vortic

I don’t usually use much profanity but this is a fucking travesty and the six conservative justices are traitors to the American people. They should all be impeached for blatant corruption and for being bought and paid-for by industry interests. They’re not even going to be embarrassed about their scientific mistake except that they got caught out on not understanding what they’re ruling on. They know they aren’t the experts in everything. They just want corporations to have free reign and for them to be able to trample the rights of citizens.

This is going to allow the courts to rapidly unwind decades of progress that has been made on some of the most important subjects including environmental regulations, workplace regulations and employee rights, antitrust law, and anticorruption law to name a few. Between this and the Jarkesy decision we’re going to go back to the days of burning eyes in Los Angeles and Lake Erie on fire, deadly workplaces and no employee right to organize, anticompetitive corporate practices with no oversight, and rampant corporate fraud. There is no longer a reasonable enforcement mechanism due to Jarkesy and there is now no real rule-making authority.

As I said before, all six conservative justices should be impeached for blatant corruption and working against the best interests of the American people. I’d settle for impeaching Alito and Thomas, but they should all be impeached. They are traitors to the American people.

Does anyone know where I can find a time line of this case? I’m really curious how it took four years to litigate something this egregious. Four years to reach a settlement, not even a litigate court ruling.

Kyle is so good in these confrontational situations. I wish more people got to see him but broadcast news is losing viewership…

Thanks for the context. I’m not sure why you’re being downvoted by some people. Given the timing, I don’t see that this either constitutes insider trading or implies prejudice (even if he is prejudiced). I do wonder, though, if something happened in the news cycle around August 14th that might have prompted his sale at that point. I don’t trust Alito to do anything in good faith around the subject of trans rights.

allowing them to profit through “normal/legal” channels prevents them from taking bribes or seeking other forms of income.

This doesn’t seem to have worked. Thomas and Alito are the glaring examples, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised to learn that they all take bribes of one form or another, whether intentionally or unintentionally because their actions bear no personal consequences other than enrichment.

I think there is more nuance to it than this. Certain government officials who are in sensitive positions should be barred from holding stocks except through a blind trust, an index fund, a mutual fund, or some other vehicle that they can’t directly control or influence. Those “certain government officials” should include members of the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches who tend to be privy to information that would, if acted upon, constitute insider trading. This would include policy-makers as well as those around the policy-makers whose knowledge would create a conflict of interest.

That is all to say, I don’t think that someone working in government IT, doing wildlife research, or doing HR work for a government agency should be required to divest from their stock portfolios. That should be limited to people whose jobs create an inherent conflict of interest.

The last printed edition was published on Saturday 26 March 2016, leaving only the online edition.

source

It’s not like it needs to go into a news paper. It’s a website headline. “condemns” is only three letters longer than “slams” and doesn’t sound lick clickbait.

I’m so tired of that word replacing “strongly criticizes”, “rebukes”, “condemns”, “denounces”, or “repremands”. Why do articles have to use such a stupid, lazy word? Does it actually draw more clicks?

My guess is that these were wealthy women who were able to afford the transfer. I highly doubt that the hospital or any insurance company paid for the transfers. I would bet that there were other women who were unable to afford similar care and had to suffer the consequences.

Has his staff managed to insulate him from memes like this or is he just realizing that they’re not going to be able to weed out everyone who thinks that way? Surely not every potential jurer who dislikes trump has publicly posted memes about him.

I’m really encouraged to see that congress is actually doing something to revive the 4th amendment. It is essentially dead in the digital space right now.

The vote was pretty bipartisan, actually. There is a faction in both parties that wants this and a faction in both parties that doesn’t.

Republicans:

• Yay: 123
• Nay: 90
• Present: 0
• No Vote: 5

Democrats:

• Yay: 96
• Nay: 109
• Present: 1
• No Vote: 7

It scares me how many in both parties believe that warrantless surveillance of citizens is appropriate. Sure, maybe law enforcement can’t perform warrantless themselves, but I don’t see much difference between doing it themselves and buying it from professional data brokers.

In fact, it is almost certainly more efficient and less costly to buy the data than to develop their own systems for collection and sorting. Getting this kind fo info on suspects might not even be possible for law enforcement without purchasing it.

This is not intended to defend Israel. From what I’m seeing, what Israel is doing here is heinous. For example, the mass graves at al-Shifa hospital.

This is just intended to point out that the modern usage of the term “anti-semitic” has come to mean “anti-jewish”, even if that doesn’t really fit with the older history of the word “Semitic”.

From the Wikipedia article on “Semitic People”:

Semitic people or Semites is an obsolete term for an ethnic, cultural or racial group associated with people of the Middle East, including Arabs, Jews, Akkadians, and Phoenicians. The terminology is now largely unused outside the grouping “Semitic languages” in linguistics.

…

The terms “anti-Semite” or “antisemitism” came by a circuitous route to refer more narrowly to anyone who was hostile or discriminatory towards Jews in particular.

…

In 1879, the German journalist Wilhelm Marr began the politicisation of the term by speaking of a struggle between Jews and Germans in a pamphlet called Der Weg zum Siege des Germanenthums über das Judenthum (“The Way to Victory of Germanism over Judaism”). He accused the Jews of being liberals, a people without roots who had Judaized Germans beyond salvation. In 1879, Marr’s adherents founded the “League for Anti-Semitism”, which concerned itself entirely with anti-Jewish political action.

Objections to the usage of the term, such as the obsolete nature of the term “Semitic” as a racial term, have been raised since at least the 1930s.

This is great. I’ll wait to see the actual proposed legislation before judging it, but this summary indicates to me that the bill is severely lacking in two major respects. Unless it is missing from the summary, it doesn’t appear to address data security requirements nor does it place limits on the types of data that can be collected.

Regardless, this is a step in the right direction, I just hope it isn’t the only step and that it has some significant teeth. Most legislation like this seems to just be a tax on companies rather than a true penalty.

It’s nice to see a republican admitting this. It would be better if he would name names and admit that it goes beyond taking the propaganda bait. It would be nice if he would say “Congressman _____” regurgitates Russian propaganda and may be compromised.

Most of the people saying this stuff, like Alex Jones, know that it’s bullshit. They are preying upon the uneducated and gullable.

I think you’re right in some cases. Maybe this woman is one of those cases.

I think that for some others “wokeness” is fairly well defined but they know that it is a dog whistle. They know that if they were to explicitly define it they would say the quiet part out lond. They would reveal that “wokeness” means “acceptance, inclusion, and celebration of fundamental differences between people”. They would reveal that being “anti-woke” is just a way to say “Hi, my name is Ron and I’m a bigot”.

Republicans support many things with higher potential for fraud and abuse than school lunch programs. Privatized prisons come to mind.

He’s not completely there for himself, though this trip is certainly self serving or he would do it. He’s there to put his weight behind a candidate for Mitt Romney’s senate seat. A MAGAT who has been endorsed by Trump.

I’m largely unfamiliar with the Church of Satan. How does the Church of Satan differ from The Satanic Temple?