deleted by creator

YES PLEASE!

Let the branches be forced to fight it out like a bunch of children in front of the SCOTUS; who will probably gleefully say “AHAHAHAH NOPE! You both get nothing, and I keep all of this power to myself.”

This 100%.

The more valuable and critical a government employee knows they are; the more effective they can be by doing this.

Everyone in any federal agency who is resisting and who is being ordered to do something they object to should be falling to this maliciously compliant default to the maximum extent they can afford to do so. Gum up the works; extend out projects, stretch deadlines out, passively resist every step of the way and insist that every possible reasonable rule be followed to it’s exact and literal definition…even if it’s not common practice or expedient.

Exhaust the servants of the tyrant of their every resource; run these liaisons ragged; overload them with petty questions and minor, but critical, decisions; especially if they’re bogged down. If you can make them quit or get fired by the cheeto in a non suspicious way; all the better. Making it impossible to keep a liaison in your department will keep them guessing if they keep quitting on their own due to extreme stress and overwork.

Anybody who is a Political Appointee should be considered a hostile co-worker automatically and kept out of every loop possible. Make them battle for every inch of information or status updates and give as little information as you can while only answering explicit questions. Bonus points if management is in on the game; and can ping-pong any information requests around violently across all the various managers and supervisors who each only leak a tiny tidbit of information.

If the constitution decrees it; sure. I think death is too kind though. But it might be the only option; seeing as how the next GOP idiot who takes the Oval Office will probably pardon him out of it.

That is our worst federal prison by far; and it’s no longer only a military-prison; with the immigrants stopping there. :)

Good. Let the courts resist him on all fronts for what he is; a fascist. The more legal material the Democrats have laid at their feet; the faster they can use it to rebuild and build the case against Trump to convict him of base tyranny, treachery and treason.

Trump deserves to rot in solitude in our worst federal prison until he expires naturally.

We don’t have to. The straws will do all the heavy lifting for us. /s

It’s insidious stuff, those PFAS. :3

The shocked anger reaction coming from Trump is priceless as he finds out that there really weren’t as many immigrants as the far-right proclaimed there to be.

No doubt that number got inflated, much like it would in a game of telephone, when it was making furious rounds through the conservative disinformation machine. I hope he feels just as stupid as anyone who voted for him and are finding out that he really did not represent their ideals nor their best interests after all.

Yes, Please.

Regardless of that; another shenanigan exists for those who did make it to the polls; Gerrymandering.

Yes; it’s horrid as it sounds and it limits the voting power of lower class people, as well as the power of people who are considered to be “ethnic minorities” by the party in power. If there’s a neighborhood of blacks next to a poor neighborhood; well both find themselves districted together and their cumulative votes are diminished by how the votes are counted by district such that a 2-3 victory for Democrats; is actually counted as a 2-3 victory for the Republicans…all because the Republicans were already in power somehow and managed to re-district the place so that the vote result never changes anything…unless the unlikely event that all three neighborhoods choose to vote the same way occurs.

Yet another shenanigan exists where voting rolls are frequently “purged” due to false assertions of fraud and onerous and routine registration becomes necessary, which isn’t a problem if you don’t work full-time in the USA; but good luck getting a day off work if you do work full-time and need to vote. (Hint: YOU DON’T; OR ELSE YOU GET FIRED WITH NO RECOURSE!)

Even if that wasn’t enough already; many times the voting times, locations, dates and even rules change from year-to-year, and sometimes even month-to-month.

What worked this time might not work next time. From ID requirements to ballot order manipulation or even other flat out shady practices like misleading or leading poll questions on the ballot are all employed.

The media is even worse; and frequently spouts simple and blatant lies. they could literally be absolutely passionate about their issue in particular and still end up being misled or lied to; as there’s no accountability for this. This would result in mistakenly casting a vote for the wrong candidate who would then go on to not represent the will or needs of the citizens voting for them once they’re in power.

The average American, just simply can’t always be on top of every one of these things 24/7. It’s easy to get taken by any one of them by surprise.

^ Another American here; and I second this notion! ^

@ #9; Whoa there. 100% is unreasonable. Still there’s room to start at a hard 90% at about 250 million and then incrementally scale until the tax is say, about 95-97% by about a billion.

Unfortunately you cannot tax anyone 100%; that would ultimately be unfair and demotivating and only motivate corruption to avoid the tax

Judging strictly by the article; it feels like this case is weak as a wet paper bag.

How do you prove that the diseases you experienced were not ones you were unknowingly predisposed to? Do they have some proof?

Something tells me that this is a paper tiger of a case. I don’t get the feeling they’re going to be able to prove it well enough. Being able to make the assertions that this case does as facts REQUIRES DECADES OF SCIENTIFIC DATA!

I shouldn’t be able to read the defendant’s statement and be able to agree with it. The fact that I can agree with it bothers me when I know how negligent these companies typically are. I hope I’m wrong; because if this case flops; it gives them an easy out.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/06/opinion/united-health-care-ceo-shooting.html

OG article link

Yikes.

In 1997; I was walking about 2 miles to and from school. Unsupervised. I had a house key on my neck and was a latchkey kid in third grade. I obediently walked to and from school directly from home; meeting the crossing guard a half mile from school twice a day; as I had to cross a major 4 lane divided highway.

The reason things like Alcohol are “considered and generally recognized as safe” has a lot to do with their effect length on the body. It’s possible to isolate someone intoxicated this way for up to 24 hours and see them recover all of their facilities in the short term.

Granted; it still has long-term effects that are bad, just not show-stoppingly so, and it only affects people who actually abuse the stuff long-term for many years.

I do agree we should be a lot tougher on Alcohol use in general. Maybe not Prohibition levels; but some framework to cut off people from acquiring quantities that can intoxicate them so badly that they pose a danger to themselves and others.

They faffed around, and now they’re finding out that, yes, the experts were in fact right! Restricting abortion access does cause more deaths and poor health outcomes!

Legitimately I question that this is even newsworthy.

It appears that these women are harming nobody and are partaking of the drug(s) safely and sensibly in a manner that ensures that no one is being significantly endangered. Yes the residual dangers exist and bad trips can happen to pretty much anyone. I don’t feel as if they’re even posing a danger to their children; if this is in fact being done in such a way that the kids are never being exposed to their parents while they’re in an altered mental state due to hallucinogenic intoxication. If it isn’t; yeah; I could see why a local branch of child services might pay them a visit. However, I’m not going to make that negative assumption.

I don’t particularly commend the women, nor the news outlet, for coming out about this though; it is still very much technically illegal by current law. But, I also do agree that the stigma attached to drug use, even when done so responsibly, is in fact ridiculous and stupid in general. However, I don’t see a better way of achieving what that does…so I couldn’t suggest any better alternatives and I don’t support going back to a previous era in Law where drugs that factually are provably dangerous, for some reason, are not regulated. Reasonable and Sensible Regulations on dangerous Drugs are REQUIRED; it’s just that some people have a different definition of ‘Reasonable and Sensible’ which has to be ironed into a proper consensus for society.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scunthorpe_problem

The effect is real.

Personally there’s just certain controls in a car I firmly believe should NEVER be digitized anyways.