This is the most legally sound argument against it.
Sure it's bad to diddle kids, but it's even worse to not have diddled kids, be accused and falsely convicted, have you genitals removed, and then on appeals the court is like "yeah sry bro they fucked that up, just reverse it".
Although a lot of people think the death penalty is bad for financial or logistical reasons, but in my opinion the biggest reason against it is that there's no quick way to revive a person when a court later on says they got it wrong.
Regarding the appearance of impropriety these facts are pretty straightforward.
If he recuses himself, he loses his voice in this case, if he doesn't, the supreme Court loses it's trustworthiness.
He chose, and he didn't do it wisely. Most people in power don't think of the consequences right up until the consequences and it looks to me like it takes a civil war for everyone to realize how badly they need trust in the system.
Nope. I'm not sure which law states that a convicted felon can't vote, but I know for sure it takes quite a few years to change such foundational laws and this will not happen quickly enough.
It can happen for the election after Biden v Trump tho.
I would agree with that from what I've seen. She absolutely killed the case and what she is doing is highly unusual in it's totality and the appearance to an outsider is pretty grim, but she would have to do something without any legal basis or similar. Just being elected by the guy that has a case pending in front of you is not enough. There is precedent for this.
Mind you even then, recusal is probably the only thing that would happen anyway. Removal is super unlikely. I would say winning the lottery levels of unlikely.
I mean fair to try, but from what I know about defamation, that sounds like an insane uphill battle.
She would have to prove credible and tightly connect damages and I think because of she is a public figure there needs to be malicious intent as well, which just means she said it while knowing it was false. That shit is awful to prove, because you need some evidence that directly prove she said it knowing it was false or with disregard for it's truthfulness.
I like the idea but my brain says this is dead on arrival.
I would argue that someone who writes "finish them" on weapons of war has absolutely no ability to comprehend nuances like the ones you described. That or she wants to be likened to people who lack that ability. Anyway, it's equally abysmal and she doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt you are trying to give her.
I played during a free week (dunno if it's still going). The game offers this world of awesome prospects. Even in a state where there's no additional content to the current, it's already a relaxing game with beautiful scenery. But: OMG the bugs. The tutorial waypoints sometimes don't appear for minutes. Interaction work at the servers whim. I bugged out one of my starter items (the helmet). I had to buy a new one. The first mission is the one I failed when I was delivering goods and they bugged out, so I couldn't deliver them anymore and the mission was bricked.
Pirate Software put it best: "what the game wants to be is great, but the only thing I see expanding is the storefront and I'd like it to not be that"
And I would extend that quote to "as long as the storefront expands while the core game doesn't function, this is not a game but a development service and as long as it's not a game you shouldn't buy it or anything related to it". I wanna play games and not glorified tech demos. Especially when there is more than 10 years of development. We definitely gave them enough leeway.
Yeah, you know what, he's probably right. And I admit this is scary. This vote determines the amount of damage he is capable of. He tried overthrowing the government once, he will try to do it again. Either covertly or overtly.
I was gonna say you might not have to sue again for taking down the post, you could just ask in judgement phase that you get x amount of money for every day the post was and is up since it was created. Should do the trick.
Yes there was another suit against the trump org in NY for fraud, but it's basically over, a judgement has been entered and last thing I've heard is that he was trying to secure a bond and the latest bond company got rejected by the court because something something not offering collateral.
I have no clue what the current status of this case is.
Yeah I am confused by the amount of likes but iirc there's three significant cases:
hush money payments to stormy Daniels (the problem is that the payments are misappropriated funds, it's actually quite dumb)
election interference in georgia (the one that people feel more strongly about for obvious reasons)
mar-a-lago classified documents (mishandling, especially by retaining them after losing rights to handle as well as to see them). Last news was that he had even more shit tucked away in his bedroom iirc.
This is the most legally sound argument against it.
Sure it's bad to diddle kids, but it's even worse to not have diddled kids, be accused and falsely convicted, have you genitals removed, and then on appeals the court is like "yeah sry bro they fucked that up, just reverse it".
Although a lot of people think the death penalty is bad for financial or logistical reasons, but in my opinion the biggest reason against it is that there's no quick way to revive a person when a court later on says they got it wrong.