After a Supreme Court ruling, only another SCOTUS ruling, or a constitutional amendment can change it.

Trump could order a soldier to execute the next Democratic Presidential Nominee and it would be against the law for that soldier to refuse.

SCOTUS ruled in Trump v United States (2024) that the President has absolute immunity for all official acts, including as Commander in Chief of the military.

Thanks to the Corrupt Six, it is now literally impossible for the President to give an unlawful order.

In the same way that not a single confederate senator or even soldier was ever charged with or convicted of the crime of treason, no one in the current fascist regime will face any consequences.

And even if they do, the next conservative president will pardon all of them on day 1.

Daily reminder that the jobs that could most easily be replaced by AI are executive jobs. CEO. VP of Whatever.

Outsource this person's job to an AI. Would probably save the company literally millions. And then use that savings to pay your actual employees enough so they don't need SNAP to survive.

It all makes sense when you know that every major media outlet is owned by billionaires who personally profit from Republican policies.

The bias is intentional.

If we don't come out the other side of this with at least 10 new constitutional amendments, we haven't learned our lesson.

Some examples:

1) clear path to citizenship that takes less than 1 year, with legal protection/rights before.
2) right to bodily autonomy
3) right to privacy
4) right to vote

Because they know that the vast majority of Democrats would never have the tenacity to use those laws against conservatives.

Evil counts on good being good.

Habeas Corpus was the Constitutional requirement to prove you had the (still living) body of the accused.

Charge them with murder. If they didn't do it they can easily prove they didn't by bringing the alive person to the court room.

But that would require DAs with a spine.

We should just start calling it what it is. They weren't just "disappeared". They were murdered.

You cannot prove a negative. You cannot prove that X does not cause Y. That's not how proofs work.

The burden of proof is to show that X causes Y. So far there is no proof that vaccines cause autism.

Stating otherwise is not just disinformation but malinformation.

You cannot prove a negative. You cannot prove that X does not cause Y. That's not how proofs work.

The burden of proof is to show that X causes Y. So far there is no proof that vaccines cause autism.

Stating otherwise is not just disinformation but malinformation.

How do I get those 17 seconds back?

In today's political climate, we need to stop reporting on district court rulings as if that's the final verdict, case closed, everyone can go home.

Report on what actually happened - they won the 1st step in a 3-4 step legal battle, which will likely be overturned at the next step.

The problem is that people have vastly different ideas about what constitutes moral leadership, and morality in general.

Appealing to any one group's idea of morality will alienate every other group.

Not all men, but somehow always a man.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” -Upton Sinclair

They will never learn from this most basic of mistakes, because they are paid not to.

Johnson's isn't just covering for Trump. He's clearly covering for himself.

Every politician against releasing the files, is in the files

That should be the talking point.

Them: "But I'm not in the files"

Us: "Great, then you'll have no problem releasing the files!"