Your statistics, like you, are wrong.
Better just to implement a "dummy data" password for your devices, something that appears to unlock it and opens to a useless collection of games, cat pictures, a few innocuous phone contacts, and a fake calendar or such.
If a single officer seized any property belonging to Mr. Trump himself I feel confident that the President would go on the warpath against asset forfeiture.I'm not so confident of this. I'm sure Trump would object to his own assets being seized, but to be able to take his own experience and imagine it happening to others would require empathy, and that is one asset he does not possess.
A ham sandwich would be better. Even a ham sandwich that met the presidential age requirement.
And Trump will likely win at the Supreme Court level.Shall we start a pool?
All just my opinions, of course; feel free to disagree. SOME people actually support other folk's prerogative to have and share those.Other folks like techdirt, for example?
Because Dingledore is not an Islamphobic bigot like you?
This won't stand. It's just lawyers being lawyers.Lawyers being lawyers is how the whole court thing works. That said, if the Administration wants to send non-lawyers instead to the next hearing -- maybe even send Trump himself to argue his case -- I certainly won't object.
I think it's more trying to wear us down with repeated wall-of-text stupidity. While you're busing crafting reasonable replies and arguments, they're just mindlessly pasting nonsense like the good little drones they are.
It's no way to hold a debate, but then that's not really what they're looking for.
From the ACLU report:
Numerous studies in the TSA’s files found that people who are trained to look for these sorts of behaviors are worse at lie detection than people who are not trained at all.
oh.
So... you're saying Hillary Clinton is a communist.
sure. right. uh-huh.
Too bad Techdirt is now heading toward leading the liberal narrative. Too bad.... it was a good site.Since you're so unhappy here, I have a suggestion for you.
The other part of this is that prisons and jails have started ending in-person visits by family members of prisoners. Instead, their only option is video calling. This is not only a very poor substitute for face-to-face visits, but also -- surprise surprise -- hugely expensive for prisoners and their families, and enormously profitable for the prisons and the companies providing this "service".
There should not be a profit motive to keep people in prison.
Actually, that's unfair. It's not just ACs.
I can honestly say...You've not honestly said anything here. You've been disingenuous and deliberately obtuse.
I don't understand why you assume I'm bias.For the eight millionth goddamn time, the adjective form of the word is "biased". Also, he's not assuming.
Re: Re: What if?