Guilt does not require a normally working psyche. It requires understanding the difference between right and wrong. And by that we mean understanding that society has made some things illegal and expects you not to do them.
I am certain that Ethan Crumbley knew that some things are illegal. Therefore he is capable of guilt.
In all of those fringe cases, 12 people thought the person was guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. And beyond any reasonable doubt basically means 100% certainty (ie any doubt is unreasonable).
People who think it’s ok to execute someone when guilt is “100% certain” are the people who designed the current system.
Weight depends on location. For example, you would weigh less on the moon.
I think you can. For example, I am 100% sure that Ethan Crumbley shot his classmates. (That doesn’t mean I think he should be executed though).
If they get one “unimportant” fact wrong, then why should I trust the “important” facts?
“Harris has a consistent platform and refuses to flip-flop the second time she is asked about it”
It’s not up to Congress, states decide how to run their elections.
If none of the facts need to be correct except that police pointed a gun at someone’s head, why read the other 2000+ words in the article?
I don’t think that said there is footage of him buying rope, they said there is evidence of him buying rope. That could be something like a credit card charge, eyewitness reports, etc.
he was close enough to the ground that at least his feet were touching
FWIW, he was found in a seated position
For reasons that should be obvious an individual protest, no matter how extreme, will never be a factor in foreign policy decisions.
deleted by creator
Tout creating clean energy jobs and training for them
In other words, do what HRC did.
“We are going to train you for different jobs” does not inspire as much optimism as you seem to think.
deleted by creator
Can’t believe it’s already brat girl autumn.
I think it might make more sense to view MAGA as the “senior” partner in the Republican party at the national level, whereas normal conservatives are the “junior” partner at the national level. Hypothetically I think MAGA could get 30-40% of the national vote, with 10-20% for normal Republicans and 50% for Democrats.
That means normal conservatives have some influence in the party overall, but ultimately they are not in control and are always at risk of being discarded. At the local level, normal conservatives might be the senior partner or not exist at all, depending on where you look.
If you are a “normal” conservative, you can vote for the “normal” conservative in the primary. And there are plenty of places where most conservatives are “normal” conservatives, like New Hampshire and Maine. They tend to elect “normal” Republicans to office, like Sununu and Collins.
Whereas places where most conservatives are MAGA, like Florida, tend to elect MAGA Republicans to office, like Gaetz. When “normal” conservatives run in Florida primaries, you can vote for them but they will lose.
So it’s not true that “There is no conservative without that nazi bullshit”. In fact, if you wanted a non-MAGA conservative president, you could have voted for Nikki Haley. But she was ultimately eliminated by MAGA voters.
There are many more like her in power elsewhere in government. Unfortunately they are mostly cowards (like Haley herself), and prefer to remain silent than to challenge MAGA in public.
Kamala Harris just did a Wired autocomplete interview.
Sorry, NYT. Get in line behind Hot Ones.