The ruling earlier this year along the lines of "you don't even allege any facts, so we have no choice but to deny you. But *hypothetically* if the president did make factual claims, the court wouldn't have the authority to second guess them" seem to set the stage for a move like that.

"The Comey case is very likely, though not certainly, over, though its denouement will take some time."

If by "over", you mean "not over".

I don't think there was ever any question whether they would ultimately be found guilty. But the process is the punishment. And the process isn't over.

Ok, but to be fair, it sounds like both Russia and Ukraine are working on making it more like flying a Reaper. See War on the Rocks interview with the guy from Lasar. Someone obviously still has to physically deploy the drone, but that could be anyone.

Yes, he is tedious and cringe. His writing style is pompous and irritating at a really base level. But I think it's also mostly correct. It sucks, but I don't make the rules.

This comment is being brought to you from debian. And not by choice. Better to dip your toes early than have to wade through all the nonsense in one go.

@nytpitchbot.bsky.social

Yeah, this was a missed opportunity to just ask "Who is Tulsi Gabbard?"

Seems like the answer should be "no, never". If there is harm worth reporting, it can be reported by a victim or uncovered by an audit/investigation. Then a warrant could uncover relevant information.

If you've read The Gig Economy, this sounds an awful lot like they're trying to build the Minotaur.