I took the ASVAB way back in the 90’s. IIRC it was mandatory then too.
Seer of the tapes! Knower of the episodes!
I took the ASVAB way back in the 90’s. IIRC it was mandatory then too.
Ask Robespierre how that works out in the end.
Some people need practical advice.
-George Carlin
“Here is nothing missing, but a cat urinated on this during a certain night. Cursed be the pesty cat that urinated over this book during the night in Deventer and because of it many others [other cats] too. And beware well not to leave open books at night where cats can come.”
Lisa needs braces!
I’m not upgrading because I don’t trust Windows 11. Not that 10 has my confidence, of course, but 11 seems worse.
Well that brightens my day :)
The value of the DNS is that we all use the same one. You can declare independence, but you’d lose out on that value.
deleted by creator
Fun fact: technically, the Vice President would preside over their own Senate trial.
This was always going to be DOA. US courts can’t provide the relief they sought.
A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. This prohibition applies to both professional and personal conduct. A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny and accept freely and willingly restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen.
https://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges
Not that SCOTUS is held to the same code of conduct that all other federal judges are held to, of course.
At least twice before, Thomas has similarly defended his failure to make required disclosures as an unintentional error or a misunderstanding of the rules.
Seems like the only possible explanations are that he’s lying or he’s incompetent.
Her continued presence on the bench, not just on this one case, is fatally undermining the already tenuous legitimacy of the federal judiciary.
One is high fantasy, the other is satire. They may be technically very similar, but as far as tone and mood they are very different beasts. Like Star Wars and Spaceballs.
The hair is all wrong.
If social media companies exist to collect massive troves of personal info from users–and they do–then there is a valid national security concern over social media controlled by an adversary. This is distinct from the individual privacy concerns towards domestically-controlled social media.