alwayshasbeen dot jpeg

Wym? I think they’ve already said no to the USA quite a few times already.

I think we need something like this for someone on death row or something, maybe.

Why, though? What makes the person occupying the position of president uniquely qualified to make a decision in cases like this? If you have a judicial system that has been found to apply the law fairly, yet can still have its rulings overturned on a whim, doesn’t that make a mockery of the system?

It feels like an equivalent of a boss saying, “I know you and your team did months of research to come to the decision that you did, but I’m going to go in a different direction anyway. Not because I did more research than you, just because I feel like I know better than all of you”.

Unless theres’ some kind of reason that I’ve overlooked.

Beyond the scope of this thread, I know, but the concept of president seems absurd to me. Especially the way it’s implemented in the USA.

Ed is finally tough enuss

Russia tried, Cambridge Analitica did

You would do too, if it happened to you

Is the joke here that you did not cry where the packet instructed you to cry?