Where are the sanctions? How many more cases can get kicked up and down the court system, with decisions that don't take effect for weeks or months down the road before the law has no meaning?
I never would have guessed that politicians would funnel money towards donors and rich friends. If there has ever been a fatal argument against collectivization it's that it expands the number of people you can grift from and narrows the number of people you need to bribe to do it.
I'm just struggling to imagine an ASL interpreter translating whatever passes for language coming out of Donald Trump's lips into sign language. On this one, maybe the deaf can just consider themselves lucky.
The proper defense to all of Trump's lawsuits is a remarkably simple "no", but like all of his lawsuits the substance of the lawsuit isn't the point and engaging with the claims in the lawsuit in good faith is giving the lawyers who risk their bar licenses to humor them too much credit. The point (as always) is to tie up a "foe" (and everyone is a foe until the moment they become your stooge and even then, it's kinda touch and go) in legal proceedings that:
A) Drain them of cash while you use the (literally) infinite resources of the state that prints the world's reserve currency of choice to attack them.
B) Show off to loyal stooges how aggressive you are for attacking your enemies. Inspire them with what an aggressive person you are.
C) Cow your enemies who do not have the resources of the BBC to fight back, making them know what you will do them if they cross you.
D) Dominate the news cycle for another day with more pointless blather that isn't any of the things you are currently doing to fuck up the entire world.
E) "Flood the zone with shit". If you repeat the line "the BBC is untrustworthy" enough times, a certain segment of people will believe it. It doesn't matter if it's true or not. This is very much the "you can fool some of the people all the time" presidency. That core constituency requires maintenance in the form of continuous bald-faced lies.
Having been personally involved in two uses of mifepristone, no it's not a wonderful thing to be sticking in your body willy nilly, but as with most drugs you must consider it in the context of "compared to what?". Two of my children died in utero but were not automatically aborted by the body. Mifepristone ended those pregnancies safely where there was otherwise a serious risk of sepsis. I shudder to think of a world where the drug would not have been available.
I hope someday the pro-life crowd as a whole steps back and realizes the damage they do to real living people on behalf of theoretical ones.
No, but the author is clearly upset that hypocrites who have made entire careers about of being hypocritical are still being hypocritical and have no plans to stop being hypocritical. I'm simply reiterating that even if you did think there oughta be a punishment for that, there isn't one because the hypocrites are hypocritical in that regard too. It's hypocrisy all the way down.
Sure, but have you heard of the SCOTUS-affirmed legal precedent where being the President means you can't be prosecuted for crimes? He can actually say, with a straight face, that what is illegal for others is legal for him simply by virtue of being president.
Benefits range from savings on upgraded smart city meters, local consumer savings on broadband access, free marketing due to the network’s popularity, improved health care outcomes, expanded business and remote work opportunities, improved tourism to revitalized parts of the city, and direct profits from the network itself
Look, I love the idea of public broadband but this kind of number counting is the same sort of math the RIAA uses to determine damages for piracy. You can't count dollars people didn't spend on something as a gain. It implies all of that stuff would have been bought (at full price), but a lot of those benefits probably would have just been forgone if people had to pay AT&T or Verizon prices. Also, "improved tourism to revitalized parts of the city" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.
Again, the community broadband is great, but I just feel that throwing around the number 5.3 billion is a bit dishonest. The entire GDP of Chattanooga TN is only 42 billion.
Predictions for 2026: Larry Ellison breaks up with Trump and tries to use his media empire to dissent, only to mysteriously decide entirely of his own accord to jump out a 50th story window.
We gonna be Russia by Christmas 2026. Straight up.
Call me old fashioned but the sorts of people that I send "intimate and embarrassing" messages to are pretty much limited to my wife.
Is Mr. Abbott meaning to imply that he and Mr. Musk know each other in the biblical fashion?
Because fear gives you power, and whoever is the most fearsome is the most powerful.
Some of them might have stepped back from the ledge of physical violence, but it's hard to miss that groups like this thrive around people who are basically one-upping each other to show how extreme and radical they are.
It's important to remember that the United States is fifty different states. There are fifty different systems. Some of them work exactly the same. Some work slightly differently. Some have their own thing going on. Virtually none of them talk to each other and communication between them and the federal government (Bespoke System #51!) is spotty at best. States are largely left to their own devices to determine who is a valid voter and how elections are held. There are nominally supposed to be some rules handed down from the federal level, but they largely operate on the idea that things are working until someone finds evidence that they are not. Combine this with a political apparatus that is very incentivized to sign up as many people as possible and throw vetting over the wall to law enforcement and yeah, sometimes things can slip through (intentionally or not).
My point is that it's not "war crime shaped". It does not sport a "war crime silhouette". It's "serial killer" shaped that sports a "premeditated murder" silhouette.
Stop calling it a war crime. It's not a war crime. To commit a war crime you must be at war, or at very least in some form of armed conflict.
This is not that.
In fact, by its perpetrators own admission (and legal necessity) it is not an armed conflict because the bad people in the boats are not capable of shooting back. The reality is so awful that it doesn't even make a funny joke: Legally the Department of Defense is claiming that the US is just shooting its weapons into the water apropos nothing and if some poor unfortunate souls happen to be in the way of said missiles that is unfortunate for them but not the problem of the United States.
Why choose to be spineless? Everyone who actually stands up the Fanta Dr. Evil succeeds at it. Before you say "defending yourself in court costs money": 1. This is the BBC. They have money. 2. You don't exactly need to dish out for a legal defense that comes down to "lol no".
Where are the sanctions? How many more cases can get kicked up and down the court system, with decisions that don't take effect for weeks or months down the road before the law has no meaning?
I never would have guessed that politicians would funnel money towards donors and rich friends. If there has ever been a fatal argument against collectivization it's that it expands the number of people you can grift from and narrows the number of people you need to bribe to do it.
I'm just struggling to imagine an ASL interpreter translating whatever passes for language coming out of Donald Trump's lips into sign language. On this one, maybe the deaf can just consider themselves lucky.
The proper defense to all of Trump's lawsuits is a remarkably simple "no", but like all of his lawsuits the substance of the lawsuit isn't the point and engaging with the claims in the lawsuit in good faith is giving the lawyers who risk their bar licenses to humor them too much credit. The point (as always) is to tie up a "foe" (and everyone is a foe until the moment they become your stooge and even then, it's kinda touch and go) in legal proceedings that: A) Drain them of cash while you use the (literally) infinite resources of the state that prints the world's reserve currency of choice to attack them. B) Show off to loyal stooges how aggressive you are for attacking your enemies. Inspire them with what an aggressive person you are. C) Cow your enemies who do not have the resources of the BBC to fight back, making them know what you will do them if they cross you. D) Dominate the news cycle for another day with more pointless blather that isn't any of the things you are currently doing to fuck up the entire world. E) "Flood the zone with shit". If you repeat the line "the BBC is untrustworthy" enough times, a certain segment of people will believe it. It doesn't matter if it's true or not. This is very much the "you can fool some of the people all the time" presidency. That core constituency requires maintenance in the form of continuous bald-faced lies.
Having been personally involved in two uses of mifepristone, no it's not a wonderful thing to be sticking in your body willy nilly, but as with most drugs you must consider it in the context of "compared to what?". Two of my children died in utero but were not automatically aborted by the body. Mifepristone ended those pregnancies safely where there was otherwise a serious risk of sepsis. I shudder to think of a world where the drug would not have been available. I hope someday the pro-life crowd as a whole steps back and realizes the damage they do to real living people on behalf of theoretical ones.
Ceci n'est pas une slippery slope
No, but the author is clearly upset that hypocrites who have made entire careers about of being hypocritical are still being hypocritical and have no plans to stop being hypocritical. I'm simply reiterating that even if you did think there oughta be a punishment for that, there isn't one because the hypocrites are hypocritical in that regard too. It's hypocrisy all the way down.
Sure, but have you heard of the SCOTUS-affirmed legal precedent where being the President means you can't be prosecuted for crimes? He can actually say, with a straight face, that what is illegal for others is legal for him simply by virtue of being president.
Predictions for 2026: Larry Ellison breaks up with Trump and tries to use his media empire to dissent, only to mysteriously decide entirely of his own accord to jump out a 50th story window. We gonna be Russia by Christmas 2026. Straight up.
Call me old fashioned but the sorts of people that I send "intimate and embarrassing" messages to are pretty much limited to my wife. Is Mr. Abbott meaning to imply that he and Mr. Musk know each other in the biblical fashion?
Because fear gives you power, and whoever is the most fearsome is the most powerful. Some of them might have stepped back from the ledge of physical violence, but it's hard to miss that groups like this thrive around people who are basically one-upping each other to show how extreme and radical they are.
I can't wait to find out that it was actually the responsibility of the plane's pilot and that she left the room when the final call was being made.
It's important to remember that the United States is fifty different states. There are fifty different systems. Some of them work exactly the same. Some work slightly differently. Some have their own thing going on. Virtually none of them talk to each other and communication between them and the federal government (Bespoke System #51!) is spotty at best. States are largely left to their own devices to determine who is a valid voter and how elections are held. There are nominally supposed to be some rules handed down from the federal level, but they largely operate on the idea that things are working until someone finds evidence that they are not. Combine this with a political apparatus that is very incentivized to sign up as many people as possible and throw vetting over the wall to law enforcement and yeah, sometimes things can slip through (intentionally or not).
My point is that it's not "war crime shaped". It does not sport a "war crime silhouette". It's "serial killer" shaped that sports a "premeditated murder" silhouette.
State sponsored terrorism?
Stop calling it a war crime. It's not a war crime. To commit a war crime you must be at war, or at very least in some form of armed conflict. This is not that. In fact, by its perpetrators own admission (and legal necessity) it is not an armed conflict because the bad people in the boats are not capable of shooting back. The reality is so awful that it doesn't even make a funny joke: Legally the Department of Defense is claiming that the US is just shooting its weapons into the water apropos nothing and if some poor unfortunate souls happen to be in the way of said missiles that is unfortunate for them but not the problem of the United States.
Why choose to be spineless? Everyone who actually stands up the Fanta Dr. Evil succeeds at it. Before you say "defending yourself in court costs money": 1. This is the BBC. They have money. 2. You don't exactly need to dish out for a legal defense that comes down to "lol no".
There was a word for this exact sort of thing long before Barbara Streisand came along: the Nuremberg Defense