holy shit the journalist girl in love with martin shkreli is on clubhouse and the story just keeps going.

"So who's the villain in this story?" these mods are so being so gentle and diplomatic.

"Do you feel like you've been manipulated?" "No. (laughing)"
A gentle question/inquiry about how she feels after losing so much in this process, and she replies saying that it was hard, but she has no regrets, and says that without it she would not have had her eyes opened to how bad the criminal justice & prison system is
Thank god for the woman who is zeroing in on the details of the exact ways he was manipulating her by saying that he had anxiety & panic attacks too (telling her what she wants to hear, mirroring her personal wounds so he can bond with her over them)
Oh my god not some guy derailing the entire room by trying to make the conversation about CLUBHOUSE and asking her how she found the app, who invited her, if she's had a welcome room yet. dl;skadlaksds
"Do you think you would have fallen in love with him if you met under different circumstances?" She says yes, absolutely, if she knew about his self-taught bio-engineering(?) and 'mastery of small subjects'(???)
i wish the best for my ex husband, i hope he goes out there and [pause, laugh cough] lives his best life. anyway, Martin was the beginning of cancel culture, and he even offered to cure COVID pro-bono but he's.. in prison.....
MODS ASLEEP, TIME TO ASK THE REAL QUESTIONS. LET'S GOOOOO
wow. what was that mess
(everyone is talking over each other)
What I want to know: when she microwaved him a hamburger during visitation, did she take the buns off first or did she heat them with the patty?
"I DONT THINK THAT LOVING SOMEONE IS MISCONDUCT."
She says the good thing about sending more white people to jail is that it makes jail better for everyone by raising awareness about how bad things are. Last question was about chicken wings. Now the afterparty room is already going.
this is now going to become the standard move: twitter's main character du jour will go on clubhouse post-virality to stir up even more attention and drama. congrats, clubhouse is now jerry springer.

More from Journalism

This is trash, @AP. Utter garbage. Shame on the “journalists” who wrote this (really? You needed 2 people to report out this garbage?) Also, you don’t even make clear that this lady is wrong. You treat it as a legitimate position. What the fuck is wrong with you?


Look at this. This treats both views as legitimate. Fucking garbage.


Have you learned nothing?! This is such bullshit. Why the fuck do I even bother trying to push back on bad journalism? No one in positions of power ever listen.

I used to think that bad journalism was mostly the result of honest mistakes, but the past few years have really hammered home for me how much it is intentional trash. Shame on @AP for that bullshit. Shame on @ABC for letting Rand Paul rant about his election conspiracy theories.

Seriously, @AP @ClaireGalofaro @JulietLinderman? You didn’t even bother to note that this lady’s delusions are false.
THREAD:
Instead of attacking those of us raising it, why aren’t mainstream “liberal” journalists on here as outraged as we are about how many senior Democratic Party figures seem to have been compromised by Chinese spies?

Genocide is non-negotiable

#TAGG 🧿

See examples:

1) Dem Senator Feinstein’s staffer for 20 years outed as a Chinese spy


2) Dem Eric Swallwell caught in a female Chinese spy’s snare:


3) Dem Senator Boxer registers as a foreign agent for Chinese surveillance firm:


3) Dem Hunter Biden allegedly invests in Megvii, a firm accused of helping to round up Uyghurs using A+++ facial recognition technology

You May Also Like

My top 10 tweets of the year

A thread 👇

https://t.co/xj4js6shhy


https://t.co/b81zoW6u1d


https://t.co/1147it02zs


https://t.co/A7XCU5fC2m
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?