That’s because for a gobsmacking number of people, judicial decisions are the absolute final word. My attitude wouldn’t be nearly so cynical if we were talking about an average person, like you or me.
For this putrid waste of oxygen, though, judicial decisions are just another inconvenience for his lawyers to appeal, delay, or simply ignore. It doesn’t even matter if those lawyers are incompetent. Some magical circumstances always seem to protect him from consequences.
This is an excellent article. I work hard for my boss because my boss is good to me. I actively look for stuff to do because I give a shit about him and the people I work with. That is not the case when my employer treats me like a replaceable asset instead of a person.
That was my initial thought, but then I read the article.
DOJ does have that footage. But online sleuths have proven to be an extremely valuable resource in identifying Jan. 6 participants, using the CCTV footage to determine which rioters entered the building and then building a database with the clearest photos of those suspects. They have often used facial recognition for leads and have aided in hundreds of cases against Jan. 6 defendants.
Blurring the footage isn’t the empty gesture I thought it was. All he’s doing is exposing the layout of the building while protecting insurrectionists. Bear in mind that the building was deliberately designed in a confusing way for security purposes.
You’re right, it does. I guess since various law enforcement agencies already have the footage, they can get away with it… but yeah, since public volunteers helped in so many cases, the end result is the same.
Blurring the faces of the protestors may not break the letter of the law, but it definitely violates the spirit. I’d like to see a skilled legal team make an official complaint.
Oh, they know, or they choose to remain willfully ignorant. Besides, “Freedom of Speech” is a simple, powerful phrase, but they’re very quick to abandon it when that same power is used by their ideological enemies.
The store manager said they are a salaried employee, so they are “essentially working in the pharmacy for free” to give their staff extra support.
Not sustainable. These managers are in an impossible position. On one hand, their staff needs the extra help, but when managers let themselves be exploited like this, the corporate decision makers have no incentive to change their policies.
Did the article explain why some Democrats went along with voting him out? If it did, I missed it, and honestly I’m too lazy to read the article again. Thanks!
Yes. If he carried a grudge for years, that would make him a pompous ass. This, on the other hand, just sounds like someone making the adjustment to television acting from a stage career.
I like that his fellow cast members felt like they could talk to him about it. That alone says quite a bit.
