SlowNPC

Once upon a time, Republican leadership were smart but evil people who fed lies to their base but understood that they were lying. Since they weren't actually delusional, they could choose the most politically useful lies and abandon the ones that didn't poll well.

Enough people believed their lies that the new generation of Republicans are True Believers. They've lost the ability to tailor their message to the political climate because it's no longer seen as just a bunch of crap to please the base, but TRUTH. Except that it's not actually true, so their policies fail.

This is the inevitable result of governing through falsehood. Objective reality can not be gaslit, and abandoning it never works out well long-term.

Let’s keep it civil

Oh, in that case I don't have a comment on the American healthcare system.

Looks good for at least another couple of hundred yards.

I want the actual reviews so I have at least some chance of figuring out if the reviewer is a bot, a shill, a customer, or is reviewing the UPS guy instead of the product.

From the article you linked:

Donald Trump was found liable for sexually abusing and defaming E. Jean Carroll

From Cornell Law School's web site:

A party is liable when they are held legally responsible for something. Unlike in criminal cases, where a defendant could be found guilty, a defendant in a civil case risks only liability

At no point in the article you linked did the Judge say that Trump was "found guilty" of anything. Trump has no crime on his criminal record.

The judge in the article says that Trump was found to have raped Carroll, but acknowledged that there is "a legal distinction" between liability and guilt.

I'm not trying to defend Trump here, or argue that he didn't do what he was found to have done, just pointing out that there is a difference between "found guilty of rape" and what actually happened.

Instructions unclear; bike impounded for Felony speeding.

Shots fired

Insert ad featuring gymbro telling you about low t

Eggs are gross.

They're both violations of the conditions of release. Two separate violations, unrelated except for being prohibited behavior.

My guess is they're cartel, and their boss didn't like the idea of someone shutting down their trade routes.