I'm Here Live. I'm Not A Cat.
Improbably, cat videos offered a sweet break from sedition when a Texas lawyer got trapped in a kitten filter during a Zoom court hearing, prompting his assurance to the court that, despite his nervous googly eyes, he wasn't a cat. Twitter was on it: The judge said it showed "the justice system continues to function in these tough times," lawyers said their dog would out-litigate some of their opponents in court, and many said the cat lawyer did a far better job than Trump's lawyers.

Improbable, we know - especially for those of us who are meh on cats - but cat videos offered a welcome break from sedition on the first day of Trump's impeachment trial when a Texas lawyer accidentally left a kitten filter on during a virtual court hearing. Attorney Rod Ponton riotously morphed into a googly-eyed kitten during a Zoom hearing on a civil forfeiture action in the 394th District Court and then, trapped by his feline persona, offered his nervous assurance to the court that he was nonetheless "prepared to go forward" with the case. "I'm here live," he declared. "I'm not a cat." To which a deadpan Judge Roy Ferguson replied, "I can see that" - though, really, he couldn't. With calm dignity, the judge suggested Ponton had a filter on in his Zoom settings and tried to walk him through its removal; the cat, worriedly peering side-to-side, eventually did. He later explained he'd been using his secretary's computer at a remote office, and "shit happens."
Despite laws typically forbidding publicizing court hearings, the good judge later released the man/cat exchange "for educational purposes," warning, "If a child used your computer before you join a virtual hearing check the 'Zoom video options' to be sure filters are off." He added, "These fun moments are a byproduct of the legal profession's dedication to ensuring that the justice system continues to function in these tough times...True professionalism all around!" Twitter was on it, relishing the rare laugh it offered the 12 or 357 times they watched it. People wondered if Jeffrey Toobin wished he'd just had a cat filter. They suggested, "I have a dog I am certain would out-litigate many of the lawyers I go against." And they argued, given Trump attorney Bruce Castor's garbled "defense - so bad Newsmax cut it off so Alan Dershowitz could trash it - "The cat lawyer did a much better job than the former president's lawyers today." "Maybe if they used the cat filter," they added, "their arguments would make more sense." Actually, nope.
We are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. In a few short weeks, US voters will have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. Our Fall Campaign is underway, and we need your help. To power our newsroom through the rest of the year, we need to raise $125,000 by midnight on October 31. So if you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |

Improbable, we know - especially for those of us who are meh on cats - but cat videos offered a welcome break from sedition on the first day of Trump's impeachment trial when a Texas lawyer accidentally left a kitten filter on during a virtual court hearing. Attorney Rod Ponton riotously morphed into a googly-eyed kitten during a Zoom hearing on a civil forfeiture action in the 394th District Court and then, trapped by his feline persona, offered his nervous assurance to the court that he was nonetheless "prepared to go forward" with the case. "I'm here live," he declared. "I'm not a cat." To which a deadpan Judge Roy Ferguson replied, "I can see that" - though, really, he couldn't. With calm dignity, the judge suggested Ponton had a filter on in his Zoom settings and tried to walk him through its removal; the cat, worriedly peering side-to-side, eventually did. He later explained he'd been using his secretary's computer at a remote office, and "shit happens."
Despite laws typically forbidding publicizing court hearings, the good judge later released the man/cat exchange "for educational purposes," warning, "If a child used your computer before you join a virtual hearing check the 'Zoom video options' to be sure filters are off." He added, "These fun moments are a byproduct of the legal profession's dedication to ensuring that the justice system continues to function in these tough times...True professionalism all around!" Twitter was on it, relishing the rare laugh it offered the 12 or 357 times they watched it. People wondered if Jeffrey Toobin wished he'd just had a cat filter. They suggested, "I have a dog I am certain would out-litigate many of the lawyers I go against." And they argued, given Trump attorney Bruce Castor's garbled "defense - so bad Newsmax cut it off so Alan Dershowitz could trash it - "The cat lawyer did a much better job than the former president's lawyers today." "Maybe if they used the cat filter," they added, "their arguments would make more sense." Actually, nope.

Improbable, we know - especially for those of us who are meh on cats - but cat videos offered a welcome break from sedition on the first day of Trump's impeachment trial when a Texas lawyer accidentally left a kitten filter on during a virtual court hearing. Attorney Rod Ponton riotously morphed into a googly-eyed kitten during a Zoom hearing on a civil forfeiture action in the 394th District Court and then, trapped by his feline persona, offered his nervous assurance to the court that he was nonetheless "prepared to go forward" with the case. "I'm here live," he declared. "I'm not a cat." To which a deadpan Judge Roy Ferguson replied, "I can see that" - though, really, he couldn't. With calm dignity, the judge suggested Ponton had a filter on in his Zoom settings and tried to walk him through its removal; the cat, worriedly peering side-to-side, eventually did. He later explained he'd been using his secretary's computer at a remote office, and "shit happens."
Despite laws typically forbidding publicizing court hearings, the good judge later released the man/cat exchange "for educational purposes," warning, "If a child used your computer before you join a virtual hearing check the 'Zoom video options' to be sure filters are off." He added, "These fun moments are a byproduct of the legal profession's dedication to ensuring that the justice system continues to function in these tough times...True professionalism all around!" Twitter was on it, relishing the rare laugh it offered the 12 or 357 times they watched it. People wondered if Jeffrey Toobin wished he'd just had a cat filter. They suggested, "I have a dog I am certain would out-litigate many of the lawyers I go against." And they argued, given Trump attorney Bruce Castor's garbled "defense - so bad Newsmax cut it off so Alan Dershowitz could trash it - "The cat lawyer did a much better job than the former president's lawyers today." "Maybe if they used the cat filter," they added, "their arguments would make more sense." Actually, nope.
