krayj

The vote was an attempt to expel without waiting for due process to run its course. There is an ethics investigation that will wrap up in under 2 weeks.

Many of the democrats who voted not to expel did so because they didn't want to see a new precedent set in congress where the body can expel a member without some form of due process. If all it takes is a vote to eject someone, then the party in power would be able to expell at will, and that would be bad for everyone.

Also, republicans were trying to get rid of him as a publicity stunt to look better for the Nov 2023 elections running across the country and wanted to be able to pull this stunt off to make themselves look better to help their regional elections.

The democrat holdouts are eager to expel just as soon as the ethics investigation is complete. Those holdout democrats are playing 4d chess and winning. They made the right call.

Rep. Jeff Jackson explains it nicely here:

https://youtu.be/QEvUmJ4gpWM?si=UbhtJhGhDrKvcRrJ

The vote was an attempt to expel without waiting for due process to run its course. There is an ethics investigation that will wrap up in under 2 weeks.

Many of the democrats who voted not to expel did so because they didn't want to see a new precedent set in congress where the body can expel a member without some form of due process. If all it takes is a vote to eject someone, then the party in power would be able to expell at will, and that would be bad for everyone.

Also, republicans were trying to get rid of him as a publicity stunt to look better for the Nov 2023 elections running across the country and wanted to be able to pull this stunt off to make themselves look better to help their regional elections.

The democrat holdouts are eager to expel just as soon as the ethics investigation is complete. Those holdout democrats are playing 4d chess and winning. They made the right call.

Rep. Jeff Jackson explains it nicely here:

https://youtu.be/QEvUmJ4gpWM?si=UbhtJhGhDrKvcRrJ

"The Thing" (1982)

I first saw this movie at the age of 13, in a very dark and creepy unfinished basement. It was terrifying.

Even after all these years, this movie still holds up very well to modern standards and stands out as one of the best sci-fi horror movies of all time. I just watched it again in October (my designated horror movie month) and it still never fails to make me uncomfortable and on edge while watching.

In the US, copyright is implicit. All work is instantly protected by copyright the moment it is created. Registering with copyright office is optional/voluntary. I think the judge's comments that you are referring to was probably referring to the works where copyright protections were waived by the artists for works placed into public domain (which, on Deviant Art, covers a vast amount).

I'm guessing because by March 2022, due to international sanctions that would have also applied to this Danish beer company, that all businesses headquartered in countries implementing the sanctions against Russia were legally required to cease operations in Russia (so, 18 months ago)...except this beer company didn't - they kept operating and eventually started trying to find a buyer while continuing to operate. Arguably, there wouldn't have been a beer company in Russia to steal if they'd obeyed the laws of their country in the first place.

My standard breakfast (for years) is: 1 hard boiled egg, a large spoonful of cottage cheese, and some fruit (usually a small banana or a mandarin orange). Assuming you hard boiled the eggs in advance, the prep time is however long it takes you to peel an egg.

I'm not aware of anything proven other than diet & exercise. There are a few trending weight-loss drugs hitting the market right now, but from what I've seen they are expensive and come with their own side effects...so for me, it's just doing it the proven old-fashioned way: diet & exercise.

My system significantly exceeds all the performance requirements for Win11, but it doesn't have the Trusted Platform Module 2.0...and therefore cannot run Windows 11. It's disappointing that my system can run circles around a lot of newer devices but can't upgrade because it's running on an older motherboard. It's dumb that Microsoft made TPM 2.0 a deal-breaking requirement for Win11.

Visceral fat builds up slowly over time (years) and the changes can be very subtle and unnoticeable until one day you just notice it.

For Kwashiorkor - I really don't know. It's just something I'd heard of before, so I found a link to a description and dropped the reference. There are probably lots of other things it could be that I just haven't heard about.

I, personally, am affected by visceral fat and have been taking steps to lose it and that process is also very slow going, so I currently look like an average guy, but with a pronounced belly. It makes me look like shit in a t-shirt and has caused me to suffer from high blood pressure.

Visceral fat can cause this (especially in men), but it's usually a side-effect of being overweight and it sounds like you describe yourself as looking 'malnourished'. https://www.webmd.com/diet/what-is-visceral-fat

There is at least one type of malnutrition, "Kwashiorkor", caused by protein deficiency that can cause something like this also. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/23099-kwashiorkor

But, disclaimer, I am not a doctor, so best advice is to get checked out by your healthcare provider.

The point is that infringing people's rights because there -might- be some public good is a horrible precedent.

The current precedent that is being used to apply the law makes no distinction between "protective order" and "restraining order". It also makes no distinction between "protective order" and "temporary protective order" nor does it recognize a distinction between "restraining order" and "temporary restraining order". So considering that, and because the naming convention varies from state to state, we're forced to consider all those terms equal under the current interpretation of law and current court precedence.

You've already admitted that Temporary POs are easy. How easy? In most states, the only requirement is a signed affidavit from an accuser claiming they feel threatened. That's it.

I'm not going to go look it up state by state to give you the requirements, but I did look up California's (since they have such a huge population and since many other states base their own laws on the precedence that California sets). In California, an EPO (emergency protective order) can be granted solely from "a person's allegation of a recent incident of abuse or threat of abuse". See California Family Code, Chapter 2, Section 6250 Paragraph (A) here: https://studentaffairs.fresnostate.edu/survivoradvocate/documents/CA%20Victim%20Protection%20Statutes.pdf

That's it. Also in California (and in many other states), EPOs are temporary, but can be repeatedly extended until some upcoming court date can decide on a permanent resolution (and this can take weeks to months). Also in California (and in many other states), a domestic EPO is sufficient to deny someone access to firearms, revoke their concealed handgun license, etc. Here's the quote from the State of California Emergency Protective Order Bench Guide for judges:

Any EPO issued prohibits the restrained person from owning, possessing, purchasing, or receiving any firearms or ammunition during the term of the protective order. A violation of this prohibition is a misdemeanor punishable by a maximum of one year in jail, a $1000 fine, or both.15 Any firearm must be surrendered while the protective order is in effect. Additionally, in a gun violence EPO (form EPO-002), ammunition, including magazines, must also be surrendered.

And that bit about "must be surrendered"...comes with some pretty big penalties also. When surrendered, the state takes possession and assigns fees to the subject of the order for hanging onto them...and then if/when the protective order is ultimately lifted or defeated in court, that poor bastard still needs to hire a lawyer to navigate the legal system and all the forms and filings to get them back. One fraudulent protection order ends up costing the subject tens of thousands of dollars.

...And this is the precedent that is currently being challenged.

I had my own brother crashing on my couch for 4 months for this very issue (his ex had filed a fraudulent one against him without needing any more evidence than an allegation....and 3 months into it (after a dozen extensions), she threatened to file one against ME for refusing to let her into my house where he was staying. Obviously, some protection orders are valid and necessary, but the system is currently easily abused by anyone who wants to make their ex's life miserable and there are ZERO repercussions for filing a fraudulent protection order. I think it's fair to reconsider how many rights we are willing to violate against an innocent person before there is due process in a court proceeding.