Primarily because if courts admit it's fallible, everyone convicted in part on bite evidence would need to be retried. Which would be a crazy amount of work. And people are lazy. Epically courts.
They did nothing when the decision was leaked.
Nothing when it was official.
Nothing in the years since.
Why?
So they could use it as campaign chip in this election.
Fuck off.
Both parties use their constituency as pawns, rather than employers. It's why we all need to support Represent Us and the Forward Party who are trying to make our representatives actually represent us.
Yes! I would love to vote for anyone from any party, who has done one thing that transfers wealth from the shareholder class to the working class. For my entire life (born in 1980) every law I've ever heard of has done the opposite, and I'm sick of it.
Yes? Probably? It depends a little on why you're using quotes. I assume you don't mean the literal academic theory. And instead mean some kind of more reasonable version, of what Republicans and conservatives seem to mean (and irrationally fear) when they use the term.
That's fine on it's own.
As long as it doesn't take away from fixing the actual problem. The way student loan forgiveness eclipsed trying to actually control higher education prices.
At no point have I felt excluded for being white, nor threatened by what has been shared.
Right. Of course not. That's not the issue. The issue is that minority history months treat the minority history as something separate from 'normal' history. Instead minority histories should be taught as an indistinguishable part of the respective time period.
The fact that you didn't learn those new things in history when you were in school is the problem. That's where the solution and proper equity is to be found.
There is a long history of law enforcement not taking threats of violence seriously, when they come from white conservative groups.
The Secrete Service might. As far as I know they take all threats to the president as pretty serious. But that only helps the president, not the rest of us.
I really don't like Coke at all. I'd try the RC its been a couple decades since the last time I had any.
I think they're referring to the new Civil War movie.
None of that logic works.
Random people can't legally pardon anyone. That's why they can't pardon themselves.
The President can legally pardon people accused of federal crimes. It's only common sense that stops one from pardoning themselves, not the law.
How was this guy a mayor?
Trump has a decades long history of not paying his debts. I assumed all his lawyers would insist on payment in full first.
Murderous assholes sure, but coward? Not sure what you're referring to with that one.
Do you mean the Republicans? As far as I could tell, the major networks basically ignored the Democrat hopefuls
Bots wouldn't have that many spelling and grammatical errors.
Primarily because if courts admit it's fallible, everyone convicted in part on bite evidence would need to be retried. Which would be a crazy amount of work. And people are lazy. Epically courts.
They did nothing when the decision was leaked.
Nothing when it was official.
Nothing in the years since.
Why?
So they could use it as campaign chip in this election.
Fuck off.
Both parties use their constituency as pawns, rather than employers. It's why we all need to support Represent Us and the Forward Party who are trying to make our representatives actually represent us.
That's what happens when you try to say eight things in two sentences.
Given that dumb requirement, I think they did a decent job.
I would agree. But the cable news business model won't survive decades. I'd be a little surprised if FOX News is still around in a single decade.
UBI would be great for those who are working or not.
Yes! I would love to vote for anyone from any party, who has done one thing that transfers wealth from the shareholder class to the working class. For my entire life (born in 1980) every law I've ever heard of has done the opposite, and I'm sick of it.
Yes? Probably? It depends a little on why you're using quotes. I assume you don't mean the literal academic theory. And instead mean some kind of more reasonable version, of what Republicans and conservatives seem to mean (and irrationally fear) when they use the term.
That's fine on it's own.
As long as it doesn't take away from fixing the actual problem. The way student loan forgiveness eclipsed trying to actually control higher education prices.
Right. Of course not. That's not the issue. The issue is that minority history months treat the minority history as something separate from 'normal' history. Instead minority histories should be taught as an indistinguishable part of the respective time period.
The fact that you didn't learn those new things in history when you were in school is the problem. That's where the solution and proper equity is to be found.
I'm not sure if that's insane or brilliant.
Of course that's their answer. It would be breaking HIPAA laws to tell the press. Or the police, unless she was in custody.
There is a long history of law enforcement not taking threats of violence seriously, when they come from white conservative groups.
The Secrete Service might. As far as I know they take all threats to the president as pretty serious. But that only helps the president, not the rest of us.
That's called willful ignorance. You're actively ignoring, or trying not to see another view point.