Reposted by SFCeleste
BREAKING:
NYT reviewed time-stamped images from a security camera at James Talarico's home, which were provided by his campaign.
The images showed Talarico at the home between Oct. 1 and Oct. 8.
nytimes.com
Republicans Promoted a False Rumor That James Talarico Was in Ohio
The Democratic nominee for Senate in Texas spent nine days off the trail with what he and his campaign said was a bad case of the flu. His opponents fueled rumors, including one that spread widely bef...
![Here, Plaintiff contends that the ads are contrary to the prohibition on using federal funds
"for publicity or propaganda purposes," Pl.'s Br. at 17 (citing Pub. L. No. 119-75, § 718, 140 Stat. at 495). But the Act does not define "publicity" or "propaganda." See Principles of Federal Appropriations Law at 3-281 ("[T]here is no definition of either term."); see also id. at 3-282 ("[T]he prohibitions themselves provide little definitional guidance as to what specific activities are publicity or propaganda").
And "[i]n construing and applying a publicity or propaganda provision," id. at 3-281, it is necessary to "achieve a delicate balance between competing interests." Id. On the one hand, the Executive "has a legitimate right to explain and defend its policies and respond to attacks on th[ose]
policies]." Id. at 3-294. So "[t]o restrict all materials that have some political content or express
support of an Administration's policies would significantly curtail th[at] recognized and legitimate exercise of the Administration's authority to inform the public of its policies, to justify its policies and to rebut attacks on its policies." Id. at 3-296 (citation omitted). It is also "important for the public to understand the philosophical underpinnings of the policies advanced by elected officials](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:36eqtmzysqf7wsslczw4uxcd/bafkreidcuzoiwnfbvrp7xkfin3pp42jcokxuegy2thfcke4exb6bovxcdq)
