This is an entire “news” article merely allowing San Jose police to repeat false talking points about “bail reform” in ways that are contrary to the scientific evidence about public health and safety and contrary to centuries of law. abc7news.com/san-jose-stree…
It could be news that the mayor and police chief of a major US city are caught misleading the public for political benefit, but instead this local reporter acts as their stenographer. Shameful.
Here is a thread with actual information in it about the issue:
Here is the (also bad) Fox story on the case. This example of following basic laws is not an important news story, other than reporters just printing police press releases. But, unlike ABC, Fox at least quoted another perspective criticizing the cops: ktvu.com/news/homicide-…
This dangerous piece with no contrary perspectives was “reported” by @DustinABC7. It’s shameful stuff, and an embarrassment to local journalists working hard to actually provide objective, helpful coverage about trump world.
this should have said "about the world," but i suppose the autocorrect to "trump" is fitting for this kind of evidence-free anti-science fearmongering from @DustinABC7. Let's see if he's open to doing another story with community voices who have views consistent with evidence.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
THREAD. Last year, we filed landmark lawsuits on behalf of children in Michigan alleging a conspiracy between sheriffs + private equity-owned companies to end family jail visits for millions of kids across the U.S. as part of a scheme to make more $$ on phone/video calls.
Several days ago, a second Michigan sheriff has announced that this ban on visits is wrong and destructive, and that they will be ending it. Hundreds of sheriffs are still doing this--do you know what's going on in your community? facebook.com/SheriffAlyshia…
You can watch a video from NBC News explaining what's going on across the country:
THREAD. Every day I get to work with amazing people from all walks of life who are dedicating their lives to fighting government repression and corporate predation. They do it strategically and relentlessly. The incompetence and grifting of political elites makes a mockery of it.
For years, Jeffries and leading Democrats pushed an agenda of mass economic plunder, health insurance profiteering, prisons, militarism, genocide, identity politics, jingoism, and ecological ruin. It's why he can't say anything meaningful with credibility in this fascist moment.
The crisis is as acute as it has been in my lifetime. People of goodwill and influence must jettison leaders like this from public life. We need to organize and demand people who can put forward a simple, popular plan of widespread human flourishing and resistance to cruelty.
THREAD. The time has come for more people to be talking about how the news media manipulates coverage of public polling. The New York Times's latest coverage of polling about Trump is unethical and dangerous.
The New York Times recently published an alarming article purporting to tell its elite liberal readers that "Trump's Policies" are widely popular.
Specifically, the headline and key parts of the article made the bold (and worrying) claim that most people in the U.S. wanted Trump to deport "everyone living in the U.S. without authorization."
THREAD. A very grave problem, across New York Times news stories of almost every subject, is the brazen stupidity and credulity of the reporting. Here is the paper's primary response to Trump's absurd push to designate drug cartels as "terrorist" groups:
First, no reasonable observer of modern U.S. politics or history could conclude that the U.S. has ever been serious about "defeating" terrorist groups or drug distribution organizations. In fact, the U.S. has been the world's most significant state sponsor of each.
That's not the point of either its selective and laughably contradictory weaponization and construction of the term "terrorist" or its comically disastrous "War on Drugs." I wrote about the latter at length, explaining why all of this is propaganda: equalityalec.substack.com/p/the-big-dece…
Not a single word in unanimous Supreme Court opinion mentioned the primary reason TikTok ban passed. The real reason was content-based, triggering a legal standard that would have struck it down. Very interesting dynamics on why TikTok decided not to press its strongest argument.
Leaders in both parties were extremely clear that it was motivated by the view that TikTok was making young people too pro-Palestine and genocide-aware. Now, of course, both parties are sounding very different after Gaza was destroyed and the news is talking about a ceasefire.
For many reasons, TikTok does not want to be seen as a place that spreads left ideas. Would be really interesting to learn more about who made the decision not to press the strongest legal arguments and how much the lawyers explained to the decision makers.
THREAD. It's important for all people of good will to understand the Laken Riley Act before the Senate votes on it tomorrow. It’s unconstitutional. It’s horrific in every word and clause. But there is a deeper, more imminent violence lurking beneath its hate-filled text.
First the background. The Laken Riley Act is unprecedented in modern U.S. history. It requires federal DHS bureaucracy to build billions in new infrastructure to cage any undocumented person *even accused* of petty theft, shoplifting, or several other property crimes.
A key aspect of the law is people are rounded up and put into mass caging facilities (built and usually run for profit) for a mere *accusation.* A person (even a child) need not be convicted, and they are taken from their families and jobs and churches and schools immediately.