legally treated as violent terrorists, and if you're already laying the groundwork of (accused) criminals not only having no rights but being able to be executed on the spot without the hassle of a trial then all the better!
As much disgust as I have towards Trump threatening yet another news outlet for saying something he didn't like I can't help but feel a good measure of schadenfreude for the BBC's suffering here. Exactly what did they expect would happen when they immediately backed down, that he'd accept their grovelling apology and attempts at appeasement and consider the matter closed? They showed that they'd cave to threats and like every other time someone tried appeasement he took that as an excuse to escalate and apply even more pressure and demands. Hopefully the BBC's fate will finally be enough for every other outlet to understand that standing your ground may be more expensive in the short-term but the alternative is perpetual grovelling and attempted appeasement because to a tyrant anything less than complete and utter submission is unacceptable.
Yet again the regime acts in a manner that is indistinguishable from a hostile foreign agent. If other countries aren't willing to share intel with the US because they have legitimate concerns that that intel might be used to commit crimes then that leaves a gaping vulnerability for hostile governments or groups to exploit meaning the regime isn't just engaging in murder via a willing military, they're making the entire country less secure in the process.
Yet again the republicans greatest enemy (tied with reality) is the republicans... There's no chance in hell that SCOTUS doesn't greenlight this given they've made crystal clear that the number one rule is now 'If Trump wants it he gets it' and Trump himself called for the gerrymandering, but it will be interesting/disgusting to see what excuses they come up with to excuse blatant and openly racial redistricting that just so happens to be entirely tilted towards republicans.
The most fragile thing in existence, Trump's feelings, were violently assaulted by someone even suggesting that voters would choose someone that wasn't him.
'Yeah I lied straight to your face and we both know it, SO WHAT?'
It turns out that when courts spend years if not decades bending over backwards to give government agencies and agents the sort of benefit of the doubt that a regular citizen would never get, and hand out nothing more than pathetic slaps on the wrist on the exceptionally rare occasion that a judge can be bothered to find an agency/agent guilty people increasingly no longer feel the need to even pretend to respect the law or courts. While I blame scum like Bovino, the regime and the rest of the US gestapo for making a mockery of the US legal system I don't blame them for thinking they can do it, because all the evidence past and present is that they can and will get away it due to courts refusing even now to enforce any actual penalties for doing so.