The chat included Vice President JD Vance; Secretary of State Marco Rubio; the national security adviser, Michael Waltz; and others, but not the acting chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Christopher Grady, the highest-ranking military official.
Mr. Parnell said that “military leadership are frequently not included inpoliticalmeetings.”
GNOME sysadmin Bart Piotrowski shared on Mastodon that only about 3.2 percent of requests (2,690 out of 84,056) passed their challenge system, suggesting the vast majority of traffic was automated.
I notice you asked for an explanation and then only sort-of read the first sentence.
No, I read the whole thing, fully. I just disagreed with your analogy, thought it was a bad one, too verbose and obfuscating of the subject being talked about. Also it didn't cover someone searching your belongings with/without your permission, the subject being talked about. Law officials have more legal leeway to detain you than they do to search your belongings without your permission, so your analogy doesn't work (especially when you throw in beatings into it).
Also, didn't think your last paragraph was legally accurate, but didn't want to bother arguing the point, since 'amendment > law > policy/rule' is a well-known given. I'm aware of the difference. When I asked my original question, it was to confirm if the border enforcement people were actually honoring the 4th amendment, or not, whatever their thought processes were.
I did appreciate you taking the time to reply (and civilly at that) though, thank you. P.S. I hope the tone of my reply wasn't too harsh, it wasn't meant to be rude, just straightforward.
Here’s a suggestion: how about instead of forming your opinion based on known incomplete data, you decide instead to just, like, not form an opinion at all until you get that information, much less spout off based on your own speculation.
You say the same thing to everyone else who's responding with comments in this post?
Instead of blaming a victim, why don't you get on the case of whoever made the post, for having an incomplete summary instead.
I’m going off of the facts of what she is being accused of doing in the criminal charges.
Please show me in the summary for the article that this post was about where it states that?
You’re up and down this thread misrepresenting the facts here.
No, I"m not. I'm expressing an opinion on a general topic, not speaking specifically about this case. This specific case was just a trigger for me to comment generally.
These are medication abortions,
The article is paywalled, and I cannot read it, so I'm determining my opinion based on what I read in the summary of this post ...
providing illegal abortions and practicing medicine without a license
She wouldn't have been arrested for dispensing legally obtainable pills, normaly. The patient would just order the meds online and take them themselves.
Someone else weaponizing laws for political gains is a different conversation.
It’s not that. They already can have their own schools. It’s just they want to take our money to pay for them
But there's certain things they couldn't do in the past, if they wanted the fed money. Now that those policies and mandates are going away, they can do whatever they want, they can go hardcore, for lack of a better description.
If you’ve been reading the newspapers over the last year or two, you’ve seen various States try to pass various rules about the Bible or the Ten Commandments. They weren’t doing that in private schools; private schools already could do that, right?
IANAL, but no, for constitutional reasons, as well as getting money from the feds if they don't do it, versus sacrificing that money if they do do it.
That’s completely disingenuous. These are clinics being run in the city of Houston, not back alleys.
I know that, in this specific case. But a location doesn't make a surgical procedure safe, if a person is not licensed to do it. It gives better odds, more resources are available during the procedure.
I'm speaking to the history of non-sanctioned surgical procedures, specifically abortions, done by people who are not licensed medical practitioners, in general.
The person doing the procedure matters more than where the procedure is being done at.
And you’re not having an honest conversation.
I am. What you said about me is not true, at all. You are misinterpreting what I said, not paying attention to the nuance of what I'm saying.
You missed the point I'm making, and then accuse me of duplicity on the point you want me to make.
You’re pushing why the law should be followed, not discussing the environment created by unjust laws.
Exactly. That's not the point I'm trying to make.
Medicine should not be practiced by those who are not licensed to do it, under most circumstance (emergencies is ok, etc.), because of the history that that scenario has had. That's the only point I'm making.
For the record, I'm pro-choice. But this conversation wasn't about how she can continue to protest (even though I did make suggestions along those lines, like transporting people out of state to get the abortions done). This conversation was about allowing anyone to do abortions, versus only those who are licensed practitioners.
If you want to start a different conversation elsewhere (your own post), I'd be glad to join in on that.
If you truly didn’t want back alley abortions, you would be defending this person’s right to maintain facilities in the light of day as they have been even in the face of this unjust law.
I do defend their right to choice.
I don't defend the right of back alley abortions to happen.
Today, ED operates programs that touch on every area and level of education. The Department's elementary and secondary programs annually serve nearly 18,200 school districts and over 50 million students attending roughly 98,000 public schools and 32,000 private schools. Department programs also provide grant, loan, and work-study assistance to more than 12 million postsecondary students.
The Department carries out its mission in two major ways. First, the Secretary and the Department play a leadership role in the ongoing national dialogue over how to improve the results of our education system for all students. This involves such activities as raising national and community awareness of the education challenges confronting the Nation, disseminating the latest discoveries on what works in teaching and learning, and helping communities work out solutions to difficult educational issues.
Second, the Department pursues its twin goals of access and excellence through the administration of programs that cover every area of education and range from preschool education through postdoctoral research.
Most (70%+) Iranians would welcome the U.S. getting rid of the Mullahs, freeing them.
This comment is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0