And he thinks there would be any surviving Ukrainians in the ensuing nuclear war?
No sovereign state armed with nuclear weapons will permit such an attack from another nation. The US knows this, which is why it works so hard to prevent countries that it doesn't like from becoming nuclear powers. Having nuclear weapons is a "get out of US military intervention free" card.
Oh, I think it is. If you had to earn your right to vote there would be a hell of a lot less voters, and it would actually mean something.
I liked how you had an absolute right to earn your franchise in the book. Even if you were disabled, the government had to find you something to do if you wanted to serve. But if you didn't have the chops to serve, you consented to letting those who did make the decisions.
Starship Troopers?
Your not wrong. This is the actual text of Title IX:
No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance, except that:
It goes on to list a bunch of exceptions (boys scouts, Amer an legion youth activities) and definitions and administrivia.
The law does not require schools to make specific types of investigations into sexual assault allegations, or even that they be investigated at all. The school simply has to treat everyone equally, which could mean that they don't do anything at all because there are school not a police agency.
20 U.S. Code § 1092 requires universities to report crime statistics but very clearly states:
(2)Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to authorize the Secretary to require particular policies, procedures, or practices by institutions of higher education with respect to campus crimes or campus security
Honestly, the smartest way to deal with this is for universities to have a policy that that all crimes are referred to law enforcement, the university takes no opinion on the guilt or innocence of accused people, and stays out of the investigation entirely, and any university discipline will take place only after conviction in a court of law.
As long as it is a real court and not those kangaroo court.
And that's the crux of the issue. What the women's groups are looking for here is to use the school's investigatory system against the accused so that there's an official "found to have committed the act" entry into the record and the accused can be expelled and have a permanent black mark. They're not interested in due process, as that would mean some/most of the people accused would be found "not guilty" so to speak.
The problem with sexual assault investigation is that it often amounts to he said/she said. Absent violence, there's no physical evidence to differentiate someone who was a victim from someone who simply had morning after regrets. In those cases, American legal tradition says the benefit of the doubt should go to the accused. By trying to get a preponderance of the evidence standard, they're trying to ensnare people by getting the institution to say "well he probably did it so I'll just expel him to be safe".
What's old is new again. The reason you can use OEM-equivalent parts and independent auto shops to repair your car without voiding your warranty is because that battle was fought decades ago and the government made laws to prevent the automakers from screwing you.
Government is a tool. Like most tools, it can be used for good or evil.
The NY case is already working through the courts. Some Colorado "assault weapons" bans have already been thrown out due to Bruen, and the CA mag ban is back at Judge Benitez who zapped it the first time.
These things take time, and we're not going to win them all. I hear these cases did not specifically address the history, text, tradition argument in Bruen, and that there's another case out there that does. So let's see how that one resolves before we become doom and gloom.
People are looking at these cases the wrong way. The Chevron Deference doesn't apply in criminal cases. In criminal cases they use the Rule of Lenity- which is basically the opposite of the Chevron Deference in that any ambiguity or multiple possible interpretations of statute are resolved in favor of the defendant. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/rule_of_lenity
So, the second the ATF charges somebody with a bump stock for illegally machine gun possesion, they're going to have to defend their position that a gun recoiling into your finger and firing again equals a continuous press of the trigger. They would lose.
The ATF has had to quietly make cases related to AR-15 receivers go away over the past five or six years, for exactly this reason: https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/the-atfs-definition-of-an-ar-15-lower-as-a-firearm-is-in-serious-trouble/
So Mr. Toffoli, the court’s chief justice, issued an order granting the Supreme Court itself the authority to open an investigation...It was an unprecedented role, turning the court in some cases into the accuser and the judge.
Ah, so the judicial branch just granted itself whatever powers it liked. I guess there's no such thing a separation of powers in the Brazilian government.
Last month, Mr. Moraes took on even more power, also assuming the presidency of the elections court that will oversee the vote.
In its investigation, the court discovered evidence that far-right extremists had discussed assaulting justices, were tracking the judges’ movements and had shared a map of a court building
Surprised? If you run your government like a banana republic, you're going to find more and more people think it's OK to overthrow you.
Mackenzie Clifton was fired from their contract role at the company in February this year.
Unless Mackenzie Clifton has multiple personalities or is a conjoined twin, it's a troon.
I want to choke the asshole that came up with "my pronouns are...". Not only for the obvious reason that it's gay as shit, but we have singular and plural words for a reason- to communicate clearly. When you muddy the waters by using plurals to refer to individuals nobody knows what the fuck you're talking about.
I think you can also just ask for the toy and buy it separately. I also didn't learn until I was an adult that you could ask what you they put in the meal and choose if they had more than one. That would have been a game-changer when I was a kid because I had so many duplicates when we went there.
Oh yeah, I remember they used to have a picture of all the toys for the current cycle. They were usually shit-tier toys related to the current hit movie. I'm sure they had to be kinda crappy to not compete with the real action figures at the toy store.
But every so often, I just had to have whatever it was that month. I still have the cheesy fake transformers that looked like menu items.
"Years ago you served my father in the console wars"
Why should I have to believe one person? If this was a comedy routine on a cruise there's at least a hundred other people that can either confirm or deny her story.
Though the video has no audio (audience members were asked to not record).
Oh, so she only half broke the rule on not making recordings? I guess that's OK then...
And honestly, when you are claiming something like this and you whip out a recording with no audio as your "proof" I'm going to trust you less than if you had no recording at all. Who the hell films a video with no audio? This isn't a store security camera.
They're not/weren't. There was a "Lake Buena Vista STOLport" that has since been decommissioned. Both the idea of a new airport and the name are entirely products of the author's imagination.
Exactly. When you read the article, the only plans for an airport date back to Walt Disney's original plans- the same ones that included a utopian community on the property.
There's nothing in the article that indicates that Disney is even remotely considering building its own airport. Even the name was conjured up from the author's imagination. This is basically some fan's suggestion masked with a bunch of words that make it seem like a news article.
The era of white male games for white male gamers is ending.
Sales figures say otherwise.
I'm more interested in the top paragraph. It's the fashion today for the left to claim that America used to welcome immigrants and that securing our borders and warning of demographic replacement is modern racism/xenophobia.
Looks like the founders had the same exact concerns, and weren't on the side the modern left claims.
So how much does the full game cost, considering they all come with a bunch of day one DLC that you have to pay extra to get?
But cultural centers have also become something of a manufactured controversy as of late. According to some critics, these rooms and adjacent projects, like so-called affinity housing, in which students can elect to live in Black or Latino-themed dorms, for instance, are new forms of segregation, because they focus on the lives of minority students instead of the majority, which in most cases is white. None of these spaces exclude white students, but articles about them often imply that they do.
Got it: white people people who want "affinity housing" with only other whites are white supremacists or segregationists. Non-whites who want the same thing are just "focusing on the lives of minorities".
Makes complete sense...if you're a racist moron. Do these fucksticks even listen to themselves?
Sounds like we should defund the Air Force academy, this has no relevence to military training or a bachelor's degree- which are the two things that place is supposed to provide.
Oh, and they're totally right; the Nazis dominated Europe and the Japanese dominated the Pacific in 1940-1942 due to their love of inclusivity and fags. Militaries win wars by being efficient and ruthless killing machines, no more or less, and that has been true for all of history.
just understand that 100% of the responsibility for said conflict is on the aggressor
Not a Russian shill, but what do you think the US's response would have been if Russia had spent the last 20 years getting all of it's neighbors to join an anti-US alliance, culminating in bragging that Canada was about to join too?
We almost started WWII when we placed tactical nukes in Turkey and Russia reciprocated by putting some in Cuba. If you think we wouldn't invade and murder the shit out of Canada in that situation you're not a student of history.
Courting Ukraine and intimating that they would be granted NATO membership caused this war. The US and Zelensky fucked around and found out.
The theory is based on the reading that Article I implies that only state legislatures may make any decisions related to election law, and prevent any actions from courts or the executive branch from challenging it.
Hmm; this case merits more research. Just from your synopsis, I'm not sure North Carolina winning would be a good thing because then both sides would just gerrymander the states they currently control to ensure the other party never has a chance again.
That sounds great for red states, but blue states already have an outsized impact on federal representation because of their population centers, and those are only going to grow as they welcome in hordes of illegals and their offspring. Another couple censuses and the Senate could get stacked with libs.
That's the request, and it's pure fantasy to think it would work.
Russia's nuclear arsenal, like that of the US, is designed to be survivable: missiles on road mobile launchers, missiles on trains, missiles on submarines, bombs on aircraft on alert, missiles in hardened silos.
The US undoubtedly knows where many, but not all, are at any given time. Of those it knows about, some strikes will succeed, and some will fail.
And then Russia will turn around and use all of the surviving weapons in a nuclear strike on the US and Western Europe, causing World War 3 and killing millions of people. And they would be morally justified in doing so, because it's the response to a US attack, which is a valid casus belli.
The thing about a preemptive strike on a nuclear power is that you have to destroy all of the nuclear weapons or you lose. And there is 0% chance of the US being able to destroy all of Russia's nuclear weapons before they can use them.