Even if they were following the law and had no agenda or ulterior motives they wouldn’t be about crime. And that’s part of the problem. They avoid constitutional limitations associated with all other forms of law enforcement by having only administrative authority and dealing with civil law.

It’s like giving postal workers body armor and assault rifles and letting them abduct anyone that they suspect might have used improper postage or that had thrown away junk mail addressed to someone else while claiming everyone they attack had been terrorists sending letter bombs.

According to the article, the names were in government documents which they were able to view. There’s no indication that the information was released or intended for release. It sounds more like someone with access leaked the information to them.

It’s possible that this is a lie, but I don’t see how it helps DHS or the administration. I think it’s a lot more likely that there’s a complete lack of standards and accountability at CBP and ICE and that the problem has festered for decades. Being a 10 year veteran doesn’t mean anything if they aren’t enforcing standards and weeding out anyone who falls short.

Not a lawyer and haven’t read the law, but it seems logical that “stalking” isn’t a separate crime from premeditated murder when it’s just determining the location of the target and traveling to reach the target.

Greenland is Iceland.

Bleach is medicine.

E. Jean Carroll is Marla Maples.

I get 3 in 1 but only use it as face and bodywash. I have long hair that doesn’t play nice if I don’t use decent shampoo and conditioner. But the 3 in 1 stuff isn’t any more expensive than other bodywashes and there’s enough fuzz everywhere else that I like a little conditioner in my soap.

[Happy Chewbacca Noises]

From what little I have seen, right wing outlets were interpreting the video as proof the officer was hit by the car because of the way the phone gets jostled at the end. You also can’t see in this video exactly when he draws his gun, or how the shooter is positioned. It’s damning when combined with the other videos, but on its own it’s a lot less clear.

And they also see it as proof that these were “agitators” obstructing “law enforcement” based on the confrontational tone with the woman outside the vehicle. They want to frame the issue as law enforcement vs criminals, rioters and radical domestic terrorists. They want to blame the victim and undercut the narrative that this was an innocent bystander.

Obviously a sane person would recognize that it doesn’t matter if the victim was politically active or even obstructing police, it’s still murder. But these aren’t moral, rational people and they aren’t trying to persuade an audience with legal arguments, just feeding the US vs them mentality.

Trump isn’t personally running the entire federal government and showing up to court to file his own motions and answer questions from judges. Trump and his inner circle may act like they’re above the law, but the people who have to carry out their instructions aren’t immune to consequences.

This is especially true in court. Lawyers aren’t eager to throw their careers away by lying to judges, filing false statements, or openly defying court orders. That’s why the administration has lost so many lawyers and says things in court that are wildly different than what they say everywhere else.

Suing this administration has been a much more effective strategy than most people seem to realize. It’s often a long, drawn out process that wastes time and money, and they drag things out as much as possible. And yes the Supreme Court has been blatantly corrupt in the ways they’ve bailed out the Trump administration. But still, they only take on a small fraction of the total number of cases (and even then, they mostly help them stall cases with temporary orders rather than deciding actual cases).

When the Supreme Court doesn’t intervene, the Trump administration loses or backs down the vast majority of the time.

The 25th amendment is invoked by the cabinet and the vice president. Those are the people supporting this shit, they aren’t going to get rid of him. He’s doing what they want and giving them cover.

I would say that the only thing that could convince them to remove him is if he became such a liability that they felt the need to get rid of him out of self-preservation. But honestly, I don’t think they have the necessary level of awareness. If anything, I suspect most of them would be more likely to double down on being cartoonishly evil and try to do whatever it takes to cling to power.

There is no statute of limitations on murder.

The feds will protect him, but that’s only guaranteed for as long as the current regime is in power. Even if the next administration (or the one after that, or the one after that, etc) isn’t inclined to make a federal case out of it, they could easily decide to just not obstruct justice and cooperate, handing everything over to the state.

She was clearly performing a Y turn to steer around him. You can see him pull his gun out as she’s switching from reverse to drive, and he fires the first shot while she’s barely moving. She continues to accelerate after getting shot and yet he doesn’t get hit, but he does continue firing.

Her intent was obviously to escape, not to inflict harm. His intent was obviously to inflict harm, not to escape.

So the average college graduate does better than the average non-college graduate if they end up with similar work histories.

OK, but those who start and don’t finish end up in debt without the benefits. So you need to factor in the chance of not completing college and the associated drawbacks and factor that into the cost benefit analysis for deciding to start college. Otherwise the argument is about as valid as saying that playing the lottery makes financial sense given the amount of money that goes to the average lottery winner.

Second, the average outcome isn’t the only metric that matters. The average person who pays for most kinds of insurance will get less out of it than they pay in, that doesn’t mean that it’s always a better idea to be uninsured. Hell, the average player in a Russian roulette game turns out fine. Unfortunately, that’s exactly the kind of thinking that tends to dominate conversations around college and particularly student loans. If the majority are better off after college, great. But if have to drop out due to forces beyond your control, or the degree you pursue suddenly becomes less valuable because of an unforeseen shift in the economy, you can still end up buried to your eyeballs in debt with nothing to show for it.

Third, even if you make enough additional income to mathematically offset the debts you accumulate in college, you can’t get back the lost time. Many people have to delay major milestones in life because they’re weighed down by debts on top of all the other brutal economic realities out there. Good luck buying a house. Hope you weren’t too eager to have kids.

Fourth, college might be a better option than not going to college, but it can still seem bad when both options are shitty due to an economy that exists to enrich billionaires.

I’m not saying it’s a mistake to go to college. I just think the article is glossing over the very real problems that come from our atrocious student loan policies, and that perhaps some of the pessimism around college is a symptom of the economy as a whole being rigged against us.

Real people don’t have scripts to read from.

But seriously, listen to the way people talk. It’s chaotic, messy, often unclear and very inefficient. Conversations meander wildly, with dangling threads that are never concluded and often times with people talking past each other as much as to each other. If you wrote dialogue that way it would just be harder for audiences to follow and waste precious screentime.

Realistic sounding dialogue is about writing what a real person would say if they stopped to think for a minute between each statement.

In some states you have to be registered as a member of a party to vote in their primaries. In states with open primaries you can vote in primaries without registering as a party member, but they still typically have party affiliation as an option on the form.

And the microorganisms. He’s gonna need an eternity if he has to go through one by one.

And let’s not forget the student loans that are being forced onto worse repayment plans, and brutal collections for anyone who can’t keep up. Because the only thing the department of education does that they actually support is keep people weighed down by crippling debts.

Honestly, if I was some admiral trying to protect a bunch of R&D projects in development from Trump, I’d probably wrap as many of them as I could into a pitch for a big battleship with his name on it then spend the entire budget on the technologies that are supposedly going into the ship. Put basically no effort into the ship itself, just show him concept art and maybe send him a model or something to make him think progress is being made.

Does he live in the mall then?

Even his handpicked board didn’t all go along with it. One of them is suing over this, and said their mic was muted so that there couldn’t be any objections.

The only thing that should be named after Trump is a maximum security prison that houses every scumbag in this administration along with their accomplices.

I really hate how many people resent the idea of any kind of student loan forgiveness.

Billionaires set up vast financial systems for the sole purpose of dodging taxes. No bid contracts get handed out like candy to politically connected scumbags. An obscene amount of money gets dumped into insurance companies that only make your healthcare worse. Giant corporations violate laws and rob both workers and customers, and if anything is done at all it will be a tiny fine that’s smaller than the profit from their crimes.

All those things that actually harm the rest of us? No big deal. But you suggest that maybe it’s a bad idea to keep generations ensnared in crippling debt? THAT’S A FUCKING OUTRAGE!

I mean obviously it wouldn’t be fair to have a policy that directly benefits some people but not others. Why should student loan borrowers get special treatment? Sure, I’ll fucking riot if anyone touches my tax credits for having kids and a mortgage, but that’s different, that’s good for society… unlike education. Besides, it’s not my fault your generation don’t buy houses and start families. Oh don’t bitch to me about how you can’t afford it, maybe you shouldn’t have taken those loans out then…