Search results

Ah yes, countries that are physically closer to us than Russia is and also hate us enough to want to nuke us. Countries like... .......

Ooh, just like in the video games!

They'll probably get away with it because they're not technically saying it's public record who you voted for, just whether you voted or not. Why else would they have not crossed that line already?

Also I'm pretty sure people's voting records aren't public, specifically to prevent this kind of thing. But it wouldn't surprise me if there's no law against claiming otherwise.

Given that the NDA in question threatened "even jail time" for violating it, I assume that means breaking it would be a criminal offense, not a civil one (I have no idea how the hell that works, but IANAL), so President Hillary would have just pardoned him for it.

There should absolutely be a law making this sort of thing an exception to NDAs. Remember how WAY BACK IN 2016 we were like "Come on, somebody release the tape of Trump saying the N word. We know it's out there somewhere. That's what it'll take to ruin him." We could have avoided his whole damn...

Yeah, it'd be more like 9-0 unless one or two of them go rogue and try to legislate from the bench. Legally he could. Logistically it'd be impossible to serve out his sentence and simultaneously fulfill his duties. So all it would take would be for Congress to invoke the 25th Amendment and the...

OK so at this point they know they're being mined by AI and they're just leaning into it. I would too.

Watch it devolve into everyone voting for themselves and acting shocked when they lose a hundred to one.

Also, young people don't like getting out to vote because for many of them, it's a huge hassle. A huge hassle that 2020 proved has an easy and obvious solution: mandating universal mail-in voting in all states. But when the Democrats got together and tried to pass some kind of voting reform...

"Slate of channels"? You mean there's already more than one? ...Ah, it seems their parent company also runs Movies! and H&I, along with some others I don't recognize. MeTV is already relegated to a subchannel here, so I wonder if they're going to have enough bandwidth to add another one.

Also, there are very few circumstances where it would be OK with the public for either party to just declare by fiat that their front-runner is being pulled out of the race in favor of someone nobody voted for. Once upon a time, party leaders would hold private caucuses and decide on who to run...

And that's...notable, somehow? It must at least also be a thing in California because I see that happen on TV shows all the time. They realize the suspect they brought in couldn't be the guy, so they let him go. It never once occurred to me that there might be states where they're not even...

Then we can stop accepting confessions or anything else said during interrogations as admissible evidence in court. Actually we should probably just do that anyway. What are the chances that a real crook will confess in a dark room but then clam up as soon as he's under oath, and have zero...

If you have a better idea, I'd like to hear it. Even if it were possible for cops who just want to close a case, and are willing to drag any old rando off the street and throw him in front of a judge to make that happen, to do so peacefully and politely, that's still an innocent person who's had...

There need be no "or". CNN, USA Today, and MSNBC are owned by right-wing shills too, just subtler ones who don't want to murder gay people. It's the nature of being a big business.

Still the most impactful outcome they could have hoped for. No one cares about Libertarian candidates, including most libertarians. That dude down the street with the yellow snake flag votes Republican all the way down the ticket, every year, just like his neighbor with the giant Trump banner.

I think you underestimate how much of Twitter is shitposting, conspiracy theories, and people who think they're the Onion. (I mean, hell, the sheer volume of disinformation on there is the whole reason the fact-check bot exists.)

It's always about closing the case. Name any jurisdiction—hell, any country—where the cops get penalized if the guy they bring in doesn't end up getting convicted.

How the hell is X's context bot, which was trained on Twitter data of all things, consistently better at fact checking than Google is at fact finding?