See, now that is the type of information that would have been useful in the article. I don't care that the property "included horse stables, a swimming pool and a 10-bedroom guesthouse". I care how somebody got trapped in their car.
Thanks for sharing.
Could she not have opened the door or rolled down the window? The article made sure we knew that she went to Harvard and described the event she was attending, but no mention of why she was unable to exit the vehicle. Did she not know how to swim? Was their some obstruction? Did something malfunction? Was she so used to having other people do things for her that it just never occurred to her to do anything for herself?
Somebody please correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the United States invade Iraq despite the objections of the UN Security Council? That happened, right? Without reprocutions?
If that's the case, I'm wondering who cares about the UN objecting to laws a country passes, within their own borders, that are not human rights violations. What are they going to do? Write a stern letter?
It's not clear why the man wanted so many vaccinations or how he obtained them.
Schober and the team compared the man’s immune responses—measured by his blood antibody levels, the first line of defense against a virus, and T cell levels, which are responsible for the body's longer-term response—to those of a control group of 29 people who had received three COVID-19 shots.
“His immune system was neither positively nor negatively affected," says Schober.
I fixed the article. Somebody accidentally added a bunch of crap that provided no meaningful information.
Yeah, kinda. Except that the laws already exist. So somebody ineligible could fight to be on the ballot (or somebody else could fight to have them removed), which would result in a court case. Which is what just happened.
If SCOTUS had decided to hear Trumps immunity arguments sooner rather than later than there would be a chance of him being ejudicated of insurrection before the election. Until that verdict, he remains eligible since Congress failed to impeach him when they had the chance.
The constitution lists the following 3 criteria for running for president.
Your kid could run if / when they meet these criteria, but not your dog.
The constitution also defines citizen as "persons", which would further disqualify your dog.
I'd like to know more about how this is supposed to work.
What is considered a wage? Is it net worth, increase in worth from one year to the next? Liquid capital?
Are benefits (insurance, child care, etc) counted towards this wage cap? What about company cars or housing? What about profit sharing through bonuses and / or stock grants?
Would loans be counted towards the wage cap? If not, can you borrow more than the wage cap?
What happens if you own a home or business that is worth more than the wage cap? Would you only be able to sell that commodity for the wage cap or would any excess of the wage cap be spread over multiple years?
Would inheritance or "gifts" be tallied towards the wage cap? Would donations to charitable organizations offset the wage cap?
Would companies be subject to these caps? What if a person incorporated, had all of their wealth and earnings go through that incorporation which they had sole discretion and control over the use of those funds?
What about foreign entities? Would people, companies, or even governments from other countries who exceed the maximum wage be allowed to buy / sell goods, direct / manage corporate interests, invest in land or stocks, or even reside in a country with a maximum wage? What authority or oversight would exist to even identify such a wage of a foreign entity? Or
Every single one of those questions represents a potential loophole that could be exploited to circumvent a "maximum wage" and I'm sure that somebody who has studied or worked in finance could think of others.
I don't think that sex can be determined until after the 7th week. Did Alabama just embrace non-binary identifications for children?
Michael Whitty was caught with thousands of pounds of cocaine, ecstasy and ketamine after arousing the suspicions of sniffer dogs who took a shine to his backside at Manchester Airport
This article takes on a whole new level of interest if "pounds" refers to the Imperial unit for weight rather than British currency.
I think this line hints at it the underlying motivation.
A national poll conducted in late 2022 found that 4 out of 10 Americans believe society has become too "soft and feminine."
Basic mysogyny to have a negative and / or "less than" mentality around women. I think a lot of males don't consciously realize how much they marginalize and dehumanize women but are desperate to avoid being treated or thought of in the same manner. But that's just an opinion based on zero research on the topic.
Missed opportunity if the Dems don't share this to energize their base.