jross

What and who do you side with? This is one of the better political quizzes that tells you which presidential candidates, parties, and ideologies your beliefs align with. Select the 'other' choice to select nuanced answers beyond yes and no. I moved from center-right to the right since the past election. See my results below. https://www.isidewith.com/political-quiz

Good grief! UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA V SPACE EXPLORATION TECHNOLOGIES / SPACEX COMPLAINT Complainant, the United States of America, alleges as follows: From at least September 2018 to at least May 2022, SpaceX discriminated against asylees and refugees throughout its hiring process, including during recruiting, screening, and selection, in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act ("INA"). Because of their citizenship status, asylees and refugees had virtually no chance of being fairly considered for or hired for a job at SpaceX. https://www.justice.gov/media/1311656/dl?inline

X support might improve in 2025. Targeted through minimally 2024... ---Biden Press Conference 2022 Jenny Leonard, Bloomberg Q Mr. President, do you think Elon Musk is a threat to U.S. national security? And should the U.S. — and with the tools you have — investigate his joint acquisition of Twitter with foreign governments, which include the Saudis? THE PRESIDENT: (Laughs.) I think that Elon Musk’s cooperation and/or technical relationships with other countries is worthy of being looked at. Whether or not he is doing anything inappropriate, I’m not suggesting that. I’m suggesting that it wor- — worth being looked at. And — and — but that’s all I’ll say. Q How? THE PRESIDENT: There’s a lot of ways. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/11/09/remarks-by-president-biden-in-press-conference-8/ ----DISSENTING STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER BRENDAN CARR (Starlink) Application for Review of Starlink Services, LLC, Rural Digital Opportunity Fund, Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (Auction 904), Viasat Auction 904 Application for Review, WC Docket No. 19- 126, OEA Docket No. 20-34, GN Docket No. 21-231, Order on Review. Last year, after Elon Musk acquired Twitter and used it to voice his own political and ideological views without a filter, President Biden gave federal agencies a greenlight to go after him. During a press conference at the White House, President Biden stood at a podium adorned with the official seal of the President of the United States, and expressed his view that Elon Musk “is worth being looked at.”1 When pressed by a reporter to explain how the government would look into Elon Musk, President Biden remarked: “There’s a lot of ways.”2 There certainly are. The Department of Justice, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Federal Trade Commission, the National Labor Relations Board, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have all initiated investigations into Elon Musk or his businesses. Today, the Federal Communications Commission adds itself to the growing list of administrative agencies that are taking action against Elon Musk’s businesses. I am not the first to notice a pattern here. Two months ago, The Wall Street Journal editorial board wrote that “the volume of government investigations into his businesses makes us wonder if the Biden Administration is targeting him for regulatory harassment.”3 After all, the editorial board added, Elon Musk has become “Progressive Enemy No. 1.” Today’s decision certainly fits the Biden Administration’s pattern of regulatory harassment. Indeed, the Commission’s decision today to revoke a 2020 award of $885 million to Elon Musk’s Starlink—an award that Starlink secured after agreeing to provide high-speed Internet service to over 640,000 rural homes and businesses across 35 states—is a decision that cannot be explained by any objective application of law, facts, or policy. https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-23-105A2.pdf

This may put X in line with 2018 revenue. We know some of the costs were notably reduced but we are not privy to everything. There might be some income before taxes...

While there are valid points in the case about whether the mother's life is at risk but ...WTF is Texas doing questioning this lady with the doctor's recommendation? ...WTF is Texas doing by implying trisomy 18 is not a severe fetal abnormality? I guess it's ambiguous here because the child can sometimes live up to a year but revert back to the doctor's recommendation, and it should be the end of the story. This is bad from Texas where I stand currently.

The reason we talk about the exception cases for abortion is because we all know someone who has had an elective abortion. #EthicsInDisguise

To this, I agree. There are not enough nut jobs to have a strong enough majority. Unlike the nut job ratio that existed against Trump and Clinton.

REFRAME A lady is unable to find a Texas physician willing to legally abort her unborn child, where the unborn child has a severe fetal abnormality known as Trisomy 18. How can you keep voting for these people? ~90% of abortions are elective choices based on want rather than need. (see attributions) For me, every unborn life is valuable, and it is difficult to separate my views on life from the issue of elective abortion. If you believe the unborn life is valuable, it makes you wonder how anyone can vote for people who support elective abortion. Abortion due to the mother's health (12% of attributions) and fetus health (14% of attributions) It seems the news is sensationalizing a story with a bias or misinformation on the actual state law. THERE SHOULD BE EXCEPTIONS AND THERE IS IN TEXAS FOR THIS CASE. --------------------------------------LEGAL------------------------------------------- HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE TITLE 2. HEALTH SUBTITLE H. PUBLIC HEALTH PROVISIONS CHAPTER 171. ABORTION Sec. 171.003. PHYSICIAN TO PERFORM. An abortion may be performed only by a physician licensed to practice medicine in this state. Sec. 171.004. ABORTION OF FETUS AGE 16 WEEKS OR MORE. An abortion of a fetus aged 16 weeks or more may be performed only at an ambulatory surgical center or a hospital licensed to perform the abortion. Sec. 171.008. REQUIRED DOCUMENTATION. (a) If an abortion is performed or induced on a pregnant woman because of a medical emergency, the physician who performs or induces the abortion shall execute a written document that certifies the abortion is necessary due to a medical emergency and specifies the woman's medical condition requiring the abortion. Sec. 171.018. OFFENSE. A physician who intentionally performs an abortion on a woman in violation of this subchapter commits an offense. An offense under this section is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $10,000. Sec. 171.043. DETERMINATION OF POST-FERTILIZATION AGE REQUIRED. Except as otherwise provided by Section 171.046, a physician may not perform or induce or attempt to perform or induce an abortion without, prior to the procedure: (1) making a determination of the probable post-fertilization age of the unborn child; or (2) possessing and relying on a determination of the probable post-fertilization age of the unborn child made by another physician. Sec. 171.044. ABORTION OF UNBORN CHILD OF 20 OR MORE WEEKS POST-FERTILIZATION AGE PROHIBITED. Except as otherwise provided by Section 171.046, a person may not perform or induce or attempt to perform or induce an abortion on a woman if it has been determined, by the physician performing, inducing, or attempting to perform or induce the abortion or by another physician on whose determination that physician relies, that the probable post-fertilization age of the unborn child is 20 or more weeks. Sec. 171.045. METHOD OF ABORTION... Sec. 171.046. EXCEPTIONS. (a) The prohibitions and requirements under Sections 171.043, 171.044, and 171.045(b) do not apply to an abortion performed if there exists a condition that, in the physician's reasonable medical judgment, so complicates the medical condition of the woman that, to avert the woman's death or a serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function, other than a psychological condition, it necessitates, as applicable: (1) the immediate abortion of her pregnancy without the delay necessary to determine the probable post-fertilization age of the unborn child; (2) the abortion of her pregnancy even though the post-fertilization age of the unborn child is 20 or more weeks; or (3) the use of a method of abortion other than a method described by Section 171.045(b). (b) A physician may not take an action authorized under Subsection (a) if the risk of death or a substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function arises from a claim or diagnosis that the woman will engage in conduct that may result in her death or in substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function. (c) The prohibitions and requirements under Sections 171.043, 171.044, and 171.045(b) do not apply to an abortion performed on an unborn child who has a severe fetal abnormality. Sec. 245.002. DEFINITIONS. "Abortion" means the act of using or prescribing an instrument, a drug, a medicine, or any other substance, device, or means with the intent to cause the death of an unborn child of a woman known to be pregnant. The term does not include birth control devices or oral contraceptives. An act is not an abortion if the act is done with the intent to: (A) save the life or preserve the health of an unborn child; (B) remove a dead, unborn child whose death was caused by spontaneous abortion; or (C) remove an ectopic pregnancy. The implantation of a fertilized egg or embryo outside of the uterus. "Medical emergency" means a life-threatening physical condition aggravated by, caused by, or arising from a pregnancy that, as certified by a physician, places the woman in danger of death or a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function unless an abortion is performed. "Severe fetal abnormality" means a life threatening physical condition that, in reasonable medical judgment, regardless of the provision of life saving medical treatment, is incompatible with life outside the womb.

PLAS: My question is - Does anybody care? (about Biden being impeached) JROSS: I care. (illegal immigration, affordable life, bad global management, swamp leader) --- I made the list of reasons that I care; not a list for Biden to be impeached, but I understand the confusion if @Wrestleknownothing connected the list to Plas's last statement: ...they (GOP) would have already impeached him for Lord knows what. --- Since the connection was made... I did some critical thinking on the case for illegal immigration... The determination of what constitutes severe harm to the constitutional order depends on the subjectivity of legal, ethical, and political considerations... I didn't know this until now... by a vote of 219 to 208, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to send H. Res. 503 – Articles of Impeachment against President Joe Biden – to the House Judiciary and Homeland Security Committees for their consideration. Texas Congressman Chip Roy authored the resolution – H. Res. 529 – that sent Colorado Congresswoman Lauren Boebert’s impeachment resolution against President Biden to the two committees. Like with Clinton and Trump... any impeachment proposal by the people against Biden will be highly partisan. ...and fail in the Senate like they all do.

This explains why the House could propose to impeach Biden for nonlegal reasons. -------------- Article II, Section 4: The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. Proceedings of the United States Senate in the Impeachment Trial of President Donald John Trump, Vol. I: Preliminary Proceedings, S. Doc. No. 116-18, 116th Cong. 416 (2020). In drafting the Impeachment Clause, the Framers adopted a standard flexible enough to reach the full range of potential Presidential misconduct: ‘‘Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.’’ 60 The decision to denote ‘‘Treason’’ and ‘‘Bribery’’ as impeachable conduct reflects the Founding-era concerns over foreign influence and corruption. But the Framers also recognized that ‘‘many great and dangerous offenses’’ could warrant impeachment and immediate removal of a President from office.61 These ‘‘other high Crimes and Misdemeanors’’ provided for by the Constitution need not be indictable criminal offenses. Rather, as Hamilton explained, impeachable offenses involve an ‘‘abuse or violation of some public trust’’ and are of ‘‘a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.’’ 62 The Framers thus understood that ‘‘high crimes and misdemeanors’’ would encompass acts committed by public officials that inflict severe harm on the constitutional order.63 Federalist Paper No. 65 "Impeachments are of a nature which may, with peculiar propriety, be denominated POLITICAL, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself." "The prosecution of them will seldom fail to agitate the passions of the whole community and to divide it into parties more or less friendly or inimical to the accused. In many cases, it will connect itself with the pre-existing factions, and will enlist all their animosities, partialities, influence, and interest on one side or the other. In such cases there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt." Discusses that it is difficult to remain neutral and that two branches should be used, like the British House of Commoners and House of Lords. The House of Representatives has more electives and better represents the changing will of the population; thus, they make the impeachment accusation. The Senate has fewer electives serving longer terms... so it is seen as a more deliberative and stable body to handle the trial.

What would you have us do other than vote and educate? Certainly, you would NOT want us to act like these folks and these educators.

No! @Paul158! Spit it out!

Could Starocci beat (T) Hidlay?

Is the tiny house warmer than the big house?

95% agreement. Impeachment is subjective and political determination made by Congress. Immigration 2021 was a record-breaking year. 2022 was a record-breaking year. 2023 was a record-breaking year. https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/cbp-enforcement-statistics Is he abusing of power? Is he violating his congressional duties? (lack of funding...) Is he negating national security? This article is critical... -------- His business dealings should be investigated. If there is evidence of high crime or misdemeanors, I'd like the House to impeach him. Regardless of the senate trial (no conviction coming) outcome... the country might wake up for the 2024 election.

Not impeached... Biden will claim there is no evidence of corruption... and this will impact voters again in 2024.

If nothing else, it is a label and talking point for 2024.

I care. Horrible performance with illegal immigration Life is less affordable (insurance, food, products, energy, housing...) Bad global management with respect to money, war, policy Supports giving money to foreign countries that should not be spent or otherwise help in-nation Swamp leader

Probably don't have enough votes to open an inquiry no matter how much evidence there is that an investigation is needed.

David Priess provided 17% of Biden voters an excuse (not his fault they are stupid) for their vote... What is the excuse of the others?

In this video, former CIA officer David Priess says it is not his fault people are too stupid to understand what the letter says. https://www.foxnews.com/video/6313629005112

To have well-informed voters? Now! So naturally, they will wait until the last minute in 2024 after "all the evidence is in order."