From travels to lots of hotels I’ve taken their mini bottles of shampoo and shaving cream, now from one hotel in Germany and another in France I exclusively buy those shampoos/shaving cream.

I am impressed it’s that high. ~60$ per donor. Will be funny when none of it gets to trump and whoever set this up spends it all.

. “‘Oh, what’s foreseeable is that things can change, and therefore, if there’s a change, it’s 'foreseeable.’ I mean, that argument is truly remarkable.”

Judge is having none of it haha.

I don’t think any party would do it. To go further, why would any of them? When the votes become public knowledge from congress to impeach, what’s to stop the president ordering anyone who said yes from assassinating them before the senate goes for conviction?

Either the president scares the senate away (in case they don’t convict and the president will know who said yes) or he goes to jail/is executed no matter how many they had killed.

Even kill anyone you know will say yes before they vote to impeach. IMMUNITY!

Yea fair enough. Just a different set of eyes is all. Thanks for the response!

The lack of conviction is prolly the biggest hurdle here which makes me wonder who would, or even could, bring those charges (even if the lower court explicitly stated he did). Jack smith has his hands full and while interesting to follow it’s not a direct case of questioning insurrection. Curious as to where it all leads.

End of the day, it starts to ask the question, which prolly ends at the Supreme Court no matter what.

It’s all up to interpretation though, you might not see it, or you might have heard it in a way, but it can be argued. Similar to the lower court judge saying so.

Similarly one of the judge points out in the dissenting opinion there is no conviction of insurrection.

So I still think C will win, but A or B is a possibility too.

"In the absence of an insurrection-related conviction, I would hold that a request to disqualify a candidate under Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment is not a proper cause of action under Colorado’s election code. Therefore, I would dismiss the claim at issue here”

Source

Going with C. Without explicit language to the president, they will need to interpret this to mean the president included, which may be up to anyone’s interpretation.

I feel it should, however it could be argued it doesn’t.

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

I like nitro for the audio and stream quality benefits. It’s not much money and makes the experience with friends better.

Doesn’t seem much different than streaming services asking for more for 4k streaming.

Right? The media matters article screenshots clearly prove it’s allegations. Unless he tries the angle that they were photoshopped (and obviously he needs proof for it) this gets dismissed immediately.

Hoping it doesn’t cost media matters anything or that they can recoup any fees they may incur from this. Nice to have real reporting with proof to back it up like they showed.

That jeep is awesome.

Can we get a picture of that free puzzle pullout when you get a chance?

Didn’t know! Interesting many “were understood to be” disqualified. Most without trial, but they also didn’t attempt to run under that understanding.

https://www.citizensforethics.org/reports-investigations/crew-reports/past-14th-amendment-disqualifications/

It doesn’t explicitly require one, but that’s what the Supreme Court could argue to strike it down. While you and I can say it’s obvious based on what happened, I’d rather have a conviction to take someone off the ballot, otherwise it would be exploitable.

Could still say he was not convicted of giving aid or comfort. Seems obvious he did, but without a trial not sure it would count. Although that would be an interesting trial as they track down the funding of these groups and how they are interconnected. Probably reveal some interesting players behind the scenes.

Yup. Every company will follow the same model. Why wouldn’t they when it was clearly successful. Not everyone accepted it, I canceled Netflix, more because of a lack of content that didn’t justify the price if I couldn’t share it.

Slowly more and more will be raising the black flag and soon some new service will come out, and the cycle will repeat itself.

Nepotism, as I think the secretary of education was his step brother? So still a little corrupt.

Good thing for the article to note…

True, but , is 1 out of 6 that great in selecting?

Took some time to find, but if their life span is 2 years, then this uptick would make sense, if not then could be bad. Lots more info should be in the article though.

President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho did seem more entertaining at least then the circus we’ve had for the last few years. At least we can look forward to that?

Plus Ow! My balls! Does seem like some good tv.