I don't fully understand. The Supreme Court has granted immunity for official acts performed as President. Aren't the charges for this case for actions from before his presidency, and therefore not subject to immunity?
officermike
joined 7 months ago
To be fair, the description included "Florida-woman" so that alone disqualified those other two nutjobs.
I can quote stuff from TV that aired in the late 90s, but I can't quote shit I watched last night. For me the distinguishing difference is smartphones. I don't have the attention span to give a TV show my undivided attention anymore, and I'm browsing on my phone while TV plays in the background.
Charge him with what, exactly? He has a first amendment right to fly whatever politically divisive flag he (or his wife if we're to believe him) chooses, just as anyone else does. As far as I'm aware, the Supreme Court still has no legally-binding ethics rules, so no matter how clear a bias he shows, there's no crime to prosecute. His recusal is at his sole discretion.
I don't know if the legislative branch has the authority to codify a legally enforceable code of ethics that has some backbone, but even if they do I'm sure someone would fight it up to the Supreme Court where they'd just nullify it anyway.
I didn't even realize Antec still existed. I knew them for their cases (I had the Twelve Hundred), but I haven't seen any build pics with their cases on Reddit/Lemmy for years. There was a year where it seemed like everyone was building in the Bitfenix Prodigy, then another where everyone was in the NZXT Phantom, then after that it's been mostly Corsair, Cooler Master, and Fractal. My last 4 have been Fractal.
On the optimistic side, helium is a product of nuclear fusion, so we will eventually be able to produce it.
Basil, onion.
Ahh yes, dropping nuclear weapons right next door, risking fallout in your own territory and pissing off every country around you, as well as all your allies. Why not?
Its safety is not the crux of the argument from the anti-choice, but it is the flimsy legal excuse they're using to try to revoke its FDA approval.
Probably true.
view more: next ›
Just a guess, but maybe they use AI to compare the live person's face to the photo on the ID to verify. Of course if they're comparing to the printed photo and not to a database photo linked to the ID, then the whole purpose of the machine is ill-conceived, as it could be bypassed with a fake ID.