Профиль

Maybe, maybe not. I'm sure he's promised them all pardons but he also left many hanging after the last term. 😆

Individual states write the rules for corporations in their jurisdiction, not the Federal govt. So, a state can amend their rules to say that corporations can't donate money to politics. Hawaii is the first state to try it. Hopefully it will spread. It's not that simple but it has to start somewhere

No, this is what the Trump administration would like you to believe but isn't even remotely true for US citizens. If you are under US jurisdiction, you have your Constitutional Rights. The courts are not backing this nonsense. The local cops wanted this guy because he protests Cop City frequently.

I meant when you get home. You're not sitting in jail w/o bail options over refusing to unlock your phone. There are no laws that can trump your Constitutional Rights and you are protected from search and seizure (they will seize anyway and you have to sue to get it back sometimes).

I doubt he's a criminal at all. That's how they are framing it. I'm saying they can't. Cops are allowed to bully and lie to you. The 4th amend still exists and this is a Cop City protestor with trumped up charges and then Trump literally sent the DOJ after him but the courts will toss it out.

get a different response than poor areas. You get to choose, and most will never question this. Read it all, and you'll have some idea of what you've learned from the poll. You get to choose, and most will never question this. Read it, then you'll have some idea of what you've learned from the poll.

Then read those questions and find the where and what time. Depending on what answers you want, you choose what time of day to call (right after dinner, there are typically two adult voters) and, crucially, where to call. If you choose the most affluent neighborhoods, you will 2/

Polls are useful, more so as we get closer. The key is what you expect from them. You can taint the responses by writing the questions in such a way as to elicit the desired response, and they get to choose who and when they call. Find the actual poll, if that's not possible, it's not real. 1/

There isn't any contention on this. The only reason it seems so, is because the Trump admin continues to violate constitutional rights at every opportunity and the CBP is famous for it. The only contention here is Trump. This is 100% covered by our rights. Cops wanted him b/c he protests Cop City.

If you are under the jurisdiction of the US, you have Constitutional Rights, there is no limbo area that is on our soil but our rights do not apply. IMO this guy was probably making a point, and being harassed by the local police over his repeated protesting of Cop City.

This will require further study because this seems to focus on Graphene OS but he didn't need to use a duress password, they could have seized an iPhone or Google phone and it can be wiped remotely from home before they get a search warrant but if you're a suspected criminal, this raises suspicion.

No one can search your phone without a warrant, unless you voluntarily unlock the phone for them. This case comes up against the 4th amendment and the need for actual probable cause to seize a phone. This person was a suspected criminal, this doesn't apply for every American. We can/should say no.

This is an argument? lol No, this isn't an argument; this is you being a troll and me calling your position completely fucking stupid. I just respond to shit that comes in my inbox and you're not spamming my inbox so I haven't banned you.

The way they are trying to apply this law is to essentially say that duress passwords are booby traps to destroy evidence and, the appearance isn't wrong. I would say this is ridiculous and the courts are obviously going to rule against this but with this SCOTUS I'm not so sure. The OS is fine.

No, when you are here, you are here. Period. There is no limbo part of an airport where your Constitutional Protections don't apply. This is simple, if they can demonstrate probable cause, they can seize your phone until they get a warrant if you refuse to unlock it.

If they claimed that, they're wrong. You have the same privacy expectations and Constitutional protections to the inside of your phone as you do the inside of your home. They need pretty solid probable cause to seize your phone if you refuse to open it, and you should absolutely refuse imo.

If you are genuinely concerned about this issue, mail your phone back home to you before flying, or, buy a burner phone you don't mind not going back for. This should be rare. They have to be able to show there was clear probable cause if/when you sue. Most people won't sue and they abuse that.

Your 4th amd rights apply here and they cannot force you to open the phone, nor can they charge you for exercising your Constitutional Rights. The hook is that they can seize your phone (with probable cause and refusing to open it is not PC) if you don't unlock it and let them look.

Nope. That wasn't reported. What was reported is that they tried to pull him over on a street that cars can't pull over on and they shot him when he was trying to pull over. Fuck your trolling MAGA bullshit.

He can't legally arrest Netanyahu and he (hopefully) knew that already. He told millions of people that, apparently he doesn't understand the most basic tenants of Intl diplomacy. I'm not going to keep arguing with people who also don't understand it. It's theater that makes him less capable.