Summary
Trump adviser Stephen Miller erupted on Fox News after MSNBC analyst Andrew Weissmann criticized Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act to deport migrants as possibly unconstitutional.
Miller called Weissmann “an absolute moron,” “a fool,” and “a degenerate,” claiming he “shills for people who rape and murder Americans.”
When host Martha MacCallum noted both could express opinions, Miller shouted that he’d “defend American lives” while Weissmann “can defend illegal alien rapists, terrorists and predators.”
This continues Miller’s pattern of televised outbursts, including previous incidents on CNN and reactions to SNL jokes about Trump.
This guy is always throwing tantrums when people ask questions. He must imagine it means he’s in control. He clearly has no life skills, unless being a bitter little Nazi counts as a life skill. Look at him throwing around accusations of being “a degenerate”: he even borrows his vocabulary from his hero Goebbels.
AKA Kapo Stephen “PeeWee Himmler” Miller.
Pee Wee Himmler is such a little bitch
Removed by mod
The fun part about fascist takeovers is when they take power, they stop trying to hide what they really are.
The thing that makes fascism self-destruct in every instance in history is that they never actually had a “playbook.” They had one trick, one narrative to get them to the top and they leave a wake of ruin behind them to get there, then they consume the host like botflies in the skin of the nation. This is why they’re going to try to stop elections and mettle with democracy broadly, because they know they will never be able to maintain a playbook narrative with this wild pack of ravenous orcs pillaging the countryside.
This is true, even their playbook is just a ghoulish wish list of the worst people in the country and has approval rating below 10%
Everytime I see this guy, this is all I can think of.
nah man. the deepest guild spice junkie had a ton of more decency and morality than Stephen Miller. don’t drag them down with him.
hmmm there’s something about the word “degenerate” that just gives me a bad feeling here!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degenerate_art oh, its association with nazis! i remember!They’ve seized the Kennedy Center for the arts in Washington DC. We can expect
HitlerTrump Youth displays and campaigns against degenerate art, starting here and spreading across the country.THANK YOU. I’ve been sounding this alarm for years and I’ve felt like a lone crazy person a lot of the time when doing it.
It makes me nervous that people use the word degenerate casually without knowing the history of the word, so people like this guy using it the nazi way can just sneak in with it
This little dick incel nazi needs to pay for his crimes against humanity.
Unless it’s plumber vigilantism, I don’t see it happening.
That’s fine.
Nothing new, Stephen Miller uses fake outrage to dodge questions where the obvious answers are either because he’s scared of everything or he’s a white supremacist.
Andrew Weissmann is always on point.
Maybe so but it doesn’t sound like he punched that Nazi bitch in the face, which he should have done. People should not generally be comfortable insulting someone to their face like that. Fighting Words are a legal defense for assault and battery FYI.
Fighting Words are a legal defense for assault and battery FYI.
Don’t bet on it. The Supreme Court’s definition of fighting words is so narrow that none of Miller’s squealing and babbling would quality.
Fighting Words are a legal defense for assault and battery FYI.
I’m pretty sure Weissmann knows what he can and cannot do under the law.
this the guy that dyed his bald scalp to look like he had a full head of hair.
This is the guy who joined the last stretch of a women’s long distance foot race to prove men are better.
This is the guy who littered on purpose in high school to make the janitors clean it up.
I thought “no way, no-one is that stupid” so I googled it. Turns out, he is.
Platform a clown - expect a circus
He is not a clown joking around, he is a dangerous sociopath who is a chief architect of our budding anti-immigrant apparatus. Our Heinrich Himmler analogue.
He is threatening a member of the press on live TV. There is nothing funny or boorish about it.
It’s uncanny to me how this little nazi has such a punchable face.
Kapo isn’t strong enough to describe this bastard.
Shouting and screaming like this is his go-to move whenever he gets put in a corner. Someone should just mute his mic and slap him when he starts his Nazi fits.
When they run out of arguments, they just start to scream.
Reminded of that Sartre quote again https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7870768-never-believe-that-anti-semites-are-completely-unaware-of-the-absurdity
Except instead of fall silent I guess it’s have a tantrum now?
Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.
Probably my favorite Steven Miller piece to watch. Gives you those feel good vibes. Props to that reporter making him look like a petulant child.
What a great journalist. Need more like him.
“I have been very respectful, why are you yelling?”
10/10
Is this guy on Ketamine too? Slurred speech, sagging eyes, exaggerated facial expressions…
I knew I recognised this guy. Is having tantrums like a fuckin toddler his only strategy?
I think that when typical toddlers throw tantrums, they usually believe that there is some injustice that they are outraged about, like why they can’t have candy at 10:00 at night. Miller’s tantrums seem entirely performative and I don’t believe that he truly gives a fuck about any of the victims in his many anecdotes that he will cite, only that he gets to pretend he has moral superiority over someone who doesn’t show the same pretend outrage.
He gets angry at being called out, then uses those victims’ anecdotes as an excuse to express that anger without getting attacked for it. It’s all calculated, one of many manipulation methods that bullies use.
I see you’ve met my mother.
Miller called Weissmann “an absolute moron,” “a fool,” and “a degenerate,” claiming he “shills for people who rape and murder Americans.”
Well, that sounds wilfully defamatory. Let’s hope his sorry ass gets dragged into court.
All of that is purely opinion. Defamation has to be statements of fact, not opinion. Turn in your law license.
“Defamation is a statement that injures a third party’s reputation. The tort of defamation includes both libel (written statements) and slander (spoken statements). State common law and statutory law governs defamation actions, and each state varies in their standards for defamation and potential damages .”
I will also be waiting for you to turn in your law license.
I assume you’re quoting from this page?
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/defamation
If so, you should have kept reading:
“To prove prima facie defamation, a plaintiff must show four things: 1) a false statement purporting to be fact; …”
So, opinions don’t count. Nothing he said was a verifiable statement of fact, it was all purely opinion, so it’s not defamation.
Thanks for your law degree!
I think you are getting confused as telling the truth is generally not considered defamation. Telling a lie that causes a tort (or an injury, now that you have lost your license) is the definition of defamation.
Please just stop with your opinion nonsense.
Exactly my point. Telling a lie (something that can be factually true or false, and isn’t merely an opinion) is an element of defamation (clearly not the entire definition of defamation, but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that you knew that much at least).
Don’t even play, your original statement was nonsensical to defining defamation.
While defamation is hard to prove in some circumstances, in this case it is pretty cut and dry.
“prove prima facie defamation, a plaintiff must show four things: 1) a false statement purporting to be fact; 2) publication or communication of that statement to a third person; 3) fault amounting to at least negligence ; and 4) damages , or some harm caused to the reputation of the person or entity who is the subject of the statement.”
We have three of the conditions already. The plaintiff would need to prove harm for the last. With an actual tort I think this case could be successful, but there are a lot of variables.
What do you think?
- a false statement purporting to be fact;
What’s the false statement purporting to be fact, and not simply an opinion?
I don’t think we use defamation lawsuits and politics enough. Look at how much good Dominion did by filing one. People who are lied about by fascists should sue them in every instance, expose their lies in court, and collect lots of money off of them. If we had done this earlier we could have stopped fascism entirely by this method, and maybe too late to do this but it’s probably not useless
Dominion’s lawsuit was based on factual statements that were demonstrably false, not just opinions.
republicans lie on matters of fact all the time.
Yes, and?
On matters of fact you can sue on like opinions
Could you try that again in English?
(And people who are lied about by them, should sue them.)
Just because something is a lie doesn’t mean it’s defamation. If a republican says that the economy always does better under republicans, that may be a lie, but it isn’t defamation.
