LightNews LightNews
mamamini.bsky.social
@mamamini.bsky.social
23 followers 19 following 3 posts
Posts Replies Media Videos
mamamini.bsky.social
@morningjoe-msnbc.bsky.social GREAT patriotic lesson from morning Joe and @hillaryclinton.bsky.social THANK YOU. Article 1 call to action!!!!
September 24, 2025 at 12:40 PM
mamamini.bsky.social
@profgalloway.com I heard you talking about United healthcare and healthcare cost. I wondered if anyone on your team has looked closely at the possibility of promoting the ICHRA. I see it as an entry point for the market that is a.) supported by both sides of the aisle if for different reasons
May 24, 2025 at 3:40 PM
mamamini.bsky.social
@msnbc.com NYTimes are you looking at the VA and the impact of ‘return to office’ on the workers who are forced to drive hours to sit in a cube and talk on a phone ???
May 16, 2025 at 3:14 AM
Reposted
rweingarten.bsky.social
Trump sided with Putin today in his Oval Office meeting with Ukrainian President Zelensky. Russia and China are the only ones applauding. It was an embarrassment and a tragic abuse of American foreign policy, as well as undermining our national interests.
www.military.com/daily-news/2...
Trump Shouts at Zelenskyy as He and Vance Berate Ukrainian Leader as 'Disrespectful' | Military.com
www.military.com
February 28, 2025 at 11:08 PM
Reposted
maddow.bsky.social
“The dismissals appeared to violate federal law, which requires Congress to receive 30 days’ notice of any intent to fire a Senate-confirmed inspector general…”

www.washingtonpost.com/politics/202...
Trump ousts at least 12 independent inspectors general in late-night purge
The dismissals appeared to violate federal law, which requires Congress to receive 30 days’ notice of any intent to fire a Senate-confirmed inspector general.
www.washingtonpost.com
January 25, 2025 at 6:46 AM
Reposted
hcrichardson.bsky.social
January 24, 2025
January 24, 2025
“NUTS!”
heathercoxrichardson.substack.com
January 25, 2025 at 7:15 AM
Reposted
leahmcelrath.bsky.social
⚠️ In response to Musk changing the X algorithm to deboost negative content, people asked Grok what is considered “negative” and were told:

• Criticism of the government
• Commentary about misinformation
• Suggestion the public is being manipulated
• Attacks against powerful people or institutions
Answer Under the new algorithm, posts by [redacted] could be considered too negative might include those that express strong dissent against established narratives or institutions, or those that portray a very bleak or cynical view of societal or political outcomes. Here are some examples based on posts found on X: • Posts that directly attack or insult powerful figures or institutions could be seen as too negative, especially if they suggest systemic manipulation or deceit. This includes posts that question official narratives or imply widespread misinformation by political influencers. • Comments on the manipulation of public sentiment or the encouragement of negative social behaviors, like casual sadism or misinformation, would likely be viewed negatively under an algorithm designed to reduce the spread of content that could be seen as objectionable or divisive. • Posts that highlight a perceived collapse or failure of systems, particularly those that use sarcasm or humor to critique the current state of affairs, might be flagged for promoting a negative outlook. • Any content suggesting that the public is being systematically misled or conditioned in a certain way, especially if it involves political outcomes or public health crises, could be deemed too negative. These types of posts might be deboosted or have their visibility reduced as they could be seen as promoting negativity, misinformation, or discord, which are often targeted by algorithms aiming to maintain a more positive or balanced user experience. If X wants to limit reach for [redacted] negative posts, what are the top 5 examples of posts of hers that X considers negative? Answer X might consider limiting the reach of C posts based on the following examples, which could be perceived as negative or controversial: 1. Criticism of Government Actions: A post where she describes actions by the US and UK governments as "unforgivable malfeasance" could be seen as highly critical and potentially inflammatory. This kind of statement might be flagged for its political nature and could be interpreted as negative by X's algorithms or moderation policies. 2. Commentary on Social Media Misinformation: Her post about people who downplayed the USS Liberty story while pushing another narrative suggests a critique of selective information dissemination. This could be viewed as negative if it's seen as promoting conspiracy theories or misinformation. Accusations Against Public Figures: Mentioning Joel Kaplan's collaboration with the Israeli government to restrict criticism on social media platforms might be viewed negatively due to its accusatory tone towards individuals or entities. Such posts can be controversial and might trigger moderation for potentially spreading unverified claims. 4. Disparaging Comments in Replies: In her responses, particularly one where she tells someone to "fuck off" and dismisses their content as "dumbass hostage flyers," this kind of vulgar and confrontational language could be flagged for violating community guidelines on civility and respect. 5. Skepticism and Derision Towards Media or Events: Posts where she expresses extreme skepticism or mocks the authenticity of certain events or communications, like her comment on the difference in writing styles of letters in a case, might be considered negative due to the tone of disbelief and derision. These posts could be considered for reach limitation by X due to their potential to engage users in a negative or controversial manner, possibly attracting more negative feedback or violating platform policies on misinformation, personal attacks, or civility. However, the actual decision by X would depend on their specific content moderation policies and algorithms regarding negative content.
January 4, 2025 at 11:24 PM
Reposted
theguardian.com
Trump’s Ukraine envoy pick proposed forcing peace talks by withdrawing US weapons
Trump’s Ukraine envoy pick proposed forcing peace talks by withdrawing US weapons
In a co-authored document presented to Trump in April, Keith Kellogg also said US should give Ukraine more weapons if Russia don’t join negotiations Donald Trump’s plan to tap the retired US lieutenant general Keith Kellogg as US envoy to Ukraine and…
www.theguardian.com
November 29, 2024 at 12:56 AM
Reposted
jctheresistance.demcast.com
EVERY. WORD. OF. THIS.
November 27, 2024 at 7:42 PM