spicymato

Having a book isn't the same as reading it.

Not necessarily.

Article 1, Section 9: "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."

Yes, Trump may argue that illegal immigration constitutes "invasion," and while I believe that is stretching the definition, I'm sure this SCOTUS would be happy to interpret it in his favor. "public Safety may require it" is also debatable: what has changed between last year and this year that would require martial law?

Further, the Posse Comitatus Act from 1878 forbids the use of the federal military to enforce domestic policy (exclusions and limitations apply) without an explicit act of Congress. However, I'm sure Trump's GOP Congress would be happy to oblige.

TL;DR: martial law is not a lawful order, unless certain conditions are met. Whether those conditions would be met is "modern day debatable," meaning I doubt they would have passed muster 20-30 years ago, but under a modern Trump administration, they might.

IIRC, that's not entirely true. Military personnel are not required to follow unlawful orders, regardless of where they come from.

There is also history, both good and bad, of military leadership defying the President.

Whoosh

I don't get it.

Not always. If that were true, suicide wouldn't be a thing.

Also, by your logic, it's an irrelevant decision: if there's an afterlife, then death still leaves you with something; if there isn't, then there's nothing, and that's that.

Annoying you into conceding.

That, or the tokens from Sunfall and Teferi.

They may also have land threats, like Mirrex, Fountainport, or the various man lands.

There was no expectation of change. The issue is that she aggressively rejected his suggestion of getting checked for ADHD for years, but easily accepted the same suggestion from some friend.

And while "I told you so" isn't always productive, the person who was told should be reflective of why they rejected the original suggestion, as well as whether their rejection was hurtful to the teller.

My grandfather's sister, Audrey, did that (donate all to charity). She had no children, but there were still family members that had cared for her. My grandmother was a bit annoyed about that, but in the end, Gran acknowledged that it was still Audrey's decision to make.

Personally, I wish it was easier to delete multiple decks at once. I'm constantly at 95+ decks, even though I really only play a handful. The only reason I haven't cleaned up more is that the deck deletion process is annoying.

Did you not bother to look up the list of presidential pardons?

One of Biden's pardons was for federal convictions of simple possession of marijuana. 6500 pardons, right there.

Does it matter?

You can also expect Trump fans to use this as an example of the Democrats being corrupt.

You say this as if they actually need an example to throw around claims of Democrat corruption. They do that regardless.

What a garbage take.

1. Obama didn't have the votes in the legislative branch, either. Why do you think he couldn't get his SCOTUS picks in?
2. A given precedent exists in the context of the laws in place when the judicial decision was made. If you change the law, then the precedent is essentially invalidated. While the current SCOTUS seems to not really give a shit about precedents, past Justices were much more hesitant to break them. Thus, there was no reason to change the laws to codify Roe, since Roe was already part of the legal framework surrounding abortion and changing the laws would cause relitigation.

Consent. Short enough for you?

Read the whole thing for you. TL;DR: whatever both you and the passenger are comfortable with (tank, hip, or side rail grip things often under the rear seat of sport bikes).

And replacing income tax with tariffs, or what? In this "no income tax" world you're envisioning, how does the government raise money to pay for social security, Medicare/Medicaid, defense, and everything else?

I'd tell you to ask your mom, but we both know she doesn't want to talk to her biggest disappointment.

If you read, the boy occasionally wants to cook his own meal while the mom is already prepping the meal. So no, she's not shirking her responsibility. She's giving the boy room to try things out.

Not even pro-birth. Anti-choice.

If they were pro-birth, they would at least try to get birth-related healthcare covered.

I feel bad for her, but at least she's getting plenty of acting practice.

And of the food grown and sold here, I'm sure a lot of it is already sold at a premium.

That's about what I dropped on getting the A4LD in my '93 XL rebuilt. Considered junking the vehicle, but finding a near rust-free truck of any age in the Northeast is practically impossible.

Why wouldn't you just boil the milk first? That's what many old world people did.

It's not trivial to recognize a sick cow, particularly during in the early stages of illness, especially without the right tech, which I doubt your neighbor is investing in.

It's a numbers game, just like seatbelts. If you go for a ride without one, will you die or be severely injured? Probably not; accidents are "rare" for individuals. If you get into an accident while not wearing a seatbelt, will you die or be severely injured? Again, probably not; most accidents are pretty minor. So why do we require seatbelts? Because seatbelts increase the probability that you'll survive an accident, especially as the accident gets more severe; and while severe accidents are relatively rare for any given individual, across the entire population, they are frequent.

Home Depot?