Also, specific to the role of Speaker, he’s disqualified due to having been indicted of felonies with a term of more than two years.
Also, specific to the role of Speaker, he’s disqualified due to having been indicted of felonies with a term of more than two years.
or prison for the chump you suckered into cheap labour.
I’m not seeing the ‘or’ bit. The article says the driver was already sentenced to nine years back in 2019. So it might be prison and deportation.
It also says he was a new permanent resident when the crime was committed. I’m surprised how they can so easily deport someone who has PR.
allow this situation to happen and all its gonna be is a civil fine for you
Alas, this is the real problem. And this case/hearing isn’t going to affect the precedent on that, it will only affect the precedent for the future chumps.
Hopefully they just haven’t thought about that yet
David Weber’s Honorverse and Mother of Demons by Eric Flint both come to mind. There is also the Little Fuzzy series by H. Beam Piper.
Edit: Also, The Legacy of Heorot by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle.
Honorable mention also to Dragons Egg by Robert L. Forward (humans start out more advanced in the beginning but get surpassed) and the Uplift Storm trilogy omnibus (or books 4-6) from David Brin (humans aren’t the most advanced in the entire universe but are in the planet that the stories take place on).
Pretty impressive! Wonder where kbin instances fit in those stats.
Here’s the formal charging document: https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2023/08/CRIMINAL-INDICTMENT-Trump-Fulton-County-GA.pdf
It spells out the accused violations that are before a court of law to rule on.
It did work well for reddit imvho as it’s understood that reddit definitely lost revenue and users as a result - but that might also not apply to FB so well in this case; as the reddit one was global rather than specific to a single country, and reddit was already unprofitable to begin with - whereas this is boycotting what’s likely an already unprofitable line for a very profitable company.
Just goes to show how low the new owner is…
Why is former Twitter even doing that? I thought only G and FB were affected, as it was based on company size. Supposedly Twitter is (still) not profitable, even.
Link says it’s not found for me
I think the service charge bit, that is widespread as an alternative to tipping in Europe, makes a lot of sense in general.
Key word in the above sentence is: alternative
I loved this movie
Hmm. Could the rivers be made navigable without hurting the surrounding ecosystem too much? Or maybe an artificial canal … but I suppose a new canal has many of the same problems that a new road (or roads) would entail…
The cost to bore tunnels would be extreme, and likely would deter investors.
I don’t have an obvious solution for that, but no one said park preservation and tackling global warming would come cheap.
On top of that, where do you put the waste rock, which can be metal leaching or acid generating.
I don’t know much about this, but as the tunnel is built, use it to truck out the waste rock, which can then be shipped outside of Alaska to be processed and handled in the usual processing plants in the US (or even pay to handle it overseas). Again, costs, but same answer as above.
The park can not be protected from global warming. It’s better to get clean energy. Though I wonder if this is a true binary choice - the decision to expand US mineral protection seems to speak of and to more isolationist views. Maybe the US could go clean using minerals from friendly foreign countries only.
That said, I wonder if we’re not being creative enough here. The english channel is 560 km long, so could it be possible to bore a series of tunnels for truckers to use to get access to the minerals without ruining the park?
It’s a shame that the mine isn’t closer to the ocean, otherwise maybe shipping the minerals on cargo ships could have been a more park friendly alternative.
Ideally there would have been a way to merge threads and preserve the comments from both. Too late now I guess, but something to keep in mind next time something like this happens I suppose…
The new article links to an academic article which describes the full legal theory, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3978095
The short version, from the news article, is this:
The academic article goes on in some detail hypothesizing why this might have been the case. Basically at the time it was written, every former President had been some other kind of Officer first, and even today Drumpf is the sole exception, so the omission of the P and VP might have been a sort of compromise to make it easier to get that amendment passed.
The academic article does a good job of proposing that it’s not a simple oversight - remember that a former US President had joined the Confederacy at that time, so this sort of thing was exactly at the top of their minds.
As much as I would personally disagree with this, I have to admit that the legal arguments made seem very sound to my layman’s understanding of things. Really unfortunate, though I do see a silver lining here - most other challenges have dealt with how hard it is to define an insurrection and if Drumpf really participated or not. At least the judge here did indeed agree with the fact that Drumpf was part of an insurrection.
Perhaps States can pass laws that, in addition to requiring presidential candidates to release their tax returns to be eligible to stand in that State, also require that candidates a) never took part in an insurrection or b) apologized for it. As Drumpf would never apologize, he’d thus not be eligible to stand.