Earlier quoted context omitted.
> was world peace during his first term Cringes hard in the Yemeni civil war. Or the conflict in the Donbass. Or the various insurgencies in the Sahel, or the war in Darfur, or the Syrian civil war. > Same hyperboles were said in 2017 and we were fine Were you fine? The Supreme Court was stacked by blatantly political appointees who then declared that the president has immunity for official business, even if it's bla…
>Were you fine? The Supreme Court was stacked by blatantly political appointees Supreme Court appointments have been political for decades in the US. Sad? Yes. New? No. >who then declared that the president has immunity for official business Not a surprising ruling at all, and not a political one. Not a "disgusting" precedent. It is a very narrow ruling and is consistent with how these things have worked for decades.…
Announcing the data.gov archive
121–130 of 148 posts
Re: Announcing the data.gov archive
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not OP but torrent would be my go to for a short term solution.
Torrent would do it but 16TB is still not that cheap to just have running in your house nas (otherwise I would).
European chiming in here. We need to backup, hash, and distribute this data. I bought four 12 TB HDDs (second hand enterprise) for about 360 EUR from USA (included tax & S&H). I could buy more, but I am feeling financially insecure now, and not buying anything from the USA anymore. I do have 3x 4 TB drives spare though. Might use these instead of going to some great parties.
Re: Announcing the data.gov archive
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
So it’s a delusion that the guy who tried to overthrow the vote last time will prevent the next election this time? Tyrants tried multiple times before succeeding in Athens, why not today?
He didnt try to "overthrow the vote" any more than Clinton did in 2016 or Gore did in 2000.
The people whom Trump rallied and told to march to Capitol Hill went there for the express purpose of preventing the results of the people’s vote via the Electoral College from being accepted. This was proven in many courts of law. Not only did Trump prevent the military from responding to the putsch in his benefit until it was clear the effort had failed, he later issued a full pardon to all those involved in the attack on Congress.
I can’t remember any Democratic President or candidate thereof in the history of the republic doing anything similar. Can you provide examples?
Re: Announcing the data.gov archive
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
He didnt try to "overthrow the vote" any more than Clinton did in 2016 or Gore did in 2000.
The people whom Trump rallied and told to march to Capitol Hill went there for the express purpose of preventing the results of the people’s vote via the Electoral College from being accepted. This was proven in many courts of law. Not only did Trump prevent the military from responding to the putsch in his benefit until it was clear the effort had failed, he later issued a full pardon to all those involved in the at…
You missed a few things.
The whole "alternate electors" thing. That wasn't "just in case the court cases go our way and we turn out to have won the state". No, they were presented as the real electors. How did that happen? It wasn't just a random coincidence that seven different states did that. No, Trump orchestrated that.
There was the pressure campaign on Pence. He was told to approve the alternate electors rather than the real ones. Not just once - he was repeatedly told to do that.
The riot is minor compared to those two items.
Re: Announcing the data.gov archive
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
He didnt try to "overthrow the vote" any more than Clinton did in 2016 or Gore did in 2000.
The people whom Trump rallied and told to march to Capitol Hill went there for the express purpose of preventing the results of the people’s vote via the Electoral College from being accepted. This was proven in many courts of law. Not only did Trump prevent the military from responding to the putsch in his benefit until it was clear the effort had failed, he later issued a full pardon to all those involved in the at…
But he didn't do that. Go and read his actual speech. The words he actually used. He encouraged peaceful protest.
Why were fiery riots presented as "mostly peaceful protests" while someone that encouraged people to peacefully protest is held responsible for that protest turning into a riot?
Re: Announcing the data.gov archive
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Were you fine? The Supreme Court was stacked by blatantly political appointees Supreme Court appointments have been political for decades in the US. Sad? Yes. New? No. >who then declared that the president has immunity for official business Not a surprising ruling at all, and not a political one. Not a "disgusting" precedent. It is a very narrow ruling and is consistent with how these things have worked for decades.…
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/06/06/supreme-court-justices-milli...
That has nothing at all to do with what is being discussed in this thread. Why are you so eager to change the topic when you lose the argument?
Re: Announcing the data.gov archive
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Nobody was taken away by the Gestapo Someone forgot the "kids in cages" episodes in 2018 when Trump was only testing the waters... EDIT: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_administration_family_se...
https://www.aclu.org/news/smart-justice/president-obama-want... Nothing to do with Trump. Also Trump's policy was completely sensible, and no different to what happens when adults are sent to prison anywhere else: you cant put their kids in prison with them obviously.
That’s exactly who Trump is and what he wants, as a tool of cruelty to startle others.
You’re denying evidence. You’re deflecting. It’s documented in the press and in the legal proceedings that it was Trump policy.
You’re deflecting too by stating a different matter. Here kids were grouped and put in cages, from all ages, without relatives, without adults other than the guards.
We know deflection is part of the strategy… you’re not fooling anyone.
Re: Announcing the data.gov archive
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
The people whom Trump rallied and told to march to Capitol Hill went there for the express purpose of preventing the results of the people’s vote via the Electoral College from being accepted. This was proven in many courts of law. Not only did Trump prevent the military from responding to the putsch in his benefit until it was clear the effort had failed, he later issued a full pardon to all those involved in the at…
But he didn't do that. Go and read his actual speech. The words he actually used. He encouraged peaceful protest. Why were fiery riots presented as "mostly peaceful protests" while someone that encouraged people to peacefully protest is held responsible for that protest turning into a riot?
You’re totally rewriting history here.
Given the distance to the events, you cannot do so in good faith.
Re: Announcing the data.gov archive
#129Re: Announcing the data.gov archive
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
>how they intend to secure this "vault" against the current government Is there any risk of the government ordering them to take it down? That seems unlikely to me. The US has strong free speech protection, stronger than European free speech protection. >keeping this data online against the express will of the government is gonna cost (political) capital. Costing them political capital (aka the government is unhappy)…
> The US has strong free speech protection, stronger than European free speech protection Citation needed. "European free speech protection" doesn't exist, each country has its own rules and freedoms. Hungary is drastically less free than e.g. France... but overall, as a rule of thumb, unless for you freedom of speech includes freedom to be a Nazi, European countries are pretty free. And don't take stances such as "s…
The US values free speech higher than privacy. The EU values privacy higher than free speech.
>Opinions on the right to be forgotten differ greatly between the United States and EU countries. In the United States, accessibility, the right of free speech according to the First Amendment, and the "right to know" are typically favored over removing or increasing difficulty to access truthfully published information regarding individuals and corporations. Although the term "right to be forgotten" is a relatively new idea, the European Court of Justice legally solidified that the "right to be forgotten" is a human right when they ruled against Google in the Costeja case on May 13, 2014.[20]
>The European Union has been advocating for the delinkings requested by EU citizens to be implemented by Google not just in European versions of Google (as in google.co.uk, google.fr, etc.), but on google.com and other international subdomains. Regulators want delinkings to be implemented so that the law cannot be circumvented in any way.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_be_forgotten#European...