I actually disagree with that, if I saw a larger gentleman wearing this I'd feel proud of him for owning his thing with self-depracating humour, and think it was funny, the same as I do here.

It's Latin for "a person not welcome"

At the end of the article, which is already a litany of clownish buffoonery, it states that after destroying (effectively) the MRI machine in order to retrieve the rifle, he failed to retrieve a loaded magazine. So it was just left on the floor as they left.

Edit: autocorrect had changed it to clownfish

Unfortunately masks are most effective when the person with COVID wears them, rather than people who are trying to avoid COVID, but human nature is such that people with COVID (ones who go out in public) are often ones least worried about it so least likely to wear a mask in the first place.

I had a similar experience where I went to a conference and masked up religiously around groups only to catch it anyway while my colleagues didn't mask and didn't catch it.

Sometimes you can do everything right and still fail (paraphrasing Picard).

If he were my boss I'd ignore him during work hours too, tbh.

I agree, the job of politicians is to reframe Trans rights as policies that benefit everyone. If everyone at a negotiation feels like they are winning you have a successful negotiation. Who cares if the new policy disproportionately benefits one group, we are all better off because of it, and in the case of Trans rights give them the same (non-codified) protections as everyone else.

(This is if course ignoring the oft used tactic of the far right which is to do the opposite and reframe beneficial policies (eh. ACA) as something that only benefits one group by calling it a funny name (eg. Obamacare), so it's easier said than done, but that is what the democrats should be doing more of, imho)

This is the whey

Fellow right-side-of-the-ponder here (so take with a heap of salt). So basically both sides present mitigations ("my client had a clean record until now", "the defendant was found liable for SA", sort of thing). These may change the outcome of the sentencing, including specific dates for any period of incarceration.

There will also be part of this given over to why they defendant shouldn't be found liable for also violating his gag order (very similar to the ones before, but this one is now he is a felon). And if the defense counsel can't explain why he did that (which is pretty much indefensible) then he can be both found liable for the breach and have it impact his potential sentence.

I am not a lawyer, I am not American, this is just what I understand, until someone better comes along to correct me.

Bad case of Irritable Towel Syndrome

If it looks like a nazi duck and it's wearing a shoe, it's probably doing a goose-step

Or perhaps JSters (pronounced Jesters)*

*Meant as a turn of phrase and not a criticism of the language.

Jake Weary