This isn't the debt ceiling, this is the government funding bills, aka what they are budgeting for departments (that will then eventually require the debt ceiling to be raised because it's still a deficit)
It means they're looking for incriminating information without any evidence it exists. They're "casting a wide net," to use another fishing term, in hopes of finding something illegal, even if there's no basis for them asking the questions in the first place.
The problem is this: regarding Netanyahu she says "Well he is very clearly a war criminal." Regarding Putin she says "With Russia it's far more complicated" and "In so many words, yes." She's hedging out of calling Putin a war criminal directly so she can plausibly deny it. She will agree with general statements saying he could be a war criminal under those circumstances but she won't say it directly so she can go "Oh no, Hasan called him a war criminal, I didn't, I just agreed that if all of those things were true then he could be considered a war criminal!"
Now congressional Republicans want the justice department to release the audio of the interview.
To be clear on this, they already have the transcripts. They just want to be able to chop up audio so they can put clips of it on TV.
There's a very wide range of options between "doing nothing" and "intentionally bombing civilians"
Before the release of further details by the authorities, others including the X owner, Elon Musk, tweeted questions on social media.
Tweets only happen on Twitter, not any "social media", and if you're going to call it X then call them posts. Or Xits.
Every friendly interview Trump has is just him "Yeah, uh huh, right, yup"-ing is way through whatever the """interviewer""" is saying, then spewing whatever stream of consciousness he has going in the background. It's why he never answers questions - he doesn't listen to them, and if actually pressed, he gets pissed because he has to actually try to think.
Someone probably tried to tell him "we should change tactics" and he went "Uh huh, uh huh.... WHERE'S HUNTER"
Having continuous pieces like this make a difference. Think of how many "Biden has to step aside!" pieces have been written in the past two weeks and how much a part of the political discussion that is. The more time the media takes up shouting from the rooftops that Trump is a threat to America, the more mainstream and central the discourse becomes.
The irony of naming someone as the "woman shares name of man she believes was the one arrested for crime before the police released the name" before the police release the name is incredibly ridiculous.
The parties aren't the problem. Macron holds the presidency and appoints the PM. The largest (coalition) party is giving him a candidate AFTER compromises and he's refusing STILL because he only wants a PM from his own party, who came in second (edit: not third, my bad, they did beat National Rally. They did come in third in the first round of voting though).
When I was practicing jujitsu, our instructors were pretty unanimous that they would rather be robbed by someone with a gun than with a knife. Not that your odds are great against any weapons, but a gun only has one dangerous bit. The first time I was learning to disarm someone armed with a knife I was told "If you fight someone with a knife, you're going to get cut, no question."
A judge can rule that a case was unfair due to procedural issues, like that a jury arrived at its decision by evidence that shouldn't have been admitted in the first place. There are terms in this I'm not familiar with (I only know "runaway jury" from the John Grisham novel...), but that seems to be the basis of throwing this out. I'm sure Legal Eagle will cover something as big and weird as this in the next two weeks or so if you want well-explained legal analysis of the finer points.
I had to downvote you to get the "total" (heart) to show up. You can see in the comment below yours that if there are only all up- or downvotes, it just shows that.
And yet when I say this people look at me like I'm crazy and tell me "Sir this is a Wendy's"
Seriously, though, Approval Voting is literally the simplest voting method (vote yes or no on each candidate) and yet it has zero traction.
If our justice system is supposed to rehabilitate people instead of punish, then it seems like she received the correct sentence.
Diversity of experience brings diversely of ideas. Why do you think Hollywood has been churning out so much of the same stuff over and over? Because it's a bunch of old rich white dudes with decades of experience in financing movies calling the shots.
Having a transportation secretary that grew up in the suburbs, had their first car bought for them by their parents, and has been driving everywhere their whole life is going to bring very car-centric ideas. A transportation secretary that grew up in The Bronx, took the subway and bus growing up, and only got a car when they realized they needed to because the only apartment they could afford was not near a line that could get them to work will bring a very different set of ideas.
This bill is literally about the federal government purchasing flags, not private citizens...
Yeah, does anyone expect them to be like "Whoops, you got us"?
Don't a lot of CPUs like Snapdragons already have "performance cores" and "efficiency cores" that the kernel has to be able to recognize in order to switch between them? This sounds neat but I'm just curious what's different between these situations.
This sort of power-trip bullshit pisses me off so much. Kid's "horsing around" in the hallway and it's your job to keep the hallways calm? Then tell them to stop. Is it a pattern of behavior and they don't listen? Assign them an official punishment with the power you've been given: detention of some kind (probably a lunch detention).
Trying to make them do pushups? Fuck off, this is school not the fucking army.
It was a Crowdstrike-triggered issue that only affected Microsoft Windows machines. Crowdstrike on Linux didn't have issues and Windows without Crowdstrike didn't have issues. It's appropriate to refer to it as a Microsoft-Crowdstrike outage.
Or Dick Cheney?
The last time there was a major schism the nations of the day were explicitly aligned with one side of the other of the schism and the states attempted to crush the other side of the schism by force. Part of the separation of church and state in modern nations is meant to prevent church issues from becoming state issues (see the recent mainstream schism in the Methodist chuch which was completely peaceful and over similar issues).
Unless the statue was erected by George Wallace, that caption is irrelevant. Put a caption of Lee's written words:
There are few, I believe, in this enlightened age, who will not acknowledge that slavery as an institution is a moral and political evil. It is idle to expatiate on its disadvantages. I think it is a greater evil to the white than to the colored race. While my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more deeply engaged for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, physically, and socially. The painful discipline they are undergoing is necessary for their further instruction as a race, and will prepare them, I hope, for better things. How long their servitude may be necessary is known and ordered by a merciful Providence.
This passage is commonly cut off after the full sentence before you get the full context in which Lee actually cares about how bad slavery is for white people and how slavery was good for the enslaved.
I don't think anyone would fault you for saying there are 435 members of the house, especially because that number is also wrong (there are six additional non-voting members).
If she had answered more correctly than the number of voting seats I wouldn't have a problem with it...
You clearly didn't read the article. She specifically endorsed the candidate for the school board that she ousted previously. She's speaking against the party line. There is a real shift that happened for her, and her actions speak to it.
Yeah this headline is super misleading
Spoilers are mathematical fact stemming from first past the post voting. I also want to be able to vote for a third party candidate but it goes against my interests to do so until the voting system changes.
The only way a spoiler is a myth if you weren't going to vote at all.
So does Britain. Something like 75 of the last 100 years have had Conservatives in power. Obviously, what that means has changed over time, but it's clear that every time Labour gets a shot at governing, Brits yell "Not good enough!" and put the Tories back in office.
The way this article is written really annoys me. The headline talks about a super PAC, but it begins talking about Trump's PAC. "Super PAC" is a specific term referring to organizations that are not allowed to directly coordinate with campaigns (and they can have large, anonymous donations, which is where a lot of the "dark money" in politics comes from).
Here's the actual meat the headline is referring to:
Save America, Trump’s leadership PAC, was able to stay in the black in March due to another $5 million refund in March from Make America Great Again Inc., the Trump-backing super PAC. The super PAC has transferred $5 million to the leadership PAC each month going back to last July, with less regular transfers before then.
The leadership PAC initially seeded the super PAC with $60 million before he announced his candidacy. Now, MAGA Inc. can only send $2.75 million more back to Save America, raising questions about whether Save America will continue to be the vehicle to fund legal bills in several cases linked to Trump.
Basically, the only reason that the super PAC is involved with paying for Trump's legal bills in the first place is because Trump's PAC is paying for the legal bills, and the super PAC is returning the "startup loan" that was given to them originally.
The point is, the well is drying up fast and Trump's PAC is going to be out of money real soon, and he'll have to rely on super PACs to campaign for him entirely.
It's not just a black player, it's the black player. Jackie Robinson was the first black baseball player in major league baseball.
Hey, I didn't have a crush on you in high school!
The station is owned by FOX Television Stations, not Sinclair. If you want to tell someone to fuck off, tell it to Rupert Murdoch, who ultimately is the owner of the FOX corp.
Seriously, blindly assuming "this must be bad because it sounds like something I dont like" and parroting an irrelevant"Fuck X" is the same thing as people saying "Dominion stole the election" when Dominion machines weren't even in use in their county.
Nutmegger? She's not from CT!
It's literally the same breakup that happened with movie studios owning theaters in 1948. It's emblematic of the state of antitrust in the past decades that we've let another industry get away with the exact same issue thing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Paramount_Pictures,_Inc.
Show me the (unbiased) research that says American auto makers' problems are having a unionized workforce.
I know i and :wq and that's all I ever plan on learning
Ugh, and he WON that election...
I shop at S-Mart for all my letter-based shopping needs. I shop smart, at S-Mart