

“Please, let me get that Overton Window for you!”


“Please, let me get that Overton Window for you!”


Fair, and pointless.


Facists: Exist
DAMNED LIBRULS
???


State sanctioned dilution of what it means for things to be true. It’s not about the vaccines, it’s about getting people to accept falsehoods.


But there are fewer people needing to use ATMs with all the card/tap/digital money transfer. The only time anyone is using an ATM is because they have to. And a high proportion of those people who have to use ATMs are going to be poor.
“Make ‘em wait through an ad, what are they gonna do?”


Oh god don’t tell them about ATMs.


Must mean they’re pro fascist, then.


FistingEnthusiast, always bringing the truth.


Pretty sure Kimmel isn’t news.


I have a real hard time believing that someone who was brought up in a Utah religious, guns, law enforcement, MAGA family ended up shooting Charlie Kirk after putting groyper messages on his rounds because he was so far left.


Guns are a useful solution to some problems.


TIL I am a New York City rat


Are they? I know that unlocking a phone and bypassing encryption are different, but I hadn’t heard this before.


They can’t compel you to give up your phone’s password or pattern, but they can compel you to open it with biometrics.


If there’s anything I know about the office of President of the United States, it’s that it’s lulz now, lulz tomorrow, and lulz forever.


Perfect, thank you.


Mangione’s lawyers argued that the New York case and a parallel federal death penalty prosecution amounted to double jeopardy. But Carro rejected that argument, saying it would be premature to make such a determination.
Bragg’s office contended that there are no double jeopardy issues because neither of Mangione’s cases has gone to trial and because the state and federal prosecutions involve different legal theories.
Mangione’s lawyers said the dueling cases have created a “legal quagmire” that makes it “legally and logistically impossible to defend against them simultaneously.”
If they were arguing against federal jurisdiction, they would be arguing against federal jurisdiction, not saying that it “amounted to” double jeopardy. The judge has still left the double jeopardy argument open, though.


The only thing I can think of that they might have to hook federal charges on is if they’re saying he crossed state lines as part of a plan to commit a crime, where that plan was executed (pun intended).


No no and fucking no (pun intended).
The original complaint is absolutely pointless. It’s bitching about what happened literal decades ago.