The Criminal Division of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia is responsible for processing all local criminal matters including felony, misdemeanor, District of Columbia code violations and criminal traffic cases.

Because (just like in NY with Trump, and specific charges, if a crime is committed within a state the state has the right to prosecute regardless of impeachment or federal charges. The UCMJ is technically federal law. But we’re looking at three different aspects of lawful charges for persons who might commit a crime per the Presidents order. The president could absolutely pardon the persons involved. But only at the federal level. There’s nothing stopping the state or states from prosecuting the same individual. It’s not just one set of checks and balances is my point. The department of justice can also bring charges regardless of UCMJ tribunal (Court Material). Which is really where double jeopardy should kick in but doesn’t for service members.

Additionally and most importantly actually, a court martial conviction for murder would result in a dishonorable discharge from the military. That can’t be overturned by a presidential pardon. They would lose their benefits. Medical and so on. Pensions. It’s a cost benefit analysis at that point. They don’t just get to walk away no harm no foul cause presidential pardon.

If there were someone would have taken a shot at Trump long before now.

Yes. You can face state and federal charges separately. Double jeopardy is when they charge for the same crime twice in the same court (state or federal), after you’ve either been convicted or been acquitted.

Specifically they would have to have new evidence in order to charge you a second time in either federal or state court.

That not what I said. What I said is their comments aren’t legal precedent. That’s not the same thing. Or are we taking everything that’s ever come out of Clarence Thomas’s mouth as legal precedent now?

https://www.snopes.com/news/2024/07/01/scotus-ruling-seal-team/

And those people would still face state charges because that’s how that works. You can’t get a presidential pardon for state crimes.

That conflicts not just with other established law, but also with what I actually said and what the ruling says. The problem with it is that the order can’t be considered lawful regardless of what the Supreme court ruled because it doesn’t fit all the criteria of a lawful order.

“What is considered a lawful order in the military? It must not conflict with the statutory or constitutional rights of the person receiving the order. Finally, it must be a specific mandate to do or not to do a specific act. In sum, an order is presumed lawful if it has a valid military purpose and is a clear, precise, narrowly drawn mandate.”

https://ucmjdefense.com/resources/military-offenses/the-lawfulness-of-orders.html

One other thing is that you’re quoting dissenting members of the SCOTUS, not the ruling itself. That’s a single interpretation of it, and one deliberately intended to alarm people so that they push back against it.

But that doesn’t sanction military members to break the law or the UCMJ. And that’s the point. They do not have immunity, qualified or otherwise. The order would be unlawful simply because of the issuing parties bias and personal gain from the act.

I’m not saying there are not people in the military who would follow this type of order. I’m saying that they don’t have the protections or immunity, qualified or otherwise, and honestly, a presidential pardon doesn’t do anything for them if the state decides to prosecute them. Plus military members are basically the only people in the US subject to legal double jeopardy because they can be tried by the military separately from state and federal law.

The answer really is that desperation is a design feature not a flaw. The system is working as intended. And people who speak up about it don’t get silenced. They just get caught out fighting to survive unless they’re already very rich. So for every Bernie Sanders you’ve got thousands of poor people who would fight for the same but not at the expense of feeding their families and losing their homes.

If he went to their homes and strangled them himself? Yes. If he ordered someone to do it? The laws and UCMJ apply to those people so no. There’s this thing people keep forgetting about. The UCMJ isn’t just guidelines. It’s actual rules. And murder is still illegal.

Before smartphones we had snake and Tetris on non smart phones and we liked it. Before that books and news papers were popular.

Other platforms exist. I’m sure they’ll be fine.

You’re in for a treat, my friend. I hope you love the book.

Manual lawnmower.

The surface RT and windows ME e-machine computer were both a close second.

Who’s driving that ambulance?

If we used billboards for something like missing children or traffic announcements etc I’d be okay with that. But pretty much no actual ads for products. Billboards are a driving distraction and I don’t approve.

The thing is, if I want something I’ll go looking for it. At the point where I’m looking for it or something like it, I am happy to consume ads even tangentially related to that thing. If analytics marketing worked this way (showing me relevant ads when I’m shopping for something, even if it’s for something I am not actively looking for), things would be better. But ads have worked their way into the cracks of everything and that’s my problem with them.

I hate Billboards. I don’t like circulars (waste of paper and generally too much trash), I hate junk mail and I think it’s predatory. Popups (singing, flashing, scrolling when I scroll to stay on the page, tiny exit buttons, video, etc) are garbage.

Are the tanks sound proofed too?

Trump would kill himself in a week. Vetinari wouldn’t even have to do anything except talk to his dog during the debate. Vetinari would even put through a request to the Assassins guild to make sure the price to beat was too high to have him assassinated. Just to make a point.

I’ve actually gone out of my way to avoid it but that has nothing to do with the accuracy of the results (although I would need those results to be accurate), and everything to do with avoiding ads and using the search web function to find very specific and detailed information rather than a summary.

In my short experience with the AI features for search specifically, I have experienced not being able to see the source of that information without having to click through and scroll down or continue a conversation with prompts. I don’t want that. It very often slows down my work flow and that’s the intention. To keep me on the page making additional queries and looking at more ads.

I have experienced Gemini with my phone though and it’s actively worse than google assistant and home assistant in a lot of ways. Features that have allowed me for years to control smart devices and have been broken or unreliable. More so than the results of the Sonos lawsuit.

I want my devices to work. I don’t want to have a conversation with a device to turn on lights or find out what the weather is like. Bottom line, the point of my comment was that (obnoxious to you or not), nobody is under attack for using AI products.