Hey, remember when the NYT asked Ms. Rachel if she's being paid by Hamas? Was that an 'official action' or did the NYT decide to cover that by themselves?

Honestly, what's the difference?

Not to mention that Trump's connection to Epstein was already known, to one degree or another, when he announced that he was running for president and when he was president.

The press could have run with that of their own accord like they ran with Her Emails and Biden's Dementia.

Also, Jeffery Epstein literally emailed the NYT about Trump's connections to him while the latter was running for president.

Hard for the opposition to take an 'official action' about a email they don't know about.

Pretty sure legacy media was covering right-wing misinformation and lunacy of its own volition long before the 'official actions' you speak of.

You're basically just admitting that the press prefers to cover conservative talking points for clicks.

Alzheimer experts visiting the White House: Publishable Info

Hilary Clinton's emails: Publishable Info

Trump's relationship with Epstein: Not Publishable Info

Yep, got it.

They are basically covering for him the same way that US media and institutions covered for Epstein before the revelations came out.

The more things change, etc

For the record, I err on the side of not replacing Starmer because changing him for someone else isn't going to change the fundamental economic issues at play.

Socially, it might make a difference (e.g. more robust attacks against far-right), but even then...

McSweeney is the epitome of 'fighting the last war in time for the new one' and it shows.

Anyone with an ounce of self-awareness could tell you that turning on one of the most effective (and loyal) communicators in the Cabinet was a bad idea.

James Bond is functionally an episodic series of movies that taps into a particular cultural moment or worldview with a 'Villain of the Moment'.

It's actually a lot of fun to track the cultural zeitgeist just by watching the Bond movie trailers.
Quite revealing, as well.

I would have replied to this earlier, but I was too busy howling with laughter at the idea of 'James Bond' having any sense of continuity.

I mean, I appreciate the effort, but...like, have the writers watched James Bond movies? Have they not noticed the lack of continuity?

The amount of respect and deference the British press has for JK Rowling and the anti-trans brigade is sickening.

And that's just the tip of a large, disgusting iceberg.

And just because I wanted to see all the goobers together, I took the full-body pics from their respective sheets and slapped 'em together.

It's not perfect, but I'm awfully darn proud of how these turned out both art-wise and character design-wise.

This from the same people who ask themselves why people don't trust Democrats when Trump is doing all of this heinous, law-breaking stuff and the Republicans are just letting him do it.

It's a real brain-teaser, huh.

I feel like this is just more evidence to my own personal theory that nothing radicalises people against the status quo/centrism/capitalism than those very things working in action themselves.