Please let her be VP, the seethe would be glorious.

Also if you can't read the article, scroll down to the "Continue Without Registration" and you can read the full article.

Let's face it: Joe Biden's dog should probably be dead https://t.co/XwJF4lebst

— Slate (@Slate) February 23, 2024

Biden, 81, says the key to his marriage is 'good sex' https://t.co/Oo970jL1GW pic.twitter.com/MlEiXueqEx

— Daily Mail US (@DailyMail) February 23, 2024

Incels place themselves slightly to the left of the political spectrum. https://t.co/CjKwCNDtsS pic.twitter.com/rajYTXjrXC

— Rolf Degen (@DegenRolf) February 20, 2024

!neolibs have s*x

Even redditoids can recognize how r-slurred it is to allow non-citizens to vote.

NYC law that would have allowed 800K noncitizens to vote struck as unconstitutional by appeals court: ‘Enacted in violation'

A controversial New York City law that would have allowed 800,000 noncitizens, but legal residents, to vote in municipal elections was struck down as unconstitutional by a state appeals court Wednesday.

“We determine that this local law was enacted in violation of the New York State Constitution and Municipal Home Rule Law, and thus, must be declared null and void,” Appellate Judge Paul Wooten wrote in the 3-1 majority decision.

Wooten said the state constitution broadly refers to only citizens having the right to vote in elections, municipal as well as statewide or for state legislative offices.

“Article IX provides that the elected officials of ‘local governments' shall be elected by ‘the people,' which incorporates by reference the eligibility requirements for voting under article II, section 1, applying exclusively to ‘citizens,'” the judge wrote.

The decision upholds a lower court ruling issued by Staten Island Supreme Court Justice Ralph Porzio in June 2022, which Mayor Eric Adams and the City Council had appealed.

Writing for the Appellate Division's 2nd Department, Wooten said that if noncitizens are allowed to vote, it stands to reason they could also run for mayor.

He ruled that such a dramatic change violated the Municipal Home Rule Law, saying the council and mayor had failed to put the issue on the ballot for voters to decide.

Judges Angela Iannacci and Helen Voutsinas concurred in the ruling.

Judge Lilian Wan issued a dissenting opinion.

“The majority, by deeming the noncitizen voting law invalid, effectively prohibits municipalities across the state from deciding for themselves the persons who are entitled to a voice in the local electoral process,” she wrote.

“The majority's determination also disenfranchises nearly one million residents of the City, despite the fact that its people's duly elected representatives have opted to enfranchise those same residents.”

Staten Island Borough President Vito Fossella was the lead plaintiff in the case along with Assemblyman Michael Tannousis (R-Staten Island), among others.

“During a time where nearly 200,000 migrants have flooded our city and streets, disrupting the public and attacking our police officers, my colleagues and I have worked tirelessly to protect our voting laws which were created for citizens of the United States,” Tannousis said.

“Democracy always wins and I am proud to say it was delivered yet again today.”

US Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY), who represents Staten Island, was also among the lawmakers who applauded the decision.

“There is nothing more important than preserving the integrity of our election system, and in today's age, the government should be working to create more trust in our elections, not less,” the congresswoman said.

“The right to vote is a sacred right given only to United States citizens. It is my hope that left-wing lawmakers stop pushing these unconstitutional and reckless measures that dilute the voices of American citizens,” she added.

A city Law Department spokesman said, “We're reviewing the court's decision and evaluating next steps.”

!chuds !burgers

https://x.com/ScottAdamsSays/status/1760391268222505274

lol smartest journo linked to files on his computer !chuds

NEW YORK (AP) --- Occupants of the White House have grumbled over news coverage practically since the place was built. Now it's Joe Biden's turn: With a reelection campaign underway, there are signs that those behind the president are starting to more aggressively and publicly challenge how he is portrayed.

Within the past two weeks, an administration aide sent an unusual letter to the White House Correspondents' Association complaining about coverage of a special counsel's report on Biden's handling of classified documents. In addition, the president's campaign objected to its perception that negative stories about Biden's age got more attention than remarks by Donald Trump about the NATO alliance.

It's not quite "enemy of the people" territory. But it is noticeable.

"It is a strategy," said Frank Sesno, a professor at George Washington University and former CNN Washington bureau chief. "It does several things at once. It makes the press a foil, which is a popular pattern for politicians of all stripes."

It can also distract voters from bad news. And while some newsrooms quickly dismiss the criticism, he says, others may pause and think twice about what they write.

THE WHITE HOUSE OBJECTS TO THE FRAMING OF STORIES

The letter from Ian Sams, spokesman for the White House counsel's office, suggested that reporters improperly framed stories about the Feb. 8 release of Special Counsel Robert Hur's report. Sams pointed to stories by CBS News, The Wall Street Journal, The Associated Press and others emphasizing that Hur had found evidence that Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified material. Sam wrote that much of that so-called evidence didn't hold up and was negated by Hur's decision not to press charges.

He said it was critical to address it when "significant errors" like misstating the findings and conclusions of a federal investigation of a president occur.

It was Sams' second foray into press criticism in a few months; last fall he urged journ*lists to give more scrutiny to House Republicans and the reasons behind their impeachment inquiry of Biden.

"Everybody makes mistakes, and nobody's perfect," Sams told the AP. "But a healthy back and forth over what's the full story helps make both the press and the government sharper in how the country and world get the news they need to hear."

Kelly O'Donnell, president of the correspondents' association and an NBC News correspondent, suggested Sams' concerns were misdirected and should be addressed to individual news organizations.

"It is inappropriate for the White House to utilize internal pool distribution channels, primarily for logistics and the rapid sharing of need-to-know information, to disseminate generalized critiques of news coverage," O'Donnell said.

In a separate statement, Biden campaign spokesman T.J. Ducklo criticized media outlets for time spent discussing the 81-year-old president's age and mental capacity, an issue that was raised anew when Biden addressed the Hur report with reporters. He suggested that was less newsworthy and important than Trump's NATO comments. Americans deserve a press corps that covers Trump "with the seriousness and ferocity this moment requires," said Ducklo, who resigned from the White House in 2021 for threatening a reporter.

To be fair, deadline times likely affected the initial disparity in coverage that Ducklo pointed out. And Trump's remarks have hardly been ignored by media outlets.

On Wednesday, Biden's campaign issued a statement headlined "Full of Malarkey," that criticized The Times for a fact check it ran on some of the president's statements about the economy. The campaign said the newspaper "continues to give Trump a pass on lies."

A.G. Sulzberger, publisher of The Times, noted in an interview with the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journ*lism that Biden's team had been "extremely upset" about its coverage lately. "We're not anyone's opposition," he said, "and we're not anyone's lapdog."

HOW MUCH IS THE PRESIDENT AVAILABLE?

The criticism comes amid the backdrop of unhappiness among some journ*lists about how much Biden is made available for questions --- an issue that surfaced again when Biden turned down an opportunity to appear before tens of millions of Americans in an interview during the Super Bowl pregame show.

The 33 news conferences Biden has given during the first three years of his presidency is lower than any other American president in that time span since Ronald Reagan, said Martha Kumar, a Towson University professor emeritus and expert on presidents and the press. Similarly, the 86 interviews Biden has given is lower than any president since she began studying records with Reagan. By comparison, Barack Obama gave 422 interviews during his first three years.

Instead, Biden prefers more informal appearances where reporters ask a few questions, with comparatively little opportunity for follow-up, she said: The 535 such sessions that Biden conducted was second only to Trump's 572.

One example followed Biden's remarks Friday after the death of Russian dissident Aleksey Navalny. Another was Biden's early evening availability following the release of Hur's report, a chaotic scene where reporters tried to outshout one another. The president's performance, and remarks about his forgetfulness that were made in Hur's report, led to more questions about the impact of age on his ability.

"It did not serve him well," Kumar said. Some on Biden's team, meanwhile, believe the president showed a combativeness in the face of criticism that Americans will appreciate.

Sesno said he can understand the Biden team's worry that the president's fitness for the job becomes a story they lose control of, much like former President Gerald Ford's stumbles led to the perception that he was a bumbler. Nikki Usher, a media professor at the University of San Diego, said she was surprised that Biden's team hadn't become more aggressive earlier.

"He needs to jump out in front of the narrative," Usher said.

The Biden pushback seems mild in comparison to Trump's epic badmouthing of news organizations like CNN and The New York Times. Republican voters, in general, are much more apt to respond to efforts that make journ*lists the villain. Democrats, meanwhile, tend to have a greater appreciation for the press' role in a democracy, Usher says, so the Biden team has to be more careful with attacks.

Particularly with the age issue, there's only so much that the president's team can say, Sesno said: "People will make up their minds based on what they see and hear from Joe Biden."

Really good to see this line in the PM's speech yesterday. Of the 8 former eastern-bloc OECD members, NZ now is less productive than half of them.

But.....where is the suite of policies equal to the challenge of reversing NZ's continued relative decline?https://t.co/V1ljlDDWh4 pic.twitter.com/DUmh7tnyYj

— Michael Reddell (@MHReddell) February 18, 2024

I have bought so much tinfoil in the past ten days. I will be the tin foil king! None shall stop my conquest of the wasteland!

Ep. 75 The national security state is the main driver of censorship and election interference in the United States. "What I’m describing is military rule," says Mike Benz. "It’s the inversion of democracy." pic.twitter.com/hDTEjAf89T

— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) February 16, 2024

https://x.com/SmythRadio/status/1758701969458253850

Short clip for the discerning dramatard ☝️

Celeb reviews 👇

https://x.com/shellenberger/status/1758669737482236322

Believe it or not this was a real thing in 2017

Bottom text