@alexthechick Most Democrats tend to view their constituents as the "people in the community", not just their fellow citizens.
It'd been 20 years and they didn't want him punished more.
It’s a widespread Dem approach, and it's why they can't help giving the admin easy W's on immigration.
@tracewoodgrains Personalized tracking somewhat divorced from grade level is also a strength of homeschooling.
Everyone is in a "grade" of course, but you can accelerate or decelerate, so it's not unusual to end up with a somewhat heterogeneous curriculum based on the kid's strengths.
@phl43 Speculative: If the global economy freezes up, people won't be able to buy their mfg goods, and they'll take a big economic hit themselves that they can't afford.
Sometimes you have to ensure adequate...liquidity....to keep the global economy's wheels from falling off.
🚨Q: You were saying a month ago about the Iranians that they are rational people, and today you called them scum What changed?
Trump: "I got to know them."
Watch Rubio's smile...
I actually understand why Democrat leaders didn't take our stories seriously when the Times reported them in June but are taking them seriously now.
It was by design.
The line most shared from the piece was the claim that the Times “could not corroborate” my story despite talking to two of my friends.
I gave them the contact information for five friends.
They called the two who I clarified would not know about the abuse but would be able to affirm our relationship timeline, events, etc.
They simply did not call the other three.
I also gave them the names of all my former roommates who remembered him stalking our row house (which was about 5 houses down from his) and waiting for me to return. I gave them screenshots of messages between these roommates and I discussing it.
I gave them the names of other men I dated who might have remembered him following us around the hill and showing up on my stoop after we walked home from dates to confront us. I gave them emails to my landlord urgently ending my lease and moving to an apartment across town and diary entries talking about it - all time marked.
I told them that during pre-marital counseling I had spoken to my ex-fiance about the abuse because I had to explain to him why I reacted with such terror any time he lost his temper. They said oh NO we don't need to bother HIM (or my priest). Besides, I had written about it in my diary in detail, they reassured.
As the weeks dragged on I stopped trying to give them evidence because the amount I had already given them seemed to overwhelm them and I thought it meant they clearly had more than enough to verify my every claim.
My friends might not have known the details of the abuse, but they affirmed that yes, I had told them that he was abusive—long before he ran for Senate.
Besides, they assured, my part in their reporting would be small. I thought my details would only serve to affirm Jenny and the other anonymous woman.
Jenny and I - having never met or spoken - both shared with these reporters terrifyingly similar details of intimate partner violence, coercive control, and cycles of abuse/love bombing. The third unnamed woman in the story did as well.
But tell me again how they “could not corroborate.”
You don't have to let the "HR ladies" run your party if you don't like the results....but if it's HR ladies or rapists, you're better off with the HR ladies.
BREAKING
Andy Burnham announces that he will keep the triple lock
Senior advisers to the prime minister-in-waiting have raised repeated concerns about the cost of the policy and suggested it should be scrapped
Burnham has used an 'Ask Me Anything' session on Reddit to confirm that he will retain the triple lock, which is expected to reach £15billion by 2030
'I appreciate there's a lot of debate about this but it is important the commitment in the manifesto stands'
People moving to NYC need to understand that gentrification is not just rent going up, it is what happens when you enter a neighborhood without respecting the people, culture, and history already here.
@neoavatara A pretty straightforward statutory change would be if you're the parent of a child born on US soil, but you are not a citizen or LPR at the time, then you're thereafter permanently ineligible for LPR sponsorship. This would undermine the incentive structure significantly.
@tracewoodgrains@razibkhan You're correct--they should not. But they will. So what?
The bitter reality is that, outside a very small number of key figures, your ability to control who is in "your tent" boils down to the right to exit.
This is also a post about Never Trump Republicans.