[AMV] #981 Cousin's Friend's Swollen Balls and Larry Elder

quote:

Op woensdag 15 september 2021 19:58 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]
Als hij niks verkeerd heeft gedaan is dat minstens zo illegaal. Voor hetzelfde deed hij gewoon zijn werk.

quote:

Op woensdag 15 september 2021 18:41 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Dankzij de Trumpisten komen er steeds veel mensen opdagen die op de dems stemmen.

quote:

Court reinstates Nunes suit over reporter's tweet
8th Circuit says journalist Ryan Lizza republished story about lawmaker's family by highlighting it on social media.

A federal appeals court has rejected Rep. Devin Nunes' defamation suit over a magazine story about his relatives in Iowa, but the court revived the lawmaker's claim that he was libeled when a reporter linked to the story in a tweet more than a year after it was first published.

The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday that a lower court judge correctly sided with reporter Ryan Lizza over the 2018 Esquire article, "Milking the System," about how members of Nunes' family quietly moved their farming operations to Iowa. However, the three-judge panel said that when Lizza tweeted out a link to the story late the following year, he essentially republished the story after Nunes (R-Calif.) had filed suit over it, rejecting what he said was an implication that the Iowa farm employed undocumented immigrants.

"The complaint here adequately alleges that Lizza intended to reach and actually reached a new audience by publishing a tweet about Nunes and a link to the article," Judge Steven Colloton wrote in an opinion joined by Judges Lavenski Smith and Ralph Erickson. "Lizza tweeted the article in November 2019 after Nunes filed this lawsuit and denied the article’s implication. The pleaded facts are suggestive enough to render it plausible that Lizza, at that point, engaged in 'the purposeful avoidance of the truth.'"

Colloton acknowledged that other courts have ruled that merely posting a new link to an old story doesn't necessarily constitute republishing it, but he said those decisions didn't foreclose the possibility it could sometimes be a republication.

Nunes' suit against Lizza and Esquire's publisher, Hearst Magazine Media, was one of a flurry of defamation cases he filed in 2019 against reporters, media entities and others, arguing that he was being trashed because of his support for President Donald Trump in ongoing investigations of Trump's ties to Russia. Many of the cases have been dropped or dismissed.

Lizza, who joined POLITICO as chief Washington correspondent in August 2019, declined to comment. Attorneys for Hearst who have represented Lizza in the suit did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment. Nunes' attorney, Steven Biss of Charlottesville, Va., did not immediately reply to a request for comment on the decision.

One First Amendment expert expressed concern about the decision and said the case would merit review by the full bench of the 8th Circuit.

"It’s certainly a novel application of a couple of important libel doctrines, and a potentially troublesome one if the 8th Circuit’s ruling is allowed to stand," said Chip Stewart, a professor at Texas Christian University. "It’s an odd kind of bootstrapping argument. Nunes claims the underlying article is false. He sues over it. Lizza tweets the exact same story after the lawsuit is filed. And what was originally not actual malice now all of a sudden is, at least plausibly enough for a lawsuit to advance to further costly litigation. All over a tweet that changed nothing about the original story."

One curious aspect of the ruling is that it appears to open the door to lawsuits against anyone who tweeted or retweeted the original story with knowledge of Nunes' lawsuit, and to similar claims over members of the public or those with significant social media followings tweeting or retweeting stories after learning that the subject of the story is disputing it in some way.

If the decision stands, the suit would be returned to a district court judge for further proceedings. The appeals court decision did not find Lizza or Hearst liable for the retweet but left those issues for the district judge to revisit.

Stewart said the appeals court's ruling is also disturbing because it allows Nunes, a sitting member of Congress, to press on with his legal campaign against his critics.

"He’s not trying to win money from these lawsuits. He just wants the pain of litigation to deter other critics from writing about him. I’ll admit, I’m hesitant to say even what I’m saying here because I don’t want to trigger a lawsuit from him," the professor said. "It’s an intimidation tactic that can make a person’s life miserable for a while, and he’s relying on that to curb honest criticism of his duties as an elected official."

Another defamation suit filed by members of Nunes' family is currently being litigated in federal court in Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

Colloton and Smith are appointees of former President George W. Bush. Erickson was appointed by former President Donald Trump.

quote:

Op woensdag 15 september 2021 23:31 schreef SnertMetChoco het volgende:

[..]
Hè? Een journalist schrijft een verhaal over Republikeins vertegenwoordiger Devin Nunes en zijn familie. Hij wordt vervolgens aangeklaagd door Nunes voor smaad. Dat verliest Nunes. Echter zou een verwijzing naar dat artikel, wat geen smaad was, meer dan een jaar later op Twitter wel smaad kunnen zijn, omdat het nieuw publiek zou bereiken?! Wat?

Het moet haast wel dat ik hier iets even niet volg, toch?

quote:

‘The Decision Okays Gag Orders’: First Amendment Experts Sound Alarm on ‘Mind-Bending Interpretation of Libel Law’ in Devin Nunes Appeals Court Ruling

U.S. Circuit Judges Steven Colloton (who was appointed by George W. Bush), Lavenski Smith (another G.W. Bush appointee) and Ralph Erickson (who was appointed by Donald Trump)

quote:

Op woensdag 15 september 2021 18:02 schreef Jabberwocky het volgende:
Gisterenavond hier in Californie wat nieuws gekeken over die recall en het werd inderdaad al snel duidelijk dat Newsom dit makkelijk won.

Ik dacht eens over te schakelen op Fox News om te zien hoe die daar mee omgingen en er werd een dame geinterviewd die zei dat ze als Democrat geregistreerd is en dat dat een heel schandaal is. Los van of dat waar is gingen ze er maar aan voorbij dat party preference geen invloed heeft op wat je kan stemmen dus voter fraud is het alvast niet.

Ik weet niet waarom ik de neiging had over te schakelen en wat ik verwachtte.

quote:

A new political map proposed by Nebraska Republicans wouldn't just make it harder for Democrats to win one of the state's three House seats -- it would make it a little bit harder for Democrats to win the White House.

Nebraska is one of only two states that divides its Electoral College votes by congressional district, rather than a winner-take-all system. That allowed President Joe Biden to claim one of the state's five electoral votes last year, even as he lost Nebraska by 20 percentage points.

Now Republicans in Nebraska's legislature are proposing splitting up the 2nd Congressional District, the one Biden won, in their new map. The change would make the swingy district surrounding Omaha, the state's largest city, more Republican. It would also make it harder for a Democratic presidential candidate to win.

Winning the presidency has not come down to a single electoral vote since the earliest years of the United States. Still, every one of the nation's 538 electoral votes is precious. That single Electoral College vote -- sometimes dubbed the "blue dot" in the state's sea of red -- has been enough to make Omaha a regular stop on the Democratic presidential campaign circuit.

The GOP map was approved in a party-line committee vote in Nebraska's legislature Thursday and will advance to the floor of the one-chamber legislature, which is officially nonpartisan, though controlled by Republicans. Democrats oppose the maps and the GOP does not have enough legislators to overcome a filibuster, making it likely the final maps will be some sort of compromise.

Critics say the current proposal could effectively undo the 1991 legislation backed by Democrats that split the state's Electoral College votes. Under the current system, the winner of each of the three districts gets one electoral vote. The two additional Electoral College votes the state gets, one for each of its senators, go to the overall winner of the state.

"There's no question that the Republicans would like to win there, and they're doing what they think is needed to do that," said former state Sen. Bob Krist, a Republican-turned-Democrat who worked with GOP lawmakers during the state's last redistricting a decade ago.

Republicans say they aren't trying to fiddle with the Electoral College. But they've made no secret of their displeasure at Nebraska's arrangement.

"The Democrats knew exactly what they were doing," said Ryan Hamilton, executive director of the Nebraska Republican Party. "They hid behind this noble, populist rhetoric, and it benefited them. The reality is, they want that electoral vote, and we want it too."

[..]

quote:

The congressman, who has two young children, emphasized that he was leaving in large part because of family considerations and the difficulties that come with living between two cities. But he made clear that the strain had only grown worse since his impeachment vote, after which he was deluged with threats and feared for the safety of his wife and children.

Mr. Gonzalez said that quality-of-life issues had been paramount in his decision. He recounted an “eye-opening” moment this year: when he and his family were greeted at the Cleveland airport by two uniformed police officers, part of extra security precautions taken after the impeachment vote.

“That’s one of those moments where you say, ‘Is this really what I want for my family when they travel, to have my wife and kids escorted through the airport?’” he said.

Mr. Gonzalez, who turns 37 on Saturday, was the sort of Republican recruit the party once prized. A Cuban American who starred as an Ohio State wide receiver, he was selected in the first round of the N.F.L. draft and then earned an M.B.A. at Stanford after his football career was cut short by injuries. He claimed his Northeast Ohio seat in his first bid for political office.

Mr. Gonzalez, a conservative, largely supported the former president’s agenda. Yet he started breaking with Mr. Trump and House Republican leaders when they sought to block the certification of last year’s presidential vote, and he was horrified by Jan. 6 and its implications.

Still, he insisted he could have prevailed in what he acknowledged would have been a “brutally hard primary” against Max Miller, a former Trump White House aide who was endorsed by the former president in February.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 september 2021 04:09 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Weer een Republikein die het voor gezien houdt vanwege bedreigingen nadat hij voor Impechemnt van Trump stemde:

[ twitter ]
[..]
Geef hem geen ongelijk, de GOP is de partij van Trumpisten geworden mda McCarthy.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 september 2021 13:10 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Ballghazi day 4.
[ twitter ]

Dit wordt nu meer gegoogled dan Biden Afghanistan, dus tja. Verder vier dagen in het nieuws en de Trumpisten jammeren over censuur en cancelculture.

quote:

The North Carolina measure, known as S.B. 824, was enacted in December 2018 after a supermajority of the state legislature overrode a veto by Gov. Roy Cooper (D). North Carolina voters also approved a ballot measure creating a constitutional requirement that voters present a photo ID. At the time, Cooper said the law would disenfranchise minority voters, who are less likely to possess the required identification.

In Friday’s majority decision, Superior Court Judges Michael O’Foghludha and Vince Rozier Jr. wrote that the attorneys defending the law failed to prove that it “would have been enacted in its present form if it did not tend to discriminate against African American voters.”

“Other, less restrictive voter ID laws would have sufficed to achieve the legitimate nonracial purposes of implementing the constitutional amendment requiring voter ID, deterring fraud, or enhancing voter confidence,” the judges wrote.

They noted that they did not find that any individual lawmaker supporting the voter-ID law “harbors any racial animus or hatred towards African American voters,” but rather that the legislature’s Republican majority targeted those voters because they were more likely to be Democrats.

quote:

Op vrijdag 17 september 2021 13:10 schreef Ulx het volgende:
Ballghazi day 4.
[ twitter ]

Dit wordt nu meer gegoogled dan Biden Afghanistan, dus tja. Verder vier dagen in het nieuws en de Trumpisten jammeren over censuur en cancelculture.

quote:

Op zaterdag 18 september 2021 07:41 schreef vipergts het volgende:

[..]
Dat die Nicki Minaj zo'n rare is en zich zo laat gebruiken door republieken.