[-] ryper@lemmy.ca 18 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I like how just summarizing the charges against Trump takes up nearly half of the article:

As of August 27, 2024, Donald Trump has been personally charged with 92 criminal offenses in four criminal cases. This total reflects charges related to Trump’s attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election, election interference in Georgia, falsifying business records in New York, and mishandling classified records after leaving the presidency. Donald Trump is the first former president in U.S. history to be criminally indicted.

In New York, Trump was found guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records. Prosecutors proved that Trump was involved in an illegal conspiracy to undermine the 2016 election in connection with concealing hush money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. He will be sentenced in September.

Slightly over 1 year ago, (Aug. 14, 2023) Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis officially filed a slew of RICO charges against Trump and 16 of his cohorts suspected to be involved in election tampering.

[-] ryper@lemmy.ca 62 points 6 days ago

From the CNBC article that is the source for the linked post:

Trump’s suit was filed in U.S. District Court in Amarillo, Texas, effectively guaranteeing that it would be assigned to Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump nominee with a conservative judicial record.

That gives Trump a much better chance of winning than you'd think from only reading the Political Wire post.

[-] ryper@lemmy.ca 61 points 4 weeks ago

Trudeau also commented on the form of electoral reform:

He said one of his mistakes was leaving the door open to proportional representation when he did not plan to pursue it. The other, he said, was “not using my majority to bring in the model that I wanted”—the ranked ballot.
Trudeau said he believes a ranked ballot is the most effective at reducing polarization because it causes parties to moderate their message in an effort to pitch to be the second choice of supporters of other parties.
However, the system was dismissed by many of the Liberals’ opponents who noted that as a centrist party the Liberals were likely to receive more second-choice votes and be the primary beneficiaries of such a model.

He regrets not using his first-past-the-post majority to push through a change to the electoral system that would mainly benefit his own party.

[-] ryper@lemmy.ca 58 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I wonder why women would be "more depressed and unhappy than they were four years ago", and "less optimistic and confident in the future than they were four years ago"? Might it possibly have something to do with what his women-hating appointees have done in the last four years? No, must be Biden's fault. /s

[-] ryper@lemmy.ca 64 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I deleted my account when I discovered that bullshit. LinkedIn's new opt-out AI data gobbling has me this close to deleting that account too.

Edit: Fuck it, I just saw Ars' article with LinkedIn's response. Bye bye LinkedIn account.

[-] ryper@lemmy.ca 91 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The terms of service have now been updated, but ordinarily that occurs well before a big change like using user data for a new purpose like this. The idea is it gives users an option to make account changes or leave the platform if they don’t like the changes. Not this time, it seems.

They should be required to delete their training data and start over after people have had a chance to opt in.

This isn't just in the US; I've got the setting in Canada and I'd assume it's in just about any country where LinkedIn is available that isn't on the very short list of exceptions.

[-] ryper@lemmy.ca 97 points 3 months ago

the only complaint came from a Russian boxing body with a history of making suspect claims in the past

And that was only after she defeated a previously undefeated Russian. Sounds an awful lot like sore losers making up excuses.

[-] ryper@lemmy.ca 65 points 4 months ago

Why are "addictive feeds" OK for adults?

[-] ryper@lemmy.ca 76 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The standard fine for violating the STOCK Act is $200, but frequently the House Committee on Ethics and the Senate Select Committee on Ethics waive the fee.

Craig Holman, a Capitol Hill lobbyist on ethics and campaign finance rules for nonprofit Public Citizen, said the fee is one of two reasons why the STOCK Act is frequently violated.

“The penalty is so minimal that these millionaire members of Congress really don't care about it," Holman told Raw Story. “The second provision is the ethics committees are not really enforcing it or taking it seriously.”

So basically this "law" is just a suggestion.

[-] ryper@lemmy.ca 63 points 8 months ago

I don't suppose the people responsible for the over hiring have seen any consequences?

[-] ryper@lemmy.ca 82 points 9 months ago

If Nancy Pelosi caused the insurrection why didn't your people try to charge her instead of focusing on Hunter Biden?

[-] ryper@lemmy.ca 57 points 10 months ago

They left out lupus. Always gotta rule out lupus.

view more: next ›

ryper

joined 1 year ago