Choose the answer you like. Those other rabbis are wrong.
Avoid breaking anyone’s rules (this is, I believe, roughly the actual method). If one rabbi says it’s forbidden to spin counter clockwise while dancing and another says it’s fine, don’t spin counter clockwise because maybe the first rabbi is right and the second just said it wasn’t required, not that you had to do it. There’s no electricity in the Biblical rules, but it’s kind like fire and there are rules about fire on Shabbat, so they’re not supposed to use electricity on Shabbat. It might be overkill, but better safe than sorry.
And that was from a “tough” judge who was doing everything he could not to jail him. Eileen Cannon is absolutely not going to meaningfully enforce a gag order. And she’d probably set aside 3 weeks to hear motions for each violation before refusing it.
That’s the most frustrating thing about all these back and forths. So much angst and arguments when the first question that needs to be asked is “do you live in a state that’s in play?” If not, then you don’t need to tell anyone who you’re not voting for and no one needs to tell you you shouldn’t, because your vote doesn’t matter and you’re not making the decision based on who you’d prefer to see in the White House. Deep-X votes are being decided in relation to their irrelevance and both shouldn’t be shamed as supporting migrant death camps and also shouldn’t be an opinion someone in a swing state should look to when making their own decision.
I’m in a deep blue state. Usually I vote for Democratic presidential candidates merely to drive up the popular vote total and make the argument against the electoral college stronger. That’s all my (presidential) vote is worth, so if I decided not to cast it, it’s in that context, and someone in Georgia should be making their decision in an entirely different context and ignoring the position declarations of people whose votes really don’t matter.
My only guess would be people can get better propaganda elsewhere and the CNN propaganda was supposed to fly under the radar as coming from a “real” news station. CNN has had various stories about right-biased reporting which actually damages their brand, unlike Fox where the target audience is all in.
the city’s mayor, who called for more police patrols.
You don’t need more police patrols, this was a protest with insufficient police staffing, not a random event the police would need to stumble upon. Somehow even with planned events the police knew about and were already present at, mayor’s answer is just more police wandering around.
Wild that the Times of Israel, reporting second-hand, has a more factual accounting of the event.
Violent clashes broke out Sunday between pro- and anti-Israel demonstrators in Los Angeles after the latter held a protest outside the Adas Torah synagogue, where an Israeli real estate fair was being held.
The first line establishes the relevant information, not some vague idea that there were protesters just stopping Jews from worshipping. The only context missing is that the real estate fair probably isn’t for apartments in Tel Aviv. It’s probably for West Bank settlements, which are heavily populated by Americans.
CNN surprisingly actually had a more detailed accounting, albeit surrounded by the dominant anti-Palestinian narrative.
Synagogue hosted Israel real estate event
The protest stemmed from an Israel real estate event on Sunday at the Adas Torah synagogue, according to the synagogue’s security director and social media posts from organizers.
The event at the synagogue was organized by My Israel Home, a firm that markets real estate in Israel and West Bank settlements and was advertising on social media. CNN has reached out to My Israel Home for comment.
In one video, two men appear to be wrestling on the ground as others kick at them. Later, one of the men – holding an Israeli flag – appears to have a bloodied face and mouth.
Additional video showed an egg thrown at a pro-Palestinian activist and a man wearing a keffiyeh, a traditional Palestinian scarf, chased and punched on the ground by a man wearing a Jewish yarmulke or kippah.
During many of the altercations, bystanders worked to pull and hold people apart.
And do investigations even if they don’t agree to show up. Air the dirty laundry in a six week hearing with witnesses. Subpoena their finances, bring in their patrons. The Supreme Court may questionably be able to just say “no”, but that doesn’t mean that’s the limit of a hearing.
Honestly have no idea what you’re trying to say here … the point of governmental power and law is arguably not to be optional.
If the Supreme Court has the final and unreviewable power to decides what the law means, and their proclamations are simply followed without question by the Executive, then they’re not optional in any way and they have ultimate power under our system of rules. Congress can make new rules that the Supreme Court can declare unconstitutional or twist to their viewpoints, the executive can take action that is then declared unconstitutional.
The only Constitutional restriction on them is impeachment and removal, but they’re the people who decide how the Constitution works. And impeachment is basically an irrelevant fantasy. The actual check is what’s not given to them. All they can do is publish words, which are supposed to be followed but which they don’t have any actual power or money to force into being without cooperation. But if your not willing to consider that an executive might at some time be right in saying “no”, then they are effectively all powerful.
That’s the “optional” part. Requiring some dupe to bring a case is trivial, it doesn’t make them optional, it’s that their power can be vetoed by simply being ignored. And it’s a power that needs to be held over them the further they stray into being an entirely political body.
It’s the least worrisome because it can be abolished (selectively). If cooperation is not at least partially optional, then it’s not the weakest branch and they can be a council of judge-kings dictating how society runs with no recourse. The recourse is refusing cooperation.
So someone is arrested for flag burning… and the case is immediately dismissed by a judge.
Ok, and? What makes you think they then get released from prison? Cause they just have to?
Pretty much everything the government does to “enforce” their will can be challenged
If the executive doesn’t empower the judiciary, then no, everything cannot be challenged. You can assert your right to challenge an arrest before a judge however much you want, if your jailer says “nah”, you don’t get out of jail. The court is the veneer of slow and steady legitimacy validating the force of the executive, but rulings are just words, the thing that actually makes you have to listen to them is force.
This is, to be sure, a constitutional crisis likely to end with chaos. The real result would likely entail some sort of attempt to stand up a new “Supremer” court or decide that certain types of cases cannot be appealed or governors relying on their state courts and refusing to bend to a Supreme Court ruling they and their constituents don’t agree with.
Fascist thought is perfectly compatible between countries of different races. The philosophy is the “right” type of people should expel (or murder) undesirable minorities and take the resources they need. If those minorities go somewhere else and oppress some other people, that’s just how the world is supposed to work when it’s not corrupted by things like equal rights or respect for personal freedom. It’s how Aryan-supremacist Germany had no issues allying with Japan. They both believed in a world order where it was the natural state of things for racially homogeneous states to dominate lesser races and claim the resources for their people. Because they’re just better, and all the problems are from race-mixing and kowtowing to the undeserving.
One of the early anti-Jewish efforts by the Nazis (promoted now by some Israeli politicians for Palestinians) was encouraging Jews migrate somewhere else, Israel being one of the common destinations.
All of my artist friends also found it soul sucking, they just needed to make (real) money. Friends of friends with the occasional $20 to spare for a commission just don’t pay the bills. I think the only artist friends I have that make a living off their chosen medium and don’t hate their job are lifestyle photojournalists.