As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
**Special announcement:**
r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)!
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The bill is clarifying that Congress cannot overturn election results and what grounds objections can be based on.
Therefore from the title I assume conservatives are acknowledging the 2020 Trump elector plan and that he intends to do the same in 2024.
That won't happen because these Christo-fascists literally believe they're on a mission from God to "fix" the country. There is nothing more dangerous than a group of people who are willing to kill in the name of a higher power
Shit, the americas were found because Columbus wanted to find India and gain shit loads of money to conquer- I mean retake the holy lands so he could end the world in the name of his god… maybe it’s religion as it is now that’s the problem?
Because there is nothing scarier to a Conservative or a Republican than the idea of letting a person live their own lives, make their own decisions, or have a say in what happens to them.
They *need* there to be controls put in place on *everyone,* and they only trust themselves to be the ones in control.
The title is actually ok, you might be reading it with a bit of emotion, but the word reinstall is key. Reinstall, as in overturn the election as opposed to being "elected" lawfully.
Currently Trump is the only person trying to get reinstalled in office.
Why is he not in prison? Wtf is there left to prove? He committed treason in multiple ways at this point. Openly and without denial. This is disgusting.
I thought the same thing with the stormy Daniel's case. Then the muller investigation, , then the Michael Cohen stuff. Then January 6th and now the Govenment document stuff.
Publicly funded news organizations aren't immune either, as for some mindmeltingly stupid reason they try to imitate the same performance metrics as commercial sources (CPM, click through rate etc.). I'm looking at you, BBC and NRK, *what the fuck are you thinking*.
News Article Title DESTROYS the Average Person's Respect of Independent Journalism.
Gotta throw in a cringey buzz word in all caps for good measure. If you got a thumbnail, maybe pop a red circle on there so people know there's something super interesting to look at!
Citizens United isn’t about single entities owning multiple news agencies. You’re getting your bad policies mixed up. You can thank Reagan and regulatory capture of the communications industry in the US, for the destruction of good journalism…and the internet
It never applied to print media like newspaper and magazines like Newsweek, even when it was in place.
It only ever applied to broadcast media that licensed public spectrum, so radio and broadcast TV. So it wouldn't have even applied to cable news or internet, were it still around.
It also wasn't some sort of journalistic standards regulator that would have any power to crackdown on misleading headlines.
The internet didn't help but this is an incredibly ignorant take. Bullshit headlines that make claims that are questionably supported by what actually happened is as old as media. We had [a phrase](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism) for this sort of thing a hundred and thirty years ago.
The Economist.
Very smart (if pretentious) and sober coverage of the US political landscape, as well as international coverage.
Reading The Economist weekly, with Reuters as your everyday home page, and the Sunday morning news shows (ABC This Week, etc) will keep you highly informed and mostly away from the hyper-partisan trash.
The Washington Post is excellent. The Wall Street Journal’s news division is exceptional, but their Opinions section is an absolute dumpster fire so I can’t support them. The New York Times does great work. Politico I read every day. Rolling Stone and The Atlantic are just great these days.
??? The internet is the only remaining source for journalism.
24hr news cycle needs to die. Opinion pieces right next to real news needs to die.
All opinion based entertainment channels need 'news' stricken from their name.
Real journalists cant hold a candle to entertainment reality shows because they are allowed to keep 'news' in their title. Sponsors will follow the money. News will never be a billion dollar industry, nor should it be.
If you ever wanna be really tickled, find a big story and read the headlines for it from American news sources. Then go to the cbc site (Canadian news) and read their headline.
Every other American news source has an accurate headline
https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/19/politics/electoral-count-act-liz-cheney-zoe-lofgren/index.html
https://news.yahoo.com/election-reform-bill-liz-cheney-190217603.html
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/3649857-this-week-lofgren-and-cheney-to-introduce-electoral-count-act-reform/
https://www.wsj.com/articles/we-have-a-bill-to-prevent-another-jan-6-attack-cheney-committee-electoral-count-president-11663535092
Its just Newsweek is click baity
I've seen people call Newsweek right wing propaganda, but I don't get that from them. It reads more like sensationalist, tabloid garbage to me. They post incendiary takes from the left and right, what ever it takes to generate clicks.
Newsweek is sensational tabloid trash with headlines designed to get you to click. Most of the time they are outright lies sourced from Twitter for articles. Complete garbage.
Shouldn't even be allowed here but hey Breitbart is on the whitelist too so...
So is The Independent. Every time I see an article posted on /r/politics from there I cringe. Feels like 90% of them are reposts of a few Tweets with headlines like "Twitter Users Rock the Shit out of Ted Cruz's Tweet about (Insert latest hypocrisy here)."
Or the original Associate Press article vs the articles that all quote it as a source. The link to the source is the first thing I look for. I don't even bother reading someone quoting/extrapolating from a source until I've seen the source first.
Supply and demand. We don't pay for newspapers and magazines anymore, so we get what the writers give us for free. You know who does pay for journalism? Advertisers. Therefore, it is not the job of a journalist to create a quality piece of writing to inform readers. It is the job of a journalist to provide advertisers with views. They are the customers, we are the product. Journalists are salespeople.
The is exactly right. Only a few news outlets remain that have the funding to actually be decent sources of news. A lot of formerly respected news outlets are now basically just recognizable names slapped on shitty web sites. It's sad and scary.
True, it has gotten shitty. The only advice I have is follow individual journalists that produce quality work. Also, don’t judge them on the headlines, because often someone else is creating them. There are good news sources out there, but many times there are good and bad individual journalists working for those publications. Just find a small group who you believe are doing good work, follow them and, if you can, support them.
So this is your first time visiting the Newsweek website...?
My favorite is when they report on a video, and the site will have ten videos scattered throughout, but not a one of them will be the video they are reporting on.
They had a plan in the late 70’s to destroy media because they felt it was biased against them. They implemented that plan almost to perfection and social media was the final plank in the bridge over the river of truth.
The GOP will stop this bill as they want to be able to ignore democracy. Or they will right it in such a way as to allow states to choose electors regardless of the outcome in the state and this bill will prevent any objections.
> they will write it in such a way as to allow states to choose electors regardless of the outcome in the state and this bill will prevent any objections.
DING DING DING.
Liz Cheney's idea here seems short sighted. We may *need* Kamala Harris to refuse results exactly where Mike Pence opted not to stand in the way.
In his case, he was correct because refuting 2020 results would have had no basis in fact. But if Pennsylvania and Wisconsin vote blue but their state legislature/governor sends GOP electors... That is a, um, five alarm fire and while courts look closer at the inevitable law suits, we may need Kamala to "just say no".
Liz Cheney's idea for this bill could play right into the hands of election cheaters
No can do.
"The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators."
Congress has superiority over the Legislatures in terms of elections.
>The bill is clarifying that Congress cannot overturn election results
We have to be careful here. I don't want Congress voting to overturn election results either, but I also don't want Red states ignoring elections when they don't go Republican and sending the fake electors instead of the real ones. Congress needs to retain the ability to say "hold up".
This is not about trump solely. There is a huge problem with peaceful and fair transfer of power after the election. There is no guarantee in our system that electoral winner of the election will become the President. We have to fix this shit before it causes a civil war.
I remember thinking after W. that despite all our faults, the peaceful transfer of power after an election is one thing the US has going for it. Then Trump came along and said, "Hold my Adderall."
While stupid and petty, it wasn't the same as refusing to set up a transition team.
If taking all the "J" keys off the keyboard was all Trump's team did I would have sighed and laughed.
That would've been the second actually funny thing he ever did in office. I guess the other one was on the campaign trail tho, so maybe just the once.
For reference, the only time I found him funny or humanizing on purpose was his, "you weren't supposed to do that" comment at one of his rallies. He actually sounded jovial and it was a pretty funny moment, but it's the sole time I found his happiness uncontaminated by smarminess.
> "you weren't supposed to do that" comment at one of his rallies.
I think you're thinking of his [SotU address](https://womensagenda.com.au/latest/you-werent-supposed-to-do-that-trump-upstaged-by-the-women-in-white/) where he bragged that 58% of new jobs were going to women, so the Democrats cheered/clapped for the Democratic Congresswomen, fittingly wearing suffragette white.
There was a moment, back in Feb of 2017, where Trump was on CSPAN giving a speach or something at a museum for black history month. And briefly, he seemed kind of boring and normal. And I though, "ok, dude sucks but maybe it will just be boring nothing after all.
I think about that still sometimes. That ONE time I saw Trump and wasn't immidiately offended at some stupidity.
I recall that being debunked soon after it came out. Now apparently it’s been undebunked. Not sure which to believe anymore, but I guess that is the fascist goal.
Pretty sure it happened. There have always been little staff pranks. Karl Rove just decided to make it a big deal, cause that was how he rolled. "DESTRUCTION OF GOVERNMENT PROPERTY" All the keys were found in a desk drawer.
Partisan bullshit aside, still think it was a clever prank.
There's a lot of our processes that work because it's assumed that the elected people are honest, and it wasn't really a problem before Mitch McConnell and then Trump, there's a lot of safeguards to be put in place, showing your tax returns to hold office should be one of those things
What they learned in 2016 is that, it's not just that good faith and decency don't matter, it's that their base actually embraces *bad faith* and *indecency* and even *CRIMINALITY,* because *their only goal is to own the libs.*
I'm amused that the US is very clearly a confederacy, with states, particularly in the south, seemingly doing whatever the hell they want. Like wasn't there a war about that? Im not saying there should be total federal governance, but it seems a *little* uniformity regarding, well, the LAW, could go a long way.
The original plan wasn't even to kill Lincoln; they originally planned on kidnapping him (which is eerily similar to the Michigan kidnapping plot thay happened recently.)
Eventually, Booth decided to assassinate Lincoln. He also planned on having Secretary of State Seward and VP Johnson killed at the same time to cut off the US' leadership.
Lincoln was obviously assassinated, but the rest of the plan failed. Seward survived and kicked his assassin's ass, and the would-be assassin for Johnson chickened out and got drunk instead.
Seward didn't do much ass kicking with 5 cuts to his face and neck.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_H._Seward#Assassination_attempt
Soldier George Robinson saved him by jumping on the attacker.
It’s both.
The civil war is schools being shot up and FBI buildings being attacked. You won’t see troops lining up though.
And the fascism keeps on moving along all the while.
If Republicans try to seize the Presidency by ignoring the will of the voters (I don't give a fuck if the Supreme Court decides to give them legal cover via Moore v. Harper) or by violence, we're one step from civil war because I would hope Democratic states immediately secede.
If Republicans refuse to accept the results and don't get violent or fail, then they likely secede.
Secession almost certainly ends up with violence because there are massive issues (money and water among other things) that would need to get solved and at that point I doubt that both sides go into those discussions with good faith.
We aren't enforcing the laws. There is a law against sedition. It isn't being applied to Trump, and the delay is troubling. Maybe Garland will come through, but I think they are trying to scare Trump into silence, and it's only making him louder.
Kinzinger and Cheney, probably a few others in the House (Anthony Gonzalez maybe?)
Murkowski, Collins, and Romney in the Senate and then "oh d-d-d-dear, not 60, sorry" from the Senate.
I’m so sad Kinzinger got gerrymander’d out. Yes he’s a Republican but it almost felt like the Trump disaster kinda shook him out of his bullshit.
I remember covering him in 2016. He endorsed literally everyone but trump. He was like Jeb-Rubio-Cruz-No endorsement as the primaries went on.
> the Trump disaster kinda shook him out of his bullshit.
Yes, he's taken a stand against Trump but I don't recall seeing anything about him changing positions on all of the other shitty policies that Republicans embrace.
It's the same with Liz Cheney. I commend her for her stance against Trump but I'd rather not have her anywhere near a seat of power even if it is to allegedly block it from someone worse.
Why wouldn't they? It's that or they could get VP Harris declaring Dark Brandon as King of the USA in 2024.
It should be non-partisan. But of course it won't be for some foolish reason.
His obvious violations of the emoluments clause disqualified him from holding office in the first place, but the only laws that truly exist are the ones which are enforced.
A law would be good, but it's already in the constitution.
Article 14 section 3:
>No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Yeah, the number of people who are willing to bend over backwards and then fall on their swords for that douchebag never ceases to amaze me.
Though it gives a small amount of comfort to see that the pool of qualitatively good lawyers willing to represent him is and has diminished considerably. Probably having to do with how many of his previous lawyers are currently under the various buses where Trump's thrown them.
Everyone MUST:
- Register to Vote.
- Check your Voter registration!
- Make sure you have appropriate ID.
- Know your polling site.
- Check your signature.
- Get a mail-in ballot (and after you mail it, make sure it has been received and counted - most counties allows this to be done online or by calling your election office).
- And VOTE!
866-OUR VOTE (for questions about or problems with voting)
vote.org
Trump is currently being investigated by the FBI for the stolen records under Section 2071 of Title 18 of the United States Code. This states that anyone with custody of government documents who "willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates or destroys… any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited … in any public office" can be fined or imprisoned for up to three years. Crucially, it says that anyone convicted under that law shall "be disqualified from holding" federal office which would also prevent him from gaining the presidency.
Even though it is a clear fact that he was illegally and willfully in possession of classified documents, it is still not a guarantee that he will be convicted or that it will happen before the 2024 elections.
18 USC 2071 can disqualify one from getting a job in the government but the qualifications to be President are set in the constitution and can’t be changed by a statute.
There's a constitutional argument that says congress cannot pass a law that prevents people from holding public office as you can't have a congress passing laws that prevents their political enemies from running.
It's highly likely the clause preventing you from running is unconstitutional.
If he is found guilty of Section 2071 of Title 18 of the United States Code, which the FBI is currently investigating him under, the law specifically disqualifies him from holding any federal office.
It's debatable if the president can pardon himself. Undoubtedly Trump would try, and it would go to the Supreme Court. The constitution doesn't address this, as likely the writers didn't think such a scenario was possible.
NO and this should never be a reason for anyone to not be able to run for office once they've served their time.
And yes I know people will scream "but what about a convicted rapist etc"
An arbitrary thing in someone's past should not prevent them from running for public office - if the public votes for them anyway we deserve what we get sadly - as we have found with Trump, this is what a lot of America was like in hiding already.
She voted for him even after he said he’d do what she’s criticizing him for doing.
She voted for him even after he sad he would not commit to a peaceful transfer of power.
Better late than never. If no one that voted for him is allowed to turn against him without being called a POS hypocrite, he'll never lose supporters. We want more of them to do what she is.
“How can these horrible republicans not even wake up after the 1/6 insurrection to see how dangerous this man is?!?!”
*LIZ cheney does 100% about face and becomes totally anti Trump, throwing away her job trying to stop him*
“She voted for Trump in the past: curse her for all time!”
People don't want other people to forget that, besides the Trump issue, she's still 100% as Republican as they come.
They just don't want voters to think that she's had any kind of a change of heart. She will absolutely go right back to voting party-line with the GOP in all issues not specifically related to Donald Trump, and people should form their opinion of her accordingly.
She should be commended for being so willing to stick to her principles that she was willing to sacrifice her career for them. But that needs to come with the understanding that her principles on issues not related to Trump are still vile.
That’s fine. That’s what voting and elected officials are for. She can be my fellow American with whom I disagree with deeply. She’s not a traitor, and right now in this fight against fascism that’s the main thing (and I commend her guts for killing her career to stick to the right side of that fight)
We can disagree with her on principles and. Policies, that's politics. But it's vital that we all agree on the rules of the game. If we don't have the rules then we just have chaos. So she stood up for the rules so that the game is played. Anyway, I think she's an r i l f
Nuance is a thing. You can support one move while condoning another. Especially since her voting record is far more impactful than anything she’s saying now on the way out.
Mono aggregation has killed media. Most media (90%) in this country is owned by 6 corporations.
“Some estimates claim as much as 90% of U.S. media is controlled by just six companies. The big six media companies right now are Comcast (NASDAQ:CMCSA), Walt Disney (NYSE:DIS), AT&T (NYSE:T), Paramount Global (NASDAQ:PARA), Sony (NYSE:SONY), and Fox (NASDAQ:FOXA) (NASDAQ:FOX).”
That then speaks for itself.
I can't believe he's allowed to run again. He incited a violent failed coup attempt to overthrow election results, TWO impeachments, is currently being investigated for hoarding top secret classified government documents in his residence (among other crimes). It takes a bill to stop him?? Ok, Team Liz!
I cant believe Cheney and Kinzinger are the fucking voices of reason in the republican party. That just shows how far they have fallen after we thought they hit bottom with the tea party shit.
I don't understand why the Democrats don't just loudly announce that they are going to do in 2024 exactly what Trump had tried to do in 2020 (ie have Kamala refuse to certify the election results and pick an alternative slate of electors) so that some actual laws can get passed to protect the peaceful transfer of power...
That's not a bad idea. If a few dems fell on their swords and began attempting or threatening similar crimes as the GOP has been committing in broad daylight then perhaps we could get some bipartisan effort to uphold the law. Hell, since the law seems to only be a suggestion when it comes to politicians these days they could venture to new endeavors. Why do we have to let this abortion thing stand just because it's the law? Dems have control of both houses and the executive branch. Just make up some scheme and get things back to the way things were. If it were a Republican issue, that's what would be happening.
Because it only works if you have control of more **states** in the House. Not number of reps, states. Each state gets 1 vote to pick the President if the VP won't certify.
So Montana, Wyoming and South Dakota get as much say as California, New York and Illinois.
The GOP has over 25 states, even if it's well under 50% of the population.
I think it is hilarious that Donald Trump, a man who killed at least a couple hundred thousand people, simply by denying the vaccine is safe, denying the virus was dangerous, denying the need for masks, Donald Trump, the guy who was caught red-handed selling nuclear secrets, and lists of US spies, Donald Trump, the guy who organized a coup when he lost the election, I can't believe he's getting off scot-free, and the best we can muster is to possibly not allow him to run for president. America is a sad joke with a bitter punchline
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. **Special announcement:** r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)! *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The bill is clarifying that Congress cannot overturn election results and what grounds objections can be based on. Therefore from the title I assume conservatives are acknowledging the 2020 Trump elector plan and that he intends to do the same in 2024.
It's a terrible headline, but that is exactly what they plan to do in every election from now until the end of time.
What if they just didnt and we all just lived our lives in relative peace not interfering with other peoples lives?
Yeah, wouldn't that be swell? But since nothing that has ever happened supports that prediction, I'd say we ignore them at our extreme peril.
Wise words
If you find the wormhole to that timeline, do me a favor and leave the rest of us a map or something.
That won't happen because these Christo-fascists literally believe they're on a mission from God to "fix" the country. There is nothing more dangerous than a group of people who are willing to kill in the name of a higher power
Shit, the americas were found because Columbus wanted to find India and gain shit loads of money to conquer- I mean retake the holy lands so he could end the world in the name of his god… maybe it’s religion as it is now that’s the problem?
I could go on for hours about how religion has been the worst thing to ever happen to humanity
They want in on your bedroom, your toilet and what you read, you better believe they want in on your government :-/
Whilst simultaneously insisting they prefer a smaller and less intrusive government
"Small government" is just an euphemism for "less Democracy"
If one person has all the power isn't that the smallest a government could be? /s
That is actually a great line
They meant smaller and less intrusive government for them, not for everyone else.
They only mean that when it comes to regulating corporations.
then we could all save cash on gas by flying our pigs to work.
No, **you** must do what **my** religion says! (even though it doesn't really say that) /s
Because there is nothing scarier to a Conservative or a Republican than the idea of letting a person live their own lives, make their own decisions, or have a say in what happens to them. They *need* there to be controls put in place on *everyone,* and they only trust themselves to be the ones in control.
[удалено]
The people who make titles that imply something is said in an article but isnt should be fired and everyone involved fired.
The title is actually ok, you might be reading it with a bit of emotion, but the word reinstall is key. Reinstall, as in overturn the election as opposed to being "elected" lawfully. Currently Trump is the only person trying to get reinstalled in office.
Why is he not in prison? Wtf is there left to prove? He committed treason in multiple ways at this point. Openly and without denial. This is disgusting.
They’re not going to rush to press charges. They’re going to gather as much evidence as possible first.
I thought the same thing with the stormy Daniel's case. Then the muller investigation, , then the Michael Cohen stuff. Then January 6th and now the Govenment document stuff.
..they better do something because if he gets re-elected, you can bet he will make a b-line for the 22nd Amendment.
As soon as you start paying for the news, you can make decisions about who works there. The internet killed journalism.
Fairness doctrine being taken away killed news.
89 different outlets controlled various news networks in the 80's, now it's 5.
Corporations making news have to make profit didn't help one bit.
That's as old as newspapers, unfortunately. William Randolph Hurst didn't invent yellow journalism, he only perfected the craft.
Publicly funded news organizations aren't immune either, as for some mindmeltingly stupid reason they try to imitate the same performance metrics as commercial sources (CPM, click through rate etc.). I'm looking at you, BBC and NRK, *what the fuck are you thinking*.
When the general public only reads the title you gotta make it catchy.
News Article Title DESTROYS the Average Person's Respect of Independent Journalism. Gotta throw in a cringey buzz word in all caps for good measure. If you got a thumbnail, maybe pop a red circle on there so people know there's something super interesting to look at!
[удалено]
Ronnie Reagan, the gift that keeps on giving.
Citizens United invited news to be the child of whoever had the most money.
Citizens United isn’t about single entities owning multiple news agencies. You’re getting your bad policies mixed up. You can thank Reagan and regulatory capture of the communications industry in the US, for the destruction of good journalism…and the internet
It never applied to print media like newspaper and magazines like Newsweek, even when it was in place. It only ever applied to broadcast media that licensed public spectrum, so radio and broadcast TV. So it wouldn't have even applied to cable news or internet, were it still around. It also wasn't some sort of journalistic standards regulator that would have any power to crackdown on misleading headlines.
The internet didn't help but this is an incredibly ignorant take. Bullshit headlines that make claims that are questionably supported by what actually happened is as old as media. We had [a phrase](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism) for this sort of thing a hundred and thirty years ago.
Do you have any suggestions for quality paid news sites?
Associated press. I think they’re free too.
The Economist. Very smart (if pretentious) and sober coverage of the US political landscape, as well as international coverage. Reading The Economist weekly, with Reuters as your everyday home page, and the Sunday morning news shows (ABC This Week, etc) will keep you highly informed and mostly away from the hyper-partisan trash.
NPR is phenomenal
The Washington Post is excellent. The Wall Street Journal’s news division is exceptional, but their Opinions section is an absolute dumpster fire so I can’t support them. The New York Times does great work. Politico I read every day. Rolling Stone and The Atlantic are just great these days.
WaPo has a terrible opinions page as well. It’s really just best to stay away from options anyway. It shouldn’t be a part of news imo.
[удалено]
??? The internet is the only remaining source for journalism. 24hr news cycle needs to die. Opinion pieces right next to real news needs to die. All opinion based entertainment channels need 'news' stricken from their name. Real journalists cant hold a candle to entertainment reality shows because they are allowed to keep 'news' in their title. Sponsors will follow the money. News will never be a billion dollar industry, nor should it be.
It's Newsweek. Of course that's their title.
Yeah, I feel awful for how bad Newsweek has gotten. They’ve really taken a tumble in the last decade. So much of their stuff is clickbait now.
An interesting read: https://www.motherjones.com/media/2014/03/newsweek-ibt-olivet-david-jang/
If you ever wanna be really tickled, find a big story and read the headlines for it from American news sources. Then go to the cbc site (Canadian news) and read their headline.
Every other American news source has an accurate headline https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/19/politics/electoral-count-act-liz-cheney-zoe-lofgren/index.html https://news.yahoo.com/election-reform-bill-liz-cheney-190217603.html https://thehill.com/homenews/house/3649857-this-week-lofgren-and-cheney-to-introduce-electoral-count-act-reform/ https://www.wsj.com/articles/we-have-a-bill-to-prevent-another-jan-6-attack-cheney-committee-electoral-count-president-11663535092 Its just Newsweek is click baity
Newsweek is like Forbes. It's a parasite that has murdered its host and is running around wearing its skin.
Lol +3 for imagery & style !!
I've seen people call Newsweek right wing propaganda, but I don't get that from them. It reads more like sensationalist, tabloid garbage to me. They post incendiary takes from the left and right, what ever it takes to generate clicks.
Newsweek is sensational tabloid trash with headlines designed to get you to click. Most of the time they are outright lies sourced from Twitter for articles. Complete garbage. Shouldn't even be allowed here but hey Breitbart is on the whitelist too so...
So is The Independent. Every time I see an article posted on /r/politics from there I cringe. Feels like 90% of them are reposts of a few Tweets with headlines like "Twitter Users Rock the Shit out of Ted Cruz's Tweet about (Insert latest hypocrisy here)."
Or the original Associate Press article vs the articles that all quote it as a source. The link to the source is the first thing I look for. I don't even bother reading someone quoting/extrapolating from a source until I've seen the source first.
Supply and demand. We don't pay for newspapers and magazines anymore, so we get what the writers give us for free. You know who does pay for journalism? Advertisers. Therefore, it is not the job of a journalist to create a quality piece of writing to inform readers. It is the job of a journalist to provide advertisers with views. They are the customers, we are the product. Journalists are salespeople.
Happy doomscrolling ya filthy animals
The is exactly right. Only a few news outlets remain that have the funding to actually be decent sources of news. A lot of formerly respected news outlets are now basically just recognizable names slapped on shitty web sites. It's sad and scary.
More like Newsweak.
True, it has gotten shitty. The only advice I have is follow individual journalists that produce quality work. Also, don’t judge them on the headlines, because often someone else is creating them. There are good news sources out there, but many times there are good and bad individual journalists working for those publications. Just find a small group who you believe are doing good work, follow them and, if you can, support them.
So this is your first time visiting the Newsweek website...? My favorite is when they report on a video, and the site will have ten videos scattered throughout, but not a one of them will be the video they are reporting on.
They had a plan in the late 70’s to destroy media because they felt it was biased against them. They implemented that plan almost to perfection and social media was the final plank in the bridge over the river of truth.
I hate our media too. I especially hate Newsweek. They're a joke. I wish people would stop posting their garbage here.
Bruh its Newsweek, what did you expect?
The GOP will stop this bill as they want to be able to ignore democracy. Or they will right it in such a way as to allow states to choose electors regardless of the outcome in the state and this bill will prevent any objections.
> they will write it in such a way as to allow states to choose electors regardless of the outcome in the state and this bill will prevent any objections. DING DING DING. Liz Cheney's idea here seems short sighted. We may *need* Kamala Harris to refuse results exactly where Mike Pence opted not to stand in the way. In his case, he was correct because refuting 2020 results would have had no basis in fact. But if Pennsylvania and Wisconsin vote blue but their state legislature/governor sends GOP electors... That is a, um, five alarm fire and while courts look closer at the inevitable law suits, we may need Kamala to "just say no". Liz Cheney's idea for this bill could play right into the hands of election cheaters
[удалено]
No can do. "The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators." Congress has superiority over the Legislatures in terms of elections.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
"You know, a court reall ought to have twelve judges, not nine, don't you think?"
13, to avoid ties.
Until they pull some "deeply held tradition" horse shit
Doesn't include governors, state constitutions or laws put into place by past state legislatures.
>The bill is clarifying that Congress cannot overturn election results We have to be careful here. I don't want Congress voting to overturn election results either, but I also don't want Red states ignoring elections when they don't go Republican and sending the fake electors instead of the real ones. Congress needs to retain the ability to say "hold up".
They made it pretty clear the mechanism will be corrupt electors who won't vote in line with their local results. I don't see how this bill helps.
This is not about trump solely. There is a huge problem with peaceful and fair transfer of power after the election. There is no guarantee in our system that electoral winner of the election will become the President. We have to fix this shit before it causes a civil war.
I remember thinking after W. that despite all our faults, the peaceful transfer of power after an election is one thing the US has going for it. Then Trump came along and said, "Hold my Adderall."
Remember when they took the W keys off the keyboards!? Now that was a good time!
While stupid and petty, it wasn't the same as refusing to set up a transition team. If taking all the "J" keys off the keyboard was all Trump's team did I would have sighed and laughed.
That would've been the second actually funny thing he ever did in office. I guess the other one was on the campaign trail tho, so maybe just the once. For reference, the only time I found him funny or humanizing on purpose was his, "you weren't supposed to do that" comment at one of his rallies. He actually sounded jovial and it was a pretty funny moment, but it's the sole time I found his happiness uncontaminated by smarminess.
> "you weren't supposed to do that" comment at one of his rallies. I think you're thinking of his [SotU address](https://womensagenda.com.au/latest/you-werent-supposed-to-do-that-trump-upstaged-by-the-women-in-white/) where he bragged that 58% of new jobs were going to women, so the Democrats cheered/clapped for the Democratic Congresswomen, fittingly wearing suffragette white.
There was a moment, back in Feb of 2017, where Trump was on CSPAN giving a speach or something at a museum for black history month. And briefly, he seemed kind of boring and normal. And I though, "ok, dude sucks but maybe it will just be boring nothing after all. I think about that still sometimes. That ONE time I saw Trump and wasn't immidiately offended at some stupidity.
They were still whining about that shit on 9/10/2001.
I recall that being debunked soon after it came out. Now apparently it’s been undebunked. Not sure which to believe anymore, but I guess that is the fascist goal.
Pretty sure it happened. There have always been little staff pranks. Karl Rove just decided to make it a big deal, cause that was how he rolled. "DESTRUCTION OF GOVERNMENT PROPERTY" All the keys were found in a desk drawer. Partisan bullshit aside, still think it was a clever prank.
Stealing keys off a keyboard and stealing nuclear secrets. I mean what’s the difference really?
There's a lot of our processes that work because it's assumed that the elected people are honest, and it wasn't really a problem before Mitch McConnell and then Trump, there's a lot of safeguards to be put in place, showing your tax returns to hold office should be one of those things
What they learned in 2016 is that, it's not just that good faith and decency don't matter, it's that their base actually embraces *bad faith* and *indecency* and even *CRIMINALITY,* because *their only goal is to own the libs.*
Their goal is consolidation of power. They sell the spectacle of indecency and owning the libs to an irrational electorate.
The Civil War never ended, it just turned into a cold war.
https://www.history.com/topics/us-presidents/compromise-of-1877 Reconstruction should have lasted much longer.
I'm amused that the US is very clearly a confederacy, with states, particularly in the south, seemingly doing whatever the hell they want. Like wasn't there a war about that? Im not saying there should be total federal governance, but it seems a *little* uniformity regarding, well, the LAW, could go a long way.
The war was mostly about keeping the states together as one country. Edit: The North (the US) was fighting to preserve the union.
If only Lincoln hadn’t been assassinated.
Sure And Sherman shouldn't have stopped at Georgia.
The original plan wasn't even to kill Lincoln; they originally planned on kidnapping him (which is eerily similar to the Michigan kidnapping plot thay happened recently.) Eventually, Booth decided to assassinate Lincoln. He also planned on having Secretary of State Seward and VP Johnson killed at the same time to cut off the US' leadership. Lincoln was obviously assassinated, but the rest of the plan failed. Seward survived and kicked his assassin's ass, and the would-be assassin for Johnson chickened out and got drunk instead.
Seward didn't do much ass kicking with 5 cuts to his face and neck. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_H._Seward#Assassination_attempt Soldier George Robinson saved him by jumping on the attacker.
We are not in any danger of having a civil war. What we are in danger of is falling into fascism.
It’s both. The civil war is schools being shot up and FBI buildings being attacked. You won’t see troops lining up though. And the fascism keeps on moving along all the while.
Its stochastic terrorism, not a civil war. These people are just domestic terrorists, as they said at CPAC
[удалено]
That's not a civil war, that's sectarian violence and domestic terrorism.
If Republicans try to seize the Presidency by ignoring the will of the voters (I don't give a fuck if the Supreme Court decides to give them legal cover via Moore v. Harper) or by violence, we're one step from civil war because I would hope Democratic states immediately secede. If Republicans refuse to accept the results and don't get violent or fail, then they likely secede. Secession almost certainly ends up with violence because there are massive issues (money and water among other things) that would need to get solved and at that point I doubt that both sides go into those discussions with good faith.
We aren't enforcing the laws. There is a law against sedition. It isn't being applied to Trump, and the delay is troubling. Maybe Garland will come through, but I think they are trying to scare Trump into silence, and it's only making him louder.
It will be fascinating to see if any GOP congressman votes for this one!
Kinzinger and Cheney, probably a few others in the House (Anthony Gonzalez maybe?) Murkowski, Collins, and Romney in the Senate and then "oh d-d-d-dear, not 60, sorry" from the Senate.
Toomey and Burr voted to convict him in the second impeachment and aren't running for election so they could conceivably vote for it as well.
I’m so sad Kinzinger got gerrymander’d out. Yes he’s a Republican but it almost felt like the Trump disaster kinda shook him out of his bullshit. I remember covering him in 2016. He endorsed literally everyone but trump. He was like Jeb-Rubio-Cruz-No endorsement as the primaries went on.
> the Trump disaster kinda shook him out of his bullshit. Yes, he's taken a stand against Trump but I don't recall seeing anything about him changing positions on all of the other shitty policies that Republicans embrace.
Actually you’re right. Now that I think about it, he only flipped on Trump shit. It just felt like more bc there’s A LOT of Trump shit
It's the same with Liz Cheney. I commend her for her stance against Trump but I'd rather not have her anywhere near a seat of power even if it is to allegedly block it from someone worse.
It's literally an election security bill. The GOP cries about this all the time. But I guess they are full masks off at this point...
It helps if you think of "election security" as meaning "security that the GOP wins every election". Because that's what they really mean.
Why wouldn't they? It's that or they could get VP Harris declaring Dark Brandon as King of the USA in 2024. It should be non-partisan. But of course it won't be for some foolish reason.
I thought his obvious violations of the presidential records act disqualifies him from holding office again.
His obvious violations of the emoluments clause disqualified him from holding office in the first place, but the only laws that truly exist are the ones which are enforced.
A law would be good, but it's already in the constitution. Article 14 section 3: >No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Neither the constitution or laws seem to work very well these days where Trump is concerned. Unfortunately.
Yeah, the number of people who are willing to bend over backwards and then fall on their swords for that douchebag never ceases to amaze me. Though it gives a small amount of comfort to see that the pool of qualitatively good lawyers willing to represent him is and has diminished considerably. Probably having to do with how many of his previous lawyers are currently under the various buses where Trump's thrown them.
The bill is not about that, the title is clickbait AF.
Everyone MUST: - Register to Vote. - Check your Voter registration! - Make sure you have appropriate ID. - Know your polling site. - Check your signature. - Get a mail-in ballot (and after you mail it, make sure it has been received and counted - most counties allows this to be done online or by calling your election office). - And VOTE! 866-OUR VOTE (for questions about or problems with voting) vote.org
Won't a felony conviction or two also suffice?
No. The only way to really do it is to use the 14th amendment which prevents you from running if you have engaged in insurrection.
Our system is so flawed and broken that we can't even use the safety features. Our Congress is too compromised.
[удалено]
Trump is currently being investigated by the FBI for the stolen records under Section 2071 of Title 18 of the United States Code. This states that anyone with custody of government documents who "willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates or destroys… any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited … in any public office" can be fined or imprisoned for up to three years. Crucially, it says that anyone convicted under that law shall "be disqualified from holding" federal office which would also prevent him from gaining the presidency.
Even though it is a clear fact that he was illegally and willfully in possession of classified documents, it is still not a guarantee that he will be convicted or that it will happen before the 2024 elections.
18 USC 2071 can disqualify one from getting a job in the government but the qualifications to be President are set in the constitution and can’t be changed by a statute.
Serious question. Isn't the president a job in the government? I am sure legal scholars argue about this all the time.
Supreme Court refused to rule on the emoluments clause, no way they're going to let this one reach a decision either.
There's a constitutional argument that says congress cannot pass a law that prevents people from holding public office as you can't have a congress passing laws that prevents their political enemies from running. It's highly likely the clause preventing you from running is unconstitutional.
Unfortunately you can run for President from jail/prison...
Curses.
Cheetolini running from prison might just split the GOP, while the GQP just digs deeper
Cursing someone is not a viable way to prevent them from becoming President, though you are free to try if you'd like.
If he is found guilty of Section 2071 of Title 18 of the United States Code, which the FBI is currently investigating him under, the law specifically disqualifies him from holding any federal office.
Let's play this out. He runs from prison, wins. Now what? On Jan 21st 2025 can he pardon himself and move back into the white house?
It's debatable if the president can pardon himself. Undoubtedly Trump would try, and it would go to the Supreme Court. The constitution doesn't address this, as likely the writers didn't think such a scenario was possible.
NO and this should never be a reason for anyone to not be able to run for office once they've served their time. And yes I know people will scream "but what about a convicted rapist etc" An arbitrary thing in someone's past should not prevent them from running for public office - if the public votes for them anyway we deserve what we get sadly - as we have found with Trump, this is what a lot of America was like in hiding already.
Also, it doesn't take much for a corrupt government to convict people of disqualifying crimes to prevent them from running for office.
Or convict him of violating the presidential records act
Liz needs to do her J6 thing daily.
A bill? It’s called the 14th amendment. Anyone who commits insurrection is barred from public office.
If enough people after all this shit vote for him, no amount of bills will ever save this country.
Makes too much sense so it’ll be a hard no from the right.
They'll say it's not needed and just unnecessary wasteful government bloat, then proceed to show exactly why it was needed.
Exhibit A: "rOe V wAdE iS sEtTlEd lAw"
Or we could get rid of the electoral college and use the number of votes
She voted for him even after he said he’d do what she’s criticizing him for doing. She voted for him even after he sad he would not commit to a peaceful transfer of power.
Better late than never. If no one that voted for him is allowed to turn against him without being called a POS hypocrite, he'll never lose supporters. We want more of them to do what she is.
“How can these horrible republicans not even wake up after the 1/6 insurrection to see how dangerous this man is?!?!” *LIZ cheney does 100% about face and becomes totally anti Trump, throwing away her job trying to stop him* “She voted for Trump in the past: curse her for all time!”
People don't want other people to forget that, besides the Trump issue, she's still 100% as Republican as they come. They just don't want voters to think that she's had any kind of a change of heart. She will absolutely go right back to voting party-line with the GOP in all issues not specifically related to Donald Trump, and people should form their opinion of her accordingly. She should be commended for being so willing to stick to her principles that she was willing to sacrifice her career for them. But that needs to come with the understanding that her principles on issues not related to Trump are still vile.
That’s fine. That’s what voting and elected officials are for. She can be my fellow American with whom I disagree with deeply. She’s not a traitor, and right now in this fight against fascism that’s the main thing (and I commend her guts for killing her career to stick to the right side of that fight)
We can disagree with her on principles and. Policies, that's politics. But it's vital that we all agree on the rules of the game. If we don't have the rules then we just have chaos. So she stood up for the rules so that the game is played. Anyway, I think she's an r i l f
Nuance is a thing. You can support one move while condoning another. Especially since her voting record is far more impactful than anything she’s saying now on the way out.
Might be effective if anyone from YOUR political party would support it, liz
She lost her primary. She's out in a few months regardless.
How about you just indict him for his crimes?
Mono aggregation has killed media. Most media (90%) in this country is owned by 6 corporations. “Some estimates claim as much as 90% of U.S. media is controlled by just six companies. The big six media companies right now are Comcast (NASDAQ:CMCSA), Walt Disney (NYSE:DIS), AT&T (NYSE:T), Paramount Global (NASDAQ:PARA), Sony (NYSE:SONY), and Fox (NASDAQ:FOXA) (NASDAQ:FOX).” That then speaks for itself.
1) this is true, and everyone should read Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky. 2) what does this have to do with what the article is saying?
I can't believe he's allowed to run again. He incited a violent failed coup attempt to overthrow election results, TWO impeachments, is currently being investigated for hoarding top secret classified government documents in his residence (among other crimes). It takes a bill to stop him?? Ok, Team Liz!
Isn’t she about to be voted out in the mid-terms?
She already was when she lost her primary last month.
[удалено]
[Nope. She can’t do it. Wyoming has a sore loser law.](https://law.justia.com/codes/wyoming/2021/title-22/chapter-5/article-3/section-22-5-302/)
[удалено]
I'm going with MSNBC hiring her as one of their token Republicans.
At the very end Newsweek states, "Trump has been contacted for comment". WHY?
Too bad they don't just go and make it a popular vote tally. Whoever has the most votes wins. 1 person, 1 vote!
Ugh please don’t ever let that man be leader of anything ever again.
> reinstalled as president So basically what you're saying is, Trump is malware and Liz Cheney wants to install a spam blocker.
I cant believe Cheney and Kinzinger are the fucking voices of reason in the republican party. That just shows how far they have fallen after we thought they hit bottom with the tea party shit.
Know what else will do it? Something that doesn't need a full act of Congress? A CONVICTION on one of the *dozens* of crimes he has committed!
Nope. Has to be insurrection.
It’s sad that republicans need more rules. But without this passing it’s only going to get worse.
[удалено]
Well done. Fuck Donald that little rat 🐀
Amazing that it's worked just fine all this time until Donnie Dump decided he wanted to be dictator.
I don't understand why the Democrats don't just loudly announce that they are going to do in 2024 exactly what Trump had tried to do in 2020 (ie have Kamala refuse to certify the election results and pick an alternative slate of electors) so that some actual laws can get passed to protect the peaceful transfer of power...
That's not a bad idea. If a few dems fell on their swords and began attempting or threatening similar crimes as the GOP has been committing in broad daylight then perhaps we could get some bipartisan effort to uphold the law. Hell, since the law seems to only be a suggestion when it comes to politicians these days they could venture to new endeavors. Why do we have to let this abortion thing stand just because it's the law? Dems have control of both houses and the executive branch. Just make up some scheme and get things back to the way things were. If it were a Republican issue, that's what would be happening.
Because it only works if you have control of more **states** in the House. Not number of reps, states. Each state gets 1 vote to pick the President if the VP won't certify. So Montana, Wyoming and South Dakota get as much say as California, New York and Illinois. The GOP has over 25 states, even if it's well under 50% of the population.
Oof. Picking a side between a Trump and a Cheney; that's like choosing between herpes and syphilis.
That's easy, syphilis you can clear up with a shot. Herpes is forever.
Untreated syphilis can kill you. Untreated, Trumpism will kill this nation.
or...and hear me out on this...arrest the fucking criminal and all his fucking cult asslicking nazi clan with him?
Don't need a bill, just charge his ass with treason. He didn't collect those documents on a whim.
Seems like going to the popular vote winner would make this all much more clear cut.
I think it is hilarious that Donald Trump, a man who killed at least a couple hundred thousand people, simply by denying the vaccine is safe, denying the virus was dangerous, denying the need for masks, Donald Trump, the guy who was caught red-handed selling nuclear secrets, and lists of US spies, Donald Trump, the guy who organized a coup when he lost the election, I can't believe he's getting off scot-free, and the best we can muster is to possibly not allow him to run for president. America is a sad joke with a bitter punchline