Funny that you don’t even try to deny that Trump may have been involved in inciting/leading an insurrection. It’s only that he hasn’t been found guilty of it by the courts. How will the goalposts shift if he is found guilty?
Funny that you don’t even try to deny that Trump may have been involved in inciting/leading an insurrection. It’s only that he hasn’t been found guilty of it by the courts. How will the goalposts shift if he is found guilty?
Thanks for the catch, I edited the comment.
A lot of people in the comments are saying how this won’t hold up or how unconstitutional it is but 35 fucking states have already passed anti-bds (boycotts, divestment*, and sanctions) laws that do the same thing as this bill but Israel. If the politicians are sufficiently bribed enough, they won’t care what the laws actually are.
Obama’s presidency was the first presidency with a truly contrarian congress. Dems should have done more when they controlled both houses, because once they lost the senate, Republicans blocked Obama’s agenda in every conceivable way, and that has been their modus operandi ever since.
Just for reference, Obamacare was supposed to be fairly close to single-payer insurance, with both public and private options (which would force private insurance to compete with the government). What we got in the end was a neutered, emaciated shell of what the original bill was supposed to be, but at least insurance companies couldn’t deny you based on preexisting conditions anymore. This was considered a huge win at the time. It’s laughable though, because this was when everyone was pointing at Canada and claiming they had death panels because universal healthcare couldn’t handle all the patients (complete bullshit/propaganda), as if our own insurance companies weren’t doing exactly this.
deleted by creator
I think you have the right idea but came to the wrong conclusion. Why would anyone buy office space if there is no value in employees coming to the office? Hint: they wouldn’t.
Edited to add: these properties may become a liability on their books which would impact their ability to apply for or pay for loans, as well as other negatives for the company.
But doctors are required to report anything that they identify as an immediate physical threat (e.g., to the patient or because of the patient). I found out recently that this is entirely subjective - different doctors have different ideas about what constitutes a threat. So, in a lot of ways, no, medical secrecy may not protect you if you tell the wrong doctor.
It’s because we like the challenge. Also how salty people get when they lose to my f-tier character.
There’s a paywall on the article, so maybe there are details there that I’m missing. I also wasn’t very politically aware until ~2016. Out of curiosity, can you elaborate on why this person caused hillary to lose in 2016? I always assumed it was overconfidence on her part (e.g., not even bothering to campaign in Wisconsin) and then the report from James Comey literally days before the election that tanked her.
It’s true. Even in the comments on this post there’s someone adamantly claiming (without evidence) that masks don’t work, despite being presented with a full literature review of studies showing that they do work.
It shouldn’t even take a full scientific study to convince someone that covering their nose and mouth helps to prevent the spread of airborne illness. Their egos are so fragile that any critical introspective examination of their viewpoints would destroy their entire identity. What even are they without their vitriol and hatred for the truth?