Few things are more repulsive in liberal discourse right now than the Andrew Cuomo saga.
They're all now lamenting that he's everything they claimed Trump was: as if they just found out. They always knew it, yet they all supported & championed this dynastic heir *for decades*.
Like his brother @ChrisCuomo, Andrew Cuomo has a career for only one reason: his dad was Mario Cuomo.
He's always been an authoritarian bully and sleazy scumbag -- the kind that comes from life-long entitlement. Yet Clinton put him in his Cabinet and Dems cheered him for years.
Democrats did not discover a single thing about Andrew Cuomo they haven't always knows about him -- not one thing.
All that changed is too much proof finally seeped out to the public and made ongoing support for him unsustainable, so they're now all pretending to be horrified.
As many pointed out in reply, the Andrew Cuomo dynamic is extremely similar to Harvey Weinstein: powerful Dems knew for years, like everyone in Hollywood, what Weinstein was. It was only once *the public* found out did it become necessary to feign horror and distance:
How did the liberal sector of the corporate media talk about Andrew Cuomo over the last year -- even while everyone knew exactly what he is and always was?
Here's what DR. Osterholm, not just an epidemiologist but the Director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota and Biden's own former COVID adviser, said on PBS. Read this: you can't say this on YouTube:
Here's Dr. Osterholm on CNN saying exactly the same thing that @RandPaul just got suspended from YouTube for saying: that cloth masks, as opposed to N95s, provide very, very little protection. Why can yo say this on CNN or PBS but not YouTube????
The US attempt to extradite and prosecute Assange for publishing truthful documents embarrassing to US leaders is the greatest threat to press freedom over the last 5 years by far: nothing is close.
But most corporate media is silent or supportive because they are also frauds.
US corporate media despise Assange because he's broken more huge stories than they have or ever could. That's why corrupt US officials wants to imprison him for life while feeding them cookies: because he does real journalism.
His existence is a testament to the frauds they are.
The NSA's independent investigator, Robert Storch, is a long-time and respected D.C. bureaucrat -- appointed by Obama and re-appointed by Trump -- making it unlikely he'd formally investigate frivolous allegations of "unmasking."
It is extremely difficult to imagine any legitimate reason the NSA would have for seeking to “unmask” the identity of a journalist who was merely seeking to interview the leader of a foreign country -- unless it believed linking Carlson to Russians could damage his reputation.
This rationale 100% applies to people who don't exercise, eat unhealthy diets, are obese and refuse to change, etc. But no liberal would shame them like this and malign them like they're non-human, monetized burdens on society.
And since many suffer extreme difficulties mastering basic principles of logical reasoning, contagiousness is irrelevant to the moral principle.
The issue is whether it's we should scorn those who make unhealthy choices on the ground that they're a financial burden to society.
It amazed me how many responded to the point I made here yesterday by saying: but COVID is contagious & obesity isn't, as if that had negated my point.
It's irrelevant to whether it's grotesque to mock those who die due to bad health choices:
A NYT reporter on CNN justifying Obama's huge maskless birthday bash because he only invited "a sophisticated, vaccinated crowd" is about as emblematic of liberal discourse as it gets.
What happened to all the concerns about vaccinated people passing Delta to the unvaccinated?
Yes, it's a pandemic and a crisis, but let the sophisticated people have their fun!
Seems like the NYT's stamp of approval for Obama's opulent, massive, indoor maskless party for the "sophisticated people" is a bit at odds with Dr. Fauci's demand this morning that motorcyclists stop acting like spoiled children by gathering outside:
The Jake-Sullivan-led Biden delegation that met Bolsonaro in Brasilia this week offered Bolsonaro *membership in NATO* in exchange for him not using Huawei for Brazil's 5G, reports Brazil's largest paper, @Folha: all this as Bolsonaro increases his threats to cancel elections.
I know liberals all suddenly decided at once that the tiny and strategically trivial country of Hungary is something they all must denounce because Tucker visited there, but maybe Biden's overtures to Bolsonaro -- President of a vastly larger country - deserves some attention.
I know it's profoundly crucial what a cable host feels about a tiny Eastern European country but for those claiming to oppose authoritarianism, the US President sending arms and $ to the Saudi and Egyptian tyrannies & offering NATO membership to Bolsonaro might matter a bit more?