FTFA:

a man officials say rammed a federal vehicle during immigration raids last week.

Call his fucking bluff. The only way anything would close is if it isn’t profitable (enough). And if they can’t turn a profit, well then they need to be better at business! (/s).

I get the concern, but the standard emulsifier in mayo is egg yolk. Something tells me they aren’t trying to get rid of eggs.

Contempt of Court is a bit different. It’s usually applied until the problem action is corrected. For instance, they could (in theory) hold the administration in contempt, meaning fines or even jail, until they comply with the court order to return him.

Now, they can and absolutely should be prosecuted for their actions, but it would likely need to be a separate case.

Then it’s a good thing the link wasn’t to Snopes

It says “No kings”. We’re allowed to have one.

/s

That’s part of the strategy. First, go after the small project that can’t defend itself. Use that to set a precedent that is harder for the bigger targets to overturn.

I would expect the bigger players to get themselves involved in the defense for exactly that reason.

Of note, Kirsten Gillibrand was on the ballot for a different seat. My guess is that it means something was calling the wrong database table (Senate candidates instead of presidential candidates). This could’ve been while casting votes, counting votes, or reporting results.

It doesn’t make it any less concerning for our democracy, but it’s a lot easier to explain how it happened.

You should take the hint.

Serious question: why would more visibility keep it safer? Israel continues to commit far worse crimes against humanity, very openly, on a daily basis. Why would this be any different?

Just like last time it was reposted, it’s from 2022, and is specifically about COVID shortages that no longer apply.

Correct about the greens. They used to be (might still be) the ones that ran at a lower RPM

That would need to be affirmed by the courts to matter.

If the rule of law still matters, here is the process:

1. Judiciary does a thing
2. Someone harmed by it (i.e. someone with standing, possibly the trump admin) files a suit
3. Court agrees with the plaintiff
4. Appeals court declines to hear or agrees with plaintiff
5. SCOTUS does the same

Now, the plaintiff can also appeal, and they get an injunction by showing immediate and irreparable harm. But generally, the actions can continue while the appeal is pending.

The explanation I heard back then was that Pluto wouldn’t qualify as a planet, EXCEPT that it has a moon. I’m not sure why that exception would apply, but it seems it’s no longer good enough.

He’d probably brag about them, even (or especially) if he had nothing to do with them.

I remember seeing someone make an argument for leashes, and it stuck with me. Forgive me that I don’t remember the source, so this is paraphrasing at best.

First, you must throw out all of your thoughts and mental associations with the leash. You must consider this scenario on its own. It has nothing to do with pets, or anything like that. This is about parenting, and only parenting.

You might see a leash as degrading. And to an adult, or an older child, that would certainly be the case. But these are typically only used on small children who have not yet developed that concept. IOW, the child does not mind the leash, aside from wanting to go where the leash won’t allow.

You might think that the child’s curiosity is being limited. Kids need to run and be free! But if there were no leash, that wouldn’t be the case. Instead of a leash, a hyper-vigilant parent would be enforcing similar boundaries. In fact, most parents would be enforcing stricter boundaries- if you need to make sure Junior doesn’t run away, you might not let them walk anywhere. The simplest form is requiring them to hold your hand, which is like an even shorter leash.

Since they can’t just run away, you can even use a long leash. That allows them to run and explore and jump around, and have significantly greater freedoms, all because the string keeps them near enough. They might still fall and get hurt, but that’s part of growing up. And yes, at a certain point, they will need to learn impulse control to stay nearby without a leash. This doesn’t mean a leash is bad, only that it’s not for every circumstance and needs to be retired at some point.

Now, after all of the above, can you articulate why a leash is always bad? Keeping in mind the child doesn’t mind.

You think he has a plan?

I genuinely don’t think he has the mental capacity to grasp his own mortality.

They often tie it to current offerings. So your plan may have unlimited 4G data for life, but won’t include anything faster/newer. So once you want/need 5G, you have to switch to a different plan.

He literally doesn’t believe in germ theory.

And I don’t mean ‘literally’ as in ‘figuratively’. He genuinely doesn’t believe in the most basic element of modern health and medicine.

You can’t expect him to then grasp something as nuanced as dosage.