The Trump administration fighting against tiktok was one of the few things I agreed with when it was a thing. I guess this flip implies it was just a shakedown.
That said, I can’t disagree with this headline either. Though if he’s saying that to say “don’t ban tiktok”, I’d disagree there. IMO there needs to be some careful thought about how social media should be regulated and if it’s something that should even be in corporate hands.
It would definitely empower Facebook, Google/YouTube, and Twitter/X. They are clearly winners in this decision. I don’t use tiktok but I don’t think it should be removed from the app store the same way Huawei was banned in America. With Huawei I can see why ISP’s aren’t allowed to use their products since it’s public infrastructure, but as a consumer you should maybe have the choice to buy their phones. If you want to be dumb enough to let another government organization spy on you, that’s your own fault.
The US is decoupling from the global trading system even under Biden. Biden maintained Trump’s block of the WTO appellate judge system (apparently because the WTO had the temerity to rule against the US in a couple of trade cases). He kept the Trump tariffs against China, and he’s had fairly tense trading relations with allies like Japan, South Korea, and Europe, in an effort to court union support. He has strongarmed/blackmailed Taiwan into helping setting up chip production in the US, a distinctly Trumpy move.
So while Trump might add a layer of unpredictability, the general direction of US trade policy is the same no matter who wins the election.
Health’care’ is such bullshit it’s infuriating. Wife and me, early to mid 30s, non smokers, no meds no pre existing conditions… $800 a month and it doesn’t pay for shit except for catastrophic.
Meanwhile, these insurance companies are some of the most profitable companies on the planet.
There should be a middle ground… maybe charge me $200 a month and still reap enormous profits. Not like I can ever charge them for anything unless my arm gets chopped off. Even if I lost an arm, something tells me they have the ‘bulk purchasing power’ to have an injury like that not cost much.
Hear me out. You shouldn’t have to pay anything, those companies shouldn’t exist and it should be government funded. - sincerely the rest of the western world
Oh I completely agree… I sadly just don’t expect that to happen in the good ol land of the free.
The least they could do is completely screw us all at a rate of about one quarter of the current rates. That way I could at least forget about the complete absurdity of the whole situation for 5 seconds.
So now that some of the reliable drumbeat of “5 shocking reasons Biden sucks, you won’t believe #3!” stories are starting to get removed as misinformation, we’re moving to just putting “Biden” “inflation” and “blame” into juxtaposition in the headline while still being plausible-deniable, huh
Biden still sucks. But if anyone thinks Biden is solely responsible for high prices at the grocery store and not the greedy capitalist pieces of crap corporations, they’re idiots.
You are, of course, welcome to your opinion on him. I honestly don't have time for an extended back and forth and I'm not sure it would be productive anyway. People can make up their own minds about what they're seeing; I'm just putting my observation in about this specific story.
But if anyone thinks Biden is solely responsible for high prices at the grocery store and not the greedy capitalist pieces of crap corporations, they’re idiots.
These are the same people who were putting stickers of Biden saying “I did that” on every gas pump when fuel costs were high (conveniently not now that prices have lowered again). Yes these people are idiots. Unfortunately these idiots also vote.
I mean, the core of what you're saying I will admit is sorta accurate -- I'm knee-jerking a response that may or may not be reasonable. A lot of it has to do with me seeing a pattern of weirdly Biden-shade-throwing stories on Lemmy, not that this one article or headline is anything wild or unreasonable.
But I will say, on CNBC's side, it would be easy (and more accurate) to just write a story "Here are the reasons behind inflation" without tangentially bringing up the theory that Biden's involved, and without bringing polls of people who may or may not have a clue what they're talking about anywhere into it.
Or even just “Businesses are the cause of inflation” if they want to skip the clickbait and get to the point.
Could be worse, though. We could pendulum swing to the full extent of clickbait and make something like “Have beef with Biden? Wait until you hear the truth behind higher prices.”
I’d settle for where my parents were 30 years ago. One middling income, no higher education, and a 2500 square foot house purchased for $350k dollars (in today dollars adjusted for inflation) that’s ‘worth’ $750k now.
Adjusting for inflation, my wife and I combined make as much as my dad did.
They used supply chain issues as an excuse to raise the price of all of their products to obscene levels, and then never brought the prices back down after the supply chains resolved, if that even was a real issue in the first place. I guess they figured people don’t really have the option to just not buy food.
“Defense lawyers for Trump and the others argued, among other things, that the indictment charging them with that specific count did "not detail the exact term of the oaths that are alleged to have been violated,” McAfee noted in his order.
McAfee agreed, saying that the language in the indictment accusing the defendants of soliciting elected officials to violate their oaths to the U.S. and Georgia constitutions “is so generic as to compel” dismissal of the charges.”
I understand dismissing a charge of “failure to uphold and oath” when the accuser cannot establish which part of an oath was broken through specific actions in a legal case.
I’m not exactly familiar with the law, or the oath in question.
Hopefully oaths become more legally binding with updated, specific, terminology and do away with generic, vague platitudes that are entirely open to interpretation.
Washington, D.C. 4 federal felonies January 6th Election Interference
Investigation
Indictment
Arrest <- You Are Here
Trial - The trial, originally scheduled for March 4th, has been placed on hold pending the Supreme Court ruling on Presidential Immunity. They are due to hear those arguments on April 25th.
Conviction
Sentencing
Florida 40 federal felonies Top Secret Documents charges
Investigation
Indictment
Original indictment was for 37 felonies.
3 new felonies were added on July 27, 2023.
Arrest <- You Are Here
Trial - May 20, 2024
Conviction
Sentencing
Georgia 10 state felonies Election Interference
As of 3/13/24 - Judge McAfee cleared 6 charges, 3 against Trump, saying they were too generic to be enforced.
Other grand juries, such as for the documents at Bedminster, or the Arizona fake electors, have not been announced.
The E. Jean Carroll trial for sexual assault and defamation where Trump was found liable and ordered to pay $5 million before immediately defaming her again resulting in a demand for $10 million is not listed as it’s a civil case and not a crimimal one. He was found liable in that case for $83.3 million.
There had been multiple cases in multiple states to remove Trump from the ballot, citing ineligibility under the 14th amendment.
The Supreme Court ruled on March 4th that states do not have the ability to determine eligibility in Federal elections.
Prosecutors have a bad habit of throwing the kitchen sink at anyone they come across and tossing a charge because it’s too broad is okay - it can always be re-filed with added specificity. I would hope it would be.
cnbc.com
Oldest