If it were repeated and wouldn't stop after civil penalties, or if the violation leads to bodily harm, then yes, I'd support criminal prosecution against civil servants who willfully break laws. (I don't see how this situation carries a risk of bodily harm, though.)
@urbancourtyard.bsky.social A good talking point to discuss with Congress would be deregulation - that would probably gain traction with the GOP majorities.
And last but not least, don't rule out the nuclear option: going to court, as the law at issue here may violate the Tenth Amendment.
Arrest is a bit over the top, but if a city willfully defies state law there should be some form of consequences. (e.g. fines, injunctive relief, etc.)
The establishment wing of both parties together forms the uniparty, which is characterized by:
> Love for war, war, and more war (and, by extension, fossil fuels and environmental harm)
> No respect for the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Tenth Amendments (and more)
> Unlimited executive power
What is he talking about when he mentions leadership positions? Is he thinking that there should be sex-based bans on running for office?
What is he talking about when he mentions leadership positions? Is he thinking there should be sex-based bans on running for office?
The only "freedom" that war guarantees is the massive profits of the military-industrial complex and Big Oil. (A great reason why politicians should have to dress like racing drivers. Also, there's probably big overlap between warmongers and fossil fuel addicts.)
As a heads up, it's really unlikely that this sort of law would be upheld in court, especially as applied to public playgrounds which anyone can enter without restriction.
Eritrea is the only other country that imposes double taxation.
Also there tends to be far more leniency for highway projects when it comes to extremely costly protectionism (Buy America) laws.
It's telling the truth about the uniparty establishment.
The uniparty establishment in a nutshell.
I can only imagine how certain politicians (e.g. Duffy) would react to that.
Tennessee did it even worse - they made camping a felony. (Which includes disenfranchisement, and loss of the ability to own a gun. The GOP are total hypocrites.)
wpln.org/post/three-y...
By the time January 20, 2029 comes around, it'll have been over 13.5 years since June 16, 2015 (the day he announced his campaign). And he'll have had 12 years combined of presidency and "shadow presidency".
Did you hear of the new Washington State sheriff accountability law? (Of course, many sheriffs are mad.)
www.nwprogressive.org/weblog/2026/...
A requirement for a proprietary device created by only one manufacturer? That raises serious antitrust concerns in addition to the conflict of interest issue. (@jasoncoxnc.bsky.social might find this familiar)
These are state charges.
I wouldn't be surprised if many or most fossil fuel addicts are also war addicts - in other words, they love fossil fuels because it creates a motive for war.
The actual first folks in line for war should be the politicians who vote for it - and they should be dressed like racing drivers so everyone can see who owns them.
He claims to be "pro-life" and against "weaponization of the federal government" but starvation isn't pro-life and it is weaponization. "Life begins at conception and ends in forced starvation by government."
Curious, were there any dicusssions about construction types on this call?
MAGA logic: "Life begins at conception and ends in a school bombing."
I wouldn't be surprised if many of the fossil fuel addicts are also war addicts - in other words, they love fossil fuels because it creates a motive for war.
Politicians should have to dress like racing drivers.
That bill has a huge (and really bad) flaw: it's a local option not a statewide change. My guess is a very small number of cities and counties will opt in to this.
Extreme home rule is one of the biggest governance problems in this country in so many ways.
I just don't understand why the report totally overlooks construction types.
If they're making up a nonexistent requirement ("shirt-pocket rule") that isn't in any law or code, you may want to consider legal action.
Is there a means by which the state (or someone else) can take the comptroller to court for a violation like this?
