Tools

Carcere ai giornalisti, la Consulta rinvia la decisione di un anno

Carcere ai giornalisti, la Consulta rinvia la decisione di un anno

La Corte costituzionale ha scelto questa strada per dare il tempo al Parlamento di intervenire con una nuova disciplina


Load more
Read full article on: corriere.it
What Happened to ‘Love Island’ USA’s Noah Purvis? Why He Left the Villa
Just as soon as he joined the villa, the new Islander has mysteriously disappeared.
9 m
nypost.com
Cardi B sizzles in a barely-there pearl outfit and more star snaps
Cardi B shakes off her divorce in a sexy outfit, Kelly Clarkson hits the beach with her kids and more...
nypost.com
Man found guilty of putting his semen into coworker’s water bottle
A California man has been found guilty of putting his semen in a colleague’s water bottle and on her workspace after she rejected his advances. Stevens Millancastro, 30, was convicted Monday on assault and battery charges stemming from his attempts to retaliate against the woman in La Palma between November 2016 and January 2017, the...
nypost.com
House Republicans urge FBI to investigate funding behind recent riots
A number of House Republicans are urging FBI to investigate who has been funding the recent riots across the country, and bring federal charges against those who they say are “aiding and abetting” criminal activity.
foxnews.com
Photos show Wuhan clubbers partying maskless in former COVID-19 epicenter
Meanwhile, coronavirus deaths in the US have now surpassed 200,000.
nypost.com
‘The Vow’s Greatest Strength Is Its Pacing
By its very narrative structure The Vow mirrors how people come to be part of a cult.
nypost.com
Inside the Biden campaign’s surprising influencer strategy
Tara Jacoby for Vox During a pandemic that’s made in-person campaigning a public health hazard, influencers aren’t just fun. They’re a campaign necessity. In 2016, when traditional American campaign activities like door-to-door canvassing and celebrity-studded get-out-the-vote concerts were centerpieces of presidential campaigns, a viral post of support from a social media star would have been a nice little bonus for candidates. Four years later, amid an ongoing pandemic that’s made in-person campaigning a public health hazard, much of the electoral battleground has moved to the internet — and getting a boost from influencers on Instagram, TikTok, or YouTube is an increasingly important campaign tactic, particularly for Democrats. That’s because Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden is at a digital disadvantage compared to the Trump campaign, which is bolstered by networks of influential conservative personalities who stand ready to amplify its messaging — misinformation and all. That’s in addition to the incumbent president’s own massive online audience: Trump has more than 30 million followers on Facebook and 85 million on Twitter, while Biden has just under 3 million on Facebook and just over 9 million on Twitter. “We are forced to do everything virtual,” Adrienne Elrod, the director of surrogate strategy for Biden’s campaign, told Recode. “We’re forced to do more [Instagram] Lives. We’re forced to do more Twitter conversations. We’re forced to go to Occupy Democrats.” With limited time until the election, Biden’s campaign and the organizations and PACs that support him are looking to find new audiences anywhere they can. That’s where online influencers come in. But this isn’t just about trotting out pro-Biden content from A-list celebrity accounts with tens of millions of online followers. Some of the best support, Biden campaign strategists told Recode, might come from influencers who speak to comparatively smaller but targeted audiences, like persuadable voters from a particular community or people living in a specific swing state. So even if Biden is doing an Instagram Live chat with an influencer you’ve personally never heard of, it’s likely that influencer is speaking with an audience that could be uniquely useful to his campaign. “We’re bringing their fan base into the campaign,” Elrod explained. “And that is really allowing us to be more specific and more targeted in our approach and in our reach.” Biden’s influencer strategy means finding audiences where they are Biden, whose team has even hired a firm to assist with influencer outreach, has developed a formula for working with these influencers: He sits at home, often in front of a plant-filled backdrop and a window, while the influencer asks him open-ended questions that allow Biden to talk off the cuff about any given topic. These interviews are often streamed on Instagram Live, but they also pop up on Facebook and YouTube. While they are not quite advertisements or endorsement videos, they’re not journalism, either. The goal appears to be as simple as engaging with influencers, people who have credibility with particular audiences, and getting those influencers’ audiences thinking about Biden. Prompts like “what your administrations plans on doing to support working families in regards to child care” allow Biden to stick to bread-and-butter anecdotes and talking points, as well as connect with audiences on a personal level. Topics of discussion have included Biden's approach to leadership, and his plans for police reform and combating systematic racism. View this post on Instagram I was recently approached with the opportunity to have a quick conversation with former Vice President @joebiden we only had enough time for 1 question but if you’d like to see him speak with more influencers about even more issues be sure to check out @allisonholker @keke #bidentownhall A post shared by Beth Mota (@bethanynoelm) on Jun 15, 2020 at 6:10pm PDT For instance, to boost the child care components of his “Build Back Better” campaign, Biden chatted on Facebook Live and YouTube with two parenting influencers who are popular with moms and online parenting communities: Elle Walker, a YouTuber with a 3 million-subscriber-strong channel called WhatsUpMoms, and Dulce Candy, who is a veteran and beauty vlogger with over 2 million subscribers on YouTube (she also spoke at the 2016 Democratic National Convention). Neither woman was compensated. “Biden was extremely well-suited to speak to them, not only because of his policy rollout but because he understood what it was like to be a single parent himself,” Christian Tom, the head of digital partnerships for Biden’s campaign, told Recode about these interviews. “Some of these influencers, whom he was speaking to, have encountered this in their own lives. They hear it from their audience on comments on their YouTube channels or responses they get back on their Instagram videos.” Biden’s granddaughters, Finn, Maisy, Naomi, and Natalie, are helping, too: His campaign told Recode that they will host Instagram livestreams with influencers who are particularly popular with young people over the next few weeks. Biden’s influencer outreach goes beyond mainstream apps as well. In September, the campaign debuted Biden-Harris campaign signs in Animal Crossing, the popular social video game that became wildly popular at the start of the pandemic. Some celebrities, like Andy Cohen and Dulé Hill, are fundraising for the campaign on Cameo, the video app, which allows them to post fan-requested video messages in exchange for donations. Of course, linking the campaign to influencers comes with risks. Biden chatted on Instagram with Jerry Harris, from the popular Netflix show Cheer, in June. Then in September, Harris was arrested on a child pornography charge. Some conservative social media accounts have now tried to hint at a connection, including the GOP’s director of rapid response on Twitter and right-wing personality Ben Shapiro. And after Biden did an Instagram Live in June with the vlogger Bethany Mota (who also interviewed President Barack Obama in 2015), a Los Angeles Times opinion piece said it was “insulting” and argued against attempts to impress young people with social media stardom instead of focusing on serious issues. But the Biden campaign says this influencer movement is serious. “We’re not using celebrities just to launch canvass kickoffs or go around from living room to living room in Iowa and have these small, intimate conversations,” Elrod said. “We’re actually using them in a way where we can bring in their audience, and bring their audience into what we’re doing on the campaign.” “Influencers are not an afterthought,” Tom said. “The idea that influencers are, in some cases, the people who have the most credibility or bring the most bona fides in people’s social feeds is a really powerful one and something that we, as the campaign, want to embrace.” Political influencing on social media goes way beyond the Biden campaign A host of other groups are also enlisting influencers and meme accounts to boost Democratic turnout in November, and even to beat back against the threat of disinformation. Some rely on more traditional celebrities: The super PAC Pacronym is running a swing-state-focused effort alongside comedian Ilana Glazer, who has a million Instagram followers to her name. The idea is to do video chat interviews with other celebrities like Eric Andre and Zoë Kravitz and encourage people who may not be so pumped to vote about Biden to vote for him anyway, along with Democratic candidates down the ballot. View this post on Instagram my comedy brother @ericfuckingandre showed up for FLORIDA and he's real n raw n it's beautiful tho it's complex, he loves his home state, and tho it's complex he wants you to vote for @joebiden & @kamalaharris n spews TRUTH bout it. if ur strugglin with the complexity, watch this ep. it's a relief to see n hear reality ty eric!! watch & register to vote at <CheatSheetForTheVotingBooth.com> #cheatsheet #GTFO45 @anotheracronym x @generatorcollective A post shared by ilana glazer (she/her) (@ilana) on Sep 8, 2020 at 9:11am PDT Afterward, recordings of the live chats are repackaged into pro-Biden ad material that targets low-turnout voters beyond the reach of Glazer’s existing base on platforms like Snapchat and streaming services like Hulu and Roku. Ultimately, the goal is to reach 7 million people across six states. NextGen America, a political PAC founded by billionaire Tom Steyer, is looking for all sorts of influencers, including those who focus on beauty, fitness, lifestyle, and even comedy, to reach young people online and urge them to vote. One of these influencers is self-described “curly lifestyle creator” Chloe Homan, who has more than 50,000 Instagram followers and has posted to her Instagram story about registering for an absentee ballot with NextGen America’s account tagged. The PAC has spread the same message through the travel influencer couple Travel to Blank, who also urged people to vote for someone who doesn’t “only spread hate.” Overall, the PAC hopes to reach 12 million people through similarly targeted outreach. A representative for PAC told Recode most of these influencers are helping NextGen for free, with only about 10 percent asking for compensation. Meanwhile, the eight-year-old progressive media operation Occupy Democrats — perhaps best known for its memes and seemingly endless supply of political videos and news — is boosting the Biden campaign with its hugely popular Facebook page. In the past three months, Biden’s official campaign page has gotten about 8.5 million interactions (reactions, shares, and comments) on posts mentioning “Trump,” according to data from the Facebook-owned tool CrowdTangle. In comparison, Occupy Democrats has gotten almost 90 million interactions on posts mentioning Trump. Since 2016 — during which the page stumped for Bernie Sanders before eventually transitioning toward pro-Hillary Clinton messaging — the page has emerged as a sort-of answer to the right-wing media ecosystem that regularly pushes pro-Trump content. Now the page has launched a deluge of pro-Biden content — which often does better than Biden’s official accounts — as well as an affiliated-meme-page, Ridin’ With Biden. Occupy Democrats co-founder Rafael Rivero told Recode he’s “plugged in” with the Biden campaign. But because the operation isn’t officially part of the campaign, “we really go for the jugular,” he said. (A downside: Sometimes the page — like Biden himself — gets dinged by fact-checkers for sharing misinformation.) Screenshot from Facebook One September post from Facebook page Occupy Democrats compared Ivanka Trump and Ashley Biden. And then there are so-called nano-influencers, according to researchers at the University of Texas Austin. These somewhat covert influencers, the researchers tell Recode, are people who might have just a few thousand followers but speak to a very specific community. That might be a religious leader or a popular local mom, talking about particular issues in a particular area. “What we’re seeing with nano-influencers is sort of a form of digital astroturfing or inorganic political mobilization,” Samuel Woolley, one of the researchers, told Recode. They noted that it’s hard to actually identify these campaigns, since they’re often hiring off-platform. Countering pro-Trump social media will take more than influencers Joe Biden’s online campaigning, official or not, faces a formidable challenge: a strong network of right-wing influencers and media outlets that are ready to boost Trump’s competing message, and an array of misinformation, across the web. That means that even if pro-Biden influencers don’t try to fight misinformation themselves, they still may end up competing with it. “What Democrats don’t have is a powerful progressive media infrastructure to amplify the Biden campaig’sn messages at every turn,” Pacronym’s Tara McGowan told Recode. “The Trump campaign does have that, so Trump benefits hugely from a robust right wing media infrastructure.” That’s in part why one group, the Defeat Disinfo PAC, is using influencers to urge people to stay aware of wrong information online, for both the presidential election and other races across the country. “The world that we’re railing against is a world in which it takes six or seven people to review a tweet. And in our model and our world, volume and frequency and quality matter,” says Curtis Houghland of Main Street One, the firm who organized that digital campaign. “We’re in this asynchronous information-cultural warfare that requires us to have more digital breadcrumbs than we ever have before.” That inevitably means that influencers matter more than ever. But whether they’ll be part of the operation that brings Biden over the finish line? Only time will tell. Open Sourced is made possible by Omidyar Network. All Open Sourced content is editorially independent and produced by our journalists.
vox.com
‘I Had a Responsibility to Tell Those Stories.’ A New Book Reveals the Hidden Costs of War on Women
Christina Lamb first met the Yazidi survivors of ISIS in August 2016 in a derelict mental asylum on the Greek island of Leros, which the European Union had declared a “hotspot” in the refugee crisis. It was there that she heard stories from young women who had been bought and sold, raped and traded dozens…
time.com
Noddy Holder talks about Slade's greatest hits
The vocalist talks about the comprehensive greatest hits album, 'Cum on Feel the Hitz,' covering the British band's career. Rick Damigella reports.
edition.cnn.com
Armed ‘Freedom Fighters’ patrol Minneapolis streets in aftermath of George Floyd
“It’s important to have men from the community step up for the community,” the city’s director of the Office of Violence Prevention, Sasha Cotton, told the Los Angeles Times of the group.
nypost.com
Ben Sasse says ‘anti-Catholic bigotry’ potential Supreme Court nominee Barrett has faced is 'reprehensible'
Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., is preemptively defending Judge Amy Coney Barrett -- one of several rumored contenders for President Trump's upcoming Supreme Court nomination --from attacks on her religious beliefs.
foxnews.com
Bindi Irwin, husband Chandler Powell reveal the gender of their first child on the way
Bindi Irwin and her husband Chandler Powell revealed the gender of their first child on Tuesday.
foxnews.com
'White House, Inc.' Author: Trump's Businesses Offer 'A Million Potential Conflicts'
Dan Alexander of Forbes examines the president's sprawling business interests in a new book. He says Trump has broken a number of pledges he made about how he would conduct business while in office.
npr.org
Is This Really the End of Abortion?
Friday was a perfect early-autumn evening in Washington, D.C., less than 50 days away from the election. Marjorie Dannenfelser, the head of the Susan B. Anthony List, arguably the most powerful anti-abortion group in Washington, had wrapped up her day on Capitol Hill. She and her kids packed cheese and crackers and headed to the lawn outside the Supreme Court building, a majestic spot for a picnic. Dannenfelser’s phone rang—it was one of her staffers calling strangely late for a Friday. He had news.Call it coincidence. Call it fate. “I’ve literally never sat on the lawn at the Supreme Court,” Dannenfelser told me. But in the moment when she found out that the pro-life movement may be about to achieve everything activists have been working toward since 1973, when Roe v. Wade made abortion legal across the United States, Dannenfelser was literally gazing upon the institution she has worked so hard to influence. The thought of victory so close at hand “makes my heart race and my spirit soar,” she said.[Read: The pro-life movement prepares to build a post-Roe world]For feminists who believe abortion access is essential to women’s health, advancement, and self-determination, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death was a gut punch. “Ruthie was my friend and I will miss her terribly,” Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren wrote. “We will use each day to carry forward her legacy,” tweeted Ria Tabacco Mar, along with a broken-heart emoji; Ginsburg founded the group Mar leads, the ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project. Rebecca Traister, the New York writer who covers abortion and women’s rights, chugged wine on MSNBC. As they mourned, these women also seemed to recognize what Ginsburg’s death could mean: Even if Democrats crush Republicans in November, a 6–3 conservative Court could dismantle abortion rights.For anti-abortion activists, however, the solemnity of Ginsburg’s death was mixed with ecstasy: They believe they are about to taste victory. The next six weeks, which will almost certainly see a vicious Supreme Court confirmation battle amid the final race to Election Day, may determine the future of abortion in America for a generation. “I’m under no illusion that this isn’t the fight of our life,” Dannenfelser said.If President Donald Trump succeeds in appointing a replacement for Ginsburg, he will solidify a six-person conservative majority on the Supreme Court that could last for a decade or more. The most fundamental issue at stake is the right to abortion, which the conservative wing of the Court has been openly agitating to revisit for years. The almost universally shared goal of the anti-abortion movement is to see Roe overturned so that the question of abortion can return to the states, where voters can directly influence whether their legislatures permit or regulate the procedure. Getting to this moment, in which the conservative justices on the Court may begin fully reimagining abortion jurisprudence, took years of careful planning. “The conservative legal movement has always made sure that it’s well prepared to deal with potential vacancies on the Court,” Leonard Leo, the former executive vice president of the Federalist Society and an architect of Trump’s judicial strategy, told me. His goal for judicial appointments has not been to impose a litmus test on nominees, making them vow to overturn Roe, but “to advance a principled judicial philosophy” that tends to line up with anti-abortion views.In the years leading up to Trump’s election, pro-life political groups had a huge footprint in politics. Dannenfelser’s Susan B. Anthony List poured millions into electing strictly anti-abortion legislators to Congress, who were almost exclusively Republican; the group also attacked self-described pro-life Democratic legislators who voted for the Affordable Care Act in 2010. And the group has fully thrown its support behind Trump, vowing to help get him reelected in November. Dannenfelser calls him “the most pro-life president in history.” (Before he ran for president, Trump described himself as “very pro-choice.”) At the state level, groups such as Americans United for Life have drafted model legislation imposing incremental limits on abortion, teeing up the legal fights they hope will eventually lead to the end of Roe.[Read: Science is giving the pro-life movement a boost]Catherine Glenn Foster, Americans United for Life’s president and CEO, was driving when she heard the news of Ginsburg’s death. She sent a few frenzied texts at the first stoplight she reached, then parked near the Potomac River and worked through dinner. The moment was emotionally complicated: Like Elizabeth Warren and many others, Foster sees Ginsburg as a feminist advocate who made it possible for women like her to advance in the ranks of the legal field. “I wish we could leave it at that. Then her legacy would be something that I could just unequivocally say, ‘She’s a legend,’” Foster told me. But Ginsburg was one of the Court’s most ardent defenders of abortion rights: “Eliminating or reducing women’s reproductive choices is manifestly not a means of protecting them,” the justice wrote in one particularly cutting dissent from a 2007 conservative-majority decision, Gonzales v. Carhart, regarding the issue of so-called partial-birth abortion. To Foster, Ginsburg’s support for abortion “does tarnish her legacy.”[Read: Should a judge’s nomination be derailed by her faith?]Although Dannenfelser believes a new conservative justice will soon ascend the steps of the Supreme Court, she didn’t linger on Friday evening once she learned of Ginsburg’s death. She had recently appeared at the White House at a number of public events, and “if somebody does recognize me,” she thought, “it’s going to be a hindrance to them being able to grieve in the way that they need to grieve.” She left, and prayed alone.As night fell, hundreds of people, many of them young women in sweatshirts and face masks, made their way to the Supreme Court steps, carrying bouquets and tea lights and American flags. Thank you, their signs read. That evening, a message Ginsburg had dictated to her granddaughter Clara Spera had begun circulating: “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.” Presumably, Ginsburg equally hoped that her replacement will be someone who believes in the legal project that animated her life: advancing gender equality—which, in her view, had to include the right to have an abortion. Those who were there to mourn, not just Ginsburg but the vision of America that she stood for, were mostly solemn. But they also chanted: Honor her wish.
theatlantic.com
The U.K. Government Has Finally Responded on Gender Recognition for Trans People. LGBT Groups Say It Is ‘Lackluster’
The U.K. government published its long-awaited response to a public debate over the Gender Recognition Act (GRA) Tuesday, prompting mixed reactions from LGBT and trans-inclusive charities. The GRA has been at the center of headlines—and consternation—since a public consultation to potentially broaden the GRA’s mandate opened in England and Wales in 2018. The consultation consisted…
time.com
Officer in Breonna Taylor case defends actions, slams mayor in mass email to Louisville cops
Sgt. Jonathan Mattingly sent an email to more than 1,000 colleagues criticizing the Louisville mayor and defending his actions that March night.        
usatoday.com
'Best in the league'? Why Tampa Bay Rays are the perfect squad for MLB's 2020 season
Set to win the AL East title for the first time since 2010, the Tampa Bay Rays are gearing up       
usatoday.com
The Republican Party is an authoritarian outlier
(L-R) Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), President Donald Trump, and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA). | Erin Schaff/Pool/Getty Images Compared to center-right parties in developed democracies, the GOP is dangerously far from normal. The Republican Supreme Court power grab after Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death should be shocking, given the naked hypocrisy involved. The only reason it isn’t is that we’ve come to expect this from Republicans — and not just under Trump. Republicans shut down the government in the 1990s and impeached President Bill Clinton over far less than what Trump has done in office. Under Obama, they fanned the flames of birtherism, held the global economy hostage to force spending cuts, and elevated obstructionism to the level of governing principle. At the state level, they have rewritten electoral rules to block Democrats from voting and seized power from Democratic governors after they have won elections. Just this week, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis proposed a bill that would effectively criminalize anti-police violence protests — and protect drivers who ran over protesters with their cars. This kind of radicalism is not at all normal — at least, when compared to center-right parties in other advanced democracies. Experts on comparative politics say the GOP is an extremist outlier, no longer belonging in the same conversation with “normal” right-wing parties like Canada’s Conservative Party (CPC) or Germany’s Christian Democratic Party (CDU). Instead, it more closely resembles more extreme right parties — like Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz in Hungary or Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s AKP in Turkey — that have actively worked to dismantle democracy in their own countries. The Supreme Court saga can’t be considered in isolation. It is symptomatic of a profound brokenness in American politics, one party dragging us away from the developed-world political standards we aspire to and towards a fight over the most basic of democratic principles: whether power should be shared. And that’s a disaster for American democracy. “The only way we move forward is when Republicans reform, and cease to be an increasingly authoritarian white nationalist party,” says Steven Levitsky, a Harvard professor and the co-author (with Daniel Ziblatt) of How Democracies Die. The Republican Party really is different Levitsky’s views are not at all an outlier. A 2019 survey of nearly 2,000 experts on political parties from around the world asked respondents to rate political parties on two axes: the extent to which they are committed to basic democratic principles and their commitment to protecting rights for ethnic minorities. The higher the number, the more anti-democratic and intolerant the party is. The following chart shows the results of the survey for all political parties in the OECD, a group of wealthy democratic states, with the two major American parties highlighted in red. The GOP is an extreme outlier compared to mainstream conservative parties in other wealthy democracies, like Canada’s CPC or Germany’s CDU. Its closest peers are, almost uniformly, radical right and anti-democratic parties. This includes Turkey’s AKP (a regime that is one of the world’s leading jailers of journalists), and Poland’s PiS (which has threatened dissenting judges with criminal punishment). Experts rate the GOP as substantially more hostile to minority rights than Hungary’s Fidesz, an authoritarian party that has made demonization of Muslim immigrants into a pillar of its official ideology. Pippa Norris/Global Parties Survey The Democratic Party does somewhat better than the global average on metrics of respect for norms and support for ethnic minority rights. The GOP does not. In short, there is a consensus among comparative politics scholars that the Republican Party is one of the most anti-democratic political parties in the developed world. It is one of a handful of once-centrist parties that has, in recent years, taken a turn toward the extreme. “The transformation of the GOP is in line with other transformations of conservative into far-right parties, like Fidesz in Hungary,” said Cas Mudde, an expert on right-wing politics at the University of Georgia. Over the past decade and a half, Republicans have shown disdain for procedural fairness and a willingness to put the pursuit of power over democratic principles. They have implemented measures that make it harder for racial minorities to vote, render votes from Democratic-leaning constituencies irrelevant, and relentlessly blocked Democratic efforts to conduct normal functions of government. According to Jennifer McCoy, a political scientist at Georgia State University, these measures follow common patterns seen among populist authoritarians who initially win power by electoral means. They tend to pass changes to the electoral system aimed at ensuring “one party dominates government” while also working to marginalize or control “accountability institutions” like the judiciary or oversight watchdogs. “Many of these leaders are able to do so when they first win a clear majority and then begin to change rules or the constitution to further entrench their advantage and get to supermajorities,” McCoy tells me. For Republicans, the process of moving toward anti-democracy has taken decades rather than a single election. There was never a single unified GOP plan to lock out Democrats, akin to the way that Fidesz intentionally remade the Hungarian political system after winning the country’s 2010 election. There is no authoritarian plot behind the GOP’s recent maneuvers, and no secret plan to end elections or declare martial law. What there is, instead, is systematic disinterest in behaving according to the democratic rules of the game. The GOP views the Democrats as so illegitimate and dangerous that they are willing to employ virtually any tactic that they can think of in order to entrench their own advantage. This is perhaps the party’s core animating ideology, at every level: we must win because the Democrats cannot be given power. You can see the effects of this idea most clearly on the state level, where most of the action of election administration happens in American systems. In a forthcoming book chapter with Murat Somer, a scholar at Turkey’s Koç University, McCoy describes clear evidence that “Republican-led states [are] more likely to support anti-democratic measures, including failing to respond to democratic mandates from the public, curbing political participation, using policy to tilt the electoral playing field in one’s favor, and rejecting progressive policies approved by municipalities.” For example, Republicans won about 50 percent of the US House vote in North Carolina in 2018’s election. That translated into 70 percent of House seats due to heavily gerrymandered districts. Wisconsin Democrats won every statewide election in 2018 but did not win majorities in either chamber of the state legislature. While Democrats are also at a disadvantage due to concentration in urban areas, gerrymanders share much of the blame. North Carolina Rep. David Lewis, who chaired the state redistricting committee that put together a map so racially contorted that it was struck down in court in 2016, openly professed the power politics behind extreme gerrymandering in a speech on the statehouse floor. “I think electing Republicans is better than electing Democrats,” he explained. “So I drew this map in a way to help foster what I think is better for the country.” Lewis is notable mostly for his unusual honesty. Republicans believe they ought to win elections, and are doing everything in the power to make that the case — including changing the rules to stack the playing field in the favor. The effect is a party committed to an anti-democratic creed outside the norm of advanced Western democracies that insists that it is the true guardian of American democracy. Any effort to fix American politics needs to be clear-eyed on this point: The Republican Party is so beyond what’s normal in a healthy democracy that some kind of radical pro-democracy reform is required — be it ending the filibuster, court-packing, DC and Puerto Rico statehood, a new Voting Rights Act, or all of above — to try and turn things around. “The Republicans pose too much of an authoritarian threat,” Harvard’s Levitsky tells me, “to simply go on with business as usual.” Will you help keep Vox free for all? The United States is in the middle of one of the most consequential presidential elections of our lifetimes. It’s essential that all Americans are able to access clear, concise information on what the outcome of the election could mean for their lives, and the lives of their families and communities. That is our mission at Vox. But our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources. Even when the economy and the news advertising market recovers, your support will be a critical part of sustaining our resource-intensive work. If you have already contributed, thank you. If you haven’t, please consider helping everyone understand this presidential election: Contribute today from as little as $3.
vox.com
Did China use Hollywood movies in military propaganda clip?
A propaganda video published by China's People's Liberation Army on social media platform Weibo uses Hollywood movie clips to depict a missile strike on a target that resembles a US Air Force base in Guam.
edition.cnn.com
Will Senators Joe Manchin, Doug Jones Break with Democrats to Back SCOTUS Nominee?
Both moderate Democrats have not only stated they oppose rushing to fill a vacancy left by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg—they have blasted Mitch McConnell for pushing to confirm a nominee before the election.
newsweek.com
Cult Leader Who Thinks He's Jesus Arrested For 'Psychological Violence' Against Followers
Sergei Torop, who believes he is the reincarnation of Jesus Christ, was arrested together with his two deputies in Siberia.
newsweek.com
Julia Louis-Dreyfus really, really wants you to vote
Julia Louis-Dreyfus joked "the apocalypse is great" during CNN's CITIZEN event on Tuesday.
edition.cnn.com
Is Apple Down? App Store, Apple Music and More Reported Problems
Apple reports that all issues have been resolved.
newsweek.com
Lindsey Graham hints at vote before Election Day
edition.cnn.com
Tons of Ugg styles are on sale at Nordstrom Rack
Fall is here, and temperatures are dropping; it's the perfect time to snag a new pair of Uggs. Right now, Ugg footwear (and a few apparel items), a go-to when it comes to stylish slippers and boots that are functional and warm, is on sale for two more days at Nordstrom Rack.
edition.cnn.com
MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough: Trump rallies like Salem witch trials, ‘mass insanity’
MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” namesake Joe Scarborough on Tuesday scolded Trump supporters who attend crowded rallies amid the coronavirus pandemic, comparing the “mass insanity” to people who participated in the notorious Salem witch trials of the 1690s. 
foxnews.com
If Chosen for Supreme Court, Amy Coney Barrett or Barbara Lago Would be Only Justices Not to Graduate from Harvard or Yale
The loss of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who graduated from Columbia law school, left only graduates from Harvard and Yale on the Supreme Court.
newsweek.com
American Airlines Asks Passenger to Exit Plane When Her 2-Year-Old Son Refuses to Wear Mask
The airline's COVID-19 protocols require all passengers and staff to wear face coverings, with the exception of those younger than 2.
newsweek.com
Here's how utterly dumb the mask-wearing debate has become
On Monday night in Ohio, Lt. Gov. Jon Husted was warming up the crowd for President Donald Trump -- and trying to sell some campaign merchandise.
edition.cnn.com
Chris Rock reveals learning disorder that affects how he communicates
Chris Rock revealed that he was recently diagnosed with a learning disorder that has made it difficult for him to pick up on non-verbal communication his whole life.
foxnews.com
Jon Gruden is dancing the Raiders back to respectability
This is what 2-0 looks like. Jon Gruden and the Raiders celebrated their 34-24 upset Monday night victory over the Saints with what appeared to be the Polynesian Haka dance. Gruden led the locker room celebration after the team’s impressive Las Vegas debut followed their season-opening win in Carolina. “Hopefully our fans, even though they...
nypost.com
Oregon sheriff deputies make 21 arrests in wildfire evacuation zones
An Oregon sheriff’s department arrested 21 people in Level 2 and 3 wildfire evacuation zones over the past two weeks on various charges, including trespassing, burglary, theft and unlawful possession of a firearm.
foxnews.com
“It affects virtually nobody”: Trump erases coronavirus victims as US death toll hits 200,000
Trump speaks in Ohio on Monday. | Matthew Hatcher/Getty Images Trump’s Covid-19 rhetoric hit new heights of irresponsibility in Ohio. Instead of taking a moment to grieve the nearly 200,000 Americans who were confirmed to have died from Covid-19 as of his rally Monday evening in Swanton, Ohio, President Donald Trump erased them. “It affects virtually nobody,” Trump said of the coronavirus. “It’s an amazing thing.” By Tuesday morning, the disease had officially had killed 200,000 people in the US — a number more than the Revolutionary War, the War of 1812, the Mexican-American War, the Spanish-American War, World War I, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, the Afghanistan War, and the Iraq War combined — and “affected” even more. The president was trying to highlight how deaths from the virus are concentrated among older people and those with preexisting conditions — never mind that more than half of the US population falls into one or both of those categories — but he made his point in a remarkably callous, revealing way. Here’s the full quote, in context, followed by the video. It affects elderly people. Elderly people with heart problems and other problems. If they have other problems, that’s what it really affects. That’s it. You know, in some states, thousands of people, nobody young [dies]. Below the age of 18, like, nobody. They have a strong immune system, who knows. You look — take your hat off to the young, because they have a hell of an immune system. But it affects virtually nobody. It’s an amazing thing. By the way, open your schools, everybody. Open your schools. "It affects virtually nobody," Trump says of the coronavirus, which has now killed 200,000 Americans and counting pic.twitter.com/qHrZvUWNhX— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 22, 2020 First off, it’s not the case that young people have no risk of bad outcomes if they catch Covid. According to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 107 Americans age 18 or younger have died from the virus. That is a fraction of the US’s total deaths, but, to state the obvious, death isn’t the only way someone can be negatively affected by Covid-19. A CDC study published last month found that there were 576 confirmed cases of children being hospitalized with Covid-19 between March 1 and July 25, with the hospitalization rate increasing over the summer. The number of child Covid-19 cases doubled between July and August, rising to 406,109, and the situation is likely to get worse before it gets better because of school reopenings. While there’s a lot that is still unknown about the disease’s impact on children, and most infections in children under the age of 18 are “asymptomatic or mild,” children can be “at risk for severe Covid-19,” per the CDC. The Wall Street Journal reported recently that “some are reporting symptoms that persist for weeks, or the development of post-viral syndromes. Symptoms reported include fever, cough, headaches, shortness of breath and gastrointestinal problems.” In short, Covid-19 is nothing to be cavalier about, regardless of age, and it’s irresponsible for the president to suggest otherwise — especially the day before Americans commemorated the grim milestone of 200,000 coronavirus deaths, Trump knows better but is spreading dangerous misinformation anyway Trump’s comments are appalling but not surprising. Constructing a coronavirus alternate reality is a centerpiece of his flagging reelection campaign. Instead of grappling with the fact that the US hasn’t had a single day below 30,000 new confirmed coronavirus cases in months, Trump is back to having multiple political rallies each week featuring packed crowds, very few masks, and no social distancing. While many of them are outdoors (public health experts say improved air ventilation is a key aspect of decreasing risk), not all are. To the extent that Trump talks about ongoing pandemic at these rallies, it’s to reassure people that the worst of it is in the past and there’s no need for any further closures of schools or businesses — or really any public health measures whatsoever — because we know more about the virus than we did months ago. "We're rounding the turn on the pandemic," Trump says, falsely pic.twitter.com/6rZMtEIFMV— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 3, 2020 But it’s worth noting that Trump doesn’t seem to be buying what he’s selling his supporters. Asked if he’s concerned about catching the coronavirus at one of his rallies following a speech in Nevada earlier this month, Trump said he’s not, because “I’m on a stage, it’s very far away, so I’m not at all concerned.” Trump has also said things publicly that directly contradict the “it affects virtually nobody” talking point. During a March 19 interview with Bob Woodward that the Washington Post recently published audio of, Trump said, “Now, it’s turning out, it’s not just old people, Bob. Just today and yesterday, some startling facts came out. It’s not just older. It’s plenty of young people.” That was the same interview where Trump infamously told Woodward that he “wanted to always play it down” because “I don’t want to create a panic.” There’s a big difference, however between trying to keep people calm and misleading them. Trump’s comments in Swanton serve as perhaps the starkest illustration yet that Trump is willing to endanger his supporters in hopes of convincing them his failed coronavirus response is actually a success story, and that anybody who tells you otherwise is part of a political conspiracy aimed at taking him down.
vox.com
NHRA drag racing series files lawsuit against Coca-Cola for terminating sponsorship
The NHRA has partnered with Coca-Cola's Mello Yello brand since 2002 and had a contract with the soft drink through 2023.       
usatoday.com
Arizona Dem could vote on Supreme Court justice if Republicans drag feet
Arizona Democrat Mark Kelly could vote for the next Supreme Court justice if Republicans move slower than expected to confirm a nominee to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Kelly, a retired astronaut married to former congresswoman Gabby Giffords, is outpolling appointed Republican Sen. Martha McSally in a special election to fill the late Sen. John McCain’s...
nypost.com
Can Democrats Stop the Nomination?
Anyone confidently predicting one way or another whether Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell can seat a new justice on the Supreme Court is blustering. Here is the only thing that’s certain: The coming fight will not be resolved by principle—no matter how senators talk or what principles they profess. It will be resolved by legislative gamesmanship, voting strength, and power politics.Four major questions will determine the outcome of this struggle, set off by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg only six weeks before Americans finish voting for both president and control of the Senate, and only four months before a new Congress gets sworn in.The first is whether McConnell actually has the votes. Right now, there are 53 Republicans in the Senate, and recent statements from senators suggest that enough of them support holding a vote on the nominee put forward by President Trump this year for the process to move forward.[David Frum: Four reasons to doubt Mitch McConnell’s power]Only two GOP senators are opposed to forcing someone through before the next president takes office. Susan Collins, facing a tough electoral environment in Maine following her vote to confirm Brett Kavanaugh, announced Saturday that “the decision on a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court should be made by the President who is elected on November 3rd.” Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who voted against Kavanaugh, coincidentally declared hours before Ginsburg’s death was announced, “I would not vote to confirm a Supreme Court nominee.” She reiterated that position following Ginsburg’s death: “For weeks, I have stated that I would not support taking up a potential Supreme Court vacancy this close to the election. Sadly, what was then a hypothetical is now our reality, but my position has not changed."Other Republican senators, however, are backing McConnell’s aggressive stance. These include Martha McSally of Arizona, Steve Daines of Montana, Thom Tillis of North Carolina, and Cory Gardner of Colorado. — The biggest blow for Democrats came this morning from Mitt Romney of Utah, who declared earlier that “I intend to follow the Constitution and precedent in considering the president’s nominee. If the nominee reaches the Senate floor, I intend to vote based on their qualifications.”So while McConnell entered the game with a thin margin, he’s been successful at winning with thin margins before, including during last winter’s impeachment trial and the Kavanaugh confirmation—and the numbers have clearly broken in his favor. To create a majority, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer would need to make sure Collins and Murkowski are solid, and he would need two more Republicans to flip positions. That’s a tall order.But the math may get worse for McConnell and better for Schumer after the votes are counted in November—if the Democrats can stall things that long. McSally is running considerably behind the Democratic challenger Mark Kelly, and because Arizona’s race is a a special election to fill the seat of the late John McCain, he would take office promptly were he to prevail—not when the new Congress convenes in January 2021. Although finalizing that election’s results and seating Kelly could take time, his would be a potential additional vote against a nominee.More generally, if Democrats were to pick up Senate seats—as seems likely—or even take control of the chamber, particularly if Joe Biden were also to defeat Trump, the optics of confirming a nominee during a lame-duck session of Congress would get particularly ugly for McConnell. He would, after all, be trying to ram through a defeated president’s nominee with a razor-thin Senate majority that might be about to diminish further, or disappear entirely. And he would be doing so by way of allowing that defeated president and the defeated party in the Senate to seize control of the Supreme Court in the face of apparent voter preference for the other side.This possible erosion of McConnell’s position raises the second key question, which is one of timing: Does McConnell push for a confirmation vote before the election, or does he wait until a lame-duck session?This question is also tricky. The fact that McConnell’s position will likely be weaker with respect to pure numbers, at least somewhat, when the votes are counted creates a temptation to act quickly and get the confirmation done before the election.But that will be hard. The election is only 42 days away, and, while plans could change to accommodate the process, Congress is not scheduled to be in session for more than 11 of them.Confirming a Supreme Court justice does take time. It requires hearings. There has to be floor debate. And Democrats will be doing everything they can to stall and slow things down.Remember also that all of those vulnerable incumbents whose seats McConnell wants to preserve need to go home and fight for their seats at precisely the time a quick vote will require them to be in Washington. Even if they support confirming the president’s nominee while reversing the positions that many of them took four years ago, when McConnell blocked President Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland, remaining in Washington keeps them off the campaign trail.The result is a complicated little puzzle for McConnell: His position is stronger if he acts quickly, but he may not have the time to do so, and Democrats will certainly attempt to slow things down and force the matter into the lame duck, where their hand may well be stronger.This raises the third key question: How much delaying power do Democrats have, and how much of it will they be willing to use?The filibuster for Supreme Court nominations is gone, so the Democrats cannot stop the nomination without finding four Republican senators willing to vote against the nominee, but delaying tactics are available to them. Some of these tactics have been only theoretical in the past, because they involve disabling the Senate institutionally, so in the normal course of business, the costs of using them are just too high.That could be the case this time around too, especially if the nomination slides to the lame-duck session. There could be competing legislative items that Democrats are not willing to cast aside by grinding the institution to a halt. Most significant, current plans to fund federal government operations involve a short-term spending measure that would run through December 11. If Democrats attempted to halt all Senate action over a Supreme Court pick, a bill keeping the government open would also be a likely victim. Additional legislation to address the COVID-19 crisis has languished as well, meaning that it, too, might well remain unfinished after the election.[Read: How the pandemic defeated America]Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has indicated that, at this point, she is not interested in jeopardizing government funding in favor of Supreme Court obstruction. The primary obstacle to legislative progress on addressing the coronavirus, meanwhile, has been divisions within the GOP over whether action is needed, so moving forward with such a bill may be difficult regardless.But even in the presence of these high-value agenda items, Democrats may face demands from their voters to use every tool at their disposal to push back against McConnell. What’s more, knowing that they would be immediately disabling the Senate for only a discrete period of time, until the new Congress comes in, their calculation may be different than it has been in the past.What are the available tactics? The Senate operates on the presumption that a quorum—51 members—is present, and suggesting the absence of a quorum triggers a roll-call vote to see who is present. Serial quorum calls can take up a lot of time.Much of the Senate operates, moreover, by what’s called unanimous consent— the absence of any objection to doing things in the manner proposed. If Democrats simply make a practice of refusing unanimous consent on even routine matters, thus forcing debate and votes on all sorts of things that normally proceed without objection, that could further make processing the nomination resemble pouring cold molasses.There are also options for delaying committee action. The Judiciary Committee’s rules, for example, require at least two members of the minority to be present for the committee to transact business, and they allow any member to request that a nomination be held over for action for a week. In addition, if the Judiciary Committee were to fail to report out a nomination, senators could discharge the panel of its responsibility, but a key motion required as part of that process can be filibustered.A number of commentators have even floated the idea of the House impeaching a Trump official, in an effort to force the Senate to receive articles of impeachment and conduct a trial.A sufficiently determined Senate majority could, however, likely take its own retaliatory steps to get around some of these forms of Democratic obstruction. In general, if a simple majority of senators is willing to vote in favor of reinterpreting the rules, stopping it is difficult. There are other possible GOP responses, too. In August 2019, for example, Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham suspended several of the panel’s rules to take action on an immigration bill. Generally, if Democrats attempt to prevent a nomination from being reported by the Judiciary Committee, Republicans can alter Senate precedents and protect from a filibuster the necessary motion to bring it to the floor. And while the current Senate rules governing impeachment suggest that the Senate would have to act if the House sent over articles, it could likely dispense with them by a simple majority vote—if enough Republicans were willing to do so. The mechanics of the Senate’s existing rules also make the use of tactics such as repeated quorum calls more difficult once cloture on a nomination has been invoked—which, again, requires only 51 votes.[Read: What Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death means for America]The final major question is whether Democrats can offer any credible policy deterrence for Republicans going forward with a confirmation. A number of Democrats have stated that if Republicans force through a nominee before the inauguration, they will feel compelled to respond, should they take the chamber, by increasing the number of seats on the Supreme Court. This is an idle threat when uttered by individual senators.It ceases to be an idle threat the moment 51 senators, sitting or incoming, have their names behind it and make clear that they are prepared to move on the matter immediately when the new Congress convenes. To do this, admittedly, they would likely have to be prepared to blow up the legislative filibuster—something some Democratic senators and many Democratic activists want to do anyway.The idea of threatening a policy-based retaliation to create a deterrent will become plausible only if Democrats prevail electorally and can then put on a united front in the lame-duck period. To be effective, the strategy would need credibly to promise something sufficiently undesirable to Republicans that McConnell backs down—or, failing that, that a few additional senators jump ship, costing him the majority he needs to get past the finish line. Given that calls from some Democrats to abolish the filibuster for major structural reforms were rising before Ginsburg’s death, and have escalated since, Republicans are likely to be skeptical of any Democratic commitment to refrain from doing so, even if Republicans stay their hand.These variables will, in all likelihood, not operate independently of one another. McConnell is more likely to push for a quick confirmation vote if he’s confident of Republican votes. Democrats will be more assertive about using delaying tactics aggressively if Republican votes are soft or perceived to be uncertain—and if Democrats are confident of major electoral gains that will strengthen their hand.Ginsburg’s seat will not be filled necessarily by the party that makes the better argument. Control of her seat, rather, will go to the party that best deploys the tools at its disposal in the fluid environment of an election, a ticking clock, and a possible shift of power.
theatlantic.com
Woman Who Lost Her Dad to COVID Responds to Trump Downplaying Virus: 'My Dad Was Not a Nobody'
President Donald Trump on Monday claimed that the new coronavirus "affects virtually nobody" as nearly 200,000 Americans had, at that time, already died from the pandemic.
newsweek.com
Sheriff refuses to apologize for saying deputies had opportunity to kill Black men but didn't
Spartanburg County Sheriff Chuck Wright stood by his remarks that his deputies had every opportunity to shoot two men whose charges were later reduced.        
usatoday.com
'Almost Famous' turns 20: Dickey Betts reveals the true Allman Brothers stories behind the cult classic
Dickey Betts reveals the real Allman Brothers Band stories that inspired the film "Almost Famous," which celebrates its 20th anniversary on Sept. 22.        
usatoday.com
Can Nancy Pelosi stop Trump? Join Kara Swisher to discuss their interview.
nytimes.com
Donald Trump Gains Votes from Asian Immigrants
President Donald Trump is on track to raise his share of Asian American voters to perhaps 35 percent in 2020, up from perhaps 27 percent in 2016.
breitbart.com
Airbus unveils designs for zero-emissions jet powered by hydrogen fuel
AIRBUS has revealed plans for the world’s first zero-emission commercial aircraft. The European plane-maker said the hydrogen-fuelled aircraft could enter service by 2035. It showcased three different designs. The ZEROe designs represent three different approaches to how technology and aerodynamics could lead to zero-emission commercial flights. Airbus chief executive Guillaume Faury said: “This is a...
nypost.com
Tommy DeVito, original Four Seasons member, dead at 92 from COVID-19
He cranked out a decade of chart-topping hits like "December 1963 (Oh, What a Night)," "Walk Like a Man," “Big Girls Don’t Cry” and “Sherry.”
nypost.com
Vanessa Bryant sues L.A. County sheriff, alleging 'cover-up' of Kobe Bryant crash photos
Vanessa Bryant's lawsuit alleges that deputies took photos of the helicopter crash site, and that Sheriff Alex Villanueva failed to investigate.
latimes.com
Vanessa Bryant sues LA County Sheriff's department over crash site photos: report
Just a week after calling out Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva over leaked photos of the helicopter crash that killed Kobe Byrant, his daughter Gianna and seven others in January, Vanessa Bryant has filed a lawsuit claiming severe emotional distress, reports say. 
foxnews.com
Kal Penn talks new voting show, how comedy brings people together
Kal Penn is marrying his two passions: democracy and comedy.
foxnews.com
Indians vs. White Sox prediction: Shane Bieber as sure a bet as any
Happy Autumn, New Anarchist City! … Can you think of anyone happier than Eli Manning two games into the NFL season? Maybe Jamal Adams, maybe? Biggest surprise of this MLB season, well other than that there actually was a season? The Chicago White Sox. The 34-win Sox are going to the postseason and have a...
nypost.com
'Attack on Titan' Season 4 Is Still Coming to Funimation in 2020 Will Stream Later This Year
Funimation will stream subtitled episodes the same day they release in Japan.
newsweek.com