Ah, so Russia wants to create rifts between Eastern and Western Europe, got it!

agriculture is facing another looming financial challenge with the recently announced SHIPS Act […] with Chinese-made vessels calling U.S. ports to be charged port fees of upwards of $1.5 million starting in the fall.

Ugh, I hate this reality so much … :(

It’s not very widespread so that risk is low - there’s literally like 400 cases right now, in a nation of 340,000,000. But if you do happen to run across someone infectious, there’s a pretty good chance of catching it. There’s really no downside to getting a booster, so I’d say yes to the booster.

Something else to consider - and I don’t know how the vaccines played out in your country - I’ve that in the US, everyone born in or before 1957 is presumed to be immune. Americans vaccinated between 1957 and ?1969? should get a booster because the vaccine the US was using at the time was less effective. And they’re recommending that Americans vaccinated before 1990 consider getting a booster, because they had thought that one shot provided lifetime immunity, but it turns out that you needed a second shot as well. So if the vaccination program where you lived might have had one of those issues, you might consider a booster as well.

No, it’s not. It’s a 1930’s that focused on a bloc of the United States, Canada, and Greenland.

Polite of you to assume they’re going to care about the slave population while they live in comfort.

So, Suze Orman is a fairly well-known investment advisor. Back when marriage equality was new, she totted up that there were over 1100 benefits to getting married. I don’t know what they all were, and I’m sure some of them are obscure, but still …

Robespierre was killed by the Revolution.

The vast majority of offers are said to come from employees at the Federal Aviation Administration. […] A department spokesperson told Politico […] that employees who perform critical safety work are exempt. “Our teams are layered with redundancies to ensure efficiency initiatives will not compromise safety,”

Really? Cause that’s really not the image they’ve been projecting.

"It feels like it’s intended to tell us we’re being dramatic or that we’re not professional enough to go through turmoil and remain detached and completely calm. It feels out of touch,” an anonymous employee said

Ri-ight. Because when I think of hysterical federal employees, the first group that comes to my mind is the FAA…

You forgot increases in travel expenses so that he can line his heavily inflated golf club coffers with lovely taxpayer lucre.

I wouldn’t mind then backing the incumbents, if the incumbents had any fucking spine to stand up to the Republicans.

“Neutrality” is just (very thin) cover for supporting the status quo, when what we need is a complete change.

Some people like wearing mis-matched socks and do so on purpose. Maybe she’s one of those people?

She testified that death threats against her increased after an editorial with an error said her PAC had contributed to political rhetoric that enabled an atmosphere of violence.The jury deliberated a little over two hours before reaching its verdict. A judge and a different jury had reached the same conclusion about Palin’s defamation claims in 2022

Sounds like a pretty open-and-shut case, if it only took a couple hours to decide.

Her lawsuit stemmed from an editorial about gun control published after U.S. Rep. Steve Scalise […] was wounded in 2017 when a man […] opened fire on a Congressional baseball team practice. […] In the editorial, the Times wrote that before the 2011 mass shooting in Arizona […] Palin’s political action committee had contributed to an atmosphere of violence by circulating a map of electoral districts that put Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized crosshairs.

Yeah, I remember those ads. They claimed they weren’t rifle sighting cross hairs but some other thing instead. That denial had about as much plausibility as all the other Republican denials.

The Times corrected the article less than 14 hours after it was published, saying it had “incorrectly stated that a link existed between political rhetoric and the 2011 shooting” and that it had “incorrectly described” the map.

A) that sounds like a pretty quick retraction, and B) that sounds like they stated there was a proven link when there wasn’t. However the Republicans and their enablers have been pumping up stochastic terrorism for decades, so while there may not have been a proven link between their rhetoric and that specific incident, it falls very directly under the definition of stochastic terrorism.

Palin testified Monday that death threats against her increased and her spirits fell after the editorial was published.

Good.

That’s what it looks like when someone with certain types of plastic surgery ages.

It’s one thing to decide, “Hey, I’m still willing to buy almonds but not bourbon,” to help support a small farmer in a blue state. It’s something else entirely to be willing to be snatched off the street and sent to an overseas concentration camp in order to “help” the underpaid hotel, restaurant and entertainment workers (but in reality just handing more money to the billionaires).

“Subject has no criminal history.”. Fuckers.

The administration was not only keeping the AP out of the press pool — the daily rotating group of reporters who get access to Trump in tight spaces that cannot accommodate the entire press corps — but removing the permanent “wire service” spot as well. That means there will no longer be a spot guaranteed for one of the wire services: the AP, Reuters and Bloomberg.

Guess that explains the videos of doordash drivers stealing deliveries and stuff …

The first agencies he targeted were all the ones investigating his companies or limiting his companies: DoD was trying to limit exposure through SpaceX due to Musk’s multiple conversations with Putin; the NLRB was investigating both SpaceX and Tesla; the EEOC was suing Tesla; DoT was investigating Tesla over both Smart Summoning and “Full-Self Driving” accidents; the FAA called for both ‘radical reform’ and Musk’s firing at SpaceX after repeated launch violations; the FEC was investigating him for repeated elections violations; DoJ had an open lawsuit over SpaceX hiring practices (now dismissed, and anti-Tesla actions are now “domestic terrorism”); the SEC had an open complaint of his Xitter takeover; the FDA was limiting his ability to pay around with NeuraLink; the EPA has repeatedly fined bitch SpaceX and Tesla; he’s been pressuring NASA to retire the ISS and to use SpaceX for Mars exploration instead of their own craft; and the CFPB had limited his plans for a Xitter-based electronic payment system.

While they haven’t always received a lot of press coverage, he’s sent his goons after every single one of those agencies.

I think gutting the government and sowing chaos is part of his goal (he’s fully bought into Zuckerberg’s “move fast and break things” mindset), but he went after specific agencies pretty quickly.