True yeah. but uh anyway what about HILLARYS EMAILS we need to hear about those for the next 4 decades (no convictions despite "Lock Her Up" slogans for 5 years)
you mean best selling children's book author Kash Patel who is desperately trying to scrub the internet of his music video[0] revising the Jan 6 insurrection
If the politicians are bought out by evil DoorDash's lobbying, why don't the voters just vote the politicians out? Do you have any evidence of a politician voting against their constituents' interests for personal gain?
Ignoring the easy second line, the answer to the first line is: we have two political parties in the US. What if neither are doing what the voters want?
Then people should stop being dumbfucks and engage in local (which are frequently non-partisan) and state elections and primaries, and stop pretending that "the president didn't fix everything and make this a socialist utopia, so both parties suck" is a useful or vaguely intelligent criticism.
> The people buying groceries know that things are more expensive.
This isn't born out in polling data. Grocery store prices went from being all anyone talked about to magically solved January 20, 2025. If only Biden had pressed the magic "solve inflation" button
You can't write rules against bad actors. There will always be some legal loophole a bad president can invent to exploit. if not for administrative warrants we would see some other creative (read: illegal) use of executive power.
The only option is to not elect someone that doesn't respect rule of law. And since I know some enlightened "centrist" will play the both sides game: What's 1 thing any previous president has done equivalent to violating posse comitatus.
I strongly disagree. You should always write rules under the assumption it will get in the hands of the worst people. If there is a 'become god-emperor' lever in your supposedly democratic government system then it is a shitty system.
Maybe so but what here really would've prevented this? The information involved is necessarily public: bank details and credit card numbers need to be shared otherwise why have them?
Writing a rule that says the government can't do this is just the government writing a rule it can simply remove it ignore when inconvenient.
The banking information belongs to the account holder and the bank. Google knows it by coincidence but should not share it because it isn’t theirs. If the government wants to know my banking details they can ask my bank. If they can’t figure out who my bank is they should get better at investigating. This approach is just exploiting Google’s wide reach.
Cool. Yeah but the topic is that it's currently not working when you have a president that doesn't want to respect rule of law.
Just like Roberts schizo-rambling about the federalist papers and inventing new terms like "Core constitutional powers" while not addressing any of the dissents. Roberts pens in that the president gets broad immunity for "core" (defined nowhere) powers and ignores the public's interest in not having a criminal president.
Originalists like senile Roberts must have forgot the framers were literally escaping a monarchy with no judicial accountability. Maybe him and Alito can figure out the mental gymnastics needed to ask his wife to take down the stop-the-steal flag outside his house.
must be pretty upsetting that sitting president Trump has tens of billions in 2 dark money shitcoins and owns a majority stake in crypto company World Liberty Financial. Just 0.001% of the total sum Hunter Biden was allegedly corrupt over (no evidence).
The problem in America is that more than half the country does not live in a shared factual reality. Like:
* Jan 6 was a fedsurrection, and also simultaneously all innocent people that needed pardoning (Pardoning the feds?)
* World Liberty Financial receiving billions selling out American interests worldwide? Never heard of this but Burisma was worse!
* The Raffensperger call was no big deal there were attorneys on that call. Trump's personal (now disbarred) attorneys, of course, not there to represent America's interests but how's that the big deal?
* Also who's Raffensperger? But did you see those boxes under the table! What do you mean the clip is longer than 6 seconds that's all I saw on the infinity scrolling apps.
There is one reality that's undeniable: that political donations by individuals are strictly monitored and can land you in jail if violated, but PAC money is untraceable and unlimited. That fact alone has led to stacking the deck in favor of lobbyists and monied interests at the expense of the electorate and national institutions.
I assume you mean Citizens United v FEC. Should they not have been allowed to release their documentary? Its not an easy question and there's a reason none of the dissents directly address Roberts' opinion.
I’m not a lawyer and won’t address the merits or lack thereof of the ruling on the particulars of the case. The effect of the ruling was a sweeping change in money in politics. It effectively legalized an oligarchic take over of governance. It’s a fact that money and advertising largely determine outcomes in battleground races. Tipping those races, along with the structural power imbalance in federal politics, means that control of the government is relatively easy and cheap.
I don't know if you read your own source but it's incredibly unconvincing "research" slop. In their "case study" they just point to a particular race and the money the candidates received and infer it's bad.
No analysis if the politician was acting against their constituents interests... Pretty embarrassing paper to put their name on. I can see why there's no coauthors.
Also they conflate political ad spending with issue awareness ad spending, which is a borderline malicious.
This is the infamous call where Trump, according to the recorded tapes, tried to overturn the 2020 presidential election results by demanding that Raffensperger "find 11,780 votes".
Dual booting is the worst possible combination, given that any windows update will kill the linux bootloader (major update to be fair, but it will happen and then you have to recovery iso to fix the bootloader every time). Plus having to disable all boot optimizations on the windows side because of tainted filesystem that linux can't figure out without risk of data destruction. I'd rather just use a VM - but the same games that don't run on linux also dont want you playing in a VM.
This is no longer true, and has been for close to a decade now. If you sandbox the Windows bootloader in a directory it will not be able to mess up your custom boot loading config, especially booting to the kernel from UEFI.
I've been dual booting windows/arch for almost 1 years now. Except the rare case that windows fucks my grub and I have to mkconfig again it'd been smooth sailing.
I have them on the separate nvmes and I disable Linux nvme before I boot into windows.
Last time I accidentally inserted encrypted pendrive I use in Linux when my windows was booted, it immediately offered razing the partition to the ground, creating a new one and quick formatting it. Very helpfully "OK" was preselected. If I was a bit more tired I'd be a bit sad.
Windows is intentionally hostile to anything non-windows. Enjoy your dual booting while it lasts :)
Yep. I've been a paying Google Workspace user for almost 20 years now (in the various iterations of the product name).
Some stuff goes in GitHub, none of which I actually truly care about though.
I'm sure you'll groan. :)
But hey, if it's good enough for Cloudflare and Datadog (two past employers), it's good enough for me.
I also may be weird because I don't own any media and I'm perfectly happy with the streaming model. I enjoy not having the mental load of thinking about self-hosting and backing up terabytes of stuff.
Yeah it makes it very easy to be OS-independant. I have backups of my whole home directory so if anything goes awry I can just reinstall software as I go and restore my config files from the most recent backup.
I have a Nextcloud instance for family to store files, though.
Yeah, but presumably that's not acceptable to the person who talks about "(not) caring about the privacy of data you put in windows" in the ancestor comment, which is why I mentioned rebooting.
Enemy combatants to...what? When has congress declared war? Using your military to assassinate another countries civilians is a literal war crime under customary international humanitarian law.
Crimes (alleged) on the high seas have a very long history of being prosecuted under their own set of rules. Look into it, you may be surprised what is “normal”
What I believe you're referring to is piracy, not drug smuggling. The term is Hostis humani generis - or enemy of mankind.
There is a very long tradition of treating pirates as outside of all laws because pirates would murder and pillage in one jurisdiction or on the high seas and then sail away to another jurisdiction. So all nations had a duty to confront pirates. That is not to say that summary execution was considered normal - it happened, but typically pirates were captured and afforded some due process.
In the modern era this logic has been extended to terrorism and certain crimes against humanity like torture.
It has NOT been extended to encompass drug trafficking. If you're smuggling drugs from Venezuela to Trinidad, you really don't want to be detected, so you're not going to stop any random ship that you see and murder the crew and steal the cargo. The whole concept of the pirate as someone who is waging war on humanity with extreme violence and can't be effectively dealt with by the nation that is effected doesn't really apply neatly to this situation.
You could make the argument that because drugs are dangerous, and drugs can be transported anywhere, that drug traffickers are effectively enemies of humanity who are doing extreme violence in the same vein as terrorists and pirates. But that would be a novel argument, not, in any way, "normal".
reply