SoylentNews

This was just target practice, right?

Because if they were shooting at Russia, they could use some!

Says here in the Times, regarding US "attacks" on the Russia grid:

Two administration officials said they believed Mr. Trump had not been briefed in any detail about the steps to place "implants" -- software code that can be used for surveillance or attack -- inside the Russian grid.

Pentagon and intelligence officials described broad hesitation to go into detail with Mr. Trump about operations against Russia for concern over his reaction -- and the possibility that he might countermand it or discuss it with foreign officials, as he did in 2017 when he mentioned a sensitive operation in Syria to the Russian foreign minister.

First, it's the Times, so bring a bag of salt. Second, why would they say this? Sounds like silly bullshit for the campaign, but it's the Times.

So, who runs the country, eh?

Let's take a vote. Who do you want to run the country? The DOD? or the prez?

Or should we just blow this off as some sort of tabloid fairy tale for ratings?

It was a little cocker spaniel dog in a crate that he'd sent all the way from Texas. Black and white spotted. And our little girl—Tricia, the 6-year-old—named it Checkers. And you know, the kids, like all kids, love the dog and I just want to say this right now, that regardless of what they say about it, we're gonna keep it.

Wanna buy one?

The whole reason for his "tariff" bullshit is to manipulate the stock market. He even tweeted that his "position" is profitable. How could it not be?

Who had the "right of way"?

It's no secret that potential appointment of new Suprme Court justices were a major factor in the U.S.'s election of Donald Trump. So it might be worth pointing out that the current Surpme Court has failed to do what conservatives hoped and did exactly what liberals feared. The Supreme Court has not instituited a blanket ban on all racial and sexual discrimination, as conservatives and independents hoped, and instead relaxed restrictions on restricting abortion, which liberals feared. (https://beta.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-compromise-on-indiana-abortion-law-keeps-issue-off-its-docket/2019/05/28/18636792-814b-11e9-933d-7501070ee669_story.html)

Gorsuch has shown himself to be willing to hand Apple a victory over obtuse procedural issues, but fortunately was voted down. Unexpectedly, Kavanuagh was the voice of reason here on the conservative side of the Court. (https://beta.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/05/13/supreme-court-rules-against-apple-allowing-lawsuit-targeting-app-store-proceed/)

Still, while the Supreme Court has shown some improvement on the First Amendment in some areas, it has crushed the rights in others. For example, ruling that police are above the law when it comes to first amendment retaliation claims. (https://www.jurist.org/news/2019/05/supreme-court-rules-for-police-officers-in-first-amendment-retaliation-claim/)

Since Gorsuch took office, as well as Kavanaugh, what cases did the Suprme Court get wrong, and why? Comment below.

PS: Feel free to talk about cases besides the ones mentioned, as long as they are post-trump.

Majority rule will not save us. There is not even the slightest hint of any change in support for these people. They'll all be reelected and able to collect their raise. This is a real pathology, an illness, a disease. Our evolutionary path is not leading to good fortune, but more like eternal conflict. Truly natural, but not human as they see themselves. From the aliens' off planet point of view, we are just ants and aphids that are wrecking the garden.

Congress will give themselves a raise, in the usual behind our back manner. It is agreed that the democrats will take the fall for bringing it up at this rather awkward time. Awkward to us, not them. Finely tuning the revulsion/attraction ratio is an artform of its own.