uphillbothways

How are they supposed to make the unimaginably big number go up ever faster if they’re not taking all they can from everyone at once?
It’s an optimization problem. Their fiduciary responsibility and raison d’etre is to solve it.

The people at the top don’t want the people under them competing with them for bribes. They want to make sure all gifts come directly to them.

Pretty sure they just have a list from major donors that tell them which cases to pick and how to rule.

Republicans negotiated with, capitulated to and were just steamrolled by a small cadre of political terrorists who’d held their party and the US government hostage and they won’t suddenly make everything okay? You don’t fucking say…

Some shitbags need to be put in particular situations where they can be useful, if not for the right reasons, then at least due to poor motivations such that others can benefit from their actions.

He’s repeatedly shown that he’s willing to throw even close allies under the bus, not even for cause, but just to distract or get himself back in the news. Even if he put you in office and/or you’ve supported him in the past, he’s made it increasingly clear to judges and everyone else that it’s not worth tying their career and livelihood to protecting him. His well poisoning is not just ridiculously public; his toxic behavior has become impossible to ignore even to the most self serving and delusional of would be allies.

Idk. You’d think even they would see how trump throws even close allies under the bus not even for cause but just to distract or get himself back in the news. Should be obvious, but maybe.

I get your sarcasm, but don’t think any judge would want to take that appeal. Why subject yourself or your colleagues to this kind of abuse. Not sure exactly how that whole process goes, but really doubt there’s any way all his bullshit works out to his benefit.

Do want the option for those things to exist in the future?
Under trump any openings for improvement go away for a long time. With Biden, there’s the option for incremental improvement in the near and medium term, when congress can be swung to a functional, less obstructionist, more democratic make up.

There’s only the present options available in this choice and one is much worse for all the things you want than the other. Most of the obstruction to your personal desires comes from congressional members of the republican party, yet you’re content to let them have the executive branch because you can’t have all the things you want immediately.

It doesn’t make any sense.

If you want to slowly, eventually work towards your goals you need to do the best you can with what you have now.

No. Did you? I was replying to every parent comment above mine.

“about to be out of a job”
“will be hired by Google, Microsoft and other companies within minutes.”
“I’m sure MS would love to grab a few more.”

All seemed to ignore the context quoted from the letter and may as well have been responding solely based on the headline alone. The employees clearly stated they already have an active offer in place.

Dude, it literally says that right in the letter…

Microsoft has assured us that there are positions for all OpenAl employees at this new subsidiary should we choose to join.

Did you not even read it?

With the biggest hedonists on earth hiding behind pulpits in churches, legislatures and boardrooms, of course he’s going after people practicing actual love and intimacy with others.

As much as I want to say no, to my knowledge he technically hadn’t “previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States” so I think he’d be eligible under Amendment 14, Section 3, article 1… quoted here in full:

Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3:

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Though, he had previously been in the US Navy, and the Navy oath of enlistment begins "“I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic…,” he was not even an officer in the Navy let alone in a legislative, executive or judicial branch position.

Pretty sure he would be eligible to run this time, whereas trump would not.

deleted by creator

And, how long until an international sell off of US currency as the national credit rating takes multiple hits?

At which point, how long does the US last?