Ozzy’s DNA sequence reveals rare form of Parkinson's
Ozzy Osbourne, Who Suffered with a Form of Parkinson’s, Dies at 76
Ozzy Osbourne, lead singer of Black Sabbath, has died at age 76. He said he had been previously diagnosed with a form of Parkinson’s disease linked to the gene PRKNLauren J. Young (Scientific American)
like this
ThoGot, Stety, raoul, TheBronko, Dampyr 🇺🇦 🇵🇸, , dafungusamongus, fakeman_pretendname, PushButton, Cardinalis, Skogkatt, snappy(she/her), Steve, fiendishplan, doublebatterypack, sem, chunkystyles, ryan_, Sinuousity, Black616Angel, dumpymctruckers, Foxfire, BestToast, Clay_pidgin, Sarothazrom, hairyfeet, corsicanguppy, Fredselfish, Fortatech, DjungelPungen, tigeruppercut, drofenvy, WIZARD POPE💫, Emi, deadcatbounce, thisisbutaname, blackbeards_bounty, EightBitBlood, rothaine, Dae, GoTime, beemikeoak, anar, Justin, Everyday0764, newbeni, FenrirIII, mrnarwall and vomitVerifier like this.
don't like this
VagueDirector doesn't like this.
Trump (not drag queens) appears in Epstein files & DOJ told him months ago, The Wall Street Journal reports
Pam Bondi told Trump he's in Epstein files, WSJ reports
Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche told Donald Trump that his name appears in Epstein investigation files.Christopher Wiggins (Advocate.com)
like this
tiredofsametab, originalucifer, dcpDarkMatter, Oofnik, WatDabney, frustrated_phagocytosis, rash, Azathoth, hpx9140 and felixthecat like this.
I wouldn't go that far, Giuliani is probably in there, and he looks quite fetching in a dress. Just ask Donald Trump.
like this
dcpDarkMatter likes this.
The obese tangerine is horrible and he needs to be ridiculed, persecuted, and prosecuted etc. However, the irony of calling it the department of justice is the thing that jumps out at me.
It really should be called the department of covering up for deviant rich shitbags, or something similar.
73-Year-Old Republican Senator Disassociates in Middle of Interview
like this
slothbear likes this.
like this
dcpDarkMatter likes this.
like this
dcpDarkMatter likes this.
there is a problem with minimum wage, yes.
but you're solution isn't a solution. it will lead to the exact opposite of what you want. even more so than now.
like this
dcpDarkMatter likes this.
Yes. We should have anti-corruption laws being reliably forced, and have anti-corruption laws strengthened.
that won't happen if all the good ones leave because they can't afford to live in DC.
They also vote on work requirements for things like health care benefits and then clock a zero hour day at their own fucking jobs.
Congress should have to work a standard forty hour work week to receive benefits and make time off requests like the rest of us.
I used to think an upper age limit for serving in government was agist and would mean a large chunk of the population without representation by their peers. I worried how poorly they might be treated without representation.
But I don’t think it could be any worse than they’re treated with how poorly their peers are doing currently.
like this
Drusas likes this.
like this
dcpDarkMatter, slothbear and Drusas like this.
They're not different things though. The only difference between one arbitrarily established limit and the other is that you think it's okay to shit on younger people.
They're both extremely arbitrary limits based on some expectation that a 29yo is unable to be a reasoning, empathic human being but a 30yo can. It's not even based on medical science. It's based on a cultural belief that old people are somehow wiser and more experienced.
Oh, and since you brought up the development of the prefrontal cortex, the human brain begins to show signs of deterioration as early as the thirties. with cognitive declines related to aging becoming pronounced and obvious around the sixties. so fuck off with that.
a kind, empathetic and compassionate 20 year old is going to be a better congress person than a 50 year old whose not.
Oh, and by the way, a person born in 1945... half of their experience predates the modern world, and the quality of one's experience is far more important than the extent of that experience. (for reference, such a person would be 80 years today, and would have been 46 when the first webpage went live. they would have been 58 when MySpace went live.)
the majority of their experience applies to a world that no longer exists. In every way relevant to modern governance, their preconceptions and understanding of the world is- generally- a world that is gone.
This is why so many of them believe that young families can afford a house on a single income if they just went and got a fucking job. Because they could and did.
There are exceptions to this, so don't even bother listing them. I don't care. Because any hard limit you set is not going to fucking care. and all of that brings us back to... both limits are either aegist, or not aegist.
I don't care if it is aegist. There's good reasons to have both limitations.
And lets be clear, you're worried about a 24 yo going off and starting a war because their brain is underdeveloped, but ignoring that a person with dementia is a paranoid fucker, and makes that 24yo look positively saintly.
Whoa. I think there is some amount of wisdom and experience people acquire and giving them until 25 to get that PFC thing going makes some sense.
I also said elsewhere in this thread that I think cognitive tests would be reasonable.
I don't think lower age limits and upper age limits are the same thing at all. I suppose if people want to put it to voters, people could work on updating the Constitution to lower age limits to 20 or whatever for Senate, House and the WH and then let voters decide. I just don't think it's the main concern (or even a real concern at all) when it comes to our broken system, although I know it's quite fashionable to blame older people for all the problems...I'd say the problem is making money = free speech and allowing legal bribery.
Having younger people being bribed vs. older people and having term limits on those younger people is supposedly going to accomplish something, but I'm not really sure what.
Having younger people being bribed vs. older people and having term limits on those younger people is supposedly going to accomplish something, but I’m not really sure what.
age has nothing to do with being bribed. that's a distraction.
As for wisdom, age has little to do with that, too.
do you really want me to list all the fucking stupid, unwise, and vile policies being pushed by mostly-old-people, who've stopped giving a fuck about their legacy because they already got theirs and pulled the ladder up?
Edit:
Again: the only functional difference is that you think it’s appropriate to shit on younger people. That’s it. Every medical justification you use to do so… can be applied to anyone over 30, and especially anyone over 60. Any justification about “experience” can be ignored since most of that doesn’t even apply to the modern world.
You act as if they would suddenly lose representation. Which is not true any more than anyone under 30 is not already represented.
There is no legitimate argument you can make that justifies one but not the other. None.
The weird part is 73 isn't really all that old for some of these fuckers...
Kennedy isn't even in the top 20. Fully 1/5th of the Senate is older than 73(!)
Iowa - Chuck Grassley - 91
Kentucky - Mitch McConnell - 83
Vermont - Bernie Sanders - 83
Idaho - Jim Risch - 82
Maine - Angus King - 81
Illinois - Dick Durbin - 80
Connecticut - Richard Blumenthal - 79
Massachusetts - Ed Markey - 79
New Hampshire - Jeanne Shaheen - 78
Hawaii - Mazie Hirono - 77
Massachusetts - Elizabeth Warren - 76
Oregon - Ron Wyden - 76
Rhode Island - Jack Reed - 75
Arkansas - John Boozman 74
Idaho - Mike Crapo - 74
Mississippi - Roger Wicker - 74
Nebraska - Deb Fischer - 74
New York - Chuck Schumer - 74
Washington - Patty Murray - 74
West Virginia - Jim Justice - 74
Colorado - John Hickenlooper - 73
Louisiana - John Kennedy - 73
Tennessee - Marsha Blackburn - 73
Texas - John Cornyn - 73
Wyoming - John Barraso - 73
like this
Drusas likes this.
I have yet to meet someone in their eighties that isn't mentally slipping. I have certainly never met someone in their 90's that wasn't a shadow of their former self.
Term limits would be a great starting point.
like this
dcpDarkMatter and Drusas like this.
I've known people in that age that are mentally intact. There's been a few celebrities that seem intact even into their 90s like Dick Van Dyke or Betty White. There was a guy at worked I only communicated with by text and assumed he was my age as we worked on an issue. Turned out he was 84. It was announced that he was leaving and I assumed he was going to retire, but no, he got a job elsewhere for a raise....
Certainly that video featured a man far more deteriorated than most anyone I've known in their 70s.
Problem is mostly the voters voting for a letter (R or D) and frequently not even paying attention to the specific person.
The problem isn't old people in office. I've known a lot of 80 year olds who are still with it mentally, and while they are slower physically they make up for it with their experience and wisdom.
But the problem is that not all older people are like this, so it's generally up to the politician themselves to decide when they're too old for it, and many of these people have egos which might prevent them from stepping back, ever. Combine this with the fact that the vast majority of seats are safe for one party or the other, and candidates are discouraged from running against incumbents in primaries, and someone who wins a Congressional seat at 40 or 50 can keep it for 30 (even 40) years, without having to face any meaningful opposition.
So, maybe we shouldn't have an upper age limit. However, we should take the stigma away from having a primary challenge. Every Federal election should have a meaningful primary. Does an 80 year old want to keep his seat? They should have to debate someone half their age, and perform well, to keep it. Nothing should be taken for granted.
I like the idea of primaries. As to debates, though - the way they are conducted (in the United States anyway) seems to be very problematic - comes down to quips and comebacks, talking over one another, going over allotted time, not really answering the questions and using prepared sound bites, and trying to go viral, all while lots and lots of logical fallacies are employed, and a populace that judges on the most arbitrary aspects of all this hot mess, such as who appeared to dominate or came off "strong", etc.
I wonder if there is some other way(s) to have candidates express their platforms during primaries. I honestly don't have a great answer for this. I suppose it still comes back to a rather tuned-out and generally clueless populace that will decide things largely based on "vibes" anyway...
I honestly don’t have a great answer for this.
Town halls work. Speeches, work. meeting with constituents in any of a dozen formats... works. hell, even an AMA somewhere.
Personally, we should replace debates with MarioKart64 competitions.
The problem isn’t old people in office. I’ve known a lot of 80 year olds who are still with it mentally, and while they are slower physically they make up for it with their experience and wisdom.
And I've known a lot of very wise 12 yo's in my time. Should we start letting 12yo's run for office? what about 22 yo's? what about a 32 yo president?
for someone whose 80, over half of their experience does not apply to the world we currently live in, anyway.
But half of their experience does, and the other half does give them context. (I would personally like it if more people in office today could remember what it was like to have fo fight in a war against fascists.) If they can offer a better vision than other candidates, and their voters are fully informed about their choices, I have no problem if voters send them back.
The problem comes when districts are manipulated to the point where the general election isn't competitive, and primaries against incumbents are also discouraged. That guarantees that if someone wins an election once, they can hold on to the seat as long as they want to, well past the point where they are relevant, because they will never have to face a contested election again. That's the real problem.
The context the irrelevant stuff offers…
…Does it tell them millennials are lazy because they can’t afford to have a family and own a house on a single income?
(Yes it does.)
…Does it tell them that being LGBTQ+ is wrong, immoral, and they should not have equal rights?
(Yes. It does)
…Has the experience of fighting fascists in a war stopped them from being fascist, or from supporting genocide?
(No. It does not.)
Now who's stereotyping based on age?
You can't assume that everyone who is 80+ holds these views, but if that person wants to run for office and represent you, then you absolutely have the right to ask them, and withhold your vote if they don't answer to your liking.
The problem is that there are no alternatives. That person can be blatant in their suckitude, and you have no other option, within the party or outside of it. People like this keep getting elected because the system is stacked towards incumbency. Once you get the gig in a safe district, it is basically a life appointment. It was never meant to be that way.
You can't assume that everyone who is 80+ holds these views, but if that person wants to run for office and represent you, then you absolutely have the right to ask them, and withhold your vote if they don't answer to your liking.
Did I say that? You are putting words into my mouth.
They are, however common views, and serve as an excellent example of how that “context” isn’t always a good thing.
If you’re gonna sit there and say anyone under x age is immature - and that’s exactly what you’re saying- then I get to say anyone over y age is decrepit.
And i think you understand that point. It doesn’t matter if it’s universally true- it’s true enough, on both sides the issue.
It’s fine to post an upper limit because, surprise surprise, time marches on and everyone will(hopefully) grow old. You’re not gunna blow up your own retirement plan but you might pull that ladder up behind you.
The elderly have proven time and time again that basically none of them can do their jobs properly, and many of them should probably be in at least assisted living and not running the country.
More easily to control a bunch of senile old farts than with a younger politician who might have an actual conscience
Old politicians don't care about the future because their time in this life is limited. A younger politician is more liable to be aware of their actions because they know that whatever they are participating in will affect their lives in a few decades.
Don’t underestimate the power of inertia.
Inertia helps the elderly appear normal when dementia starts to hit. It’s part of the reason why the beginning of dementia goes unnoticed. Even if family notices “something isn’t right”, dementia may not be evident because they’re doing their usual daily routine.
Reminds me of the interview where he learned that you don’t need to swear on a bible. It broke his head. His jaw was agape while he struggled with that news. That was a while ago and this moron is still in congress. Absolutely mind boggling that people like him hold as much leverage as they do over people’s well-being.
I’m not saying I could run the ball to the hoop, but I know there are more suitable people out there.
Reminds me of the interview where he learned that you don’t need to swear on a bible. It broke his head. His jaw was agape while he struggled with that news.
Do you have a link? I'd like to see that.
There are still just a whole lot of dumbasses that think America - a secular nation - was designed to be, and is, a xtian nation. This gomer is just one of them.
One of my favorite things to ask one of these types is to tell me where their little book club - or the protagonist of that book club - is mentioned in the Constitution. I've seen multiple cases of them shorting out over this. Most of them just flat refuse to believe me. Of course. I tell them to "do their own research" on the matter. 🤣
- YouTube
Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.m.youtube.com
Holy shit, I agree with one of the first comments, "Flagging this video for depicting a murder".
JFC - "I know DAhnawld truhmp did it".
And oh, that attempt at the "Merry Christmas" dig at the end. Real sick burn, dude. FFS, these people. They use a fucking holiday as a way to really stick it to others, just like Jesus would have done.
like this
themadcodger and dcpDarkMatter like this.
gonna fix that for you...
how many Republican Senators does it take to change a light bulb?Just one. But Trump has told them he already changed it and they applaud him in the dark.
"That's about enough of that from you."
Sizzle
"Bwhah? Who's making toast?"
like this
dcpDarkMatter likes this.
That's God smiting him for using Jesus' name in the service of the evil he and MAGA released on the earth.
God is angry at the MAGA antichrist.
like this
dcpDarkMatter likes this.
huhuh.
If that's true then why hasn't god smited trump? whose objectively awful, but acting in his name? or any of thousands of preachers who are pedophiles? Why are they still allowed to be preachers and pedophiles raping kids?
I'd be for a cognitive exam. Ideally screening out various personality disorders, too.
But this thread is riddled with the usual ageist tropes and stuff about term limits. None of which will fix anything about our broken system.
Having some hard-coded age put into our legal system is bound to end badly. First of all, what is considered the typical years of health span I expect to change, most especially for the higher class (even if America's health advances stall out thanks to the Republicans, other countries will continue forward and the upper echelons will definitely have access to such care). Secondly, even if it doesn't, the typical years of health span vary wildly person to person. Telling someone at 73 they are too old to do the job, apropos of nothing else but the number of times they have been around the sun? That's just plain stupid and it should be up to the voters to decide that.
I don't think anyone would necessarily be hoarding anything; I'm just pointing out that health spans are likely to change as things advance. Maybe the average American might lag a bit behind the top 10% or so, but I very much doubt that these people will be aging the same way that people age now or ten years ago.
Setting some hard-coded thing now will be hard to change later to adapt with the times.
Every one of those aholes that want to run for office should take a basic science exam.
When there are legislators getting all het up about chem trails I know we're going down the drain.
The problem is that as people age cognitive decline can be rapid. You elect somebody at 70 with no symptoms for a 6 year term. By 73 you get this type of issue.
A cognitive test would only work if it was administered yearly. If they show signs of cognitive decline they are immediately relieved of duties. You'd have to set up an independent body of physicians to administer the test and have the physician chosen at random to prevent shenanigans. The rich and powerful would still find a way to rig the system.
Or you can just set rules to prevent the issue.
64 is the oldest anyone can run for office and 70 is mandatory retirement age for all positions in government service. Yes some people still have a lot of life left in them at that age They can do something else.
As we've seen over and over again one dement old person in a position of power can cause pain and suffering or even the loss of life to millions.
I have a friend who retired from government service at 58 after 35 years. He then started his own business now at 79 it's large and prosperous. Just because he "retired" doesn't mean he stopped being of value to society. Hell his business has more impact now that he ever did in his government job.
Unfortunately old age is starting to catch up with him. He had a mild stroke last year and his brain isn't what it used to be.
Well there's age limits v. term limits.
I think term limits are definitely reasonable, regardless of age. We don't need one person in a specific government role indefinitely.
Age limits, I'm kind of inclined to agree that would be hard to pin down. Frankly 73 is a bit young in my experience to be as far gone as John Kennedy seemed to be. Certainly it drops off and drops off suddenly at some point for people, but you do have people into their 90s with their cognition intact. Bernie Sanders is in his 80s and he seems mentally still there.
I've just never seen a very compelling case for term limits. I don't think they'll fix anything and in my anecdotal experience, the most prominent supporters tend to be rightwing cranks, so it makes me all the more suspect of the idea.
It's one of those things that might sound really good to say, especially when someone has just had it up to here with the outcomes of legalized bribery and a corrupt government in the hands of incompetents and radicalized right wingers.
And yeah, when it comes to things like healthspan, I am not a fan at all of trying to apply some upper bound on age, especially when we may be poised on a revolution in things related to aging. Our government is already famously slow in catching up to other developments, this would be yet another where we are ushering people out of job long before it makes sense....
the most prominent supporters tend to be rightwing cranks,
Right now, the most ardent term limit hopes are against Trump. I also see people here all the time clamoring for Congressional term limits, either to get some of the GOP out or to make more room for progressive candidates on the Democrat side. Without term limits things can get too stagnant.
Even if people get to be as perfectly healthy at 90 as they were at 30, without term limits you could have some pretty bad situations with the same politicians in the same offices for decades and decades. Even with term limits there's plenty of political positions across the municipal, district, state, federal levels to move between to build a very long and useful political career.
like this
FerretyFever0 likes this.
like this
Drusas likes this.
Fox News is way better and more sophisticated as a propaganda machine than whatever NK has.
It's one thing to brain wash people that have no access to education or outside sources it's a completely different level to do it in a western country.
Not really. Is there much difference between no education and an American education?
It doesn’t really count if you just make up all the facts and history.
I often think about how many people I went to school with felt that high school was difficult. High school in America is a fucking joke. I understand that high school is difficult if you have a disability of some sort, and I even buy the cultural bias argument for standardized testing, but I went to high school in a lilly white suburb with lots of supposedly normative kids and some of them barely made it through graduation.
The American populace is chock full of idiots. Most of the people that even graduated high school here (which is not everyone) went on to never pick up another book again.
College too. I used to study in the business school beacuse it was new and the chairs were excellent. I'd frequently run into students doing the whole "Math is hard!" thing.
So I'd offer to help, super basic high school algebra type stuff.
I'd explain it and they'd go "Wow! You're smart! What classes are you taking here?"
"Oh, I'm an English major, I'm just here because the chairs don't suck."
remain in office for far longer than they should, usually out of pride and denial.
These cunts keep getting elected.
He's the only name the voters recognize, probably.
Anyone who would oppose him doesn't have the funding to force their name into everyone's mouths.
He literally froze up when he got caught in the Christan Nationalist logical trap.
Literally got stuck in the loop when his lips said, "I'm sure Jesus loves them, but everybody else..."
The topic they were discussing was Trump's crackdown on sanctuary cities.
Mamdani can be the way forward for the city, and the nation
Mamdani can be the way forward for the city, and the nation
David Mirtz is a co-chair of the NYC Working Families Party Some elections prove to be turning points in politics. For the Democratic Party in New York, Assemblyman Zorhan Mamdani decisive mayoral primary win over the well-connected and...BY DAVID MIRTZ (The Chief)
like this
SuiXi3D, andyburke, Oofnik, wagesj45, frustrated_phagocytosis, tiredofsametab and FerretyFever0 like this.
Unfortunately with the laws as they’re currently written, since he was born in Uganda, he can’t be president.
That’s not me trying to poo-poo the idea of him being president, that’s me saying the laws need changing.
Doesn't need to change, we have those rules for a reason.
Also, should see how he actually does as mayor before giving him too much credit. Plenty of other politicians have been flops or changed their tune once in office.
What is the reason? Honest question.
Like, obviously we can have restrictions. Basically Id say shift the age requirement to time as a citizen instead. But I really don't see why a kid born in Uganda and moving to America at 7 years old (Like Mamdani) and running for president at 42 is really any different than a kid born in America and running for president at 35.
I don't know when he got his citizenship. But shift the age X years to whenever he got it.
The plan of having a 35 year long sleeper agent living in America is fantasy. That's significantly too much work when you can already buy our politicians right now and not wait 35 years. (APAIC comes to mind first)
I feel like all Citizens should be able to run at some point. I really don't care what patch of dirt you were born on.
I would guess something like preventing a foreign born and indoctrinated agent or Manchurian Candidate type situation.
Boy howdy, I bet it would really suck if we got a foreign asset into the presidency, huh? Imagine not even knowing you are being attacked and wondering why the country seems to be happily self destructing! What an awful hypothetical and not real situation.
Needless to say, it may have made sense at one time but it's probably a bit outdated now.
If orangeboi is alive and runs for a 3rd term, all bets are off, because running for a third term is explicitly and unambiguously unconstitutional at this point in time. And there is approximately zero chance the fascists could get an amendment through to change that.
So, yeah, Mamdani could run, and Obama could run, and W could run, and Clinton (Bush) could run, and the Governator could run, and Jimmy Carter’s ghost could run, and eel-on-musk could run, and Putin could run, and -
You get the idea
It's a step in the right direction, that's for sure.
But in this timeline, electing someone who's not a kiddy-diddler is a step in the right direction and a third of our country (and 2/3s of our fucking government) don't wanna do it...
Trump supporters report higher levels of psychopathy, manipulativeness, callousness, and narcissism
Trump supporters report higher levels of psychopathy, manipulativeness, callousness, and narcissism
Support for Donald Trump is linked to darker personality traits, including increased psychopathy and decreased empathy, new research finds.Eric W. Dolan (PsyPost Psychology News)
like this
zeograd, trib, U762, Killer57, argh_another_username, Marleyinoc, Lazer365, PacMan, YiddishMcSquidish, WanderWisley, 2lama, miridius, pandakhan, BigBenis, Dae, bassgirl09, watty, Hermit_Lailoken, Redditsux, inbeesee, Lifter, Wolf, Tiempo, cascadia, Ispanicus, SalmiakDragon, grumpydwarf and nudi like this.
don't like this
RANS0M doesn't like this.
You needed to conduct official research to figure that one out?
I'm up in Canada in northern Ontario and I have a few friends (on very thin ground mind you), relatives and associates who support or agree with Trump or MAGA ..... and all of them are racist, show signs of psychopathy, are manipulative, are callous and are narcissists.
9/10 if I meet a total ignorant jerk, they'll be a MAGA idiot
like this
indecisiveidiot likes this.
like this
indecisiveidiot likes this.
“This paper was several years in the making, starting as a result of the 2016 election, and was designed to address why some people might view favorably a political figure with a history of business failures, bankruptcies, misogynistic statements caught on video, use of charity money for a self-portrait, etc,” explained study author Craig Neumann, a Regents Professor of Psychology at the University of North Texas.To investigate these links, the researchers conducted two large surveys with a total of over 9,000 participants from the United States. The first sample consisted of 1,000 men recruited online, about one-third of whom were racial or ethnic minorities. The second sample included 8,047 men and women who completed personality questionnaires on a public psychology website.
Participants in both samples completed a range of validated questionnaires measuring political attitudes, personality traits, and empathy. Political ideology was assessed through questions about general political orientation, preferences for military versus social spending, support for gun control, and evaluations of Trump’s first term as president. The researchers used structural equation modeling, a statistical technique that allows for the testing of relationships between multiple variables at once, while accounting for measurement errors.
like this
indecisiveidiot likes this.
What I wonder is how much of that is innate versus learned.
Because it has been an increasing talking point among the right wing and evangelical churches that empathy is bad. And... a lot of that boils down to not having any.
like this
RestrictedAccount likes this.
it has been an increasing talking point among the right wing and evangelical churches that empathy is bad
While I'm inclined to believe this, my attempt to add a source came up mostly empty, other than an amusing chapter of CS Lewis' Screwtape Letters.
This was new to me so I tried looking it up as well. I found a lot of results right away with startpage, which makes me wonder what search engine you were using?
They (the evangelicals) are apparently calling it "toxic empathy" and they jump through a lot of loops to claim that it's bad to have empathy with the victims of USA republican policies.
My first result was a long opinion piece criticizing evangelicals for their newfound crusade against empathy: churchleaders.com/news/511911-…
2nd result is an evangelical that does a bit of mind bending to explain why empathy with outgroups is "toxic": unityinchristianity.com/2025/0…
The 3rd article has a claim that Jesus Himself was not empathic: "Clearly the Lord Jesus Christ can be sympathetic, but He cannot be empathetic in the sense of identifying with our sinful emotions and desires." e-n.org.uk/features/2025-03-th… That article also references a book by an evangelical called "the sin of empathy".
Modern USA could be summed up by the old Russian adage: "And then, somehow, it got worse."
The Truth about Toxic Empathy and Why It’s Becoming a Controversial Topic - Unity In Christianity
The past several weeks have been filled with multiple examples of what is taken into account "toxic empathy," and we, as Christians, are to see it as aadmin (Unity In Christianity)
like this
simulacra_procession and DagwoodIII like this.
"...identifying with our sinful emotions and desires"
Don't they also say that's why he was fucking sent to Earth in the first place?
And the US evangelical team has won the gold in mental gymnastics once again.
I was at a cocktail party with people who mostly I have known for at least 15 years. This guy came up who is the husband of a good friend of my wife and he was talking about how he doesn’t believe in empathy anymore.
There’s definitely something in the water
kofe doesn't like this.
don't like this
RestrictedAccount and kofe don't like this.
I would imagine it's an even wider scope than that... People who vote for bigoted, ignorant candidates are themselves bigoted and ignorant.
"LOOK AT THEM! THEY'RE JUST LIKE ME!"
(Votes)
Explains Michelle Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Josh Hawley, Jim Jordan, John Kennedy, etc. etc.
like this
indecisiveidiot likes this.
There is a book that gave a scientific explanation and it was written fifty years ago.
"Future Shock" by Alvin Toffler. Toffler was a sociologist. He studied what happened in the past when there were radical changes in society. The first great wave was the switch from hunter/gatherer tribes to farming towns. 5,000 years later there was a leap from farming to industry. Both times there were people who couldn't or wouldn't adapt themselves to the new order.
'Future shock' was his name for the madness of people who would do anything to hold on to a past that was already dead.
like this
indecisiveidiot likes this.
You want a major mind fuck?
"Stand On Zanzibar" by John Brunner. Brunner's novel won the 1969 Hugo for Best Science Fiction Novel. It is set in the early 21st Century. The author based his predictions on Toffler's work. He imagined things like Detroit being a ghost town; legalized pot; the internet; AI ; well paid adults needing roommates and a lot of other things. He got enough right to be very scary indeed.
DagwoodIII likes this.
Lower reading levels too.
Then they screech at everyone that they are “alpha.”
Boggles my fucking mind.
like this
indecisiveidiot likes this.
It's just been made acceptable and even praised.
So everyone inclined is following suit.
like this
indecisiveidiot likes this.
like this
eronth likes this.
psychology is not science
source: I am a psychologist.
don't like this
indecisiveidiot doesn't like this.
for sure. it's definitely research.
Also, just because something is not science, doesn't mean it's not valuable. Art, compassion, diplomacy, love, money, etc are all unscientific yet valuable.
Psypost - Bias and Credibility - Media Bias/Fact Check
PRO-SCIENCE These sources consist of legitimate science or are evidence-based through the use of credible scientific sourcing. Legitimate science follows the scientific method, is unbiased and does not use emotional words.Media Bias Fact Check
like this
indecisiveidiot likes this.
Patches doesn't like this.
like this
_AutumnMoon_ likes this.
It's not a job. It's an activity, more like a hobby.
Garbageman, municipal sewer worker, meat inspector, those are jobs.
Patches doesn't like this.
⠀⣿⣿⣿⣷⣤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣤⣶⣾⣿
⠀⠘⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣦⣀⣀⣀⣄⣀⣀⣠⣀⣤⣶⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠇
⠀⠀⠈⠻⣿⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠋⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⣰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣟⠋⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⢠⣿⣿⡏⠆⢹⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠒⠈⣿⣿⣿⣇⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⣼⣿⣿⣷⣶⣿⣿⣛⣻⣿⣿⣿⣶⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⡀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⡁⠀⠈⣿⣿⣿⣿⢟⣛⡻⣿⣿⣿⣟⠀⠀⠈⣿⡇⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⢿⣶⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡻⣿⡿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣶⣶⣾⣿⣿⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠘⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡆⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⣼⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⠀
like this
BabyInAStraightJacket likes this.
like this
indecisiveidiot likes this.
like this
Patches likes this.
like this
indecisiveidiot, Marleyinoc, 2lama and pandakhan like this.
like this
Psythik, WanderWisley, 2lama, pandakhan, Dae, ksigley, Wolf and rustyricotta like this.
like this
2lama, FilthyHands and Dae like this.
Rep. Randy Fine Tells Palestinians To 'Starve Away' as Babies Die of Malnutrition Under Israeli Blockade in Gaza
Rep. Randy Fine Tells Palestinians To 'Starve Away' as Babies Die of Malnutrition Under Israeli Blockade in Gaza - News From Antiwar.com
On Tuesday, Rep. Randy Fine (R-FL) said on X that Palestinians in Gaza should "starve away" while also claiming the reports of people dying of hunger due to the US-backed Israeli blockade are a "lie.News From Antiwar.com
like this
SuiXi3D, wagesj45, Oofnik and SolacefromSilence like this.
So what? Jewish people believe in the same god.
He and his party play the religion card and get votes from religious assholes claiming that they have better morals than other people because of their book and faith.
In this context, who gives a shit? They all believe in a slightly different version of the same invisible all-powerful creator, preach one thing and do the exact opposite...
Next time I'll post "The party of religious fucking nutjobs everybody" and save you the trouble.
like this
frustrated_phagocytosis, SuiXi3D, Maeve and wagesj45 like this.
like this
frustrated_phagocytosis and SuiXi3D like this.
I bet if you took food away from that tubster for 5 mins he would lose it.
Scum.
Pretty fucking rich coming from a guy who looks like he's never missed a meal in his life.
And no the point isn't that he's fat, it's that he's a hypocrite. Definitely the type that would pull up the ladder behind him.
Gabbard Releases New Documents Targeting Obama Administration
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/23/us/politics/trump-russia-obama-gabbard.html
Trump is clutching at straws and will throw any amount of chaff to try to deflect the Epstein missile closing in on him.
I say Trump and not they, because Gabbard is just a puppet here, like all of Trump's nominees. And of curse Trump himself is just a puppet of the Heritage Foundation...
like this
dcpDarkMatter likes this.
like this
dcpDarkMatter likes this.
like this
Maeve likes this.
Was it 1,000 all at once or 1,000 putting in a few hours?
I think there was 300,000 documents or something?
There were probably more names they were looking for.
Are the documents digital? Could they use & trust OCR?
Doc review is always digital now. You can trust the vendors because they would go out of business otherwise.
You also don’t doc review just a few hours.
The software is pretty advanced and makes getting through large amounts of discovery fast.
1000 people is a lot.
Patel better make sure he works in slab on grade buildings.
FBI Director Kash Patel has privately told other government officials that Trump’s name appeared in the files, according to people close to the administration.Patel declined to answer an inquiry from the Journal about the Epstein case, but said in a statement that the memo on the Justice Department website explaining why the department wouldn’t release more Epstein documents was “consistent with the thorough review conducted by the FBI and DOJ.”
like this
dcpDarkMatter and SuiXi3D like this.
like this
Maeve likes this.
like this
dcpDarkMatter likes this.
I have a feeling this was the plan all along.
They did the same thing with Theranos. You don’t throw all your cards out with one story. You wrote a story. Let it marinate. Follow up later. Rinse and repeat.
I have a feeling there’s more damning info WSJ has that’s coming out in a week or 2.
like this
Maeve likes this.
Oh wow, if it really is Vance that might explain why the WSJ is so confident.
(And Vance doesn't just have the most to gain. He's also someone who used to be a never-Trumper.)
Chuck Schumer theorizes the reason for the house recess is to draft pardon papers for Maxwell
Chuck Schumer Shares His Theory on Trump Admin's Plans for Ghislaine Maxwell Amid 'Epstein Recess'
Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer has theorized that House Republicans declared an early summer recess not only to avoid voting on the Epstein files, but also to give President Donald Trump time...Maryam Khanum (Latin Times)
I mean, they could try. It would toss nitroglycerin into the MAGA rage that's already forming. So yeah, go right ahead.
She could still be subpoena'd by Congress--House Oversight Committee already has--and I don't think she could plead the fifth on anything if she's already pardoned. So yeah, go ahead and do that.
She could still be subpoena’d by Congress–House Oversight Committee already has–and I don’t think she could plead the fifth on anything if she’s already pardoned. So yeah, go ahead and do that.
I mean I'm all for throwing fuel on the fire, but Congress is such a weak body, where they constantly allow those giving testimony to get a pass while being in effective contempt.
Yes throw fuel on the fire. But there needs to be meat on the menu. Democrats/ Democratic talking heads have tried in engaging in this kind of business before. Look at the Rachel Maddow/ Trump tax return edge fest that should make most ASMR content creators blush. And it went no-where.
Democrats need to not make a show of going after this; they need to actually go after this. No more jerking themselves or the base off. Go for blood with the intent to kill.
They won't because there are almost certainly big Democratic donors on that list. And Bill. Both parties slow walked this whole thing for decades.
The AOC and Bernie types don't care about that, but they don't serve on the Oversight Committee. Still, just getting Maxwell there should stoke the fires.
AOC
We'll see. She made a serious betrayal the other day with her vote on "defensive weapons" for Israel and is not currently meeting the moment.
This might end up being more AIPAC/ Israel controlling the strings than anything else. There is reasonable conjecture that Epstein had ties to Israelli foreign intelligence, so he may have been either leveraged or using his position to gain leverage for Israel. The assumption seems to be that its "only" the US government that has whatever dirt Epstein had collected, well it may not hold.
Lets just say that Israel has copies of some or much of the evidence gathered in the Epstein case, and some of it applies to now living, now in power politicians. This would give them real power over those people, so long as they have the only copy.
If it all comes out, well there goes all that leverage.
Doubtful. They might pardon her, but it won't be for a while. It might be one of Trump's last actions as president.
I wouldn't mind being wrong, it will be very entertaining if they do it sooner.
like this
dcpDarkMatter likes this.
Maybe he could form a strongly worded letter about it?
Sack of shit deserves to be tarred & feathered, put in stocks in public square. Along with his maga homies
like this
TVA likes this.
First of all, good to know someone's finally gotten in touch with Chuck Schumer. When you don't hear from someone of his age for this long, you start to worrry.
Second of all, what the hell is he talking about? He's 100% right to call this an, "Epstien Recess," that's accurate and good branding, but why would he be pardoning Maxwell? What would the motive be? "She might talk, so I'm going to pardon her as a bribe, even though that would be incredibly suspicious and unpopular with literally everyone. Also, it wouldn't guarantee she would never talk, and would make it much harder to silence her later." Doesn't seem like a great idea, but maybe I'm missing something.
like this
TVA likes this.
Former federal prosecutor and Trump 45 labor secretary, Alex Acosta, offered Epstein a deal in 2007 that promised the feds would not prosecute Epstein or any of his co-conspirators in the future. He also only had to serve 13 months with daily 12-hour work-release... for 40 counts of underage prostitution.
Anyway, current US AG under Trump 47, Pam Bondi, declined to prosecute Epstein under state law the entire time she was Florida AG.
Maxwell's family has said that her ongoing imprisonment violates that 2007 deal. An administration that wasn't compromised by Epstein at every level might say "a-fuck-a-you" but, well...
Those "co-conspirators" should have chosen a more stand-up guy.
like this
TVA likes this.
like this
TVA likes this.
MAGA loses it as death of Epstein lawyer triggers fresh spiral: 'All died under Trump!'
MAGA loses it as death of Epstein lawyer triggers fresh spiral: 'All died under Trump!'
The death of legendary criminal defense lawyer Roy Black, who helped secure a controversial plea agreement for Jeffrey Epstein two decades ago, sent conspiracy theorists in a fresh spiral or outrage.Travis Gettys (Raw Story)
like this
originalucifer, LostWanderer, Blackout, SuiXi3D, Oofnik and wagesj45 like this.
Whaaaa.....
Black won acquittal in 1991 for Smith, a nephew of John F. Kennedy, on rape charges and later married one of the jurors in that nationally televised case, Lea Black, who later became known as a cast member on “The Real Housewives of Miami.”He also represented Epstein during his 2006 criminal case on charges of soliciting prostitution from underage girls, and Black helped secure his 2008 plea agreement that was challenged by two victims who said the deal violated federal law because they were never given an opportunity to object to it.
“Hey there, Juror number 4. What’re you doing after I help this rich politician get away with rape?”
Probably creamed the whole juror’s box right there. Married him and watched him do it again for Epstein.
like this
dcpDarkMatter likes this.
like this
wagesj45 likes this.
But it’s like calling someone’s class a DPS. It’s just… off. Even if everyone accepts “you’re a damage per second and I’m a healer.”
“Make America Great Again is seething.” Uh huh.
Everyone knows what these things mean. But we could have done better.
Yeah. MAGA has always been a symbol of white supremacy. It has pretty specific meaning. The dude walked down the escalator and started calling Mexicans criminals and rapist. He said on a major TV network with half the world watching that immigrants are eating people's pets.
MAGA is white supremacy. MAGA is Nazi shit. Always has been.
Dude said that immigrants are "poisoning the blood of our nation".
Might as well be saying the 14 words.
You and I might know it means the set of deplorables and their awful views on race and gender, but when they use that term, just what policies and principles do they want others to believe that "maga" stands for? I mean, it's not 100% white people in the group calling themselves "maga", so other than sucking up to Taco, what are the core principles that are the supposed cover story to pull in POC, women, LGBTQ and so on?
Same goes for other terms they use that sound like baby talk....like "maha". Just how do they plan on making people "healthy"? What metrics will they use? Does "healthy" include things like reversing the recent trends in maternal mortality? Or is it just about lining the pockets of Big Wellness for RFK? No, we just get baby talk like "maga" and "maha" and very little discussion about real goals, real metrics, etc...I'm just tired of all the baby talk that passes for real definitions of anything. Nailing down what any of "maga" and "maha" are supposed to stand for is like nailing jello to a tree. It's like when Orwell talks about losing the language. This mostly passes without comment, too, by the way. We are just supposed to accept terms like this...
When the likes of MTG claim they are the "real" maga, and those that don't want to release the Epstein files are not, how can anyone really argue for either side, since "maga" means nothing at all other than loyalty to Taco, and the real meaning that most normal Americans know is behind "maga" (xenophobia, homophobia, misogyny, theocratic, etc.) doesn't really enter into releasing information about pedos for or against. They are for it if they think it will mostly damage Democrats, but against releasing it if it would hurt Taco...
I'm not saying to ignore them. I'm just saying more people should press them on just what "maga" means.
As a for instance, does "maga" support or oppose tariffs in the amount and in the way that Taco is (illegally) doing them? Would that position be the same if it was anyone else other than Taco doing it?
The conspiracy wing/Q cult of the party have spent a lot of time trying to “root out” the global pedo cabal
Well, these dipshits thought Taco was going to bring about "The Storm" and arrest Hillary, Podesta, Obama, etc...and that children were being trafficked out of the basement of a basement-less pizza parlor, so, let's just say they have a very active imagination and have next-level abilities to tie themselves into pretzels with their "logic" about the real world.
Just the fact that they believe the real source of pedophilia would be primarily Democrats, and would not involve someone so obviously creepy and slimy like Taco - a guy that is on record saying what he has said about his own daughter - tells you a lot about their reasoning capabilities.
They legit had no clue Trump was involved. That's how much of an echo chamber they had. Now the faction that cared the most about the Epstein files is clashing with the rest.
There are almost certainly high level donors to the Democrats in there, too, and probably Bill Clinton and a few other politicians. Naturally, the left in the US is happy to have them released, anyway, but MAGA doesn't think in those terms. They think everyone to the left of Hillary is brainwashed into supporting Democrats, and would never support releasing the files. That's why they were able to pretend it had nothing to do with their side.
Yeah. I don't think the magats are competent enough to actually put out a proper hit. And the TLA assets who ARE mostly would have been fired because they worked the russia beat or whatever.
Still. All for the qanon conspiracy folk to get riled up against their handlers because they are too stupid to critically think through anything "conspiracy" related.
like this
dcpDarkMatter likes this.
Being aphantasic, I admire their imaginations.
I just have to sit here in reality and take it.
like this
Maeve likes this.
The International Court of Justice issued a strongly worded opinion
Gotta love the meaningless symbology of the UN. Sometimes I think it exists just to keep good politicians occupied while the shitty ones really lead.
Tell that to Israel, who is opening up a new hole with all their missile launches
You must have me confused with someone who has contact with, and political sway over, Israel.
Can you explain to me how you came to the conclusion that I have the ability to tell Israel anything?
U.S. Quietly Drafts Plan to End Program That Saved Millions From AIDS
PEPFAR, the campaign to end H.I.V. globally, would morph into an effort to detect disease outbreaks and sell American products, according to documents obtained by The Times.
like this
Maeve likes this.
Imagine the profits from dealing with all those HIV infections.
-Big pharma, probably
Announcing the Lancet Global Health Commission on anti-corruption in health: a call for a novel approach
Some excerpts:
Corruption—commonly defined as the abuse of entrusted power for private gain—is a pervasive threat to health, health systems, and societies worldwide.1 Corruption compounds inequities, disproportionately harms marginalised populations, and undermines the right to health and the health system by diverting resources from their intended purpose and limiting access to essential services.Corruption can affect countries at every income level. High-income countries have experienced major corruption scandals, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic.10 These same countries are often complicit in enabling global corruption by hosting financial institutions and tax havens that allow illicit profits to be hidden.
Despite decades of reform, anti-corruption efforts have had limited success.11 Most initiatives emphasise transparency and legal enforcement, yet overlook deeper institutional and political drivers. Focusing solely on sanctioning individuals fails to address underlying systemic incentives and structural weaknesses,1 many of which originate from outside of the health sector. Tackling corruption effectively, therefore, requires engaging with the broader political economy.
The Lancet Global Health Commission on anti-corruption in health will respond to this challenge with a novel approach. Corruption is not merely a moral failure but a deeply embedded structural issue that requires evidence-based, context-specific solutions. We recognise that health systems are shaped by both formal rules and by informal networks, kinship ties, and political allegiances. Tackling corruption could involve high political and practical costs and might even worsen conditions in the short term. The Commission will move beyond punitive approaches to champion pragmatic, politically realistic solutions that build trust, strengthen institutions, and drive progress towards universal health coverage.
The Commission will highlight the mechanisms linking corruption to health outcomes, making it harder for policy makers to ignore root causes. We will examine how governance structures, labour rights, and economic conditions interact with health policy. Our recommendations will address the incentives facing actors at every level—from rural clinics to global financial hubs—and promote the role of civil society in holding power to account. We will identify the opportunities that prompt actors to engage in corruption and will propose ways to strengthen appropriate checks and balances in health systems and beyond. Health institutions need to embed safeguards and early warning mechanisms to foster integrity and resilience. Addressing low pay and poor working conditions is crucial to curbing misconduct driven by desperation. Above all, proposed measures should consider unintended consequences, including the misuse of anti-corruption policies to target political opponents.
Our commissioners, drawn from diverse backgrounds, will rely on evidence synthesis, exemplar case studies (especially those that have had demonstrable results), and extensive stakeholder consultations. By engaging policy makers, health workers, civil society, and researchers, we aim to ensure that our recommendations are practical and adaptable across all contexts. This approach will support stakeholders in navigating political realities and implementing effective, evidence-informed responses to corruption.
We will measure our success not by the publication of a report, but by the movement we want to spark—a movement that catalyses sustained action, fosters accountability and resilience, and ensures that health resources reach those who need them most.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214-109X(25)00215-3/fulltext?rss=yes
Epstein’s Brother Dishes on Joke He Says Trump Told Him on Plane
“I was talking to Jeffrey, and he told me that he asked Donald, ‘How come you sleep with so many married women?’ And Donald‘s answer was, ‘Because it‘s so wrong.’”
“That‘s not the kind of question you ask a casual acquaintance. That‘s a question you ask a good friend that you can get away with asking those kind of questions.”
like this
EpicFailGuy, FerretyFever0, aramis87 and SuiXi3D like this.
That's not a joke. That's just his honest answer. The reason they thought it was "funny" is because they are also petulant fucking creeps.
No, Mark Epstein, I don't think you're any better than your brother.
Anyway, the media is sanewashing the whole thing by calling it a "joke." We all know it's not a "joke" we know that this is Trump's genuine, honest answer to this question.
What a fucking farce this country is.
like this
elgordino and FerretyFever0 like this.
Zelensky signs law destroying independence of Ukraine's key anti-corruption bodies
President Volodymyr Zelensky on July 22 signed into law a bill that effectively destroys the independence of Ukraine's two key anti-corruption institutions, according to opposition lawmakers and watchdogs.
Earlier in the day, the Ukrainian parliament (Verkhovna Rada) approved amendments that grant the prosecutor general new powers over investigations led by the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and cases led by the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO).
Among other new powers, the prosecutor general could also close NABU's investigations at the legal defense's request.
The protests were still underway when Zelensky signed the bill.
UPDATE: Zelensky signs law destroying independence of Ukraine's key anti-corruption bodies
President Volodymyr Zelensky approved the law on July 22 despite large-scale protests against the law, which critics say undermines years of pro-democracy reforms.Martin Fornusek (The Kyiv Independent)
like this
EpicFailGuy, dhhyfddehhfyy4673 and massive_bereavement like this.
like this
dcpDarkMatter and Rascal7748 like this.
like this
rash likes this.
like this
massive_bereavement likes this.
No Explanation Given for NASA Director's Departure
The director of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center announced her resignation Monday, marking yet another high-profile departure as questions loom about the agency’s budget and future.Makenzie Lystrup, who has served as director of the center in Maryland since April 2023, will leave the agency on Aug. 1, according to a NASA statement.
Lystrup’s resignation comes less than two months after Laurie Leshin stepped down as director of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California.
...more than 280 current and former NASA employees signed a letter to Sean Duffy, NASA’s interim administrator, stating that the Trump administration’s recent policies “have or threaten to waste public resources, compromise human safety, weaken national security, and undermine the core NASA mission.”
The agency did not provide a reason for Lystrup’s resignation.
NASA said Monday that Cynthia Simmons, Goddard's deputy director, will take over as acting center director in August.
like this
bacon_saber, EpicFailGuy, aramis87, FartsWithAnAccent and SuiXi3D like this.
The NASA statement is just Makenzie Lystrup's resume:
nasa.gov/news-release/nasa-god…
NASA Goddard Center Director Makenzie Lystrup Set to Depart - NASA
On Monday, NASA announced Dr. Makenzie Lystrup, director of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, is set to leave the agency on Friday,NASA
like this
SuiXi3D likes this.
Trump’s Epstein Fiasco Takes Darker Turn as Dem Senator Drops New Bomb
cross-posted from: endlesstalk.org/post/92157712
Hmm, suspicious wire transfers from Russian banks to Epstein. Trump was good buddies with Epstein.
Could Epstein have been Krasnov's handler?
Trump’s Epstein Fiasco Takes Darker Turn as Dem Senator Drops New Bomb
Ron Wyden has some ideas for Pam Bondi to pursue—if, that is, she’s genuinely interested in getting to the bottom of the Epstein scandal.The New Republic
like this
originalucifer, FerretyFever0, Lasslinthar, EpicFailGuy, aramis87, Atelopus-zeteki and wagesj45 like this.
That's the perfect kind of blackmail to have as well.
Although judging from the trump cults response to all this, people like Putin might find out that blackmail doesn't work against a cult leader. The cult will follow even if it was literally Satan killing their own family members and abusing children in front of them...
like this
dcpDarkMatter and FerretyFever0 like this.
like this
dcpDarkMatter and FerretyFever0 like this.
For instance, Wyden suggests that DOJ prosecutors and FBI agents should “immediately investigate the evidence contained in the Treasury Department records on Epstein.” Wyden’s investigators know of these records because his office has been examining Epstein’s financial transactions for several years. In February 2024—when Democrats controlled the Senate—Wyden’s staff viewed in camera (that is, privately) thousands of pages of Treasury files documenting those transactions.That review brought to Wyden’s attention the $1.5 billion in suspicious transactions flagged to Treasury by big banks, which is detailed in the Times report. Wyden’s letter fleshes out these revelations, noting starkly that Treasury’s “Epstein file contains significant information on the sources of funding behind Epstein’s sex trafficking activities.”
. . . In that regard, Wyden’s office also offers another revelation. In the Times piece, a Treasury spokesperson dismissed Wyden’s demand for release of these documents, insisting that when Joe Biden was president, Wyden “never asked” for this information, exposing the demand as “political theater.”
But Wyden’s office says this is false. The in-camera review by Wyden staffers of Treasury documents in February 2024 itself shows that Wyden sought this info from the Biden administration—and that he got access to it.
What’s more, a Wyden aide tells me that in 2024, soon after Wyden’s staff viewed these Treasury documents in camera, Wyden actively moved to get the Senate to subpoena their release. Because Finance Committee rules require bipartisan support for subpoenas, Wyden sought the backing of several GOP senators on the committee, including now-chairman Mike Crapo and Marsha Blackburn. But none would support a subpoena, the aide says.
“Pedo rapist president A-OK” says repibliQan party
like this
Atelopus-zeteki and rash like this.
Backlash grows after Zelensky strips anti-corruption bodies of independence
cross-posted from: lemmy.zip/post/44586959
Many Ukrainians outside parliament – the Rada - disagree with the decision. Critics say the law will severely undermine the Nabu and Sap's authority and effectiveness.The creation of Nabu and Sap was one of the requirements set by the European Commission and International Monetary Fund more than a decade ago in order to move towards a relaxation of visa restrictions between Ukraine and the EU.
Ukraine backlash grows after Zelensky strips anti-corruption bodies of independence
Protests gather pace in Ukrainian cities as some of Kyiv's closest allies sound alarm bells.Laura Gozzi (BBC News)
like this
EpicFailGuy likes this.
Trump Goes Full Fascist: 'Whether It's Right or Wrong, It's Time to Go After People'
Trump Goes Full Fascist, Says DOJ Should 'Go After' Obama
Donald Trump is trying to distract from his ties to Jeffrey Epstein by calling on the DOJ to "go after" his political enemies, including Barack Obama.Ryan Bort (Rolling Stone)
like this
dcpDarkMatter, magic_lobster_party and slothbear like this.
like this
dcpDarkMatter likes this.
The bad news is that this is going to be very bad for a lot of people.
The good news is that he's escalating to avoid dealing with the fact that he's already losing grip on power.
i'm somewhat certain an escalation is needed because otherwise lots of people are not gonna admit that there even is a problem.
consider that trump would still get too many votes if there was election day today. he first has to mess up a whole lot harder for people to take a stance and demand for change.
what i mean is, i've talked to some republicans recently and some of them say that yes, essentially, trump is a conman. they're waking up. had trump not been elected into absolute power, they'd continued to blame the democrats for opposing trump's genius plan, and we'd never get the revolution we need.
lol. I just read a few words and I see he accused Obama of a coup.
Trump truly is cut from the same cloth as Putin. That is a telltale sign of a dictator. Accuse others of exactly what you've done. It's fascinating.
like this
dcpDarkMatter and slothbear like this.
like this
dcpDarkMatter and Drusas like this.
It's both. I spent a decade in a relationship with someone who lied nearly continuously, it seemed to me that after a few years the lies they told became truths to them, no dementia involved. I made up this theory that their brain converted the lies to truths, because truths are easier to remember than lies, according to Judge Judy at least. So, in order to remember all the lies, they are converted to truths. imo.
After the relationship ended, my ex was eventually convicted twice for fraud, the second time they went to jail. I could go on and on with stories.
Trump's not even in control of his own brain, he's got serious mental illness.
like this
dcpDarkMatter likes this.
This is what you voted for protest-non-voters.
Trump was asked which Democratic figures the Justice Department should target specifically in light of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s recent call for Obama administration officials to be “prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law” over claims that they “manufactured” intelligence to allege Russia worked to get Trump elected in 2016.“It would be President Obama; he started it,” Trump replied. “The leader of the gang was President Obama. Barack Hussein Obama, have you heard of him? He’s guilty, it’s not a question. This was treason. This was every word you could think of. They tried to steal the election.”
like this
Azathoth likes this.
After calling his supporters weaklings I'm surprised there hasn't been a coup.
I've met a few of the deep in the ground MAGA, and they do not like the slightest insinuation that they are weak.
...and yet if you want to see examples of extreme snowflakes, look no further. Ironic that they'd get butthurt over being called weak.
Did I say ironic? I mean all too predictable...
I have just enough sympathy to feel why MAGA is upset by it.
He's a strongman or, at least, was, in their eyes. Some of them still. But if the strong man calls you strong for a long time, then calls you and everyone that is in you group weak, something is a lie. And MAGA certainly believes they can't be weak, liberals are weak. So Trump is putting MAGA in the same group as liberals, AND trying to cover up a conspiracy raged by Trump and his inner circle ?
Paradoxics are by nature required for a group like MAGA. But this isn't just a paradox. This is a grand insult to what they hold as the Truth (the Truth that they believe things should be as).
It's the same as your favorite author, or actor, or singer, or whatever idol you have personally saying "you're just as shitty as everyone else."
Unless I'm incredibly mistaken, they're feeling anger that needs to be directed somewhere, and we should definitely point the fact that Trump himself called them weaklings. Not another member of his regime. Not democrats or liberals. It was Trump.
After all, it DOES take a wild measurement of "strength" to be his supporter.
Oh, I think I get it, too. They operate on a whole host of bad impressions about the world. They believe a lot of tropes such as liberals being snowflakes, and that conservatives are more numerous, and so on.
To have the very guy they worship come along with a great big pin and pop one of those most precious of balloons is going to cause a lot of cognitive dissonance, to be sure.
About a decade late. People like myself were mocked for years for trying to warn people about this.
Wish I could say I felt vindicated. Really, I'm just sad.
like this
SuiXi3D likes this.
Okay, Cassandra.
But also me too. Problem is if people listen then it doesn't happen and it never would've and everyone went nuts over nothing. If they don't listen, everything goes to hell and we have to learn the hard way.
At this point anyone who pretends like they don't know Trump is a fascist is either suffering from severe cognitive impairment and should seek medical attention, or more likely a fascist themselves. You don't get to live through the past 6 months and play the "but i didn't knoooooowwwww :((((((" card.
Pick a side and fight, but don't pretend that the fascist regime will go away with hearts and minds and a nice little conversation. These people know what they're doing, and they'll happily kill you to keep doing it. Resist or don't but don't pretend that this will go away by just motivating people to turn out next election cycle.
People such as children?
Sexually?
I hear there's some kind of file about this. Could be good to see that.
This whole Epstein thing is going to be sweep under a rug, and something else will happen. It’s their whole plan… and been doing this since the start.
Never forget.
Full Text: (because Paywall)
President Donald Trump appears to be growing increasingly desperate to turn the national conversation away from his ties to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. He spent the weekend suggesting prominent Democrats should be prosecuted over bogus right-wing conspiracy theories, and today he said it outright.
“Whether it’s right or wrong, it’s time to go after people,” he told reporters in the Oval Office.
Trump was asked which Democratic figures the Justice Department should target specifically in light of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s recent call for Obama administration officials to be “prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law” over claims that they “manufactured” intelligence to allege Russia worked to get Trump elected in 2016.
“It would be President Obama; he started it,” Trump replied. “The leader of the gang was President Obama. Barack Hussein Obama, have you heard of him? He’s guilty, it’s not a question. This was treason. This was every word you could think of. They tried to steal the election.”
“This is like proof, irrefutable proof that Obama was seditious, that Obama was trying to lead a coup,” Trump said later. “It was with Hillary Clinton, with all of these other people, but Obama headed it up.… This is the biggest scandal in the history of our country.”
Obama’s office responded today in a rare statement. “Out of respect for the office of the presidency, our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response,” a spokesperson wrote. “But these claims are outrageous enough to merit one. These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and weak attempt at distraction.
“Nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes,” the statement continued. “These findings were affirmed in a 2020 report by the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee, led by then-Chairman Marco Rubio.”
Several investigations and reviews — including one by the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee review chaired by current Secretary of State Rubio — have concluded that Russia worked to elect Trump over Clinton in 2016. Trump has repeatedly called the idea a “hoax,” and has similarly been calling the Epstein scandal a “hoax” in the face of backlash to the Justice Department announcing it would not be releasing any more material on the sex offender and longtime friend of the president — despite Trump and top Justice Department officials, including Attorney General Pam Bondi, promising supporters they would release the government’s files on Epstein and the elites potentially in league with the disgraced financier.
Trump’s history with Epstein has been under the microscope as his administration has tried to bury the story. The Wall Street Journal reported last week on a salacious birthday note Trump wrote for Epstein in the early 2000s, and in which he allegedly wrote about how the two “have certain things in common.” Rolling Stone reported on the lengths the administration went to kill the story, which Trump has denied. The president sued the Journal and its owner, Rupert Murdoch, for publishing the piece last week.
Trump is now going on the offensive against his political enemies over long-disproven conspiracy theories, ostensibly to distract from his ties to a sex offender. “We caught Hillary Clinton, we caught Barack Hussein Obama,” Trump said. “It’s the most unbelievable thing I think I’ve ever read. You ought to take a look at that and stop talking about nonsense.”
This is working too. The marching orders are in and conservative sites are saying there is proof that Obama was trying to form a coup and stop Trumps election.
It is amazing how fast this narrative has stuck and become the new discussion.
Can we just take a moment to give props to the photographer who took this picture? It truly captures the essence and spirit of Donald Trump. If there is any justice in the world this will be his official presidential portrait.
When (not if) he uses an executive order to have himself added to Mount Rushmore, I hope the poor bastards who have to work on it use this photo as their primary reference.
Wikipedia will need to be updated: "The sculpture features the heads of five United States presidents: George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln, and Donald Trump respectively chosen to represent the nation's foundation, expansion, development, preservation, and enshitification."
Omg, you just gave me chills.
Mt. Sucksmore is already a sacrilegious and disgusting monument to colonialism and imperialism that needs to be destroyed. If they put Orange Hitlers ugly mug up there as well I swear Ill do it myself if it's the last thing I do.
Look at a lot of these social media post.. here’s a ridiculous from moron Mike Johnson. I bet he’s on the damn list. Look at other social media post where people are now saying, ”a pedo? Whatever! As long as they’re not 10.” Or “rape? Donald can rape me anytime.”
https://x.com/Acyn/status/1949489387043180960
CalmChaos72
in reply to nymnympseudonym • • •like this
ThoGot, Stety, raoul, fakeman_pretendname, Fortatech, WIZARD POPE💫, zartemie, redsunrise and Dae like this.
don't like this
Dae doesn't like this.
Semisimian
in reply to nymnympseudonym • • •like this
Drusas, ThoGot, raoul, fakeman_pretendname, fistac0rpse, Sinuousity, NotSteve_, Clay_pidgin, Fredselfish, Fortatech, WIZARD POPE💫, IggyTheSmidge, Dae, Justin and Swedneck like this.
Twinklebreeze
in reply to Semisimian • • •like this
ThoGot, raoul, fakeman_pretendname, fistac0rpse, Foxfire, Fortatech, WIZARD POPE💫 and Swedneck like this.
nymnympseudonym
in reply to Semisimian • • •The good and bad thing about perplexity.ai is that is almost never hallucinates, and gives good grounded references. That is usually a Good Thing, but in this case the result is not what I wanted. GET YOURSELF TESTED, MR RICHARDS!!
perplexity.ai/search/had-keith…
... show moreThe good and bad thing about perplexity.ai is that is almost never hallucinates, and gives good grounded references. That is usually a Good Thing, but in this case the result is not what I wanted. GET YOURSELF TESTED, MR RICHARDS!!
perplexity.ai/search/had-keith…
don't like this
thelasttoot, Coriza, BlameTheAntifa, NailOnTheWall99, Hoimo, ExperiencedWinter, InternationalKnee69, StallmansParrotExperience, groucho and Swedneck don't like this.
yumyumsmuncher
in reply to nymnympseudonym • • •like this
Clay_pidgin and WIZARD POPE💫 like this.
don't like this
BlameTheAntifa, Sp00kyB00k and timbuck2themoon don't like this.