Not just US interests, but European and Ukrainian interests as well. There was a multi-national effort to remove Shokin. You think Joe Biden orchestrated all of that to get his son a cushy board membership? It's laughable.

Probably exactly what has been reported. Putin waited for things to settle, weakened Wagner troops by taking their weapons and splitting their numbers, then they killed leadership. Occam's razor certainly points to this.

But, of course, the way it was done certainly leaves the door open for conspiracies.

Part of what makes religion so useful, to suffer becomes virtuous.

Couldn't have happened to a prouder boy

I was interested in it but at the end of the day Dorsey got Twitter into its initially mediocre state, and he's endorsed RFK Jr. as well as Musk's purchase of Twitter. So should I really expect it to be any better? I'll keep an eye on it but my expectations aren't terribly high.

This is the fruits of the GOP strategy that's been going on for decades to strengthen their support through Christian believers. The Pope is just recognizing the impact of that from the religious side, whereas Barry Goldwater warned of it's impact from the political side.

Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.

It certainly is a terrible damn problem, and we're knee deep in the shit right now.

The Greeks figured this a couple thousand years ago and we're just now catching up. SMH!

The incentives of capitalism and the intended role of the 4th estate are not compatible. Stoking the flames of populism is simply too lucrative of a business model when compared to trying to keep the public informed. This is what allows perverse media groups to proliferate and dominate the public eye.

I don't think this is an easy problem to solve. If you're able to successfully regulate things like Fox, does that fix it, or do people just start gravitating more towards alternate media like Joe Rogan? Do you start regulating podcasts too? Twitter influencers? I feel like it'd just become a never-ending game of whack-a-mole. And given that the 4th estate's role is to check the government, how do you use the government to safeguard it without giving them too much control over it? It's a difficult balance to strike.

That said, clearly we aren't striking that balance now, so perhaps it's time to try something different.

Group A was wronged by entity B. Group A goes to court to seek restitution from entity B. Courts rule that entity B did in fact cause damages to group A and must be held liable.

That's all reparations are. Entity B is your government. It's the same legal entity as it was 190 years ago, regardless of the composition of the population it represents. If a group was wronged by their government, this is their only means to legal restitution. Unfortunately since the primary form of income for some governments is taxation, it means people complain about paying for things when that's not exactly what's happening.

The alternative is to say that if a government "runs out the clock" and is able to avoid responsibility until the population turns over, then they can no longer be held liable for anything they did prior to that point. That's not a very good position, in my opinion.

I think they're suggesting an aggregate feed from some number of concurrently logged in users.

The goal isn't to create successful states, it's to create politically safe states. Doesn't matter if the state crumbles as long as that crumble is red.

When there's domestic problems that you haven't even offered a solution for, point outward.

The issue of climate change is routinely one of the most important issues for young people, so perhaps she played a role in that.

The question itself is pretty useless because how could we possibly quantify a single activist's contribution to a global issue?

Every time I see it I can't get past how hideous it looks. I just don't get it...who's the target demo for this thing? They've already been beaten to market by non-absurd looking trucks, how big could their market actually be?

If she was trying to run him over why did she cut the wheel as far as she could to try and get around him?

If there's one thing to take to heart from Joe Rogan, I think it's this quote of his:

I'm not a doctor, I'm a fucking moron

It's not police policy to kill fleeing suspects, plenty of jurisdictions even choose not to pursue. So the answer to those questions is that yes, they absolutely could have let her drive away, as some other police forces already do without issue.

Aside from that, even if they decided to pursue, it is not police policy anywhere to use deadly force to stop a fleeing subject unless it becomes an acute danger to the public. A fleeing subject who has yet to break 10 MPH does not fall under that description, not here, not anywhere.

And here's a question, if it was such a deadly situation for this officer, how did he not get injured? He was already safely out of the way of the vehicle by the time any of his bullets had an effect. Because he's not a fucking invalid and can side step a car, which he put himself in front of to begin with, pulling out of a parking spot.

Do you feel safer today because this woman is dead? Does anyone?

Memorization is a skill humans are generally really, really good at. If you put in enough time, there's a good chance you'll be able to regurgitate what you put in, both in words and actions. That's enough to get you through most schooling. When you step outside of memorization is when people like this run into trouble.

I don't think it's that simple. Heinous allegations can make that business relationship untenable. YouTube has an image to protect as well as other partnerships to maintain. There are people (not just wealthy executives) whose livelihood relies on those things,.

If a person's reputation, fair or not, creates a risk to those things, why should YouTube be forced to assume that risk on their behalf?

Easy to say when you won't be the one fighting it.

This would cover things like hunting and/or target practice at a home or private property, so not entirely that weird.

It doesn't necessarily have to, but then you have someone like Trisha Cotham in NC who switched parties to give the GOP a veto-proof majority and has been voting with them in lockstep ever since.

If they weren't planning on acting as Republicans they could just as easily become independents.

"Person we hired to say things says the thing" more at 11.

Really irresponsible reporting, to be honest.

I get incredibly anxious about her finding incriminating things that I didn't do and I know don't actually exist, but what if they do somehow?

The real question is how much would I accept in payment to use Twitter. It's probably not a lot, but it surely is not negative.

A viral tweet stated that we are not a Democracy, we're a Republic, and Republicans collectively nodded their heads in agreement.

Aside from that, I think many Americans don't believe American democracy is currently working in their favor, leading to apathy or outright hostility towards democracy itself.

I don't think anyone would confuse military service with freedom.

A pit maneuver isn't an attempt to kill the driver.

There is no evidence she was a danger to anyone in that parking lot. None. Zero. Pulling out of a parking spot does not make you a deadly threat. There's no amount of imagination of what could go wrong that makes it so.

Have the police even used the threat to the public as justification for this shooting? If not, why are you making that argument for them? The only issue I've seen them raise was the danger to the officer who fired the shot.

There's no such thing as objective right and wrong, we're not discussing a measurable experiment here. I'm biased against the unnecessary loss of life. I'm biased against police murdering pregnant women (or anyone, of course). I'm biased against our police being far more violent than any of our contemporaries. If that makes me "politically biased" in your eyes, so be it. I'd much rather be on that end of bias than the other.

Would have thought it crossed his path when he was calling for the death penalty for the Central Park 5.

I don't know what will happen with Twitter. Maybe it succeeds, maybe it fails, maybe it just keeps humming along in mediocrity. But what I do know is that wherever it ends up, there was surely a much simpler way to get there.

Helps to be familiar with the main cast but no, it doesn't rely on previous episodes.

What are the ages of the generations here? I'm just curious because it's rare enough to have a living great-grandparent, let alone a great-great-grandparent (in relation to your children) in the same house. And how did this end up falling to you?

No problem meaning they shouldn't care about not being able to wear it? Or that the French government shouldn't care in the first place?

Something tells me the secessionists wouldn't agree with that. Are they going to let their urban centers secede from their states if they voted to do so?

A billion people are on track to die from climate change, according to some estimates.

https://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-warn-1-billion-people-on-track-to-die-from-climate-change

Even if we call that highly inflated, maybe it is, maybe it isn't, some non-negligible number will certainly die as a result with some multiple of that facing harsh negative impacts. A disproportionate number of those will be in Africa.

If your argument is based in morality, it's absolutely absurd to suggest the moral concerns of cobalt mining outweighs that of climate change.

You raised a very valid concern, let's work to make it better instead of running back into the burning building.

Fine, I'll make my own [thing] with blackjack, and hookers.

Don't you worry about [thing], let me worry about blank.

Woop woop woop woop woop woop!

Is there something in particular about this book that you think is off? It's standard procedure for US Presidents to have books written about them, and far more mundane people than Biden have gotten the same treatment.

I'm also using Niagara, it's a really fun but simple design.

And there's a decent chance he is elected again in 2024. This country is broken.

Quit playin' games with my heart