Search
525 results for “robert_said_what”
-
On September 28th Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase, one of the most prominent, most successful financial figures in the United States, published an article in the Wall Street Journal titled, “The Hell with Trump, Let’s Go Back to Globalism.”
Okay, that’s a lie. That wasn’t what the article was titled, but it was, in effect, what it said.
#JamieDimon #dimon #JPMorgan #Chase #economy #trump #maga #global #globaltrade #freetrade #globalism
-
On September 28th Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase, one of the most prominent, most successful financial figures in the United States, published an article in the Wall Street Journal titled, “The Hell with Trump, Let’s Go Back to Globalism.”
Okay, that’s a lie. That wasn’t what the article was titled, but it was, in effect, what it said.
#JamieDimon #dimon #JPMorgan #Chase #economy #trump #maga #global #globaltrade #freetrade #globalism
-
On September 28th Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase, one of the most prominent, most successful financial figures in the United States, published an article in the Wall Street Journal titled, “The Hell with Trump, Let’s Go Back to Globalism.”
Okay, that’s a lie. That wasn’t what the article was titled, but it was, in effect, what it said.
#JamieDimon #dimon #JPMorgan #Chase #economy #trump #maga #global #globaltrade #freetrade #globalism
-
On September 28th Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase, one of the most prominent, most successful financial figures in the United States, published an article in the Wall Street Journal titled, “The Hell with Trump, Let’s Go Back to Globalism.”
Okay, that’s a lie. That wasn’t what the article was titled, but it was, in effect, what it said.
#JamieDimon #dimon #JPMorgan #Chase #economy #trump #maga #global #globaltrade #freetrade #globalism
-
“A public trial is the best security for the pure, impartial, and efficient administration of justice, the best means of winning for it public confidence and respect”*
The west façade and plaza of the U. S. Supreme Court (source)We have all, understandably, been paying a great deal of attention to what the U. S. Supreme Court has been deciding. But as Joe Patrice reminds us, it’s important to attend to how they are making their decisions as well…
Conservative justices have spent years at war with two words. I know you’re thinking it’s something like “equal protection” or “reproductive rights,” or “basic ethics,” but let’s be serious — they already won those wars. The two words that get the conservatives riled up these days are “shadow docket.” Samuel Alito blasted the media for using the term to create the impression that the Supreme Court “is deciding important issues in a novel, secretive, improper way in the middle of the night, hidden from public view,” just because the Supreme Court is, in fact, deciding important issues in a novel, secretive, improper way in the middle of the night, hidden from public view. Brett Kavanaugh even channeled his inner Gretchen Wieners seeking a “fetch”-esque rebrand, hoping the term “interim docket” might catch on to make the flurry of consequential constitutional decisions rammed through without briefing or written opinion seem less… shady.
Well, maybe they’re right! Maybe it is time to drop the shadow docket. Not because the Court’s aggressive abuse of the procedure is any more legitimate, but because the metaphor broke. A shadow needs something real to stand in the light, while the shadow is the smaller, murkier thing trailing behind.
But now, the shadow docket is the Supreme Court’s preferred way of doing business. The outlier is when the justices deign to respect transparency.
ProPublica set out to put numbers behind the shadow docket. Analyzing the Court’s records, and excluding simple administrative requests and capital cases that have long lived on the emergency docket, ProPublica found back in July that the shadow has overtaken the merits docket:
I discovered that in the term that ended in 2025, the justices issued more substantive decisions on their emergency docket than in cases argued in open court. Experts told me this was likely the first time this has happened in the court’s modern history.
The Supreme Court issued 63 shadow orders in the term ending last year, to only 56 with argument and real, written and signed majority opinions. This year isn’t looking much better.
When the kitchen door handles more traffic than the front door, it’s just the front door now. The briefing-argument-signed-opinion routine everyone learned in school — and which underpins the judiciary’s entire claim to legitimacy — is now the side project. We shall henceforth dub the merits docket as the “transparent docket,” a quaint exhibition the justices run from October through June in between unbriefed and unexplained rulings to rewrite constitutional order.
ProPublica’s Ken B. Morales put the numbers to the Supreme Court itself:
Representatives from the Supreme Court did not respond to my questions.
You have got to hand it to the justices for their commitment to the bit.
ProPublica notes that “Every decision the court has made since July has been on its shadow docket.” Which is always true during the Court’s summer break — but historically the summer break was a “break” and not business-as-usual. These days, the Court doesn’t take summers off from deciding things, just from explaining them.
Oh, remember back in the day when Amy Coney Barrett whined about the public needing to “read the opinion.” That was before she decided well, you can’t expect us to put ourselves on the record when we blow up constitutional order!
The surge in these under-the-table orders have mostly inured to the benefit of the Trump administration. Like the Court greenlighting the president’s power to blow up and then squander millions in taxpayer funds to build vanity projects — a power we hope to see applied to One First Street soon. But Trump has suffered his share of losses through the process too, notably this month’s block on Missouri’s new gerrymander and the order upholding the injunction on Trump using the Postal Service to steal mail-in ballots.
But as much as it warms the heart of anyone who cares about constitutional order to see the Trump administration lose, this is about more than the outcome. We should have arguments and signed opinions. The Court’s power derives from its power of persuasion, as Judge J. Michael Luttig has said. An emergency stay is all well and good if issued to give the justices time to set up a proper, transparent process.
But too often these days, as Professor Vladeck notes, the supposedly “interim” order slides into de facto permanence without the Court bothering to follow up…
Eminently worth reading in full: “Supreme Court ‘Shadow’ Docket Is Now Bigger Than The Real, ‘Transparent’ One,” from @joepatrice.bsky.social in @abovethelaw.com.
Update: After publication, I received this response from an old friend…
As a retired lawyer with time on my hands, I follow the Supreme Court fairly closely. To add some context to Joe Patrice’s article, lower federal courts have issued roughly 300 preliminary injunctions/temporary restraining orders against the Trump administration. The Supreme Court has considered 32 emergency appeals (the “shadow docket”) of those orders. It has stayed 24 of the PIs/TROs. The Court has explained most of those stays, particularly over the last year, and for the rest the reasons for the Court’s action are fairly obvious.
I have been reading Supreme Court opinions for 54 years now. The old opinions were more concise, elegant, and sweeping. They often ignored counterarguments and stayed out of the weeds. The current opinions & dissents are more thorough, rigorous, and legally sophisticated. They read more like law review articles. They address the other side’s arguments. They are more tedious to read, but do a better job of explaining decisions. The Court is more transparent today than it has ever been.
Your correspondent is not (like Joe Patrice and my old friend) a lawyer, retired or otherwise. I find that, while I take my friend’s points, I still prefer a return of the balance to the more open, on the merits docket… even as I appreciate that the Administration’s “flood the zone” approach is making this difficult… In nay case, even if we look past how the Court is operating, we’re left with what they are deciding…
* Robert Reid, 1st Earl Loreburn
###
As we agree with Louis Brandeis that “sunlight is the best of disinfectants,” we might recall that it was on this date in 1967 that Thurgood Marshall was sworn in as the first African-American justice of the United States Supreme Court. Appointed by President Lyndon Johnson, Marshall had been a storied civil rights attorney and jurist (Federal Court of Appeals); he served on the highest bench from 1967 until his retirement in 1991.
#culture #EmergencyDocket #government #history #law #MeritsDocket #politics #ShadowDocket #SupremeCourt #ThurgoodMarshallOur whole constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men’s minds.
— Thurgood Marshall
-
“A public trial is the best security for the pure, impartial, and efficient administration of justice, the best means of winning for it public confidence and respect”*
The west façade and plaza of the U. S. Supreme Court (source)We have all, understandably, been paying a great deal of attention to what the U. S. Supreme Court has been deciding. But as Joe Patrice reminds us, it’s important to attend to how they are making their decisions as well…
Conservative justices have spent years at war with two words. I know you’re thinking it’s something like “equal protection” or “reproductive rights,” or “basic ethics,” but let’s be serious — they already won those wars. The two words that get the conservatives riled up these days are “shadow docket.” Samuel Alito blasted the media for using the term to create the impression that the Supreme Court “is deciding important issues in a novel, secretive, improper way in the middle of the night, hidden from public view,” just because the Supreme Court is, in fact, deciding important issues in a novel, secretive, improper way in the middle of the night, hidden from public view. Brett Kavanaugh even channeled his inner Gretchen Wieners seeking a “fetch”-esque rebrand, hoping the term “interim docket” might catch on to make the flurry of consequential constitutional decisions rammed through without briefing or written opinion seem less… shady.
Well, maybe they’re right! Maybe it is time to drop the shadow docket. Not because the Court’s aggressive abuse of the procedure is any more legitimate, but because the metaphor broke. A shadow needs something real to stand in the light, while the shadow is the smaller, murkier thing trailing behind.
But now, the shadow docket is the Supreme Court’s preferred way of doing business. The outlier is when the justices deign to respect transparency.
ProPublica set out to put numbers behind the shadow docket. Analyzing the Court’s records, and excluding simple administrative requests and capital cases that have long lived on the emergency docket, ProPublica found back in July that the shadow has overtaken the merits docket:
I discovered that in the term that ended in 2025, the justices issued more substantive decisions on their emergency docket than in cases argued in open court. Experts told me this was likely the first time this has happened in the court’s modern history.
The Supreme Court issued 63 shadow orders in the term ending last year, to only 56 with argument and real, written and signed majority opinions. This year isn’t looking much better.
When the kitchen door handles more traffic than the front door, it’s just the front door now. The briefing-argument-signed-opinion routine everyone learned in school — and which underpins the judiciary’s entire claim to legitimacy — is now the side project. We shall henceforth dub the merits docket as the “transparent docket,” a quaint exhibition the justices run from October through June in between unbriefed and unexplained rulings to rewrite constitutional order.
ProPublica’s Ken B. Morales put the numbers to the Supreme Court itself:
Representatives from the Supreme Court did not respond to my questions.
You have got to hand it to the justices for their commitment to the bit.
ProPublica notes that “Every decision the court has made since July has been on its shadow docket.” Which is always true during the Court’s summer break — but historically the summer break was a “break” and not business-as-usual. These days, the Court doesn’t take summers off from deciding things, just from explaining them.
Oh, remember back in the day when Amy Coney Barrett whined about the public needing to “read the opinion.” That was before she decided well, you can’t expect us to put ourselves on the record when we blow up constitutional order!
The surge in these under-the-table orders have mostly inured to the benefit of the Trump administration. Like the Court greenlighting the president’s power to blow up and then squander millions in taxpayer funds to build vanity projects — a power we hope to see applied to One First Street soon. But Trump has suffered his share of losses through the process too, notably this month’s block on Missouri’s new gerrymander and the order upholding the injunction on Trump using the Postal Service to steal mail-in ballots.
But as much as it warms the heart of anyone who cares about constitutional order to see the Trump administration lose, this is about more than the outcome. We should have arguments and signed opinions. The Court’s power derives from its power of persuasion, as Judge J. Michael Luttig has said. An emergency stay is all well and good if issued to give the justices time to set up a proper, transparent process.
But too often these days, as Professor Vladeck notes, the supposedly “interim” order slides into de facto permanence without the Court bothering to follow up…
Eminently worth reading in full: “Supreme Court ‘Shadow’ Docket Is Now Bigger Than The Real, ‘Transparent’ One,” from @joepatrice.bsky.social in @abovethelaw.com.
* Robert Reid, 1st Earl Loreburn
###
As we agree with Louis Brandeis that “sunlight is the best of disinfectants,” we might recall that it was on this date in 1967 that Thurgood Marshall was sworn in as the first African-American justice of the United States Supreme Court. Appointed by President Lyndon Johnson, Marshall had been a storied civil rights attorney and jurist (Federal Court of Appeals); he served on the highest bench from 1967 until his retirement in 1991.
#culture #EmergencyDocket #government #history #law #MeritsDocket #politics #ShadowDocket #SupremeCourt #ThurgoodMarshallOur whole constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men’s minds.
— Thurgood Marshall
-
“A public trial is the best security for the pure, impartial, and efficient administration of justice, the best means of winning for it public confidence and respect”*
The west façade and plaza of the U. S. Supreme Court (source)We have all, understandably, been paying a great deal of attention to what the U. S. Supreme Court has been deciding. But as Joe Patrice reminds us, it’s important to attend to how they are making their decisions as well…
Conservative justices have spent years at war with two words. I know you’re thinking it’s something like “equal protection” or “reproductive rights,” or “basic ethics,” but let’s be serious — they already won those wars. The two words that get the conservatives riled up these days are “shadow docket.” Samuel Alito blasted the media for using the term to create the impression that the Supreme Court “is deciding important issues in a novel, secretive, improper way in the middle of the night, hidden from public view,” just because the Supreme Court is, in fact, deciding important issues in a novel, secretive, improper way in the middle of the night, hidden from public view. Brett Kavanaugh even channeled his inner Gretchen Wieners seeking a “fetch”-esque rebrand, hoping the term “interim docket” might catch on to make the flurry of consequential constitutional decisions rammed through without briefing or written opinion seem less… shady.
Well, maybe they’re right! Maybe it is time to drop the shadow docket. Not because the Court’s aggressive abuse of the procedure is any more legitimate, but because the metaphor broke. A shadow needs something real to stand in the light, while the shadow is the smaller, murkier thing trailing behind.
But now, the shadow docket is the Supreme Court’s preferred way of doing business. The outlier is when the justices deign to respect transparency.
ProPublica set out to put numbers behind the shadow docket. Analyzing the Court’s records, and excluding simple administrative requests and capital cases that have long lived on the emergency docket, ProPublica found back in July that the shadow has overtaken the merits docket:
I discovered that in the term that ended in 2025, the justices issued more substantive decisions on their emergency docket than in cases argued in open court. Experts told me this was likely the first time this has happened in the court’s modern history.
The Supreme Court issued 63 shadow orders in the term ending last year, to only 56 with argument and real, written and signed majority opinions. This year isn’t looking much better.
When the kitchen door handles more traffic than the front door, it’s just the front door now. The briefing-argument-signed-opinion routine everyone learned in school — and which underpins the judiciary’s entire claim to legitimacy — is now the side project. We shall henceforth dub the merits docket as the “transparent docket,” a quaint exhibition the justices run from October through June in between unbriefed and unexplained rulings to rewrite constitutional order.
ProPublica’s Ken B. Morales put the numbers to the Supreme Court itself:
Representatives from the Supreme Court did not respond to my questions.
You have got to hand it to the justices for their commitment to the bit.
ProPublica notes that “Every decision the court has made since July has been on its shadow docket.” Which is always true during the Court’s summer break — but historically the summer break was a “break” and not business-as-usual. These days, the Court doesn’t take summers off from deciding things, just from explaining them.
Oh, remember back in the day when Amy Coney Barrett whined about the public needing to “read the opinion.” That was before she decided well, you can’t expect us to put ourselves on the record when we blow up constitutional order!
The surge in these under-the-table orders have mostly inured to the benefit of the Trump administration. Like the Court greenlighting the president’s power to blow up and then squander millions in taxpayer funds to build vanity projects — a power we hope to see applied to One First Street soon. But Trump has suffered his share of losses through the process too, notably this month’s block on Missouri’s new gerrymander and the order upholding the injunction on Trump using the Postal Service to steal mail-in ballots.
But as much as it warms the heart of anyone who cares about constitutional order to see the Trump administration lose, this is about more than the outcome. We should have arguments and signed opinions. The Court’s power derives from its power of persuasion, as Judge J. Michael Luttig has said. An emergency stay is all well and good if issued to give the justices time to set up a proper, transparent process.
But too often these days, as Professor Vladeck notes, the supposedly “interim” order slides into de facto permanence without the Court bothering to follow up…
Eminently worth reading in full: “Supreme Court ‘Shadow’ Docket Is Now Bigger Than The Real, ‘Transparent’ One,” from @joepatrice.bsky.social in @abovethelaw.com.
* Robert Reid, 1st Earl Loreburn
###
As we agree with Louis Brandeis that “sunlight is the best of disinfectants,” we might recall that it was on this date in 1967 that Thurgood Marshall was sworn in as the first African-American justice of the United States Supreme Court. Appointed by President Lyndon Johnson, Marshall had been a storied civil rights attorney and jurist (Federal Court of Appeals); he served on the highest bench from 1967 until his retirement in 1991.
#culture #EmergencyDocket #government #history #law #MeritsDocket #politics #ShadowDocket #SupremeCourt #ThurgoodMarshallOur whole constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men’s minds.
— Thurgood Marshall
-
“A public trial is the best security for the pure, impartial, and efficient administration of justice, the best means of winning for it public confidence and respect”*
The west façade and plaza of the U. S. Supreme Court (source)We have all, understandably, been paying a great deal of attention to what the U. S. Supreme Court has been deciding. But as Joe Patrice reminds us, it’s important to attend to how they are making their decisions as well…
Conservative justices have spent years at war with two words. I know you’re thinking it’s something like “equal protection” or “reproductive rights,” or “basic ethics,” but let’s be serious — they already won those wars. The two words that get the conservatives riled up these days are “shadow docket.” Samuel Alito blasted the media for using the term to create the impression that the Supreme Court “is deciding important issues in a novel, secretive, improper way in the middle of the night, hidden from public view,” just because the Supreme Court is, in fact, deciding important issues in a novel, secretive, improper way in the middle of the night, hidden from public view. Brett Kavanaugh even channeled his inner Gretchen Wieners seeking a “fetch”-esque rebrand, hoping the term “interim docket” might catch on to make the flurry of consequential constitutional decisions rammed through without briefing or written opinion seem less… shady.
Well, maybe they’re right! Maybe it is time to drop the shadow docket. Not because the Court’s aggressive abuse of the procedure is any more legitimate, but because the metaphor broke. A shadow needs something real to stand in the light, while the shadow is the smaller, murkier thing trailing behind.
But now, the shadow docket is the Supreme Court’s preferred way of doing business. The outlier is when the justices deign to respect transparency.
ProPublica set out to put numbers behind the shadow docket. Analyzing the Court’s records, and excluding simple administrative requests and capital cases that have long lived on the emergency docket, ProPublica found back in July that the shadow has overtaken the merits docket:
I discovered that in the term that ended in 2025, the justices issued more substantive decisions on their emergency docket than in cases argued in open court. Experts told me this was likely the first time this has happened in the court’s modern history.
The Supreme Court issued 63 shadow orders in the term ending last year, to only 56 with argument and real, written and signed majority opinions. This year isn’t looking much better.
When the kitchen door handles more traffic than the front door, it’s just the front door now. The briefing-argument-signed-opinion routine everyone learned in school — and which underpins the judiciary’s entire claim to legitimacy — is now the side project. We shall henceforth dub the merits docket as the “transparent docket,” a quaint exhibition the justices run from October through June in between unbriefed and unexplained rulings to rewrite constitutional order.
ProPublica’s Ken B. Morales put the numbers to the Supreme Court itself:
Representatives from the Supreme Court did not respond to my questions.
You have got to hand it to the justices for their commitment to the bit.
ProPublica notes that “Every decision the court has made since July has been on its shadow docket.” Which is always true during the Court’s summer break — but historically the summer break was a “break” and not business-as-usual. These days, the Court doesn’t take summers off from deciding things, just from explaining them.
Oh, remember back in the day when Amy Coney Barrett whined about the public needing to “read the opinion.” That was before she decided well, you can’t expect us to put ourselves on the record when we blow up constitutional order!
The surge in these under-the-table orders have mostly inured to the benefit of the Trump administration. Like the Court greenlighting the president’s power to blow up and then squander millions in taxpayer funds to build vanity projects — a power we hope to see applied to One First Street soon. But Trump has suffered his share of losses through the process too, notably this month’s block on Missouri’s new gerrymander and the order upholding the injunction on Trump using the Postal Service to steal mail-in ballots.
But as much as it warms the heart of anyone who cares about constitutional order to see the Trump administration lose, this is about more than the outcome. We should have arguments and signed opinions. The Court’s power derives from its power of persuasion, as Judge J. Michael Luttig has said. An emergency stay is all well and good if issued to give the justices time to set up a proper, transparent process.
But too often these days, as Professor Vladeck notes, the supposedly “interim” order slides into de facto permanence without the Court bothering to follow up…
Eminently worth reading in full: “Supreme Court ‘Shadow’ Docket Is Now Bigger Than The Real, ‘Transparent’ One,” from @joepatrice.bsky.social in @abovethelaw.com.
Update: After publication, I received this response from an old friend…
As a retired lawyer with time on my hands, I follow the Supreme Court fairly closely. To add some context to Joe Patrice’s article, lower federal courts have issued roughly 300 preliminary injunctions/temporary restraining orders against the Trump administration. The Supreme Court has considered 32 emergency appeals (the “shadow docket”) of those orders. It has stayed 24 of the PIs/TROs. The Court has explained most of those stays, particularly over the last year, and for the rest the reasons for the Court’s action are fairly obvious.
I have been reading Supreme Court opinions for 54 years now. The old opinions were more concise, elegant, and sweeping. They often ignored counterarguments and stayed out of the weeds. The current opinions & dissents are more thorough, rigorous, and legally sophisticated. They read more like law review articles. They address the other side’s arguments. They are more tedious to read, but do a better job of explaining decisions. The Court is more transparent today than it has ever been.
Your correspondent is not (like Joe Patrice and my old friend) a lawyer, retired or otherwise. I find that, while I take my friend’s points, I still prefer a return of the balance to the more open, on the merits docket… even as I appreciate that the Administration’s “flood the zone” approach is making this difficult… In nay case, even if we look past how the Court is operating, we’re left with what they are deciding…
* Robert Reid, 1st Earl Loreburn
###
As we agree with Louis Brandeis that “sunlight is the best of disinfectants,” we might recall that it was on this date in 1967 that Thurgood Marshall was sworn in as the first African-American justice of the United States Supreme Court. Appointed by President Lyndon Johnson, Marshall had been a storied civil rights attorney and jurist (Federal Court of Appeals); he served on the highest bench from 1967 until his retirement in 1991.
#culture #EmergencyDocket #government #history #law #MeritsDocket #politics #ShadowDocket #SupremeCourt #ThurgoodMarshallOur whole constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men’s minds.
— Thurgood Marshall
-
I’m currently at the library with my Drafty writers group and someone finally tried to mock the name. The dude passed by us and asked what our group was called. When I explained we were the Drafty writers group, he laughed and said that is the most cringe name ever. What’s next? Are you guys going to call yourselves the paragraph punks? And now I want that as an official T-shirt for myself. This is how we started. Https://sightlessscribbles.com/the-colonization-of-confidence/ #Library #WritingCommunity #Cringe
-
I’m currently at the library with my Drafty writers group and someone finally tried to mock the name. The dude passed by us and asked what our group was called. When I explained we were the Drafty writers group, he laughed and said that is the most cringe name ever. What’s next? Are you guys going to call yourselves the paragraph punks? And now I want that as an official T-shirt for myself. This is how we started. Https://sightlessscribbles.com/the-colonization-of-confidence/ #Library #WritingCommunity #Cringe
-
I’m currently at the library with my Drafty writers group and someone finally tried to mock the name. The dude passed by us and asked what our group was called. When I explained we were the Drafty writers group, he laughed and said that is the most cringe name ever. What’s next? Are you guys going to call yourselves the paragraph punks? And now I want that as an official T-shirt for myself. This is how we started. Https://sightlessscribbles.com/the-colonization-of-confidence/ #Library #WritingCommunity #Cringe
-
Frustrated Robert MacIntyre warned after drone row at Carnoustie
MacIntyre said he was spoken to by a tournament official after expressing his frustration directly towards the camera…
#Golf #RobertMacIntyre
https://www.europesays.com/golf/73955/ -
Tributes to ‘adored’ father and founder of skip business
Robert Warden, founder of The Skip Factory based in Parley, died on August 22 at the age of 72 after a battle with leukaemia. His family described him as a man who ‘never stopped making people laugh and smile’. Robert Warden (Image: Martha Warden) They said: “Dad was the heart of our family …
#Bournemouth #AFCBournemouth #England #PremierLeague #EnglishPremierLeague #Football #a.f.c.bournemouth #bournemouth
https://www.eucup.com/1790046/ -
ANSA English: Siracusano to sue Vannacci over AI-manipulated revealing photo. “Relations with Parliament Undersecretary Matilde Siracusano said Monday that she intends to take legal action against general-turned-politician Roberto Vannacci over an AI-manipulated image of her with a revealing neckline that he posted on social media.”
https://rbfirehose.com/2026/10/01/ansa-english-siracusano-to-sue-vannacci-over-ai-manipulated-revealing-photo/ -
ANSA English: Siracusano to sue Vannacci over AI-manipulated revealing photo. “Relations with Parliament Undersecretary Matilde Siracusano said Monday that she intends to take legal action against general-turned-politician Roberto Vannacci over an AI-manipulated image of her with a revealing neckline that he posted on social media.”
https://rbfirehose.com/2026/10/01/ansa-english-siracusano-to-sue-vannacci-over-ai-manipulated-revealing-photo/ -
ANSA English: Siracusano to sue Vannacci over AI-manipulated revealing photo. “Relations with Parliament Undersecretary Matilde Siracusano said Monday that she intends to take legal action against general-turned-politician Roberto Vannacci over an AI-manipulated image of her with a revealing neckline that he posted on social media.”
https://rbfirehose.com/2026/10/01/ansa-english-siracusano-to-sue-vannacci-over-ai-manipulated-revealing-photo/ -
ANSA English: Siracusano to sue Vannacci over AI-manipulated revealing photo. “Relations with Parliament Undersecretary Matilde Siracusano said Monday that she intends to take legal action against general-turned-politician Roberto Vannacci over an AI-manipulated image of her with a revealing neckline that he posted on social media.”
https://rbfirehose.com/2026/10/01/ansa-english-siracusano-to-sue-vannacci-over-ai-manipulated-revealing-photo/ -
#UN, have also reported the movement of the Yellow Line, as has the Israeli government, details differ.
Last month, 🚫 #Netanyahu put the share of 🇵🇸 Gaza's territory inside the 🟡 Yellow Line at 60% rather than 70%, also said the plan was to expand the area.
☹️
––
#Israel #Palästina #palestine #Gaza
Gaza: Danish Refugee Council r... -
#UN, have also reported the movement of the Yellow Line, as has the Israeli government, details differ.
Last month, 🚫 #Netanyahu put the share of 🇵🇸 Gaza's territory inside the 🟡 Yellow Line at 60% rather than 70%, also said the plan was to expand the area.
☹️
––
#Israel #Palästina #palestine #Gaza
Gaza: Danish Refugee Council r... -
#UN, have also reported the movement of the Yellow Line, as has the Israeli government, details differ.
Last month, 🚫 #Netanyahu put the share of 🇵🇸 Gaza's territory inside the 🟡 Yellow Line at 60% rather than 70%, also said the plan was to expand the area.
☹️
––
#Israel #Palästina #palestine #Gaza
Gaza: Danish Refugee Council r... -
#UN, have also reported the movement of the Yellow Line, as has the Israeli government, details differ.
Last month, 🚫 #Netanyahu put the share of 🇵🇸 Gaza's territory inside the 🟡 Yellow Line at 60% rather than 70%, also said the plan was to expand the area.
☹️
––
#Israel #Palästina #palestine #Gaza
Gaza: Danish Refugee Council r... -
HRC nails it with this post.
Trump uses projection and scapegoating to push his toxic lies.
Robert Reich’s comments from 1994 were prescient and we’re now living the nightmare that he predicted.
We can only hope enough of us open our eyes and vote these charlatans and snake oil salesmen out!
https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/october-2-2026
#Election #trump #democracy #authoritarianism #gaslighting #projection #scapegoating #Mimetics
-
HRC nails it with this post.
Trump uses projection and scapegoating to push his toxic lies.
Robert Reich’s comments from 1994 were prescient and we’re now living the nightmare that he predicted.
We can only hope enough of us open our eyes and vote these charlatans and snake oil salesmen out!
https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/october-2-2026
#Election #trump #democracy #authoritarianism #gaslighting #projection #scapegoating #Mimetics
-
HRC nails it with this post.
Trump uses projection and scapegoating to push his toxic lies.
Robert Reich’s comments from 1994 were prescient and we’re now living the nightmare that he predicted.
We can only hope enough of us open our eyes and vote these charlatans and snake oil salesmen out!
https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/october-2-2026
#Election #trump #democracy #authoritarianism #gaslighting #projection #scapegoating #Mimetics
-
HRC nails it with this post.
Trump uses projection and scapegoating to push his toxic lies.
Robert Reich’s comments from 1994 were prescient and we’re now living the nightmare that he predicted.
We can only hope enough of us open our eyes and vote these charlatans and snake oil salesmen out!
https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/october-2-2026
#Election #trump #democracy #authoritarianism #gaslighting #projection #scapegoating #Mimetics
-
Robert Griess - Die goldene Rampensau
Kabarett Kaarst, Samstag, 17. April um 20:00 MESZ
Eine Gala - in unserem Theater! Ein hoch dotierter Preis, gestiftet von einem anonymen Startup-Milliardär. Verliehen an einen Kabarettisten, der solche Typen eigentlich satirisch Hops nimmt und zerlegt: Robert Griess erhält Die GOLDENE RAMPENSAU!
Weitere Informationen:
https://www.kabarett-kaarst.de/events/robert-griess-die-goldene-rampensau
https://calendar.kufoka.de/event/robert-griess-die-goldene-rampensau
-
Robert Saleh Details How to Prepare for Ravens’ Lamar Jackson and Derrick Henry
Getty Titans’ head coach Robert Saleh threw shade at the Giants after their Week 3 matchup The Tennessee…
#NFL #TennesseeTitans #Tennessee #Titans #Football
https://www.rawchili.com/nfl/1017087/ -
Robert Saleh Details How to Prepare for Ravens’ Lamar Jackson and Derrick Henry
Getty Titans’ head coach Robert Saleh threw shade at the Giants after their Week 3 matchup The Tennessee…
#NFL #TennesseeTitans #Tennessee #Titans #Football
https://www.rawchili.com/nfl/1017087/ -
Robert Saleh Details How to Prepare for Ravens’ Lamar Jackson and Derrick Henry https://www.rawchili.com/nfl/1017087/ #Football #NFL #Tennessee #TennesseeTitans #TennesseeTitans #Titans
-
Robert Jenrick confronts brazen shoplifter in heated exchange: ‘You think you’re above the law?!’
This is the moment Reform UK’s Robert Jenrick took the law into his own hands on the streets…
#EuropeSays #Britain #Europe #EU #UK #News #Politics #ReformUK #RobertJenrick #UKPolitics #UnitedKingdom #VideoNews
https://www.europesays.com/britain/136236/