I don’t see any concrete promise made, much less any penalty holding them to a concrete promise.

The Associated Press chooses not to discuss the small fact that DeJoy was appointed to destroy the USPS.

Reuters not honest enough to write “killing” much less “murder”.

The headline frames hypocrisy as the sin rather than the silencing of climate protest.

I understand there will be no consequences for the media kings, but I wonder about the levels below. They can’t all be in a position to skip out on what they are flirting with on behalf of America.

Does the press think there will be some protective force field for them if they succeed in setting America alight?

I’m relieved to learn this is a term. I see so many appeals to civility and decorum, and it turns into giving the Supreme Court away.

Now I’m reminded of Dick Cheney shooting that guy and the guy having to apologize to Cheney for it.

I’ve always wished Democratic candidates would be contemptuous when needed. Gutsy. Maybe I’m all wrong, but if for instance Clinton had strongly stood behind having said deplorable.

it looks like that to me too

Genuine question. I do want to engage in discussing political matters—well, some days, when I’m up for it—but I’m hesitant because I expect to be viewed with some paranoia. I will do my best not to even look at votes. If I snark on headlines for some time, which I would enjoy, maybe enough people will figure out I’m not something bad.

“It’s something I’ll have to deal with for the rest of my life,” said Gardner

“I shot someone, so I’m the real victim here!” (In Nebraska, victim shoot you?)