America

[Son of Mathonwy]

Elon Musk awards Elon Musk $29BN in Tesla stock.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... -of-shares

Or in other words Musk gives himself another 2% of the company.

[Which Tyler]

If I say something is so, then it is so.
If observable reality disagrees, then that's a problem for observable reality...

[Which Tyler]

Just discovered that the general public can nominate people for an IgNobel prize.
https://improbable.com/ig/about-the-ig- ... minations/

I've just nominated... someone for the peace prize Re: Ukraine & Gaza, and also the economics prize Re: global trade war, raising tariffs, and services to extortion in general.

[Son of Mathonwy]

The dictatorship is being constructed, piece by piece.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... n-dc-crime

[Son of Mathonwy]

Hilarious climbdown. Why does anyone take his threats seriously? EU, learn a lesson from China.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... l-deadline

[Puja]

The dictatorship is being constructed, piece by piece.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... n-dc-crime

Or as someone else put it, "Jesus, how many kids did he touch that he needs this much distraction!?!"

Really does feel like building up towards declaring martial law and "postponing" midterms.

Puja

[Which Tyler]

Really does feel like building up towards declaring martial law and "postponing" midterms.

Whether they go ahead or not, probably depends on whether places like Texas are allowed their redistricting.
Even if they do, what's the bet that every polling booth is crawling with ICE agents, ready to disappear anyone who looks vaguely latinx - even if released the following day.
Oh, and of course, to arrest anyone who objects to the above (which will be almost exclusively Dem voters)
Bear in mind, under Trump "videoing an ICE agent" counts as "assault", and can be charged as such

[Which Tyler]

Oh, and this from overnight, was only a matter of time
Supreme Court formally asked to overturn landmark same-sex marriage ruling

[Son of Mathonwy]

Oh, and this from overnight, was only a matter of time
Supreme Court formally asked to overturn landmark same-sex marriage ruling

Hope they wouldn't go as far as ignoring the precedent of a previous Supreme Court ruling* but they may well do.


* even they will see that this weakens their own power.

[Puja]

Oh, and this from overnight, was only a matter of time
Supreme Court formally asked to overturn landmark same-sex marriage ruling

Hope they wouldn't go as far as ignoring the precedent of a previous Supreme Court ruling* but they may well do.


* even they will see that this weakens their own power.

It's exactly the same precedent that they overturned for Roe v Wade though - declaring that the 14th Amendment provision saying that "no State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws" does not have the broad effect and meaning that was previously relied upon for many Supreme Court cases. This won't be a new or far-reaching decision as far as they're concerned - just the logical extension to the precedent they've already struck. The groundwork has already been laid and, while it may not be the Kim Davis case cause that one's legally full of holes, it is coming soon.

Clarence Thomas even noted in the judgement overturning RvW that "In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold [the right for married couples to use contraception], Lawrence [the right to have same-sex relationships], and Obergefell [the right to same-sex marriage]. Because any substantive due process decision is 'demonstrably erroneous,' we have a duty to 'correct the error' established in those precedents. After overruling these demonstrably erroneous decisions, the question would remain whether other constitutional provisions guarantee the myriad rights that our substantive due process cases have generated." Although for some unknown reason, Thomas didn't name-check 'Loving vs Virginia', which also relies on the substantive due process precedent in exactly the same way and you would surely have thought should also be an error to be corrected under the same logic?



I can't comprehend why the fundamentalist Catholic judge thinks it's legally important to urgently "correct the error" of nationwide legalisation of contraception and equal rights for queers, solely because they're based on an "incorrect judgement" of course, and it's the correct approach to have the rights removed asap and let new cases come forward to see if those rights can be re-established on different points of law, but he's not chasing up removing the nationwide legalisation of mixed-race marriages on the same grounds. I am sure his decisions are based only due to his deep respect for the law and involve no kind of bigotry whatsoever.

Puja



ETA. Saw this comment about Kim Davis's respect for traditional marriage values and thought it worth sharing: "She cheated on her first husband with her third husband, then divorced her second husband to marry her her third husband, then divorced her third husband to remarry her second husband. It's unknown whether she cheated on her first husband and third husband with her second/fourth husband."

[Danno]

What a vile bitch.

[Which Tyler]

The war on reality continues apace

Trump admin orders Smithsonian museums to be reviewed for ‘Americanism’

Those who prevent the teaching of history, fully intend to repeat it.

[Which Tyler]

More on the War Against Reality

Exclusive: Medical journal rejects Kennedy's call for retraction of vaccine study

And the worms... ate into his brain