Having the DOJ argue in court that sexual assault is part of the job of president when a republican holds the office is certainly one way to try to get out of paying but I'm not quite sure they understand what that says about them and their boss.
And what's your alternative, what do you think people should be doing and to avoid confusion be specific.
What was it? A reminder yet again that if you want actual news anything CBS related is worse than nothing at all.
“Because of our relationship with Dunwoody PD as a development partner–meaning we had explicit permission from Dunwoody to use their Flock system for both testing (for product improvement) and demonstration–Flock employees did occasionally access Dunwoody’s devices for those purposes,” Langley added. “I recognize that the choice to use MJCCA, rather than parts of the city, was a poor one on our part. I am cognizant of the additional, well-founded sensitivity of the Jewish community to security concerns at this time. Therefore, I would like to extend a formal apology to you and the entire MJCCA community for this poor decision. Candidly, it is because of the very real security concerns the MJCCA community is feeling that I am so proud of our partnership, and those with Jewish organizations across the country.” That wasn't in the slightest an apology, that was a 'I'm sorry if you felt that we did something we shouldn't have but we didn't' non-apology that shifts any offense or outrage outwards along with any blame for feeling those things.
Oh I expect that they'll be flipping/exposing their true position a lot sooner due to multiple democrat states deciding to play by the new republican rules. I fully expect that within the next month or two, or at the latest before the mid-terms SCOTUS will declare that the democrat efforts to gerrymander republican voters out of their voting maps are unconstitutional and must be reverted even as they greenlight republican efforts to do so.
If the NYPD or any other police department is tired of the negative public perception they've earned and the presumption that allegation against officers should be treated as true even if an internal review ends up dismissing it then they have only themselves to blame for refusing to hold their own accountable and ensuring that the 'few bad apples' spoiled the entire barrel. If they spend even a fraction of time honestly investigating and as appropriate kicking the corrupt and criminal out of their own ranks as they do trying to find and arrest those that aren't cops they'd have solved this problem decades ago and it would be unfair to act as though their entire lot is corrupt and untrustworthy, but they didn't so it is.
The most messed up part? I'm honestly amazed that the US is just barely out of the top third, though I suppose there's still a few more years for the Trump regime to make a play for dead last just like they seem to be doing for everything else like 'economy' and 'international reputation/trust'.
And another group finds out that their face is and always was on the menu, and as always it's just as funny this time as it has been before.
SCOTUS is really going above and beyond in their efforts to make crystal clear that they are the most openly corrupt court in the US, the only thing more horrifying is the thought of what the fifth circuit will do in response to make their case that they deserve the 'title' more.
On this front, she appears to walk a fine line—being skeptical of vaccines and critical of vaccination recommendations, while avoiding overt opposition to them. Given what happened with Kennedy anyone who's not vocally fully on board with vaccinations having proven to be safe and effective at cutting down infectious diseases both at the point of getting infected and the results of infection has no business being nominated never mind having that nomination confirmed. One pro-plague 'alternative health' nutjob is already getting enough people infected and killed, the US does not need a second major government position filled with another one.
Yeah they really did screw that one up by making it so narrow when it should have applied to federal and state agents.
By 2004, the racial gap in voter registration and turnout had largely disappeared, with minorities registering and voting at levels that sometimes surpassed the majority. Black voters now participate in elections at similar rates as the rest of the electorate, even turning out at higher rates than white voters in two of the five most recent Presidential elections nationwide and in Louisiana. Even if you took that statement at face value and accepted that as true the question then becomes if that's because racism is gone from the US or because it was previously illegal to racially discriminate against minorities voting and therefore the states had to allow them to or face lawsuits? Much like the Kavanaugh Stops I foresee a whole lot of silence, whining about how they had nothing to do with that and attempts to change the subject when, not if a whole slew of republican run states now start openly engaging in race-based voter suppression.
Which tells you all you need to know about how vile those people truly are, if all the other evidence somehow didn't already make it clear.
We conclude that § 10 of the No Vigilantes Act attempts to directly regulate the United States in its performance of governmental functions. The Supremacy Clause forbids the State from enforcing such legislation. So strange how the government has been able to do it's thing for over two centuries without masked goons running around kidnapping and murdering people and it's only now that it's apparently impossible for the government to operate without said masked goons. 'If you're a federal agent operating in our state you're doing so without a mask' is no more california trying to 'regulate the United States in its performance of governmental functions' than a law that made clear that federal agents aren't allowed to drive while drunk would be and the fact that the ninth circuit bought such a blatantly pathetic lie should be considered a stain on their credibility for the rest of their lives.
The problem with Cassidy is that he’s acting like he’s trying to convince Kennedy to change his mind on this. He’s not going to. Not ever. He’s made that clear. If Cassidy wants to begin to try to fix the mess he left the nation in by voting in favor of RFK Jr's nomination to his current position nothing short of constantly beating the 'remove this lunatic from his position before he kills even more kids' drum is going to do the trick.
MAGAts: Make humor legal again! Liberal Comedian: [Exists] MAGAts: Not that kind!
Depends on the context. TDS when used as an insult by a MAGAt is a stadium sized red flag that the person saying it has a mind only remotely attached to reality and should be seen and treated through that lens. TDS when used by someone talking about a MAGAt is much more likely to be credible since that's the only context that TDS actually exists.
Even if he did state flat out that he'd follow her recommendations if memory serves he also claimed that he wasn't pro-plague in his initial confirmation hearings for his current role so it's not like it would be the first lie he gave to congress. The fact that he didn't even give that little however makes crystal-clear that if she does get the job and gives him a recommendation that he doesn't like he'll just ignore it and continue his campaign to 'make america healthy again' by what sure as hell looks like purging it of anyone not 'fit' enough to survive because after all, if all the sick people die then all that's left is healthy people.
I mean I get RFK Jr's frustration, why in the world would congress be grilling him over something that he has no responsibility for or any influence to change, it's not like he was given a position where he'd have any authority on how the government responds to diseases or anything and has spent the entire time since then sabotaging it and filling it with pro-plague lunatics and/or frauds...
'How dare you play by the new rules we started using first!'
Given how openly corrupt the regime is and how willing they are to lie and engage in political persecution the default assumption should always be that if they're going after a democrat or non-MAGAt the 'charges' are fraudulent until proven otherwise beyond any shred of doubt.