Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 404: Fox Tuckers Out, CNN Sours On Lemon

(+) Yeah! (+)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Bill Clinton's impeachment deemed a supposedly partisan power grab by Republicans that actually increased his popularity with Democrats? Guess some things never change.

https://twitter.com/juddlegum/status/1661006191525531648?s=46&t=v9nzYLLBIiNYrqldFs9NWQ

https://twitter.com/juddlegum/status/1661008182205087746?s=46&t=v9nzYLLBIiNYrqldFs9NWQ

Absolutely insane story.

white supremacist with crazy nazi names for her children?

musk must already be in her DMs

Why are we saying alleged when she literally named her kids "Aryan" and "Nation".

"Alleged Nazi, Gas Chambers killed a woman this morning while driving a car with his two children Adolf (5) and Hitler (3)"

Dancedreamer posted...

Why are we saying alleged when she literally named her kids "Aryan" and "Nation".

"Alleged Nazi, Gas Chambers killed a woman this morning while driving a car with his two children Adolf (5) and Hitler (3)"

Better question, why were her kids not taken the second she chose those names?

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/oath-keepers-founder-sentenced-18-years-jan-6-seditious-conspiracy-cas-rcna85852

Speaking of nazis

RuneterranSnap posted...

Better question, why were her kids not taken the second she chose those names?

Maybe their middle names make it better. Could be like Nation Alismisbad Lastname.

Kenri posted...

Maybe their middle names make it better. Could be like Nation Alismisbad Lastname.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/3/4/6/AAfXLkAAEgqK.jpg

Kenri posted...

Maybe their middle names make it better. Could be like Nation Alismisbad Lastname.

well her last name is White lol

oh fucking god, in attendance they would be listed as "White, Nation"

So apparently the Citi Bike drama isn't done, now the mother of the central kid in the video is claiming, with receipts, that the kid had been using the bike to travel and was stopped to rest when she asked to tale a bike from him and his friends, and after being declined she reached over and scanned the bike he was using

Yesterday felt like a sneaky big news day. First day in a good while where there like 3+ stories I felt were worth posting here.

1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/05/25/trump-classified-documents-mar-a-lago/

Update on the classified documents at MAL. Trump's employees were moving boxes of documents the day before the FBI arrived to seize them and they find that suspicious. Additionally it came out that even before the subpoena that led to the seizure that Trump and his aides carried out a "dress rehearsal" for moving the classified documents. Finally, it appears prosecutors have gathered evidence that Trump kept classified documents in a visible place and showed them to others.

2. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/05/25/supreme-court-clean-water-act/

SCOTUS decides 5-4 to gut the Clean Water Act by overturning a decades-old previous decision that defined what counted as protected under the law. While all 9 agreed that the EPA went too far in the specific case of an Idaho couple they were deciding, the Court decided to go further than that and just eviscerate the law.

Kavanaugh was the one conservative who joined the liberals this time. In his dissent he points out that the majority is literally just ignoring the text of the law and redefining words as they please to push their agenda. (At issue is the text of the Clean Water act uses "adjacent" and the majority just goes "fuck it" and decides it actually means "adjoining" to which Kavanaugh points out they are different words with different meanings. And that by deciding to ignore the text and insert their own version from their asses they are having millions of acres fall out of protection of the Clean Water Act with potentially massive consequences.)

The majority barely responds to his point, and the tiny paragraph they address him with you can feel their disdain dripping from it. I'm barely paraphrasing when I say their response is, "But how can a wetland count as water? who is redefining words now? checkmate libs."

3. https://twitter.com/VanityFair/status/1661763458843529216

Is it really "saying the quiet part out loud" at this point? I kind of feel like it's not quiet anymore that the GOP puts the party before the country. "A default would be bad for America but good for us politically."

Thorn posted...

Kavanaugh was the one conservative who joined the liberals this time. In his dissent he points out that the majority is literally just ignoring the text of the law and redefining words as they please to push their agenda.

weird of kavanaugh, of all people, to act like he has any issue with someone doing this

Defund the Supreme Court

Kenri posted...

weird of kavanaugh, of all people, to act like he has any issue with someone doing this

yeah it is, but honestly it almost always feels weird when one of them defects because it's almost never about principle based on their previous votes

Only exception I can think of offhand is that Gorsuch and Native American rights where he seems to be pretty consistent on that. Well, some of their rights, I guess.

Wow, possible to be too corrupt for Texas Rs apparently

https://twitter.com/patricksvitek/status/1662576221035667457?s=21

Tentative agreement in principle reached on debt ceiling between McCarthy and the White House.

https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1662615601200734209
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/27/us/politics/debt-limit-deal.html

Details are sparse right now (McCarthy says we'll get the text tomorrow), but NYT reporting that part of the deal includes:

2 year raise of the debt limit (so past the 2024 election)
New work requirements on TANF and food stamps

• Specifically it seems it limits the time people under 54 with no children can benefit
• Also expands the program for vets and homeless

IRS funding to crack down on tax cheats reduced from $80bn to $70bn
Speeds up environmental reviews of certain energy projects

Welp I guess I wont lose my health insurance at least!

Speeding up environmental review is actually probably good, the process is seriously abused by people who just generally want to stop stuff for any reason (in fact, a ton of clean energy projects get held up massively by environmental review as well)

LordoftheMorons posted...

Welp I guess I wont lose my health insurance at least!

Same, but I'm not counting that yet until the text is out and the bill passes.

Fair enough! Overall it looks not that terrible all things considered (still bad of course, but better than default or the GOP wishlist). And the limit being pushed past 2024 is pretty big.

Details are still fluid but I've seen several numbers now on the IRS number: $1.9b (apparently McCarthy used this on Fox), $10b (the NYT had this when the details broke), and $20b.

I'm tentatively thinking that NYT just fucked up/details changed last minute and it was a $20bn reduction (So $80b increase dropped to $60b) spread over 10 years which would explain why the $1.9b number is around as a per-year thing.

Also seeing reporting that the changes to TANF and food stamps isn't new work requirements but moving the existing age restriction on the already in-place ones from those age 49 and below up to age 54 and below. Which still sucks for those people but is not quite as bad as I feared.

Also seeing that Sinema blew up a good deal of the permitting reform that ended up in the final deal (as in, it's still there but in a much reduced form) because of fucking course she did. (how did she eve get in the negotiating room for this when it was House GOP and Biden?)

Though, naturally, until we see the bill who the fuck knows. But this is my current understanding of what the deal entails.

I stand corrected. Apparently it really is only a $1.9 billion reduction from the original $80 billion lmfao

https://twitter.com/doug_sword/status/1662876896596566017

Also lol:

https://twitter.com/caitlinzemma/status/1662981982576427010

Thanks for the updates. I haven't been seeing many updates in my circle since last weekend.

https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1663200925018726407?s=46&t=v9nzYLLBIiNYrqldFs9NWQ

Some of the replies are about as awful as youd expect.

insert sowing reaping meme here

its really funny that every now and then a gop lawmaker will tip their hand and reveal they aren't a true believer psycho and they get completely roasted by their base for it

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1663200925018726407?s=46&t=v9nzYLLBIiNYrqldFs9NWQ

Some of the replies are about as awful as youd expect.

probably a fun game to search the "it's their country" folks twitter history with the word "canada"

Tara Reade defected to Russia, lol?

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1664005386649628672

Debt ceiling deal makes it out of the rules committee and clears one of the last (I think) procedural votes. These are usually straight party line votes, but the Dems had to bail the GOP out since enough Freedom Caucus people tried to kill it hence the wacky seeming vote splits here.

I think the actual final vote is expected some time tonight. (Where I expect the vote will be more bipartisan, as this was just a procedural vote)

Passed the House

https://twitter.com/justinwolfers/status/1664079270140846080?s=21

About twice as many R no votes as D

Also happening:

https://twitter.com/cnnbrk/status/1663999624930050048

Special Prosecutor allegedly has Trump on tape acknowledging he had classified info taken at his golf course in NJ. CNN, WaPo and others cross-referenced the description of the tape with all the post-administration books people released and think it likely refers to a meeting described in Mark Meadows's book where Meadows describes Trump "recalling" a report written up by former Joint Chief of Staff Milley about how to attack Iran - including a massive troop deployment.

Again, this guy was POTUS.

https://twitter.com/moreperfectus/status/1664287708070461441?s=46&t=v9nzYLLBIiNYrqldFs9NWQ

Supreme Court rules 8-1 that companies can sue unions for costing them money, which it feels like, worst case scenario, legalizes union busting?

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Supreme Court rules 8-1 that companies can sue unions for costing them money, which it feels like, worst case scenario, legalizes union busting?

I mean it's not like we're enforcing the bans on union busting anyway.

What a hellscape we live in

That's unbelievably fucked up. Wow.

If it was 8-1 it doesn't sound like it was a very divisive case. The lone dissent doesn't even really say it was wrong, but it should have been handled by the NLRB instead.

NLRB is already setup to handle this shit. Completely overstepping. Fuck em all.

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

https://twitter.com/moreperfectus/status/1664287708070461441?s=46&t=v9nzYLLBIiNYrqldFs9NWQ

Supreme Court rules 8-1 that companies can sue unions for costing them money, which it feels like, worst case scenario, legalizes union busting?

Question: is this allowing them to sue for costing them money because of the interruption of the strike, or rather for costing money because they deliberately wasted company materials by leaving wet concrete in the trucks?

major difference in what that ruling means depending on what the answer to that question is

cause Im all for strikes but it doesnt seem unfair for a company to sue if inventory is deliberately damaged or wasted beyond what is actually necessary in the course of a strike

Chaeix posted...

Question: is this allowing them to sue for costing them money because of the interruption of the strike, or rather for costing money because they deliberately wasted company materials by leaving wet concrete in the trucks?

major difference in what that ruling means depending on what the answer to that question is

cause Im all for strikes but it doesnt seem unfair for a company to sue if inventory is deliberately damaged or wasted beyond what is actually necessary in the course of a strike

Sounds like yet another good reason to consider the SC illegitimate and completely disregard them.

I hope any union that gets sued following this just completely refuses to cooperate or even acknowledge the lawsuits.

Edit: Meant in reply to the initial announcement, but I think we all know they're doing it to open the door more against them.

If you're the party getting sued, you can't disregard the courts. Well, you can I guess, but it won't stop them from seizing your assets.

red_sox_777 posted...

If you're the party getting sued, you can't disregard the courts. Well, you can I guess, but it won't stop them from seizing your assets.

Stopping the bullshit has to start somewhere and it's clearly not going to be from up above like it should.

Chaeix posted...

Question: is this allowing them to sue for costing them money because of the interruption of the strike, or rather for costing money because they deliberately wasted company materials by leaving wet concrete in the trucks?

major difference in what that ruling means depending on what the answer to that question is

cause Im all for strikes but it doesnt seem unfair for a company to sue if inventory is deliberately damaged or wasted beyond what is actually necessary in the course of a strike

I think these sound distinct but are actually the same thing.

RuneterranSnap posted...

Sounds like yet another good reason to consider the SC illegitimate and completely disregard them.

+1

You all are arguing that destroying company property is ok as long as its considered union activity?

What in the world.

It was an 8-1 decision not a 6-3 or 5-4

masterplum posted...

You all are arguing that destroying company property is ok as long as its considered union activity?

What in the world.

It was an 8-1 decision not a 6-3 or 5-4

The issue is, where do you draw the line for what qualifies as "destroying company property"? The case itself was about concrete truck drivers who let their concrete harden, wasting it. In the lawsuit itself, they specifically say "we took measures so no trucks were damaged, but the concrete was wasted".

So now you have a precedent that companies can say "oh no, we have veggies/concrete/anything perishable, if you strike--it will be wasted and you'll be 'destroying company property'".

That's the entire point of a strike, dude! You point out "hey, if we don't work, your business literally fails".

Unions shouldn't get rights that any other corporation or organization wouldn't get.

Why do unions not simply follow the company approved strike guidelines if they do not want to be quashed?

Debt ceiling deal passed the Senate:

https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1664465163947319297?s=21

Sooner than I thought; I assumed the Mike Lees and Rand Pauls of the place were gonna force it to take forever

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

The issue is, where do you draw the line for what qualifies as "destroying company property"? The case itself was about concrete truck drivers who let their concrete harden, wasting it. In the lawsuit itself, they specifically say "we took measures so no trucks were damaged, but the concrete was wasted".

So now you have a precedent that companies can say "oh no, we have veggies/concrete/anything perishable, if you strike--it will be wasted and you'll be 'destroying company property'".

That's the entire point of a strike, dude! You point out "hey, if we don't work, your business literally fails".

Right. I don't think straight up vandalism should be protected, but if, for example, restaurant workers refused to work then a lot of food will likely go bad. The union shouldn't be liable for those kinds of losses.

Read through the SCOTUS opinions and yeah the majority is just legislating out of their asses here and KBJ is the only one who makes a rational case in her dissent.

The law is extremely clear that if it is even arguable that the Union is protected by the NLRA then the courts have to sit back and wait for the NLRB to investigate the case before proceedings continue - a clear statement of intent on the part of Congress that the heavy lifting and fact finding is meant to be handled by the NRLB and not the courts.

What the majority does is go, "Well, fuck that. We'll hijack the fact assessment from the NRLB so we can fuck over labor." They decide to accept the company's allegations while simultaneously dismissing the Union's rebuttals re: what actions the Union took regarding the wet concrete in the trucks and therefore conclude "Well, the Union didn't do enough to help the company out" and just start theorycrafting things they could have done instead - despite KBJ pointing out not only does precedent continuously show that workers are perfectly protected in their right to strike even if it's known that the company would lose perishable products because of the timing chosen.

Like the majority keeps coming back to, "But the Union just left the concrete in the trucks and oh my god those poor trucks, the company had to do miracle work to save them and jesus those trucks were innocent so fuck labor" and when presented with the Union stating they brought the trucks back to the company and left the barrels rotating to extend the amount of time the company had to act they go, "Well, why the fuck should we trust you? The company said not all the trucks came back and they seem like honest blokes." Meanwhile KBJ points out that - again - workers have a right to withhold labor and that the limitation of, "Workers can't affirmatively destroy property" refers not to things such as perishable goods (whether they be food, livestock, or in this case concrete) being lost because of a work stoppage and that again there is precedent on this - but that it instead means that the Union employees can't double back after striking and start sabotaging and says that unprotected actions would be more in the vein of slashing the tires on the trucks or just dumping the concrete themselves at random. And also that by the company's very nature there's basically never going to be a "good" time for them to strike under the majority's asinine view and points out the company had advance notice of two months that a strike was possible because it was required by law and they knew the bargaining talks had broken down so it's not like they could credibly claim to be blindsided by a strike.

Meanwhile Thomas and Gorsuch just want to gut the NLRA even more than the majority was willing to and Alito essentially writes a separate concurrence specifically to threaten the lower court now getting this case back that if they listen to KBJ who points out why this case should still be dismissed even taking into account what the majority said today that he (and implies the majority) would be willing to overturn them in record time so don't you dare listen to her.

https://www.dw.com/en/german-left-wing-extremist-lina-e-found-guilty/a-65767893

State prosecutors said Lina E.* and her three co-defendants Lennart A., Philipp M., and Jannis R. carried out a series of attacks on neo-Nazis in the eastern states of Thuringia and Saxony between 2018 and 2020, including two attacks on Leon R., a notorious far-right extremist who was himself arrested for allegedly forming a far-right extremist organization.

The group around Lina E. is believed to have raided a well-known neo-Nazi bar in the town of Eisenach in late 2019 and attacked Leon R. with hammers and batons. When the initial attack failed, the group attacked him again a few weeks later outside his car. Other neo-Nazis were left with broken bones and other injuries after the attacks.

Should receive an award imo