Which showed ZERO instances of the government overriding the editorial board.
- DeflectionForth

How about intimidation?

Not what the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that held;

several Biden administration officials violated the First Amendment in two ways: First, some officials unlawfully bullied and intimidated social media platforms into changing their content moderation policies, and second, other officials became so entangled with the companies' moderation processes that those companies were no longer making their own independent decisions.

This is wrong. Period.

Which part?

Jimmy is allowed to get it wrong.
#24 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Why?

Why can't a corporation decide it would rather stay out of the political speculation rotation, and just be a comedy late night show?
It would have perhaps been fine he wasn't so serious, but it really wasn't even a joke.

I have never been around when the late night shows were supposedly great, IMO they have always been poor political humor.

My concern is that we're sliding from comedy into a kind of speech-policing that feels uncomfortably McCarthyesque.

I recall a rodeo clown in a Obama mask got fired, I guess this was the beginning of the end for comedians.

"We can also, at the same time, say that I disagree with the idea that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a mistake," he continued.

I always find these sorts of replies funny, they avoid the points that Charlie was making. I was always sold Obama a wise man, maybe its his cadence, but this really is just tiktok reponse.
Thanks for showing me that part of Obama, Corky.

How many times can Gaza burn? It seems like once a week we get a Gaza thread.

Trumps fault!

Just curious, other than a few good comments, do you Americans even understand how your system works?

Americans are too poor to afford Europe.
#12 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

This is funny.

Europeans can't even afford AC.

-So then all Trump has to do is declare Democrats to be terrorist.

President can't designate Domestic Terrorist groups

Here's the due process :

Record compilation: The State Department, in consultation with the Department of Justice and the intelligence community, compiles an "administrative record." This record uses both classified and open-source information to demonstrate that the organization meets the legal criteria for designation.
Consultation: The Secretary of State consults with the Attorney General and the Secretary of the Treasury on the intended designation.
Congressional notification: The Secretary of State sends a confidential communication to key congressional leaders, notifying them of the intent to designate the organization and providing the factual basis for it.
Publication: Seven days after the congressional notification, the designation is published in the federal register.
Effective date: The designation officially takes effect upon publication in the federal register.

This is Patel telling accusers they are not credible.

No, it would seem that their evidence isn't credible.

Patel is an unqualified substandard moron.

#8 | Posted by Alexandrite

He maybe but, help me out is there any new evidence since he's been in charge?

IOW when Trump DOJ brought him, is there new evidence? Did Bush, Obama, Trump and Biden DOJ miss something?

Hearing stuff like this kinda makes me wish Obama would have done all the stuff Alex Jones said he was going to do.
#4 | POSTED BY HORSTNGRABEN A

What did you hear? The link doesn't go anywhere.

My understanding is it allows the State Department to reject or revoke a passport, if they find the individual is materially connected with a terrorist organization. Then the individual can file a petition and "request a hearing to appeal such denial or revocation not later than 60 days after receiving notice of such denial or revocation."

Seems reasonable, has due process.

Let me guess you think in America, they should be able to name streets after Muslim terrorists. And if someone objects, you'd call them an Islamophobe?

First, you brand your opponents as wicked, malicious, soulless. You tell the public they're "radicalized people," "terrorists," a "wicked ideology." You convince your followers that the very existence of the opposition is a mortal threat to family, to faith, to civilization itself. And there is only one final stop on that train. Dehumanization always has the same destination: extermination.

Is this guy talking about the left wing or the right wing? Its really hard to tell, they sound the same.

Being on the DR for hours on end has made you irrational and stupid. Come back in a few days.
#111 | POSTED BY MODER8

Well it only takes you one post.

Is this divisive?

"You do not belong in this city, Islamophobe! Get out!, you are not welcomed here"
~ Mayor of Dearborn.

How many straight couples have said, "I sure hope little Jr turns out gay"?

Given social media today, probably more than than you are comfortable with.

So God killed 42 kids for calling a guy bald?
Ridiculous.
#13 | Posted by Alexandrite

Well see you're a literalist, which is why you're an idiot.

Is about being subject to current authority, not being forced to accept it's actions as biblical behavior.

Yes, the current authority at the time Rome. In America is American law and authority.

Islam has the same idea as Christianity, the idea of obeying the laws of the nation you are in, much like Druze of Israel.

This was used so the religion could grow within a country and not appear to be rebelling or a traitor; otherwise it wouldn't last.

He cares who other consenting adults sleep with. Get a life!

#5 | Posted by Alexandrite

idk looking at Leviticus, do you sleep with your mother? Sister? A women with her period? Animals?

Why would you only accept violating one of those tenets? I mean if you're going to use the Bible for your moral/ethics guide, why would you accept violating just this one principle?

Leviticus, it would appear, is an evolutionary guide for generational gene transfer.

Are Greeks religious? Why are we quoting scripture when we don't care about religion?

Which brings up a question I have IF Islam is derived from Christianity, which is derived from Judaism, why isn't everyone Muslim?

Why are some people stuck in the old religions.

But since we are playing and it's easy to on the web.

Corky throws down -> Matthew 25:35

I raise you - > Romans 13:1

You can still be nice to the illegal immigrants and kick them out, these aren't mutually exclusive.

You do 2 Kings 2:23-24.
Explain that one to me.

Simple, a large group of young men were ridiculing Elisha, which was to ridicule the Lord himself; The young men were dealt with.

Holy crap, I did just a little research on this shooting and it is frightening how strong the nihilist, violence is the purpose for life, websites are, how dangerous they are, and of course, how easily the far right is covering this shooting up.
#12 | POSTED BY HUGHMASS

I wouldn't say it's being covered up, its just being drowned out by "political" people cheering or grieving Kirks death.

Didn't it happen on the same day Charlie was murdered?

That is simply not true. Not for the NOAA at least.
#35 | POSTED BY REDIAL

Well for all intents and purposes its a meaningless forecast, NOAA seasonal outlooks for the number of storms has a historical rate around 50-60% accuracy.

What movie should I watch to get a sense of who Robert Redford was as an actor?

The other question have, is when these famous actors die, why isn't there a station that would play just their movies for a day? Or period?

Anyhow. Rest in Peace Robert.

You know who I feel bad for? The kids. Two of them. Perfectly innocent of all this.

While true its so sad and unfortunate for all involved, the reality is non-suicide deaths by fire arm are typically black on black.

Why does America ignore this?

And who does the deeming?

Well given gun violence is typically in blue cities. I would say Democrats can change it but choose not too, for some confusing reason.

Charlie Kirk is an acceptable loss.

Are black people? Or do you just hate White people that you disagree with?

"taking care of trans people like we did in the 50s. wtf
#53 | Posted by Alexandrite"

Were there "Trans" people in the 50s? idk but I think there's a difference between a transvestite, and todays transgender individual.

Better living through chemistry?

"It sounds like he meant someone should have beat the trans athletes up the way they would have back in the 50s when men were men and not low testosterone sissies.

#59 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday

You mean like today "trandgenders" are threatening women who complain about them competing in womens sports?

Just this weekend ... its near me ...

"Go suck a sawed-off shotgun."
"You're a Nazi piece of ----."
"We kill Nazis"

"If you wanted Charlie Kirk to be alive, Donald Trump shouldn't have been President for the second term."
~ Destiny, today.

IOW Give us Lumpers what we want or we start taking lives.

Reminds me of ClownShack's famous Oct 7th love for Hamas slicing women after raping them, he loved the enthusiasm..

Where is the outrage Gal? I mean one is just a reference to a possible future. The other is an outright threat to voting citizens lives.