Herbert Feuerstein, a german journalist and entertainer went as far as to record his own one hour feature for his previous employer, a public ratio station in the western part of Germany to broadcast after his death. It’s an hour of his favourite music, him telling the story of how all that came to be and some remarks on life and everything. I quite liked the idea and the way he executed it.
What’s funny is my mom really does live with her best friend as housemates now that my dad is dead and it really is just a friendship and they hate it when people think they’re in a relationship. Especially when my mom mostly stays downstairs and her friend mostly stays upstairs and they generally just share the kitchen and dog walking duties.
I really don’t want to pry. And here’s why- Once, I said to my wife that it looks like people are giving someone a blowjob when they start to eat a banana and my mom walked into the room and said, “what’s so bad about that?” And she was in her 70s then. I definitely don’t want to know about my mother’s sexual proclivities now that she’s 82.
Oh dear. She’s a smut novelist. Well hopefully you are supportive and add her books to your library. 😄
I would absolutely cringe if my mom brought that up but I think that is largely because that is not something my parents really ever talked about. My wife had the opposite experience where she and her mother were fine talking about it growing up.
The report Friday comes after a separate report this week found Supreme Court Justices have received about $4.7 million in gifts over the past two decades — more than $4 million of which was pocketed by Thomas alone, newly revealed data showed.
We all really wish he would have accepted the motorcoach offer. John Oliver is a treasure, putting his money where his mouth is trying to save our country from scum like Thomas.
CEOs haven’t been a thing for hundreds of years, but many come to mind for most folks. In fact, I’d wager most can probably name more “CEOs” from the 19th century than they could musicians. Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Carnegie, Ford. Some say they were Captains of Industry, others may, more accurately say Robber Barons. Good or bad, we remember them.
That’s not really a fair comparison. Robber barons got to build statues and skyscrapers as testaments to their own vanity, meanwhile recorded music was still in the process of being invented. Even so, I’ll make the point that names like Beethoven, Liszt, Chopin, and Tchaikovsky are equally as recognizable.
I disagree it’s an unfair comparison, but don’t care to argue about it. That said, I’m glad we can agree 19th century musicians and titans of business are equally recognizable.
That’s a little harsh. He allegedly beat and raped Ivana. Many years later, when she died by “falling” down the stairs, he buried her in a pauper’s grave on his golf course so he could get a tax write-off.
Everyone who ever helped him get where he is today got what they deserved, from Mrs Buried on a Golf Course, to America’s Mayor sweating away the last vestiges of his credibility on a landscaping company forecourt.
It’s like all the warning signs are right there, and every single one just believes everyone else was dumb, and they’ll be the one to get a reward.
That may be true. It still wouldn’t surprise me if Barron was conceived through IVF. I can’t imagine the dude who doesn’t exercise because he thinks a person’s energy over a lifetime is finite has the best sperms count or motility.
What beautiful model wouldn’t want to marry an arrogant liar, who paints his face orange, is 25 years older, has a public history of infidelity, and has one of the weirdest combovers the world has ever seen?
So the MBAs decided to outsource the work to some shithole where unions don’t exist to bust the WA union, and when the whole thing blew up in their face, they are shipping back the “completed” plane to the union shop to get it fixed up.
About two years too late for me to accept apologies on post pandemic price gouging, already cancelled prime and use local groceries over corpo stores. In general they have better quality of selection and prices most of the time, plus it encourages me to explore more variety of small groceries from other cultures, farmers markets, etc.
Similar with fast food if you want to charge me 16 bucks for a meal I’m going to an actual restaurant instead
The chain stores are more than the co-op stores in my area too. And with summer coming farmers markets are definitely a better value AND quality option, too
Yeah definitely a privilege of living in a pretty densely populated area with lots of options and even here some have closed, including some of the larger populations of Asian and middle eastern immigrants in the area running many of the smaller shops.
Let’s just not vote for Trump. We went through this already and we already know he will profit from the Presidency in any way he can. This article is the same one I read 6 years ago. It’s insane that people have forgotten all of this already.
Young Democrats are mostly progressives and don’t like it when you call them liberals. But yes, their votes for Biden are what will keep Trump out of office.
There are many progressives on Lemmy that love to identify wedge issues for no reason other than to designate the difference between progressives and liberals. I’m all about being on one team against the right, but I was trying to be respectful of those who don’t want to be mislabeled.
Progressive and liberal are two very different things. Fox News and the US political discourse/Overton Window has classified anything left of the GOP as “liberal,” but in reality it means “center right.”
Those aren’t liberals. They’re the far left. And most of them would be just fine to suffer under Trump instead of doing the actual work to it takes to change the system in the four years they have between the presidential elections.
It’s when a person sets up and then attacks a position that is not actually being debated. Which is exactly what you did. Your lacking the ability to see it isn’t a me problem, it’s a you problem.
I’m perfectly within the wheelhouse of the discussion. So there’s no setting up of a position that isn’t being debated. Liberals and the definition of- is the subject. I simply corrected something that in my opinion, was incorrect.
That you dislike my opinion in the matter, doesn’t mean you get to accuse me of things I’m not doing. Especially when you come back with a definition that doesn’t fit my actions even remotely.
I have come to the conclusion over the last few months based on things people have said they expect Biden to do that they aren’t worried about a presidential candidate who says he will be a dictator because they think that presidents are already dictators.
I know nothing about Ohio specifically, but some Republicans in state legislature aren’t completely brain dead or MAGA.
I am going to hop onto my soap box for a minute and say if we want high quality US politicians, we need to better compensate State legislature roles. In Ohio they make 68k, which isn’t great, but maybe liveable in Ohio. Looking up CT as a random example, they just bumped the pay from 28k to 40k two years ago and their staffers still earn 2 to 3x their pay.
That’s ridiculous. It means only rich people or people funded by rich people can afford to run for state legislature. This doesn’t even get into local politics where selectman can earn like 12k yearly… if we want more normal down to earth politicians, we need to fund this shit better.
No, that’s the defining feature of conservativism, and the only consistent value among all conservatives throughout the history of conservativism. Define the self, benefit the self, blame the scapegoat.
“It is appalling that someone would show up to an emergency room and not receive care – this is inconceivable.”
You keep using that word… I do not think it means what you think it means. This was all predicted as potential outcomes from overturning Roe. It’s not even the first time, because this is what things were like before Roe. You know that quote? “Those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” I used to think it was kind of cliché, but it seems to be more and more relevant all the time these days.
This is an OB/GYN in a different state reviewing the cases at a medical level. You can be 100% sure she knows why they are occurring :
For Huntsberger, the OB-GYN, EMTALA was one of the few ways she felt protected to treat pregnant patients in Idaho, despite the state’s abortion ban. She left Idaho last year to practice in Oregon because of the ban.
What she is saying that it is absolutely shocking that these woman, in deep medical need, were turned away because of cruel and pandering state laws.
Shes making it clear that medically, these hospitals broke their hippocratic oath in order to comply with these heartless state laws while also violating federal law that requires them to provide medical care to those in need.
Oh, I know all that. I still think “inconceivable” is the wrong choice of word. “Monstrous” is good. “Horrifying” works. Even “Heartbreaking”, though that’s maybe a little soft. Unfortunately, it’s all too conceivable.
The court would likely reject Trump’s bond if the paperwork is not corrected. That would mean Trump would lose his right to appeal Engoron’s fraud judgment and the $454 million would be due.
Based on everything that lead up to this they will just lower the amount and give him even more time to find someone else, because rulings and laws just don’t appear to mean anything.
Unfortunately we don’t live in a world were the rich can be held accountable. Hell 90% of Congress are millionaires. They system is set up for the 1%. We are oligarchy not a democracy. Trump getting away with his crimes in plain sight is proof of that.
The reduction isn’t common, but it does happen. It’s often seen when the appeals court has reason to believe the original judgement will be reduced on appeal.
She’s decided to get to the stage with a jury, attach jeopardy, and then immediately dismiss the case on BS grounds. Because jeopardy was attached (the case was tried, even if in a perfunctory and illegitimate manner), then you can’t charge the defendant with the same crime again. This way, she can essentially discharge the crimes permanently.
That does mean she needs to actually get to the trial stage of things. It also means she can use the trial scheduling to keep tripping up the other trials for his crimes in other jurisdictions as she moves her trial dates around to block progress by other judges. She’s actively trying to undermine the judiciary, the rule of law, and protect an enemy of the republic.
Her response is nonsensical unless what you say is the case. She first says, hypothetically if we were to go with either of these both flagrantly incorrect interpretations of this law to say automatically that everything Trump did is legal to make jury instructions for the jury, how would you write them?
Smith replies, hold up, are you saying you’re going with that totally ridiculous law interpretation? These are both very wrong and would mean no matter what the charges get dismissed for Trump, why would we make jury instructions based on them? If this is your interpretation, say so definitively in a ruling, so we can appeal right now before the trial.
She responds, I will not rule on this issue pre-trial (implying hey I might dismiss it the second the trial starts when this is unappealable because it would trigger double jeopardy, lol), and it was just hypothetical who knows, how dare you suggest we finalize jury instructions early this instant! (even though Smith never asked to finalize jury instructions, she was the one who asked them to write hypothetical jury instructions early hinting at her insane interpretations in the first place!) She even called the case a “first impression” which is ridiculous, the law has been around since the 1920’s and has a ton of precedent.
Hopefully Smith has enough to file to just remove her from the case at this point. Yes this delays the trial, and yes the appeals court might say no, but at least it might stop her from deliberately setting her calendar for the trial this Summer to try and delay his other criminal cases too, especially the January 6th case (assuming Supreme court doesn’t give Trump immunity or something equally dumb). She should be impeached and removed from the bench, for being unqualified in the first place, making flagrant dumb mistakes in multiple cases showing her lack of any ability to do this, and actual clear malice in using her position for political ends to boot.
This can just get appealed, right? I mean obviously the clock is on Trump’s side, but a judge can’t just magically wave away crimes on double Jeopardy like this, can they?
If a judge acquits the defendant during a trial before a jury has rendered a verdict, yeah they kind of can de facto wave crimes away if they really want to. Trial judges are important too, not just appeals judges. Another reason why republicans pushing through all of these unqualified judges is so devastating.
She’s hinting that she’s going to make up some totally incorrect interpretation of the presidential records act (made to prevent presidents from taking materials that belong to the government, not shield them from stealing classified records), say under my interpretation no reasonable jury could convict him based on the evidence, and then acquit him before a jury renders any verdict, essentially not appealable to the best of my knowledge as long as it’s done before a verdict, but correct me if I’m wrong. If she dismissed on this basis before the trial it would be appealable, or if she overturned a jury guilty verdict that would be appealable. This ruling she issued just said she would not dismiss the charges on this basis before the trial, but she’s not ruling out going with that interpretation anyway during the actual trial, and her bizarre hypothetical jury instructions order telegraphs this is her intent.
Yup. SCOTUS never really contemplated a completely corrupt judge just jumping on a grenade for her lumpy overlord. Her career under any Democratic president (and possibly several Republican ones) would be over, but she can totally let him off the hook. The circuit has been halfway sensible so far, and Smith needs to accept that he’s fighting two opponents who are not even playing the same game as he is, and he needs to pivot to getting rid of her, however long that takes.
I’m not a specialist, nor lawyer. The discussion I’ve heard so far is that if the judge dismissed the case after the jury is empaneled, but before much (or any) evidence has been presented, then it limits what can be appealed. Appeals can only be done on the case as it was run, not with new evidence, so if she ends it before the prosecution can enter evidence and arguments, then the appeal process might not have much to appeal.
Whether that strategy would actually work to protect the defendant, I don’t know, but it’s currently a scenario being floated by some commentators (who actually are lawyers) watching the case.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.