36 Burst results for "Palin"

Fresh "Palin" from Stephanie Miller

Stephanie Miller

00:37 min | 18 hrs ago

Fresh "Palin" from Stephanie Miller

"A left. Surprise, Sarah Palin didn't shoot it from a helicopter just to be vindictive. She lost. Yeah. Loser put it from Twitter. He was in the basement? Firefighters and wildlife officials in Alaska responded to a home where a young moose was found trapped in the basement. Aw. Yeah. I fell through a window. And got trapped in the basement. He's fine now. The moose is fine. You can fall down and hurt your hoof. Moose's are wildly unpredictable. Did you know that? I've heard. Apparently, like Sarah Palin. Yeah, yes. No, I was told when I went to Alaska Wednesday. Said they're more dangerous than the bears because they're unpredictable, particularly when they're drunk on elderberry juice or whatever. Wait a minute. How do you know how predictable a bear is? Better than the average moose? I did say the words came out of my mouth when I was in Alaska. Take my picture with the bear. But the bear was, you know, always behind me and so I was just like, oh, you get the picture. But I don't know if you just saw the latest one on Twitter. There was a woman that just monitored her picture. And she got closer in the bear one. Yeah, the bear would do. Don't do that. Yeah. She was like, no, bear. No. No, bear. Yeah, but she got like this close. God. That pitch, like I just thought there was no bitch that's worse than Sarah Palin, but that woman. So bear was eating the kayak and the kayak was her only way home. That's why she was so panicked about it. How did we get tape? What? How did we get to? There's video. She's taping herself. Yes. Yeah. My favorite is the reason with the bear. It's not even food. Okay, it was her only way home. Look at a phone. You know what? She was hundreds of miles away. All right, let's try to recoup and we're not going to do a real segment of radio unless someone has another harm or mall. 47 minutes after the hour, this portion of the show brought to you by my cozy earth pajamas. Can you two keep a secret? Can everyone keep us? No. No. I said Lilly and Jane cause you're a pajamas. Is this a member? Because the thank you for the dinner party. Jane, stop listening to me. They're the best gift ever. That's why they made Oprah's favorite things with list of four years in a row. They're so soft. Everyone loves these. Who doesn't love really super soft amazing pajamas? I do. Don't tell anyone. All right. Okay. Cozier. I'm just saying they have luxury bedding. Cozier sheets and pajamas, because I always have a hard time thinking, what do you get somebody? There's nobody that doesn't love. Who does not love fantastic soft pajamas? They are made from premium viscose from highly sustainable bamboo. That makes them naturally temperature regulating your sleep comfortable year round. And second, anything from their luxurious loungewear collection

Sarah Palin Alaska Twitter Moose Jane Cozier Lilly Oprah
"palin" Discussed on WCPT 820

WCPT 820

02:33 min | 5 d ago

"palin" Discussed on WCPT 820

"Surprise, Sarah Palin didn't shoot it from a helicopter just to be vindictive because she lost. Lose her foot from Twitter. He was in the basement? Firefighters and wildlife officials in Alaska responded to a home where a young moose was found trapped in the basement. Aw. Yeah. I fell through a window. And trapped in the basement. He's fine. The moose is fine. Because you can fall down and hurt your hoof. Moose is our wildly unpredictable, did you know that? I've heard. Apparently, like Sarah Palin. Yeah. No, I was told when I went to Alaska once they. Said they're more dangerous than the bears because they're very unpredictable, particularly when they're drunk on elderberry juice or whatever. Wait a minute. How do you know how predictable a bear is? Better than the average moose? I did say the words came out of my mouth when I was in Alaska. Take my picture with the bear. But the bear was, you know, always behind me, and so I was just like, where are you get the picture? But I don't know if you just saw the latest one on Twitter. There was a woman that just monitored and she got closer in the barrel. We do. Don't do that. Yeah. She was like, no, bear. No. No, bear. Yeah. But she got like this close. God. That pitch, I just thought there was no bitches worse than Sarah Palin, but there was that woman. Bear was eating the kayak in the kayak was her only way home. That's why she was so panicked about it. How did we get tape? What? How did we get to? There's video. She's taping herself. Yes. Yeah. My favorite is the reason with the bear. It's not even food. Okay, was her only way home. You know what? She was hundreds of miles away. All right, let's try to recoup and we're not going to do a real segment of radio unless someone has another harm or mall. 47 minutes after the hour, this portion of the show brought to you by my cozy earth pajamas. Can you two keep a secret? Can everyone keep us? No. No. I said, Lilly and Jane goes here with pajamas. Is this the number because the thank you for the dinner party? Jane, stop listening. They're the best gift ever. That's why they made Oprah's favorite things lift on four years in a row. They're so soft. Everyone loves these. Who doesn't love really super soft amazing pajamas? I do. Don't tell anyone. All right. Okay, cozier. I'm just saying, they have luxury bedding, the cozier sheets and pajamas, 'cause I always have a hard time thinking, what do you get somebody? There's nobody that doesn't love. Who does not love fantastic soft pajamas

Sarah Palin Alaska Twitter Jane Lilly Oprah
Matt Palumbo: Liberals Exploit Crises to Their Advantage

The Dan Bongino Show

01:58 min | 6 d ago

Matt Palumbo: Liberals Exploit Crises to Their Advantage

"You know this whole great reset crowd The Klaus schwabs of the world are these globalist crowd They all have the same agenda It's not complicated They want totalitarian top down government Shut up and take your vaccine and we'll tell you where to go to work and when and shut your pie hole crap These crisis every time you see a crisis financial Like you said the George Floyd riots They're always there to take advantage of it And every single solution involves the exact same thing More government more mandates and that's why you don't see any of them speaking out about the riots in the protests in China right now Oh it's amazing the extent to which you'll use literally any crisis to justify any policy goal I mean the most recent example was with Chuck Schumer where you know we're in a situation where we appear on paper and have a low unemployment rate but it's really just because the labor force is so small that it looks that way And I think something like one third of America is out of work And instead of boosting participation rates Chuck Schumer goes well this is why we need to naturalize at least 11 million illegal aliens Now obviously that's the most insane perspective where when you have a tight labor market you want to see wages rise in that kind of thing But it's always used for the liberal agenda And yeah these people don't actually profess any of the beliefs They claim to you I mean you're using the example of their opposition to big money Obviously not when it's in their favor And I mean so I guess be it another point to the ground they profess things like diversity and we need more women candidates more minority candidates And obviously they're not supporting Sarah Palin or anyone like that So yeah it's all for talk And I think we all kind of know that none of their values are really the professed values early real It's just sort of tools to get power We see this actually a lot with the campaign against Elon Musk's advertisers where they claim you know we're against misinformation and harmful misinformation And I mean I can't think of anyone who spreads more misinformation in the left And that's actually what Twitter was sort of known for before Musk take over was amplifying complete nonsense liberal narratives without any fact checking whatsoever

Klaus Schwabs George Floyd Chuck Schumer China America Sarah Palin Elon Musk Musk Twitter
Kathleen Madigan on Why People Have a Personal Connection to Trump

Stephanie Miller's Happy Hour Podcast

01:52 min | 2 weeks ago

Kathleen Madigan on Why People Have a Personal Connection to Trump

"That's an interesting sociological thing 'cause you play all over the country. What is it? Do you think? What is the personal connection to Donald Trump? I don't know. I don't know why, like one lady in Florida. She was kind of a drunk grandma. You stood up in a balcony and a theater somewhere on the gulf side of Florida and said, Kathleen, I love you and I love Sarah Palin. Don't make fun of her. I had not said a word except Sarah Palin, comma. Now if the lady would have listened, my joke was really about the gist of it is there's no people in Alaska to have more respect for you if you were the game warden than I would if you said you were the governor because there's a lot. It's a lot more dangerous if you're okay. It's a stupid joke. It's silly innocuous. But that lady was so upset because she like, I don't know. I'm like, you can't love me and her. And you're at my show, so I'd pick me if I were you. Which one is it? I don't know what the Trump thing you could do any other Republican, any other Democrat and people do not lose their minds. There's something about I know this is going to sound snotty coastal liberal elite, but an education problem where they're just like, oh, I want people that sound dumb, like me. I just can't. I don't understand what the connection is. I it could go back to the, you know, George Bush, people are like, I'd like to have a beer with him. Right. Well, right. You might want to have a beer with me, but I shouldn't be running anything. I mean, just because I seem fun, which I am. You are that doesn't mean I'm qualified to work at NASA. I don't understand that leap. When people say, I think George Bush seemed fun too. The younger one to have a beer with after golf with a country club. I get it. Right. But what is that next level where I defend him like I would, my brother. It's weird.

Sarah Palin Florida Donald Trump Kathleen Alaska George Bush Nasa Golf
Mollie Hemingway Calls In to Explain the Latest Midterm Shenanigans

The Charlie Kirk Show

01:44 min | Last month

Mollie Hemingway Calls In to Explain the Latest Midterm Shenanigans

"Now is Molly Hemingway from the federalist and you gotta check out her book. Her book on the 2020 election rigged was just such a great book. Molly, welcome back to the program. Thank you for joining us. Molly, I want to talk about something here that's really firing me up. The turtle is spending $9 million in Alaska to prop up Lisa Murkowski. Meanwhile, Blake masters and Herschel Walker and Oz and Ron Johnson and JD Vance and Adam laxalt are in a fight for their political life. And now Republican Lisa Murkowski pledges to vote for the Democrat in the Alaska House over Sarah Palin. This is what the turtle is subsidizing. Molly, what's going on here? Yeah, it's just a very weird situation in Alaska because the general election is pitting two Republican candidates against each other. You have Lisa Murkowski, who, as you note, has promised to vote for the Democrat running for the house race versus Kelly shabaka, who's the conservative endorsed Republican endorsed candidate in that race. So no matter who wins, you get a Republican. So why is Mitch McConnell devoting 7 million plus of his PAC money to that race when you have these races that are where that money could be much better utilized for a larger Republican majority. And so people are frustrated and just it's a good example. It's not the only situation where Mitch McConnell's choices have been bizarre. You know, he famously abandoned the Arizona race, which really needs money because that's the race that Democrats have focused laser focused on in their attempt to keep Blake masters from winning that race and also in the New Hampshire race. He pulled money out of there, which is a surprisingly close race given that Democrats were supposed to have an easy hold. But this is his approach.

Lisa Murkowski Molly Molly Hemingway Alaska Jd Vance Adam Laxalt Herschel Walker Ron Johnson Kelly Shabaka Blake Mitch Mcconnell Sarah Palin OZ Arizona New Hampshire
Lisa Murkowski Is Turning Out to Be a Real Snake

The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast

01:18 min | Last month

Lisa Murkowski Is Turning Out to Be a Real Snake

"Let's start by talking about Lisa Murkowski in Alaska. We use some Murkowski is turning out to be a real snake. First of all, she helped to orchestrate a ranked voting system that is taking a Republican state like Alaska and handing it off to the Democrats. Why? Because when you have multiple people in the same race, the ranked voting system doesn't mean that the party that gets the most votes. In fact, Republicans got 60% of the vote and yet the candidate Sarah Palin lost or Democrat Mary peltola. Now, in a new development, a very disturbing, Lisa Murkowski has endorsed Mary for peltola. The Democrat and Mary beltola has turned around and endorsed, so she's endorsed Mary for beltola for Congress and Mary pelto does turn around and endorse Lisa Murkowski for the Senate. Why? Because Kelly shabaka, who's been on this podcast, now I think two or three times has been giving Murkowski a run for her money. She is quite possible that shabaka will pull this off and Murkowski is running scared, so she's basically trying to corral some democratic support to neutralize the fact that Republicans are going to vote for her.

Lisa Murkowski Murkowski Alaska Mary Peltola Peltola Mary Beltola Mary Pelto Kelly Shabaka Mary Sarah Palin Shabaka Congress Senate
'Liberty and Tyranny' Became a Call to Action

Mark Levin

01:55 min | Last month

'Liberty and Tyranny' Became a Call to Action

"Too many conservatives particularly those who are hosts or write columns or speak don't quite get it They've never understood it The relationship between Such a broad swath of the American people And what it is that we're supposed to be doing We are blessed at least for now To have the ability to speak freely it's getting more and more difficult that's no question So when somebody like me is especially blessed to have a microphone like this or to have a publisher just to do what needs to be done then do it Do it Limiting tyranny Became a call to action Every rally I went to people had it under their arms You remember that mister producer Including Sarah Palin who's a wonderful lady who they're trying to defeat up in Alaska Was the number one book on The New York Times list I think For four months It was the number one book on Amazon for 6 months Number one Because of you And your reaction to it was fabulous

Sarah Palin Alaska The New York Times Amazon
House GOP Unveils 'Commitment to America' Agenda Ahead of Midterms

The Officer Tatum Show

01:24 min | 2 months ago

House GOP Unveils 'Commitment to America' Agenda Ahead of Midterms

"Republican Party wants to give us a little hope. They came out with their commitment to America plan. It outlined a few things, but here are some of the here are some of the specifics of the plan according to Kevin McCarthy. The House minority leader under the first thing an economy that's strong, Republicans outlined the following. They want to fight inflation and lower the cost of living, curb wasteful government spending that is raising there and bring stability to the economy through pro growth tax and deregulatory policies. Okay, I think they need to get a little more personal. They still sound too wonky. Make America energy independent and reduce gas prices. They need to refill the strategic petroleum reserve. Another thing they don't list on here, they need to get rid of these CRs. These continued resolutions, where they can spend as much money as they freaking want because we don't have an annual budget. I'd like to see them force Joe Biden's hand. Make America energy independent and reduce gas prices is the second thing by maximizing production of reliable, cleaner, American made energy and cut the permitting process time in half to reduce reliance on foreign countries prevent rolling blackouts and lower the cost of gas and utilities in essence they could have said what Sarah Palin said, drill baby drill.

Kevin Mccarthy America Republican Party House Joe Biden Sarah Palin
"palin" Discussed on WABE 90.1 FM

WABE 90.1 FM

03:33 min | 2 months ago

"palin" Discussed on WABE 90.1 FM

"The end. He hectored the kid into adding an E, thus disfiguring his correctly spelled word. And that really became the thing, that's the thing that he's best known for. And Trump misspelled things on Twitter about once every 5 days. When he was still allowed on Twitter. Late last night, the president tweeted, despite the constant negative press, covfefe. And it never became an issue at all. There's been no shortage of comic writing about this. But at the same time, it doesn't embarrass Donald Trump to misspell a word every two seconds on Twitter. I distinctly remember him saying, by way of compliment, I love the uneducated. Right. Where am I uneducated people? This kind of thing. And that's not to say that people who have not had the advantage of an advanced education or a fine one should be looked at. In fact, I think Trump scorns them as much as he scorns anybody. But is able to use it to his political advantage is able to use the comedy about him to his political advantage, too. So what's to be done about this? Well, you know, this might be my cockeyed optimism. I am an optimistic person actually and I'm a little bit of an idealist. And I do think that history doesn't move in a straight line. I think we've been in a very dumb period the last 50 years have been trending dumb words clearly. But there's some hopeful signs. I thought it was really interesting that the good people of Alaska decided that they'd had enough of Sarah Palin. I think that Sarah Palin's status as a national joke really finally caught up with her. And I think it was a contributing factor. I think that there are other things about Sarah Palin that were turn off to people the fact that she quit halfway through her term as governor probably didn't help her. I guess I feel after a while the times are such and it's different from this sort of high moment of Jon Stewart and some of the that it's not always funny anymore. You know that, you know, these conspiracy theories and Jewish space lasers and the things that come out of Trump's mouth and Ted Cruz's mouth, which would have, in a different context, seemed hilarious, now seem just dangerous. You ever feel that way? I think it's both, really. I mean, I feel like this might be my manifestation of my cockeyed optimism, but I love this Will Rogers quote. And I quoted in the book where Will Rogers said, there's no trick to being a political humorist when you have the whole government working for you. And I feel that we've lived through really terrible times in this country, which in retrospect, they're in the midst of time now, the myths of the past. So we don't, we're not living them viscerally anymore, but the McCarthy era was an era of conspiracy theories and a lot of people's lives were ruined. It wasn't just a question of somebody tweeting out a nasty mean tweet. It was entire careers were ruined and the early 1950s through the 1960s was a time where we were living on the precipice of nuclear annihilation. That wasn't really funny either. And yet people still, George Carlin was making jokes and doctor strangelove was made. Yeah, I mean, every now and then people will say things like Tom lehrer, the comedy songwriter famously said that satire died when Henry Kissinger won the Nobel Peace Prize. I get

Twitter Sarah Palin Trump Donald Trump Ted Cruz Rogers Jon Stewart Alaska George Carlin Tom lehrer Henry Kissinger Nobel Peace Prize
Caller: The Right Needs to Call Things as They Are

ToddCast Podcast with Todd Starnes

00:57 sec | 2 months ago

Caller: The Right Needs to Call Things as They Are

"I'm always concerned with how things are repeated by the by the far left people. And also, we just don't call things as they are. So how about this? How about we close to the college degree new deal? Call it the green raw deal. How about that? And then we gave credence to the mainstream media. Why do we call it the mainstream media? Why don't you call it the lame stream media? Sarah Palin got it right, 15 years ago, didn't she? Yeah, they did. And you know, you're talking about the inflation reduction act, why isn't that the inflation seduction act? Because it's getting taken to the American people. It has seduced more inflation, hasn't it the latest numbers were awful as well. It keeps getting worse and worse. Yeah, what is in a name Bobby? It is kind of crazy. I guess it is their way to try to put a big bag of sugar on a big load of hooey.

Sarah Palin Bobby
"palin" Discussed on Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments

08:00 min | 3 months ago

"palin" Discussed on Opening Arguments

"Tax services from the check that prints. The logo in the show is an almost identical Statue of Liberty head above. Now, again, there's a little stars there. It says sweet liberty underneath. It's not the exact same. I'm wondering what went on here. Do you think this was intentional by the show? So here's what I do know. Paragraph 57, liberty text sent a cease and desist letter to AMC dated April 27th, 2022. And as soon as the episode aired, and thereafter engaged in follow-up communications with AMC and Sony, in which it put defendants on notice that the show infringed on and tarnished liberty taxes trademarks and trade dress in the liberty objected to such depiction, bergara 58 defendants continued to engage in the unauthorized use of disparagement by distributing episode two on multiple media outlets, including on AMC's channel, AMC plus and Google TV. Yeah, so, you know, if they really wanted to put a stop to it, they could have edited out that Starbucks cup. They could have edited out the Game of Thrones Starbucks cup. They could have put a pause on the episode. That's a big step, but it's not an impossible step to take. So I picked today to cover this because yesterday, September 1st was the deadline for AMC to answer this complaint, but they got a 30 day extension to October. We're going to have to see what their answer is. A lot of these cases, again, as you probably suspect, defamation trademark infringement cases are very, very difficult to resolve on summary judgment, right? They tend to be highly fact intensive. But I'm curious to see what the show's argument is going to be. Here are the allegations that are made. So the first is trademark infringement. The key allegation here is, likelihood of causing confusion, mistake, or deception as to the affiliation connection association with or sponsorship and approval by liberty tax. And I think for me, and this is going to be true for the trade dress as well, and also for the trade dilution claims. It is that sponsorship or approval that is really the key aspect of that I would want to dig into the case law to see how many cases are, yeah, you put our product on there. That makes the viewing public think that we support your show. And your show depicted trailer park tax return services as likely to be run by cheats. So no, we don't support that. And that, I think, is kind of the real claim because you're going to have a pretty good parody defense on the trademark use, right? I don't think anybody is going to say they intended for you to think that sweet liberty tax services was liberty tax relief. They're just making fun of the industry. How much are you allowed to do that? So let's say you did have malicious intent and you're like, I really hate Burger King, so we're going to put a smoker smearing in there and that person's vile, whatever. What's the line there? So typically, the line is, are you identifying one particular person or entity or are you identifying a business, a category of industries? For example, let's go back to Los Pollos Hermanos. Those polyester manos does not implicate any one. I think if you took a family feud style, what is Los Pollos Hermanos parodying? I don't know that you would get any one answer would exceed 20%. I'm not sure it's parodying anything, really. But it suggests fast food. So it does not. If you were Burger King and you say, hey, this is casting aspersions on the fast food industry and here are three things that was polios Hermanos that seemed to be very similar to what a Burger King does. Then you'd have a losing case, right? And you'd have a losing case on likelihood of confusion because they would say right, but taken together all of the other elements make it clear that we're not singling you out. Now, I don't know among tax relief services, particularly ones that are run out of strip malls and run out of trailers like liberty tax relief. I don't know what that market looks like. It's entirely dirt bags who rip off Native American people. I would think that that's a possibility, right? And so suppose his competitors are patriot tax services, then you would say, okay, this is parodying an enterprise. In the same way that you might take more elements from the, what are the people with the song that have the cash for gold people, right? I want to structured settlement. Wentworth. JG wentworth. I do as soon as I started saying it. So if you were parodying that industry, you might lean the most heavily on the JG wentworth ads because they are the most notable, including our buddy Ben young was one of them. But have a decent defense of like, no, I'm not singling out JG wentworth. I'm saying your entire industry of people who buy back structured settlements is gross and borderline fraudulent and terrible, which, by the way, is my opinion of those entities. But I want cash now, Andrew. I've got a structured settlement. So yeah, so that's part of why I am not passing judgment on the likelihood of success in the merits of this case I want to see what the response is from AMC. They certainly seemed rather unconcerned. And again, I think it's going to come down to the identification of a specific company of identifying just liberty tax and whether that negative associational really carries through or whether they're able to argue. No, like nobody would think that you were actually approving of our depiction of these services in this episode. Even if you could get around that, you do still have defamation disparagement injuries falsehoods, and if there is a serious likelihood of confusion, let's go back to your schmeer king, right? You could easily imagine a show having a king and having people look into the camera and go every time I eat at schmeer king. It makes me sick. And people would walk away from that and go, they're trying to tell us not to eat at Burger King. And that would be defamation, right? That would be potentially injurious falsehoods. If there are false statements. So I'm curious, I am definitely going to be following this. And I thought it was a great way to take some legal questions with pretty funny packaging. The tied into a show that you and I both love. But can you give us any predictions? Because I mean, I didn't know there was a company that so much like this. I feel like if it's similar enough just going being Thomas, the non lawyer just what's reasonable person. I don't know, it feels pretty rough. As much as I love the show to depict a company that's like really identifiable and to just have them be total tax cheats and scammers. It does to me too. I will tell you that. Interesting. I think that this is not a frivolous complaint by any means. And I was surprised to see that the allegations. Now maybe, you know, their demands are unreasonable and AMC tried their best to reach an accommodation. And they will have to engage in some creative pleading if that's the case. But I've done that before, because when you send letters back and forth, they're privileged by rule four O 8. They are not admissible to prove the contents of the letter they're in. When you offer to settle. Right. Yeah, I remember that. Yeah, yeah. So oftentimes, you will have the situation where the party will say, we sent a demand letter and then they did nothing. And you have to come back in your answer and say, we exchanged 12 drafts that attempted to reach a resolution on this point. Obviously, I can't attach those drafts because the contents thereof are excluded by

AMC bergara affiliation connection associa Starbucks Burger King Los Pollos confusion JG wentworth Ben young manos Sony Google Wentworth Andrew Thomas
"palin" Discussed on Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments

03:03 min | 3 months ago

"palin" Discussed on Opening Arguments

"But so had he stayed in after that because he was the one who left after the primary or no, that's Al gross is the independent who dropped out. Begged his the second Republican. He just finished last. Oh, okay. Because there was now no fourth person. Remember, 74,058 1052 thousand in a normal race, there would have been the top four finishers from the primary. And so there would have been somebody who finished under him who then presumably begich would have gotten enough votes. He only needs 6000 to pass Sarah Palin. So it would have elevated him ahead of Palin if he had netted 6000 more votes from the fourth place finisher dropping out. Who knows? Yeah, that's so interesting, but my first thought is because we're dealing with a lot of election denying Republicans all the time now. This feels like just fuel for the fire. You already know, of course. It's a different rule. Yeah, you already mentioned they're going to hate it, but I'm having a hard time understanding what happened here, and I'm not like an election, big lie person, you know? I mean, genuinely trying to figure out what happened and it's like, how did Republican state the Democrat end up winning after losing the primary? This strikes me as very confusing and could perhaps turn people off to this kind of election reform, but I guess bottom line statement had the voting populace ranked a Republican first and all Republican second, a Republican would be sitting in that seat, right? Yep, because look, the ad hoc objections that are being raised now. And again, they're super easy to understand is patola got 40% and the two Republicans combined got 60%. That's 60% of votes for republicanism, why are we now going to be represented by a Democrat? And the answer back to that is a substantial minority of those of one of the Republican voters is actually not wanting to be lumped in with Sarah Palin, right? You're lumping them together and saying, well, they're both Republicans. And this is a way to ask voters. What do you want? Forget about their party official affiliation, and then all of a sudden it's not so crazy. If you just had if you just were there were no parties, you'd be like, well, there's one person, you know, who got this vote, one person who got this vote, combined that's more than the other one. Sure, but you didn't have that majority that wanted either of them as the top two. And so the result is the result. Yeah, you could have. If all the baggage voters really wanted to be represented by Sarah Palin, they could have voted for second, right? That's interesting. That's your answer back if you've got an uncle Frank who was saying, I don't understand how, you know, 60% of the votes can go Republicans and then a Democrat like isn't that election fraud like oh man you know what I can't understand is how we win the popular vote in the country by millions and millions of votes. And then somehow we don't get represented by the Supreme Court is somehow wow. And they voted along party lines in every single one. How weird. Crazy random happenstance. All right. All right, there you go. This is a breakdown. This show is brought to you by talk space.

Al gross Sarah Palin begich patola Palin Frank Supreme Court
"palin" Discussed on Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments

07:14 min | 3 months ago

"palin" Discussed on Opening Arguments

"Arguments. This is episode 628. I'm Thomas, that's Andrew Torres. How are you doing? I am fantastic, Thomas, how are you? Doing great. It's just been good news after good news episode. And now I'm told. We've got a fun Better Call Saul tie in, which I am dying to hear. I am dying to share it with you. It's going to be a lot of fun. Oh, and Andrew, before we get started, I wanted to announce, we've set the date for our normal monthly Q&A here. It's September 9th. That's this Friday. And that is at 4 p.m. Pacific 7 p.m. eastern, and as always, you go on Patreon. You look at for the question thread that Andrew has already posted. He opposed the questions you want to hear and even more importantly, perhaps, vote on the questions you want to your answer because I use that as a loose guide for which questions people want. Because you know what? Andrew has so many bits of information we want to get out of him. That there's infinite questions every week and we can't get to it. Please me like an orange, Thomas. And remember, anybody can attend the Q&A. You don't have to be a patron to attend the Q&A. Patrons get to ask the questions. So, you know, if you want us to fawn all over what a smart questioner you are, then you know how to do that. But anybody can come anybody can listen. We've had great interaction and really high levels of turnout. Last couple of q-and-as. So let's keep that going. I think there may be two or three things that people might want. Might be curious about. That is, again, as you said, Friday, this coming Friday, September the 9th at 4 p.m. Pacific 7 p.m. eastern can't wait. On YouTube, you'll get the links from us. When it comes down to second and third place votes, that's gonna decide who's gonna win. I mean, really? A quick news alert. Sarah Palin, not quite the political darling of the right that she might have once been. She has lost. Yeah, I thought we might start off with that news, obviously that's the top line story of Sarah Palin defeated by a Democrat for the at large congressional seat in Alaska. That's always good news, but I'll ask is also a state that has recently implemented a ranked choice voting statute. Is this a victory story for ranked choice? This is a story of how ranked choice might operate. I find it really, really interesting, of course, Republicans instantly now that they lost are decrying the ranked choice voting system in Alaska. Even though, but for an incredibly bizarre situation, it would probably have been the reverse. In other words, ranked choice voting almost certainly would have elevated a Republican over the lone Democrat in the race in the event that Sarah Palin didn't suck so bad. Sarah Palin did suck so bad. That's right. Wow. Yeah, I didn't even think about that because there was two Republicans, right? Yeah. Let's talk about what happened there because it's a really, really interesting situation. In 2020, there was an omnibus ballot measure was Alaska ballot measure two. 19 8 KBE. I'll link it in the show notes. It actually does three things, but we're going to only talk about two of them right now. So put a pin in the third one. So the first thing that it did was get rid of the party based primary system in Alaska. And it replaced that with a top four nonpartisan open primary. Second, and that was amending Alaska statutes 15.15. Then it amended a bunch of different things, including the most operative section 15.15 .3 50, which added the following, said C, a and B were already part of the statute. C, all general elections shall be conducted by ranked choice voting. And yes, that means the 2022 presidential election absolutely statewide national office doesn't matter all general elections in Alaska use ranked choice voting. How does ranked choice voting work? It's super easy. You have the candidates listed on your ballot as rose, and then you have columns, and you can bubble them in, choice one, choice two, choice three choice four. What if you leave a bubble blank? Well, the law provides for that. What if you leave a couple of bubbles blank, the law provides for that? What if you rank candidates tied shocker the law provides for that? You can rank them. You can put like number one number one. Yeah, if you don't want your palate to count. Oh, it doesn't count. So important definitional change because this is not otherwise a term that was used in Alaska law. Defeated candidate is now defined as the last place candidate on the ballot when there is no winner. So what you do is you go through multiple cycles and here's what the statute says. D, when counting ballots in a general election, the election board shall initially tabulate each validly cast ballot as one vote for the highest ranked continuing candidate on that ballot, or as an inactive ballot. So that's what they do. They segregated, they go, is this an inactive ballot or is this a valid balance? I'll tell you what makes a ballot inactive in a second. If the candidate is highest ranked on more than one half of the active ballots, that candidate is elected. And the tabulation is complete. Otherwise, tabulation proceeds in sequential rounds as follows. If two were fewer continuing candidates remain, the candidate with the greatest number of votes is elected and the tabulation is complete. Otherwise, the tabulation continues. Candidate with the fewest votes is defeated, votes cast for the defeated candidate shall cease counting for the defeated candidate and shall be added to the totals of each ballots next highest ranked continuing candidate or considered an inactive ballot. We're going to get to that one. And then a new round begins. Just as a side note, this is not covered in the law, but it seems to me plausible that I could rank candidates to three four on my ballot, not rank anybody first, and that would still be a valid boundary. It was effectively become one, two, three. It would be effectively the same as one, two, three, and interesting. But I think I could do that under this because what it does is the counting mechanism looks to what's your highest ranked vote among candidates that are still eligible and defeated candidates are ineligible. And the highest ranked vote is second choice in the first round. There's nothing that says we throw that out. Here's what we do throw out. We throw out a ballot containing an over vote. And an over vote is if you have multiple candidates listed as your first or second choice or anything like that. You tie the candidates. It doesn't matter. You don't go to any of the rounds. And by the way, this is important. Suppose you say, and this is why there needs to be some education done, right? Suppose you say, I rank the candidates as follows. The Democrat, the Republican that's not Sarah Palin, and then let's say there's a libertarian and Sarah Palin running together. And you're like, and I tie those for fourth. Oh, yeah. And you could imagine somebody saying that. The fact that you have an over vote, they won't even count your first ones. Your first two do not count. That is an inactive balance. So it gets thrown out. Don't do dumb stuff with your ballots, alaskans. It's not that dumb. But so like if you were like, all right, I'm ranking Sarah Palin and whoever else, 9 9 9 9 9, each of them would be like, well, you just killed your ballot.

Alaska Sarah Palin Andrew Torres Andrew Thomas Saul YouTube
"palin" Discussed on The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast

The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast

02:13 min | 3 months ago

"palin" Discussed on The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast

"The left scenes really excited and energized by the defeat of Sarah Palin for in a congressional race in Alaska. Sarah Palin, of course, is the former governor, and so it might be expected that she would have a powerful sway in Alaska now the problem with Sarah Palin is that she, in a sense, put that aside and step down as the governor of Alaska when she really didn't need to. She seems to have done it just in order to be able to go on the speaking circuit, make some money. And so she vanished from elected political life and is now making a kind of a belated attempt at a return. So Sarah Palin is become, she was a very popular figure in Alaska. She's now a somewhat more ambiguous figure. In fact, much of the Republican establishment in Alaska is not pro Palin. Not anymore. They once were. But the problem in Alaska was also that thanks to Lisa Murkowski and her acolytes, Alaska has established a very bizarre ranked voting system. It's not one person running against another. It's multiple people multiple people running in a single contest and you don't just choose one candidate. You sort of rank them. I want this person first, I want this person second. I want this person a third. And it is this ranked voting system that creates a little bit of a different structure than the straightforward. This is the Republican nominee. This is the democratic nominee. You also had a race at which there were two prominent Republicans. One was Sarah Palin, when was another guy, and they divided the Republican vote in a Republican state, and so the Democrat was able to sort of now, the point I'm trying to make here is it's a little unfortunate. Obviously I was hoping that Sarah Palin, or the other guy, the other Republican would make it, but we have a Democrat in that seat. But it's worth noting that this is an extremely anomalous result in an anomalous voting structure.

Alaska Sarah Palin Senate Lisa Murkowski House judiciary committee House Palin Republican house Biden administration Congress IRS Biden Ukraine U.S. Europe
Dinesh Unpacks Sarah Palin's Special Election Loss in Alaska

The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast

02:13 min | 3 months ago

Dinesh Unpacks Sarah Palin's Special Election Loss in Alaska

"The left scenes really excited and energized by the defeat of Sarah Palin for in a congressional race in Alaska. Sarah Palin, of course, is the former governor, and so it might be expected that she would have a powerful sway in Alaska now the problem with Sarah Palin is that she, in a sense, put that aside and step down as the governor of Alaska when she really didn't need to. She seems to have done it just in order to be able to go on the speaking circuit, make some money. And so she vanished from elected political life and is now making a kind of a belated attempt at a return. So Sarah Palin is become, she was a very popular figure in Alaska. She's now a somewhat more ambiguous figure. In fact, much of the Republican establishment in Alaska is not pro Palin. Not anymore. They once were. But the problem in Alaska was also that thanks to Lisa Murkowski and her acolytes, Alaska has established a very bizarre ranked voting system. It's not one person running against another. It's multiple people multiple people running in a single contest and you don't just choose one candidate. You sort of rank them. I want this person first, I want this person second. I want this person a third. And it is this ranked voting system that creates a little bit of a different structure than the straightforward. This is the Republican nominee. This is the democratic nominee. You also had a race at which there were two prominent Republicans. One was Sarah Palin, when was another guy, and they divided the Republican vote in a Republican state, and so the Democrat was able to sort of now, the point I'm trying to make here is it's a little unfortunate. Obviously I was hoping that Sarah Palin, or the other guy, the other Republican would make it, but we have a Democrat in that seat. But it's worth noting that this is an extremely anomalous result in an anomalous voting structure.

Alaska Sarah Palin Lisa Murkowski Palin
Tom Cotton Rips Apart Ranked-Choice Voting Following Sarah Palin Loss

Mark Levin

01:36 min | 3 months ago

Tom Cotton Rips Apart Ranked-Choice Voting Following Sarah Palin Loss

"Rank choice voting very complicated that took place in Alaska is what defeated Sarah Palin The Democrat Palin was a Republican and the number three person was a Republican So under the rank choice voting the Republican votes were split and the Democrat won Because they wanted a Republican to hold that seat So rather than have a Republican primary where you duke it out in a Democrat primary where you duke it out they have this convoluted system born in California so the Democrats never lose office Pushed by Lisa Murkowski in Alaska so are rhino She hopes can never lose her slot And she costs the Republicans a seat in the house And a number of Republicans are decrying this Tom cotton ranked choice voting is a scam to rig elections 60% of alaskans voted for a Republican but thanks to a convoluted process in ballot exhaustion which disenfranchises voters at Democrat one He's right Under the rules of rank choice voting voters list ballots in order preference election officials first choice preferences a candidate is deemed the person who a winner is deemed a person who garners more than 50% of the vote But if nobody does then they start well this one counts We had those votes This was their second choice and we had those votes And so what happens The Republican votes are split in the Democrat one

Alaska Tom Cotton Sarah Palin Lisa Murkowski Palin California
"palin" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

02:21 min | 3 months ago

"palin" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"It comes down to second and third place votes, that's the next kind of win. I mean, really? Alaskans want Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi? Joel, you know, that's all we have on that, but I won't get into a debate with you about ranked choice voting. I just wonder how much alaskans hold against Sarah Palin, the fact that she quit when she was governor. Candidates matter. Local storylines parochial issues matter. We obviously were big audience in New York. Lots of people know about those special elections and that those primaries in New York a few weeks ago where those local issues kind of took precedent over the national storyline. So I don't know if the story here is ranked towards voting. I think it's about kind of the local legacy of Sarah Palin in Alaska. She was not the most beloved figure in that state by the time she departed that state and took the national scene. And I think that might have a lot more to do with it than process, which I think Republicans have to be careful that they are poking holes and process every time they don't like an outcome. Rick was the Trump endorsement help for hindrance for well, obviously it didn't help her enough, right? And so I'm not sure I'm not sure how much of an impact I mean, she was already going to get all those Trump voters that were willing to vote for Sarah Palin, right? I mean, if anything, I think her image in Alaska is much bigger than Donald Trump's image in Alaska. And equally divisive, right? So, I mean, I don't think I don't think he could help or hurt her in Alaska. She's a bigger personality than he is with that electorate. Do you have a thought on her chances in November? You know, look, I think they're limited. I mean, right now, when I look at the polling data going in in November, she's third. And if she's third, she's first out. And so the question is where her votes go, probably the Republican. I doubt if any of her votes are going to go with the Democrats. So it's a completely different election. It just happens to be the same people. Great panel, Rick, thank you, as always, Rick Davis, of course, Bloomberg politics contributor and Republican strategist Joel Payne. Great to have you, Joel. I hope you'll come back and talk to us soon, be part of the program again. Former director of African American advertising for Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. The fastest hour in politics, you're ready now for the speech tonight maybe even the cocktail party beforehand, don't you feel smarter? That's why we do this every day on Bloomberg

Sarah Palin Alaska Joe Biden Nancy Pelosi Joel New York Rick Donald Trump Joel Payne Rick Davis Bloomberg Hillary Clinton
Ranked Choice Voting Is Coming to a State Near You

The Charlie Kirk Show

01:57 min | 3 months ago

Ranked Choice Voting Is Coming to a State Near You

"Really haven't taken this nearly as seriously as they should. So we learned in Alaska recently, just last night, Sarah Palin was defeated, but she moves on to the general election in the November election ranked choice voting runoff or the four person primary there, but the Democrat who won the ranked choice voting here ends up filling the vacant Democrat seat for the next month and a half in Washington, D.C., or two months, and then they have to rerun in November. So it's not a huge loss. It's nothing that significant that regard. But it does show and it should be a warning about what rank choice voting means for our civilization for our republic and for how we select leaders. So rank choice voting. I know this is murky and it's murky by design. And I know this might not resonate with you, but I'm telling you right now, this is the most important technical thing happening right now in American politics that if we say we don't care about it, all of a sudden you are going to see moderates and Democrats win in red states and you'll be like, oh, I remember when Charlie did that segment on the voting ranked choice thing. Why don't we take it seriously then? And it's coming to a state near you. In fact, it's already implemented in several states on local elections and presidential primaries. I'm going to name every single state that already has ranked choice voting. So ranked choice voting stems from basically a college thought experiment. It stems from a bunch of kids that say, oh, we're too radical and we need to try to find the second or third place winner because deep down most people actually want the moderate to win. Now, this is nonsense. It's garbage. It also gives preference to the loser. As Ricky Bobby would say, if you are second place, you're the first loser. So the winner, the person who actually wins the most amount of votes isn't the winner in a ranked choice system if they don't get more than 50 plus percent votes. Now, I know we're going to get emails from people in Alaska that say, well, Charlie this is the way we do it here. And someone in Maine, every state has their own algorithm, might be 40% might be 50%. It's unbelievably confusing.

Washington, D.C. Sarah Palin Alaska Charlie Ricky Bobby Maine
What to watch: Cheney in trouble while Palin eyes comeback

AP News Radio

00:56 sec | 3 months ago

What to watch: Cheney in trouble while Palin eyes comeback

"A former Republican star's career could effectively end today At least for now Liz Cheney was the house GOP's number three leader but is now fighting to keep the seat she's held for three terms as the January 6 panel's vice chair Cheney has led efforts to keep Donald Trump from serving again The dam has begun to break Her career may go with it Cheney's trying to fend off a primary challenge from Trump backed Harriet hagman in a state where Trump remains hugely popular Cheney has doubled down Last week bashing Trump for what she called an insidious lie that the 2020 election was stolen This is Donald Trump's legacy but it can not be the future of our nation If she loses her house seat Cheney has not ruled out a White House be it in two years Sagar Meghani Washington

Liz Cheney Cheney Donald Trump Harriet Hagman GOP White House Sagar Meghani Washington
The GOP Are Scared of Their Own Base

Stephanie Miller's Happy Hour Podcast

01:24 min | 4 months ago

The GOP Are Scared of Their Own Base

"We were just talking about the dangerous repercussions. This is how pathetic this party is. House Republicans have been plotting investigations of Biden and his family if they retake the majority, but those plans have been complicated by the, yes, by the actual crime. Committed by Donald Trump, for some Republicans expressed concern about the fallout among the conservative base, the base has lost its mind, said one senior House Republican, and Trump decides to call them to arms. I think he could get another January 6th. This is what we've been talking about all morning, Dana. They are scared of Trump's base. This is how this party has become so pathetic. Eric swalwell said it's very clear Republicans have recognized they can no longer win with votes. So they're leaning in to try to win elections with violence and they're fomenting that violence right now. Jared Hoffman was talking about is they retake the house. He said it will be a show on steroids. Absolutely. We've got to get out and we've got to make sure that we get everyone out with us. The midterms are terrifying. We've got to keep the house. Yeah. Oh, I know. I mean, this is not only has this been an extraordinary two weeks for Joe Biden and Democrats in terms of what they've gotten done. Republicans will do none of that and we'll do nothing for you or your family or anything that they have already told you. It will be Benghazi and I'm not kidding. I'm not joking about they're saying we won't be Sarah Palin said Benghazi. We will do Benghazi and Hunter Biden. I mean, that's what they'll do.

Eric Swalwell Jared Hoffman Donald Trump Biden House Dana Joe Biden Benghazi Sarah Palin Hunter Biden
Why Did Meghan McCain Block Todd Starnes on Twitter?

ToddCast Podcast with Todd Starnes

01:57 min | 4 months ago

Why Did Meghan McCain Block Todd Starnes on Twitter?

"Chad McCain was a conservative. How dare you? Oh, really? Well, why would he hire a leftist like Steve Schmidt to run his campaign? Steve Steve Schmidt, the founding member of The Lincoln Project, a former McCain campaign manager. Also, a political analyst for MSD and C? That's exhibit a let's talk about exhibit B Nicole Wallace. A former senior campaign adviser, she was the one who handled Sarah Palin. She was the one responsible for literally bludgeoning Palin in the back with a political knife. And what is she doing now? She's one of the lady host on MSD and C. But the real reason she blocked me is because you see, we have a mind like a steel trap. Here at the Todd stern's radio program, ladies. So we don't forget anything here. And that's why she blocked me. You see, misses Dominic, Meghan McCain. Misses Dominick, she blocked me because I reminded the nation about her daddy's most egregious sin. Would he betrayed every single one of us. He had the power in his hands to kill ObamaCare. And while the cameras were rolling on C-SPAN, what did he do? He looked up at that C-SPAN camera, and he put his, he put his hand in the air. With his thumb exposed, and then he did the big thumbs down. A big blank you to America. That's what he did. All I was doing was asking misses Dominic to explain her daddy's political strategy. But you see, this is what the establishment thinks about all of us. You vote for Donald Trump, you're an irredeemable deplorable. You vote for Donald Trump, you're a Neanderthal.

Chad Mccain Steve Steve Schmidt Lincoln Project Nicole Wallace Steve Schmidt Todd Stern MSD Sarah Palin Mccain Meghan Mccain Dominic Palin Dominick America Donald Trump
Dinesh Examines the Ongoing Feud Between Trump and Musk

The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast

02:27 min | 5 months ago

Dinesh Examines the Ongoing Feud Between Trump and Musk

"There is a public skirmish going on between Donald Trump and Elon Musk. Which I think is unnecessary and in fact kind of pointless for both sides. But let me describe it first and then comment on it. So this got started when Trump was in Alaska. This was a rally that Trump did for Sarah Palin. But also for Kelly shabaka, who's been on the podcast running against Lisa Murkowski. And Trump began to talk about left wing censorship. And then he goes, quote, Elon is not going to buy Twitter, he goes, where did you hear that before from me? So this is actually Trump being correct. Trump actually predicted that that Musk would give up on the Twitter deal and pull out. And in fact, when Trump said that, no one really else was saying that. Most of us thought, well, Musk is going to want this platform, and even if he ends up overpaying for it, what's it to Musk? I mean, when you have $250 billion and you spend 44, yeah, it's a sizable chunk, but on the other hand, you get to have fun on Twitter, you are the boss. And so this is not I didn't think and others didn't think that Musk would sort of nickel and I am this. But Trump was right. So now, Trump comes back on to say, well, he might later. He's got a pretty rotten contract, not a good contract. So Trump evidently thinks that Musk is over a ping. For Twitter, but then Trump goes on to say he's actually talking about Musk's statement that he first voted. His first Republican vote. Said Musk was from Myra Flores. Another one of our pals, who's been on the show, but Trump then kind of marks Elon Musk and he goes, you know, he said the other day, oh, I've never voted for a Republican. And then Trump says, he told me he voted for me. So evidently, Musk met with Trump for earlier. And apparently Trump says that he told Trump, I voted for you, so that's the case, obviously Musk has voted for a Republican before, and then Trump this, I think, is the unnecessary part, calls Musk a quote BS artist.

Donald Trump Kelly Shabaka Musk Elon Musk Twitter Lisa Murkowski Elon Sarah Palin Alaska Myra Flores
Caller: Sarah Palin Would Not Be Good for Vice President

ToddCast Podcast with Todd Starnes

01:09 min | 5 months ago

Caller: Sarah Palin Would Not Be Good for Vice President

"Okay, so I've been hearing rumblings about president Trump's picking Sarah Palin as the VP. Just rumbly. I don't know that it's true, but I've been hearing it on Twitter and stuff. And I just wanted to say, I hope he doesn't. Because and this is my reasoning. More than half the countries in this world have no use for women. And if it's kind of the purpose for a vice president to run up to being elected president. And so I just don't. So what, you don't think Sarah Palin would be respected by other countries? Is that what you're suggesting, Kathy? Yeah. I don't think she would be simply because she's a woman. And I'm not saying that's the way we are. I'm saying that there's a lot of countries that don't like us already. Yeah,

President Trump Sarah Palin Twitter Kathy
Palin nabs early lead in Alaska US House special primary

AP News Radio

00:56 sec | 6 months ago

Palin nabs early lead in Alaska US House special primary

"Initial vote counts have been released in Alaska's special primary for the state's only U.S. House seat I'm Ben Thomas with the first numbers The Associated Press has not declared any winners but the initial results show Republican former governor Sarah Palin with 29.8% of the votes counted so far Republican Nick begich has 19.3% while independent Al gross has 12 and a half percent and Democrat Mary peltola 7.5% Another Republican Tara Sweeney has 5.3% in a candidate whose name is Santa Claus a self described independent progressive democratic socialist had 4.5% 48 candidates have been running for the seat held for 49 years by the late congressman Don young the top four will advance to in August special election The election was conducted primarily by mail and election officials planned several days of ballot counts I'm Ben Thomas

Nick Begich Ben Thomas Al Gross Mary Peltola Tara Sweeney U.S. House The Associated Press Alaska Sarah Palin Santa Claus Don Young
Sarah Palin: Not Expected but Nice When People Reciprocate Endorsements

The Dan Bongino Show

01:27 min | 6 months ago

Sarah Palin: Not Expected but Nice When People Reciprocate Endorsements

"Know me you know me well enough to know I'm not going to support somebody or endorse somebody expecting them to reciprocate at all But it is really really nice when people remember that ten 12 13 years ago if I help them out and it was just kind of a curiosity factor perhaps and helping them out and in the media would pay attention to what it is that they're saying And then they would get some ink they'd get some eyeballs and some ears listening to them It was a privilege for me to do so But it's really nice when people do remember that because a lot of people in the political and the media arena they don't care They don't remember it They use you But those who do remember and acknowledge it It's like cool They're not a real politician then Just like Trump Trump came out early to endorse me because I came out really really early and endorsed him and felt the wrath of the political machine in the GOP for doing so But I knew he was the only one who had the ball to take on Hillary the balls to take on the meeting We love you You're the greatest You're the greatest interview ever This is the second time you said like balls to the wall or Baldwin The third time my producers this is the greatest interview ever You are one of the few politicians up there with president Trump Who I swear I never know what you're going to say and it is the greatest That's why Jim right This is why we don't have politicians on the show governor because I already can predict the answer A focus group told me to say this Sarah Palin is like we're going balls to the wall I'm like I love this woman

Trump Trump President Trump GOP Hillary Baldwin JIM Sarah Palin
Dan Bongino: Sarah Palin Is the Real Deal

The Dan Bongino Show

01:54 min | 6 months ago

Dan Bongino: Sarah Palin Is the Real Deal

"One of the things I always respected about you is early on when I was one big nobody you probably am nobody's other people still but whatever When no one knew who I was You got behind me And I never forget when your people reached out and said you know the governor wants to help and it's not just me You didn't get behind people who were fashionable candidates You got behind people who are conservatives I remember a candidate you endorsed in the Maryland governor's race who had candidly no chance of winning but he was a real conservative and you believed in him He was a friend of mine And he was so inspired by that and I just want people to know that you're not some act This is you're the real deal I saw it I meant it and I want everyone to understand that That did you backed me up and many others not just me You know when used your power and your social media and your voice to help those people And I think even though it's one congressional seat I think it means a lot if you are sitting at it I appreciate that And if nothing else I am thankful for the discernment that I have that I believe God has put in my spirit a discernment for it Who's good And who's fake and who's phony and who's not capable and who were the good guys and you definitely find your top top of the list of thank you These others whom I had the privilege of endorsing early early on like Rand Paul He endorsed me yesterday and he reminded me Siri you were there when nobody else would Be there for me You helped me when nobody else would People knew my dad but they didn't know me Ted Cruz is one that says I wouldn't be in the United States center if it worked for Sarah Palin but by the way he hasn't come out and endorsed me yet However you know it's not You better get on that Jimbo Governor we're on a lot of stations where I'm one of the biggest ones in Texas WB AP We love you senator You gotta get on that

Maryland Ted Cruz Rand Paul United States Center Siri Sarah Palin Jimbo Texas
"palin" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

03:08 min | 8 months ago

"palin" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"On Bloomberg television radio I'm David Weston Up in Alaska it's not just the midterms It's also a special election for the seat left open when Republican congressman Don young passed away And the best known of the 48 count them 48 candidates is former governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin Contributors Jeannie chanzeaux and Rick Davis are still with us So Rick you're the expert in Sarah Palin last time I checked The thing that I'm finding interesting is he's best known but I'm hearing a lot from Trump supporters There's at least man on the street person on the street who are saying yeah okay fine we know her but we're not sure she's really Alaskan anymore Yeah you know she's got a love hate relationship with Alaska and since she walked out of the governor's mansion before the end of her term and quit it's been a really rocky road I would say though in a recent poll her fave unfavor is 37 to 51 And she's getting 90% in that same poll of her favorables voting for her So you got a problem where that's really extraordinary to have that many people voting for you out of your faves But it means also that there may not be anybody else left there to vote for you Yeah you know we do have Rick Davis to thank for Sarah Palin So thank you Rick Davis Oh thank you Thank you very much You're welcome And it is interesting Of course this is a crowded field So and they have a new voting system in Alaska So she is absolutely I believe going to get into the top four a name recognition alone I think the real challenge for Sarah Palin is can she get through that second round And that is going to be tough as Rick mentioned because when you have that much support with your favorables she's going to have to really spend time appealing and the word that's coming out of the focus groups and the polling is quitter Alaskans are not forgiving her for quitting the governorship And they're also frustrated that she moved out of state And even people who support Donald Trump and are very conservative and like her politics are having a bit of trouble with the fact that she doesn't seem as committed to Alaska as she did to herself when she quit So I think but it's not something she can't get over I think she can still do it but it's going to be a bit of work on her So Rick that takes us back to JD Vance a little bit and the significance of the Trump endorsement because former president Trump has of course endorsed Sarah Palin Is that going to make a difference up in Alaska Sure it will I mean probably one of the few states that he can have a lot of impact is a state like Alaska that went so far overwhelmingly for him Look it's a GOP state It's a Republican state And one of the other contestants in this race was only about ten points behind Sarah Palin is a Republican running and then the one person between them about 5 points back is an independent and the independence are very strong in Alaska Also Lisa Murkowski basically has become an independent in the state who's one of their senators So I think that it'll be interesting to see how much time Trump has actually helped her because as we know the 11th of June is the primary runoff cutoff where 48 people be on the ballot But then it's only 60 days later that they have what's basically the equivalent of the general election on August 16th And so it does put.

Sarah Palin Rick Davis Alaska David Weston Jeannie chanzeaux Rick Don young Bloomberg Trump JD Vance president Trump Donald Trump GOP Lisa Murkowski
"palin" Discussed on Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments

06:29 min | 10 months ago

"palin" Discussed on Opening Arguments

"And on the basis of the facts that have been introduced, it does not meet the legal standard. There is no need to send this to a jury because the jury could not legally find this person responsible under the operative legal standard. Judge rakoff held that motion sub curiae and said, okay, I'm going to think about this in the meantime, I'm going to let the jury go. And deliberate. Well, after the jury had been out for a day, judge rakoff came back into court, some of the parties, jury, not present, and said, I'm granting The New York Times motion for a J and ov. Can he do that while the jury is out? Yes, with an asterisk. Got a jury's out on it. Nice. I like it. And judge rakoff said, look, the jury isn't sequestered, but I've given them the instructions not to follow any press on this case. Right, yeah, you know, you don't want to have a juror go look down at their phone and go judge rakoff dismisses and you're like, wait, that's me. So the jury is still deliberating. The judge has said, I'm going to grant a JN ov. So if the jury comes back with a verdict for the plaintiff, I'm overriding that I'm striking it out as a matter of law and replacing it with a directed defense verdict. By the way, it's also totally legitimate to wait for the jury to write and to just using the J and E process just strike out the jury's verdict. We thank you for your service, and then the second leave the room go. We're going to strike that. Why he didn't do that, I don't know, right? He literally picked the only day. It's like he picked the only day. It's the same judge that effed up the other things. Yes, it is. He's 78. He's losing it. Okay. Not to suggest everybody who's 78 is losing it. Now that this judge is. We love our septuagenarian listeners. But yeah, this judge is seemingly has made some errors in judgment. So what happened is, of course, what you think happened, the jurors have subsequently admitted they came back the next day with a verdict for the defense. And having gone home, right? They were not sequestered. They went home for the evening. They admitted that, oh yeah, look, I was following the rules of not directly following the news or anything, but I got a push notification on Twitter that says judge dismisses Palin case. Did I see that? Yeah, I did see that. And of course that's the risk. And of course, it's why I mentioned, you know, the age, not an insinuation of lack of capacity, but rather a not thinking about the reality, right? If you're thinking about a world in which you have given a jury instruction and that means jurors don't go home and watch the 10 o'clock news, is a little different than you might have a phone. My jurors have phones right, my jurors are on Twitter. And I can tell them that they had to surrender their phones or turn off Twitter because I didn't think about that. Yeah. What a mess. It is absolutely a mess. I think that is absolutely going to give grounds for Sarah Palin to reverse this a second time on appeal. And then what happens? She has yet another trial. Yep, do the exact same thing all over again. But the question is whether the appellate court looks at the J and ov, which by the way is a deferential standard. It's a judicial discretion. And says, we agree that there was prejudice here, right? That the jury could have come back with a verdict for the plaintiff on her defamation claims, but we agree with the trial court judge that that would have been legally insufficient as a matter of law. So that prejudice was, you know, that was harmless error. I can't wait for the right wing reporting on that. That would be you could imagine what would happen. Panel, a judge is overturned the jury verdict for Sarah Palin. Never minding, right? That this second circuit previously said was like out of an abundance of caution. We want to make sure Sarah Palin has her day in court. But, you know, consistency is not crucial to the right wing. So that's what's going on with that case. Lots of crazy mistakes. So this judge really messed it up. We wouldn't be having this conversation at all. Like it would have just, it could have been routine, had the judge not mess it up. Absolutely could have should have been routine. We do want to have. Yeah, on our radar that this is one of the important battles that the right wing is trying to wage, right? To make it easier for disgruntled politicians to sue newspapers over editorials. And that's a terrifying future. My question though for you is, does this really have any bearing on that broader New York Times the solvent debate if it's really just kind of an F up by a judge? Oh, yeah, the only way in which it would is if this vehicle were to. So let's play this out. Sarah Palin appeals to the second circuit. The second circuit says that there was error by the district court in failing to sequester the jury or otherwise exposing them to potential prejudice from the court's J and ov ruling, but notwithstanding that the error is harmless because as a matter of law, the testimony was not sufficient to establish The New York Times V Sullivan standard of actual malice, and then Sarah Palin appeals to the Supreme Court. And the question is, that legal standard is wrong. It should not be actual malice. It should be something else. Right. Couldn't that happen anyway though? Oh, absolutely. Yeah. Okay. So any day the Supreme Court could just be like, this is the one. But maybe this is a case where they might be more inspired to do it because of the visibility and stuff. Because of the visibility and because of the sort of repeated charitably called mistakes by the trial court here that seem to be pretty prejudicial to Sarah Palin. Gives them more of like cover. Yeah, it's a good case if you're a right winger going. Yeah, the press just has it in for Sarah Palin. Look at this, right? Like this judge made basic errors and then compounded it. So that's okay. The argument I expect. Wow, thanks for the breakdown. Okay, there's a reason I wasn't understanding that. That's very complicated. It's tough to get the right reporting on it as well, as we've talked about. All right, wow, crammed a lot in, but excellent breakdown. Thanks, Andrew. And thank you. And now it's time to thank our Hall of Famers our all time greats on Patreon dot com slash law..

rakoff Judge rakoff judge rakoff Sarah Palin The New York Times Twitter appellate court Palin Supreme Court Sullivan Andrew
"palin" Discussed on Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments

07:19 min | 10 months ago

"palin" Discussed on Opening Arguments

"And like all libertarian things, the minute someone breaks the rules, you want to govern to come in and step in and regulate it. So as it so happens, we're going to take a slight detour to this delightful vice article from two days ago because I think it might be slightly relevant. And it is entitled democratic DAO suffers coup, new leader steals everything. And I'm going to read from the article. So after explaining and I had to translate some of what they've said into English and into lawyer and then into English, real telephone situation. It really is. Why didn't they just put on the blockchain though, Andrew? I could have. So like you, right? After kind of explaining sort of what a DAO is, the author says, well, this sounds okay in theory. But a group called build finance DAO just suffered a coup in which one person amassed enough tokens to get a vote passed, then voted to give themselves full control of the DAO. Oh God. Then using this power took all the money. So in a sense, the DAO did replace a corporate activity with its own version. It's just that was the hostile. It's totally reproducing what you already have in corporate America. There you go. It works. The system works, Andrew. That was my whole point with this thing, is that the crypto component, the NFT component of this ads almost nothing. It's more what you do with the structure, the architecture that you're describing, right? Yes, except that you lack what they view as a feature is that no one is accountable, right? Like it's all written in the blockchain, so you know who's accountable, well, well, we're going to see how that plays out in the build finance deal in a minute. But there would be no corporate officers, no government oversight, right? Like this is part of their anarcho libertarian utopia. Well, what's the difference between that and if the employees of a company owned all the stock and just voted on issues and didn't have a CEO, et cetera? Is there any difference there? Well, in order to have a corporation that is legally recognizable, you have to have a corporate form. You have to have a board. And so even if the employees own all the stock of a corporation, they still have to vote somebody in charge. So what kind of entity even is this legally? I missed. So that's the libertarian part you're talking about is like they're trying to sidestep even having to be an entity. Is that it? Right. This is why they say it's an organization. It is not recognized as an. Skies, right? And so I am sure the argument is, right? Well, we're going to demonstrate the feasibility of this. And then you could put it into then you can make, you can change the laws. Right. And look, that happened. We talked about how states began recognizing limited liabilities companies. C corps S corps, all those different ones, they weren't all written into the law in 1776 or whatever. That's exactly right. So let's go back to the feasibility, shall we? So that person for the build finance CEO had taken over the token contract. Well, first, what they did, what they did was we described how they managed to buy enough tokens to win the vote. So this was a wallet named pseudo ETH, made the initial proposal to put themselves in charge and it failed. Then they transferred their tokens to another wallet and offered the proposal once bore, and that time it passed because they had slipped in under the timing on alerts between notices that go out. So I guess fewer people showed up to vote. Then they assigned the token contract the governance contract, minting the keys at the project's treasury all to themselves, draining $500,000 worth of tokens from the project. You know, I actually am proud of that person. That's like, all right, I'm showing how dumb this whole concept is. Is that going to be any sort of criminal thing, though? Because if it was all within the rules of this structure, will that person just get away with it? Will they be punished? It is not criminal. It is not a financial crime. It is not regulated. It's the kind of thing that you would think that. Yeah, exactly. This is my new favorite person. I mean, I'm sure they're douchebag, but that's kind of awesome what they did. I love it. So the build finance DAO runs a Twitter account. Now, who gets to run the Twitter account is an interesting question. To a vote, each letter is right. They have somebody in charge of the Twitter account, so maybe we could have somebody in charge of the corporation. Anyway, they admitted the attacker was able to access funds in this way due to the structure of the build Dao governance model. Yeah. It is believed that the attacker took extra steps to stop evidence of their activities by way of disabling the proposal bot. So they passed a vote that said, hey, we're going to shut down the proposal bot. They had enough votes to stop the proposal bot would have alerted the credit. I was like, we're going to do a vote to mute alerts on your phone essentially. We're going to mute the lawn on your phone and then you did it. And because it's this automated blockchain Y thing, it just happens, and then that's amazing. It's the blockchain holds people accountable. Like, yeah, they know exactly what happened and who he did it, right? So they then minted 1 million 107,600 new tokens. Oh, there you go. Drain the liquidity pools on decentralized exchanges. Then they took the tokens out of the treasury, sold those on crypto exchanges, minted another billion of the tokens, and then went on to sell everything they could on the exchanges. That almost seems like it could be fraud though, right? I'm trying to think of what the analog it like what the equivalent is. That's like your printing up a bunch of stock in the company kind of and just like repeatedly selling it. Couldn't that be like a real producers situation, the best, the absolute best Mel Brooks movie? Well, the absolute best mo Brooks movie. It could be if there were any regulations on these things, which no one wants. I know there's no regulation on these things, but isn't there. I've refused to believe there's no crime when you misrepresent what you're selling someone and get a bunch of money for it. The defense would be it's all right there in the blockchain. I didn't misrepresent anything. You can see you can trace back it is a part of the fundamental structure of this that you can see every single thing that I did and if you're still too greedy or dumb to buy the billion tokens that I have now created. Well, that's on you. Isn't that a one weird trick Andrew? Isn't that a like I sold you a thing with a super small fine print that said this will explode and ruin your house? Well, it was in there. You knew what you were getting. Come on..

Andrew DAO Twitter treasury America mo Brooks Mel Brooks
"palin" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

03:40 min | 10 months ago

"palin" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"This is a jury trial And we always think jurors we always appreciate the system so whatever happened in there kind of usurps the system that I believe we're used to and we respect and worse You can sort of understand her seeming confusion about this The path here seems to be a little bit unusual But it seems that part of what's happening here is an effort to preserve a verdict in case this went up on appeal again It would prevent the need to retry it if the Court of Appeals disagreed with him And as you said the same judge dismissed the state at an earlier stage and was overruled by the Court of Appeals And so may well have wanted just to make certain that if the case came back there was a jury verdict in place for that process Speaking of which Palin has suggested that she might use this case as a vehicle to try to get the law changed at the Supreme Court level Tell us about the critical comments that justices clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch have made about the Sullivan standard Last year a party asked the court to take a case that would have opened the door for reconsidering some aspects of the actual malice standard in these cases And justice Thomas who had already launched this view a few years earlier joined now by justice Gorsuch Both suggested that they thought that the court ought to look for an opportunity to take such a case that the time is ripe for reconsidering the kind of protection that the court gives to public officials and public figures in defamation actions so far it just the two of them who have chimed up on that but there's a growing awareness of the fact that judges elsewhere in the judiciary seem to be gravitating towards that view and a general concern I think amongst press freedom scholars that the soul of the standard is not in a safe spot as it was even 5 or ten years ago It takes four justices to take a case Do you think it's likely that the court would take the pail in case as a vehicle to look at the Sullivan standard or it might not be the best vehicle to do that That's right The Palin case for a number of reasons might not be the same vehicle New York law independently as a statutory matter calls for a similar standard to this constitutional standard that's attention here So that might make it a poor vehicle It also the case that some of the justices who might have the greatest interest in reconsidering the Sullivan standard might not be interested in such a hot button conservative political figure as the litigant in such a case and sort of more globally the broader concerns that I think a lot of critics of the soul of the standard have lodged aren't focused on its application to cure public officials like Sarah Palin Somebody who was a candidate for the vice presidency who was quite clearly an elected official at the very core of the heart of the soul of indoctrine concerns that at least some of the justices including justice Gorsuch in last year's commentary on this were focused more on the expansion of that doctrine to public figures And so it may be that if the court is looking for a vehicle for the reconsideration of some aspects of the doctrine it might be looking for more of a case along those lines Thanks so much ronnell That's ronnell Anderson Jones of the university of Utah coming up next Litigation funders bet on wrongful convictions You're listening to Bloomberg Verdon at avocado we.

justice Gorsuch Court of Appeals Neil Gorsuch Palin clarence Thomas confusion Supreme Court Thomas New York Sarah Anderson Jones university of Utah Bloomberg Verdon
"palin" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

04:11 min | 10 months ago

"palin" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"Are next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska Warned us the British that they weren't going to be taken away our arms by renewables and making sure as he's riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be secure and we were going to be free Former Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin is known for her gaffes from saying that Russia was right next to Alaska to a revisionist version of Paul Revere's midnight ride to saying the constitution is based on the Bible The list goes on and on However it was not Palin but The New York Times that was on trial for false statements in a defamation case pale and claimed the newspaper hurt her reputation with a 2017 opinion piece that tried to tie her political rhetoric to a deadly shooting It was an uphill battle because of the Supreme Court's landmark decision in New York Times V Sullivan and pale in essentially lost twice The judge and the jury found for the times Joining me is Ron el Anderson Jones a Professor of law at the university of Utah This was the first libel case against the times to go to trial in nearly two decades Is that a testament to how high a standard The New York Times V Sullivan case sets for defaming a public figure It is The constitutional rule here sets the bar very very high And it's set there because of a First Amendment concern for breeding space The rule is basically rooted in this understanding that some falsity about public officials is sort of the cost of doing business in a democracy And the court has said that if our choices between some mistakes in this coverage or self censorship with no coverage at all we choose to have space for public discourse And so that standard is set very very high and these cases almost never go to trial The judge and the jury found against Palin it was a little unusual judge Jed rakoff while the jury was deliberating announced that he would throw out the defamation suit regardless of the jury verdict explain why he decided to throw out the suit The judge makes a determination as a matter of law And so looking over all of the evidence that was presented in the course of the trial He has to decide whether it's possible for this jury based on what was presented to them to find clear and convincing evidence that this very strict standard was met That is that the journalists at the times had a high degree of awareness of the probable falsity of what they published or that they in fact entertained serious doubt as to its truth This isn't just about the sloppiness of the journalism not just about western journalists did but about what they thought and new And he concluded as a matter of law that they couldn't reach that conclusion that that bar could not have been met based on the evidence that was presented by Palin's attorneys And how important was the evidence showing that the times had moved quickly to acknowledge its mistake and correct it It does help the wider narrative here that nobody set out with an agenda to tell a particular story which I think was a large part of what he was counsel was trying to suggest A failure to investigate in journalism or getting some facts wrong isn't enough to meet the standard It has to be a failure to investigate because they didn't want to hear the answers And the fact that they very promptly followed up on it and quickly corrected the fact that there were no evidence of pre publication correspondence showing that the writer was aware of this problem I think all contributed to a suggestion that what happened here might well have been really unfortunate journalism sort of truly grievous mistake but not the kind of knowing faulty or reckless disregard that's required in these sorts of cases Listen to Palin's reaction outside the courthouse after judge rakoff made the decision to throw out the defamation case regardless of how the jury verdict.

Alaska The New York Times Ron el Anderson Jones Palin Russia Sullivan Jed rakoff Paul Revere Sarah Palin university of Utah Supreme Court the times judge rakoff
"palin" Discussed on Today, Explained

Today, Explained

07:23 min | 10 months ago

"palin" Discussed on Today, Explained

"Up against a Tea Party favorite. And the times publishes an editorial about these shootings. So what happened in this 2017 editorial was the times was trying to make an argument trying to fasten an argument about how political rhetoric had amped up the possibility that we would see political violence in this country. And they citing that 2011 shooting. Claimed that there was a quote unquote political incitement link between a map that Sarah Palin's political action committee had circulated before the lochner shooting months before the loughner shooting. In fact, as a lot of reporting indicated after that 2011 shooting, there was no link between that Sarah PAC map and the Jared Lee loughner shooting. But the times said there was this political incitement link. What exactly did Palin take issue with in this editorial? We're talking about two or three sentences that are in two paragraphs in this editorial. The main passage is, in 2011, when Jared Lee loughner opened fire in a supermarket parking lot, grievously wounding representative Gabby Giffords and killing 6 people, including a 9 year old girl. The link to political incitement was clear. Before the shooting, Sarah Palin's political action committee circulated a map of targeted electoral districts that put misses Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized, crosshairs. And then in the next paragraph, they basically compare the two shootings and they say, though there's no sign of incitement as direct as in the Giffords attack. Liberals should, of course, so those are two instances there, where they're really, really, you know, their own factual territory pretty much. Was the times within its sort of editorial guidelines to write this or was this objectively wrong? I think that in today's media age, opinion writers get more and more leeway to do what they do and that's always the commonly cited defense for what Fox News Sean Hannity Tucker Carlson. Their opinion journalist. There are talk show hosts. But in this case, the answer would be no. The times did not have the authority to say what it said because it was directly contradicted by objective facts that had already been reported. And The New York Times itself would acknowledge and does acknowledge that its opinions piece is need to be based on a commonly shared factual basis. And this was not anything close to that. And so they published the editorial and they learned pretty quickly from Twitter that they had problems. Ross doubt that, who was a colleague and a conservative columnist at the times, alerted the editorial page editor James Bennett, via email to this problem. I would be remiss if I didn't express my bafflement at the editorial that we just ran on today's shootings and political violence. James was clearly starting to get unnerved. He later testified he didn't sleep that night and sent an email to his colleagues at 5 O 8 the next morning, saying we need to get to the bottom of this and perhaps run a correction, but we need to learn the truth. He said. How does that go? Well, I don't think it took them that long to figure it out because the editorial itself had linked to a story that debunked it. Right within the editorial itself was a link to an ABC News story, saying, you know, that there is no link between the Sarah pax map and what Jared Lee loughner had done. You know, and this is what made, I think this suit somewhat plausible is that this was really widely debunked. And for them to just insert this and say it was fact, you could possibly think that it was evidence of reckless disregard or knowing falsehood. Yeah. Given that it had been anybody who followed this back then, probably would have known. So the times corrects itself, but Sarah Palin still decides to sue? Yes, a 100%. She says she was harmed and obviously she has been a critic of The New York Times and the mainstream media for a really long time. You're seeing some idiots in the press. In this case, I think that she had a genuine group. And people who have dismissed her suit when her suit initially came out, I put a headline on my piece saying it was a convincing lawsuit. And I took a lot of heat for that. And my response to those people who are upset with my original assessment is, well, you've probably never been accused by The New York Times of inciting a mass murder. So I think it was a pretty serious thing. So heading into this trial, what exactly do Sarah Palin and her lawyers have to prove? What Sarah Palin and her lawyers have to prove is one of two things. Either The New York Times published this falsehood fully knowing that it was false, or they have to prove that the times published it with reckless disregard. As to its truth or falsity, which basically means they have to prove that the times entertained serious doubts about its truthfulness. And that's a real tough thing to do because you can't just document that they define industry standards or industry guidelines or best practices as the wonks might say. They have to prove that James Bennett walked by like informational signposts telling him that this was wrong. This case is pretty close because it's proven that James Bennett didn't click on various things that were writing his vicinity. That would have alerted him to this falsehood. And the trial after being delayed because Sarah Palin herself got the rona started earlier this month, and James Bennett himself takes the stand at trial, right? What was his testimony like? You know, it was many hours. I found it kind of riveting, I think that he was tremendously measured, tremendously responsible and tremendously contrite. I mean, he said, you know, this was my mistake. I own it. One of the lawyers asked him, did you send the editorial back to Elizabeth Williams and after you finished your revisions? And he said, yes. And I think he sensed that answering the question might shift blame onto Elizabeth because maybe she didn't review it enough after he finished his edits. And he was like, I just want to be clear on something here. This was my fault. But it is true that after he put these edits in the story that his other colleagues did not really scrutinize those edits. One of the dynamics there is that James Bennett was a revered editor. He was the top editor here. It was kind of a forceful editor. And I don't think that people were inclined necessarily the challenge his edits, the way they would be inclined to challenge someone lower down on the organizational hierarchy if you understand what I'm saying. Sure. Was Sarah Palin in the room for all of this? Sarah Palin was in the room I believe every day for the trial. Yeah. And she eventually takes the stand too. She eventually take the.

Jared Lee loughner Sarah Palin the times James Bennett lochner Sarah PAC Giffords Gabby Giffords The New York Times Tucker Carlson Tea Party Sean Hannity Palin Fox News The times ABC News Ross Twitter James
"palin" Discussed on The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast

The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast

02:06 min | 11 months ago

"palin" Discussed on The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast

"Now let's talk about the Sarah Palin case. The New York Times basically published as something that is downright scarless. A 2017 editorial took a political map that the Sarah Palin pack had put out and said, look at this political map, and they superimposed it on a shooting in which 6 people were killed including an representative Gabriel Giffords was badly wounded. So basically what The New York Times was, I wouldn't say implying was flatly saying is that somehow Sarah Palin was providing the road map to get these people killed. Now in reality, Sarah Palin's kind of political map had nothing to do with the shooting. And The New York Times eventually admitted this and they wrote a correction and they retracted the article, but Sarah Palin's like I don't care. You can retract the article, but you still put it out, lots of people saw the article who may not have seen their retraction, the article was far more prominent than the retraction you harmed me what you said is flatly untrue. And The New York Times was like, this was an accident. And I want to make the point that with the press, these accidents are not accidents. They're not accidents because the ball always falls on the same side of the net. If they were truly accidents, you're in relentless pursuit of the truth. All the news that fit to print, that's The New York Times as motto, then you'd get things wrong, you'd frequently be accidentally saying bad things about Democrats who'd accidentally be saying nice things about Republicans, but you notice that's never the case. They do their best. They were trying very clearly here to pin the tail to pin the mass shooting tail on Sarah Palin, blame her for it. And they failed to do it, and they were caught. And so they're apology, if you will, was not an apology and we were sorry we did it. It was really an apology. We're sorry, you busted us. And we're kind of we're now regret being sued. So, look, it's going to be difficult, I think, this is a case that's being heard in New York. And it's being heard before liberal judge, and I would be shocked. Shocked if therapy would win

Sarah Palin The New York Times Gabriel Giffords Sullivan James Bennett ed senator Tom cotton Bennett New York Palin
"palin" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM

WNYC 93.9 FM

05:06 min | 11 months ago

"palin" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM

"And I'm a Martinez Sarah Palin is about to get her day in court against what she used to call the lame stream media The former lack of governor and Republican vice presidential candidate defamation suit against The New York Times is set to start jury selection today at a federal courthouse in downtown Manhattan NPR media correspondent David folk at flick has followed the case David so why is Sarah Palin suing The New York Times This is going to be pretty theatrical trial in some ways but the specifics are pretty clear that times wrote editorial linking Sarah Palin's political action committee a mailing from that committee to a 2011 shooting of former congresswoman Gabby Giffords I want to be clear no evidence was found that the shooter was motivated by that mailer The times also mischaracterized the mailer which had drawn these crosshairs on specific congressional districts that conservatives wanted to take back for Republicans The times wrongly said it symbolically targeted the actual members of Congress The times wrote this an editorial that ran 6 years after the Giffords shooting it was published in 2017 hours after a Republican congressman was shot at a congressional baseball game These errors were inserted into the editorial by Manning James Bennett was at the time the times his top opinion editor He wanted to make a bigger point about gun violence and about heated rhetoric All right so the times really got this wrong What did the paper do and how has it explained what happened Well so the paper actually made public corrections within hours as objections were raised both outside the times in social media and inside the paper as well Privately you see these text messages that have been submitted as evidence showed that Bennett really was pretty contrite and felt pretty terrible about it David mccraw is a deputy general counsel for the times He has told The Washington Post a couple years back that the times viewed that this was quote an honest mistake it was not an exhibit of actual malice And that phrase has meaning that actual malice is the legal standard that Palin's attorneys will have to meet that is that The New York Times either knew that what they were saying was wrong or showed reckless disregard for the fact given the ways in which our laws protect free speech that's a pretty hard standard for any former public official to meet But in what ways could Sarah Palin's argument hold up Well could be hard for her to show actual harm has been done You know she hasn't pointed so far at a specific job as she lost as a result of this The strongest element is that it had been widely known for years that no evidence showed that connection between the mailing from Palin's political action committee and the shooting in Tucson Arizona and that Bennett had edited the wrong material into someone else's draft of the editorial and that it was rushed out as Ben later acknowledged on a deadline The fact that it's part of the opinion section which might seem like ah it's just one person's thoughts That doesn't get the time off the hook both because in some ways it represents the times as institutional voice and more importantly because the editorial is purportedly grounded in fact We reached out to the times for comment they declined James Bennett and Palin's lawyers also did not respond to our request for comment What's it say here for The New York Times Well you know I talked to lawyers a jury of verdict could reach in the millions or theoretically the tens of millions or one media lawyer told me in the hundreds of millions Palin's attorneys want to introduce evidence about other journalistic lapses by Bennett at the times as a way of showing that the times was kind of slipshod Bennett left in 2020 after other controversies involving decisions he made the times wants to narrow the focus for the jurors on this specific incident involving Palin saying it's not a large argument about ethics but about the law and that an honest mistake was made here and swiftly remedied People tell me anything can happen once it's in front of the court and runs it in front of a jury Her attorneys have asked the court to send the media a message That NPR media correspondent David volk inflicted David thanks You bet Arizona is still dealing with the worst of omikron hospitals there have been near capacity for months Lately a number of them have been working to free up patient beds by treating people with serious conditions in their own homes From member station KJ and Phoenix Katherine Davis young reports In late 2020 the federal government announced strategies to ease stress on healthcare facilities including more flexibility for hospital level care at home We went from zero approved hospitals to a year later over a 185 hospitals all throughout the country have been approved for this care model Doctor David Levine with Brigham and women's hospital in Boston has led research into the effectiveness of acute care at home Providers can't offer surgery or ICU level care outside of hospitals but technology is now good enough that a growing number of hospitals are offering x-rays blood work and many treatments for non life threatening conditions on the go And Levine's research shows patients who get treated at their kitchen table or on their couch have better health outcomes than those in brick and mortar medical facilities You end up getting readmitted much less often And you end up lying down much less often and moving around much more when you're at home versus in the hospital Patient Dolores Weiss says getting to eat home cooked meals see her family and sleep in her own bed makes recovery a lot more.

The New York Times Sarah Palin Martinez Sarah Palin The times David folk the times Palin Gabby Giffords Bennett Manning James Bennett David mccraw NPR Giffords Manhattan The Washington Post James Bennett baseball Congress David Arizona
"palin" Discussed on Throwing Shade

Throwing Shade

02:36 min | 1 year ago

"palin" Discussed on Throwing Shade

"Right is almost. Don't even get me sick. What she has that she should be embarrassed to even have tried to bring up a an issue that and make her point. She saw based politically but off-base even in this analogy or whatever it is that she's throwing out there she she's milking female thing as a real feminist. I'm barris for her now. Here's where. I was impressed with sarah palin so far on this show we have given. We have been like yes. Jimmy puff and yes the seraphim by the way absolute no to sarah palin in all things. I just like him when she talks. 'cause i can't believe what's coming out of her mouth sir. She said she called. Afc she said in that clip. She's that she's a fake. She's such a fake amendment feminist. She's milking the whole female thing. And then herself sarah palin and said and as a real feminist. I'm embarrassed for her. Now here's the thing she's dead wrong. She's absolutely doing a makeover on the word feminist and re reclaiming it for something that doesn't exist for. She does not believe in the equal rights for women but she called herself a feminist. She would never have done that in two thousand eight. What is happening was shocked. So yeah. She's just abusing that word and twisting it in any way she wants. But i gotta say point for sarah palin and she called herself on points office has no one is so ao see once again heard this and kind of didn't take it lying down. She posted a video to sarah palin and says this my existence make you mad does the fact that yes i am a mouthpiece for the people of new york's fourteenth congressional district upset you will i have held for you call one eight hundred cry now at one eight hundred cry now a love it. I love it. She gives less fox each and every day. And by the way don't forget she's the person in dc the all the probably the biggest proponent of saving this planet who's been elected in washington dc. Let her go off and off off. I wish there were more like her. I i i hope. She's getting massages or doing something. Reset our nervous system. You know what i mean. 'cause like to may be outlet. I don't know but anyway. God bless as.

sarah palin Jimmy puff barris Afc new york fox dc washington dc
"palin" Discussed on REAL 92.3

REAL 92.3

01:39 min | 2 years ago

"palin" Discussed on REAL 92.3

"Cameron. Who? Your lawyer too. Is the money is a famous away. It is the drink isn't coming down with the loud pipes in the rank big chilling only for the Palin your name tell you later, too. Is it left with his face with a nice good dog is unconditioned know when the robbery don't stop. Tell me when you let your tears coming from the heart. It was with a woman that you man doing here with your family. Your friends? Are you lying to yourself in the pants? I said laughter. Is it anybody that she would love anybody? He was left for anybody with Dad. That's what I'm fighting. All I want you not just Yu Hae t layer to layer 90 days. Careful, No switches sides. Still something wrong? Wacky shit. You don't buy me I need to talk to you Later. T Man T s so hard to be humble s O No drag day they you're talking about a lot of Jason is blue to lose my DJ. Damn right. Listen for everybody out there. The wheelchair. Have a seat because I have to tell you about something that is just completely No,.

Palin robbery Jason Cameron.