Facts?! That just makes them devolve to No true Scotsman rhetoric. ;-)

Vance and the rest – including Trump himself – are suggesting that the attacks are because Democrats are demonizing Trump and Democrats need to tone down the vitriol, ignoring that Trump has said Democrats are destroying America and that we won’t have a country left if they get in office and all the rest. At least Vance is – after saying on TV with Dana Bash that they have confirmed reports from Springfield (in an interview about the pet eating thing) – that he, too, ought to tone down his rhetoric, but let’s see if he can stick with that for more than a day.

Here’s a story from July about the left/right spread in toxic language: https://theconversation.com/trump-shooting-is-a-warning-about-how-toxic-language-leads-to-violence-234637

Note the disparity on their graphic:

That is so pretty!

Ehn. The latest guy called Putin a terrorist on camera, which is something a Trumper would never say.

On a personal note, I regret missing the first night, which had several greats, starting with The Battle of Algiers, which moved me. I would have liked to hear the guest discussion on it.

At just over 1/2 hour, Night and Fog is a must-watch (but also triggering).

Of the other upcoming movies I’ve happened to see in the past, I highly recommend: The Fog of War, The Tin Drum, The Murder of Fred Hampton, and if you don’t mind subtitles, High and Low, and The Passion of Joan of Arc.

Refresher on McCabe from The Guardian:

McCabe was part of FBI leadership, briefly as acting director, during investigations of Russian interference in the 2016 election and links between Trump and Moscow. Trump fired McCabe in March 2018, two days before he was due to retire. McCabe was then the subject of a criminal investigation, for allegedly lying about a media leak. The investigation was dropped in 2020. In October 2021, McCabe settled a lawsuit against the justice department.

I mention this because y’all know that Trumpers will immediately brush off McCabe’s comments as a known-bad-guy who was fired for being so awful and is now trying to get revenge.

You’re right. I hear you. Intellectually, I understand that the conservative/fundamentalist mindset gives higher importance to following leaders and is more triggered by moral disgust. I understand that a conservative may feel a liberal is less moral because liberals ‘lack’ a moral imperative to follow leaders simply because they are leaders. I even accept that agreeing to a premise has utility by getting everyone to work towards a common goal. Unfortunately, I get stuck on the bit where the premise seems illogical to me, or the leader seems to be obviously lying. That’s the part where any intellectual understanding of why someone might choose to ignore obvious red flags flies to the wayside and I can’t figure out what to do about it.

I’m pretty sure that journalists should continuously report which things are unfounded lies, but I don’t think that will sway those who believe those lies. It might, however, convince the continuously emerging crop of newly interested people to be skeptical.

I spent a good while writing up a reply, but it was long and the main point was: while any group of 100+ people is likely to have a bad actor, you look for credible proof (like Edward Snowden showing evidence rather than Sidney Powell saying she had ‘visions’). Side bit: tales of killing/eating/sexually-exploiting babies and pets by a GROUP should always be taken as a manipulative lie because it always is. When some whacko actually tries that crap, the Boys in Blue get up in arms – even if it means ignoring pressure from their bosses, “He’s Illuminati. Let it go.” No. That sort of thing gets exposed.

I kinda understand how some people fall for conspiracies, but I don’t understand how so many people would VOTE for someone who reliable falls for and promotes so very many obvious conspiracies.

@aihorde@lemmy.dbzer0.com draw for me a Simpsons cartoon of people picnicking while Trump shouts, “In Springfield they’re eating the dogs!”, causing everyone to look on in shock and incredulity.

If you missed it, I highly recommend watching it. High drama. Great visual reactions that you’ll miss if you only hear or read it. Just for fun, here’s a composite image of Daily Beast posts that were flying up as I read reviews elsewhere:

… but even a monster like Dick Cheney – a man who largely created a needless war and supposedly LIKES being compared to Darth Vader – even that monster thinks, “Trump would be horrible for the U.S.”

@aihorde@lemmy.dbzer0.com draw for me a spider’s web with a red light that attracts male fireflies to come have a good time at the web bordello

I basically agree with you, but I took it as both a warning to Democrats to stay vigilant and as permission for Republicans to abandon Trump.

There are additional details from ammoland.com (emphasis from source article):

Mr. Soukaneh claims that Officer Andrzejewski demanded that he tell the officer where the prostitute and drugs were located. The officer searched Soukaneh pulled out pills from the man’s pocket. The officer thought he found illicit drugs. In reality, what the officer discovered was Soukaneh’s nitroglycerin pills for his heart condition. In addition to the heart medication, the officer seized the $320 in cash plus a flash drive that contained pictures and videos of Soukaneh’s deceased father. Neither the flash drive nor the money was returned to Soukaneh.

They also mention that the cops DID run a check on the gun permit before figuring out how to write Soukaneh up.

Officer Andrzejewski ran Soukaneh’s gun permit and found it to be valid. Shortly after, another officer and a sergeant arrived on the scene. Andrzejewski asked the two what he should “write him up for.” The sergeant told Andrzejewski what to write into the computer system.

Note, however, that the PDF of the ruling linked by techdirt has a footnote on page 6 saying, "It is unclear from the record when Andrzejewski determined that Soukaneh held a valid firearms license, and whether that determination occurred before, after, or during Andrzejewski’s search of Soukaneh’s car. Andrzejewski does not specify whether he ran the check on the firearm license before or after he searched Soukaneh’s vehicle. "

Of course, the medication, cash and flash drive were all found through an illegal search of the car, so that whole chunk is somewhat irrelevant, and thankfully, it looks like the lawyers all knew that because the PDF suggests it was only the cop who suggested a legal gun was probable cause to search the car.

So Soukaneh is suing the cop. It has now gone through two courts. Per the Techdirt piece:

Unsurprisingly, the lower court rejected the officer’s request for immunity, pointing out that while the initial encounter may have been justified, nothing that followed that (pulling Soukaneh from the car, handcuffing him, searching his vehicle, detaining him for another half-hour while trying to figure out what to cite him with) was supported by probable cause.

The Second Circuit comes to the same conclusion. Simply being made aware Soukaneh possessed an item millions of Americans also own legally is not probable cause for anything the officer did past that point.

You can adjust them, but it is better if you get them adjusted wherever you bought them because they know how to do it properly. In particular, the spot where they touch your nose might get sore, and maybe moreso on one side than the other. That’d be a sign to get them adjusted. Some people even have one ear slightly lower than the other, needing an adjustment to the arms.

Glasses have an optimum focal point so your glasses were meant to be a particular distance from your eyes and over adjusting might change that. On the other hand, the change is going to be so small that it probably only matters to the people selling glasses rather than the wearers.

Reminds me of the incident in February where a waymo tried to get through a bunch of street revelers, and their response was to set it on fire. From the old pcmag story :

San Francisco Fire Chief Jeanine Nicholson noted that it had tallied 55 incidents where self-driving vehicles had interfered with rescue operations in the city.

Edit: unrelated to above quote, pc mag also says:

In some cases, residents have put orange cones on the hoods of cars, which makes them temporarily immobile.

(see also the autopian story it references)

Reminder that Palantir is the same company whose bosses are deep in bed with AmericaPAC – which got big write-ups (link is to one comment, but you can read more there and lots of places) because Elon Musk is gathering voter data seemingly for that PAC to target swing state voters with canvassing efforts.

I wish I’d been online yesterday to see this because it is way worse than just not working, so I’m repeating this whenever I see it brought up: They’re targeting swing state voters (via in-person canvassers) to vote Trump. The key pieces are Palantir, which compiles data to see trends and ‘insights’ and a new FEC opinion that says PACs can work with candidates for canvassing. CNBC had a big article on it and states (archive – emphasis is mine):

[…] users who enter a ZIP code that indicates they live in a battleground state, like Pennsylvania or Georgia, the process is very different.

Rather than be directed to their state’s voter registration page, they instead are directed to a highly detailed personal information form, prompted to enter their address, cellphone number and age.

So that person who wanted help registering to vote? In the end, they got no help at all registering. But they did hand over priceless personal data to a political operation.

“What makes America PAC more unique: it is a billionaire-backed super PAC focused on door-to-door canvassing, which it can conduct in coordination with a presidential campaign,” Fischer said. “Thanks to a recent FEC advisory opinion, America PAC may legally coordinate its canvassing activities with the Trump campaign — meaning, among other things, that the Trump campaign may provide America PAC with the literature and scripts to make sure their efforts are consistent.”

The America PAC raised more than $8 million between April 1 and June 30, according to FEC records. It has received donations from veteran investor Doug Leone, cryptocurrency investors Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, and a company run by longtime venture capitalist Joe Lonsdale, according to FEC records.

They also quote the NYT in saying Lonsdale is one of Musk’s political confidants – which is interesting because he’s at Palantir which was you’d think of as his old buddy Peter Theil’s gig. Palantir sells info. As long as they get good info, we can expect them tailor the perfect messages to win over swing states voters, because those voters are (unintentionally) telling them exactly how to do it.

A low allergenic dog would probably thrill your kid, and even if it didn’t, I’m betting the adults in the house would quickly fall in love. I’d avoid Schnauzers because they are harder to train (they’re smart enough, but will test whether they should actually listen to you or not – whereas Basenjis are hard to train because they aren’t that bright). Wheatens and other similar terriers are likely to have similar stubbornness issues. Maybe an Irish Water Dog or Lagotto Romagnolo? I don’t know those breeds but I see them listed as low-allergy. I hate to link to reddit, but their LR sub says they really are pretty safe.

I worry that whatever you choose, your son will be dissatisfied. Maybe your kid is different, but most the kids I’ve known wanted a pet they could bond with. They’ve wanted a pet that was interested in what the kid does, that silently listened to the kid expressing their issues, and that offered things to do, like: “feed me”, “pet me”, or “play!”

Rabbits might work, but they might be too interested in one another. Even if they weren’t forbidden, you’d run into the same issue with social birds like cockatiels. The only pets I can think of that give kids the attention a kid craves are the animals that have lived with humans for hundred if not thousands of years. Basically: dogs and cats. After that you get into cows, pigs, chickens, goats, and the like. Goats are wicked smart, but the males stink to high heaven unless neutered young. If you raise geese from goslings, they will love you forever and ask for cuddles whenever they see you – but they have to stay outside and do make a mess. Someone else might correct me, but I doubt you want a pig – partially just because they end up getting so big (I’m told there’s no such thing as a teacup pig).

If the only issue with dogs is allergies, you could consider a low-allergenic breed. Dogs are simply the ideal pet for people with the time and space for them. They’ve lived with humans nearly forever and do all the stuff a young boy wants from a pet. Cats require less attention and can be caring and affectionate if they want to, but that depends on the particular cat. I’ve had turtles, ferrets, parrots, fish, and lots of other animals as pets and only the parrots and ferrets held a candle to dogs and cats. Fish-wise, I found the most exciting to be South American Cichlids – but mostly because I had a Green Terror who fell in love with a Blue Acara overnight such that the two of them tried to kill everything in the tank in the span of 10 hours. I got them their own tank where they raised many babies.