I don't like our new White House Press Secretary any more than her predecessor...
Susan Collins isn't that interested in finding out more details
Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins, who has made a big production of advocating for witnesses at the Senate trial, wasn't that interested in the new information provided by Parnas.
Speaking to CNN's Phil Mattingly, she threw cold water on the new Parnas evidence.
"I wonder why the House did not put that into the record and it's only now being revealed," she said.
After it was pointed out the documents were only just turned over to the House, she said, "Well doesn't that suggest that the House did an incomplete job then?"
Collins has been instrumental in the effort to subpoena witnesses and, perhaps, additional documents at a Senate trial. But that effort, clearly, seems to be more about appearing to be open to witnesses than it is about pursuing leads. The idea that the Senate should have every single piece of information presented to it gives lawmakers like Collins a lot of leeway to ultimately make this inquiry go away.
Biden potentially seeing benefit from this is just a byproduct, I think. At a macro level, sure, outlets like CNN would prefer Biden over a more progressive candidate. But this? This is just about conflict being easier to understand and follow than a policy debate. People like conflict. They're more likely to click on stories about conflict. This is about pageviews and ratings, I think, not the nefarious master plot to undermine progressives.
You know what, on reflection I'm not even sure I believe this part. CNN will report as if they prefer Biden, but part of me thinks that, as with the election of Trump, they can really drive up ratings with another candidate that generates lots of opposition and conflict. President Sanders? Sure, here's your next four years of Very Sensible Pundits telling you that Bernie is out of his mind. Isn't that better TV than
"Breaking: President Biden Adopts Centrist View on Foreign Policy"?
You know what, on reflection I'm not even sure I believe this part. CNN will report as if they prefer Biden, but part of me thinks that, as with the election of Trump, they can really drive up ratings with another candidate that generates lots of opposition and conflict. President Sanders? Sure, here's your next four years of Very Sensible Pundits telling you that Bernie is out of his mind. Isn't that better TV than
"Breaking: President Biden Adopts Centrist View on Foreign Policy"?
You are forgetting that CNN is owned by AT&T which Bernie wants (rightfully) to break up AND has led the charge in bringing a spotlight to their unionbusting tactics.
That's under the assumption he'll have a Congress opposed to him. Only guaranteeable perhaps two years into the future?Granted. But if you have guarantees (via Congress) that he'll be a somewhat ineffective president, why not have your cake and eat it too? Just saying that I think corporations have some contingencies such that they can still wage pretty strong campaigns in their own favor no matter who occupies the office, and might even be able to make some money off of the fight itself, to boot.
It’s too risky. See Trump.Granted. But if you have guarantees (via Congress) that he'll be a somewhat ineffective president, why not have your cake and eat it too? Just saying that I think corporations have some contingencies such that they can still wage pretty strong campaigns in their own favor no matter who occupies the office, and might even be able to make some money off of the fight itself, to boot.
I know, I know. But gerrymandering seems above the paygrade of a news outflow pipe, at least when it comes to one election.That’s where re-districting and disenfranchisement come into play. If you can’t fix people’s preferences, you can try to fix how many of them can vote and how much those votes count.
It's difficult to imagine that won't become illegal at some point. I mean, illegal in at least in the sense of civillians won't have access and the government's not going to be blatant about its use. This is like the bomb and the internet. That's never going to go back in the bag but hopefully we will figure out how to be unstupid about it. WISHFUL THINKING I REALIZE.The Secretive Company That Might End Privacy as We Know It Stories&pgtype=Homepage
This article is behind a paywall, so you may not be able to view it.
But to sum it up, there is a company called "Clearview", which is an IS that has scraped over 3 billion photos from many sources including social media such as Facebook and Twitter. The AI is using the photos to identify individuals and have sold the software to police departments and other law enforcement agencies. The company may even offer the software to the public in the future.
The software has leaked and looked at and it appears it contains support for an AR headset that could display bubbles above people walking down the street with names and other information.
One thing that is important to note is the collections of peoples photos and other information from Twitter is against their terms of service. So not only does this software issue privacy concerns, it also completely disregards companies privacy policies in it's' data collection.
Clinton says 'nobody likes' Sanders and won't commit to backing him if he's the Democratic nominee
Hillary Clinton blasts Sen. Bernie Sanders in a new documentary, saying "nobody likes him" and declining in an interview with The Hollywood Reporter to say whether she would endorse and campaign for him if he's the Democratic 2020 nominee.www.cnn.com
Sighs, can we stop attacking the progressive candidates and supporting big corporations.
To get attention so she can make money off of the Hulu documentary?I saw it posed at another site that this was an odd statement for her to make at this point.
Saying she won't commit to supporting him isn't likely to get people who currently support him to stop supporting him.
If Bernie wins the nomination, she has no option except to support him.
If he doesn't win the nomination, she'll be blamed. Again.
So it may be true that she feels this way personally, but I don't see the wisdom in saying it.
To get attention so she can make money off of the Hulu documentary?