It’s really weird to say, but I agree with Rand Paul on this issue. Found our 1% common ground.

They’re not well fitted either, gotta hide his figure. Also why does his dang tie hang halfway to his knees?

They don’t need a dead drop. Republicans just collaborate with facist authoritarians way out in the open. Their base either doesn’t care, makes excuses for them, or actively root for a christofacist dictatorship to take over and destroy democracy.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/dec/10/hungary-viktor-orban-republicans-ukraine-aid

He wasn’t a senator at the time so JD Vance wasn’t on the infamous republican 4th of July trip to meet with putin.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/395719-gop-senators-visited-moscow-on-july-4/

Oh but what’s this? His companies helping to spread Russian propaganda? Wow, it’s always the ones you most suspect.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/31/us/politics/jd-vance-peter-thiel-rumble.html

Maybe. Hopefully not. All the more reason to follow every little process for new executive regulations flawlessly when enacting it, like the 6 month comment period. A lot of people are saying just do it immediately. But that’d just be giving the pharma companies and republicans an easy out to strike it down in the courts.

This is the specific law Biden is trying to derive the authority from if you’re interested in more:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayh–Dole_Act

It’s not toothless. There is an existing law that allows the government to issue their own licenses for drugs still under patent developed using at least some amount of tax payer money under certain circumstances. It’s pretty broadly worded in the law when this can be done, so previously regulations were made to define the circumstances more precisely. The administration is issuing a new regulation that says one of those circumstances will now include if the drug is high priced limiting its access. Because new regulations issued by the executive branch have a mandatory public comment period after they are proposed before they take effect, its not active quite yet but will be soon (that’s why every headline about this is using the dumb vague word of threaten). The drug companies are already promising to sue to try and overturn the new regulation. So yeah it’s got teeth.

I believe they have the dates slightly wrong, pretty sure this is probably what they were referring to. At least that’s the incident I usually hear people griping about online, where companies were paid with the expectation they would lay fiber and never did. I could be wrong though.

Below is the best I could find about bush’s broadband policies. Sounds like he may have given out some tax breaks or something to broadband companies and gave them free access to federal lands and some other things. Does sound like he was basically giving them some stuff with no strings attached or even the appearance of benchmarks or things.

https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/infocus/technology/economic_policy200404/chap4.html

I also found this slimy junk from the heritage foundation from around that time.

https://www.heritage.org/government-regulation/report/broadband-2007-look-the-presidents-internet-initiative

Basically saying, hey we should just give telecoms lots of tax breaks and not dictate or regulate anything about what we get in return and it’ll all be great.

If there’s other incidents of telecom companies screwing us over I’m happy to hear about them.

It would certainly make me think twice about voting for Hunter Biden. What’s he running for again?

Oh no, we accidentally developed these cheaper non polluting energy sources. And then we accidentally helped people get appliances that use way less electricity and upgrade their homes to save them money on their bills. I guess it was all for nothing.

Find it? It’s not exactly missing, it’s in the pocket of telephone companies mostly and some cable companies.

https://conexon.us/blog/sunk-costs-a-cautionary-tale/

Tldr: There’s a lot more to it than just this, but the bill specified broadband but didn’t specify the speed that meant. FCC set a good at the time goal of 100 mb/s speed internet for urban areas but a not even that good for the time goal of 4 mb/s speed for rural areas. They would then pay companies to achieve those goals in essence. FCC calculated the cash awards for reaching those speeds based on if companies were to do it by building a fiber network. Companies didn’t need fiber to hit those slow rural target speeds, built much cheaper networks, many already existing, and then pocketed the difference. Good idea, but ruined in the details and telecom companies made off like bandits.

It’s New York State. New York prosecutors already dismantled his so called “charity” in previous fraud causes. Trump’s already got a guilty verdict with the trial only to decide the damages. The judge has already ruled that Trump businesses in new york must be dissolved. I think this is gonna hurt. Jail would be better though. Unfortunately this is a civil case so no jail is possible.

2000 election that gave us George W Bush came down to only 537 votes in one state. Assuming you believe the totals which… Yeah. Thanks Florida. Anyways point is it was very very close.

SCOTUS prevented it not Biden. And after the case Biden immediately started on trying to get other new forgiveness through with his jurisdiction under different laws to circumvent their dubious ruling to some extent. It can’t be exactly the same or scotus would strike it down again. Because that’s now another new regulation there are some mandatory processes it has to go through before it can implemented, which takes some time. If they skip all that they’re just giving the courts easy ammo to strike it down all over again on procedural grounds.

The draft of the new proposal has been released. Feel free to read more here.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/05/biden-administration-releases-draft-student-debt-forgiveness-proposal.html

If we want the original proposal of Biden’s back, we either need a new scotus or a new law. A new law would be easier, but impossible atm with republicans in control of the house. And Biden isn’t congress so yes everything he’s doing has to be some new implementation of existing law.

That’s what they’re doing! They are announcing a new executive department regulation about implementation of a specific law. You have to propose the regulation first. A public comment period and other mandatory things have to follow. The regulation they’re proposing is that they will also consider high drug prices and gouging by pharmaceuticals in their decision making on whether to over ride patent rights. Previously this was not a regulation, so they can not do it right now. Once the regulation is in place, then they can start taking specific actions on drug companies. If they just start doing shit willy nilly without going through the process of new regulations, it’ll just get struck down by the courts in a nanosecond. That’s why a lot of the dumb horrible crap trump tried to do got struck down well before Biden even took office.

I can add more, we don’t only have five senses. Elementary school propoganda that is. Here’s all the ones I can think of while driving.

1. Vision
2. Hearing
3. Tactile feedback from wheel, pedals, you could break this down further into skin tactile pressure receptors, and also receptors of muscle tension, though muscle tension and stretching receptors also involved in number 4
4. Proprioception, where your limbs and body are in space
5. Rotational acceleration (semi circular canals)
6. Linear acceleration (utricle and saccule)
7. Smell, okay this might be a stretch but, some engine issues can be smelly

And that doesn’t even consider higher order processing and actual integration of all these things which despite all it’s gains with Ai recently can’t match all the capabilities of the brain to integrate all that information or deal with novel stimuli. Point is Elon, add more sensors to your dang cars so they’re less likely to kill people. And people aren’t even perfect at driving, why would we limit it to only our senses anyways? So dumb

I think you could argue since it says “other than the mother” and the mother is the one electing to have it done, this law does not ban an elective abortion initiated by the mother. I think the section 5 provisions would still be necessary in this reading. Let’s say a pregnant person is critically ill and unable to give consent for an abortion procedure. If a physician went ahead and performed the abortion without consent, even though necessary to save their life, without that provision in the law it would be a felony for them to do so. The 2 physicians agreeing it is necessary is similar to many other laws about performing medical procedures without consent. They’re often written like that to help protect physicians performing life saving procedures in emergency settings when obtaining consent for a procedure isn’t feasible. However IANAL. And have no idea what happened to sections 3 and 4 either, haha.

It’s not worth it, I had to follow the ex president’s advice and inject it straight in afterwards. The horrible burning helps distract from what I saw. Anyways, time to call 911.

They did show it, it’s just slightly confusing. He retweeted (or retruthed it’s apparently called on truth social) that guy Cory Mills. So in the story where they show the post from Cory Mills and the Washington post article below, that’s the entry from trump’s account of trump retweeting it. Cory Mills is just the original person who shared the article, then Trump reshared the post about Cory Mills sharing that article. Whoever made the story cropped out a slight thing that’s above that where it says “Donald J trump retruthed” this, would have been less confusing if they left that in. He often does it this way with the most controversial stuff and calls to violence and things, so he can falsely claim “I never shared that.” He thinks retweeting doesn’t count.

Here’s his truth social account if you want to scroll down just a bit and see for yourself. Get some eye bleach and brain bleach ready after trying to read that mess though, ugh. https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump

Don’t vote Democrat, vote third party I hear! Me, I’m like well with first past the post voting this is impractical and could help empower fascists to take over, but let’s see what options we got.

/opens box of third party candidates, before gently closing it and walking away

Yeah no, Biden still best option, these guys are nutters. It makes sense though, a sensible candidate would run in the democratic primaries, rather than hurting their own purported causes by running in the general in a first past the post election. It’s why you saw Bernie Sanders, an independent, running in the democratic primary, and not out there helping to siphon votes to fascists by running as a third party in the general against Biden.

Anyways, let’s focus on continuing to empower politicians that want to improve our voting system (usually has been democrats, though with an exception in Alaska). This starts at the local level, but we’re getting more and more federal offices now with ranked choice voting. Once you have that, then better quality third party candidates will follow, knowing they can fairly safely run without harming their own causes.

Yeah that’s what I’m saying, it’s a pretext. Initially we wanted to pretend we weren’t giving aid to the allies in WWII. Though it’d be inaccurate to say it never hits the books. Portions of it were repaid after WWII. You’d still need another act to forgive that debt though, as far as I’m aware there’s no provision in the law for the president to unilaterally forgive the debt. So you’d have to ask congress, and be right back where you started. And why go through all the hoops? Just allot the aid instead of hurting Ukraine’s credit for no reason for a while if you’re planning on eventually forgiving it. It’d still be nice to have the option to kind of paper over any funding gaps like what’s happening right now, shame that now is when it’s expired otherwise they could be using it as a stop gap. But I suspect that’s why the Republicans chose now.