We can dream.
Americans have a huge hard on for punishing people, regardless of utility.
We can dream.
Americans have a huge hard on for punishing people, regardless of utility.
Shouldn’t you be able to get it in in at least some states via ballot measures, from where you can use it to send better people to DC to implement it federally?
First conviction, they’d be concurrent and highly unlikely he’d get max time. However, this is a first conviction, breaking the glass ceiling for convicting an ex president, in the weakest of the four current trials. Sentences become more likely to be jail up to minimum guaranteed imprisonment for some time, because of sentencing guidelines, as well as the terms getting longer for each conviction.
A lot of things, apparently. He’s been leaning further and further into it, and as it’s caused his channel to fall off he’s making pity me videos about how the sjw algorithm is out to get him.
I didn’t store a local copy of the specifics; it didn’t seem worth occupying space with, but there’s plenty of stuff around. I wasn’t sure if you’d want a video, so here’s text (apologies about the site but.)
https://www.reddit.com/r/Shadiversity/comments/rc4vj0/general_wtf_shad_vent_discussion/
If you care, shadiversity went full chud.
Apparently it has a significant chance of “aggressive ass cancer”.
I have no interest in downvoting you, but I would like to say that on priors, I would be surprised to learn that she saw “Hamas” and “Palestinians” as anything other than a distinction without a difference. She’s electively of a set with Lindsey “Nuke Gaza” Graham, and she’s voting for Trump apparently now, who has been very vocal about his support for the “kill them all” perspective.
Do you have specific evidence that leads you to believe otherwise, or is it more of a charity in humanity thing?
These companies provided access to the required technologies free of charge, for humanitarian purposes.
They don’t own it, they don’t get paid for it.
“Big corps” aren’t involved here. It’s a philanthropy project, and from what I can find it’s not legally encumbered in any way like Monsanto stuff is. This is entirely Greenpeace doing something that gets headlines, instead of something actually good. Don’t forget that that organization, too, has motives, first among which is going to be survival and advancement of the organization.
If just grow carrots lol was adequate, tell me again why people are deficient in the nutrients golden rice has over baseline rice, please.
I did that. I’m also going to vote against more genocide, done not just abroad but at home.
In the voting booth, there is no “no genocide” button. Your choices come down to “more genocide” and “less genocide”, and you get to push towards one outcome or the other.
Personally, I’m going to take a brave stance against “more genocide”, but if your principles keep you from engaging with the real options, well.
I’m sure the people who die who wouldn’t have otherwise will forgive you.
So on some level, sure, boo hoo, cry me a river, right?
But wealth, serious wealth, orders of magnitude disproportionate wealth will fuck you up. It isolates you from the majority of people, makes you paranoid, makes you unable to reasonably judge your success… There’s a Some More News on this, with links to a lot of research, and at this point, I honestly feel like gently separating people from any amount of money over 999m USD at most and using part of it to pay for therapy and the rest to help the rest of humanity might be the kindest thing we could do for them.
Super weird how it’s made up but I watched video of the event.
Better hope nothing gets made up at the debates, Donny.
I’d be pretty surprised if there were a private security option capable of holding off the military, if the president really wanted someone dead and had the legal go-ahead.
I’d be really surprised if Trump could afford them.
My mom introduced me to Napster. So at this point, it would be a family tradition.
Alternative perspective: many “traditional” things are in fact bad. Not everything, but many things, and we should dump those things.
Yes, it can’t impact the trial, that he didn’t testify. Doesn’t mean we can’t infer, out here away from the court, that he put up a big front in public and slunk away with his tail between his legs in court, because he knew he was guilty and would only have made things worse if he testified, along with earning some counts of perjury.