The billionaire and his lawyer apparently believe they get to stop congressional investigations if they so choose. Also: Hamburger Mary's sues DeSantis. And: Execution regrets.
Well, why WOULDN'T Crow think that he is the law, or at least above it? He's paid zero price for any of his influence-purchasing, and the people who are on his payroll have paid zero price as well.
Billionaires should not exist. Not as human beings, but as a category. There is nothing anyone can do to deserve that much money. Bring back the 90% tax bracket. That would still leave Mr. Crow THREE HUNDRED MILLION dollars -- enough to keep him in statues and tea sets for the rest of his life.
Coincidence or not, Harlan Crow's attorney waited until the Judiciary Committee was at full strength before he tempted them to subpoena his client. Whether that subpoena gets issued is the question: I doubt Dianne Feinstein will vote to subpoena her late husband's business partner.
They don’t have to be right on the law. They just have to make a colorable argument and run out the clock. If the GOP takes the Senate in 24, case over.
You say the AP "stated it as fact that the new law is aimed at drag, and the law specifically includes coverage of “prosthetic or imitation genitals or breasts” to include coverage of drag even when no actual nudity is included." Even though the AP cites no evidence or source for this. You do not take that position because as a journalist with integrity you know internally that there is no source for it. however, you know it to be true (because it is) so you simply avoid your journalistic principals by referencing the AP article. But you know their article lacks integrity and yet here you cite to it. I joined your subscription because i want independent journalism. Citing a bad article so you do not have to engage in the same journalistic error just seems shady.
I do take the position that the law is aimed at drag, and I included the AP's note as further evidence that others think so as well. Your continued confusion about what "independent" means, and apparent confusion about what "integrity" means, are leading me to think you're not quite here in good faith.
Well, I think the use of “activist” to describe journalism is in the eye of the beholder. I have very clear opinions on many issues, but I also believe that my journalism stands for itself. For example, while you pointed to the half-sentence referencing the AP article, you conveniently ignored the sentence that preceded it, which includes a link to discussion of anti-drag policy goals of the DeSantis administration. What’s more, the second half of the sentence that begins by citing the AP is not gathered from the AP article; it is quoting from the new law.
I am independent in that I am not an organ of a political party, a large media organization, or any other group. It does not mean I lack independent thought or opinions — which, in reality, are in most cases analyses of situations based on my knowledge and experience.
Finally, I’m glad to hear that you are here in good faith.
The problem, here as with the phrase "unless the life of the mother is at stake" is not so much what the words say as what the legislators indicate is MEANT by the words. A good example is in the "Don't say Gay" law in which menstruation is not actually mentioned but which a legislator has stated MEANS that one can't discuss it in 6th grade--when many girls have started to have their periods.
What this creates is confusion--doctors refusing abortions because they don't know how "at stake" the life of the mother must be, or 6th grade teacher facing a child who suddenly has discovered blood on her panties and is in a total panic.
Well, why WOULDN'T Crow think that he is the law, or at least above it? He's paid zero price for any of his influence-purchasing, and the people who are on his payroll have paid zero price as well.
Billionaires should not exist. Not as human beings, but as a category. There is nothing anyone can do to deserve that much money. Bring back the 90% tax bracket. That would still leave Mr. Crow THREE HUNDRED MILLION dollars -- enough to keep him in statues and tea sets for the rest of his life.
Coincidence or not, Harlan Crow's attorney waited until the Judiciary Committee was at full strength before he tempted them to subpoena his client. Whether that subpoena gets issued is the question: I doubt Dianne Feinstein will vote to subpoena her late husband's business partner.
They don’t have to be right on the law. They just have to make a colorable argument and run out the clock. If the GOP takes the Senate in 24, case over.
He is the law according to the Golden Role: whoever has the gold, makes all the rules
Who put the Bopp in the bopp shoo bopp shoo bopp
Who put the dip in the dip dee dip dee dip
You say the AP "stated it as fact that the new law is aimed at drag, and the law specifically includes coverage of “prosthetic or imitation genitals or breasts” to include coverage of drag even when no actual nudity is included." Even though the AP cites no evidence or source for this. You do not take that position because as a journalist with integrity you know internally that there is no source for it. however, you know it to be true (because it is) so you simply avoid your journalistic principals by referencing the AP article. But you know their article lacks integrity and yet here you cite to it. I joined your subscription because i want independent journalism. Citing a bad article so you do not have to engage in the same journalistic error just seems shady.
I do take the position that the law is aimed at drag, and I included the AP's note as further evidence that others think so as well. Your continued confusion about what "independent" means, and apparent confusion about what "integrity" means, are leading me to think you're not quite here in good faith.
I take independent as "not an activist." And I am far too busy to be here not in good faith. Cheers and I hope you do not ban me.
Well, I think the use of “activist” to describe journalism is in the eye of the beholder. I have very clear opinions on many issues, but I also believe that my journalism stands for itself. For example, while you pointed to the half-sentence referencing the AP article, you conveniently ignored the sentence that preceded it, which includes a link to discussion of anti-drag policy goals of the DeSantis administration. What’s more, the second half of the sentence that begins by citing the AP is not gathered from the AP article; it is quoting from the new law.
I am independent in that I am not an organ of a political party, a large media organization, or any other group. It does not mean I lack independent thought or opinions — which, in reality, are in most cases analyses of situations based on my knowledge and experience.
Finally, I’m glad to hear that you are here in good faith.
The problem, here as with the phrase "unless the life of the mother is at stake" is not so much what the words say as what the legislators indicate is MEANT by the words. A good example is in the "Don't say Gay" law in which menstruation is not actually mentioned but which a legislator has stated MEANS that one can't discuss it in 6th grade--when many girls have started to have their periods.
What this creates is confusion--doctors refusing abortions because they don't know how "at stake" the life of the mother must be, or 6th grade teacher facing a child who suddenly has discovered blood on her panties and is in a total panic.