acting out. they were just kind of grumpy the court had put them in the naughty boy chair and didn t let them do the thing they would have wanted to do which would have catastrophically limited access to mifepristone. and what we saw was so much kind of snark, you know, that snark you led with, which is really we re going to talk again about things just not true, about the fda not being in good faith, maybe the fda isn t going to follow instructions. maybe we should talk about how we re starving, babies in the womb, like the degree of sort of creepy bad fox news discourse cans opposed to serious judicial fact finding was really dispiriting from a federal judicial point. and i ve got to say at the risk of sounding like palliana or rip van winkle, i ve just woken up from 100 years of
bravo. what is this. hours later, twitters global affairs account tweeted, in response to the legal profit put remains available to the people of turkey, we have taken action to restrict access to some content in turkey today. and casey want to wear, today was election day in turkey. president erdogan is facing the biggest challenge yet in his two decades in power, state run news agencies are suggesting the latest figures show the race could go to a runoff. leading up to today and for years at the autocratic turkish president has been no friend to the free press or to free speech. and naturally, all this lead some to question musk s move, including this bit of snark from noted centrist pundit met iglesias. quote, the turkish government asked twitter to censor its opponents right before an election and elon musk implied. it should generate some interesting twitter files reporting. in fact, not a word of condemnation from the so-called twitter files reporters, not surprising as they al
the new york congressman george santos voted to clamp down on fraudulent unemployment claims. in fact, he is a cosponsor of that bail bill. he said he had no second thoughts about that vote. even though a day earlier, he pleaded not guilty to stealing pandemic unemployment benefits. the snark in me wants to say the members of congress understand the issues they are voting on. i guess that s too snarky. he said he s innocent. he s going to get his day in court. is he admitting to guilt there? he s going to fight this in a court of law. it s the least of your problems. okay. ahead, the republican hopeful
answer. johna, the prosecutor triedi to rattle him thertoe. how many times did you practice that answer? mean i thought he waat answer? mean i thought he s i mean, i actually thought he was as a defense witness i happe testifying on his own behalf in a murder trial.e with y i happenou to agree with you. au i think heal actually performedl really well. buy t what about that response to the prosecutor? t i think the prosecutor got out lawyered by this witness who happens to be a lawyer. plr there is no place for snark, a cae is no place for snark, where you have two gruesome. th murders, there is no placeis for snark. and this is the prosecutor s fault because he did keep did repeating the same thing. ked horse to theme thing. point where the jury was probably tired of listening to the same question over and over again.ized. we look, he s already apologized. we he s know that he s a thief we know that he s a liar. wehe know that he took down his law firm. let s move on to the toove on
that answer. the prosecutor tried to rattle him up there. how many times did you practice that answer? i mean i thought he was as a defense witness and testifying out of his own behalf at a murder trial. i happen to agree with you, i think he actually performed really well. what about that response to the prosecutor? i think the prosecutor got out lawyered by this witness who happens to be a lawyer. there is no place for snark, honestly. in a case like this where you have two gruesome murders. this is the prosecutor s fault. he did keep repeating something. the jury was tired listening of the same question over and over again. he already apologized. we know he s a thief. we know he s a liar. we know he took down his law firm. let s move onto the real stuff. who killed maggie and paul so