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.

And after that His home improvement tv show… 9 seasons

. “‘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.

Same. Tons of hard working people that do a lot behind the scenes. But South Park probably got it right with ‘they took errr jerbs!’ Jobs they wouldn’t do themselves anyway.

Yup! Thank you. It’s not as big as it’s being made out to be (obviously people trying to get political points), but it’s still an issue that does need to be addressed, and it is disproportionately effecting some more than others. No one is going to start at civil war over something like this.

Eh. Something clearly needs to be done, and the concerns aren’t being addressed (and haven’t been for awhile). Congress and the senate haven’t done anything aside from attempt to impeach hunter Biden (from who knows what) or show off his dick.

Doubtful it’s any kind of civil war, but Texas (and other states) is being hit hard by the number of immigrants, and if the federal government can’t (or won’t?) do anything to curb it, makes sense that they will do something on their own.

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

You can turn off iMessage in settings and disable the phone number from messages. Then use whatever messaging service you want with the phone number.

Still not sure how it’s anti competitive to not allow others to use your own proprietary software when there are alternatives available, and they are not being restricted.

How is creating a proprietary service anti competitive? There are many other methods of messaging and Apple is not stoping anyone from using them.

Kids being bullied in school has nothing to do with being anti competitive.