netslut.bsky.social
Über-geek, fat old Welshman. Programming Overlord. Left-wing empath and Shouter At Idiots.
134 posts
43 followers
30 following
Discussion Master
comment in response to
post
So they're saying they can issue a nationwide injunction against judges and that's what the Constitution meant, but the judges can't issue a nationwide injunction because it's unconstitutional...? Make it make sense...
comment in response to
post
It’s obvious sophistry; lawyers are very good at saying things like this and mean they didn’t say “defy that court order” to a specific person; not an answer to what was asked and certainly not what the question meant
comment in response to
post
He looks like Nosferatu
comment in response to
post
But that eyebrow…!
comment in response to
post
ICE ICE Baby…!
comment in response to
post
Obviously, it was when she didn’t fluff Dear Leader 25/8
comment in response to
post
It’s a bit like Darth Vader killing the Emperor: it doesn’t redeem him but it certainly shows Committing the Evil was a choice he made.
comment in response to
post
There’s a common thread there if only I could put my finger on it…
comment in response to
post
Doesn’t international law allow for self-defense?
comment in response to
post
Is he really trying to tell everyone that if you get into negotiations with him, he'll bomb the shit out of you halfway through anyway?
comment in response to
post
And he did it with 2,000 illegally federalized National Guard that couldn’t even be deployed to the streets!
comment in response to
post
Should people who buy his crypto be called $TRUMPets?
comment in response to
post
“Punishing them enough” is not on his radar. “Punishing them until they comply” is what it’s about.
comment in response to
post
The party-based chart is a bit weird: Republican-appointed judges heard 36 cases, but Democratic-appointed judges heard 92 - almost three times as many. I get that the ratio was close to the same, but it seems like an important detail that wasn't really clear?
comment in response to
post
So he DOES know it's US companies who pay the tariffs, not the exporting country...?
comment in response to
post
He was shilling products from behind the Resolute Desk in his first term “in his personal capacity”, why on Earth would he hesitate to go bigger this time around when no-one stopped him then?
comment in response to
post
I don’t understand how Republicans can ever mention supporting the Blue in future, with a straight face. But they will.
comment in response to
post
Reminiscent of Blair/Campbell's 'sexing up' of the Dodgy Dossier about Iraq WMD's...
comment in response to
post
Grok isn't ratting out anyone, in any way. It's a simple bug caused by a lack of understanding of how it works; it's exactly the same as if your autocorrect started suggesting weird new words unexpectedly.
Grok is in no way intelligent, it has no agency or sentience, don't treat it like it does.
comment in response to
post
Biden said he was making sure people could buy more stuff and got flayed for it.
I’m beginning to suspect what they say isn’t the crucial differentiator here.
comment in response to
post
Just like Trump said on his campaign trail?
comment in response to
post
I wouldn’t mind so much if he replaced the current pope. As in, six feet under.
comment in response to
post
It's nothing to do with wanting us to fear him; he's got that covered elsewhere. This is all about taking public gratitude and admiration away from Veterans, and towards himself. "Veteran's Day" is clearly not something he can claim glory for, but "Victory Day" is.
comment in response to
post
Just like Trump has done with his enemies list…? Are you planning to punish or threaten them too…?
comment in response to
post
What I find most interesting about this Amazon debacle is that it shows this administration KNOWS the tariffs are a tax and will increase prices on everything for everyone; otherwise they wouldn’t think it a problem if they showed how much money America was earning. They’re just lying to everyone.
comment in response to
post
I would give cash money to know what he thinks the purpose of capital letters is.
comment in response to
post
Good to see he's going to "executive the minimum" in future... (my drunk uncle makes more sense than him)
comment in response to
post
'erosion' makes it sound like he's chipping away at it slowly. He's not. He's taken it out back and shot it like one of Noem's puppies. Now he's jumping up and down on its' corpse.
comment in response to
post
Exactly how lethal IS guyliner, anyway...?
comment in response to
post
That would imply he gives any kind of a shit for them, which he does not. Only reason he pardoned them now was so he could continue to point at how dastardly the Dems are.
comment in response to
post
“Working class Judean’s”…? Fuck off, we’re the “working Judean class”…
comment in response to
post
Seems to me to be the same thing Biden took such impressive advantage of at his last Union speech, with Republicans shouting ‘lie’ about wanting to cut Medicaid, so he said it’s good to hear they’re committing to not do that :-)
comment in response to
post
If they insist on using “Biden crime family,” we should use “Republican crime party”
comment in response to
post
Wouldn’t help. Plenty of ways it would be worse, with military grunts not being told why they’re picking people up there’s nothing for them to refuse, and that discipline would mean they would definitely follow the order.
comment in response to
post
Due process and rights for people suspected of criminality is what put the USA head and shoulders above any other country at the time. It is moral exceptionalism, and removing those rights now is the most serious crime anyone has ever committed against the country and humanity.
comment in response to
post
Xinis is doing everything she can to stop any appeals hard, by giving the admin every chance to explain themselves.
Unfortunately, Jack Smith took the same approach, and the same outcome is likely here.
comment in response to
post
We better hope DoJ don’t say this in court, or else SCOTUS’ immunity ruling could shut this whole case down immediately
comment in response to
post
His condition is as far from the Admin's minds as Christmas. The reason they're doing what they are is to prevent any further challenges from the court system for anything in future: defying them now will let them set a precedent.
comment in response to
post
So all this Evil is knowing and deliberate, then? Good to know…
comment in response to
post
Your inability to focus on more than one issue at a time is the whole reason he’s dumped multiple issues at the same time
comment in response to
post
The Constitution was never written to be able to deal with people as corrupt and evil as tRump. It relies on an absolute minimum of human decency, and he has none at all.
Unfortunately, there are plenty of ways corrupt lawyers can work around the 22nd.
comment in response to
post
No, having power is not the same thing as being unable to be challenged by courts. Having power allows you to initiate actions; being unchallenged means those actions will always be completed.
comment in response to
post
There is a fourth possibility: that DoJ doesn't want to accept courts ordering it about and challenging it. I don't think they could give two fucks about Garcia, but they're using this as a stepping stone to be truly above the law and the courts.
comment in response to
post
Xinis should ask DoJ for all the details of the agreement with Bukele and then she’ll be able to specify with precision what effectuate means
comment in response to
post
Worse even that that, I think: "We tried to facilitate a return, but Bukele didn't want to because he wanted our money instead"
comment in response to
post
That’s simply not true. People wouldn’t be able to write an LLM machine if they didn’t know the reasoning. What you’re talking about is understanding the way the brain maps neurons, which is specifically NOT what LLM’s do.
comment in response to
post
That’s a lousy article full of misleading nonsense. As a computer scientist, I can tell you we know exactly what algorithms are used to generate text and what those researchers are looking for is a deeper meaning where there is none.
comment in response to
post
You’re clearly perfectly entitled to feel that way: it’s only the calling of names and belittling I’m hoping to reduce. Plenty of ways to express ourselves without dropping to that level, is my only point here.
comment in response to
post
Worse: a lot of this could have been prevented with enforcing existing legislation :-(
comment in response to
post
Unless we’re told and it’s explained what the truth may be, it’s hard to blame people for holding a belief that seems correct prima facie.