What I find interesting about the rxns to this podcast is the # of ppl who didnt want anything to do w/Sanders, listened and came away w/ either a) changed perspective on him or b) a willingness to ask more q's re: healthcare, min. wage, drug abuse etc to their preferred choice.
People really detest this man or profess to on social media. He is polarizing. But that some actually took the time to listen to an in-depth political conversation for 1hr+ w/an open mind - that is encouraging generally speaking. Open minds give good ideas room to flourish.
Not sharing the podcast to endorse any candidate or endorse Rogan or his show. I am however noting this podcast because it broke records for Rogan's program and some of the commentary on social media was enlightening. I see Warren voters giving room to Sanders platform...
I see Castro, Biden, Harris supporters doing it too. The honest interview Rogan conducted fomented good convos about issues all people in America face. That ppl can be civil about this in many of the comments... it isnt meaningless. This type of dialogue should be encouraged.
If a candidate you prefer has conducted an interview that you feel achieved this sort of dialogue amongst the people, drop it in the comments. Share it with others. Give this one a listen if you like. Or don't.
And on that note, have a good weekend all!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The lawmaker says kids don't want lunch breaks. Hey, that's interesting how on this issue they "listen" to kids. But funny how on every other, like when kids say, hey don't destroy the planet any further, adults, I'd like to live here..ignored. via @msnbcmsnbc.com/rachel-maddow-…
It's almost like these lawmakers actually don't care about these children at all. Hm.
When i was 13, my first job was at a chocolate shop. I had to stand in the store room and spray display chocolates w/ hairspray to give them a sheen. Stood in a room with little ventilation doing this for four hours. I needed a break. Everyone working needs at least 15 mins. Foh.
Tyler Boebert is now appearing before a judge for his arraignment. Before things began, he had a hearty laugh with his co-defendants, though I could not hear what was said.
Atty has concern about names of minors being read out or being made public without redactions.
I was prepared to share a screen shot of this moment with you from the livestream I am watching from but the judge said no screen shots of the zoom are permitted.
In Oklahoma, the only time abortion is legal is when the life of the mother is at risk in an emergency. There are no exceptions for rape or incest and what constitutes an emergency is still legally hazy.
But now, if a new law continues to hurdle through the state’s legislature, any time — and every time — someone has an abortion there, their name will be put into a unique database. lawandcrime.com/high-profile/b…
So, you want to listen to oral arguments weighing whether Trump is disqualified from the presidential ballot under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Heres a link: c-span.org/video/?532724-…
After its over, on the SCOTUS page, there will be a transcript posted if you prefer it that way, by the way. supremecourt.gov
Starts at 10am and I'd bet it will move a lot faster than you think.
Oral arguments weighing the immunity claims of Donald Trump, the twice impeached, quadruply indicted former president accused of criminally conspiring to overturn the 2020 election (and 90 other charges across four total venues), start at 9:30AM ET.
link: youtube.com/live/PEQ1aToav…
Proceedings will be underway shortly. I'm not in the courthouse today, but following along remotely. I will post updates here and then I will have a report out later for @lawcrimenews.
If you prefer, the livestream link is also available from our friends at CSPAN c-span.org/video/?532581-…
"Giuliani feebly counters concerns about him hiding assets, stating that there is no evidence in the record of any attempt by [him] to dissipate assets. This statement simply ignores the ample record in this case of Giuliani’s efforts to conceal or hide his assets..."
"Nowhere in opposition does Giuliani promise not to hide assets from plaintiffs. Nor does he contend, let alone demonstrate with documentary or other proof, that he would be unable to satisfy the judgment, in whole or in part. "
Judge reacts to Rudy's trial claim that requested damages would amount to 'civil death penalty': "Giuliani has made similar representations... that “financial difficulties” hampered his ability to immediately pay...