Well, it starts live…

Perhaps you should look at the community rules. Like rule #1, for example, where it says post only links to articles.

Thanks. I really should have quoted the whole passage.

I lived most of my life in Illinois and you’re right, the property taxes suck. But keep in mind that you get what you pay for. Move to a state with low property taxes like I did, and enjoy shitty roads, crumbling infrastructure, and lack of assorted services that you now take for granted.

I also miss having a Governor who gives a shit about people. I held my nose and voted for Pritzker when he ran against Rauner, thinking that it wouldn’t make a difference. Turned out to be the best choice I ever made. I’m really hoping he runs for President in '28.

“egregiously misquoted” sounds a lot like lying. I’m pretty sure that lying in federal court filings is a felony. These lawyers should be censured at minimum.

False Statements (18 U.S.C. § 1001)

The principal federal false statement statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1001, proscribes false statements, concealment, or false documentation in any matter within the jurisdiction of any of the three branches of the federal government. It applies generally within the executive branch. Within the judicial branch, it applies to all but presentations to the court by parties or their attorneys in judicial proceedings. Within the legislative branch, it applies to administrative matters such as procurement, as well as to “any investigations and reviews, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission, or office of the Congress consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.”

So ignorance is bliss?

You don’t say. That kind of seemed obvious from the very fucking start. Trump is absurdly incompetent or he is actively working to destroy the country. I honestly can’t tell which it is.

How exactly does Iowa have standing for such a claim? In 2009 the Iowa Supreme court affirmed that the right to marry (gay or otherwise) was enshrined in the state constitution. Even if SCOTUS made such a ruling at the federal level, it wouldn’t change the state constitution.

Would you feel the same way if his stroke destroyed his ability to drive a car but he insisted on continuing to do so anyway and kept putting lives at risk? It would be great if if can make a full recovery, and I certainly hope he can, but he needs to get the fuck out of the driver’s seat until he does so.

Yes, but I dont think that’s relevant. Whether gross or net, they are still ruining lives to achieve a pointless profit motive.

Edit: relevant, not irrelevant

You don’t need $10 billion in revenue. You could just coast along and only hit, what, $9.8 billion? And then you wouldn’t have to ruin 500 people’s lives. I’m betting the CEO has a bonus scheduled if he hits this goal.

Oh look, another court order to ignore.

It was indeed hubris, but 9/11 wasn’t expected. Anyone at the time with half a brain and access to the intelligence apparatus knew an attack was coming. Sadly, that left out then President George W. Bush due to his grey matter deficiency. Two months before 9/11, Gee Dubya was handed a Presidential Daily Brief with a clear warning about it and that wasn’t the first warning he ignored.

“Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” The CIA’s famous Presidential Daily Brief, presented to George W. Bush on August 6, 2001, has always been Exhibit A in the case that his administration shrugged off warnings of an Al Qaeda attack. But months earlier, starting in the spring of 2001, the CIA repeatedly and urgently began to warn the White House that an attack was coming.

They knew that the World Trade Center towers were a prime target for terrorists because of the last attack on them. Fortunately the 1993 terrorist attack failed to knock the towers down and the law enforcement was able to track down the attackers before they could try again.

We later learned from Yousef that his Trade Center plot was far more sinister. He wanted the bomb to topple one tower, with the collapsing debris knocking down the second. The attack turned out to be something of a deadly dress rehearsal for 9/11; with the help of Yousef’s uncle Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, al Qaeda would later return to realize Yousef’s nightmarish vision.

We knew that Yousef’s uncle was working with Al Qaeda and we knew they wanted to knock down the towers. Bush was warned but he, as you say, could not imagine anyone attacking here. That is indeed hubris because everyone else in a position to do anything about it knew an attack was coming in some form or another.

Don’t give them ideas. Really. Just don’t.

The bill passed the Senate Committee on Commerce and Tourism 5-4, with one Republican lawmaker, Sarasota Sen. Joe Gruters, joining Democrats in voting against it.

“I think we need to let kids be kids,” Gruters said.

Uh oh, somebody’s gonna get primaried. How dare he show moral fortitude in public.

If they used illegal means to find him, Im pretty sure that taints any evidence found on him.

Possibly. It’s called The Fruit of the Poisonous Tree doctrine. If the police obtained evidence illegally, or derived evidence from other evidence that was illegally obtained, it can be ruled inadmissible by the judge. There are exceptions shown in the link. One of the big exceptions is the first listed. If it was discovered from a source independent of the illegal activity it can be allowed.

Police are aware of the risks of tainted evidence so they will sometimes cover for it with a parallel construction investigation.

Parallel construction occurs when the federal government learns of criminal activity through one source but then gives the information to federal law enforcement agencies to “reconstruct” the criminal investigation so that the source of that second investigation differs from the original source.

So, let’s say the police arrest a suspect and find compelling evidence against the suspect at the location. That evidence might be suppressed if it turns out that, for example, the police found out where the suspect was going to be via an illegal wire tap. If it weren’t for the illegally obtained location information, the police would not have obtained that other evidence. Rather than admitting in court that this is how they found the suspect, one of the investigators might call in, or arrange for someone else to call in an anonymous tip about the suspect’s location to other investigators that don’t know about the illegal wire tap. The police then exclude the real origin of the knowledge of the suspects location from court filings.

Illegal, very possibly. Likely, also very possible.

Of course it won’t. It would take years to move manufacturing to the USA. Building factories, hiring and training workers, none of that can happen over months. It’s also a huge expenditure for the business which, along with higher payroll costs, would be passed on to consumers. Costs are going to go up weather they move manufacturing here or not so why not take the path of least resistance and just pass on the tariff costs?

This is more of an indictment about people not being safe while preparing food. Wash the eggs before you crack them into the pan, or whatever. Wash your hands properly any time you touch the shells, yolks or whites. Wash all surfaces that come in contact with the shells, yolks or whites. Cook thoroughly. Do the same when cooking or handling meats or even vegetables that could be contaminated.

Typical Republican: either scared of their own shadow or indifferent to the grievous damage they inflict on others.

I think scared and indifferent to the damage they do is more accurate. Though I’m not even sure it’s indifference. I think they actually delight in causing harm to people they believe deserve that harm.

Strong evidence?! Whoa! I’m convinced!