Skip Navigation

Posts
2
Comments
565
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • All this stupid applauding for votes. They should just get in with it.

  • I've not heard this one before!* I like it!

    *I know, dad jokers; I still haven't "heard" it, just read it.

  • Legally, it's a fine distinction. What his attorneys are arguing appears to be that, even if he did commit insurrection, the law in question doesn't apply to the office of the president and, thus, not to Trump. On the surface, the logic is sound: Law applies if conditions are met; conditions were not met, therefore law does not apply.

    The problem for Trump is that the law does apply,^1 so he should face the consequences.

    If I had access to Westlaw or LexisNexis, I'd be interested to look into the caselaw. My concern is that the argument for specific word choice (i.e. "support" was specifically used instead of "preserve, protect, defend") isn't without some merit. I'm just glad he can never seem to hire competent attorneys. I'm hoping for a long, long, lonely life behind bars for his retirement years. (Though I know this isn't one of his criminal cases.)

    1- Assuming, of course, there remains any justice left in the US system. Unfortunately not a small assumption these days.

  • Needs more jpeg. I can barely tell it's him even looking right at it. Maybe it's because Kanye is a total bean sac, anyway.

  • Since it says Spiner "called," it could be either: we don't know whether he said it verbally or wrote it down.

  • I disagree; it's a loaded, politicized word. Even if you say that the "entire western world" considers Hamas a terrorist organization, that's a sweeping generalization which, even if it could be called 100% true, does not represent the whole world.

    Tell me the facts without giving me those loaded words. I'm smart enough to draw my own conclusions.

  • It's simply not the BBC's job to tell people who to support and who to condemn - who are the good guys and who are the bad guys.

    I miss when this was the standard for news. Now most (e: major) outlets don't even try to pretend they have no bias and instead push a subjective point. Even when I agree with the point, I don't like it when my "news" pushes it instead of just, you know, reporting.

    Give me the info and let me form my own opinions.

  • I'm not wasting my time, but I sure would pay someone else to do it.

  • I'd rather a decades-late abortion for them, to be honest.

  • He is such a disgusting excuse for a human. He doesn't care about anything but himself.

  • Part of me hopes it was just some rando ordering it as a joke to make it seem like he ordered McD's. If so, that's hysterically funny to me. If not, well, it's still funny - just in a more pathetic way.

  • The fact that he thinks a last-minute, half-assed effort that has little chance of passing because neither party wants those terms after rejecting the Senate's bipartisan bill without even bringing it to the chamber is "be[ing] the adult in the room" would be laughable if it weren't so frustrating.

    I think he's out. The MAGA caucus hates him because they hate everyone and the Dems really have no reason to rescue him when he's made a point of reneging on any bipartisan deals.

  • In this spirit, I suggest "porta-potty" country. A step up from shithole, since we have structure and something to sit on, but it's still unpleasant and bad in many ways.

  • That and the corporate vampires of the prison industrial complex lobby against decriminalization because it costs them their (predominantly POC) slave labor. Selective enforcement against communities the people in power don't like (i.e. POC and/or poor) is an added bonus.

  • These are, indeed, the most useful mooseful states.