Didn’t SCOTUS already rule that states couldn’t leave people off the ballot unless Congress had impeached and prosecuted them?
Über-geek, fat old Welshman. Programming Overlord. Left-wing empath and Shouter At Idiots.
43 followers 29 following 143 posts
view profile on Bluesky
Didn’t SCOTUS already rule that states couldn’t leave people off the ballot unless Congress had impeached and prosecuted them?
Don’t threaten us with a good time!
I want someone to ask Trump who it is in the Democratic Party that is so good they can organise all this and not leave a shred of evidence the courts will accept…
Did you misspell that, by any chance…?
Clearly. Just don’t understand why it’s being attached to the poor citizen that got killed today. With the best will in the world, Biden is not going to do anything about it now…
Exactly my point: why mention Biden not doing something if he means the party isn’t doing something? It’s like saying Obama isn’t doing anything.
? Pretty sure an election is what happened and now Biden can’t respond to anything…? No idea what your point was there.
I would be SO up for this if, like his Club Golf Competitions, the Orange Cunt would participate as a contestant!
Maybe it wasn’t the best idea on the planet to buy the last election for them, huh? 😂
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...
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
He looks like Nosferatu
But that eyebrow…!
ICE ICE Baby…!
Obviously, it was when she didn’t fluff Dear Leader 25/8
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.
There’s a common thread there if only I could put my finger on it…
Doesn’t international law allow for self-defense?
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?
And he did it with 2,000 illegally federalized National Guard that couldn’t even be deployed to the streets!
Should people who buy his crypto be called $TRUMPets?
“Punishing them enough” is not on his radar. “Punishing them until they comply” is what it’s about.
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?
So he DOES know it's US companies who pay the tariffs, not the exporting country...?
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?
I don’t understand how Republicans can ever mention supporting the Blue in future, with a straight face. But they will.
Reminiscent of Blair/Campbell's 'sexing up' of the Dodgy Dossier about Iraq WMD's...
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.
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.
Just like Trump said on his campaign trail?
I wouldn’t mind so much if he replaced the current pope. As in, six feet under.
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.
Just like Trump has done with his enemies list…? Are you planning to punish or threaten them too…?
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.
I would give cash money to know what he thinks the purpose of capital letters is.
Good to see he's going to "executive the minimum" in future... (my drunk uncle makes more sense than him)
'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.
Exactly how lethal IS guyliner, anyway...?
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.
“Working class Judean’s”…? Fuck off, we’re the “working Judean class”…
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 :-)
If they insist on using “Biden crime family,” we should use “Republican crime party”
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.
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.
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.
We better hope DoJ don’t say this in court, or else SCOTUS’ immunity ruling could shut this whole case down immediately
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.
So all this Evil is knowing and deliberate, then? Good to know…
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
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.
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.
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.
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
Worse even that that, I think: "We tried to facilitate a return, but Bukele didn't want to because he wanted our money instead"
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.
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.
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.
Worse: a lot of this could have been prevented with enforcing existing legislation :-(
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.
Fortunately, like 3D TV and Betamax videos, it may not survive long in its’ current form. As soon as people like Cohen realise it only has limited use, it’ll go away until someone makes something more like real AI
I think fearing AI is wrong: as you say it’s a tool to be used. But it isn’t actually AI yet, it’s just predictive text generation and shouldn’t be used in many circumstances. If someone puts it in charge of a nuclear reactor, it’s not capable of calculating a process to handle emergencies
Sure: but it responds in a way that only depends on what you feed it, allowing anyone to generate anything they want and claim that AI said it so it’s somehow true. That makes it really pointless to use, and is neither hopeful nor depressing.
The biggest problem is that it does not check anything for truth, as when Michael Cohen produced a briefing for the court that turned out to have case references that in reality opposed his argument: it knew that it needed case references but had no way to find the right ones so it used any ones.
It hasn’t been fed with ideas that are sensible: it hasn’t been fed with ideas at all. If I told it that Trump crashed the economy and then asked it what happened a couple of days ago, you know what it would say? If a Republican told it that he made America stronger, guess what it would say then?
As for not knowing how they work, that just isn’t true. Plenty of us understand the algorithms and techniques they use.
Yes: that’s how they can say things in a different order using different words compared to the literal text they’ve been fed. But what they DON’T do is understand the question and try to work out an answer: they can only reword their input. It’s not telling us anything we haven’t told it.
Can we please have a respectful discussion on here without trying to shout louder or insult the other side? We’re not Republicans or X, we can have differing opinions and still be good human beings.
What dictionary has your spell checker been fed with? Do you find the choice of dictionary to be hopeful? It’s kinda like saying it’s hopeful because the computer it’s running on is blue…
I can’t understand how you think that feeding a spellchecker current events is in any way better than feeding it fiction: our original point is that the program is useless and it’s only saying the things it is because that’s what it’s been fed with. It’s not helpful or hopeful.
Nope. It means what it’s been fed so far is current events. If you fed it the planet of the apes scripts, it would claim that in order to destroy democracy you might have to kill most humans with a disease that also evolves apes.
Alas, no. What we’re saying is that it will only spit out what it’s been fed with in new combinations. It doesn’t investigate or check or understand anything, it just uses autocorrect-type algorithms to deduce the next word. If you feed it current events, that’s what it will give you back.
Please, for the love of God, stop treating Grok and the like as though it was anything more than a spellchecker. It is not. It looks at the data it’s trained on and spits out words that are commonly used together in that data. It does not think or investigate or check anything. It’s useless!
The US also doesn’t even HAVE a trade deficit with several of these countries, they have a surplus and are still applying 10% or more. And of course, Russia and North Korea get a free pass while Ukraine does not.
Exactly this. The system of checks and balances is clearly inadequate and cannot stand up to people like these because this was never foreseen. Now that we have seen them with our own eyes, is the perfect and appropriate time to draw up the new system.
He is absolutely correct. There IS value in losing an election: $29 million at the last count 😂
What an incredible ’unity’ president…!
That message does NOT confirm this wasn’t a one-off. Things are bad enough as it is, there is no need to make up stuff they can easily deny and use to distract from the real issues
? That's... not even close to what that tweet says? Goldberg used the phrase "Attack Plans" and DoD called him out trying to claim he retreated from calling them "War Plans". Shitty enough, no need to confuse the issue with things they clearly didn't say...
When I wrote one of the biggest messaging iPhone apps that was planned to have a client that could run in Russia, the FSB insisted on having a full copy of the server in their offices that ran all messages worldwide through. If we wanted the app to operate there, that was the requirement.
Goldberg should ask DoD if it’s ok to publish the ‘not war plans, not classified materiel’ in that case…
It’s like the Portrait of Dorian Gray again except he also looks like an old shit…
Money. Enough to buy lawyers, legal loopholes and delays, courts, judges, presidents and countries. :-(
What were their other choices - “F-Trump”, “F-Biden”, or “F-You”…?
This is utter nonsense. Grok is in NO way an AI. It doesn’t have opinions or check facts or make predictions. It’s a clever predictive text engine that takes the sources it has been fed and spits them out in new combinations. It’s like asking a four year olds’ opinion.
"I can't tell you" and "I can't tell you why I can't tell you" should be treated exactly the same as No Defence Presented
What are the odds SCOTUS won't see it that way? :-(
Does his book recommend accepting that anti-semites will hurt and kill Jews, and that we should all give them the weapons to do so…?
This is what Trump has always wanted: he gets the adoring praise and someone else does the work. He didn’t realise he’d be expected to do something the first time around but he has the perfect setup this time.
What do you mean, “Trump will agree to this”…? You make it sound like Putin gives tRump free will to choose to agree or not…
Ffs it’s not like they need more ideas for next week’s random policy draw…!
If it was, it would have burned down, exploded, and been graffitied with anti-Nazi slogans by now
100% Something has to change. The Founders couldn’t have envisioned such a corrupt character actually getting into office or the checks and balances would have been stronger. If we don’t make them stronger now, America is lost forever. The problem is clear, but the solution is not so much :-(
OIG isn’t meant to be partisan, but the GOP has shown that when they’re in control, it will be. This is why I say the problem is deeper than expanding SCOTUS can help :-(
So making Justice Thomas’ corruption more likely as they are bribed more easily?
Current SCOTUS and Presidency is result of a vote: how would annual votes change it except that you’d only have a government for 9 months of the year, and the GOP would try to oppress voters then too?
I can’t understand what you’re saying you want: everything you’re suggesting suffers from the same problem of partisan control. If Congress’ Oversight is controlled by GOP, they won’t stop SCOTUS. If SCOTUS is expanded, we’ll still have times when partisan justices are in control.
Clearly. But the GOP is too corrupt to allow that, and with SCOTUS lost too, America is already lost.
The reason it’s an odd number is so there can’t be a tie. The advantage also comes from justices acting in partisan manner; regardless of numbers, if you have a set of corrupt justices they will swing things their way.
I don’t understand: how would 13 be any different to 9…? If we get 7 justices as bad as Alito and Thomas, we’re in exactly the same position as now.
An expanded SCOTUS wouldn’t help in any way: the same problem will happen repeatedly where the composition will be biased (even though the current corruption is legendary). And we’re just as likely to have the R’s do it now and pack it against us anyway