SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
AlterNet reports
A new report by the Huffington Post [September 15] reveals Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump told Peter Thiel he would nominate the PayPal co-founder and one-man anti-free speech crusader to the Supreme Court if elected president.
Thiel--who bankrolled a devastating blow to First Amendment rights earlier this year when he secretly paid $10 million in legal expenses to support Hulk Hogan's defamation lawsuit against Gawker Media--is apparently just the type of freedom-loving, Bill of Rights-protecting intellectual Trump hopes to stack on the Supreme Court.
A source close to Thiel told Huffington Post the GOP candidate "deeply loves Peter Thiel", which isn't terribly surprising considering Thiel served as a delegate for Trump, spoke at the candidate's convention, and pretty much became a walking how-to guide for Trump's promise to "open up libel laws". According to the source, Trump has "made it clear he will nominate" Thiel.
"It's not clear whether Trump has indeed offered to nominate Thiel--only that Thiel has said Trump would nominate him and that Trump's team has discussed Thiel as a possible nominee", the Huffington Post article reads. "Both sources requested anonymity, given that Trump and Thiel have each demonstrated a willingness to seek revenge against parties they feel have wronged them."
Both Thiel's spokesperson and Trump's press secretary denied Trump's indication, and Thiel--who sits on Facebook's board and serves as the chairman of the software company Palantir--told the Huffington Post he's not interested in the job.
We've previously referenced Thiel in contexts from "Mean People" to vampirism.
See also:
Trump camp denies report that he would consider Peter Thiel for Supreme Court
Peter Thiel denies he's talking to Donald Trump about Supreme Court job.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by arcz on Saturday September 17 2016, @07:48AM
What kind of idiot cites the Huffington Post? It's a liberal propaganda outlet, not a news website. Please don't cite them.
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 17 2016, @08:20AM
Apparently some readers of HufPo took ire with your assessment.
With the amount of moderate to obliterate that happens here, they are just inviting shit posting galore.
Let the games begin!
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Saturday September 17 2016, @01:56PM
It's more accurate to say that it's a corporate propaganda outlet. It's the same as Fox. The only difference is that the language is designed to appeal to liberals whereas Fox's appeals to conservatives. The end goals are the same, however, to further entrench corporate power and the status quo.
We can't make any progress on our common project of building better countries, democracies, and futures until we acknowledge that the Left vs. Right duality in government is an illusion, nothing more than a tactic designed to divide & conquer.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 18 2016, @03:06AM
Well there really are several dualities involved in government - economic (centralized/individualism/capitalism/right wing vs de-centralized/collectivism/socialism/left wing), concentration of power (centralized/authoritarianism vs de-centralized/libertarianism), and social policies (conservative/traditionalist vs liberal/progressive) its just that in the US there is no duality in any of these; the only thing represented in the US government is conservative capitalist authoritarianism (in short, fascism), the only thing being put forward by both of our "two party" system. The fix for this is getting rid of the two party system and replacing it with proportional representation such that all combinations of these dualities can be represented instead of just the one.
TL;DR, there really are dualities just not in the US's one party system masquerading as a two party system.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 18 2016, @03:14AM
I should add, the problem is tribalism and irrationality ("my side is right because its my side, and your side is wrong because its your side!") not the existence of conflicting opinions on how to best manage a population and run a government.