The suits make similar and overlapping claims that Medicare negotiations are unconstitutional.
The companies argue that the talks would force drugmakers to sell their medicines at huge discounts, below market rates. They assert this violates the Fifth Amendment, which requires the government to pay reasonable compensation for private property taken for public use.
The suits also argue that the process violates drugmakers’ free speech rights under the First Amendment, essentially forcing companies to agree that Medicare is negotiating a fair price.
They also contend that the talks violate the Eighth Amendment by levying an excessive fine if drugmakers refuse to engage in the process.
A great way to tell that a business is making way too much money is when they can afford to hire monkey cages full of lawyers to fling every terrible legal argument they can think of at you in the hope that one of them somehow sticks.
They don't need to. They need to outspend the specific attorney's dept. Plus, many are counting on a change in administration before any consequences of merit.
One thing that bothers me about the law. This kinda thing. There should be some sorta limit on how many arguments you can present. Multiple bad arguments does not equal a solid one.
The companies argue that the talks would force drugmakers to sell their medicines at huge discounts, below market rates. They assert this violates the Fifth Amendment, which requires the government to pay reasonable compensation for private property taken for public use.
It will be interesting to watch this shake out, because this decision could have a lot of knock-off effects when it comes to further price negotiations by the government across a wide array of sectors.
If only looking at the USA where pharmaceutical companies are free to do as they please, but probably still higher than in any other rich countries in the world.
Yeah I think that’s going to end up being a pivotal distinction here, as these are companies with global reach and thus “market rate” will be a difficult concept to defend.
Exclusivity contracts would be one thing, but suggesting this is an egregious step by the US government is going to be a difficult case to prove imo.
Charge what they please. They are heavily regulated in what they can do. Which is why stuff like the J&J arsenic event is a once a decade thing vs a constant thing.
They likely are subsidized by the federal government anyway. As far as I’m concerned, any time the government gives money to a corporation, they’re no longer a private company until they pay it back.
Oh yeah, lawyers start preparing these lawsuits as soon as an announcement is made (in this case the legislation being announced). They just don’t file them until absolutely necessary.
The suits also argue that the process violates drugmakers’ free speech rights under the First Amendment, essentially forcing companies to agree that Medicare is negotiating a fair price.
At this point the first amendment is just their catchall for any time they want to stop the government doing something, isnt it? Selling drugs isnt speech, making cakes or websites isn’t speech, you fucking monsters don’t have to like it and you don’t have to pretend to like it, you just have to stop destroying people for money.
something something gay wedding cake. Last I checked LEO isn't a protected class. And they aren't even denying LEO, just those that come in on-duty and are armed. So yeah, get fucked pigs.
In history. The US cops commit more murder, theft, rape, and assault than any other organization in history. They don’t even have Qualified Immunity, according to the full text of section 1983, but that’s not what was given to SCOTUS in 1982 when they heard Harlow V Fitzgerald.
It’s not prejudice when literally all the evidence supports it. Maybe you’d be process that evidence more clearly without that pig cock cutting off your oxygen supply.
Yes, but they are intelligent, useful to society, and quite friendly with a tiny amount of socialization. None of that is true for the average cop. Remember, they HATE being called a Citizen On Patrol.
In an overwhelming number of situations, yes. Cops are intended to prioritize property over people and convictions over justice. Those who speak out about injustices face retribution from their peers and little defense from their union. Police unions act as criminal legal defense to eschew responsibility.
There have even been legal cases of departments refusing to hire people because they were “too smart”. This is largely speculated to be due to fear of those who are more intelligent speaking out, and having a moral compass of their own rather than blindly following.
Yep. I’m one of them. I applied to the cybercrimes division of the Lexington, KY PD in my naive youth and got an official letter saying they refused to hire me because they were worried that I would “get bored and pursue other employment.” Asked a couple of my lawyer friends and they all agreed that was code for “we’re afraid that you’ll notice all the shit we do, and try to prosecute us” aka, “you’re too smart.”
So, just a general message to all the commenters who are eye-rolling this:
Viruses mutate, and COVID has mutated continuously since it has been in the wild. All those shots did serve a purpose to continue to provide protection, and that this one will too.
You’re tired? Viruses don’t get tired. It’s not only a good thing, it’s a miracle that we even are able to keep up with these mutations and almost completely mitigate the risk of, oh, just death and life-long debilitating symptoms with a 15 minute visit to the doctor to get a shot every so often.
Viruses mutate, and COVID has mutated continuously since it has been in the wild. All those shots did serve a purpose to continue to provide protection, and that this one will too.
It’s somewhat baffling that this needs repeating after three years of COVID, but yet here we are.
Not even the doctor. I’ve never once gone to the doctor to get a COVID shot. Once a clinic and the rest of the time CVS or Kroger or whoever has the most convenient appointment time.
Yeah, we all know that viruses mutate. That’s like 4th grade science. We all know that new vaccines would be part of the deal. After all they roll out a new flu vaccine every year. I’m not saying that Covid is comparable in devastation to the flu. I’m just saying that anyone who even halfway knows how things work knew this would be the deal.
That’s why I don’t care. I knew from the beginning that this would be how this played out. It’s not a bad thing. I’m not an “anti-vaxer”. Everybody should get their yearly Covid vaccine and flu vaccine.
But when you knew this is how it would work all along it’s not really news is it? It kind of feels like they are just distracting from providing real help to struggling people.
Currently, at least 5 main lineages, with several sub-lineages among Omicron, at least. Wikipedia only marks Omicron as a variant of concern right now, and the others are considered out of circulation among the general population. I couldn’t find WHO data easily on their website, however.
I kinda dislike what the WHO has done with Omicron though. It has had so many lineage variants over the past year that we should have had 4-5 official new named variants by this point, but they seem to be avoiding doing that for some reason.
So we're dealing with unofficial sub-names now with the currently rising Eris variant and the emerging Pirola variant.
They are so genetically different from Omicron at this point that they make Omicron look like the same lineage as Delta.
So, yeah, it's been aggravating me that they haven't been officially recognizing these still ongoing pandemic variants.
We had 1 chance to eradicate COVID and that was when countries first started locking down. We failed… Miserably. So now COVID is endemic, meaning it is NEVER GOING TO GO AWAY. We will be going in for COVID and Flu shots every year for the foreseeable future. If we are lucky, they’ll eventually be able to roll the flu and COVID shots into one inoculation.
The terrible part being that Covid is several times more deadly than the flu, so we're going to have 60,000 more deaths on average per year than we used to. And that's only until some other viral epidemic occurs.
In Texas, it’s actually illegal for a government entity to do business with a company that boycotts Israel. Calls for divestment at UT and other schools can’t legally be given any consideration because of our fucked-up state government.
Like: when I evaluate bids for the City, one of the sections I have to fill out by law relates to the bidder’s stance on the Israeli government. It’s insane.
…i do a lot of work with texas municipalities and universities and all their standard contracts include a section forbidding us or any of our subconsultants from boycotting israel…
Look. im from europe and even us havent figured that out(even in the not genocidal countries) but at least we dont send them money and weapons for FREE. At least our countries sell the weapons to genocidal countries.
You can support with food, medicine, and infrastructure. If we believe in killing something so dearly, we can send our own people. Harder to be a war monger if your own ass is on the line.
Some of the biggest supporters of Ukraine are its neighbours in Europe. I think they have a good reason to believe that if Ukraine fell they’d be next.
a former coworker sat and tried to convince me that sugar is neither bad for you nor addictive. the sugar lobby psychological manipulation propaganda machine is the behemoth that has to be dismantled before any meaningful change can even be attempted
this coworker was an instructional academic librarian who included confirmation bias and how to avoid it in her teaching
yea, the whole “everything is bad for you if you do enough of it to kill yourself!” is a pretty common response. and yes, that’s true. there IS a threshold for everything. one cigarette won’t kill you either.
Agreed but the cigarette analogy is not really accurate.
Sugar is arguably good for you in moderation. We evolved to seek out sugar in the form of fruits, berries, etc. Quick energy, fast acting carbohydrates etc.
Can’t think of how this translates to a single cigarette lol.
Agree 100%. And arguably “in moderation” is much lower than people might want it to be. Plus most of this stuff is processed with high fructose corn syrup trash.
HFCS isn’t even just one product. There are different blends that are all HFCS. At the extreme, HFCS-90, is far FAR different than table sugar. HFCS-55 is close to table sugar (which would be numbered “50” if table sugar used that same numbering scheme), and there’s HFCS-42 which is farther away from table sugar.
The Corn Refiners Association (CRA) have been successful in rebranding HFCS under a bunch of different names so you don’t know it anymore. Current labeling has HFCS-90 (the worst kind) simply called “Fructose” on ingredient labels now. source
Agreed but the cigarette analogy is not really accurate.
why not? if you’re going by “too much of anything is bad for you,” then doesn’t it follow that “NOT too much of anything isn’t necessarily bad for you”?
so yea, one soda won’t kill you = true. also one cigarette won’t kill you = true.
what i’m getting at is that your “argument” isn’t one
the body needs glucose which is A sugar. but “sugar” in the context of the conversation is referring to refined sugar, which the body absolutely doesn’t need, and when it contains fructose (as in sucrose or HFCS, by far the most consumed sugars), then sorry, it’s not good
But it does need sugar to survive. Comparing sugar to cigarettes is kinda dumb. But you keep making whatever false equivalencies support your argument, boo.
The person you’re replying to is clearly uninformed but I do want to let you know that like most things involving the human body, this isn’t a one-size-fits-all problem. I did keto but I have nondiabetic hypoglycemia, which is how I got an A1C of 3.9, and how I found out how dangerous that is and that I do actually require some (preferably complex) carbohydrates every day.
I understand nondiabetic hypoglycemia is pretty rare so I still support you fighting misinformation (and especially that no one requires added sugars, which should, by now, just be common sense) but I did want to throw this out there, that folks should absolutely seek a doctor before going all in on a zero sugar diet.
Yes, sugar is needed to survive, but a normal diet with little processed foods will supply more than enough. OP is talking about added sugars which are known to increase risk of heart disease, diabetes, liver disease, etc.
I agree that the comparison is dumb. Regardless, I think a better way to frame your previous statement is nicotine is a known carcinogen while glucose itself is not. Thanks for the snark lol not everything is confrontational. Ease up on your quills, hedgehog.
I stand by my point, refined sugar isn’t even arguably good for you. A handful of jolly ranchers won’t kill you but it’s not a good source of carbohydrates.
In no universe do you need refined sugar. You absolutely don’t need hundreds of grams of carbohydrates a day. Your body needs less than 100 grams a day and that’s being generous.
You can literally get all the carbohydrates your body needs from green vegetables or a single piece of fruit.
In nature, fructose is usually found in about equal parts with glucose, but high-fructose corn syrup (at least the stuff used in beverages, maybe more) has more fructose than glucose.
Weird quirk about our digestion, fructose is absorbed 1:1 with glucose, so if there’s less glucose than fructose, some fructose gets left behind as excess free fructose, and that fructose can go and play with other parts of the body. It’s been found to cause childhood asthma, hypertension, coronary heart disease, and allergic sensitization.
Sodium and sugar are not “bad” for you. Sodiums/salts are arguably an absolute necessity for brain function lol (electrolytes). It’s the too much that is the bad part. There’s natural sugar in fruits and stuff, which you already know. Blanket statements like “sugar is bad” are dumb.
Maybe if the issue wasn’t soo widespread, but the manufactured over abundance has tipped the scales enough that simple statements of sugar/sodium being bad for you (even if not entirely correct) are a step in the right direction.
No, you are wrong and so is your ridiculous statement.
even if not entirely correct
It’s not that it’s “not entirely correct”, it’s entirely incorrect. Full stop.
We evolved to seek out sugar. Originally in the form of fruits and berries and whatnot, as its an efficient fast acting carbohydrate for quick energy. It is good for you. Period.
Over consumption due to over abundance and the capitalist profit motive not giving a shit about the consequences on people’s health, because muh profits, is why people eat to much of it.
Your solution is to blatantly lie, which is dumb and wrong. Lying is not a step in the right direction ever.
Educate people, and hold capitalists accountable, in the form of violent regulation. You ain’t gonna do that cuz you have no power and never will. Lying is dumb. Sugar is good for you in moderation.
But that doesn’t make sugar bad. It makes too much sugar bad, which seems to be what they were saying. Albeit, ineloquently. **Insert thought terminating insult.
That said, I was the one selected to take my kid to see Detective Pikachu and I have to admit it was a damn good movie. And really only took the skeleton of the Pokemon idea and did something interesting with it anyway.
What is there to really dislike about Pokemon? I didn’t realize that it was intrusive enough on those that don’t play or watch it to trigger such strong feelings.
Thanks for pointing it out. I always write “the Ukraine” because it’s how we write it in my native language. I didn’t even know in English the article is used for non sovereign counties. It’s really hard to avoid the extra article here, as in for example German, we use “the Ukraine” exclusively, as it’s female. It’s the same with the Netherlands, the Turkey, the Switzerland. Never even heard before this could imply denying sovereignty.
In English it implies it’s a geographical region rather than a nation’s name. The exceptions are for nations that have an adjectival element. The United States, The Democratic Republic of Wherever, etc.
It’s petty semantics that passes by most, but the people that translate Russian official statements in English are aware of the difference and made a point of it for decades specifically to attack Ukraine’s standing in America and the Commonwealth.
Generally speaking, it’s a minor enough distinction that no one would care if Russia didn’t.
It is actually Reddit policy about threatening violence and harm to others. But it is silly, because that’s the article title. Perhaps it was removed by automation?
IMO the only valid move for Biden right now asap, is to use his new immunity powers to invalidate his immunity powers, as a display of self checkmate.
Declare the full supreme court under threat of death has to go back and redo the decision, and all of them must vote to reverse it and remove the presidential immunity, or be hung.
This of course means “if you dont remove my ability to kill you, you will die”.
Its the ultimate display of being handed ultimate power, and rejecting it through the power itself.
I cant think of any other move that makes sense really. It would be a headache in court but thats what the supreme justices get for making such a stupid ass decision.
As far as I understand the decision (IANAL!), the definition of what constitutes an “Official Act” is left intentionally undefined, so in effect you can only claim this ultimate power if the courts like you in order to declare what you’re doing official.
This means, if I understand it correctly, king powers for Trump and nothing for Biden. They’d just rule everything Biden is doing as not an official act.
You realize immunity doesn’t mean declare what you want, and you get it?
Also It’s not illegal for Biden to say he is invalidating his immunity powers, it’s just meaningless. Now if he punched Stormy Daniel’s until she agreed to give syphilis to the court, that might be illegal acts that fall under his official duties.
Also, you need the courts behind whatever illegal thing you are going to do.
I didn’t ask a question. Please refer to the single sentence I wrote if you have any more questions about how your first two steps have nothing to do with immunity from criminal prosecution.
The idea that you actually need courts behind you is laughable. Power is enforced through the threat of violence, this is how law enforcement functions. Courts do not have soldiers.
Know who does? Commander-in-Chief, now with full immunity for any official act, like, giving orders to the military.
One could say perhaps the soldiers themselves would be afraid of prosecution and would disobey orders, since they don’t get immunity. Until the President pardons them anyway.
Otherwise only one last line of firm defense remains: the oath each serviceman takes to defend the Constitution against all threats, foreign and domestic. That might make someone disobey an illegal order.
Immunity here means declare whatever you want, and then mandate that the military eliminate anyone who opposes your new mandate. This “fun” hypothetical is a president invalidating their immunity powers and then having that decree reinforced by death, that second part is the illegal you want in this equation.
It’s done to “Save America”, so it’s an official act.
"If a president couldn’t freely do rapes, bribes, frauds and incite violence without repercussions, who would way to be president?"
one of the two candidates for US President probably
I tell people as often as I can, especially my trans and bipoc friends; now is the time. Get a couple guns (a long one and a short one) and learn how to use them. Learn some basic first aid, you really just need to know how to stabilize someone. Start networking with like-minded people in your communities. The police will not protect us, they’ve proven they’ll happily club senior citizens to the ground and shoot any protesters in the face with rubber bullets while escorting a rightwing murderer to safety.
Iran was a secular, liberal state until almost 1980 when they (mostly legitimately) elected an Islamist theocracy; it could happen here
Soap box, ballot box, jury box, ammo box. In that order.
If you’re just standing on your soap box unwilling to go to the ballot box, you’re probably not going to be willing to go to the other boxes that may be necessary. It doesn’t take that much effort to vote, and the other things take even more effort than that.
I think the main thing is, people have been banging the “just vote” drum for like 12 years now, and people are voting.
Trump isnt currently the president, nor has he been for nearly 4 years.
And yet the US’s constitution has never been more eroded. People DID vote, but it doesnt do jack shit when the individuals in question fucking shit up weren’t voted in
It takes a long time before a Supreme Court Justice retires or kicks the bucket, doesn’t it? It’s only then they get replaced and that’s done by whoever is in power at the time.
Democracy isn’t voting once and immediately getting what you want. Democracy is a process, it isn’t like ordering something on Amazon.
There are a lot of people who wanted abortion to be illegal. They voted in every election they were eligible to vote in for decades. And they got what they wanted, didn’t they?
That’s what you’re up against. If you’re whining about having to vote in multiple elections, remember the people that want to take away your rights aren’t whining about having to vote in every election. They will even vote for Trump knowing full well he’s not a religious man so they can get what they want. They just do it and they’re now getting what they want.
And that’s democracy. The people that vote in every election get what they want. The people that lack the dedication to do the same don’t get what they want.
So either vote or accept that abdicating your responsibility to others you’re allowing them to decide the long term direction your country will take. That’s the choice you’re making.
If you’re whining about having to vote in multiple elections Thats not what people are “whining” about.
Voting has nothing to do with the deeper rooted intrinsic issues, and voting will simply never solve them. Way more serious legal measures have to be taken instead.
The average American has zero clue how anything in the government works, nor the interest in policy to actually understand what the policies their politician of choice are pushing do. The average American is so disconnected from politics it’s zero surprise that shitty politicians are elected everywhere regularly.
This isn’t an indictment of the people themselves but the society they live in that somehow incientivizes general laziness when it comes to civics
The republikkklowns have really simplified it though.They STAND for removing human rights, racism, facism and against anything good for the people. At this point you have two choices. Democracy or Dictatorship. I’ll take human rights and Democracy please.
That doesnt take care of it, nor can voters take care of it.
Even if Biden gets re-elected, this ruling stays in play perpetually until someone undoes it, which requires the supreme court justices to walk it back after a period of time.
The only option is to use the newly granted powers themself to undo the granted powers.
It’s, imo, the only play.
Also this has nothing to do with being a “petulant child”, it proves the point of how the granted powers are over-reaching.
If they werent over-reaching, then he wouldnt be able to use them to do this. It becomes a forced move on the justices behalf.
They either:
a. Accept the powers are to overpowered and in turn are forced to, through the command itself, have to roll it back or b. Rule that Biden cant do that, which forces cementing an upper limit on what the powers can do (it establishes a baseline that you cant just use the powers to force supreme justice acts and/or to order people to die)
Either way, it either neuters the powers to some extent or completely nullifies them.
There’s a difference between having the authority to do something and being immune to prosecution for a crime.
Biden doesn’t have the authority to issue an order for summary execution.
If he could convince someone to commit the crime of killing members of SCOTUS, and it was considered an official act of the President, then he might be shielded from prosecution for it, and he could issue a pardon for those that did the deed.
The ruling only benefits a criminal President, and Biden isn’t a criminal.
That’s actually him learning that one of the people he shot at survived. Just a reminder, this shithead crossed state lines to dump gas on the fire of a protest and riot caused by disgusting, racially motivated circumstances.
He wanted to kill some people that night, so he brought a big gun. His success resulted in a lot of free money from the folks that want everyone else struggling to survive without violating a ten commandment to go hungry.
Just a reminder, this shithead crossed state lines to dump gas on the fire of a protest
The “crossed state lines” thing really irks me because does nobody know that maps exist? I’m thinking about crossing state lines today because I need to get more baby wipes. Shithead went to the next town over, which just so happened to be in a different state.
But let’s also not forget he went and partied with KKK members immediately after posting his crowdfunded bail, just in case there’s any questions on how much of a shithead he is
I’ve lived in the edge of a state before. It’s really hard to miss what side of the populated area is one state or another, and the fact that there are laws about crossing. I knew if I went shooting in CA I needed to keep my ammunition and firearm in seperate compartments, unloaded, and that I couldn’t have friends buy me a gun to take across if I couldn’t legally buy it myself. And I was just shooting clay pigeons, not my racially hated neighbors.
I’m sure that disappointed him deeply, the blatant racism isn’t erased by this. He’s publicly linked himself to well known racists, he’s not shy about it, also he clearly went in the hopes of killing black people, pretty sure he said as much before he left.
Also I don’t know if you know this, but most white supremacist would be more inclined to kill ‘‘race traitors’’ before killing other races in many situations.
I’m not saying he killed who he intended to kill. I’m saying my plan was to shoot clay pigeons. His plan was to shoot BLM protestors.
The straw purchase of the murder weapon the judge shrugged and tossed on a whim is something that can land you in jail for 10 years.
There was a parallel case to Rittenhouse: Andrew Coffee IV. He was acquitted in his case but the charge of his weapon possession is what got him 10 years.
But Rittenhouse’s judge figured hey, NBD, and everybody clapped.
The NRA will not defend anyone if drugs or police are involved.
Leaving aside the NRA a lot of 2A Advocates were / are hoping that this case will bring an end to these questions being on the 4473 form. They are obviously unconstitutional and they should not be on there.
Wow, the film makers Heineman and McNally are total pieces of shit. They were warned several times that people would be killed if they didn’t blur their faces. Heineman and McNally said it would be fine, then said no one ever warned them, then said it’s normal to show faces, then said it’s really the governments fault, not theirs.
Heineman and McNally are responsible for this person’s death, and are too cowardly to admit it.
Yup that’s how you never ever get future work as all potential victims are gonna be too scared now to come forth for any kind of reveal. They didn’t deserve an award for just manipulating and then outing vulnerable people.
I know this is completely irrelevant, but since we’re all laughing at leaky Rudy, here’s a clip of him congratulating Legal Eagle, a fairly left-leaning channel, on his success and two million subscribers. www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeARRJyKkwY
Hilarious that he thought he could have a birthday and duck a subpoena at the same time. These people aren’t willing to give up anything to stay out of prison.
I am, depressingly, aware. License plates are the stereotypical example (at least in my mind).
It’s absolutely fucking atrocious that anyone is allowed to profit off prison labor. At the very least those funds could be sent to halfway homes but they should probably just be paid to prisoners.
I don’t think you’ve visited enough Canadian online communities.
If you ask the internet, specifically Reddit, Galen Loblaw will arrest you for buying 30% off stewing beef at the self scan, and while you’re shopping your car will have been stolen and TFWs will have taken your job.
Galen Weston is definitely a huge asshole, but I’d blame that one more on capitalism and greed. The weed helps us endure the price fixing bullshittery.
Those are primarily ppl larping as canucks, and the same stupid 20% of the population that believes their bullshit as any other country. Like the morons wearing maga hats at a clownvoy rally.
If you go into a thread with real Canadians in it, you will most likely not see anybody having a problem with foreign workers or immigration.
Galen Weston can fucking die though… We all agree on that.
Admittedly I’m sitting here in Winnipeg, having just taken a huge bong rip but I would sincerely challenge your claims that our country didn’t fall into anarchy post legalisation.
I’m not saying weed is the cause, in fact I believe more people should take a toke but seeing everything around me going to shit like it is, seeing it accelerate since '19 doesn’t really help with this Indica induced anxiety. Trucker convoy, campuses being taken hostage, food banks over run… This ain’t been a good run bro.
I agree that weed wasn’t the cause - I’d also argue that it isn’t Canada as much as the whole fucking world going to pot. And, as much as I’d hate the conservatives even more, neoliberalism has been absolutely wrecking us. Things like food banks, health care, public transit, and the post service don’t need to be independently profitable. Raise our fucking taxes and fund this shit right.
If Trump wins I'm going to be too preoccupied with the climate disaster and end of American democracy (in that order) to give a single fuck about what happens in Gaza, Ukraine, or anywhere else.
I mean, am I wrong? Should I care more about what happens to Gazans or Ukrainians than the fact that we're living in a kleptocracy of science-deniers who are openly taking $1 billion bribes from the oil industry? I don't think so...
If you're just abstractly posting about shit on the internet, sure. But if a wildfire burns my neighborhood down (a real possibility where I live, even now, and increasingly likely as the climate slips into the irredeemable zone over the next decade or so) I'm not going to be thinking about global politics and wars happening in countries that I will never step foot in. That would be borderline pathological.
I'm just being honest. You need to live a life of privilege to have the time, freedom, and emotional capacity to worry about what is happening in Gaza. And, should Donald Trump become president again, he will do whatever he feels like doing in Gaza, nobody will hold him accountable (as nobody seems willing to do right now for the things he's done in the past), and I'm not going to have the willpower to care because, mark my words, WE will have real problems of our own.
If you want to see what unchecked genocide, mass civil unrest, climate disaster, and American autocracy looks like, by all means, allow Donald Trump to take over our country. 2024 is our last stand, and what happens next is a matter of individual survival.
What do you mean? I don't follow, so can you elaborate?
Are you really saying that you care more about what happens to people in countries half way across the world in regions that you'll probably never step foot in than yourself, your country, or the world at large?
So we hand America over to a criminal autocrat because Biden hasn't managed to solve world peace adequately enough for your liking. Doesn't make a ton of sense to me. Maybe I'm not understanding something here.
You didn't elaborate on what you meant when you said "saying the quiet part out loud". Can you tell me what you mean by that? I don't follow.
“Hasn’t managed to solve world peace adequately” is quite the euphemism for “is supporting an ongoing genocide with billions of dollars of weapons.”
Biden is "supporting an ongoing genocide". He's doing what every President in modern US history has done by arming Israel because they are (a) our ally and have been since Israel and Palestine were both created, and (b) under attack from multiple groups including Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran.
Since October 7th 2023, Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran have launched well over 11,000 missiles and drones at Iran, the vast majority of which were intercepted and nullified by Israeli defense systems. On top of the 1,500 people that Hamas killed and kidnapped on October 7th, had those missile and drone attacks not been defended against, how many more innocent people do you think could have been killed in this war? Would you have been happy to see thousands of missiles hit Israel as well as what's going on in Gaza?
I personally feel that we need to put stronger restrictions and conditions on the weapons we send to Israel in light of the war, and they have started doing that, which is good. But let's not pretend that American defense spending in Israel hasn't saved thousands of lives and prevented further escalation. Hamas are a terrorist organization founded on an explicit call for genocide against Israeli Jews, and they killed more people on October 7th than Israel is killing per day on average over the last 8 months.
On top of that Biden has spent more money and sent more aide into Gaza than the UN or anyone else... You think Biden is happy about this war? You think he wanted any of this shit to happen, during an election year of all times? C'mon...
Listen, I don't care what you do, but go ahead and help elect Trump if you want to see what actual, unmitigated genocide in Gaza looks like, because unlike Biden he will not give a single fuck what Netenyahu does to the Palestinians. In fact, just like Trump will do what the oil lobby wants if they give him $1 billion, Trump will be more than happy to help Netenyahu flatten every inch of Gaza if he can get some kind of "deal" (read: bribe) in return.
Reverse order for me, the climate distaste I worry about with a Republican dictatorship is a nuclear winter. But that might be growing up during the Cold War talking.
Maybe nuclear winter blocks out sun for so long we solve global warming and enter a new ice age. So many humans will be dead we won’t be able to carry on with our global warming activities, as the small handful remaining return to an agrarian society. Maybe Putin and the republicans will save us all.
Yup. Russia takes Ukraine and funds Iran in the inevitably escalated Israel-Iran direct conflict, while China attacks Taiwan and Trump preaches isolationism. Good start to WWIII.
Nobody is starting a global thermonuclear war over Gaza. Iran doesn't have a capability, NK doesn't give a fuck, and if Russia was going to elevate the world into a nuclear war they would have already done so over Ukraine.
Meanwhile climate change is here and American democracy is in peril, and these are things that actually affect people in this country and the entire world.
If Trump wins, Gaza is his to do as he pleases. If we didn't hold him accountable for his crimes against the United States, I have serious doubts that we're going to hold him accountable for crimes in the middle east.
Let's imagine Trump wins in 2024. He's leading in a number of polls and Biden's popularity is down, so there's a REAL chance...
Who exactly do you think is going to hold him accountable for anything he does at home or abroad?
Congress? (Maybe in some kind of weird scenario where Trump wins the presidency but loses the House and Senate. Not very likely...)
The courts? (Trump has personally appointed 33% of the current SCOTUS, and we have seen that they will tie themselves into knots to do his bidding. Another 33% of SCOTUS are other highly political conservative judges who have proven to be on Trump's side. And then we have to consider that Trump has also appointed a huge number of judges at every different level of our legal system. They aren't going to do anything to him, ever.)
And if Netenyahu was to kill every last man, woman, and child in Gaza, do you think a Trump administration would push back even in the slightest? This is a guy who sides with Putin and Kim Jung Un. He does not give a fuck about humanity or anybody's life other than his own.
I once had hope that someone, somewhere would hold Trump accountable for things like January 6th, but I guess hope doesn't spring eternal after all because I'm just not seeing it. Trump's right about one thing: he could shoot a guy on 5th avenue in broad daylight and nothing would happen to him. One third of this country would be evil enough to still vote for him, and another third of the country would be to stupid to hold him accountable.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.