The same Clarence Thomas trying to give ammo to the Trump team undermine the very idea of a special counsel?!? I can't believe it

Weird cause I've got the FTC act right here. Says this:

(a) Declaration of unlawfulness; power to prohibit unfair practices; inapplicability to foreign trade (1) Unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, are hereby declared unlawful.

And then later on it has this whole entire section where it lays out the process for how the FTC is supposed to make rules in regards to unfair or deceptive practices

Except as provided in subsection (h) of this section, the Commission may prescribe-- (A) interpretive rules and general statements of policy with respect to unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce (within the meaning of section 45(a)(1) of this title), and (B) rules which define with specificity acts or practices which are unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce (within the meaning of section 45(a)(1) of this title)

And more sections about how they can enforce those rules on individual rule breakers.

Sure sounds like congress was trying to give the FTC the authority to make rules about unfair competition. Both general rules and with "specificity" apparently. Specifically here, non compete agreements have been declared an unfair practice and they followed all rule making procedures as laid out in the law.

https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/statutes/federal-trade-commission-act/ftc_act_incorporatingus_safe_web_act.pdf

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca5/22-60596/22-60596-2023-08-09.html

For anyone curious. I mean I disagree with these ridiculous overlay broad second amendment interpretations personally, but looks like he has an appeal argument based on how the courts have been treating the second amendment lately. I look forward to the mental gymnastics of the second amendment extremists on this case. Seeing marijuana spelled "marihuana" over and over in the ruling above is also pretty funny.

What is wrong with people? Anyways, here's the facts:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35675595/

Compared with deliveries to patients aged 20-54 years, deliveries to patients aged 11-14 years were associated with increased risk for severe maternal morbidity (aOR 1.73, 95% CI 1.49-2.00), hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (aOR 1.79, 95% CI 1.71-1.88), and postpartum hemorrhage (aOR 1.37, 95% CI 1.27-1.49).

I can't even find data for kids as young as 9, because it's such a rare and obviously bad situation.

There's a lot of confused people in these threads. Steve Huffman sold 500,000 shares as part of the ipo, so they were some of the shares sold immediately before they opened on the market (at the about $30/share price). He still holds 4.1 million shares. Other insiders sold some shares as well. Some shares were created to raise money for the company. Once the ipo actually happens and the price for all those shares is negotiated with the bank assisting and all initial buyers, then it begins trading on the open market. At that point they are in a lockup period, and they can't sell anything for about 180 days. All of this is in sec filings, where you can see the source of all the shares that were part ot the ipo.

Look I hate Steve Huffman too, I'm here on lemmy after all. But this is a grossly over valued tech stock and there hasn't been many tech ipos in a while. It's very not surprising it would start sinking after an initial explosion of buying activity. It's not dropping from insiders unloading stock right now though. They're in lockup.

It would not. It's a defensive treaty.

Ukraine isn't a part of France or under the jurisdiction of France, so the attack wouldn't be on France's territory, and Ukraine isn't a member of NATO itself.

The examples were ridiculous too, like he doesn't have perfect recall of the exact dates that staff members moved certain papers from one office to another 6-7 years ago? During an interview literally the evening after the latest Israeli Gaza conflict started between important foreign policy meetings? No shit. Who would.

The report even talks about lots of other people who didn't recall exact details or dates, but he doesn't go accusing all of Biden's aides of having poor memory too. What a ridiculous and unprofessional political hit job. Looks like this special counsel is hankering for another turmp administration job like his last one.

She was also separately the judge in an earlier lawsuit that Trump filed trying to stop the government from examining what it obtained with the search warrant, for reasons that made no sense and they couldn't really articulate. The Trump filings were essentially legal nonsense, so this judge took it upon herself to try to weave together something else for them, that still didn't make any sense. She was faffing about with appointing a time consuming special master (not at all appropriate for that situation) and trying to find ways to prevent the government from examining the evidence. Jack Smith played along with her but at the same time appealed the legality of any of this to the eleventh circuit (actually pretty conservative circuit too). When they finally got the case they said this is all legal nonsense, you never should have even taken up this complaint, accused them of just doing all this only because he was a former president. It was a pretty crazy opinion to read, they were not happy with her. Case was dismissed and the government was finally able to examine all the evidence they had seized with the search warrant. Whole charade delayed the investigation by at least 6 months.

And then when the government finally file charges after the investigation is complete, she gets pulled, again, to be the judge in this case (randomly apparently but from a very small potential pool). Ugh. So that's why we have her again. It's been reported Jack Smith has contemplated filing for her removal from the case. It's a tall order though and would also delay things. Potentially could be trying to gather even more evidence for bias before trying to make such a play, or could be trying to see if there's any way he could still get it through in a timely manner while she plays interference for Trump. Either way it's infuriating, as she's tying up probably the most solid criminal case against him, probably trying to delay it past the election.

But the aliens wouldn't share the resources with us, or maybe like just a pittance to keep us alive so we could be used as cheap lab.... oh I see where this is going.

23 and me isn't a healthcare provider and not a "covered entity" under HIPAA . So the protections that would apply if you got genetic testing through your doctor from an actual medical genetic testing company don't actually apply to 23 and me. Though the company maintains it follows federal regulations voluntarily "as a courtesy."

So don't worry, your genetic data is protected by the good will of venture capital tech bros.

Irregardless, if a word shifts spelling or meaning like this and is generally understood, even if initially by mistake, than it becomes becomes another correct meaning too. Like, literally.

If this graph isn't just made up bs in the first place, one thought I recall from every major college campus I've been to is random religious preachers camped out every day telling everyone they're evil, subhuman, and going to hell. Guessing the atheists find that a little more annoying and worthy of shouting back at than some of the religiously inclined.