volkris @volkris@qoto.org

@Tooden given the situation it's pretty much impossible that it would have been staged.

That's not the kind of shot you can stage.

@Captain_Jack_Sparrow
@OgieOgilthorpe

@theindex but the claims weren't baseless, they were based on witness accounts.

Maybe the witnesses were lying. But to say the claims were baseless means that anyone who heard about the witness accounts is just going to dismiss the story as gaslighting.

The press must engage with the people where they are, not feed them lines that they know to be false.

@tmstreet The reporting about Vance have been lies, so I guess in a way it's bad journalism threatening his life, or his job I guess.

No, Vance didn't invent this stuff. And they've even lied about what he said. These stories about Haitians were circulating in mainstream conservative outlets long before Vance said the first thing about them.

Part of the problem is that we can't address the rhetoric if we're stuck with these false stories about what the rhetoric is in the first place.

But that's just life in these days. News reports can't address these claims because the news itself doesn't match what we see with our own eyes.

@Free_Press if you follow the links, you can see that the headline is wrong. He didn't create the story as the headline suggests.

And anyone who had been keeping up with conservative media would have known that the story existed before Vance said anything about it.

So this is just another bit of false reporting.

@thisismissem what rhetoric specifically?

Honestly I don't think it's notable just because the two candidates both stink, so a lot of people have just checked out of this election at this point. We're just done with it.

If it seems like it doesn't really matter who gets elected then the two candidates just end up being no different from any other people on the street.

@SonofaGeorge well it's more that the list of sensationalized headlines getting clicks while misleading the public is getting longer and longer.

Journalism is dead.

@GottaLaff

@libramoon except that the biases of the Chief Justice are held in check by the fact that he doesn't get to just do whatever he wants. He is at the mercy of all of the other justices.

And that's the point, these sensational headlines give an impression that run counter to how our government actually operates, and so these journalists need to knock that stuff off because the population ends up misinformed.

@MartyLemert I mean what specifically are you referring to?

@Nonilex

@libramoon these sensationalized stories are overlooking that Roberts still didn't have unilateral control over the court.

The other justices still had their ability to object and write their own opinions.

This is all just really misleading sensationalism and it needs to be called out for the journalistic malpractice that it is, misleading readers for the sake of clicks.

@cemedia lack of quid pro quo.

That's the answer.

@Wallyapplebee those conspiracy theories are just not useful.

The Times headline is flat out misleading, considering that Trump didn't get the results he was asking for, but the times is mainly trying to stir the pot among people who don't know how to court actually functions in the US system.

It doesn't matter what the Chief Justice thought because the other justices outvoted him and wrote their own opinions.

The times is just engaging in hello journalism here, and it's not good for society.

@usernamesAreTricky there's a really well-known prototypical logical fallacy that most serial killers drink milk therefore drinking milk must be a sign of a serial killer.

Same thing here.

Just because this rejected white paper does have some overlap with Trump policy doesn't mean Trump supports it despite his rejection.

I mean, we could also say that the Harris campaign supports it because both of them recognize the presidency.

No, sometimes when somebody agrees with you you should take yes for an answer instead of pushing forward with the conspiracy theory.

Do you like what heritage wrote? Think it's a good idea? No? Well Trump and mainstream conservatives say it's not a good idea, so they're on your side here dude. Why promote it?

@eddeeMN that a person is a liar is no justification for setting up a straw man argument.

Still, the fact that key campaigns against this proposal, and that his voters reject the proposal, comes together to say that he would lose support and lose votes should he actually try to implement the thing that he says he doesn't want to implement and that his people don't want him to implement.

It gets into this really nutty conspiracy theory. Yeah, Trump's a liar, but that doesn't give much license to ignore everything else happening in his entire orbit to put words in his mouth and criticize him for the thing that he explicitly rejects.

Just because he's a liar doesn't mean you can ignore everything and make up an alternative story and run with it.

@politics @DemocracyMattersALot

@mhjohnson I think one blaring thing is that the Times headline talks about a winning streak for Trump, and yet Trump LOST in for example not getting the broad broad executive privilege he asked for.

So the headline from the Times itself promotes the false story they've been peddling all these months, and that needs to be called out.

@eddeeMN and Trump has explicitly rejected the plan.

So Trump and other high-profile conservatives have joined with critica of Heritage to say that they are misguided and that this is not the way forward for the country.

It's not a blueprint for a second Trump term because Trump has said that's not anything he's interested in going by.

@politics @DemocracyMattersALot

@MugsysRapSheet

Congress does not set state election districts.

That's not a federal authority.

That is set on the state level, not by Congress.

@aaron.rupar

@petergarwood

Zero. Because that's not how the Supreme Court works.

@Nonilex

@MugsysRapSheet they don't.

That's absolutely not true.

Legally, that is not how voting works. Congress does not pick their voters. For a couple of different reasons. Not the least of which being the legal separation between federal and state powers.

So no, Congress does not pick their voters. It was intentionally designed to prevent that, and legally that is not possible because of those safeguards.

I don't know who told you otherwise, but you need to stop listening to them, they are misleading you, and we have such a huge problem of misinformation in this country, conspiracy theories being spread around.

@aaron.rupar

@TheOldGuy to be clear, the guy is a troll that you can't believe.

Does he hate Taylor Swift? Who knows, but you know what he does love? People talking about him.

And you played right into his game.

We have an old saying on the internet, don't feed the trolls. Just ignore them. If we had just ignored Donald Trump he would have decayed into the oblivion. He would have become irrelevant.

If you don't want to support him, ignore him. But posts like this are exactly what feed into his game.

You're supporting him by giving him attention.

@MugsysRapSheet I'm admitting that the only views Congress represents are those of the people who bother to vote.

You want your views represented? Vote!

Otherwise you're out of the system. That's just how it works.

@aaron.rupar