After Trump split, Epstein said he could ‘take him down’ NYT: President Donald Trump’s long friendship with Jeffrey Epstein came to an apparent end in the mid-2000s. But Epstein remained intently focused on Trump for years afterward, seeking to exploit the remnants of their relationship up until his arrest on federal sex-trafficking charges in 2019. In more than 20,000 pages of Epstein’s typo-strewn emails and other messages released by a congressional committee on Wednesday, Epstein insulted Trump and hinted that he had damaging information on him. By turns gossipy, scathing and scheming, the messages show influential people pressing Epstein for insight into Trump, and Epstein casting himself as the ultimate Trump translator, someone who knew him intimately and was “the one able to take him down.” -- nordy
The release of the messages instantly pushed the two men’s much-scrutinized relationship back into the public eye, re-energizing Democratic attacks on Trump and his Justice Department for failing to publicly disclose more information from the investigation of Epstein.
Ultra-rich media owners are tightening their grip on democracy. It’s time to wrest our power back
The richest man on earth owns X.
The family of the second-richest man owns Paramount, which owns CBS, and could soon own Warner Bros, which owns CNN.
The third-richest man owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp.
The fourth-richest man owns the Washington Post and Amazon MGM Studios.
Another billionaire owns Fox News, the Wall Street Journal and the New York Post.
Why are the ultra-rich buying up so much of the media? Vanity may play a part, but there’s a more pragmatic – some might say sinister – reason.
If you’re a multibillionaire, you might view democracy as a potential threat to your net worth. Control over a significant share of the dwindling number of media outlets would enable you to effectively hedge against democracy by suppressing criticism of you and other plutocrats, and discouraging any attempt to – for example – tax away your wealth. -- nordy
Actually, Susan is fairly correct. After all, they were invented during the French Revolution. But most ironically, they were seen as a humane means of execution!
"The guillotine was invented during the French Revolution as a more humane and equal method of execution. Proposed by Dr. Joseph-Ignace Guillotin, it was designed to provide a quick and painless death, replacing the brutal and varied punishments that often depended on a person's social status. The device was intended to ensure equality before the law by providing the same method of execution for everyone, although it tragically became a symbol of the revolution's violence."
I have just learned that there is a program of extended security updates for Windows 10 and have enrolled for one year free. Not clear if it can be extended beyond that year. You entoll through your PC's settings.
😆Just had to laugh when I read this paragraph! Gee, think it'll apply equally to Texas, etc.? Talk about hypocrisy!
“California’s redistricting scheme is a brazen power grab that tramples on civil rights and mocks the democratic process,” Attorney General Pam Bondi (https://apnews.com/hub/pam-bondi) said in an emailed statement. “Governor Newsom’s attempt to entrench one-party rule and silence millions of Californians will not stand.”
Marianne at Revealing Light sees the Dems taking back Congress next year and, eventually, impeaching the Orange Turd yet again. She didn't know if the Senate would convict, but still... Oh, dear Lord, let it be so!
Of course, then we'll have to deal with Shady Vance. But, sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.
It's an absolute given with the current makeup of the Senate. If, by some miracle, the Dems take the Senate too and if, by an astronomically remote chance, none of the Dems (and Indes caucusing with them) are cowering, sniveling Republican Lite, who would rather kiss Trump's ass than do what's honorable and right for the country and if all seven Reps who voted to convict last time vote to do so again - the most unlikely chance of all! - then, just maybe, they'll convict.
After Trump split, Epstein said he could ‘take him down’
ReplyDeleteNYT: President Donald Trump’s long friendship with Jeffrey Epstein came to an apparent end in the mid-2000s. But Epstein remained intently focused on Trump for years afterward, seeking to exploit the remnants of their relationship up until his arrest on federal sex-trafficking charges in 2019.
In more than 20,000 pages of Epstein’s typo-strewn emails and other messages released by a congressional committee on Wednesday, Epstein insulted Trump and hinted that he had damaging information on him.
By turns gossipy, scathing and scheming, the messages show influential people pressing Epstein for insight into Trump, and Epstein casting himself as the ultimate Trump translator, someone who knew him intimately and was “the one able to take him down.” -- nordy
The release of the messages instantly pushed the two men’s much-scrutinized relationship back into the public eye, re-energizing Democratic attacks on Trump and his Justice Department for failing to publicly disclose more information from the investigation of Epstein.
Oops -- that is what you get for trying to post at 2 a.m. -- nordy
ReplyDeleteRobert Reich on Guardian
ReplyDeleteUltra-rich media owners are tightening their grip on democracy. It’s time to wrest our power back
The richest man on earth owns X.
The family of the second-richest man owns Paramount, which owns CBS, and could soon own Warner Bros, which owns CNN.
The third-richest man owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp.
The fourth-richest man owns the Washington Post and Amazon MGM Studios.
Another billionaire owns Fox News, the Wall Street Journal and the New York Post.
Why are the ultra-rich buying up so much of the media? Vanity may play a part, but there’s a more pragmatic – some might say sinister – reason.
If you’re a multibillionaire, you might view democracy as a potential threat to your net worth. Control over a significant share of the dwindling number of media outlets would enable you to effectively hedge against democracy by suppressing criticism of you and other plutocrats, and discouraging any attempt to – for example – tax away your wealth. -- nordy
That's why guillotines were invented. Susan
DeleteEr, I think we should try the nonviolent path first. Save the guillotines for the last resort, if the re-education camps don't work.
DeleteActually, Susan is fairly correct. After all, they were invented during the French Revolution. But most ironically, they were seen as a humane means of execution!
Delete"The guillotine was invented during the French Revolution as a more humane and equal method of execution. Proposed by Dr. Joseph-Ignace Guillotin, it was designed to provide a quick and painless death, replacing the brutal and varied punishments that often depended on a person's social status. The device was intended to ensure equality before the law by providing the same method of execution for everyone, although it tragically became a symbol of the revolution's violence."
I have just learned that there is a program of extended security updates for Windows 10 and have enrolled for one year free. Not clear if it can be extended beyond that year. You entoll through your PC's settings.
ReplyDeleteGreat! I'll check that out. Thanks, W.A.
DeleteJustice Department sues to block California US House map in clash that could tip control of Congress
ReplyDelete😆Just had to laugh when I read this paragraph! Gee, think it'll apply equally to Texas, etc.? Talk about hypocrisy!
“California’s redistricting scheme is a brazen power grab that tramples on civil rights and mocks the democratic process,” Attorney General Pam Bondi (https://apnews.com/hub/pam-bondi) said in an emailed statement. “Governor Newsom’s attempt to entrench one-party rule and silence millions of Californians will not stand.”
I'm not laughing because it applies to every state that doesn't use nonpartisan districting, including Texas and Illinois.
DeleteUnderstood. Still, I grok Listener's glee. These jackasses continually open themselves up to ridicule.
DeleteMarianne at Revealing Light sees the Dems taking back Congress next year and, eventually, impeaching the Orange Turd yet again. She didn't know if the Senate would convict, but still... Oh, dear Lord, let it be so!
ReplyDeleteOf course, then we'll have to deal with Shady Vance. But, sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.
On the plus side, Shady Vance doesn't have a following.
DeleteThe Senate will not convict. That's an absolute given. And without conviction impeachment is worse than futile.
DeleteIt's an absolute given with the current makeup of the Senate. If, by some miracle, the Dems take the Senate too and if, by an astronomically remote chance, none of the Dems (and Indes caucusing with them) are cowering, sniveling Republican Lite, who would rather kiss Trump's ass than do what's honorable and right for the country and if all seven Reps who voted to convict last time vote to do so again - the most unlikely chance of all! - then, just maybe, they'll convict.
DeleteAnyway, a girl can dream.
You do not dream alone.
Delete