A shady new super PAC named for Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg just spent nearly $20 million on efforts to help Donald Trump appear more moderate on abortion, but the group won’t reveal where its money comes from until after the election.

The pro-Trump RBG PAC (a massive insult to the late justice, who hated Trump) is attempting to use the liberal justice’s legacy to try and boost Trump ahead of the election. Its website even features photos of Ginsberg and the former president, captioned “Great Minds Think Alike.”

    • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      3 days ago

      I sat here trying to come up with a defamatory statement about Rush Limbaugh to post for quite some time before giving up. I couldn’t think of a single awful thing that wouldn’t be believable. What a colossal piece of trash, even from the grave.

        • Baaahb@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          The national kind, yeah. Common knowledge. See above statement about how awful he was.

          I am aware you’re specifically referring to rush’s specifically anti-socialist dint. But by suggesting he was a fan of socialism, you’re committing to the same fallacy as he tended to, where he would equate socialists (from USSR so obviously they are mega socialist, and fans of the purges, read authortarians) with actual socialist ideology.

          The grand irony of rush is that his solution to authoritarianism was authoritarianism.

          • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            I was just trying to say something about him that he would find insulting. Anyways, tobacco did a good job with him.

            • Baaahb@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Entirely reasonable, and likely successful. There are however a bunch of weirdos here, and a bunch of people that won’t understand the reference cause they do t remember the guy. No seriously, we grew up with him, but that was ages ago for the young’uns these days.

      • kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        I believe that is the case yes. The logic behind why libel and defamation are crimes is that it can cause damage to a person and their livlihood. It could obviously hurt the earning potential of their estate, like if they were still selling books posthumously. But i don’t think that’s protected.