|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On June 27 2016 22:32 Laurens wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2016 13:40 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 27 2016 07:17 pmh wrote:
Time to put on some censorship then,just to make sure the plebs make the right choice with the next election.
One of the bigger offenders is google,filtering results when you search for Hilary Clinton for example. As showed a bit earlier in this thread by another poster.
A conspiracy that actually turned out to be true. No wonder people are looking for alternative sources. And now there is a source for everyone!
The democrats when they want to know about Clinton they can use google! Makes sure you wont see the bad things.
And the anti Clinton people when they want to know about Clinton they can go to trumps twitter! Makes sure you wont find anything good. Isnt it just wonderfull,everyone can live in his or her own reality.
Most of the people here do already anyway.
That was a hilarious video because it forgets to tell you that Google actually is designed to give you what you want, not "true" facts. Autocomplete and auto-correct is based on your own searches and habits. This is the problem with conspiracy theories... No matter what you do/search, Hillary Clinton ind/cri will never be autocompleted to criminal charges/indictment. On any other search engine (even ones I have never used before) it is the case, for every other presidential candidate, it is the case. Google clearly messed with their algorithm to stop this from happening.
Google is a privately own company, not a news organization, so there is nothing stopping them from doing that. The amusing part is that people think this is any worse than back in the day when all we had was news papers and the news stand.
|
On June 27 2016 22:36 farvacola wrote:
Uhhh, it autocompletes to Hillary indictment for me!
Try Hillary Clinton ind
|
hillary ind and hillary i autocomplete to hilary indictment for me.
|
Again, the conspiracy theories run rampant on the internet. It auto completes to independent, but goes to indictment at indi.
|
Holy shit you guys, I just typed in Dennis Hastert cri and it didn't autocomplete to crimes! Same for Bill Cosby! Google's pro-Hastert/Cosby conspiracy confirmed.
Really I think Google's algorithm just doesn't autocomplete to crimes... Maybe they don't want people googling other peoples' crimes for some reason?
|
It doesn't even autocomplete "Breveik sh" to "shooting" (well it didn't before I put in shooting so it knew to do so). You get his manifesto and video though.
|
Everyone knows google is part of the NWO on its quest for world domination. Their goal is to make us servile slaves while praving to Hillary. Duh.
|
Supreme Court just ruled Texas' abortion restrictions unconstitutional 
|
On June 27 2016 23:12 farvacola wrote:Supreme Court just ruled Texas' abortion restrictions unconstitutional
Thank god, since those laws are boiler plate draftings created by anti-abortion advocates that the lawmakers barely understood. But the damage is done since Texas is down to one or two clinics.
|
On June 27 2016 23:04 TheTenthDoc wrote:
It doesn't even autocomplete "Breveik sh" to "shooting" (well it didn't before I put in shooting so it knew to do so). You get his manifesto and video though.
Well, his name is Breivik so 
"Breivik sh" should give several shooting phrases as suggestions. People are reading a lot more into this than need be though, the autocomplete is mostly used as an aid so people looking for indictment or incriminating will simply keep on typing until it autocompletes correctly.
Besides, as someone who works with the Google Search Index daily, autocomplete-manipulation would be stupid because it's obvious. What they can do is manually filter or sandbox negative results about Hillary and just present positive articles in the top 20. This can be done manually or through RankBrain-manipulation.
|
|
|
And then the Supreme Court vacates Bob McDonnell's sentence, tsk tsk!
|
The creation of those laws notable because they were always billed as ways to protect “women’s health” without ever providing any evidence that is what the restrictions would do. And they were countered by overwhelming data from the medical community that the laws actively harmed women and prevented them from accessing health care.
And now anti-abortion advocates will working on a new, totally disingenuous way to close down clinics.
|
It's absolutely amazing how easily justices can sweep away the rule-book when it comes to abortion law adjudicating. As Alito put it,
If anything, when a case involves a controversial issue, we should be especially careful to be scrupulously neutral in applying such rules. The Court has not done so here. On the contrary, determined to strike down two provisions of a new Texas abortion statute in all of their applications, the Court simply disregards basic rules that apply in all other cases.
The thrust of the Court’s argument is that a trial judge can circumvent the rules of claim preclusion by granting a plaintiff relief on a claim that the plaintiff is barred from relitigating. Not surprisingly, the Court musters no authority for this proposition, which would undermine the interests that the doctrine of claim preclusion is designed to serve. supremecourt.gov
+ Show Spoiler +In an effort to get around this hornbook rule, the Court cites a potpourri of our decisions that have no bearing on
the question at issue. Some are not even about res judicata.5 And the cases that do concern res judicata, Abie State
Bank v. Bryan, 282 U. S. 765, 772 (1931), Lawlor v. National Screen Service Corp., 349 U. S. 322, 328 (1955), and
Third Nat. Bank of Louisville v. Stone, 174 U. S. 432, 434 (1899), endorse the unremarkable proposition that a prior
judgment does not preclude new claims based on acts occurring after the time of the first judgment.6 But petitioners’
second facial challenge is not based on new acts postdating the first suit.
Even the factual claims by petitioners did not satisfy the burden of proof. Simply counting the number of clinics closed during the time of this law does not satisfy the burden of proof that challenged provisions caused this (other provisions of law were held constitutional, other funding schemes for abortions being withdrawn, changing demands, cited by Alito). That's not to mention failures to properly calculate availability/capacity of compliant clinics. Another win for the planned parenthood crowd, but anyone interested in rule of law and the merits of the argument should be sickened to their stomach. It should please everyone concerned only with striking down laws they disagree with, not those that care about women's access to abortions (excluding those that agree Gosnell should still be practicing). Additionally, it's yet another blow to self-government since every following court should feel emboldened to ignore traditional court purview if the lawyers-as-justice-legislators simply want to invalidate laws.
|
The notion that pro-choice advocates are against the rule of law is as hilarious as your writing is prolix-laden. There is an incredibly easy to decipher legal rule inherent to the Supreme Court's invalidation, and just because it disagrees with your perspective doesn't mean that it lies outside the pale of legalistic coherence.
|
Sorry, nakedly boiler plate laws drafted by anti-abortion advocates to protect “women’s health” do not justify restricting access to abortion.
And its weird when you talk about self-government when the law requires that women be sent home to think about their decision and then receive the abortion the next day. Talk about a nanny state.
My new plan is to write a bunch of boiler plate laws regulating the gun manufactures, protecting workers health. They will have no baring in reality and require things that they have to do random things that costs way to much money. Because I care about workers health, trust me.
|
And this is ultimately why most Sanders supporters (like me) are going to support Hillary come fall, the SCOTUS is just too damn important. If Garland doesn't get appointed there's Scalia, Ginsburg, Kennedy, and Breyer possibly up for grabs in the next few years. With Sotomayor and Kagan being relatively young that would be a liberal court for at least two decades.
|
On June 28 2016 00:54 ZeaL. wrote:
And this is ultimately why most Sanders supporters (like me) are going to support Hillary come fall, the SCOTUS is just too damn important. If Garland doesn't get appointed there's Scalia, Ginsburg, Kennedy, and Breyer possibly up for grabs in the next few years. With Sotomayor and Kagan being relatively young that would be a liberal court for at least two decades.
This is where political revolution comes from. This is what *actually* gets things done.
|
On June 27 2016 23:38 farvacola wrote:
And then the Supreme Court vacates Bob McDonnell's sentence, tsk tsk!
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/8Jm3fwL.jpg)
|
Dick Morris is advising Donald Trump, he said in an interview published Monday, revealing to the Daily Caller that he’s been peppering the Manhattan billionaire with advice on a daily basis.
Morris said he sends “several” memos per day to Trump campaign staff members, but is not planning to join the campaign in any official capacity.
“I’m not and I never have been looking for a full-time job, 9-5, advising the campaign,” Morris said. “Yes, I am interested and I do send them a lot of memos and a lot of ideas and in fact wrote a book for them filled with advice as to what they should do.”
That advice, Morris said, is to attack Hillary Clinton and the Democrats on the Affordable Care Act, immigration and terrorism, a strategy the longtime political consultant likens to a “right jab.” That jab must be accompanied though, Morris said, with a “left hook” appealing to disaffected Democrats who supported Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and are unsatisfied with globalism and the Democratic Party establishment.
While Morris, now a columnist for the National Enquirer, holds no unofficial role with the campaign, the real estate mogul’s camp said his 'unofficial' contributions are appreciated inside Trump Tower.
“To my knowledge, he has no association with the campaign,” Trump campaign spokeswoman Hope Hicks told The Daily Caller. “We appreciate his support and contributions, which are presumably made in an unofficial capacity.”
Source
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
