Until the leopards eat his face.

So this wasn’t an official act? I guess it depends upon which SC justice you ask.

In a civilized country, this would not be a political question, but, rather, a medical one.

The Russian response is purely for their internal consumption.

The party of law and order. Their law, and their order.

Instead of “rotten”, the title should use “completely predictable”.

Bets on whether trump walks out at the break?

What about treadmill-based walking? It’s too freaking hot out during the summer.

The US is not the only country that has enacted laws governing jurisdiction in cases of genocide that has occurred outside their borders. Many of these countries also have laws that are automatically in force when a determination of genocide has been made by the UN. These laws generally cover sanctions and doing business with “those who perpetrate or support genocide”.

https://thesentinelproject.org/2013/06/14/when-to-act-a-states-obligations-and-responsibilities-regarding-genocide/

Many other States have adopted statutes pursuant to Article VI, which explicitly provide not only for territorial jurisdiction, but also for universal jurisdiction over genocide. Examples of such statutes include: the 2002 German Code of Crimes Against International Law (Völkerstrafgesetzbuch) Section 1 of which recognizes the jurisdiction of German courts over genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed outside the German territory and to which Germany has no specific link. Likewise, Section 2, § 1(a) of the Dutch International Crimes Act of 19 June 2003 makes provision for universal jurisdiction over genocide provided that the alleged perpetrator is physically present in the Netherlands. Moreover, the Canadian’s Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes Act, adopted on 24 June 2000 sets the basis for universal jurisdiction for genocide; Section 6, §1 of this Act reads as follows:

Every person who, either before or after the coming into force of this section, commits outside Canada (a) genocide […] is guilty of an indictable offence and may be prosecuted for that offence in accordance with section 8.

Many other countries, including France, Switzerland, Spain, Belgium, and Austria, have adopted national legislation, as required under Genocide Convention Article VI, that allow for the prosecution of genocide committed outside their territories.

The political question of the US’ position on genocide rulings can be better understood by reading what it has done with previous atrocities.

This repost was done during Bush Sr’s presidency by the US Holocaust Memorial Museum. It goes through the US’ response in the past to quite a few incidents and describes the decisions that were made and the thinking behind them.

https://www.ushmm.org/m/pdfs/Todd_Buchwald_Report_031819.pdf

I would never make that assumption. After all, in their minds, it’s perfectly all right for their religion to impose their views on everyone else. But, if I try to use my religion to impose my views on them, that’s evil.

The ironically named ADF claims it’s a free speech issue. How do you suppose they would feel if I sent my kid to school wearing a shirt that said, “All White People are Guilty of Genocide” with an indian head silhouette?

Dragging them out into the light of day, just like all fascists should be. Or would you prefer that they be allowed to spread their nonsense in the dark?

If you don’t know anything about this group, just consider this line from the article:

These buzzwords — inclusion, acceptance, love — usually mean only one thing to leftists.

They consider those to be nothing more than “buzzwords”.

It reminds me of some lines in the movie Bullit. A ladder-climbing DA tells detective Bullit, “Don’t be naive, Lieutenant. We both know how careers are made. Integrity is something you sell the public.”

Bullit tells him, “You sell whatever you want, but don’t sell it here tonight.”

The FedSoc sold their integrity long ago.

In case anyone has trouble with a paywall: https://archive.ph/BvXTY

He’ll be speaking to them virtually.

It would be a shame if somebody “attended” who wasn’t invited.

We need to start a pool.

When he loses and declares the election stolen, how many of his cultists will lose their right to vote and own guns? We can break it down by state and date.

They could have stopped that headline at “Tommy Tubervile Tries to Argue”.

Yes, I meant to spell his name that way.

Unlike most of Trump’s boasts, this one may be true, but not in a way that reflects well on him. Perhaps he’s right that Putin “will do that for me, but not for anyone else.” But that is because Putin rightly considers Trump an ally in whose success he is invested.

What’s worse is that, by openly signaling to Putin that he does not want Gershkovich to be freed before the election, he is destroying whatever chances may exist to secure his release before then. If Gershkovich goes free prior to the election, Trump would look foolish, and Trump understands perfectly well Putin does not want that to happen.

collusion: noun (Law) An agreement between two or more persons to defraud a person of his rights, by the forms of law, or to obtain an object forbidden by law.

https://www.wordnik.com/words/collusion

Can’t we just declare the entire Trump crime family to be an enemy of the state?