Depends on the crime. One would think the Second Amendment might cover some crimes.

True, but that’s mainly because they forgot about it.

Seriously?

I’ll definitely look for that. I’ve stayed off political channels for the last week, but it might be time to head back.

Just watch out for access to abortion in Australia. It’s recently been under attack in Queensland and South Australia, and those are very much warm-ups for a bigger push. Expect it to become an issue next year as Peter Dutton starts to repeat Trump talking points in his campaigning.

Don’t forget looking around the office to find a clue as to what the password is. It’s either the dog’s name or the owner’s favourite baseball player.

Trump isn’t president of the US though.

In Australia the coal and gas industries appear to be pushing nuclear quite hard, mainly because they distract from the renewable options preferred by the market. They know that while we’re arguing over literally every other power source, they can just keep burning holes in the ground.

How is it gaslighting? Gaslighting isn’t simply making (unfounded) accusations.

What happened when Trump’s lawyers brought that up in cross examination?

I’m not sure I completely agree with the number-line-only approach, but I’m definitely sympathetic to it. It reinforces the idea that fractions are numbers like any other numbers, and not pieces of pizza.

Damn, she must have crumbled when Trump’s lawyers brought that up when cross-examining her. As far as the jury is concerned, that would be game over for the prosecution.

Trump’s lawyers did bring that up, didn’t they?

Oh, bullshit. Men were happy to commit all sorts of atrocities (more so, in fact) when society only had room for men. If men don’t like the fact they can no longer legally rape their wives, or use, ‘But she burnt my dinner!’ as a reasonable excuse for breaking a woman’s bones, or use , ‘Look at the way she was dressed!’ as an excuse for rape, that’s just tough.

There’s no room for that in our society anymore, and if that sounds like a bad thing, leave.

Isn’t that how the open-source community operates?

The Appellate Court likes to see that judges gradually escalate through the options, not just go straight for the harshest one available. It’s likely Marchan (and the prosecution) want to make this case as appeal-proof as possible.

That’s the thing I like about Trump. He always says exactly what he means.

If only we could figure out what he’s saying…

We would. That’s a fairly normal thing to say.

The problem is that Trump tends to use phrases like this literally. Not saying it’s the case this time, but it’s certainly on brand for him. My initial thought was that he’s advocating for getting rid of missiles and replacing such systems with an actual dome. It’s just so hard to figure out what he means sometimes.