Here is the ugly truth.
A federally cleared merger of two entertainment companies is being obstructed by California AG Bonta and Democrat national allies, not for fear of monopoly, and not because the Clayton Act requires it (Washington already declined to block the deal under the antitrust statutes.).
It’s being obstructed because Warner Bros. Discovery owns CNN.
AG Bonta denied that CNN was the point, then reportedly engaged in settlement discussions turning on “content monitoring” of that network.
Senator Warren warns him not to settle, lest Trump gain influence over the CNN newsroom.
The cost of this abuse of public office is not theoretical. It is a California industry of studios, crafts, theaters, and the households that live by them.
When public officials will risk an entire economy rather than loosen their grip on an institution that helps keep them in office, they reveal their unbridled lust for power.
Power has become so integral to their being that they would sooner reduce our society to ashes than lose their ability to rule over it.
That is breathtakingly shocking and scandalous.
I, for one, am dismayed by all this.
The LATU does not treat tenants as clients whose rights it is bound to defend. It treats them as pawns in a campaign to abolish rent and “overthrow capitalism.”
Individual tenants are useful only insofar as they advance that project.
Leaving a tenant with an eviction judgment on his/her “record “ is simply the price that may have to be paid to achieve LATU’s revolutionary goals.
So, is this an implicit admission that the antitrust lawsuit was not motivated by monopoly concerns but by partisan politics?
Don’t California Democrats realize that utilizing the machinery of state government (the Attorney General’s law enforcement powers) for partisan purposes is an abuse of public office?
@CAgovernor Governor Newsom:
“Other state militaries?”
You mean Title 32 National Guard?
What are you afraid of?
Are you afraid that a governor like DeSantis might send a federally funded, state-commanded force into California without asking?
The suspicions are confirmed:
“California Attorney General Rob Bonta emphatically insisted less than a month ago that his legal battle against the $110 billion Paramount acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery had “zero” to do with CNN.”
“Now, independent monitoring of CNN’s content is reportedly among the terms being discussed to settle that very case.”
https://t.co/WPhfDW1JQY
Saying the Los Angeles Tenant’s Union is a “relic of ‘Woke 1’” is an understatement.
There is publicly available evidence of the Los Angeles Tenant’s Union’s associations with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and with Marxist organizations and ideas.
Wikipedia’s entry on the Los Angeles Tenants Union (LATU) states that LATU “has a history of working with other left wing grassroots organisations, such as the Los Angeles chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America.”
Co-founders Tracy Rosenthal and Leonardo Vilchis published “Abolish Rent” (Haymarket, 2024). Reviews and interviews in Marxist and socialist journals treat the book as a class-struggle analysis, claiming housing is exploitation, tenants are political targets, “small-c communism” is collective control of housing and land, and rent abolition should be the goal beyond housing reform.
Influence Watch reports that a 2022 LATU-linked “people’s assembly” was led by organizers from the Party for Socialism and Liberation (a Marxist-Leninist organization) and adopted demands including “overthrowing capitalism,” seizing properties, and rent cancellation.
The LATU ideology overlaps with the anti-fascist rhetoric and confrontational direct action tactics of Antifa. LATU also operates in the same protest coalitions where some Antifa-identifying activists show up.
It’s not surprising then that the LATU has influence in the Los Angeles City Hall, when the City Council is constituted by at least four DSA members.
@nettermike A judicial officer has the authority to maintain order in the courtroom.
That authority does not extend to dictating how the executive branch (here, the Sheriffs) secures high-risk prisoners.
Contempt is not a tool for rewriting the Sheriff’s policy.
I understand the point you’re making.
But, the landlord should not immediately capitulate by settling with the customer.
Settling a claim that a liability policy does not cover, without first pursuing the tenant who actually owned and controlled the dog, merely signals to future plaintiffs that these losses belong to the property owner.
That’s a bad signal, and insurers notice. They respond by raising their rates.
In California, the owner of the dog is strictly liable under Civil Code § 3342. The landlord is not.
A landlord’s exposure, if any, is a narrower negligence claim that requires actual knowledge of vicious propensities plus the legal power to remove the animal. That is a high evidentiary bar for the customer to hurdle in litigation.
Additionally, a commercial lease almost invariably contains an indemnity and hold-harmless clause.
So, the landlord should file a cross-complaint against the tenant for contractual indemnity, equitable contribution, and negligence.
The cross-complaint joins the tenant and the tenant’s own liability policy to the lawsuit.
The additional defendant and additional insurance pool give the landlord far more leverage to force a global settlement or to shift the economic loss onto the tenant who brought the dog onto the premises.
Hmmm 🤔
Perhaps our culture is so fixated on images of youth that it will not countenance famous people growing old.
If they lead ordinary lives and age in public, they are no longer allowed to remain famous.
James Dean, Marilyn Monroe, and even Elvis Presley escaped that fate because they died relatively young. Time never degraded the familiar images we remember them by.
Others escape it by becoming recluses after a certain age, hence the tabloid pieces on rare sightings that dwell on how shockingly different they now look.
Ginny,
Your post rings true.
With the passage of time, even our most famous figures become ordinary people at the next table, and no one looks up.
But the corollary is also true.
I would not recognize the celebrities of today any more than the young recognize the celebrities of yesteryear.
President Coolidge in his first state of the union to Congress: “New arrivals should be limited to our capacity to absorb them into the ranks of good citizenship. America must be kept American. For this purpose, it is necessary to continue a policy of restricted immigration."