It feels like given the number of incidents Okinawa somehow has a particularly bad problem with US soldiers committing heinous crimes against the host population. But that doesn’t make sense, it would involve somehow promoting crime at that base or intentionally concentrating the bad apples there. Which means other bases are probably doing similar things, they just don’t get talked about as much.

They name all the potentially responsible parties in the article.

Even more easily now that they don’t need to pay for this medication. Sick patients killing themselves is probably seen as a result to be encouraged in the boardroom.

The fuck do those two things have to do with each other?

https://www.openimmigration.us/judges/salinardi-jayme

They brought in a ringer with an exceptionally low rate of granting asylum.

Not a judge. A fascist paper pusher who owes their position to the same entity bringing a case against their target.

Immigration “judges” are not judges and shouldn’t be called such.

Allegedly.

I read that as whatever the retirement age currently is when the retirement rule is being evaluated. If it would be pegged to this moment and not move why not just say the specific number?

In that case they’re giving you the best shot at beating the charges. Lemmy is too small not to value every soldier.

Man I wish it would be the awful behavior that sinks them, but I just can’t help but think it was primarying establishment incumbents.

They’re just protecting all our future runs for public office.

These fuckers will raise the retirement age in a heartbeat.

Major policy makers (which the Supreme Court justices certainly are) should own zero investments that could be majority impacted by their choices. We shouldn’t even need to rely on voluntary self-recusals.

The very existence and sharing of this article is a waste of time. The context that it’s from the last person in the world who would give such a thesis value and in promotion of a book just makes it worse not better. My assumptions were kinder than they would have been otherwise.

Your comment saying who the author is is literally the only comment in this entire post that references the content of this specific article. Every single other comment is a generic commentary on politics, rehashed arguments about Sanders’ primary run, or meta comments. Which is more evidence of its worthlessness. So I don’t care that you don’t care and you can tut tut about correct form to someone who has a reason to seek your approval.

Their examples of “swing-states” were Montana and New York, all while they downplayed her being a prominent supporter of el-Sayed in Michigan. It doesn’t even seem like the NY moderate had an offer from AOC to snub, it was just a response to a CNN question.

And yes, it was two whole house races in non-swing states vs. a senate race in a key swing state. Bravo Axios. Others might have let shame get in the way of a nonsensical hit piece, but not you.

The Democratic Party has told us it is important by putting it first in the primaries to boost conservative Democrats. It’s not the media that created this pointless waste of effort.

They should, just because that’s the tool they’re explicitly supposed to use to curb an of of control executive, but I also don’t particularly care about them doing it. It’s a box to check and a media spectacle to give them an opportunity to highlight the abuses, which they’ll probably flub, but it’s also not particularly important.

What I want from a Democratic Congress is them to say “no” on everything, pass good governance laws he’ll have to veto, and to use congressional subpoenas to compel testimony to put all the crimes and corruption and inhumanity on the record. Because I don’t think there’s a way to meaningfully provide justice in the next two years, but I want bringing them to justice in two years to be the driving goal.

Oh, and zero out funding for ICE and the CBP. Let them coast on the giant pile of money the Republicans gave them. Not one cent more from Democrats. That’s a message that will motivate me. Not more promises of performance.

So the thesis statement is not driven by actual political analysis but is from a biased source about the only event that would make him relevant in a discussion of politics? Man, if only the title or post text had told me that I would have not-clicked twice as hard.

Next up on my not-reading list, Harris’s campaign strategists talking about how their strategy was actual great and people should listen to them about politics. And that’s a group actually involved in a recent election. Bernie had a whole second campaign with a different strategist since the one with that guy. And during that campaign this guy wasn’t involved and had to throw in with Andrew Yang instead.

“Uncomfortable” does not mean “is an important voting issue”. There are policy questions that would affect people’s lives that have much greater support in left-inclined voters that get disregarded because “people only care about kitchen table issues”.

Republicans care about this because there’s a constant culture war being pushed by their propaganda to distract from everything else being unpopular and it’s all they have left. The guy who leans Democratic and is uncomfortable has other things that matter to him. When it comes to voting and vibes, most Republicans probably do too.

Oh my God, how did you not already find one of the hundreds of other articles that gave that same validation in the last 10 years? If you were waiting for this moment for that, that’s pretty much on you.