"Not guilty" is distinct from "innocent", and such a verdict, if a trial ever comes of this, would not impact libel or slander. Being unable to prove your accusations in court to the standard required is not a determination that the accusations were false, only that doubt remained.
I don't know much about Canadian politics, but...
The data shows the Liberals in a distant third place for 18-29 year olds with 15.97 per cent, compared to the Conservatives and the NDP with 39.21 per cent and 30.92 per cent respectively.
It’s a dip for the Liberals, who were at 26.8 per cent at the beginning of August for the same age group. And it’s a boost for the Conservatives, who are up from 29.3 per cent at the beginning of the month.
That large of a swing over the course of a month seems like a red flag for the data. Did something happen that would explain the shift?
Thought for a second that was a magic cupholder built into the spoiler.
I know people are quick to jump on this as a sign of cognitive impairment, but could this be a form of aphasia resulting from his fall a few months ago?
I just ask because it's possible it's a motor issue (knows what he wants to say but can't physically say it) rather than a cognitive issue (can't think of something to say).
As much as I'd love for McConnell to GTFO, and certainly support age/term limits in Congress, if it is a motor issue it'd be similar to what Fetterman has dealt with since his stroke (auditory issue vs. cognitive issue).
Good riddance, though a plane crash seems like a relatively easy way to "kill" someone while they go into hiding.
I thought it was pretty when it was novel, but it's been around long enough now that it just kind of blends in. I think it's still a nice clean design, but not really eye catching anymore.
Sure, as long as we also have a competency test for retirees as well.
I wonder who scores better?
Genuine belief in fraud, ignoring that it's obviously bs for a moment, does not give you a right to usurp power through illegal means.
Well, takes one to know one, ya know?
What procedural step is being abused here to allow one Senator to have this much influence? Or is this another case of one Senator being the face while backed by the rest of their party?
I get why people do it, but man do I hate the glorification of Sherman when it comes to addressing Confederates southern conservatives.
He used the same tactics that he used against the Confederacy against the Native Americans, to vile ends.
Why would this be treated any differently than googling things? I just googled the same prompt about hiding food that's mentioned in the article and it gave me pretty much the same advice. One of the top links was an ED support forum where they were advising each other on how to hide their eating disorder.
These articles are just outrage bait at this point. There are some legitimate concerns about AI, but bashing your hand with a hammer and blaming the hammer shouldn't be one of them.
I do think libertarianism has some principles and concepts that are valuable, I would have even called myself libertarian-ish at certain points, but over the years it's fallen into a similar bucket as communism from my perspective.
It's an attractive system until you start introducing the people.
I think too often we get caught up on "the game" and try to frame decisions solely in that context.
The reality is that sometimes in politics people hold genuine beliefs, and when it comes to the GOP I think a non-insignificant caucus of them genuinely opposes abortion for various personal reasons.
Of course, it's just his "get out of jail free" card to save face publicly when he starts rejecting requests.
He qualified it by specifying it's if you were "unfairly" facing repercussions, which of course means he can deny or accept anyone he wants for any reason that he wants and still claim he's upholding his pledge.
There's a significant difference between the people rising against their government and the people rising against some of the government on behalf of the rest of the government.
That's what happened on Jan 6th. Those people were launching an assault to support their preferred representatives, they were very much pro-government. Nothing libertarian about it.
I think their words are accurate, it's just that their allegiance isn't to the United States of America.
I don't think he knows how SCOTUS works...
I don't think so, his "X" idea has been around for a long time, he really thinks it's his next big idea. I'm sure people have raised all of these concerns with him, but I doubt he's listening. Tesla, SpaceX, etc. are ideas that he bought, this one is his baby. I don't think he's open to ideas or criticisms on it.
