I don’t know about you but I was disappointed by the CNN interview of Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. Interviewer Dana Bash wanted her colleagues to say she was tough, so she asked several gotcha questions. In particular, I was annoyed by the “what will you do in your first day in office?” question. It seems to be a standard question, but the answers it elicits are either banal or unrealistic. I recall that Trump told Sean Hannity that he would “drill, baby, drill” and “build the wall” on his first day. Oh, and he would be a dictator on day one. Harris just offered some platitudes about starting “the opportunity culture.” The realistic answer might be “I’m going to meet with my new staff; I’m going to find out where the bathroom is; I’m going to check out the desk drawers and arrange my family pictures; I’m going to plan our legislative agenda.” If Harris were coming in after Trump, she would have many executive orders to sign, reversing his bad ideas. But she follows Biden, and it is unlikely she will reverse anything.
Thom Hartmann was disappointed by the CNN interview. He explains here:
CNN shows everything that’s wrong with 2024’s repeat of 2016’s election coverage. In an interview with Vice President Harris and Governor Walz Thursday night, CNN’s Dana Bash chose to repeat pathetic rightwing attacks on the candidates instead of engaging in issues of importance to a majority of Americans. Only four of the questions she asked during the entire interview were not rightwing talking points. She could have asked about their pledge to protect Social Security and Medicare after Trump proposed cuts to both programs every year for his 4 years in office, or the 90% of Americans who want weapons of war off our streets, or their efforts to revive labor unions in the face of GOP opposition, or how they feel about Republicans on the Supreme Court thwarting Biden’s efforts to cut student loan debt, or what they’d do about the severe ethics problem with bribed Supreme Court justices Alito, Roberts, and Thomas, or their support for the queer community in the face of unrelenting attacks by JD Vance and other rightwingers, but, no. Instead, she had to ask about a one-word misspeak by Walz five years ago, whether Harris identified as Black or Indian or what, and why Walz implicitly lied when he said he and his wife had undergone “IVF” treatment for infertility when, in fact, they’d undergone the similar “IUI” treatment. As if anybody, anywhere, gives a damn. Probably the best analysis of the interview is here on Substack by Jeff Teidrich. Meanwhile, CNN’s management is ebullient about having pulled in a “whopping 6 million viewers.” Like I said, money over country…

I was very underwhelmed by that interview. Had to turn it off. As for the “what would you do on your first day” question, yes, perhaps it is a silly question, but as you note, it is a standard question that is asked of every single candidate. That Harris didn’t have a crisp response to that gimme of a question at the ready was very surprising to me. No, it doesn’t matter substantively. But it’s not a good look and I wish she had been more prepared.
LikeLike
She’s been VPOTUS for four years. She knows where the bathroom is. And developing a legislative agenda is something she should have started on by now. In fact, it should be highly detailed and published by now. In fact, the transition should already be happening now. It’s not unreasonable to expect her to hit the ground running day one and to be able to tell us what she’ll do that day.
LikeLike
Vice-presidents don’t customarily develop their own policy agenda and transition plans. Since she is Biden’s veep, you can expect that she and he have lots of common policies.
LikeLike
OMG, incoming presidents plan their transition. This is expected behavior. Every other candidate in history has been expected to have clearly developed policies laid out and publicly available. The fact that you’re pretending Harris’s lack of policy is normal is the problem. You will literally excuse anything in the name of “not Trump”.
And the fact that her policies are likely to be the same as Biden’s is the problem, not something to celebrate. I know you don’t realize it in your Long Island bubble, but people are suffering. Homelessness and debt are higher than they’ve ever been. There’s still a pandemic raging. Healthcare is priced out of the range of most people. We are destroying our planet at the fastest rate ever. We’re rattling sabers at the largest nuclear armed countries on the planet. And we’re funding mass slaughter. Neither Biden nor Harris (and, yes, nor Trump) have any plan for dealing with any of that because their corporate owners don’t want them to.
LikeLike
Harris is not an incoming president. She became the official candidate only six weeks ago.
LikeLike
You’re being pedantic. Harris is running for the highest office in the country. She should be able to tell people specifically what she intends to do with that office. This has never been controversial.
LikeLike
Why do I know exactly what she plans to do in office and you don’t?
LikeLike
Okay, what does she plan to do about the mass slaughter in Gaza and now the West Bank? How does she plan to deal with Russia in a way that won’t lead to nuclear war? What is she doing to get the millions of homeless people off the streets? How is she going to provide every American with healthcare? What will she do to protect the rights of free speech and protest? What will she do to reduce carbon emissions and protect the environment? Flint, Jackson and East Palestine still don’t have drinkable water – what’s her plan for that?
For starters.
LikeLike
Listen to her.
LikeLike
Okay, post.(a) video(s) where she answers those questions and I’ll listen. I’ve done a lot of listening and I haven’t heard the answers so far. I’ve only heard generic platitudes.
LikeLike
Sorry, Dienne, I’m busy.
LikeLike
So you can’t back up your own argument. Duly noted.
LikeLike
So, Dienne, do you think that Vladimir Putin is serious about starting a nuclear war?
LikeLike
Putin has made it clear that he sees U.S./ NATO actions as an existential threat to Russia and he will not allow Russia to fall and be Balkanized. He’s been extraordinarily patient so far, tolerating a lot more than the U.S. would tolerate. I hope his patience lasts longer, but when cornered and feeling like the have no other options, people and nations do extreme things.
LikeLike
So, you do think that Putin is insane enough to start a nuclear war.
LikeLike
I believe it’s likely he would rather than letting Russia be Balkanized. I also believe either the U.S. or Israel could launch a first strike. (In Israel’s case, likely Iran, not Russia.)
LikeLike
What I believe is far more likely though is that with all this build up and brinkmanship, there will be some misunderstanding or malfunction that will launch WWII. Ratcheting up hostilities is the height of hubris and stupidity.
LikeLike
Agreed. That’s why Tsar Vladimir the Short and Defenestrating should a) get tf out of every square inch of Ukraine and b) renounce the imperialist program he set forward in his essay “On the Historical Unity of Ukrainians and Russians,” hold actual elections in Russia without first imprisoning or killing off any serious opposition he has.
LikeLike
“Every other candidate in history has been expected to have clearly developed policies laid out and publicly available.”
Please tell us what Trump’s “carefully developed policies” on Gaza are. Or his “carefully developed policies” on ANYTHING are.
Or don’t, because he (and most other candidates) do not have one.
Drill, baby, Drill is NOT a “clearly developed policy”. Neither is Build a Wall or “I will make the greatest deal ever made with Netanyahu and Hamas and Putin and Ukraine and everything will be sunshine and roses.”
LikeLike
Truly sad how Trump has become your yardstick for acceptable political behavior. I could’ve sworn Democrats were supposed to be better. But the only argument I’ve heard for months now is “so you think Trump would be better?” No, that’s the point!
LikeLike
“Every other candidate in history – EXCEPT FOR THE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE IN 2016, 2020 and 2024 – has been expected to have clearly developed policies laid out and publicly available.”
There, I fixed it for ya!
I didn’t know you wanted to talk about how the Republican candidate for the last 3 presidential elections did not have to have any policies. Or doesn’t that matter to you?
And why is it that you have posted FREQUENTLY since 2016 without ever mentioning how upset you were that the Republican candidate wasn’t revealing detailed policy.
On the contrary, you even surmised frequently that it was very possible that Trump would not be any worse than a Democrat! Despite all the racist and xenophobic dog whistles Trump was using throughout the 2016 campaign, you still had some faith that the leader of the birther movement might turn out not to be any worse than the evil Democrats.
Your hypocrisy is unbelievable. You hated the Dem in 2016 for her policies but thought the Republican might not be any worse because you knew nothing about his policies and didn’t care.
In 2024, you hate the Dem for not offering more policy details and never once speculate that she might be even better than Biden or at least no worse.
You don’t have any excuse for not knowing who Trump is anymore and what policies he supports. If you are content with those policies of the right wing neo-fascist Republicans, vote for Trump. This isn’t a beauty contest. Most of us – including Bernie and AOC – were happily surprised at Biden’s work toward more progressive legislation. If you don’t see a difference between a little better and a lot worse, that makes sense since the Supreme Court didn’t matter to you either.
LikeLike
Thank you for proving my point, NYCPSP. You can’t address any point I raise except by yelling “but Trump!”. Again, are Democrats supposed to be better than Trump, or is everything that Trump would do now excusable if Democrats do it too? If Democrats are no better, then what’s the point? And if they are better, then damn well expect them to be better!
LikeLike
The ONLY point you keep making is “Trump doesn’t count”! For 3 elections now that is your only point. There’s no difference between the Dems and Republicans(as long as you don’t count Trump and ignore everything that Bernie and AOC say and imply they are co-opted liars who want the evil Dems to keep doing evil things),
The Democrats aren’t “supposed” to be better than Trump, which is your ONLY argument when you attribute your own lies to us. We never said that the Dems are “supposed” to be better.
Read my lips: The Democrats ARE better than Trump. That is a fact.
It is only YOUR OPINION that Trump doesn’t count or that Bernie and AOC are supporting corrupt Dems and lying to us. You haven’t made one convincing argument, except for your disgusting innuendo that Putin is justified in nuking Ukraine or us because the evil Dems made him do it. Or maybe the “zionists” (as you like to call anyone who believes Israel has a right to exist).
You know exactly what Kamala stands for — she hasn’t disavowed Biden’s economic policies – the policies that Bernie and AOC liked – although she has made it clear that she would push back more on Netanyahu and has ideas for making housing and food more affordable.
You gave the benefit of the doubt to a white man – the leader of the birthers – spewing racist and xenophobic remarks in 2016, but 2024 you insist that a Black/Asian woman “prove” to you that she will only support detailed policies that are approved by you. Because you won’t vote for her if she “only” supports the policies Biden has been supporting the last 4 years?
Your concern for the Palestinians would be more believable if you had shown any concern for Trump’s pro-Netanyahu foreign policy in 2016 or 2020 when the Democrats were pushing back.
You keep giving Putin the benefit of the doubt! You trust what he says! The faith you place in the word of known liars like Putin and Trump defies belief, and your don’t hold Kamala to a higher standard of honesty — she already far surpasses that — you are holding her to a non-existent standard of presenting detailed policy papers that no politician has ever met.
LikeLike
All I keep hearing you say is that since Trump didn’t have policies, it’s okay that Harris doesn’t either. Yes, I hold Democrats to higher standards than Republicans. I’m sorry you don’t. The willingness of people like you to accept literally anything because “not Trump” is why this country is in the dire straits it’s in.
LikeLike
Here are her policies:
She will appoint highly qualified justices to the Supreme Court; Trump will replace Thomas and Alito with lunatics.
She will do everything possible to protect reproductive rights; Trump will sign a national abortion ban.
She will appoint smart people to lead the Environmental Protection Agency; Trump will abolish it.
She will protect the rights of LGBT people; Trump will undermine them.
She will continue to support NATO and multilateralism; Trump will go isolationist.
She will try to pass reform of our immigration laws to strengthen border security and create a path to citizenship for immigrants who are law-abiding and responsible; Trump will round up 11 million immigrants in detention camps and deport them.
She will expand Obamacare to give more people coverage; Trump will try to repeal Obamacare and put nothing in its place.
Just watch her speeches. It’s all there.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Those are platitudes , not policies. The same platitudes Democrats have been mouthing in campaigns for decades, but somehow one they’re in power they have a million reasons why they can’t do those things. Yet you believe it every time, like Charlie Brown and the football.
LikeLike
They are policies, not platitudes. You are wrong. Has Trump pledged to appoint justices who will defend reproductive rights? Or to expand health insurance? Or to build affordable housing? Are you playing dumb?
Please. Enough. Nothing will satisfy you but Trump’s victory.
LikeLike
The double standard of this Putin-defender must be called out.
“The rich must pay their fair share of taxes” is a platitude if Kamala says it, but brilliant policy if Jill Stein says it.
Advocating “community control” of police is keeping the status quo if a Democrat says it, but a brilliant policy idea if Jill Stein says it.
“an economy that works for all of us, not just the wealthy and powerful” is a platitude when Kamala says it, but a brilliant policy detail if Jill Stein says it.
A candidate who says she will center US foreign policy around human rights to oppose “violence, occupation, and apartheid” — but who rabidly opposes economic sanctions on Russia and rabidly opposes helping Ukraine defend itself against aggression by Putin — is an honest believer in human rights.
Allowing Putin to annihiliate as many Ukrainians as he wants — in the name of fighting Nazis – is ADMIRABLE. Helping Ukraine fend off Putin is evil.
A politician like Jill Stein who promises to shake their finger vigorously (and do nothing else) to stand up for human rights around the world, is supposedly someone who has policy details and not the “platitudes” that Kamala is offering.
We have seen 4 years of Biden and 4 years of Trump. Kamala will be even better than Biden, IF she has a working majority in Congress.
And yet…..this person clearly didn’t think Trump was so bad. And that says it all.
LikeLike
Compare Stein’s policies listed on her website to this pithy list before you talk about double standards.
LikeLike
Who cares what Jill Stein’s policies are? AOC said she was a vanity candidate and I agree. She has built nothing. This is her third pointless run for president. She helped elect Trump in 2016.
LikeLike
BTW, what does “local control of police” even mean? Police are locally controlled. That doesn’t stop police violence. Police need to be defunded and demilitarized, not just “locally controlled”.
LikeLike
No, she didn’t. That’s a state, long debunked way for liberals to console themselves that their candidate lost to an orange baboon that she hand-picked to run against.
Stein’s policies are everything the majority of Americans want – M4A, living wages, end to proxy war, occupations, sanctions and other world destabilizing aggressions, debt forgiveness, free college, etc
LikeLike
She is a Putin stooge. She got 1 million votes in 2016, enough to elect Trump in swing states.
https://search.app/jNuGdqkgmmaVJBxeA
”
In two key states that President-elect Donald Trump won, his margin of victory was smaller than the total number of votes for Green Party nominee Jill Stein.
{mosads}In Michigan, Trump defeated Democrat Hillary Clinton by 10,704 votes, while Stein got 51,463 votes, according to current totals on the state’s official website.
And in Wisconsin, Trump’s margin over Clinton was 22,177, while Stein garnered 31,006 votes.
In Pennsylvania, meanwhile, Stein’s total of 49,485 votes was just slightly smaller than Trump’s victory margin of 67,416 votes, according to the state’s latest numbers.
The margins were first noted by Cook Political Report’s Dave Wasserman, who on Thursday tweeted that Stein’s total votes were greater than the margin of Trump’s victory in all three states. The votes in Pennsylvania have since changed again, and Trump’s margin is now larger than the total vote for Stein.”
LikeLike
Dienne, vote, don’t vote.
No one cares how you vote.
LikeLike
You say after you just said that Jill Stein cost Hillary the election. Pick a lane.
LikeLike
I said I don’t care how you vote. I meant it.
LikeLike
There is nothing wrong with dienne77 voting for Trump. Or voting for a 3rd party candidate because she would rather have Trump than a Democrat.
As long as she OWNS it. Hearing her blame Kamala or Biden or some amorphous entity known as the “evil Democrats” for HER OWN CHOICES because she seems to know, deep down, that her choices are wrong and dangerous for vulnerable trans kids and others, is the problem. She should own her choice, not pretend someone forced her to empower Trump and the far right haters of multicultural America.
I don’t think that it is a coincidence that the same people who make excuses for Trump and Putin also make excuses for themselves.
Jimmy Carter was elected in 1976 and he had a huge majority in both the House and Senate. 61 Democratic Senators! Americans wanted universal healthcare! Yet Carter blocked it.
So I refused to vote for Jimmy Carter because I thought he was no different than Reagan. I was like dienne77 except at least I had some reasonable expectation that Carter should be getting this done with that kind of majority in both the House and Senate. Assuming dienne77 is not a hypocrite, she would probably applaud me for recognizing that Jimmy Carter was just the kind of evil Democrat she hates, and dienne77 would – if she is not a hypocrite – STILL be blaming Jimmy Carter for Reagan’s victory and all the bad stuff that came from empowering Reagan instead of Carter.
But even as a teenager, it only took a short time of experiencing Reagan’s presidency until I realized I was wrong about there being no difference between Carter and Reagan.
There came a time when I could accept that Jimmy Carter, for all his flaws, was still a decent person and far better candidate than Reagan.
Jimmy Carter wasn’t perfect. Neither is ANY candidate.
I don’t understand why dienne77 can’t admit she was wrong in 2016, she was wrong in 2020 and she is wrong now. What more proof does she need? The overthrow of democracy? The right wing Supreme Court isn’t convincing enough?
If she is fine with Trump winning and NOT fine with Kamala winning, she should own it.
Not desperately search for something – anything! – to justify her hatred and rejection of Kamala.
AOC and Bernie explained this very clearly in 2020 and in 2024. I find it odd that dienne77 has more trust in Putin’s words than in Bernie’s and AOC’s. She clearly believes that there is no difference between Trump and Kamala and she puts her fingers in her ears and pretends Diane Ravitch hasn’t explained what Kamala stands for multiple times.
lol that Jill Stein has well-thought out policies! They are the typical Democratic wish list and include policies that Trump’s Supreme Court blocked Biden from implementing! Thanks, Jill Stein voters in 2016! If you weren’t Putin’s pawns, we might already have a lot of that! Jill Stein: vote for me in 2016 to prevent an evil Democrat from filling an open Supreme Court seat and repealing Citizens United! Putin says it will all be good! Jill Stein: vote for me in 2024 to prevent an evil Dem from being president because having Trump with full immunity and the blessing of the Supreme Court is no biggie. Putin says it will all be good!
LikeLike
The CNN interview was almost entirely softballs for Harris and was much too short. Harris just recited platitudes that fool extreme partisans but don’t fool people who actually think about what she said. Linked below is an incredible statement by Harris where she implicitly states her belief that government should regulate speech. Neither Trump nor Harris has much regard for constitutional norms.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1830830413725786135
LikeLike
Your “both sides do it” doesn’t hold any water.
Should I assume that you are going to be voting for the CONVICTED FELON?
LikeLike
You made no points to refute anything I wrote. Because I don’t regard Harris as perfect you assume that I support Trump. Same for Trump worshipers who assume I support Harris when I criticize their idol in any way.
Note to this blog’s readers: despite having an obvious bias – like Fox has the other way – CNN is still to some degree a news organization. They are not going to have the extreme partisanship that this blog does.
LikeLike
I didn’t say anything about “Harris as perfect”.
I refuted your “both sides do it by pointing out that the tRump, ya know the CONVICTED FELON, and Harris are not the same at all. . . see the felony difference-sorry that you couldn’t figure out my little less than totally obvious analysis.
So you are voting for the CONVICTED FELON, eh!
LikeLike
You’re arguing with a troll.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I prefer to call it “giving shit to the troll.”
LikeLike
It is not “extreme partisanship” to oppose the re-election of a man who tried to overthrow the Constitution and the government because he is a sore loser.
LikeLike
I agree with Duane.
Amber Stockman said: “Neither Trump nor Harris has much regard for constitutional norms.”
That sounds like bothsiderism to me. She’s equating Harris to Trump on constitutional norms!!! Are you kidding me. Harris is not a nutty rando serial liar as Trump is. There’s no comparison between Trump and Harris because Trump is so off the charts bizarre, a bloviating blowhard while Harris is a thinking sane human being.
LikeLiked by 1 person
In that brief Twitter comment, Harris was probably referring to COVID disinformation. Before Elon Musk bought Twitter, Twitter had content reviewers to delete known liars who were spreading disinformation. Musk fired all the content moderators and welcomed all the Nazis and science-deniers to return to Twitter.
Of course she has read the Constitution. Trump has tried to shred it. See January 6, 2021.
LikeLike
I can’t find the original full video but I assume you’re right about this being about Covid. But the idea that Facebook and Twitter should have government oversight regarding the content of speech on those platforms is disturbing, at least to me. Maybe the full clip would make clear that that wasn’t what she was arguing for. But if it is what she was arguing for, she should be asked whether that’s still her view.
LikeLike
But the idea that Facebook and Twitter should have government oversight regarding the content of speech on those platforms is disturbing, at least to me.
AGREED
LikeLike
The idea that Elon Musk should have total oversight regarding the content of speech on “this platform “twitter/x” is disturbing, at least to me.
He gets to censor. He gets to amplify lies.
When a network broadcasts content that is false, they can be sued.
Elon Musk believes he should be able to amplify false content (and censor true content that he doesn’t like) in the name of freedom of speech. And then deny responsibility.
I think the people who think this is okay would not think it was okay if it was their own family subjected to it, or the politicians they like who were subjected to a campaign where people wanted to kill them to help “protect” the innocent.
A group of folks did an experiment with pushing false information about a Republican via facebook and he lost. Oh the outrage by the Republicans and the media.
The problem is that the Dems understand that they are stuck between a rock and a hard place. If they start lying too, then all public discourse is debased and no one believes anything anymore – the Orwellian future that authoritarians dream of.
So they expect the media to call it out, but it doesn’t because only side does it, so it would be “biased” to call it out. Or they find something that the Dems do that is not even remotely equivalent, getting a number wrong that they correct later, and then make false equivalencies to the blatant false reality the Republicans offer (because Trump and the Republicans claiming Trump won in 2020 is equivalent to a Dem getting a fact that is irrelevant to the main point wrong.
LikeLike
I agree that Musk himself is also disturbing.
LikeLike
Who are you agreeing with who said Musk himself is also disturbing? Did someone here talk about Musk’s personality?
Do you agree with this?
“The idea that Elon Musk should have total oversight regarding the content of speech on “this platform “twitter/x” is disturbing, at least to me.”
We all agree that censorship is disturbing, which is why it is very disturbing to give Elon Musk, a man who amplifies lies on his platform, the unregulated freedom to do so and to also censor truths.
LikeLike
Do you think the government should have oversight regarding the content of speech on Twitter or Facebook?
LikeLike
If you don’t, I don’t see what we’re arguing about.
LikeLike
I know you are not questioning me, but my answer is NO! The government should not have oversight of the content of speech on social media sites. Nor the press or radio or TV.
But I do think that the media should review what appears on their sites and be pro-active in removing dangerous information or words intended to incite violence or fake medical advice (prevent COVID by injecting poisons).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Musk is a hard case because he uses his personal platform to circulate lies and hate speech.
LikeLike
Worth noting that other countries have differing policies with regard to social media.
Relatedly:
https://www.propublica.org/article/telegram-pavel-durov-arrest-domestic-terrorism-extremism
LikeLike
There has never been complete freedom of speech in this country.
You can get arrested for yelling “fire” in a crowded theater and starting a stampede that kills people. At least, that was the case. Is is now always legal to shout fire in a crowded theater, flerp!?
But as far as I know, a person cannot be arrested for yelling “fire” if there is a fire!! If smoke is pouring out of the windows.
I assume that courts would decide what constitutes a fair belief that there is a fire (even if it turns out to be wrong), and would not condone someone yelling “fire” who just wants to deceive people.
Although we now have “respected” Republican judges who bend the law to favor the powerful. So there is always danger that if it were a powerful Republican yelling “fire” in order to cause great harm to a theater full of Democrats, the Republican judge would embrace the argument that as long as the person says that they heard a rumor of fire from another person who heard that rumor from a 3rd person, then it was fine for them to yell “fire” and cause people to be hurt, because a 3rd hand rumor is considered credible evidence in special cases where Republicans lying to hurt Democrats needs to be justified as legal and valid.
LikeLike
I am loving this conversation—it’s robust and intelligent. This is why I love this blog and why the trolls continue to appear. You are doing something right. 😉
Musk has been getting pushback from other countries for proliferating false and/or harmful information on his platform. Of course, he doesn’t care, but laws are laws.
LikeLike
Brazil banned Twitter for spreading misinformation. Musk appealed to the courts in Brazil and lost.
https://search.app/kVT5HQKEVgcRLFmH8
One of the justices, Flávio Dino, argued that “freedom of expression is closely linked to a duty of responsibility”.
“The first can’t exist without the second, and vice-versa,” he added.
Reacting to the decision to ban X, Mr Musk had earlier said: “Free speech is the bedrock of democracy and an unelected pseudo-judge in Brazil is destroying it for political purposes.”
In his ruling, Justice Moraes gave companies, including Apple and Google, a five-day deadline to remove X from its app stores and block its use on iOS and Android devices.
LikeLike
Yes! Musk is certainly getting slapped although I’m not holding my breath that it will be enough to stop his disinformation campaign.
Robert Reich also shared this recently:
“In the UK, far-right thugs burned, looted, and terrorized minority communities after Musk’s X spread misinformation about a deadly attack on schoolgirls. Musk not only allowed instigators of this hate to spread these lies, but he retweeted and supported them.
At least eight times in the past 10 months, Musk has predicted a future civil war related to immigration. When anti-immigration street riots occurred across Britain, he wrote: “civil war is inevitable.”
The European Union commissioner Thierry Breton sent Musk an open letter reminding him of EU laws against amplifying harmful content “that promotes hatred, disorder, incitement to violence, or certain instances of disinformation” and warning that the EU “will be extremely vigilant” about protecting “EU citizens from serious harm.”
Musk’s response was a meme that said: “TAKE A BIG STEP BACK AND LITERALLY, F*CK YOUR OWN FACE!”
Elon Musk calls himself a “free speech absolutist,” but he has accepted over 80 percent of censorship requests from authoritarian governments. Two days before the Turkish elections, he blocked accounts critical of the president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.”
https://open.substack.com/pub/robertreich/p/how-to-put-musk-out-of-business?r=ottd6&utm_medium=ios
LikeLike
Hmm. It would serve Musk right if Twitter were banned by the EU.
LikeLike
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lq0BwV_rR4A
LikeLike
That would be pretty hilarious.
LikeLike
Great video!
LikeLike
Musk’s tweets are the kind that used to be deleted by the content moderation teams.
LikeLike
Money talks, apparently.
LikeLike
CNN leadership should be embarrassed, an opportunity for a dialogue turned into the typical gotcha type questions with usual replies. The format was sterile, a panel with interactions on specific deep dives might have been interesting , oh well .. on to September 10th
LikeLike
The interview did not make Harris and Walz look bad. It made CNN and Bash look petty, shallow and biased because it focused on the same old talking points like Harris’ identity.
LikeLike
In this age of social media, it’s all about the clicks to bring in the dollars. Legacy media clamored for this interview because they know they are becoming irrelevant and advertisers are noticing. I have yet to see Dana Bash conduct one interesting interview. As a matter of fact, late night hosts might be the best in that enterprise given the shackles corporate media puts on their reporters. If the vice president wins I hope she considers a full assault on Citizens United and election reform. This eternal political grift is a profound hindrance to governing. This may sound pollyannish, but democracy will remain on the endangered list if politics remains a growth industry.
LikeLike
Dana Bash didn’t want to seem LESS MAGA, and so she does what she does…🤮🤮🤮.
This seems to be what the mainstream news media does: They softball that dump! Are they afraid of getting sued by that dumpster?
LikeLike
What we need from the media is a constant re-iteration of the stakes, not the odds. It’s absurd that Lindsey Graham has a post in the NYT today talking about how Trump can win. He makes no mention of Trump’s attempted coup, nor of his intentions in a second term..
LikeLike
Also, Lindsey Graham was complicit in interfering w/the 2020 Election. What business did the South Carolina Senator have calling Georgia Sec. of State Brad Raffensperger & asking him about “tossing ballots,” which “implied he should try to throw away ballots?” (I can’t find anything further that has resulted from an investigation into this…nothing legal: no prosecution.) Does anyone know?
L.G. is such a toady for it45, despite the fact that, of course, it45 has disparaged L.G. (along w/all its other psychophants-not misspelled!)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Please don’t waste my time. Here are a few things she will do that matter.
She will appoint highly qualified justices to the Supreme Court; Trump will replace Thomas and Alito with lunatics.
She will do everything possible to protect reproductive rights; Trump will sign a national abortion ban.
She will appoint smart people to lead the Environmental Protection Agency; Trump will abolish it.
She will protect the rights of LGBT people; Trump will undermine them.
She will continue to support NATO and multilateralism; Trump will go isolationist.
She will try to pass reform of our immigration laws to strengthen border security and create a path to citizenship for immigrants who are law-abiding and responsible; Trump will round up 11 million immigrants in detention camps and deport them.
She will expand Obamacare to give more people coverage; Trump will try to repeal Obamacare and put nothing in its place.
Just watch her speeches. It’s all there.
LikeLike
I don’t understand how anyone can credibly complain that Kamala has no policies.
The Republicans have no policies! Drill baby Drill? Build a Wall? I was for abortion until I was against it, until I was for it up to 16 weeks, until I was against it again.
LikeLike
haaaa!!! That’s the Donnie we know and . . .
LikeLike
She will–not under any circumstances–be a “dictator from Day One.”
Enough said.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well said, Diane!!!
LikeLike
CNN does NOT stand for “Communities’ News Network.” It’s more like “Corporations’ News Network.” I’ll never forget, Diane, when CNN (& MSNBC too, I think) were softball interviewing Michelle Rhee (& WHERE is she today? Oh, yes, living in the lap of luxury what w/all the $$$ Students Last stole, er, made), & there was a challenge thrown to interview…Diane Ravitch. & I’ll never forget the awful interviewer, Randi Kaye, who asked ridiculous & skewed ?? & rudely cut you off. (She’s now listed as “an investigative reporter for “Anderson Cooper 360.”)
NONE of these “anchors” or msm “stars” (more like celebrities who have no business being in the news business) have what is required (oh, I don’t know–professionalism, courage, journalistic aptitude). ABC doing the Presidential Debate next Tuesday? Why Lindsay Davis (or David Muir for that matter) when you could have your own Washington Chief Correspondent, Rachel Scott, who tore it45 a new one at the Black Journalists Convention. Wouldn’t you like to see her & Kyle Clark of 9News Denver? Did any of you see his unsurpassed moderation of the Colorado CD4 GOP Primary Debate, where he absolutely eviscerated Lauren Boebert & 3 of the other candidates? (I sent Diane the link last week.) I first saw clips on Bill Maher’s “Real Time” (I forgot which episode), but had to look up (& watch, although you can FF through the other moderator) the entire 58 minute presentation. I believe I copied the link correctly (I’m very bad at this, but I tried it, & it worked). If not, just put “9News CD 04 Colorado GOP Primary Debate” in your search engine, & it should come up.
http://www.9news.com/video/news/politics/elections/colorado-congressional-district-4-gop-primary-debate/73-a10d3344-df88-479e-b015-8af8f-79380e1
You might want to read many of the comments (too many to read all), but people from as far away as Ireland (“I’m gobsmacked! I didn’t know a real moderator existed in the USA!”**) & Belgium (& all over the US) watched the entire debate.
Good times: Kyle asks Candidate Deborah Flora about closing public schools–34:16-36:01
Kyle ?s Lauren Boebert about that “theatre thing”: 36:01-37:23
A question about “earmarks” (provisions inserted into a discretionary spending appropriations bill that directs funds to a specific recipient–fr. Wikipedia)–37:36-38:56 (Watch him really trip them up!)
Kyle asks Candidate Richard Holtorf, “Mr. Holtorf, you almost take pride in being offensive to people…” & then goes on to ask Holtorf to talk about his having said that “Boebert dresses like a prostitute.” 40:34-42:26
Kyle forces candidate(s) to answer “Just yes or no”–43:26-44:17
& I missed marking his ?ing of a candidate who failed to disclose a DUI (just watch this guy squirm!) Fast forward/reverse until you find it–it’s priceless!
**Neither did I…a commenter wrote: “& the winner of this debate was Kyle Clark. WHY isn’t he on national tv?” &, finally, “Please make Kyle Clark host for all the debates including the Presidential Debates in 2024!”
Rachel Scott & Kyle Clark–the Presidential (& Vice Presidential) Debate Moderators America deserves.
LikeLike
I’m bad at links–it doesn’t work. But do put “9News CD4 Colorado GOP Debate” in your search engine; it can be found. (Or someone else just post it or the link here, please!)
LikeLike
ALL the “mainstream media” are minions of corporate overlords who favor keeping the tax cuts they got from Trump. If Trump is elected, they will not only keep those tax cuts, but get even more. Just look at the way the mainstream media are ignoring Trump’s mental decline. After each of his rambling, disjointed, and often bizarre (Hannibal Lecter!?!) speeches, the mainstream media write headlines that manage to make it sound like Trump not only made sense, but even made great points. In contrast, the mainstream media go out of their way to nitpick speeches by Harris and Walz. There’s a great deal of the Fox News disease in all of the mainstream media.
LikeLike