Nougat @ Nougat @kbin.social

I am trying to focus on posting source documents, as opposed to someone els

---

Read more

Posts

22

Comments

1,917

Joined

2 yr. ago

Okay real answer here, not just "don't."

You can read it with the goal of having a solid understanding of why you think it's bad, in a way that can be communicated to other people. Having that kind of understanding is better than not, and it'll make it so that you have a better perspective on what you do like, and why you like it.

I’d expect redundant fuel pumps, redundant fuel lines in order for any tank (and any pump) to fuel all engines while shutting the remainder of tanks (and pumps) off. That’s been around since piston engine fighters in WWII at least.

Throw a layer of charcoal in there, and that’s legit.

I’ve been at it so long that my head’s thick,

11th Circuit has slapped her once, if they don’t act on this one (after Smith puts it before them, which he will), I don’t even know after that.

AM I BEING CONSTRAINED? OR AM I FREE TO GO?

I've also heard that if you read something, look away, look back and read it again, and it's different, then you're dreaming. You can practice this experiment when you're awake; this will condition your brain to do that reflexively, and eventually you'll do it in a dream.

One of the possible outcomes of this kind of dream-testing is lucid dreaming. When you're dreaming, knowing you're dreaming inside the dream can give you some semi-conscious control of the entire dream universe. Wanna fly? BAM you can fly. Enemies need smiting? SMITE. Done.

Now I'm wondering if the "real me" that, you know is actually real ... doesn't just entirely believe that I'm really real, but is really just a dream of the next level up. Same thing goes for the other direction, with innumerable layers to the onion. How could I possibly know?

fuck

I think it was an insurrection caused by Nancy Pelosi.

Those first two words are doing some hard work fending off a slander suit.

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript#2-1

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

Only States decide presidential elections, by selecting electors, and every single one of those Justices knows it.

Rising sea levels hate this one trick!

They steered clear of it because SCOTUS is not a fact-finding court. That fact finding was already handled by Colorado courts. Trump did engage in insurrection.

SCOTUS answers questions of law, not questions of fact. In this case, it seems that they all came to the oral arguments looking for a way to justify what they already wanted to do: keep Trump on the ballot. There are a few justifications they may employ. (For the record, I think all of these are stupid, but I am not a Supreme Court Justice.)

• Section Three disqualifies an insurrectionist from holding office, not from running for office. (So if one wins the election, then what? This only kicks the can and makes it harder to address later on. It's a gamble that the insurrectionist will lose the election.)
• The President is not an "officer." (This is absolute nonsense, but there's a suggestion that it might go there.)
• Individual states should not be allowed to have a sort of "veto power" over presidential candidates. (There is already a patchwork quilt of procedures and qualifications for ballot access, and the Constitution grants States the sole power to manage federal elections.)

SCOTUS is going to overturn the Colorado Supreme Court's ruling barring Trump from the Republican primary ballot in that state, even though no federal entity has any authority over elections. What of Maine, then? Will the SCOTUS ruling mention or otherwise impact the Maine decision (which is itself still working its way through the Maine court system)? What about the other states that have challenges to Trump's qualification still pending? A problem that I see is that if the court finds that States do not have the right to disqualify candidates based on Section Three, it would seem that States also do not have the right to disqualify candidates based on age, natural born citizenship, or any other reason. Hell, a tortoise should run. Nowhere in the consitution does it say that non-human candidates are disqualified.

I frankly don't understand this court's obvious desire to order that Section Three be ignored for this candidate. I do see that a problem with Section Three is that it is written to be self-executing, but that it hinges on slightly subjective definitions of "insurrection" and "aid or comfort." This court's ruling will clarify that, but it will do it wrong.

Lenin

Change where their silverware drawer is to assert dominance.

Bunch of top brass got pulled out after some of the corruption was discovered. Like rockets fueled with water.

I believe they are going to attack the moment China can or does not want to stop them anymore.

Considering China's whole military has recently been shown to be stripped bare by corruption from the top to the bottom, China's power in the world is shaken. They could pivot to letting DPRK off leash a little bit, as a threat to step aside and let DPRK do what they want with the nuclear weapons they absolutely have, now on missiles that can reach the west coast of the US.

You seem like someone who might be interested in !OriginalDocuments. link

In the meantime, the worker still has bills to pay and food to buy, and even a successful complaint or suit would still likely end with the worker either not being employed there going forward, or a very confrontational workplace.

Commercial driver's license? I AM TRAVELLING AND NOT ENGAGED IN COMMERCE

I'm willing to bet the super tall pickups and SUVs are more likely to hop over those steel guardrails, too. Related: Those sloped concrete dividers that have a slightly shallower slope at their wider bottom? Those are super effective, because that bottom slope deflects the vehicle's front wheel, causing it to turn slightly away from the barrier instead of continuing to smash through it.

Yeah that's the tack I've heard, just buy a month. I decided to buy a year, because I have existed for fucking ever, and there are a good number of those data brokers that drag their feet longer than a month to remove your info.