I ate the onion on this one for a second.
- 0 Posts
- 106 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
Cake day: August 20th, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
181·10 months agoThe president already was protected from all civil lawsuits due to previous rulings. This ruling was only about criminal prosecutions.
He has absolute immunity for any use, for any reason, of his core presidential powers include anything listed in article 2 (the military, pardons, firing or hiring officials within the executive department). There is no determining if those are an official act or not. Anything the president does with an article 2 power is an official act with absolute immunity now. Motives or reason for using that power or the outcome of that cannot be questioned. It is legal for the president to accept a bribe to pardon someone right now. The fact that it happened couldn’t even be mentioned in court.
Only when the president is doing something not listed in the constitution can it be determined if it’s an official or unofficial act by the courts and should be immune. And again it’s the action, not the motive or the result or purpose of the action, that determines whether it is official. The only example they gave was talking to justice department officials is official. So if he is talking to justice department officials to arrange a bribe or plan a coup? Legal, immune, can’t even be used as evidence against him. It doesn’t matter why he was talking to the justice department, the fact that he was makes him immune from any laws he breaks in the process of doing so. They aren’t determining if a bribe or coup is an official act, they’re determining if talking to justice department officials in general is. It doesn’t matter what he’s actually doing it for, arranging a coup? That’s perfectly okay. Oh someone found out, pardon everyone else involved in the conspiracy who wasn’t already immune. Now it can’t even be brought up in court.
In the example you gave of ordering an assassination, if it used the military to do the assassination that is a core power, cannot be questioned. The supreme court ruling placed no limits on what can be done with his article 2 powers. Only a nebulous official vs not official test for things not listed in article 2. There’s also a very worrying core power in article 2 about “ensuring laws are faithfully executed” that even Barrett thought was too much in her concurrence as it could apply to seemingly anything. Basically, as long as the president is using the levers of government to commit crimes, legal now.
Impeachment is the only recourse now as you say, but even if impeached and removed from office by some miracle, they still wouldn’t be able to be held criminally liable afterwards for that.
Everyone panicking in this thread is right to do so.
Re read, and stop setting up straw men. I criticized teaching seven year olds to shoot. Not teaching actual gun safety.
I seperately said it’s sad that we have to have the “heroes program” to teach pre schoolers about active shool shooters, because gun nuts don’t allow real gun controls or solutions.
https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1848971668
People from other countries are shocked and horrified by everything in this thread.
And the “well if it wasn’t a gun it’d be something else” yeah guns aren’t necessary to kill but it sure makes it a whole lot easier and faster. I don’t think this guy could have killed 60 people in ten minutes with a knife:
Stop for one second, re read the conversation, and the link. I’m criticizing teaching 7 year old kids to shoot, not criticizing teaching actual gun safety. That was a straw man you set up to knock down.
Teaching kids to use guns doesn’t save kids’ lives. If you want to teach em to stay away from guns, that they’re deadly, they shouldn’t touch it and should tell an adult right away go ahead.
Teaching kids to use guns in the name of gun safety is like saying you need to teach them how to drive in case they find some car keys lying around and decide to take it for a spin.
Already in the comment, click the links.
https://www.safekidsinc.com/hero-program-overview
Here’s where it goes through their curriculum per grade level including pre schoolers.
The 'heroes" program is not teaching pre schoolers to use guns, it’s teaching them about active shooter situations.
The other link was the one offering actual gun training (for 7 year olds and up so second graders potentially).
My comment was that it’s sad we apparently need programs to to teach pre schoolers about how to deal with active shooting situations now.
The one I linked specifically mentions shooting afterwards for kids as young as 7…
But yes if guns are at home they should be locked (and really locked, like a trigger lock plus a safe that’s set to something besides 1111, holy crap you’d be surprised at how cavelier some people are) and totally inaccessible to kids. Teaching single digit age kids about guns is not a substitute for that, but of course I’m not saying you shouldn’t teach your kids that they shouldn’t touch guns and what they can do.
And teaching kids about guns will not solve the serious gun problems in America. The gun problems unique to America that pretty much every other industrialized nation has figured out already. And it’s a horrible tragedy that stuff like “the heroes program” to teach preschoolers how to deal with active shooters is necessary in this country. All to please gun nuts.
Most gun nuts aren’t too interested in education anyways:
https://www.thetrace.org/2022/01/which-states-require-firearm-safety-course-concealed-carry/
Kindergarten? Ridiculous. They gotta be at least 7.
141·10 months agoI guess it vaguely looks like this one in terms of the large flat plane in the front. Though it’s blade runner, so it’s all grungy like pieces are falling off and it’s all rusted and junk. Wait maybe cyber truck was inspired by bladeunner.
Doesn’t look much like a lot of other cars in the movie though.
Well there are evaporator fans in modern refrigerators in the US. They serve an important role though helping with defrosting, improving cooling efficiency, and evenness of cooling throughout the fridge.
https://refrigeratorguide.net/maximize-cooling-efficiency-best-refrigerator-evaporator/
Usually only very small refrigerators are without them now.
It is another point of failure though, but should be pretty easily repairable. I mean it’ll still be able to cool without the fan, but it’ll be running much more to try and compensate and keep things cool though.
If you know the YouTube channel technology connections, here’s a fun video of him messing around with a fanless style refrigerator:
Will use 4x as much electricity though, ugh.
https://www.cleanenergyresourceteams.org/your-old-refrigerator-energy-hog
Anyone know of any refrigerators today that are as durable as older ones and have today’s efficiencies, but without the smart features and other junk?
Average refrigerator today still lasts 13 years though, and while they’re made cheaply they also are cheaper (at least as a portion percentage of the average paycheck).
https://reviewed.usatoday.com/dishwashers/features/ask-the-experts-why-dont-new-home-appliances-last
To be, or not to ble
Damnit he was so close, start again
I know it’s a shit post, but for anyone not aware the FBI used to assist in the persecution of lgbt people and engage in all sorts of surveillance including infiltrating lgbt rights organizations.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/xg8dzn/-the-fbi-secretly-tracked-gay-activists-in-the-60s
https://outhistory.org/exhibits/show/fbi-history/2010-2019
So it’s not only a shit post, but a shit post pointing out some very important recent history.
Only catch is Republicans probably launching some type of legal action to try and stop it.
No lawsuit launched yet to my knowledge, just sternly worded letters saying please stop helping taxpayers instead of letting predatory companies like Intuit fleece money off of them.
I would expect them to try something soon though with this announced.
They are now legal to grow in many states. Unfortunately still not going to find it in a grocery store most likely. I grow my own in the backyard so I can have some at least part of the year. They’re perennial, very easy to grow, and produce a ton of berries. Gooseberries were banned for similar reasons, but are now also legal in many states.
Do they not use the word country as a synonym for rural? I checked the Cambridge dictionary, it’s their second definition listed, even higher than where that definition is listed in Merriam Webster. It’s like complaining rock music is made with guitars instead of boulders. Does he also think that country is like the only genre of music made in America? Though some country singers do like to put a lot of nationalism in their music which does kind of confuse things.
I’m a firm mayo by itself as a sauce hater though so I’m with him there. Even more abominable are the jello (or jelly for those in the UK) “salads.” It’s not a salad!
There are definitely pros and cons with both systems. It can be brutal for someone who was listed as a health care proxy but the patient never expressed their wishes to them. Can’t agree more about having those conversations with loved ones even if you’re healthy, you never really know, and it’ll make the decisions so much easier on your loved ones when they know they’re doing what you would have wanted.
Technically doctors are not required to offer futile care in the US even if the health care proxy wants it, but courts have sometimes inserted themselves into that which makes it complicated. Luckily those cases are rare, usually through education and meeting with all family members most come to agreements about what their relative would want and move forward.
I’m sorry you went through all of that, it sounds terrible.
For anyone reading from the US, the system is a little different there. Treatment decisions would default to a health care proxy if a person is not competent (and like this poster said, that means unable to understand, ask questions, and articulate choices, not making bad choices). A health care proxy is different from power of attorney (in the US), check your state for forms to pick one. It’s always a good idea to have one declared and paperwork with your doctor, however if you don’t have one selected on paper, then default health care proxy is closest relative (spouse, then adult kids, then parents, then siblings, usually). If no health care proxy can be found, only then would the court system get involved and appoint a guardian.
In regards to the original posters question, involuntary commitment for a mental health issue may involve a competency determination, but is much more involved and needs to involve courts very quickly. In general only a 72 hour hold can be placed by a doctor without a court getting involved. It’s less common too, most people in inpatient mental health situations are in voluntary stays.
In addition to the ED which is always available if needed as a last resort, check your local area for mental health crisis lines and support. These are often a local group such as through a county and may be affiliated with mental health providers, can often even make home visits and quickly connect people with resources and advice on how to go forward.
There’s no one that can make the estimate accurately right now. Any calculation like that is going to rest on lots on many wild estimates and unknowns. Happy to look at it if you have a source though.
Some more important context for people.