Avatar: Here's to the late, great Steve Dillon. Best. Punisher. Artist. EVER!
But wasn't Trump literally caught for Tax Fraud too?
This seems more a private matter than actual crime. (Not like Melania should care. Even Trump's brain-dead cult should know that she didn't marry a fat slob with multiple failed marriages due to his infidelity because she loved him)
This just feels desperate and will be ineffective. All they're doing is firing up Trump's Base.
Last edited by Godzilla2099; 03-30-2023 at 03:49 PM.
It's not that everyone is working together.
Trump is a bad man who broke many laws in many jurisdictions. Bragg is the DA in Manhattan, so he's limited to Trump's wrongdoing in that borough. The Fulton County DA and the justice department are doing their own investigations, which may move at different paces.
The Capone point was made, and in that case he did violate tax law so that was a way to get him behind bars. With Trump, there are some questions about whether the statute of limitations ran out, or whether they'll be able to prove wrongdoing (the terms "novel legal theory" have been used a lot; those don't always have a great track record.
A factor against Trump is that it's possible that much of what he did is legal, but that he got sloppy with paperwork.
This assumes the prosecution has a conventional and airtight case.
We'll know more about this soon enough.
Sincerely,
Thomas Mets
It depends on your perspective. The mainstream media is pretty left-wing if you use the typical Americans on the baseline, but it's not enough for some people on the left, who wish it would go further.
Honestly, it may be a good idea to avoid going near their airspace.
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/belar...ht-4978-arrest
Musk has been concerned about apocalyptic questions here.
And to be fair, he's not the only one. A weird detail in an article on the scientists working on AI is that their answer to the question “What probability do you put on human inability to control future advanced A.I. systems causing human extinction or similarly permanent and severe disempowerment of the human species?" is around ten percent.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/27/o...-chatbots.html
To stop AI at this point would require fast action from multiple militaries and law enforcement agencies.
What's the solution? A potential complication is that when people who don't like access to firearms hint that they want to confiscate firearms, it increases sales, which means there are more guns in the US.
Sincerely,
Thomas Mets
So far I am not seeing even the start of any protests from trumps base that he has been calling for because of this.
This Post Contains No Artificial Intelligence. It Contains No Human Intelligence Either.
These are difficult questions, which touch on every aspect of life and the economy, so it's a big deal. There are employers who will take advantage of workers they push too hard, and there are employees who want to get paid as much as possible to work as little as possible. Policywise we've got to figure out a delicate balance, with the additional complications of technological changes (which typically have net benefits, but have adverse effects on some people) and the need to adjust to shifting political realities (at the moment, we have a tight labor market, but that's not always the case.)
As you pointed out, upward mobility is limited, and people don't always have the information to figure out what jobs are the best for a career, especially when we don't know how tech is going to change stuff. Someone could spend ten years learning skills that make them indispensable to employers, or it could turn out that a free app covers all those bases.
Certain costs rise as we insist that people get paid more, since those costs are transferred to the customers. And we want people to have health insurance and retirement plans, and those all cost money, with pensions going to people who don't currently work. And as people live longer, and are in need of expensive medical care, someone's going to have to pay for it all. So the stressed out couple working for less benefits have to pay for their own child care, rent, health insurance, as well as the pensions of others.
There is a messiness when entry-level jobs are filled with people who have different needs. A salary that is enough for a young person with roommates will not cover a single mother with four kids, who may be less appealing as an employee because she's more likely to need days off.
Quiet quitting mainly works for people whose passion is not related to their job.
And this is another conflict. There are some people who want a job with consistent hours that pays enough to make a decent living. There are others who work harder and/ or are willing to make their job be their life. Obviously employers often want people from the latter group.
Sincerely,
Thomas Mets
Take a look at this headline, and see if you notice the issue...
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr...g-criminal-tax
Michael Cohen Pleads Guilty In Manhattan Federal Court To Eight Counts, Including Criminal Tax Evasion And Campaign Finance ViolationsPlea Follows Filing of Eight Count Criminal Information Alleging Concealment of More Than $4 Million in Unreported Income, $280,000 in Unlawful Campaign Contributions
https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2023/03...ional-politics
A recent episode of the news podcast On Point discussed this subject. Trump's offenses are more severe and the investigation is more legit than you may think.
The Cover Contest Weekly Winners ThreadSo much winning!!
"When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." - Sinclair Lewis
“It’s your party and you can cry if you want to.” - Captain Europe