It's important for those who thought electing trump was a good idea be exposed to "Civil Discourse", and other sites where the facts are outlined, for them to understand why it was NOT, and the importance of voting out the republican party that allows this damage to continue.
That's what I share with everyone I meet...a list of sites like Joyce's for people to learn why their lives are a constant fight to survive anymore. And that it doesn't have to be that way.
But Trump is primarily the means to an end, and is "autocracy" really the goal? The last few decades don't really support that conclusion: plutocracy is far more likely. Consider for instance the Citizens United decision of 2010. It put corporate power, i.e., the power of $$$, on a par with the power of the electorate -- and gave Big Money almost unlimited power to influence elections. Citizens United was a 5–4 decision, and the 5 were all appointed by Republicans (surprise, surprise).
Big Money and Big Corporations aren't fans of democracy. They never have been. They don't like it when "we the people" vote to impose restraints on their power and to levy taxes to support the common good. However, left to their own devices they have a nasty penchant for crashing the economy with their overreach: think 1929 and the depression that followed, or the more recent crash of 2008–2009, or the botching of the COVID response, or what's happening now. And too many of us don't catch on, or we forget, or we're all in with the racism and/or "owning the libs," so we give the Republicans another chance.
For sure Trump wasn't any smart plutocrat's idea of the ideal president, but by 2015–16 the alternatives were pretty pathetic and Trump was a magnet for headlines. Come to think of it, the last competent, pro-democracy Republican president was Eisenhower. Unfortunately his VP was Nixon.
You are probably correct … Trump is but a facade for a future Xian Nationalist - i.e. white supremacist - regime—he brings in the unwashed, disgraces himself, come the “saved” on white steeds (but not in white sheets this time).
In some ways they're a throwback to the America Firsters and diehard anti-FDR corporate types, but IMO the alliance of corporate $$$ and Christian nationalism is an uneasy one, and it seems to be coming apart with Trump II. The congressional Republicans, OTOH, have been a hapless crew for several decades now. Which is why Trump could come out of more or less nowhere in 2016 and they all fell in line behind him when he won.
That was a whole different Republican Party. Check out the Hayes-Tilden Compromise of 1877, which resulted from the contested election of 1876 and pretty much ended Reconstruction. A case could be made for Theodore Roosevelt, who was both a Republican and a progressive when he became president after the assassination of McKinley and was elected in his own right in 1904. But it was an uneasy relationship: TR ran for president on the Bull Moose ticket (which party he founded) in 1912, split the vote, and helped get Woodrow Wilson (D) elected.
Johnson was pretty clearly more loyal to the formerly Confederate states -- he got paired with Lincoln because Lincoln was clearly pro-union. (I'm lowercasing "union" here because this was before the Confederacy split off from the rest of the country and "the Union" became a separate entity.)
But did Johnson actually end Reconstruction? Not as I understand it. Johnson was succeeded in March 1869 by Ulysses S. Grant, who's gone down in history as a good general but a really lousy president. Whatever his faults, he was clearly pro-Union. The Tilden-Hayes compromise in 1877 was about who would succeed Grant. *That's* when Reconstruction came to an end.
No surprise as once again, democracy is saved by America's judicial system, except of course for our current Supreme Court and DOJ. Aside from the voters, it is the lower courts that will save us from oligarchy, corruption and just plain incompetence. And of course, the likes of Joyce Vance.
Our DOJ is so hopelessly biased for Trump and against the American people under Blanche that it will take a massive Democrat shift in 2026 and 2028 to put our country back on the straight and narrow. Voting out Mike Johnson, James Comer and Gym Jordan would be a huge help.
It is good to know that the judges are doing their jobs without fear of retribution. With all of the other bad news happening, this was a ray of sunshine and much needed. Thank you, Joyce, for keeping us apprised of all these things going on. We are lucky to have you.
You know, it's interesting as I read these cases with a judge holding the line, and then come across a pronoun and the judge is a she. It seems the percentage of female judges limiting Trump is much higher than the percentage they represent in the pool of judges as a whole. Has anyone looked at those statistics? Are women more likely to interpret the law against him? Or is he just getting a higher sample of women? Of course I do not include judge Cannon in this group...
>>>>Trump has consistently accused CNN of being “fake news.” Last December, he said it was essential for CNN to be sold and placed under new, presumably more Trump-friendly, management. “I think CNN should be sold, because I think the people that are running CNN right now are either corrupt or incompetent,” Trump told reporters. At least for now, a federal judge disagrees.<<<<
The ONLY reason that Trump says this (endlessly), as we all know, is because "fake news" is any news that isn't treating him like a god. His inner tanteum child cannot cope with it.
If you get a minute, can you tell me if MSNOW has changed their reporting b/o being intimidated? For what it's worth, I was a devout follower of that channel (Ari, Joyce, Chris, Rachel, Lawrence, Peter -- sometimes I'd watch them all in that order), but no longer watch. I don't know why. I haven't been able to put my finger on it. But it seems like it must have something to do with what you just said.
Joyce, you’re invaluable at explaining what and why when the maneuvers of these con men who are so rich and getting more so on our tax dollars, try again and again to destroy all competition in all the business world. They truly believe everyone should simply bow down to them and their schemes and that’s how it would be without the likes of you and so many of the AG’s of our states. Thank you!!
There’s a reason time is of the essence for the Ellisons. Larry Ellison’s wealth, the theoretical money behind the deal, is tied up in Oracle and connected AI businesses. S&P just downgraded Oracle to the lowest credit rating above “junk” status because Oracle’s future is so heavily tied to OpenAI, which is increasingly seen as likely to fail. If the AI bubble pops before the Paramount deal goes through, Pop won’t have the bucks to back the boy. OpenAI and Anthropic, the only two AI providers that really matter, are both losing money hand over fist and have hoped that IPOs would bail out early investors by enticing retail stock investors. But to do that they’d need to make their failures visible vial open books. Huge losses are not encouraging to investors. And they’ve just watched SpaceX, which included XAI in order to ride the AI-hype, go public and immediately tank. If the judge issues the longer restraining order, the house of cards is likely to collapse before any merger emerges. Grab your popcorn, folks. This is gonna be a great show!
The fact that the judge was willing to base her temporary restraining order (TRO) on the states' narrow markets argument (the states only had to show that the merger may be anti-competitive in one of the narrow markets they defined --- theatrical distribution and basic cable ) is one of the strongest early signs that the states’ strategy is working so far. However, at the next stage, the burden becomes higher: the states must show the merger is likely to substantially lessen competition. And even though Judge Martínez‑Olguín has already accepted the narrow markets view at the TRO stage, the defendants still have multiple pathways to push broader markets at the preliminary injunction stage --- and they will use all of them because only by inducing the judge to broaden her view do they stand a realistic chance of warding off an injunction. The defense gains the upper hand only if it can convince the judge that the narrow markets she accepted are not the real markets --- that is, theatrical distribution and basic cable are not standalone markets anymore because of substitution patterns (e.g streaming), competitive constraints (i.e. Paramount Skydance and Warner Bros. Discovery face more competitive pressure from Netflix, Amazon, Apple, Disney+, YouTube, and TikTok than from each other) and industry economics have changed (theatrical economics no longer resemble a distinct market) --- or, in short, the classic "modern market realities" argument, one of the cornerstones of a defense in merger litigation. All in all a heavy lift, at least at this stage, since the judge has already signaled skepticism toward this broader framing. Unless the case is transferred or the judge recuses, the same judge will handle all phases, including trial.
Thank goodness we have some judges that actually read AND comprehend the law. The DOJ appears to have forgotten they are supposed to be upholding our laws and just ignore or re-write the meaning of whatever is inconvenient to Felon47 and his minions. That this has gotten this far along should be inconceivable, but given the current regime and its blatant corruption, not exactly surprising.
Incomprehensible! All this to prop up a bitter, petty manchild … and to pave the way for a not-so-benevolent autocracy.
It's important for those who thought electing trump was a good idea be exposed to "Civil Discourse", and other sites where the facts are outlined, for them to understand why it was NOT, and the importance of voting out the republican party that allows this damage to continue.
That's what I share with everyone I meet...a list of sites like Joyce's for people to learn why their lives are a constant fight to survive anymore. And that it doesn't have to be that way.
The problem is (and I'm not being ugly here) is that people who elected trump are not, for the most part, people who read much, if at all.
They follow the leader in that.
Precisely. That is a significant element in why they are so fiercely devoted to him. "He's just like us!" they gleefully say.
That Kool-Aid is pretty potent stuff!
But Trump is primarily the means to an end, and is "autocracy" really the goal? The last few decades don't really support that conclusion: plutocracy is far more likely. Consider for instance the Citizens United decision of 2010. It put corporate power, i.e., the power of $$$, on a par with the power of the electorate -- and gave Big Money almost unlimited power to influence elections. Citizens United was a 5–4 decision, and the 5 were all appointed by Republicans (surprise, surprise).
Big Money and Big Corporations aren't fans of democracy. They never have been. They don't like it when "we the people" vote to impose restraints on their power and to levy taxes to support the common good. However, left to their own devices they have a nasty penchant for crashing the economy with their overreach: think 1929 and the depression that followed, or the more recent crash of 2008–2009, or the botching of the COVID response, or what's happening now. And too many of us don't catch on, or we forget, or we're all in with the racism and/or "owning the libs," so we give the Republicans another chance.
For sure Trump wasn't any smart plutocrat's idea of the ideal president, but by 2015–16 the alternatives were pretty pathetic and Trump was a magnet for headlines. Come to think of it, the last competent, pro-democracy Republican president was Eisenhower. Unfortunately his VP was Nixon.
Agree with you about Eisenhower. I remember reading 10 years ago that one of his family members said if Ike were alive today, he'd be a Democrat.
And probably too furious to speak.
I don't know much of anything about Ike's relationship with VP Nixon. Ike was the war hero, Nixon was the sleazebag McCarthy sympathizer.
There was no love lost in that relationship. I believe Nixon was in the typing pool during WWII … and Vance a PR warrior in Iraq.
You are probably correct … Trump is but a facade for a future Xian Nationalist - i.e. white supremacist - regime—he brings in the unwashed, disgraces himself, come the “saved” on white steeds (but not in white sheets this time).
In some ways they're a throwback to the America Firsters and diehard anti-FDR corporate types, but IMO the alliance of corporate $$$ and Christian nationalism is an uneasy one, and it seems to be coming apart with Trump II. The congressional Republicans, OTOH, have been a hapless crew for several decades now. Which is why Trump could come out of more or less nowhere in 2016 and they all fell in line behind him when he won.
I think it was Lincoln...
That was a whole different Republican Party. Check out the Hayes-Tilden Compromise of 1877, which resulted from the contested election of 1876 and pretty much ended Reconstruction. A case could be made for Theodore Roosevelt, who was both a Republican and a progressive when he became president after the assassination of McKinley and was elected in his own right in 1904. But it was an uneasy relationship: TR ran for president on the Bull Moose ticket (which party he founded) in 1912, split the vote, and helped get Woodrow Wilson (D) elected.
IMO because Johnson ended reconstruction, causing great harm to the country, only thinking of the southern states.
Johnson was pretty clearly more loyal to the formerly Confederate states -- he got paired with Lincoln because Lincoln was clearly pro-union. (I'm lowercasing "union" here because this was before the Confederacy split off from the rest of the country and "the Union" became a separate entity.)
But did Johnson actually end Reconstruction? Not as I understand it. Johnson was succeeded in March 1869 by Ulysses S. Grant, who's gone down in history as a good general but a really lousy president. Whatever his faults, he was clearly pro-Union. The Tilden-Hayes compromise in 1877 was about who would succeed Grant. *That's* when Reconstruction came to an end.
IMO
No surprise as once again, democracy is saved by America's judicial system, except of course for our current Supreme Court and DOJ. Aside from the voters, it is the lower courts that will save us from oligarchy, corruption and just plain incompetence. And of course, the likes of Joyce Vance.
Our DOJ is so hopelessly biased for Trump and against the American people under Blanche that it will take a massive Democrat shift in 2026 and 2028 to put our country back on the straight and narrow. Voting out Mike Johnson, James Comer and Gym Jordan would be a huge help.
It is good to know that the judges are doing their jobs without fear of retribution. With all of the other bad news happening, this was a ray of sunshine and much needed. Thank you, Joyce, for keeping us apprised of all these things going on. We are lucky to have you.
Awesome I enjoy your hard work and truthful reporting.
Thank God for faithful, honorable judges.
You know, it's interesting as I read these cases with a judge holding the line, and then come across a pronoun and the judge is a she. It seems the percentage of female judges limiting Trump is much higher than the percentage they represent in the pool of judges as a whole. Has anyone looked at those statistics? Are women more likely to interpret the law against him? Or is he just getting a higher sample of women? Of course I do not include judge Cannon in this group...
Bonnie, now that is an interesting observation!
>>>>Trump has consistently accused CNN of being “fake news.” Last December, he said it was essential for CNN to be sold and placed under new, presumably more Trump-friendly, management. “I think CNN should be sold, because I think the people that are running CNN right now are either corrupt or incompetent,” Trump told reporters. At least for now, a federal judge disagrees.<<<<
The ONLY reason that Trump says this (endlessly), as we all know, is because "fake news" is any news that isn't treating him like a god. His inner tanteum child cannot cope with it.
And the people running DT ‘s administration ( looking at you Stephen Miller)
Are both corrupt and incompetent…it’s stunning & mind-boggling…Thank you Joyce ✨🩵💙☮️💟
Well... plus he likes being able to bestow a governmental gift on his good friends, the Ellisons.
@ Michael H.... And virtually all MSM has been intimidated and that includes MSNOW.
The Trump as liar in chief should be top of the page virtually every day.
If you get a minute, can you tell me if MSNOW has changed their reporting b/o being intimidated? For what it's worth, I was a devout follower of that channel (Ari, Joyce, Chris, Rachel, Lawrence, Peter -- sometimes I'd watch them all in that order), but no longer watch. I don't know why. I haven't been able to put my finger on it. But it seems like it must have something to do with what you just said.
Yay, for now. 🙏
Joyce, you’re invaluable at explaining what and why when the maneuvers of these con men who are so rich and getting more so on our tax dollars, try again and again to destroy all competition in all the business world. They truly believe everyone should simply bow down to them and their schemes and that’s how it would be without the likes of you and so many of the AG’s of our states. Thank you!!
There’s a reason time is of the essence for the Ellisons. Larry Ellison’s wealth, the theoretical money behind the deal, is tied up in Oracle and connected AI businesses. S&P just downgraded Oracle to the lowest credit rating above “junk” status because Oracle’s future is so heavily tied to OpenAI, which is increasingly seen as likely to fail. If the AI bubble pops before the Paramount deal goes through, Pop won’t have the bucks to back the boy. OpenAI and Anthropic, the only two AI providers that really matter, are both losing money hand over fist and have hoped that IPOs would bail out early investors by enticing retail stock investors. But to do that they’d need to make their failures visible vial open books. Huge losses are not encouraging to investors. And they’ve just watched SpaceX, which included XAI in order to ride the AI-hype, go public and immediately tank. If the judge issues the longer restraining order, the house of cards is likely to collapse before any merger emerges. Grab your popcorn, folks. This is gonna be a great show!
Very interesting information. Thank you for sharing it. I would love to see those greedy Ellisons go down into oblivion.
These are such spot on descriptions: “inner tantrum child” and “bitter petty manchild”
I like the sound of "manbaby" a bit more. Not to insult babies or children, but he does display underdeveloped behavior at every turn.
I would say OUTER tantrum child!
The fact that the judge was willing to base her temporary restraining order (TRO) on the states' narrow markets argument (the states only had to show that the merger may be anti-competitive in one of the narrow markets they defined --- theatrical distribution and basic cable ) is one of the strongest early signs that the states’ strategy is working so far. However, at the next stage, the burden becomes higher: the states must show the merger is likely to substantially lessen competition. And even though Judge Martínez‑Olguín has already accepted the narrow markets view at the TRO stage, the defendants still have multiple pathways to push broader markets at the preliminary injunction stage --- and they will use all of them because only by inducing the judge to broaden her view do they stand a realistic chance of warding off an injunction. The defense gains the upper hand only if it can convince the judge that the narrow markets she accepted are not the real markets --- that is, theatrical distribution and basic cable are not standalone markets anymore because of substitution patterns (e.g streaming), competitive constraints (i.e. Paramount Skydance and Warner Bros. Discovery face more competitive pressure from Netflix, Amazon, Apple, Disney+, YouTube, and TikTok than from each other) and industry economics have changed (theatrical economics no longer resemble a distinct market) --- or, in short, the classic "modern market realities" argument, one of the cornerstones of a defense in merger litigation. All in all a heavy lift, at least at this stage, since the judge has already signaled skepticism toward this broader framing. Unless the case is transferred or the judge recuses, the same judge will handle all phases, including trial.
Thank you for sharing your knowledge and understanding of the law. Your work keeps giving me hope for our future.
I’ll take it.
Thank goodness we have some judges that actually read AND comprehend the law. The DOJ appears to have forgotten they are supposed to be upholding our laws and just ignore or re-write the meaning of whatever is inconvenient to Felon47 and his minions. That this has gotten this far along should be inconceivable, but given the current regime and its blatant corruption, not exactly surprising.
Thank you, Joyce, as always!