There is seriously a few accounts on here where they are just shit stains saying horrible shit and bullying people but they are on 24/7 and people just upvote because they look strong and sometimes say things that feel smart or empowering.
If you ever want to know how Trump got to power just look around.
Poor whites may have been poor, but they sure as Hell weren’t in danger of being arrested for “vagrancy” for being unemployed and then worked to death in a convict-leasing scheme the way black people were.
(Or, getting back to the specific topic of this thread, having their neighborhood firebombed for being too “uppity” whenever they did actually manage to succeed.)
They need to side with the companies on this. The FDA fucked things up royally to crush the industry.
Edit: if anyone wants to know how they did this, it’s because of the Premarket Tobacco Product Applicatios (PMTA) process.
Basically, for every single SKU you made, you had to submit the application which costs about $250k minimum. This means that if you have a line of 10 flavors in 4 different nicotine strengths, you’d need 40 applications. Their guidelines for the applications were also super vague, basically guaranteeing they could deny all of them.
And that’s just the most egregious thing they did. They also labeled anything relating to vaping a tobacco product, including wire and batteries. Which would also be subject to the PMTA process.
Yep, the ecig industry has helped a epic amount of people quit smoking and fewer people to just vape vs picking up smoking cigs. It’s insane how against the grain regulators went with this.
It’s because they weren’t subject to the tobacco tax that cigarette companies must pay due to the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement (MSA). Now the vaping industry is all but decimated outside of disposables, but you can still go buy your favorite cigarettes at any corner store.
Yup, it was all about the taxes. If you look at basically any study on vapes that has come out of the US, the methodology is designed to produce negative results.
If the FDA cared about public health they would have actually regulated the market, instead of guaranteeing the market was flooded by sketchy Chinese disposables which generate a shit ton of dangerous and hazardous waste.
They would also ban cigarettes if they actually cared.
I hope he gets on a private jet with 5 other justices and some of his billionaire buddies for a trip to some tropical resort only for the plane to get shot down through a president’s official act suddenly go down, totally unexpectedly.
Man I’m so paranoid. Why do I feel like it’ll be something stupid like claiming encryption is unconstitutional or that freedom of speech only applies to words that come out of a physical person’s mouth?
The law requires web-based age verification on sites with at least one-third of their content devoted to adult sexual material. Now the Supreme Court will solicit arguments and briefs about the case.
My hot take is that it won’t fly, but that Texas can also potentially revise the law to make it pass.
The problem is that this is targeting websites serving non-porn material if the site also serves porn. Like, there’s porn on Reddit, for example. But this doesn’t say “we restrict access to minors just to porn”, but “we restrict access to the website”, where someone like Reddit can do finer-grained filtering. It’s hard, I think, to argue that this is the “least restrictive means” to solve the issue.
For a law that that restricts speech to pass the First Amendment, it has to pass strict scrutiny, and “least restrictive means” is one requirement of this.
In U.S. constitutional law, when a law infringes upon a fundamental constitutional right, the court may apply the strict scrutiny standard. Strict scrutiny holds the challenged law as presumptively invalid unless the government can demonstrate that the law or regulation is necessary to achieve a “compelling state interest”. The government must also demonstrate that the law is “narrowly tailored” to achieve that compelling purpose, and that it uses the “least restrictive means” to achieve that purpose. Failure to meet this standard will result in striking the law as unconstitutional.
The standard is the highest and most stringent standard of judicial review and is part of the levels of judicial scrutiny that courts use to determine whether a constitutional right or principle should give way to the government’s interest against observance of the principle. The lesser standards are rational basis review and exacting or intermediate scrutiny. These standards are applied to statutes and government action at all levels of government within the United States.
The ACLU lawyer references a “reasonable” criteria, and apparently that’s one element of the “rational basis” review, so I’m guessing that they’re attacking it on those grounds.
Oh that’s easy. Encryption is only legal when communicating with a business that is registered with the IRS and not when doing peer to peer. There, we’ve hopelessly broken digital privacy while letting the US government determine who gets to exist online.
Honestly if it meant everyone got kicked offline I might take that exchange. Turns out access to the entirety of human information and misinformation is a pretty good way to go extinct (at least at the rate we are going).
They’re altering the fabric of our rule of law to protect Trump. Bribery? It’s cool as long as it’s AFTER the politician carries out the request. President does anything illegal (including killing a political rival (sorry, Traitor!) or selling state secrets to Russia for example… as long as it’s “official” (and SCOTUS rules what is and isn’t “official”) - it’s all good.
If Trump wins we are one Reichstag Fire away from a complete fascist dictatorship and frankly it may not even take that. Trump already “liked” a couple of posts suggesting military tribunals and firing squads for Biden, Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger and anyone else he finds disloyal or having persecuted him… And he’s said he’ll be a dictator on day one. If someone tells you who they are, believe them.
We’ve permitted bribery for years with that alternate name of lobbying, nothing new really there.
The official acts thing is far more troubling particularly since as I understand it they left the declaration of what is ‘official’ ambiguous saying the lower courts would have to decide on each case. If so it opens a door for years of infighting as different districts decide their preferred person was working as president or candidate in any given action.
The question in this case is whether §666 also makes it a crime for state and local officials to accept gratuities—for example, gift cards, lunches, plaques, books, framed photos, or the like—that may be given as a token of appreciation after the official act. The answer is no.
The official act was a $1.1 million contract. The “token of appreciation” was a $13,000 check. At trial it was argued that the payment was for consulting services, but presumably the jury did not believe that.
At least with respect to the President’s exercise of his core constitutional powers, this immunity must be absolute. As for his remaining official actions, he is also entitled to immunity. At the current stage of proceedings in this case, however, we need not and do not decide whether that immunity must be absolute, or instead whether a presumptive immunity is sufficient
The court takes a very broad view of core constitutional conduct
In dividing official from unofficial conduct, courts may not inquire into the President’s motives
Trump is therefore absolutely immune from prosecution for the alleged conduct involving his discussions with Justice Department officials.
But it nevertheless contends that a jury could “consider” evidence concerning the President’s official acts “for limited and specified purposes,” and that such evidence would “be admissible to prove … " The Government’s position is untenable in light of the separation of powers principles we have outlined.
Like everyone else, the President is subject to prosecution in his unofficial capacity. But unlike anyone else, the President is a branch of government, and the Constitution vests in him sweeping powers and duties.
Kind of. “Gratuities” are legal, bribery is not, and presidents are immune for prosecution for acts undertaken as part of their duties.
A “gratuitity” must be made after the fact, which is still totally a type of bribery, but it isn’t the same as making all bribery legal as a blanket rule.
Presidents are now immune to prosecution, but only regarding official acts. The court refused to rule on what an official vs unofficial act is, basically meaning that they’ll decide whether something is legal or not when they feel like it. The obvious problem here is how heavily stacked the supreme court is, but they also didn’t just come out and say “fuck it, presidents have absolute power.”
Edit: To be clear, both of these rulings are absolutely fucking terrible. If our courts had any appropriate amount of oversight, the blatant corruption on display would be enough to see the court disbarred and indicted. They’re just not quite as bad as people describe on Lemmy.
Are these actually counterfeit, or just the extra produced past what is contractually required at the original factory?
Many Chinese factories will be contracted for say 18 hours of production, but stay open for 24 hours, and the extra is sold on the grey market. Or the product that doesn’t make it through contracted quality control will be sent to the grey market.
I can’t believe the actual market for these is large enough to actually justify a second factory spitting out duplicates when the original factory can just make extra beyond what’s contracted. More likely the original factory made like 5,000 pairs instead of the 1,000 Trump sold officially, and those are on the grey market as “counterfeits” despite being exactly the same, just not official.
I mean, I can see that if you’re unaware and maybe from another country you can see them as looking pretty cool at first glance. Maybe? But as actual Trump merch I feel that they’re of limited demand.
That’s why I’m thinking the factory that made the official 1000 of them just made a bunch more to sell to the grey market and those are making their way out as “counterfeit” despite being exactly the same product from the same factory.
That’s exactly how most Chinese counterfeits are made. By patent definition, a counterfeit is an illegal copy of an original. Any similar or identical items produced outside of contract are infringements, and considered counterfeits.
Also, not all grey market counterfeits are exactly the same as originals. The manufacturers no longer care about brand representation, so they tend to have far lower quality control standards, and often use lower-quality materials to increase profits.
They’re not exactly the same. Since they’re being produced outside the contract, they don’t have to meet quality standards, so they can use cheaper materials and skip QC entirely. This means that they can look almost like the genuine article, because they’re using the same plans and methods, but in reality they can be significantly inferior.
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.