Kamala Harris's $7M support from LinkedIn founder comes with a request: Fire Lina Khan LinkedIn cofounder and venture capitalist Reid Hoffman was quick to express support for Kamala Harris's bid for the US presidency this year after incumbent Joe Biden stepped aside, and now the reason has become clear: He's hoping she'll fire FTC boss and Big Tech arch-critic Lina Khan. Word of Hoffman's support came almost …
> LinkedIn cofounder Reid Hoffman was quick to express support for Kamala Harris' bid for the US presidency this year after incumbent Joe Biden stepped aside
It was just a teeny tiny itty bitty bit sus the way that all the high up dems and mainstream media pundits went from 'he is still sharp' and that there is nothing wrong with him and any claim of mental degradation is a right wing conspiracy theory to 'ZOMG!!!1 we have to get rid of him to save Our Democracy(tm)' almost overnight.
The 'he had a cold' claim was utter BS. Even Joy Reid on the view saw though that one! And then he 'had covid' yet was out doing a meet and greet with the public barely an hour prior.
Oh and the whole George Clooney fundraiser and they George suddenly turns on him.
And these are the same people that tell you they are fighting for democracy..
They are all a bunch of Autocrats, they all want to be in a position of dominance. The current bunch of democrats are truly shameful, they are the porrsest selection of politicuans that I have ever seen.
That 7 million should be taken away and given to the poorer voters , those that put these people in power and yet never reap any of the benefits.
@UnknownUnknown
"and the Project 2025 lunatics"
Are you still pushing this nonsense? What do they have to do with Trump?
"Them you will see some catastrophic politicians tearing down a state and replacing it with a banana republic."
A banana republic which maybe tries to get the opposition locked up and uses the tools of the state as weapons to target their opposition?
few things are funnier than when they do go full banana republic and change the law to 'get' their political opponents and it backfires in their faces.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/nyc-pol-says-law-allowing-rape-suit-against-him-was-unconstitutional-even-though-he-voted-for-the-legislation/ar-BB1lRuZ6
Lets not forget that Andrew Cuomo and Eric Adams have also been accused due to this law change.
It really is a case of 'believe all women (except those that accuse dems)'.
So... you are telling us you don't know anything about Project 2025 other than what you might have heard on CNN.
The kind of nonsense the Democrats pulled first in making sure there could be no serious opposition to Biden in the primaries along with lying and conspiring with the legacy media to tell us he was perfectly OK is classic banana republic stuff.
As is the Democrats lawfare against President Trump, going back to the Russian collusion hoax if not further.
The only way you could get any more banana republic would be if the United Fruit Company was the biggest donor to the DNC.
It'll all be sorted. No need to vote again after this year, if Trump wins!
#BananaRepublic (And not the clothes store.)
I have this nagging feeling that all this was planned. The entire Republican machine was set up to attack Sleepy Joe and indeed the entire RNC was one long Biden disfest. Overnight all that effort and money wasted. (Trump himself described this as a 'fraud'!)
I think there's worse to come for the GoP. It doesn't help that the wheels might be falling off JD Vance. I did have him pegged as the person who made Trump obsolete, the old dolt who's just good for marshaling voter turnout so as to pave the way for the Tech Bro' takeover, but it appears he just doesn't quite know how and when to keep his mouth shut. NSFW, indeed.
Really doesn't matter if it was planned or otherwise IMO. Folks still get to vote in November to decide whether they want a convicted Felon, Rapist and suspected kiddie fiddler running the world's most powerful Superpower with total immunity from prosecution - or something else. The Gropey Old Perverts could try actually winning an election with popular policies instead of slinging mud, preventing folks from casting their votes, throwing lawfully cast votes out and attempting coups. Sadly appear to be deliberately tanking their election chances with blatantly mentally unstable Presidential and VP nominees while yelling out their pre-excuse that the election will be rigged.
It is sad to see America getting taken up the rear end by a corrupt bunch of right whinging theocrats, rapists, crooks and grifters, and even sadder to see folks rooting for it. :(
I think there's worse to come for the GoP. It doesn't help that the wheels might be falling off JD Vance.
I saw an interesting discussion between a Democrat commentator and Republican (but never-Trump) strategist/comms director. They agreed Vance was a bit of a weird and overly bullish pick. A running mate should broaden your ticket. Pence widened Trump's appeal within the evangelical constituency who might otherwise have been lairy of a thrice-married, grab-em-by-the-pussy philanderer.
By contrast, Vance offers nothing. He's not from a battleground state, he doesn't bring a new demographic or cohort. He's basically just a younger, more business-savvy version of Trump, but with even less ability to gauge his public statements and interactions. Worse yet, he actively brings baggage to the table, like being more outspoken on abortion and reproductive rights than Trump and various other issues that could be more liability than asset when trying to reach moderate swing voters. The Republicans were so confident (or carried away with delusions of grandeur) that they just thought "it doesn't matter, Trump's gonna win any which way".
I suppose he brings some donations from the TESCREAL nutters. But now the strong vs. frail campaign developed for Biden is in the bin and the "party of law and order" are fighting against a younger, female law-bringer candidate with a pair of misogynists who would prefer their woman in the kitchen, one of whom is a felon no less.
And now Vance is getting to see the real face of MAGA. The white supremacists are now laying into his wife for having the gall to be of Indian heritage. Something that he seems incapable of condemning with his bizzare defence
“Look, I love my wife so much. I love her because she’s who she is ... Obviously, she’s not a white person, and we’ve been accused — attacked — by some white supremacists over that, But I just — I love Usha. She’s such a good mom, she’s such a brilliant lawyer and I’m so proud of her.”
Apparently he needs to defend his wife on the basis "I know she's not white, but she's a good mom. She's one of the good indians". Like... what? She's a good person in spite of her ethnicity?
There's a staggering naivety in the RNC right now - no doubt courtesy of Lara Trump being parachuted into the chair. As Michael Steele (former RNC Chair) had to point out, her sole focus on Trump is liable (regardless of the Presidential outcome) to lose seats in the House and Senate and drive the Republicans out of power for a generation. Go Lara!
"law-bringer candidate"
Who actively encourages law breaking when it benefits them. If the dems weren't utterly shit-scared then why are they busy expunging the internet of anything critical of the cackling idiot? Remember when she said she believed the women who accused Joe? And then promptly forgot all that when he picked her as VP? Or when Joe appointed her as border czar?
The dems have a MAJOR problem which is that a large portion of their voter base hate them due to the Israel issue. All these articles you post quote a few randos on X and claim they are fully representative of MAGA yet completely ignore the huge numbers on the political left who will not vote for the dems come November.
It is utter desperation on the part of the dem political elite to cover up the complete failings of their undemocratically selected candidate.
I'm looking forward to the increase in the chocolate ration next week!
Party candidates have never been "democratically" chosen. Traditionally smoke filled rooms. Technically neither republican nor democratic parties are official entities of the government. Neither is listed in the Constitution where reps, senators, scotus and potus are. Democratic elections not until November. even that brings in the electoral college which skews the democratic election to influence of states with no population.
I have this nagging feeling that all this was planned.
Well, if it was, it worked, and at the very least one party would seen to be smarter and better organized. Sounds like a reason to vote for them.
If it wasn't planned, then the image of an aging statesman stepping aside despite personal ambition for the good of the country sounds like a reason to vote for them.
It is safe to say that Joe would never willingly step aside. He is a typical politician and desires to cling to power above all else. I'm sure Jill is of the same mindset. It has made him a very wealthy person with almost zero liability to himself and family.
Funny given that he (well, his handlers) is now pushing for an amendment to set term limits for SCOTUS judges yet still no mention of term limits for house and senate. The major hole in this plan is that the three branches of the US govt are supposed to be independent and the dems desire to 'bring the supreme court under our control' is fundamentally at odds with the way the founders intended.
And before anyone goes off on one about how Trump filled the court with lackies, Amey Coney Barret was a dissent to Fischer Vs United States (inflating the charges of Jan 6th protesters) and Ketanji Brown Jackson went with the majority! No-one expected that!
@Sherrie Ludwig
"If it wasn't planned, then the image of an aging statesman stepping aside despite personal ambition for the good of the country sounds like a reason to vote for them."
Except none of that happened did it? Instead the aging statesman was seen mentally incapable before running for the presidency and hidden from the population using covid as an excuse. Then he became president and you were told he was fine, sharp as a tack and running rings around his staff. Any suggestion he wasnt capable was brushed off as lies and altered footage. After being told countless times that he was incapable it took a live debate to show the democrat supporting voters that they had been lied to severely!
After the debate became a rewrite of history. Suddenly the news realised he was incapable and needed scripts and pre-selected questions, his staff saw his mental capacity failing, his donors (see Clooney) knew the guy was gone, foreign allies had to rearrange their schedules to accommodate his incapability and everyone knew! But they didnt say anything until the emperor stood on stage with no clothes and the lies didnt cut it no more!
And just in case you think its a blip to ignore and not intentional, when Biden refused to step aside and the dems were desperate the news forgot or brushed away their prior awakening.
But now there is Harris. Someone so unpopular nobody voted for her to be president as vice president she is considered awful and useless and she knew all along about Bidens state yet lied.
Is that someone you would want to vote for? Who was/is running the country under Biden? And who will be running the country under Harris?
Ah yes, barely weeks prior Joe had to be marshalled at the D-Day events and guided off stage at the Clooney fundraiser and any claim that he was mentally frail was deemed a 'cheap fake', 'taken out of context' or 'deceptively edited video' by the talking heads desperate to cling to the lie that all was well.
But lets not forget that the same people crying 'out of context' are taking snippets of Trump and playing it over and over...
Decades back when one could say such things, a Texas politician (supposedly) said : "If you can't take their money, drink their booze, screw their women, and still vote against 'em, you don't belong in the Texas Legislature."
Ah, thank you... I'd remembered the comment, but not where I'd read it. I should have guessed, though; much of my knowledge of Texas politics came from reading Molly Ivins (I don't live anywhere near Texas).
"Hope she takes the money and fucks him over."
Just taking the money would hold huge political risk. IF she were to become President and excluded Kahn from a government post, was that move bribed or rationally decided? The other way around might discourage other campaign financiers from contributing money since she obviously doesn't hold up her end of the bargain. The only winning move is not to play.
Since the money was donated to a PAC, that's not directly a donation to her but to a theoretically separate group. Direct donations to politicians are limited in value IIRC.
I don't think adverts by PACs and super PACs carry an endorsement from the candidate and therefore aren't a binding policy announcement. Often they are attack ads.
Obviously as a right-pondian I may be wrong and am happy to be corrected.
I seem to remember the figure of $2B being banded about in regards to Barak's first run and I don't know if that included PACs or direct donations.
I disagree. I have worked in politics. If you have already made the decision to keep Kahn, take the money. Otherwise, don't. The foolish donor has made sure their donation will have no impact on the decision by making their desires public.
Just taking the money would hold huge political risk.
Oh you sweet child. Almost nothing constitutes "huge political risk" in US Federal politics. The vast majority of the voters Don't Give A Damn — their minds are already made up — and internal controls such as the impeachment process are rendered impotent by the partisan divide.
"Oh you sweet child. Almost nothing constitutes "huge political risk" in US Federal politics."
Yeah, ok, I'll restate it as if they don't do the things they've been paid on the side to do, they won't again get a pile of "campaign contributions" from that source again. I agree that even though it's really bribery in sheep's clothing, that dog won't bark. (I'm trying out a new tumbler for my metaphors).
Hope she takes the money and fucks him over.
As the late lamented Texas born journalist and commentator on Texas and US politics said:
"As they say around the Texas Legislature, if you can't drink their whiskey, screw their women, take their money, and vote against 'em anyway, you don't belong in office."
Molly Ivins
For anyone who hasn't read any of her columns or books, may I recommend them as time capsules of the Bush I and II era, and very fine examples of laughing at the enemy.
"It is not bribery because money did not change hands in a "traditional" brown paper bag."
In the movies it's almost always in a Halliburton Zero briefcase. For Europe, it might be a nicely tooled leather just for distinction. It's so hard to find brown paper bags these days.
"an interview with an international news outlet."
That's probably the safest place for a US politician (or politician buyer) to tell the "truth". The vast majority of Americans don't see/read/hear international news :-)
Smart move would be to very publicly turn it down and intentionally make it a media circus.
Sure she needs the money but she needs publicity and to be seen as a public champion much more in the competition she is in against the opponent she has.
What is better 7m to run address or 10 plus million in free publicity and media coverage casting her as tough on corruption and this kind of shinadigan.
The "problem" with that (from the politicians point of view) is that the other dodgy rich buggers might decide that they wouldn't get what they wanted, and so would keep their money at home or give it to the other side.
You can't get free publicity for money that's not been given...
Better to wait to a few days before the vote, and then make a big song and dance about it. But then that might hurt the donations for the next election. So I doubt they'll do it...
It's politics. The only people who get elected are capitalist champions. The people don't matter and the media won't champion her as they are a tool of our capitalist oppressors. The Dems in America are running on a "not Trump" ticket the same way Keith beat the Tories on a "not the Tories" ticket. Democracy was on life support and now it's finally dead. Politicians now have to claim things are "a threat to our democracy" to fool people into believing it still exists.
Instead of "Linkedin founder", so people understand why he cares about who is running the FTC. VCs don't like it when they can't get bought out for billions because big tech companies want to prevent competition, so they want an FTC that's less concerned about antitrust laws.
The problem for him and other VCs is that even if the US waves through every merger, the EU is going to be standing in the way.
> FTC boss must be doing something right if folks will pay to get her binned
Pretty sure the FTC employs thousnad if not more people... are you really going to say the boss did all the work ?
If the boss did all the work, then why are they employing all those other people ?
What a stupid comment to write.
> What a stupid comment to write.
We all say about another CowHorseFrog post where he tries to bang his drum again and this time hits himself in the head with the sticks*
*That explains a lot, doesn't it
PS
Cow, you prattle on about bosses being useless, just telling people what to because "they do not know how to do it", now you rail against a reference to a boss who has been active in setting good policy and keeping Big Corporate in line by doing so - i.e. by just telling people what to do!
Your thinking has all the consistency of cottage cheese.
This post has been deleted by its author
CowHorseFrog, your mistake is in your (apparently) rhetorical question "are you really going to say the boss did all the work ?"
The answer is "no". Nobody is claiming that the boss did all the work.
What the boss does, among other things, is: set policy; hire people with the ability to implement that policy; ensure those people have the right resources to implement that policy.
I do however agree with your last line. You did indeed write a stupid comment.
AC: What the boss does, among other things, is: set policy; hire people with the ability to implement that policy; ensure those people have the right resources to implement that policy.
cow: WHat makes you think the boss understands all the moving parts and can make an informed decision ?
How exactly does someone join a large org and the next day or next year they then understand exactly the consequences of the new business ?
Harris will win or lose without Reid Hoffman's money. So this isn't bribery -- Harris is hardly going to be swayed. This is to create obligation should Harris win, the open door available to a "donor" to have their issue heard. But having heard Hoffman out, Harris's administration may well say no.
Is this a corruption of the political process? Well yes. The average citizen wouldn't get a hearing from a new administration, they've got too much else happening.
"Pay to Play" is what its called here and as extolled by this idiot is not only really bad optics, its illegal.
I put all our problems down to a failure of our educational system. Its bad enough that we don't teach science that much (due to a chronic shortage of specialty teachers) but we probably don't bother with civics any more. This is a bit unfair on us immigrants -- we at least had to pass some kind of test to get the right to vote etc. while all the natural born Americans have to do is follow whatever meme amuses them at that moment.
we probably don't bother with civics any more. This is a bit unfair on us immigrants -- we at least had to pass some kind of test to get the right to vote etc.
Natural born USAian here, and I agree. Back in the primordial mists when I went to school (public school in the USA is nothing like your public school, I think you have council school as the lowest common school?) one had to take actual history and US government courses, and had to pass a test on US government to graduate.
Of course, each state sets its own educational policies, and in some the standards are so low I would be surprised if enough literacy to read traffic signs would be included.
So another rich religious minority member with vested interests, makes a donation because then can just write it off try, to stick thier big nose in where they has no business doing so. As a consumer I think Lina Khan is doing a good job, and that is the ONLY fucking reason said fuckwit is having a pop, because it will effect one of more of the companies his is a board member off - https://fortune.com/2024/07/26/reid-hoffman-angers-democrats-republicans-trump-harris-lina-khan/
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
