Why does the FBI care about the opinions of domestic terrorists? FBI agents aren’t elected to their positions. It’s not like you can vote for your local district chief. They’re not fucking county sheriffs.
Maybe it’s because most of those that join forces are the same that burn crosses?
As per the recent SCOTUS decision that it’s legal for the president to commit crimes if they are official presidential acts, I would think the DOJ’s hands are tied here.
I don’t know the specifics around this case but if for instance The President ordered protesters to be “taken care of” and they were killed, or even in the more realistic situation where police used excessive force, is it not possible that someone could sue the federal government for violating their rights? And I don’t mean first amendment rights but whatever case law prevents the use of excessive force (in addition to 1A supporting it). Would a reasonable judge find that even the President is permitted to violate human rights (I’m realizing how stupid this sounds as I type it) when there is no perceived threat?
Everyone has thrown around the example of POTUS killing anyone for any reason but is that an actual legit thing? I have a very hard time believing this would be the case in reality.
You may have a hard time believing it, but that was what SCOTUS decided. If it is considered an official presidential act, the president can violate any law up to and including assassinating their political rival. That is exactly what Trump’s team argued a president could do before the ruling was decided in their favor.
Isn’t the difference here that Musk has a tremendous amount of assets in the form of Tesla stock that can be used to repay the debt? It’s not like he can declare bankruptcy and stiff them on the bill.
The thing is, selling off the amount of Tesla stock that he’d need to to pay off the debt would cause Tesla stock to plummet, leaving him significantly less wealthy and putting Tesla in danger. So even though he technically has the money to pay them, he functionally doesn’t.
He both technically and functionally does have the ability to repay them, which he will find out soon if he doesn’t restructure the debt, and implying this is in anyway similar to the financial crisis is absurd clickbait.
It could possibly tank Tesla and make Elon less rich if he had to pay his debt. Oh no. As though Tesla should be valued at more than 9 major other other automakers combined in the first place isn’t outlandish on its face.
From our studios in Midtown Detroit, WDET 101.9FM creates and curates an award-winning mix of news, music and cultural content that is unique as the city and region we serve. As Detroit’s flagship NPR station, WDET broadcasts and contributes to popular national shows like Morning Edition and All Things Considered in addition to producing over 60 hours of original local programming each week.
As a community service of Wayne State University, we use the power of our broadcast and digital channels to inspire and educate listeners at home and away. Our radio signal is one of the most powerful in southeast Michigan and extends to northwest Ohio and southwest Ontario. Each week, we reach a growing audience of over 200,000 listeners and can be heard online around the world through WDET.org and the WDET mobile app.
For over 70 years, WDET has provided an independent voice for the Detroit region. Founded by the United Auto Workers in 1948, Wayne State University has held WDET’s license since 1952 to serve in the public interest. Support for WDET comes from Wayne State, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and through private donors and corporate underwriting. More than half of our annual operating revenue is contributed directly by listeners.
They’re really running with dramatic and misleading headlines here. From what I’ve gathered, the actual story is at the very bottom of the page.
The former president was initially named as a defendant in the case solely in his official capacity, which would not allow for a financial award.
However, in March, U.S. District Court Judge Dabney Friedrich gave the plaintiffs permission to amend their suit to seek damages from Trump. The suit was amended to name him personally liable the following month.
The JD is agreeing that if Trump were found personally liable, the fed would foot the bill. This is very strange and has little to no hope of success for the plaintiffs given, as flying squid mentioned, the recent SCOTUS decision. I would think they should have stuck with suing The President rather than Trump even if that meant no financial reward.
NPR - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for NPR:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
Internet Archive - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Internet Archive:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
“I was asked to be here to provide moral witness to the delegates of the Democratic National Convention, the civilian casualties that I myself witnessed while I was there, the entire families that were exterminated, health care workers, humanitarian workers, that have been killed in unprecedented numbers, child amputees, record numbers of child amputees, all the children who had survived and arrived injured at the hospital with no surviving family,” Haj-Hassan told WDET. “I myself treated several children who would fall into that category. And for these children, they would often die in our arms in the emergency department without any family around to comfort them, because their family were killed in the same attack, and without anybody to bury them once they were dead…it was honestly, completely, utterly devastating.
“So we feel like the only way to protect and preserve human life is to put political pressure at this point. The unconditional ongoing funding of the U.S. for this military campaign, it starkly contrasts with the documented realities on the ground, with the findings by the International Court of Justice — a plausible genocide — and with universal global condemnation from every human rights and humanitarian organization, saying ‘This has to stop.'”
Wallz and Harris have both spoken at AIPAC conferences, but it’s been years since for both of them.
Even if they’re “pro Israel” theres no chance they’re as unquestioningly as supportive as Biden.
And Wall has shown that he’s open to different viewpoints and modified his stance on the genocide long before being picked as VP.
Definitely still need to keep pressure up. But I’m cautiously optimistic
Based on the past couple of months and internal reporting I really don’t think either Harris or Biden like Netanyahu at all. I just think Biden and the Democrats overall have for so long been conditioned to protect Israel lest their high ground on right-wing extremism and antisemitism backfire and they lose Jewish-American votes or others sympathetic to Israel; so from a campaign perspective it can be perceived as zero-sum at best or worse a net-loss.
Then there’s the power of AIPAC, who are almost solely responsible for both Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush losing their primaries because of their outspokenness on Gaza.
So I fully expect a Harris administration post-election will be far more cold to Netanyahu and take more decisive action, but not before. Which doesn’t change much for me, considering in this dichotomous choice we all know Trump is far worse for the outcome of Palestinians.
There is one notable member of the squad absent at the convention, Rashida Tlaib. While Ilhan Omaar and AOC have endorsed Harris, she — the first and only Palestinian American in Congress — has yet to endorse. I do think it would be useful for Harris to meet directly with her.
Nevertheless I’ve been saying to my fellow advocates for Palestinians: The key to influencing administrative policy is side-stepping the administration and convincing your friends, family, acquaintances, and those on social media who are still sympathetic to Israel and who are ignorant to the atrocities they have committed. If you shift the polls, you will shift the administration who will perceive less risk in cutting aid to Israel. Even then from the administration’s perspective, there is still significant risk because Netanyahu could just so happen to ignore intelligence on an impending attack on Israeli soil and if another October 7th-like attack happens following a withdrawal of aid to Israel from the US, then that is going to look very bad and sink the Democrats. Don’t put it past Bibi to commit a false flag. That fucker is evil.
AIPAC is bad. But being from Missouri. Bush was always a weak candidate. My understanding is that Bowman was in a similar position? Bush in particular was swept in based largely around contemporary events that have since cooled. She doesn’t have a big history of civil service to build support from etc. She has some fairly signature legislation that she’s been involved with related to her community and district. But voters are ignorant, fickle, and more concerned with other things currently.
Check out the very first sentence of the article you didn’t read:
Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer convicted of killing George Floyd, was transferred to a federal prison in Texas almost nine months after he was stabbed in a different facility
For the life of me, I can’t understand why so many people think they can absorb an entire article through the headline…
Taylor Swift should write a country song that has subtle attacks against Trump that many of his followers will love and slowly understand the underlying message.
Bold of you to think these people ever listen to the lyrics, or pay attention to the message if they do.
I’m old enough to remember Ronald Reagan using Springsteen’s Born in the U.S.A. as a Republican anthem when the song is about a disaffected Vietnam vet being treated like shit.
And it was about a real guy, Ron Kovic. He wrote the book Born of the Fourth of July, which was turned into the movie of the same name. He was paralyzed in Vietnam and has been a left-wing peace activist the rest of his life.
I was really figuring myself out when I was in my 20s, and started watching Elliot Hulse videos because I was into fitness, and he seemed to have some half decent ideas (initially) that helped me sort out, to a degree, some of the emotional turmoil I experienced earlier in life. Because of this, I can see how easy it is to buy into the shit Tate sells, especially if you lack critical thinking skills.
My posture is shit and I tested the leaning back and breathing thing and it did feel pretty good. But yeah, nothing wrong with drawing some inspiration within reason.
Example being Jordan Peterson. Cleaning your room if you can muster the will isn’t a bad thing. That doesn’t mean pronouns are a Neomarxist plot to control language or that you should only eat meat and get hooked on benzos.
Don’t let their perceived expertise in one subject cloud your judgment over other subjects where they haven’t the scantest idea what they’re talking about. That said, it would be nice if everyone was forced to take a media literacy course or three in schools.
Harley-Davidson’s statement, posted on X, said that it sees “every leader’s role to ensure we have an employee base that reflects our customers and the geographies in which we operate”
… “which means white and male only. Minorities and women need not apply.” -Harley Davidson probably
This is how nations destabilize. States perpetuate themselves through maintaining the exclusive monopoly on violence and using that monopoly to secure certain guarantees for or against its people. The Roman empire saw a similar decline of administrative willpower and rises in both vigilantism and shitty little civil wars between the wealthy elite who really ran the show (spoiler alert). I’m convinced that Balkanization of the US is, at this point, inevitable. I’m not saying that’s necessarily a good or bad thing in its own right. On one hand, it might be better for both the states and the world if we went to more of an EU type structure. On the other hand, a nuclear armed independent Texas.
Not really. The vast majority of refineries in the US can't use Texas crude. It's why the idea of shifting to using American oil over imported is laughable. Not only that we have no pipelines from our oil wells to the refineries, so those would have to be built, as well. Basically, it'd take decades and tens to hundreds of billions of dollars to shift from foreign oil to American.
I understand the words you are using and the concept they are conveying, but I’m having a hard time getting around said concept making zero sense, at least to my uninformed brain.
There's two types of oil, essentially and I don't remember what they are called. When oil was easy to get we built refineries for that kind. When it got scarce you could only get the other kind.
The US in its infinite wisdom decided it was too expensive to build refineries for the new kind, so what we've been doing is sending the oil we pump to other countries who can refine it, then import the kind we can refine.
I honestly believe Texas wouldn’t last more than a few years without begging for someone, anyone to help them.
They aren’t a self-sufficient state, no matter how much they pretend to be. They need a massive influx of goods that would all immediately halt or be indefinitely postponed (and massively marked up) if they broke off.
The real question is whether the treasonous MAGAt politicians who run the state would make a deal with Russia for assistance.
I don’t know that I’d agree that the EU and the articles of confederation are comparable. There were a few big differences, including states printing their own currency without a common exchange medium (as opposed to the Euro), and that the mechanism for funding the federal government was (IIRC) entirely voluntary. States could just choose to not send money without consequences, and most or all made the obvious choice of not funding the federal government. The articles of confederation also had a few things about it that were more progressive than the constitution; for example, if I’m remembering right, it offered automatic citizenship to all native Americans, which pissed a lot of the farmer-settlers right off.
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.