This is a good point and I wonder what it will take for Texans to realize just how much money Paxton is wasting on these lawsuits. Or do most Texans not care because they actually appreciate the performative "sticking it to the libs"?
So Trump is upset that the BBC showed a documentary in the United Kingdom more than a year ago, and now he's going to sue for billions of dollars?
Is he really going to sue the BBC in the United Kingdom? Does he have lawyers that are familiar with British law?
Though like with his other lawsuits, I'm sure he has no case whatsoever and he's hoping they will settle with him for a few million dollars. After all, ABC and CBS settled with him, so why can't he bully other networks?
Or how about disbarring the lawyers for bringing cases like this to court?
Yes, I know lawyers are almost obligated to file any cases their clients want, but at some point they should realize these companies have logos that are completely different.
In turn, this means copyright lawyers are taking money from the client knowing there's no case.
Maybe I'm old, but I just can't get over the phrase, "your fridge will miss out on software updates", like it's running Windows.
Again, I may be old, but I want my fridge to keep things cool, so why does it need software that needs to be updated? Why does it need software at all?
This statement needs to be shared more often. People should understand that Fox News actually admitted to being entertainment and opinion under oath in court when they were sued. Yet people still watch them thinking they're actually delivering news.
Let's get it out of the way that murdering people without a trial or even accusing them of a crime is horrible.
But I've watched enough police shows to know thst you NEVER kill the guy transporting the drugs since he's a small fish. Instead, you arrest him and interrogate him to lead you to the big fish.
Where's the US navy or Coast Guard? Why aren't they scooping up these "drug runners", arresting them, and learning who's supplying the drugs?
Oh, right, Trump doesn't care and he just wants to kill people. Today, it's "drug runners" and tomorrow it'll be political enemies.
We also live in a world where way too many politicians play the game of "my side good, your side bad".
Using your example, a Democrat could try to ban child marriage and many Republicans would oppose it (and vote FOR child marriage) just because it's something the Democrats want.
Back when I had a land line, I got a device called a Telezapper, which promised to reduce robo calls.
It worked by sending the "number is disconnected" tones when you picked up the phone. The robocaller machine on the other end would hear the tones and mark your number as disconnected. Then in time, your number would be spread to other databases as disconnected, and the robo calls would stop.
Why is there not a similar technology for call phones?
But keep in mind that $24 million to Google is like $5 traffic ticket to you and me.
And would you pay the $5 to be done with the problem or fight it and go to court? Yes, the right thing to do is fight it, but still.
Trump: Democrats are domestic terrorists that should be round up and beaten and deported.
Also Trump: we need to pass a budget to fund the government. Why won't the Democrats work with us? They're being so unfair.
I was just about to say this.
It'll be very interesting to see if the Supreme Court ignores all the huge ramifications if Trump is allowed to take control of the Federal Reserve.
The Trump administration: we need to stop with the violent rhetoric and turn down the temperature in this country.
Trump himself: I hate those people and we should seek vengeance for Kirk's death. (I'm summarizing, but you know what I mean.)
The next problem is that too many people on TikTok will see the news from Trump and then start "just asking questions" (hint: there are none). In turn, this will create more confusion about whether Tylenol is safe (hint: it is).
Then some influencers will jump on the anti Tylenol bandwagon for attention and millions of people will believe them rather than their own family doctors.
"If the bullshit is so easy to refute, why haven’t they done it?"
I know that's a rhetorical question, but it's the same playbook as usual: they say it's easy to refute, but when you call them on it, they come up with all kinds of excuses for why they can't refute it.
It's like how Trump said he didn't commit all those felonies. Okay, go to court and prove it. Nope, he and Republicans would rather moan and complain about how unfair the system is.
I'm going to play the devils advocate and say this is actually a good thing. Why?
This way, when people like Noem go off on a racist Nazi rant, the whole world will see it, rather than have it buried in a printed transcript.
On the other hand, Trump supporters will then complain that CBS should have edited out racist rant since it wasn't relevant.
We've known for over 10 years that Trump is an egotistical cry baby who bullies people into getting what he wants.
In his first term, he was surrounded by adults who could rein him in, including Congress.
Yet now, there's no one to tell him "no". He hasn't changed yet everyone else in power is letting him get away with it.
The solution is to make Republican politicians more afraid of the voters than of Trump. Sure, they might be rigging elections and changing districts so they always win, but at some point a vast majority of people are going to reject this nonsense.
Like other people are saying, this case won't last long. Obviously the newspaper and Murdoch will never pay the billions that Trump is asking for, but they'll pay $10 or $20 million to the "Trump presidential library" just to be done with it.
And sure, the newspaper will be done with the case (for now), but it'll be another victory for Trump to use against another media company.
I'm not sure if you meant your comment as sarcasm or not, but I agree.
I still think the reason there weren't more terrorist attacks on the US is that the terrorists decided we're doing more damage to ourselves than the terrorists could.
First, adding more ads creates a downward spiral: people learn there are 30 minutes of ads, so they show up 30 minutes later. Then the theater adds more ads, so people continue to show up later.
Second, I thought the whole point of ads was to get people interested in your product. Do companies that run ads in theaters really expect a return on their investment if people either show up to see the ad or actively avoid it?
Third, has anyone taken a closer look at the Nicole Kidman "magic of movie going" ad? She's in the theater entirely by herself! Where's the audience? Where are the crowds of people buying tickets?
Or is the ad saying that if we go to the movies, we'll get the theater all to ourselves? While a prive screening sounds fun, I can't believe the theater would make much money.
I was just about to say this.
I'm sure someone in the administration (maybe DOGE) will say it's quicker and cheaper to kill the people in the camp instead of shipping them off to another country.
Plus, the polticians could claim they "lost" the person in the "bureaucracy" instead of arguing with a court that the deportation plane already took off and they can't get the person back.
But let's keep people distracted with tacky merchandise and this week's tariffs so no one questions what's actually going on in the camp.
This is a good point and I wonder what it will take for Texans to realize just how much money Paxton is wasting on these lawsuits. Or do most Texans not care because they actually appreciate the performative "sticking it to the libs"?
How does he have standing to sue?
So Trump is upset that the BBC showed a documentary in the United Kingdom more than a year ago, and now he's going to sue for billions of dollars? Is he really going to sue the BBC in the United Kingdom? Does he have lawyers that are familiar with British law? Though like with his other lawsuits, I'm sure he has no case whatsoever and he's hoping they will settle with him for a few million dollars. After all, ABC and CBS settled with him, so why can't he bully other networks?
Or how about disbarring the lawyers for bringing cases like this to court? Yes, I know lawyers are almost obligated to file any cases their clients want, but at some point they should realize these companies have logos that are completely different. In turn, this means copyright lawyers are taking money from the client knowing there's no case.
Maybe I'm old, but I just can't get over the phrase, "your fridge will miss out on software updates", like it's running Windows. Again, I may be old, but I want my fridge to keep things cool, so why does it need software that needs to be updated? Why does it need software at all?
This statement needs to be shared more often. People should understand that Fox News actually admitted to being entertainment and opinion under oath in court when they were sued. Yet people still watch them thinking they're actually delivering news.
What a stupid decision
Let's get it out of the way that murdering people without a trial or even accusing them of a crime is horrible. But I've watched enough police shows to know thst you NEVER kill the guy transporting the drugs since he's a small fish. Instead, you arrest him and interrogate him to lead you to the big fish. Where's the US navy or Coast Guard? Why aren't they scooping up these "drug runners", arresting them, and learning who's supplying the drugs? Oh, right, Trump doesn't care and he just wants to kill people. Today, it's "drug runners" and tomorrow it'll be political enemies.
We also live in a world where way too many politicians play the game of "my side good, your side bad". Using your example, a Democrat could try to ban child marriage and many Republicans would oppose it (and vote FOR child marriage) just because it's something the Democrats want.
Telezapper
Back when I had a land line, I got a device called a Telezapper, which promised to reduce robo calls. It worked by sending the "number is disconnected" tones when you picked up the phone. The robocaller machine on the other end would hear the tones and mark your number as disconnected. Then in time, your number would be spread to other databases as disconnected, and the robo calls would stop. Why is there not a similar technology for call phones?
But keep in mind that $24 million to Google is like $5 traffic ticket to you and me. And would you pay the $5 to be done with the problem or fight it and go to court? Yes, the right thing to do is fight it, but still.
Trump: Democrats are domestic terrorists that should be round up and beaten and deported. Also Trump: we need to pass a budget to fund the government. Why won't the Democrats work with us? They're being so unfair.
I was just about to say this. It'll be very interesting to see if the Supreme Court ignores all the huge ramifications if Trump is allowed to take control of the Federal Reserve.
Turn down the temperature
The Trump administration: we need to stop with the violent rhetoric and turn down the temperature in this country. Trump himself: I hate those people and we should seek vengeance for Kirk's death. (I'm summarizing, but you know what I mean.)
The next problem
The next problem is that too many people on TikTok will see the news from Trump and then start "just asking questions" (hint: there are none). In turn, this will create more confusion about whether Tylenol is safe (hint: it is). Then some influencers will jump on the anti Tylenol bandwagon for attention and millions of people will believe them rather than their own family doctors.
"If the bullshit is so easy to refute, why haven’t they done it?" I know that's a rhetorical question, but it's the same playbook as usual: they say it's easy to refute, but when you call them on it, they come up with all kinds of excuses for why they can't refute it. It's like how Trump said he didn't commit all those felonies. Okay, go to court and prove it. Nope, he and Republicans would rather moan and complain about how unfair the system is.
I'm going to play the devils advocate and say this is actually a good thing. Why? This way, when people like Noem go off on a racist Nazi rant, the whole world will see it, rather than have it buried in a printed transcript. On the other hand, Trump supporters will then complain that CBS should have edited out racist rant since it wasn't relevant.
Where are the adults in the room?
We've known for over 10 years that Trump is an egotistical cry baby who bullies people into getting what he wants. In his first term, he was surrounded by adults who could rein him in, including Congress. Yet now, there's no one to tell him "no". He hasn't changed yet everyone else in power is letting him get away with it. The solution is to make Republican politicians more afraid of the voters than of Trump. Sure, they might be rigging elections and changing districts so they always win, but at some point a vast majority of people are going to reject this nonsense.
The case won't last long
Like other people are saying, this case won't last long. Obviously the newspaper and Murdoch will never pay the billions that Trump is asking for, but they'll pay $10 or $20 million to the "Trump presidential library" just to be done with it. And sure, the newspaper will be done with the case (for now), but it'll be another victory for Trump to use against another media company.
I'm not sure if you meant your comment as sarcasm or not, but I agree. I still think the reason there weren't more terrorist attacks on the US is that the terrorists decided we're doing more damage to ourselves than the terrorists could.
First, adding more ads creates a downward spiral: people learn there are 30 minutes of ads, so they show up 30 minutes later. Then the theater adds more ads, so people continue to show up later. Second, I thought the whole point of ads was to get people interested in your product. Do companies that run ads in theaters really expect a return on their investment if people either show up to see the ad or actively avoid it? Third, has anyone taken a closer look at the Nicole Kidman "magic of movie going" ad? She's in the theater entirely by herself! Where's the audience? Where are the crowds of people buying tickets? Or is the ad saying that if we go to the movies, we'll get the theater all to ourselves? While a prive screening sounds fun, I can't believe the theater would make much money.
I was just about to say this. I'm sure someone in the administration (maybe DOGE) will say it's quicker and cheaper to kill the people in the camp instead of shipping them off to another country. Plus, the polticians could claim they "lost" the person in the "bureaucracy" instead of arguing with a court that the deportation plane already took off and they can't get the person back. But let's keep people distracted with tacky merchandise and this week's tariffs so no one questions what's actually going on in the camp.