Democratics should be taking the opportunity to point out that this is emblematic of the chaos Trump brings, and they should be listing all the right-wing violence that's been inflicted by his supporters since 2016.

Dems should not be cowed into tacitly taking ownership of this shooting. It's Trump, this is what he and the Republicans have to offer.

Israel blames the United Nations agencies responsible for collecting this aid and distributing it inside Gaza, saying they need to urgently step up aid deliveries.

Of course they do, it couldn't possibly be because the IDF is a rapid dog off the leash that kills anything that moves, including (or rather, especially) aid orgs and journalists.

Shay's Rebellion and the Whiskey Rebellion were both carried out by veterans who had fought in the Revolutionary War, only to immediately have their rights curtailed and be taxed to pay the debt that was held by the elite revolutionary class. Massachusetts (where Shay's rebellion was focused) had basically paid off all these wealthy elites who had funded the revolution and then taxed the normal citizens of the state.

Hamilton was pretty explicitly trying to create an oligarchy in the US, and the rebellions were a response to that effort to essentially cut the general population out of the democracy they had fought for while also getting them to pay down the debts incurred by the ultrawealthy landowners.

These rebellions were led by revolutionary veterans who had been fighting under the assumption that they were fighting for their own democratic rights, yet even after the war without a certain amount of property you couldn't vote or run for office, leaving most people out in the cold.

So yeah, Washington (one of the biggest landowners) was eager to put down the rebellions, but it was out of a hypocritical and anti-democratic impulse, ironically. So, does it matter what the founders intended with 2A? If they were against what we now understand as democracy, how much weight should we really be lending their opinions now, in our context and understanding of what democracy should be? You start to see how "Constitutional Originalism" came to be a thing -- it's a relic of that early struggle between oligarch's and the common people.

If people are interested in more on that topic there was a great podcast featuring William Hogeland that outlines a lot of really interesting context about post-revolution US that is not widely understood, but makes a lot of what we still struggle with to this day make a lot more sense. I'd say it's critical history for progressive inclined people to understand.

Is the one trying to overthrow democracy the fascist or the one funding the ethnic cleansing?

They look like they're stoned and someone just came in and asked if they want anything from the corner store.

UK, what is going on with you guys? You had both George Orwell and Aldous Huxley...

Medical disinformation should be suppressed, sorry. People died because of idiots like Joe Rogan.

So this is like an anti-vaxxer thing then? A GOP committee defending Elon Musk and Joe Rogan spreading harmful disinformation. What am I missing here?

OceanSoap being loaded into the train car: "Ok guys, any minute now will be the prime opportunity to stop these fascist guys. Just remember to consider both sides, they might have a really good reason for taking us out to this isolated camp."

There is no such thing as neutral, unbiased reporting. Believing that there is is a mark of media illiteracy. Making the choice not to discuss the obvious conflict of interest is a choice, it is a form of bias. Journalists cannot be unbiased, that's not a possibility with the job.

We should not be allowing a dismantling of our democracy because "you have to be fair to bothsides".

Nowhere do they explicitly connect this to her political ideology. That's exactly my point, they're soft-selling it.

The liberal media (no quotes needed, they're corporate neoliberal) refuses to actually call a spade a spade.

This is not a critical article, this is just them shrugging and being like "Oh, well, it seems like tenuous grounds for dismissal but thems the licks."

Oh, suddenly she can move quickly on something when there's political cover to do what she actually wants.

Unbelievable corruption. And the liberal media is going to be tripping over themselves to talk about this like it's some complicated issue, rather than straightforward political corruption.