Oh no, this absolutely was a crime and absolutely illegal.

Unlawful, but a moral, responsible and respectable action. One which any reasonable and sane person would likely do the same.

The next step is realizing that Obamacare, Build Back Better, and pretty much every "win" from the "resistance" is written by or re-packaged from the exact same group of people.

The DNC's strategy in 2016 was to explicitly and intentionally elevate the Clinton's vacation buddy Trump at every opportunity during the primaries because they believe he was too ridiculous and wouldn't do well in the general election.

Do not buy it, but Donna Brazile's book "Hacks" does offer some interesting perspective on the whole situation and how all of them are directly and knowingly responsible.

the pre-existing conditions rule alone is huge.

Which has had what effect?

Better health outcomes for those with "pre-existing conditions"? Because that isn't the case, and unless diabetes suddenly changed to be more aggressive and deadly I don't see any externalities that would explain the data. Do you?

Better financial outcomes? There was a small period between 2013-2018 where this was arguably true, for specific people. But it does show in general trends enough to maybe be true for a time.

The metrics you're talking about might not be from the ACA effects, but from other issues hitting the health care industry over time.

Yes, and disentangling those is hard. However, the implicit assumption you're starting from is that the externalities were significantly greater. I would agree that is somewhat true for COVID and it's downstream effects, but there isn't anything else I can really point to. Do you have something?

that dwindled because the facilities couldn't support the demand because of closures or not enough staff. That's not the ACA.

You sure? Because I can draw a pretty straight line between the ACA and private equity gutting healthcare facilities for the tax credits and direct payments that were promised by the heritage foundation.

Why is this controversial? Because it implies the American democratic system is anything but? This is the objective facts that everyone was saying behind closed doors while telling the media to blame "southern black voters" or "Bernie bros" or whatever.

Also it wouldn't have mattered if he wasn't independent. That's not how the game is played and he did a reasonably good job of exposing that, probably through via his own naïvety more than anything, but still.

it did make a difference for many people

By what metric?

I hear it repeated a lot with many anecdotal examples and rationalizations but by every quantifiable metric healthcare post 2010 is much worse than before.

Tech bros and "no understanding of consent", name a more iconic duo.

Simultaneously very heartening and incredibly frustrating to watch. The victim had to fight so fucking hard while everybody else was being incredibly passive and meek.

Shout-out to the girl in the black dress for being the bravest of all of them and showing how to be a proper menace.

The full paper is here and, as usual, it's hardly anything and decontextualized in order to get a publishable result.

This one is so bad that it doesn't use established baselines or do any form of statistical analysis on the results instead opting for their own "baseline" measurements using very small sample sizes. It also plays a smoke and mirrors game where it shows a result for short term immunological response and then uses that to insinuate the 'slightly reduced but still likely well within the error of the poor control' long term effects are worth noting.

Other major flaws:

• As others have mentioned, mice are a terrible model for this as their skin is very thin and proper tattooing is near impossible.
• They mention verifying with human cadavers but don't include any data from those.
• There was no control group, the baseline was an untreated mouse, not one with an acute foot trauma.
• Mice age very quickly, best I can tell the immunological markers weren't age controlled. 2 months out of a <2 year lifespan is a lot of aging. Again, if there was a proper control to measure against.
• The obsfucation of the raw data into cheesy and unreadable box and whisker plots is hella suspicious.

At best it's a very poorly communicated and poorly designed experiment but I suspect that's due to it result hunting.

Lol, if you actually read the article it legitimately was the counter-protestors attempting to bomb the white nationalists protesting against "Islam" outside Mamdani's residence.

The spin here that Mamdani was the target, or in active danger from the "explosives", is incredible!

The actual target was Jake Lang and the police protecting him and was an attack against NYPD who is actively enabling and supporting said intimidating campaign against Mamdani and does pose an actual risk to his, and his families, health and safety.

Luckily he is American famous.

The usual story here for Americans is that they get arrested for resisting arrest and assulting a police officer and then get sentences to 10+ years in the local gulag.

Immigrants instead get sent to the camps for deportation.

He's well enough known, there were enough cameras and he's media/white american savvy enough to avoid the worst outcomes.

“I have not once ever voted to authorize funding to Israel, and I will never,”

She has though: https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2024128, https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2023681, https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/202428

It's a much better track record than pretty much anyone else but this article and post is a pretty blatant attempt at reputation laundering.

Do y'all really fall for this so easily?

If you're looking at, or suggesting others look towards, destruction and genocide for "purpose and direction" you are truly lost.

1. It was ICE agents onboard the ships. Not CBP, not BORTAC--- ICE.^1^
2. That statement is alleged. This would be a very different story of any were charged according to Title 18 U.S.C. § 2251. The names are not given as that would be explicitly defamatory.

You can stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody without public backlash so long as there is enough reasonable suspicion they're a pedophile.

This is why this article exists. To reputation launder ICE and portray their victims as all being child rapists.

Stop supporting ICE.

^1 technically incorrect. Both CBP and ICE were present.^

Summaries are generally misleading.

Full text for H.R.5917: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/5917/text where it outlines the modifications to public law 115-348 which according to Sec. 3.d authorizes usage of the IEEPA to enforce sanctions.

Israel then directly receives defense spending to enforce those sanctions as well as indirectly being funded via any seized assets that are found in violation of those sanctions as "reperations". Here's an example of a $500Mil funding source.

H.R.5961 uses essentially the same mechanism but targets Iran specifically redirecting a large chunk of the $6B mentioned towards Israel.

You are correct that H.R.6679 isn't about funding, but I still felt it was important to include.

The short story is that the difference is mostly one of dosage and metabolism. While there are some subtle differences between methamphetamines and amphetamines, see pharmacology section, they have nearly identical effects on most people.

The big difference between recreational and medicinal usage is dosage and duration. A lot of the pharmacology around ADHD medication is in trying to get a slow and steady release either via binders and packaging (IE Adderall XR) and/or prodrugs/salts (IE lisdexamphetamine aka Vyvanse).

Street drugs on the other hand usually don't have the same level of quality control which makes dosing difficult and aren't intended for the same level of consistency.

Someone could microdose meth and get similar results to a real shitty Adderall generic but it comes with a lot of risks and is generally not recommended.

Why the use of the word "poor"? She's being brave as hell and using her publicity in a very productive manner.

Wait until you hear the true story of the Irish Potato Famine and realize that not only did nobody learn from it, but most of the anglosphere seems to be towards a direct repeat of it at an even wider scale.

::: spoiler Spoiler The potato blight was a secondary or proximal cause of the mass death and emigration. The primary cause was the system of absentee landlords (arguably an early form of corporatism), ineffective government and racism. :::

The specific metric cited is "retail revenue loss" given in dollar amounts. The "since 2019" is doing some heavy lifting. Q1 2020 was a historic dip in Retail sales. Retail revenue has increased by ~82% since then leaving only 11% of that 93% variability unaccounted for which covers operational inefficiencies, theft, food waste, fuel mismanagement, inventory errors, fraud, etc.

The source is the US census bureau and the National Retail Federation who has a vested interest in blaming all shrinkage as the result of outside forces.

Sure, there's some truth there and as people get more desperate they will certaintly act like it, but this framing is at least 80% bullshit and using that as a starting point means any conclusions drawn from it will be even more bullshit.

Shoplifting isn't the problem, retail stores are big mad they're reaching hard limits on what they can/are allowed to extract from society and are using this talking point to push for more authoritarian power grabbing. Can we stop repeating and reinforcing it?

Keep in mind this tactic is one of the key reasons behind a lot of anti-swatting laws. Those laws were passed explicitly because it is a pretty effective tactic, but remember to be smart about it.