Sure, criticize the woman for charging people for sex rather than the absolute chump who paid a quarter of a million dollars to hide the fact that he got his pee-pee sucked. That sure sounds like the type of smooth brain deflection a trump supporter would try, but the rest of us ain’t stupid or bigoted enough to fall for it.

Yes, Nikki, you’re right that it was about “tradition” and “change,” but what you’re conveniently neglecting is the fact that the tradition that these states didn’t want to change was owning slaves.

But that district court judge, Sarah Wallace, ultimately ruled that Trump could remain on the ballot because she said it was not clear that the drafters or ratifiers of the 14th Amendment intended to cover the presidency in the insurrection clause.

This part really pissed me off. The 14th amendment is pretty clear that it refers to any and all people. Is it just me, or is judge Wallace implying that it isn’t clear that the founders believed the president is a person?

I had that dog as my interviewer too, but I made the wrong decision.

When I got the to interview, I immediately remindend him that when I saw him on the street, I said “Sorry I can’t feed you, I have a job interview so that I can get food. You should pull yourself up by your own bootstraps and get an interview so you too can get some food.” And he said “Yes, I took your advice and arrived here first and got the job you were going to interview for, so you’re fired.”

I don’t believe for a second this was accidental. If it were, there would be no reason to hide it.

Perfectly toxic, as all stack overflow comments should be.

And just like 9/11, they were warned of the attack weeks in advance but were still woefully unprepared to protect their citizens.

Can we please include sales tax in that price too? It is also a bullshit hidden fee the way the US does it.

And it may be illegal in some states to not offer the customer an actual refund.

In Thursday’s decision, Anzalone recommended that Starbucks offer the benefits and higher pay to excluded employees, starting from the date when they went into effect for non-union workers, among other remedies.

Starbucks should also post a notice in its cafes telling workers that the NLRB found Starbucks had violated federal labor law, and detailing employee rights, she said.

This is the part that pisses me off the most - the only punishment is that Starbucks has to pay the unionized employees what they are owed and post a piece of paper correcting their earlier lies. There’s no fine, so they risked nothing by breaking the law.

This isn’t even enough to be considered a slap on the wrist. Other companies will take note and try any creatively dishonest policy they can come up with to prevent unionization.

Good. I hope he gets rich and that it ends this sort of bullshit in Texas schools.

This title is so misleading. France hasn’t banned the device, and the radiation levels could likely be fixed with a software update. French officials have stated that they may prohibit sale and issue a recall IF Apple doesn’t respond to their request. The article says as much:

France's junior minister for the digital economy, Jean-Noël Barrot, told newspaper Le Parisien that a software update would be able to address the radiation issues linked to the iPhone 12. Apple has two weeks to respond to France's request, if it fails to do so, Barrot stated that he is prepared to issue a recall of the device, which went on sale in 2020.

Also, why the hell did it take French agencies 4 years to test this device? Even if Apple says they won’t update the phones and is forced to stop selling them, taking a 4 year old phone off the market won’t really hurt them in any way.