#expedite prosecution

[cnpatenteverything]

Pre-examination System——One Way to Expedite Prosecution of Invention Patents in China

Besides patent prosecution highway (PPH) and prioritized examination, pre-examination system is also one way to expedite prosecution of invention patents in China.

From 2016, many intellectual property protection centers have been successively set up throughout China. These IP protection centers perform patent pre-examination services for patent applications. Applications that pass pre-examination can quickly enter the examination channel before the CNIPA.

How fast?

According to an official news release, the time to grant a patent application submitted to CNIPA after passing pre-examination can be shortened. It is about 3 months for invention patents; about one month for utility model patents; and less than 10 days for design patents.

What are the requirements for requesting pre-examination?

In order to apply for pre-examination before an IP protection center in China, an application must satisfy the following four conditions:

a) The applicant should submit the pre-examination application to the proper IP protection center prior to formally submitting the patent application to CNIPA;

b) The registered address of the applicant must be in a location where an IP protection center is located;

c) The applicant has been recorded before the IP protection center; and

d) The application submitted must be within the technical field of the IP protection center.

It should be noted that different IP protection centers in China provide pre-examination services in different technical fields. Therefore, the applicant should check whether their inventions are within the technical field of a specific IP protection center.

Can foreign applicants request for pre-examination?

It should be noted that the pre-examination system is not applicable for Chinese national phase entry application of a PCT international application.

In addition, the registered address of the applicant (enterprise, university, or research institute) must be in a location where an IP protection center is located, and the application submitted must be within the technical field of the IP protection center.

Therefore, if a foreign applicant wants to file a request for pre-examination, the applicant should have an entity registered in China.

Different IP protection centers provide patent pre-examination services in different technical fields.

The Beijing Center mainly focuses on the fields of generating new information technology and high-end equipment manufacturing.

The Shanghai Pudong Center focuses mainly on the fields of biomedical and high-end equipment manufacturing.

The Guangdong Center focuses mainly on the fields of new generation of information technology and biological industry.

So, if a foreign applicant wants to register a company in China to be qualified for pre-examination, he/she should choose a place where 1) a protection center is located; 2) the technical filed of the protection center is close to the technical field of the company.

[robertreich]

Are Presidents Above the Law? 

Donald Trump thinks presidents should be allowed to commit crimes. Rubbish.

Trump claims that quote, "A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES MUST HAVE FULL IMMUNITY” from prosecution for any crime committed while in office. His lawyers even claim that a president could be immune from prosecution for having a political opponent assassinated.

Trump says anything less than total immunity would quote, "incapacitate every future president." Baloney. It would incapacitate him! He’s the only president who's been criminally charged with trying to orchestrate a violent coup on January 6th, 2021.

Trump wants to turn the U.S. president into a supreme ruler — who is not bound to the same laws that everybody else is — the very antithesis of the bedrock values this country was founded on. A president shouldn’t be above the law.

In reality, this is all part of Trump’s plan to avoid accountability. He wants to gum up the legal system to delay his federal trial until after the 2024 election. If he really believed he was innocent, wouldn’t he want to have a trial as soon as possible?

Just as bad, the Supreme Court is abetting his plan by dragging its feet.

Trump’s criminal trial in the January 6 case was supposed to begin in March. But now, it’s on hold until Trump’s immunity claim is resolved by the Supreme Court. Who knows how long that will take?

The high court could have ruled on Trump’s immunity claim immediately — which Special Counsel Jack Smith asked it to do last December. Instead, the Supreme Court accepted Trump’s request not to expedite a ruling. Trump’s immunity claim then went slowly through the lower courts, which, not surprisingly, found that, no, presidents DO NOT have carte blanche to commit crimes.

The Supreme Court then had another chance to expedite a ruling on this, but it took weeks even to set a date for arguments.

The Supreme Court can move quickly when it wants to. When Trump appealed Colorado’s decision to keep him off the state ballot, the Supreme Court rushed to get a ruling out before the Colorado primary. Shouldn’t the court move with the same urgency on Trump’s immunity claim? Otherwise, Trump’s January 6th trial may not be decided before the presidential election.

Voters are entitled to know before casting their ballots whether they are choosing a felon for president.

[queering-ecology]

Erotophobia And the Colonization of Queers/Nature prt 2

“The widespread homosexuality of the North American Indians was given as an excuse by the invading Christian whites for their extermination” (1978, 101)(126)—numerous reports on the ‘sinfulness’ of native sexual behavior such as the lack of inhibition, the prevalence of sodomy, and tolerance or even respect for transgender persons—fueled arguments for the colonization of the native people and their land in the name of Christianity.

Since the church had been prosecuting the erotic since its inception, choosing the sexual behavior of indigenous peoples seemed like adequate justification. Gaard provides several examples of colonists’ erotophobic thoughts and feelings about the native people such as men having long hair and skirts or being ‘addicted to sodomy’ (127) or the presence of gender diverse groups and individuals such as the nadleeh and that generally most villages had two or three ‘transgendered’ people.

It was intolerable to the conquerors who could not comprehend such a worldview so fundamentally different from their own. It brought out a fear of themselves, of their own nature. What followed was genocide, torture, enslavement and missionary zeal. Gaard provides several brutal quotes from Spanish conquistadors that demonstrate this. Gender role deviance and the accepted presence of non-heterosexual erotic practices had become the rhetorical justification for genocide and colonialism. But even heterosexual practices devoid of Christian restrictions were objectionable to colonists. Gaard then provides several examples of these ‘heterosexual’ practices among the native tribes that were deemed ‘bestial’ (129) and improper.

Colonial erotophobia continued through westward expansion. In the twentieth century narratives around colonialism and exploration continue along the same line. “Subordinated countries are feminized, subordinated men are emasculated, and the colonized women are turned into fodder for imperialist postcards” (re: colonized women are hypersexualized and dehumanized ie ‘sexy native princess costumes’ ,129) and that U.S. polar expeditions created a narrative of U.S. national identity as an essentially white masculine one (129). Colonial nationalism and the ‘master identity’ share a similar structure as “a set of ideas that sharpens the distinctions between ‘us’ and ‘them’” and is inevitably shaped by what it is not and what is opposes and is ‘forever haunted by [its] various definitional others” (Parker et al. 1992, 5) (130).

“The native feminized other of nature is not simply eroticized but also queered and animalized, in that any sexual behavior outside the rigid confines of compulsory heterosexuality becomes queer and subhuman. Colonialism becomes an act of the nationalist self-asserting identity and definition over and against the other” (131). Colonization can therefore be seen as a relationship of compulsory heterosexuality whereby the queer erotic of non-westernized peoples, their culture, and their land, is subdued into the missionary position—with the conqueror ‘on top’” (131).

[ospreyeamon]

the falls of the revanchist jedi

The narrative doesn’t directly examine why the Jedi who followed Revan and Malak fell. It is spoken of as a given – they followed Revan into war, so they followed Revan into darkness. That’s not how people work though. That’s not even how people under the influence of the Dark Side of the Force work. Spending twenty years as Palpatine’s thrall didn’t prevent Vader from throwing his Master into the reactor shaft to save his son. Revan can murder every NPC available to be murdered until reaching Rakata Prime only to pull a 180, redeem Bastila, and be feted as a hero of the Republic, Sith-eyes and all.

All but one of the surviving Revanchist Jedi who followed Revan and Malak into the Mandalorian Wars followed them again into the Jedi Civil War. Even the Exile, that lone dissenting actor, can say that they would have fought with their fellows against the Republic had their connection to the Force not been severed; that they were unable, not unwilling. Yet, the Exile can also say that they would not have followed Revan and Malak in attacking the Republic, that they went to war to defend the innocent. Many of the other Jedi who joined the war effort alongside them must have felt the same way, in the beginning.

Many of the soldiers of the Republic like Carth Onasi returned home after the Mandalorian Wars were over, even those like Saul Karath who would bow to Revan again. What then are the factors that led every surviving Revanchist Jedi, save the Exile, to follow Revan from the Mandalorian Wars into the Jedi Civil War?

1) The Mandalorian Wars changed the Jedi who fought in them. The Exile’s dialogue provides the different reasons why they might have left to fight in the war – to protect the innocent, to test their power, to defend the Republic, to win glory – reflecting varying motivations of Knights and Padawans recruited by Revan and Malak. However, despite the differences in the initial reasons for defying the Jedi Council to answer the Republic’s call, they all would have gone through similar uniting experiences during the war. Terrible experiences. Shared hardship often serves to reinforce group identity.

Older Jedi like Kavar and Arren Kae had fought wars before, but the initial expedition led by Revan and Malak was almost entirely composed of young Knights and older Padawans. Military morality, ethics in warfare, tends to be rather twisted from the perspective of modern western civilian morality. Your ability to prosecute the war and the safety of your soldiers takes priority over the lives of enemy, and sometimes even allied, civilians. Ruthless is more than a virtue, it’s a necessity. Collateral damage is an inevitability. For young relatively inexperienced Jedi, raised on ideals of valuing all life and always seeking non-violent resolutions, the transition to military command positions where they were not only required to kill, not only required to led troops to their death, but required to give orders which they knew would directly result in the deaths of civilians would have been distressing.

We know that the Exile once led troops directly into a minefield during the Battle of Dxun, but I think that barely scratched the surface. We aren’t given the full laundry list of the Mandalorians’ war crimes, but at the very least it includes the crime of aggression, murder of civilians, use of child soldiers, and conscription of captured civilians into the Neo-Crusaders and for forced labour. Given this disregard for the lives of civilians, I consider it likely that the Mandalorians also used hostages and headquartered themselves inside buildings like schools and hospitals. I suspect both sides used poison weapons, nuclear weapons, torture, and executed prisoners of war.

2) The Battle of Malachor V was a purge and a crucible of conversion. Kreia, HK-47, and the recording of Bastila Shan all say it; “a series of massacres that masked another war, a war of conversion”, “the intention was to destroy the Jedi, break their will, and make them loyal to Revan … Revan was "cleaning house" at Malachor V”, “to convert the last of the Jedi who fought beside [Revan] – and murder those who would not”. The Jedi in the radius of the Mass Shadow Generator would have included the Jedi Revan did not believe would agree with the plan to invade the Republic.

I think many of the Revanchist Jedi had already been falling by inches before Malachor. The Mandalorian Wars were brutal and one of the major symptoms of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder is emotional dysregulation. Irritability, anxiety, depression, guilt, anger – the ongoing effects of trauma make a person more susceptible to inadvertently drawing on the Dark-Side of the Force. Using the Dark-Side of the Force was forbidden by the Code enforced by the Jedi Council, but the Revanchists had been pressured to compromise their ethics in other ways to effectively prosecute the war.

For any Jedi who had not already fallen, the detonation of the Mass Shadow Generator was a final blow they could not withstand. They all fell – into the Dark-Side, into death, away from the Force.

This was the conversion that Revan desired. The moral conversation – the acceptance of actions that violated their previous moral code, the previous moral code that would not have permitted making war on the Republic. The conversion in the Force – pushing Jedi to the Dark-Side ensured that they would not be accepted back into the Order by the Jedi Council even if they desired to return.

3) The Jedi Council’s decision to exile the Jedi who returned to face them was a gift to Revan and Malak. The Council’s judgement might have been rooted in their discomfort with what the Exile had become but the reason they publicly gave is that the Exile disobeyed the Council to follow Revan to war. That reason applied equally to every single other Revanchist. By exiling the one Revanchist to return the Jedi Council exiled them all, whether or not they intended to. They may not have, but by deciding to keep secret the true reasons behind their sentence of exile they ensured the other Revanchists could interpret their judgement no other way.

Telling the Revanchist Jedi they would never be welcome to return to the Jedi Order ensured that they would never go back. Onwards was the only path left to them.

4) Revan was extremely charismatic and competent. The Revanchist Jedi had already decided that Revan and Malak judgement was better than the Jedi Council’s when they chose to defy the Council’s orders to follow them to war. Revan, Malak and the Revanchists then won the war for the Republic. In fact, Revan even discovered the shadowy threat the which had been the Council’s justification for sitting out the war through engaging in it, while the Jedi Council remained ignorant.

The Republic government probably bungled the early stages of the Mandalorian Wars by not intervening sooner. The Mandalorians were committing more than enough war crimes for them to justify it, but they allowed Mandalorians to expand their territory, build their forces and industry, and entrench their advantage. When the Republic did enter the war, it wasn’t because the Republic leadership had made a strategic decision, or even a moral one; it was because some corrupt politicians organised bribes to fast-track Taris into the Republic because it was under threat and they wanted to protect their business holdings there. The Jedi Council was also tangled up in the culture of corruption; Lucien Draay was given a seat on the Council even though he’d been accused of planning and assisting the murder of four Padawans because of his powerful family connections.

The Old Republic was more an aristocratic republic than a democratic one. Alderaan, Onderon, the Empress Teta system – they were all monarchies during this period, not democracies. If aristocrats could hold power through right of blood and plutocrats through wealth, then why shouldn’t Revan lead the Galactic Republic by right of merit and conquest?

Revan was secretive, but at least some of the other Revanchist Sith knew about the shadowy threat – the True Sith Empire. If the Republic was going to need to fight another war against an even greater enemy, surely it would need better leadership. Leadership like Revan.

[ukrfeminism]

2 minute read

Police will be barred from asking for rape victims’ therapy, health, school or other personal records unless it is “absolutely necessary” under new laws to reverse plummeting conviction rates.

Ministers announced the rules as part of a new victims and prisoners law which also gives victims a right to refuse to provide the information without the prospect of the police threatening to drop their case.

The moves will mirror laws already in place that limit police access to victims’ mobile phones to prevent intrusive “digital strip searches” of their private lives, which have been blamed for deterring women from continuing with a prosecution.

The Ministry of Justice said it aimed to end “expansive fishing expeditions” for information that was not relevant to the investigation and could be used to undermine the credibility of the victim.

Preventing ‘invasive requests’

The number of sexual offences including rape have jumped by a third to nearly 195,000 since before the pandemic ,while the proportion resulting in a charge have fallen to as low as 1.3 per cent.

Since ministers pledged to tackle the crisis, the charge rate has increased, although up to 60 per cent of victims withdraw from the prosecution before it comes to court amid concerns at intrusions into their private lives, delays of two years or more in bringing cases to trial, and the trauma of reliving the attack in the witness box.

The new measures to protect from “invasive requests” will cover any official “third-party” information on victims such as education, medical, social services and counselling records.

Police will be allowed to request access only if it is “absolutely necessary and proportionate” to the investigation. They will also be required by law to inform victims about what type of information is being requested, why and how it will be used.

It will dictate that any victim must be informed their refusal to hand over their phones will not automatically lead to a police investigation being dropped.

Police face threat of legal action

If the police fail to abide by the statutory duties in the legislation, they would be in breach of the law and could be open to a legal challenge, according to John Edwards, the Information Commissioner.

Alex Chalk, the Justice Secretary, said: “This important reform will end invasive unnecessary requests for therapy notes for rape victims and give them the confidence to seek the help they need earlier, free from the fear that what they share in the process of healing could be weaponised against them.

“The Victims and Prisoners Bill is ensuring victims are treated as participants in, not just spectators of, the justice system – improving support for them while overhauling the parole system to better protect the public from the most dangerous offenders.”

Suella Braverman, the Home Secretary, said: “It is simply unacceptable that victims of some of the most traumatic crimes have had significant amounts of their personal records unnecessarily requested.”

The changes followed a Home Office consultation in 2022 which showed that almost 90 per cent of respondents were in favour of introducing a statutory duty on police forces to only make necessary and proportionate requests for the disclosure of third-party information.

[disacurveball]

A LIST OF HISTORICAL FIGURE RPF I WANT IN TMAGP.

(This is post is also written from the point of wanting these figures and their stories in the Magnus Archives universe. Trying to keep in line with the historical contexts and figures in TMA, so most are British, except one because it's crazy to me.)

Jeremy Bentham

This whole post is inspired by how absolutely crazy it is that Jeremy Bentham is not in the original TMA series. YES, I get it was to allow Robert Smirke's architecture be front and center to the TMA plot, but I still think it is criminal. He is briefly mentioned in MAG 41 because of reasons I will explain, but briefly mentioned is not enough.

Quick rundown of this dude for those unaware: Bentham was the English philosopher to come up with the idea of the panopticon prison, and Millbank prison was originally proposed and designed by him in 1799.

I feel like there are quite a few facts about Bentham that could make killer plot points in the TMA universe: one is obviously his creation of the panopticon as a way of "humane reform" for prisoners and subsequent criticisms. And....Also he had himself publicly dissected and his skeleton was put on display as an "auto-icon" TO THIS VERY DAY. It's in the student center at University College London. It's a wax figure now with his skeleton inside. It haunts me. Alice and Sam should visit him.

Robert Knox

The Burke and Hare Murders took place in 1828 in Edinburgh, Scotland. Within the span of ten months, sixteen killings were committed, before William Hare agreed to give up details in exchange for prosecution immunity. His partner, Burke, was executed (His skeleton still remains at the Anatomical Museum at Edinburgh to this very day.)

What sets this case apart is Burke and Hare's claim it was done for "scientific purposes." All of the corpses were sold to anatomist Robert Knox, who used them for both dissection for his own study and at his anatomy lectures. While he claimed he had no idea that Burke and Hare were murders, reasonable doubt can be cast on that claim. This very-public case contributed to the Anatomy Act of 1832, which further regulated to study of human dissection to prevent events like this and "resurrectionists" digging up corpses.

In a TMA statement format, I would absolutely love a letter from Robert Knox, after his reputation has been trashed from being involved in this very public murder case, detailing his denial of ever knowing these cadavers were murdered. Of course, it's obvious he's lying, as there is some supernatural happenings surrounding his studies that just get worse the more he works with these two men. (Either Slaughter/Flesh for sure.)

Sir John Franklin

Ok, so, TECHNICALLY Sir John Franklin & The Crews of the HMS Terror and Erebus are in TMA already. In MAG 98, that Algernon dude outbids Maxwell Rayner for an artifact from, you guessed it, the HMS Terror. I think this could be a wonderfully great tie in that could connect the TMAGP universe to the TMA universe if another artifact from it is found.

I just want more of it because the disappearance of the HMS Terror and Erebus are just TMA statements waiting to happen. The HMS Terror and Erebus were two Royal Navy ships, under the command of Sir John Franklin, who ventured into the Arctic in 1845, in order to find the Northwest Passage and gather magnetic data. They disappeared, and during rescue expeditions it was discovered both ships had been abandoned as the crews attempted to trek overland to Fort Resolution 970 km southwest.

There are so many different ways you could take this story in the contexts of the TMA universe: there is evidence cannibalism occured, so obviously Flesh there. The Dark could be invoked, as both a connection to MAG 98 and the fact that the Arctic's sunless winters swallowed them. The Corruption could be used as well because there is evidence the canned rations were tainted with lead and botulism. Finally, the Vast because of the endless nothingness of the landscape they found themselves in. Admittedly, I am a big AMC's The Terror fan, and I think TMA like that show, would be a great place to represent this story's themes of the hubris of man and the British Empire.

Florence Nightingale + Mary Seacole

Both Florence Nightingale and Mary Seacole were British nurses who were pioneers in sanitary medical conditions during the Crimean War. I think less background is needed with these two, but I'd like to see an anti-Corruption artifact come from one of them, like in MAG 45 the syringe that once belonged to John Snow (19th century medical pioneer who deduced that dirty water was linked to cholera). Lowkey would also love a statement set in Scutari Hospital during the Crimean War, Florence Nightingale or Mary Seacole fight the Corruption?? Please, for the love of god.

John Lambe

Congrats...you made it to the start of the more obscure section. Get ready, because this is. A case.

"Doctor" Lambe was an astrologer and a quack physician (in his time period's context, 1545-1628, that means a person who had no formal medical training, not necessarily a charlatan, although Lambe most definitely was.) He was the personal advisor to George Villiers, 1st Duke of Buckingham, who, I don't know why he kept him around because this guy claimed he could read fortunes and find things in his crystal ball. Literally, everyone thought this guy was the Duke's personal sorcerer, which was not great for the nation, because the Duke was close to King Charles I, which if you don't remember from history class was the king who got executed and Oliver Cromwell ran England as a republic for a little bit. Regarding Lambe, a plaque even got put up in London referring to him, saying, "Who rules the kingdom? The King. Who rules the King? The Duke. Who rules the Duke? The Devil."

So what I'm saying here is that this guy is a ye olde Web avatar, which could be discovered in some government files by Alice and Sam regarding the Civil War.

Margaret Cavendish

Okay, I feel like in an alternate universe (*cough* TMAGP *cough*) she could have been the most formidable foe to Jonah Magnus. She was a 17th century (before Jonah's time but with avatars it doesnt matter) philospher, poet, scientist, and fiction writer, and the first woman to attend a meeting of the Royal Society of London (an upper class academic society which we know Barnabas Bennett was involved with in MAG 92).

Academic contemporaries os her day called her mad for her unusual and bold manners and interests that bordered on "masculine." Despite being bold af, the reason I think her and Magnus would square up is her work on natural philosophy. She claimed the use of artificial instruments that are used to study the world "delude" academics, specifically the experimental philosophers in the Royal Society. For example, when Robert Hooke created the diagram of the flea, she said using magnifiying glasses to enlarge the flea's image have no practical purpose because it doesn't help anyone afflicted by them.

Therefore, her philosophical writings are literally the antithesis of The Eye's voyeuristic knowledge-seeking. I'm not entirely sure what entity she'd be an avatar of (though her book The Blazing World gives major Spiral vibes), I just want Jonah to have to square up with an enemy in the Royal Society and have a conniption over it.

Gaspare Tagliacozzi

Last guy. He is not British, but I swear....As The Flesh's certified number one fan, I just need this statement/story in the TMA universe.

Operating in Bologna in the 16th century, Tagliacozzi was one of the pioneers of plastic/reconstructive surgery. Due to the dueling culture amongst upper-class men who felt they needed to protect their honor if insulted, there were many rich men during his time who had lost their noses. This was seem as a great social stigma, the nose was seen as the most important part of the face, and more importantly, it showed you lost that duel. So these rich men had the time and money to hire Tagliacozzi...(He also did surgery on other groups as well, but all of his literature he wrote was tailored to this group.)

Tagliacozzi was inspired by natural botany for the idea of his reconstructive nose surgery; he studied how plants and trees grew over time and applied the same logic to human skin. What he would do was this: He would attach a mold in the shape of a nose to his patient's face, he would attach this to a graft of skin on the arm, and over the course of three weeks, the living skin would grow over the nose mold.

I don't think I have to explain this one. It's my duty as the Flesh's number one fan to give the people good material to work with. (Also could be Stranger.)

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Ian Millhiser at Vox:

On Thursday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Trump v. United States, the case where former President Donald Trump claims that he is immune from prosecution for any “official acts” that he committed while in office. It is, frankly, very difficult to care about this case or to spend mental energy teasing out what the justices may say in their opinions. That’s because Trump has already won.

Trump’s arguments in this case are exceedingly weak, and it is unlikely that even this Supreme Court, with its 6-3 Republican supermajority, will hold that Trump was allowed to do crimes while he was president. Trump’s immunity argument is so broad that his lawyer told a lower court that it would apply even if he ordered the military to kill one of his rivals. (Though Trump does concede that he could be prosecuted if he were first impeached and convicted.) But this case was never actually about whether the Constitution allows a sitting president to avoid prosecution if he uses the powers of the presidency to commit crimes. Trump’s goal is not to win an improbable Supreme Court order holding that he can assassinate his political adversaries. It is to delay his criminal trial for attempting to overturn President Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election for as long as possible — and ideally, from Trump’s perspective, until after the 2024 election.

And the Supreme Court has been his willing patsy. As a general rule, federal courts only permit one court to have jurisdiction over a case at a time. So once Trump appealed trial Judge Tanya Chutkan’s ruling that, no, presidents are not allowed to do crimes, Chutkan lost her authority to move forward with Trump’s criminal trial until after that appeal was resolved. Special prosecutor Jack Smith understands this problem as well as anyone, which is why he wanted the Supreme Court to bypass an intermediate appeals court and rule immediately on Trump’s immunity claim last December. The justices denied that request. After the appeals court ruled, they also denied Smith’s request to resolve the case on an much more expedited schedule.

[...]

The legal arguments in the Trump v. US case, explained in case anyone actually cares

Trump’s lawyers seek to blur the line between civil lawsuits — the president actually is immune from being sued for official actions taken while in office — and criminal prosecutions. Under the Supreme Court’s precedents, all government officials, from a rookie beat cop all the way up to the president, enjoy some degree of immunity from federal lawsuits filed by private citizens. If you follow debates about police reform, you’ve no doubt heard the term “qualified immunity.” This is a legal doctrine that often allows police officers (and most other government officials) to avoid liability when they violate a private citizen’s rights. As the Supreme Court held in Harlow v. Fitzgerald (1982), “government officials performing discretionary functions, generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

The purpose of this immunity is to protect government officials from the kind of liability that might deter them from performing their jobs well. Harlow argued that qualified immunity ensures that the stresses of litigation won’t divert “official energy from pressing public issues.” It prevents lawsuits from deterring “able citizens from acceptance of public office.” And the Court in Harlow also warned about “the danger that fear of being sued will ‘dampen the ardor of all but the most resolute, or the most irresponsible [public officials], in the unflinching discharge of their duties.’” Yet, while qualified immunity often prevents civil lawsuits against police and other government officials from moving forward, it’s never been understood as a shield against criminal prosecution. Just ask Derek Chauvin, the police officer convicted of murdering George Floyd. The Supreme Court has also ruled that a short list of government officials — prosecutors, judges, and the president — have “absolute immunity” from civil suits. This is because people who hold these three jobs are unusually vulnerable to harassment suits filed by private litigants. Prosecutors perform duties that require them to antagonize potential litigants: criminal defendants. And judges’ duties necessarily require them to rule in favor of some parties and against others — who might then turn around and sue the judge.

[...]

The best defense of the Supreme Court’s behavior in this case

The Court’s decision to delay Trump’s trial for months, rather than expediting this case as Smith requested, cannot be defended. That said, in an op-ed published in the New York Times shortly after the Supreme Court decided to delay Trump’s trial, University of Texas law professor Lee Kovarsky made the strongest possible argument for giving the justices at least some time to come up with a nuanced approach to the question of whether a former president is sometimes immune from criminal prosecution.

Trump, Kovarsky argues, should not be given immunity from prosecution for attempting to overturn an election. But he warns that “American democracy is entering a perilous period of extreme polarization — one in which less malfeasant presidents may face frivolous, politicized prosecutions when they leave office.” For this reason, Kovarsky argues that “the Supreme Court should seize this opportunity to develop a narrow presidential immunity in criminal cases” that would prevent a future president from, say, prosecuting President Biden for the crime of being a Democrat. The problem with this argument, however, is that even if the current Supreme Court could come up with a legal framework that would allow Smith’s prosecution of Trump to move forward, while also screening out any future case where a president was prosecuted for improper reasons, there’s no reason to think that a future Supreme Court would hew to this framework. Kovarsky is arguing that the Court should use the Trump case to establish a precedent that can guide its future decisions. A precedent like Roe v. Wade. Or like Lemon v. Kurtzman. Or like Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. Or like United States v. Miller. Or like any other precedent that this Supreme Court has tossed out after that decision fell out of favor with the Republican Party.

Donald Trump won the delay battle in Trump v. United States, even as the court hasn't issued a ruling yet on whether or not he has total presidential immunity.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Mike Luckovich

* * * *

Jack Smith calls the question.

December 12, 2023

ROBERT B. HUBBELL

          Monday brought multiple positive developments for those who yearn for the courts to serve as a bulwark against Trump's effort to assume dictatorial powers. Let’s review the threads of hope that run through the judicial developments on Monday relating to Trump.

Jack Smith goes directly to the Supreme Court on the question of Trump's presidential immunity defense in the D.C. election interference case.

          Trump's primary defense against the 91 federal indictments secured by Jack Smith is delay. His claim of presidential immunity for all acts undertaken as president is not a serious defense but is structured to create delay. It is one of the few defenses that can lead to a pre-trial appeal—and lengthy delay of trial.

          Judge Chutkan denied Trump's motion to dismiss the D.C. election interference case, and Trump appealed to the D.C. Circuit. After the D.C. Circuit rules, the matter can go to the Supreme Court. Even with expedited briefing in both the D.C. Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court, that process might delay Trump's criminal trial until after the 2024 election.

          Everyone knows that Trump's claim of presidential immunity will eventually end up in the US Supreme Court, so Jack Smith called the question on Monday by asking the Supreme Court to take the case without an intervening stop in the D.C. Circuit. The procedure invoked by Smith has been used in extraordinary cases—including US v. Nixon.

          The historical background is discussed by Lucian K. Truscott IV in his excellent Substack newsletter. See Lucian K. Truscott IV, It's called the Nixon rule, and the Supreme Court should uphold it without delay (substack.com). I highly recommend Truscott’s analysis—so much so that I will assume you have (or will) read it so that I can skip some of the details he ably covers.

          Jack Smith’s petition is here: U.S. v. Donald J. Trump | Petition for Writ of Certiorari Before Judgment.

          Before addressing Smith’s petition, let’s skip to the end: Smith has undertaken a bold, brilliant, gutsy move that prioritizes the interest of the American people in knowing whether the leading GOP presidential candidate is a criminal before they are asked to vote for (or against) him in November 2024.

          Smith is, of course, taking a gamble by front-loading the ‘overwhelming question’ that will determine whether Trump is above the law. Framed as a two-part question by Jack Smith in his petition, he asks the Supreme Court to decide the following:

Whether a former president is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office, or

Is constitutionally protected from federal prosecution when he has been impeached but not convicted [in the Senate] before the criminal proceeding begins.

          The answer to those questions is plainly “No.” The questions posed by Smith can be reframed as, “In America, is any person above the law?” Again, the answer is plainly “No.”

          Given that Trump's defense is meritless and should be summarily rejected, Jack Smith’s petition poses the following question to the Supreme Court:

          Will the US Supreme Court aid and abet Trump's effort to overturn the 2020 election by delaying his trial until after the 2024 election—preserving the possibility that Trump will dismiss the prosecutions against himself if he is elected?

          Stripped to its essence, Jack Smith is challenging the Supreme Court to put its legitimacy and legacy on the line. Indeed, he is offering the Court the opportunity for partial rehabilitation. If they decline that opportunity, the justices will deserve the judgment of history that would follow a refusal to consider the matter on an expedited basis and rule that “No person is above the law.”

          Let’s now look at the procedural posture of the petition. Jack Smith is asking for two forms of relief: (a) to skip over the D.C. Court of Appeals by granting a “writ of certiorari” (a fancy word for appellate review), and (b) that the Supreme Court grant review on an expedited basis.

          In a positive sign, the Supreme Court ordered Trump to respond to Smith’s request for expedited review on Wednesday, December 20, 2023. As explained by Professor Tribe on Lawrence O’Donnell’s “The Last Word,” the fact that the Supreme Court ordered Trump to file on an opposition on an expedited basis suggests that there are five votes on the Supreme Court to grant Jack Smith’s request for expedited review.

          If the Supreme Court is inclined to grant expedited review, that is a very good sign. It suggests that Trump will be tried for election interference before the November 2024 election. Although a conviction is not guaranteed, Jack Smith will present evidence of Trump's guilt on the eve of the 2024 election. That is all we can ask for.

          But there is more good news. As Jack Smith was filing his petition with the Supreme Court, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals also indicated that it would move expeditiously by granting Smith’s separate motion for an expedited hearing before the D.C. Circuit. On Monday, the D.C. Circuit ordered Trump to file a response by Wednesday, December 13, in opposition to Smith’s request for an expedited hearing in the D.C. Circuit.  

          Here is the way to think about the dual proceedings in the D.C. Circuit and the Supreme Court. Unless and until the Supreme Court grants Jack Smith’s petition for a writ of certiorari, the D.C. Circuit retains jurisdiction over the case. If the Supreme Court grants Smith’s petition, the D.C. Circuit loses jurisdiction; if it denies Smith’s petition, the D.C. Circuit retains jurisdiction.

          In effect, Smith is on “two fast tracks” to review Trump's defense of presidential immunity. He has hedged his bets and called the question. Good!

[razorblade180]

Whispers in droplets

More of this <- I guess?

It was another calm night in the nation of Hydro. Warm street lights cut through the darkness on every corner while the bustling sound of rushing water had become a source to soothe wary souls to a good nights rest. Furina wished she was one of those people.

All by her lonesome, she stepped rhythmically on every painted brick on the way to the Opera House, her gaze fixated on the ground. Though she lived for the performances, a piece of her also found it calming to be in the grand, empty hall with its lustrous curtains closed; no performances to a n audience had its own since of beauty in her eyes that were currently a little puffy and pink. By now, even the energetic Charlotte had to going to bed, which was good. Furina couldn’t bear the thought of an unwanted picture of citizen capturing her in such a pathetic state of-

“Focalor?”

A voice called out, causing her to jolt upright out of her trance. What was a the muffled sound of water became crystal clear as the young adventurer who sat up against the fountain. Furina’s heart nearly stopped. Of all fountains, it had to The Fountain of Lucine that Aether sat against. She quickly recovered from her internal fear but failed to be as in character as she would’ve liked.

Furina:W-Well well… aren’t we a night owl? To think I’d see you here even later than usual. Plotting a scheme no doubt.

Aether:I thought you learned your lesson about baseless accusations.

Furina:Excuse me!? If you’re referring to Mr. Lyney’s prosecution, we both know it was far from baseless. Even if I hadn’t uttered a word he’d still be questioned, given the fact a crime happened that was during the show! My bold declaration merely expedited the process towards the inevitable truth. Though I’ll admit….the twists and turns along the way were indeed…unexpected.

Aether:I’d say you’re putting that mildly, but I don’t anyone, not even a god, would’ve predicted that nonsense accurately. The crime spanned decades after all.

Furina:Well…I agree, I suppose. *deflates* Though a couple decades in comparison to centuries of life makes my assumption laughable at best. Anyways, why are you here of all places? You of all people must know it wouldn’t do you any good to be around the water system so casually given recent events. Neither Neuvillette nor I would expect you of foul play or tampering, but you’re still a foreigner with trust to earn.

Aether:Can’t argue with that. Unfortunately for me, I’ve been accused of crimes while having even less suspicious behavior. *stretches arms* I couldn’t really sleep, so now I’m here.

Furina:Most decide to take a proper walk or eat something to soothe the body and mind.

Aether:Well I’m not exactly most people. Turns out I’m pretty sensitive to the hydro element. When l can’t sleep , I come here to listen to the water and the secrets they share~

No amount of practiced theatrics could remove the shock in Furina’s eyes. Aether could see her fists tense slowly and despite her attempts to stand tall, she looked a little less composed.

Furina:Secrets you say? What kind of secrets exactly?

Aether:..*smiles* Can’t say. If they wanted to be known, they would. It’s like you said, I have trust to build, so the secrets stay with me.

Furina:…*grins* Ha! Very well then. I suppose I can’t drag them out of you.

Aether:You sure perked up quickly. Though I guess it’s a good thing. It looks genuine.

Furina:Genuine, you say? Heh…

She approached Aether and sat down beside him, going as far as to remove her hat as she gently leaned against his arm. She didn’t care if he could see the redness under her eyes, wrinkles on her clothes, or the frizzled strands of hair that weren’t befitting of a god.

Furina:Pardon my proximity, but I’m rather tired tonight. Or…I suppose I should say I’m tired most nights.

Aether:That’s fine. I’m tired too. I thought you had some place to be, or at least that’s what it looked like?

Furina:I did, however…*closes eyes* I enjoy company; even if it’s yours.

Aether:You were so close to being sweet.

Furina:Gotta keep you on your toes. Seriously, I do enjoy this little moment. Though I hope you do understand you can’t go blabbering about this to anyone.

Aether:Heh, what’s one more secret between us?

[scotianostra]

On February 6th 1615, Patrick Stewart, the tyrannical 2nd Earl of Orkney was beheaded in Edinburgh for treason.

As promised, a follow on from Sunday's post about Robert Stewart, an equally unpleasant member of the Stewar family that influenced Scotland so much.

Ultimately a footnote in the sweep of Scottish history, the earl was — and remains — locally infamous for his decadence and cruelty. He persecuted “witches” gleefully, one name : Alison Balfour, he accused of attempting to murder him. Stewart said that absent vigorous prosecution his subjects “wald all have becommit witches and warlockis for the people ar naturally inclynit thairto,” though the property forfeiture accompanying a witchcraft conviction might also have had something to do with it.

None of this had aught to do with the noble’s fall, although it was cited against him in passing; a treason charge for usurping royal authority arising from parochial jockeying for power did him in.

For those paying attention this basically follows up Friday’s post and sees the karma playing a part.

In 1593, the “iron grip” of the Stewart earls passed from Earl Robert to his second son, 28-year-old Patrick Stewart.

Like his father before him, Patrick’s rule over Orkney was not a particularly pleasant one, earning him the nickname “Black Patie”.

Patrick’s reputation for extravagance, arrogance and greed was matched only by his love of finery - exemplified in the magnificent Earl’s Palace in Kirkwall.

Stewart held the native Orcadians in very low regard. When not bickering with his own family, his time was spent feuding with the more powerful local families.

By 1606, Earl Patrick was heavily in debt and ignored a summons to appear before the Privy Council, in Edinburgh, to explain the complaints received regarding his extremely oppressive rule. He was even charged with treason but the charge was dropped in 1607, such was the power of The Stewarts.

The appointment of Bishop James Law, in the same year, marked the beginning of Patrick’s end. The bishop, a close friend and confidante of the Scottish king, James VI, presented a petition before the king, describing the oppression suffered by the people of Orkney. It is thought he also made mention of the danger the Stewart family posed - at this time the islands were still more Norse than Scottish. The latter statement probably prompted the King to take action.

In 1610, at the age of 35, Earl Patrick Stewart was indicted on seven charges of treason, on the ground of usurping royal authority. He remained in Edinburgh Castle, despite pleading justification for his actions on the islands’ County Laws.

While incarcerated, Patrick appointed his illegitimate son, Robert, as his deputy in Orkney. Robert had instructions to regain his father’s “houses” and to collect rents to prepare for his hoped-for restoration to the Earldom.

Robert’s attempt to comply with his fathers orders resulted in what amount to a rebellion against royal authority. Earl George Sinclair of Caithness - who had a score to settle with the Stewarts - came to the King’s aid, volunteering to lead and pay for an expedition to Orkney to quash Robert Stewart’s rebellion.

After a long siege of the Kirkwall Castle, the Bishop’s Palace and St Magnus Cathedral - where supporters were garrisoned - the Stewart rebellion was brought to its knees by the work of a traitor working from the inside.

Earl George threatened to demolish St Magnus’ Cathedral as a reprisal against the Orcadians who had nearly ruined him but fortunately Bishop Law persuaded him otherwise.

Patrick Stewart, the man destined to become Orkney’s most despised earl, was found guilty of treason in 1615, and subsequently beheaded. And according to tradition, so wicked was he that his execution had to be delayed for several days to give him time to learn the Lord’s Prayer.

As I touched upon earlier the accusation of witchcraft had become a particularly convenient way of depriving people of their land - in the following century there were many trials, often beginning in St Magnus Cathedral and ending at the stake.

And so the tyrannical Stewart’s reign ended in the northern isles. The picture shows Coat of arms of Earl Patrick. The first and fourth quarters show the Scottish royal arms debruised by a ribbon, a symbol of bastardy, while the second and third quarters show the arms of the Earldom of Orkney, you might recall from Monday’s post the Stewarts sprang from illegitimate children of King James the V. Other pic is The Earls Palace ruins at Kirkwall.

Such was their prowess at spreading their seed that recent DNA research shows that a remarkable round half of men with the Stuart or Stewart surname - regardless of the spelling - are believed to carry a unique marker in their Y chromosome which identifies them as the direct descendants of a 13th Century nobleman who fought alongside William Wallace and whose subsequent lineage includes the Stuart monarch, James VI of Scotland, so if you are a man and your surname’s Stewart/Stuart, around about half of you have royal lineage.

Pic is by Martin Laird https://martinlaird.scot/drawing-painting/james-vi-earl-patrick-stewart/

[cnpatenteverything]

Prioritized Examination——One Way to Expedite Prosecution of Invention Patents in China

Besides patent prosecution highway (PPH), prioritized examination is also one way to expedite prosecution of invention patents in China

Similar to certain acceleration provisions before the USPTO, in some situations it is possible to expedite prosecution of a Chinese patent application based on real-world developments. For example, if a particular invention is directed to certain technologies, or is actively being infringed, or is of particular national or public interest, that patent application can be examined on a fast track.

How fast?

For invention patents, if the Request for Prioritized Patent Examination is accepted, the Chinese Patent Office will examine and issue a first Office Action within 45 days, with examination being completed within one year of the request.

When can you file the Prioritized Examination Request?

For invention application, you may file a request for Prioritized Examination after the application has entered the stage of substantive examination, before or after the first Office Action is issued.

What are the requirements for Prioritized Examination?

Patent applications are entitled to Prioritized Examination, if:

1) They involve national key development industries such as energy conservation and environmental protection, new generation information technology, biology, high-end equipment manufacturing, new energy, new materials, new energy vehicles, and smart manufacturing;

2) They involve industries encouraged by the provincial and district-level municipal governments;

3) They involve the Internet, big data, cloud computing and other fields and the technology or product obsolescence is fast;

4) The patent applicant has made preparations for implementation or has began implementation, or there is evidence that others are implementing their inventions;

5) The patent application was first filed in China and then filed in a foreign country; or

6) They are of great significance to national interests or public interests need to be reviewed first

The requirements are applicable for all patent applications in China. However, the results may be affected by some local policies and the situation undergoes constant change. Therefore, it is suggested to consult local counsel when it comes to decide whether and how to apply for prioritized examination.

What are the documents needed for Prioritized Examination Request?

1) Priority exam request;

2) Prior art;

3) Proof of meeting the requirements; and

4) Power of attorney

Please note that for invention applications under Prioritized Examination, the Office Action should be responded within 2 months. Besides, the applicant is not entitled to a 15-day grace period on postal delivery which it is otherwise entitled for normal examination. Further, the applicant is not entitled to extensions if the applicant wants to maintain prioritized examination.

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

Special counsel Jack Smith on Monday asked the Supreme Court to immediately step in to decide whether former President Donald Trump has immunity from prosecution for his actions seeking to overturn the 2020 election.

"This case presents a fundamental question at the heart of our democracy: whether a former President is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office," Smith wrote in the court filing.

Smith said it was "of imperative public importance" that the high court decide the question so that Trump's trial, currently scheduled for March, can move forward as quickly as possible.

The Supreme Court decides which cases it hears, so it is not required to take up the case.

In a brief order issued just hours after Smith's filing, the court asked Trump's legal team to respond by Dec. 20. The court also said it would consider on an expedited basis whether to hear the case, an indication that it takes Smith's request seriously.

The Trump campaign issued a statement saying that Smith was attempting to interfere in the 2024 election.

"As President Trump has said over and over again, this prosecution is completely politically motivated. There is absolutely no reason to rush this sham to trial except to injure President Trump and tens of millions of his supporters," the statement said.

Earlier this month, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is presiding over the election interference case, denied Trump's motion to dismiss his indictment on presidential immunity and constitutional grounds, prompting Trump to appeal and ask for the case to be put on hold.

In order to prevent a delay, Smith is seeking to circumvent the appeals process by asking the Supreme Court to take up the case and decide the issue on an expedited basis.

Smith asked the court to order Trump to respond by Dec. 18 and then immediately act on his request. Under the timeline proposed by Smith, the court — if it decides to step in — could hear arguments and issue a ruling in a matter of weeks.

There is precedent for such an outcome, with Smith citing the 1974 U.S. v. Nixon case, in which the court ruled on an expedited basis that President Richard Nixon had to hand over tape recordings sought during the Watergate scandal probe. Nixon resigned soon after the ruling.

More recently, the court has on several occasions taken up cases at an early stage of litigation to decide issues of national importance, such as the Biden administration's vaccine mandate for businesses and its plan to forgive student loan debt. The Justices ruled against Biden in both cases.

The court has a 6-3 conservative majority that includes three Justices appointed by Trump. But since he left office in January 2021, the court has not been receptive to filings brought by the former president, including over his separate legal fight concerning presidential documents he stored at his Mar-a-Lago home in Florida.

Trump’s lawyers argue that his role in questioning the result of the election was within the “outer perimeter” of his official responsibilities as president, a phrase that appears in a 1982 Supreme Court ruling, also involving Nixon, about presidential immunity. Therefore, under Supreme Court precedent, he is immune from prosecution, the lawyers say.

Smith disputes that argument, saying that the 1982 case, Nixon v. Fitzgerald, concerned only presidential immunity in a civil case. He also noted in the court filing that the long-held view of the Justice Department that the president cannot be prosecuted refers only to sitting presidents.

"Like other citizens, he is accountable for criminal conduct," Smith wrote.

In an effort to hedge in case the high court doesn't take the case, Smith also asked for an expedited appeal with the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for Washington, D.C. The court asked for Trump to respond to Smith's motion by 10 a.m. Wednesday, and Smith's reply to their argument by 10 a.m. the next day.

A federal grand jury in Washington indicted Trump on four charges in August: conspiracy to defraud the U.S., conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction, and conspiracy against the right to vote and to have one’s vote counted. Trump pleaded not guilty at his arraignment hearing.

Prosecutors allege Trump used “dishonesty, fraud, and deceit” to subvert the 2020 election won by President Joe Biden with “pervasive and destabilizing lies about election fraud." Trump was indicted after a sprawling investigation that included testimony from dozens of White House aides and advisors ranging in seniority up to former Vice President Mike Pence.

In a separate filing in the criminal case Monday, Smith's office said it plans to call three expert witnesses to testify at trial. The three unnamed experts will testify on location data history for people who were in the crowd on Jan. 6, the use of that data in the government’s investigation and the use of Twitter on Trump’s phone on Jan. 6, Smith's office said.

Trump is facing three other criminal cases but remains the front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination.

[cosmicsponge2004]

LISTEN...

For any US Viewers here, we all know Joe Biden hasn't been a good president at all. With both his contributions to Isreal's Terrorism in Palestine along with his incompetence when it comes to doing ANY for the United States of America

We also know the republican party is just as evil as last time. With the options there being either Donald Trump or Ron DeSantis. You can just search them here or on any news site to see why they would be even worse.

HOWEVER, We might not have to settle for Biden.

Now, I am under 18. So I am not allowed to vote. The US Government says my opinion dosen't matter. However, I can influence YOU! The 18+ Year Old US Citizens who DO matter in the eyes of the law

I found an independent candidate from a comment section on a tumblr post here (I forgot which one) and he seems great

He's very ambitious (I don't see him reaching most of his goals but surely he could get SOME change done)

Enter: Cornell West

More information on his website (more of his campaign's site but I think he runs it...?)

What does he plan to do? Here's a highlight reel of my favorites. Click "keep reading"

(the full list is on the site)

Abolish poverty 

Abolish homelessness (big statements right there, dude)

Wealth tax on all billionaire holdings and transactions

National $27 minimum wage with special considerations for specific geographies where $27/hour would not be a family-sustaining wage

Mandatory minimum of six months of fully paid parental leave

National free pre-K childcare

Habeas Corpus Healthcare, free healthcare for any and all residents of the United States

Codify abortion rights as a Constitutional mandate (THIS ONE!!! THIS ONE RIGHT HERE!!!!)

Remove Transgender exclusions/limitations from all healthcare policies

Nationalize the healthcare industry, including the pharmaceutical industry

End medical apartheid and protect/increase rights for people with disabilities

End the war on drugs and associated collateral damage on families and communities (Reagan would shit his pants)

End mass incarceration and codify voting rights for all incarcerated people and immediately reinstate voting rights for all returning citizens

Address the disproportionate mortality rate for Black pregnancies

Establish a Land Back Commission to explore and address brutal land theft from, attempted genocide of, and broken treaties with Indigenous peoples

Protect free speech, enforce whistleblower protections, and stop the prosecution of those who expose government corruption

Shut down Cop City and plans for similar facilities across the nation 

Redistribute police funding to unarmed community-led forces

Eliminate crowded prison facilities by developing alternatives to incarceration 

Prisoner Bill of Rights that includes a right to humane treatment and humane living conditions for all correctional facilities

Investigate and end sentencing discrepancies based on race, ethnicity, and class

Ban the death penalty, life without the possibility of parole, three-strikes laws, mandatory minimums, and sentence enhancement politics

Restore voting rights for people with criminal records, including those who are currently incarcerated

Confiscate all military equipment from civilian police forces

Free tuition for all state and community colleges

Dismantle the school-to-prison pipeline by removing police and so-called School Resource Officers from all public schools

Cancel all student loan debt

End the unwarranted, unnecessary, and dangerous assaults on transgender people

Gender-affirming standards of care for trans people in public life and institutions

Codify an Equal Rights Amendment for LGBTQIA+ U.S. residents

National ban on any and all so-called "Don’t Say Gay" laws and all other anti-LGBTQIA+ laws

End crimes against humanity for migrants and their families - no separation of families, no children in cages

Slash the bloated U.S. military budget

Expeditious and responsible closure of global U.S. military bases - AFRICOM, etc.

Cease military funding to the State of Israel

End Israeli apartheid of Palestinian people and press the UN to establish a program for Palestinian dignity and liberation

Cease all military support to nations committing war crimes

(16-24 feel SUPER IMPORTANT to me as a Texan)

If he ain't all talk, I can see this going decently! Have a little hope. Vote for this guy. Or don't, I'm not your dead mom. But I am a concerned US Citizen with a tiny bit of hope. Emphasis on tiny

We can do it!!!

[itsadmiralactually]

OF GENERAL DUTIES OF ADMIRALS.

ADMIRAL, (amiral, Fr.) an officer of the first rank and command in the fleet, and who is distinguished by a flag displayed at his main-top-mast-head. Also an officer who superintends the naval forces of a nation, and who is authorized to determine in all maritime causes.

The origin and denomination of this important office, which seems to have been established in most countries that border on the sea, have given rise to a great variety of opinions. Some have borrowed them from the Greek, others from the Arabic, while a third sort, with greater probability, derive both the title and dignity from the Saracens. But since no certain conclusions have been deduced from these elaborate researches, and as it rather appears the province of this work to give the reader an idea of the office and duty of an admiral at sea, than to furnish an historical or chronological detail of the rank and power with which admirals have been invested in different nations, we shall contentedly resign this talk to the ingenious lexicographers, who have so repeatedly entertained us with such critical investigations.

The ADMIRAL,, or commander in chief of a squadron, being frequently invested with a great charge, on which the fate of a nation may depend, ought certainly to be possessed of abilities equal to so important a station, and so extensive a command. His squadron is unavoidably exposed to a variety of perplexing situations in a precarious element. A train of dangerous incidents necessarily arise from those situations. The health, order, and discipline of his people are not less the objects of his consideration, than the condition and qualities of his ships. A sudden change of climate, a rand and infectious air, a scarcity or unwholesomeness of provisions may be as pernicious as the former, as tempestuous weather or dangerous navigation to the latter. A lee-shore, and injudicious engagement with an enemy greatly superior, may be equally fatal to both. He ought to have sufficient experience to anticipate all the probable events that may happen to his squadron during an expedition or cruise, and, by consequence, to provide against them. His skill should be able to counteract the various disasters which his squadron may suffer from different causes. His vigilance and presence of mind are necessary to seize every favourable opportunity that his situation may offer to prosecute his principal design; to extricate himself from any difficulty or distress; to check unfortunate events in the beginning, and retard the progress of any great calamity. He should be endued with resolution and fortitude to animate his officers by force of example, and promote a sense of emulation in those who are under his command, as well to improve any advantage, as to frustrate or defeat the efforts of his ill fortune.

The most essential part of his duty, however, appears to be military conduct. As soon as the squadron under his command shall put to sea, he is to form it into the proper order of battle, called the LINE. In this arrangement his is to make a judicious distribution of strength from the van to the rear, throwing the principal force into the centre, to resist the impression of the enemy's fleet; which might otherwise, at some favourable opportunity, break through his line, and throw the van and rear into confusion.

A competent knowledge of the seas, weather, and reigning winds, of the coast or region where he is stationed, is also requisite, as it will greatly facilitate his plans on the enemy. It will enable him to avoid being improperly embayed, where he might be surprised in a disadvantageous situation; and to judge whether it will be most expedient to attack his adversary, or lie prepared to receive his assault. When his squadron is forced by stress of weather, or otherwise, to take shelter in a road or bay, it will likewise suggest the necessary conduct of keeping a sufficient number of cruisers at sea, to bring him early intelligence, that he may be ready to cut or slip the cables when they shall be too much hurried to weigh their anchors.

As the forming a complete, strong, and uniform line is a very material article in naval war, the admiral ought frequently to arrange the squadron under his command into this order, that the inferior officers may observe to bring their ships, with great dexterity and alertness, into their several stations, and maintain the regularity of the line when they tack, veer, or sail abreast.

When the admiral intends a descent on an enemy's coast, or other attack which may be attended with complicated and unforeseen incidents, his orders should be delivered or drawn up with the greatest accuracy and precision: they should be simple, perspicuous, direct, and comprehensive; they should collect a number of objects into one point of view, and foreseeing the effects of success or defeat, appoint the proper measures to be adopted in either event. History and experience confirm the necessity of this observation, and present us with a variety of disasters that have happened on such occasions, merely by a deficiency in this material article. In the commanding officer, inattention, barrenness of expedient or a circumscribed view of the necessary effects of his enterprize, may be equally pernicious. And general orders ought to be utterly free from pedantry and perplexity, which always betray a false start and confused imagination, besides the probability of producing many fatal consequences.

When an admiral shall conquer in battle, he should endeavour to improve his victory, by pushing the acquired advantages as far as prudence directs; a conduct that merits his attention as much as any in the action! When he shall be defeated, he ought to embrace every opportunity of saving as many of his ships as possible, and endeavour principally to assist those which have been disabled. In short, it is his duty to avail himself of every practicable expedient rather than sink under his misfortune, and suffer himself to become an easy prey to an enemy.

He should be sufficiently acquainted with civil law, to judge with propriety of the proceedings of courts-martial, and to correct the errors, and restrain the abuses which may happen therein by mistake, ignorance, or inattention.

As secret treaties, propositions, or schemes of the enemy, may occasionally be submitted to his inspection, or fall into his possession by capture; and which it might be improper to discover to any person near him, he ought to have a competent knowledge of the modern languages, or at least those of the countries against whom his military operations are directed, to be able to comprehend with facility the full scope and purport of such papers.

He ought to be well versed in geometry, so as to be capable of ordering proper and correct surveys of unknown coasts, roads, or harbours to be made, and to judge of their accuracy, and detect their errors. To ascertain the situation and longitude of different places, he should be also sufficiently skilled in astronomy and the method of taking observations, which indeed is essentially necessary to the profession of a sea-officer, although too much neglected.

By his instructions the admiral is likewise to assist at all councils of war that relate to naval affairs: to visit, as often as convenient, the other ships of his squadron: to enquire particularly into their condition, and observe the men mustered, taking care that no supernumeraries are born on the books. He is directed to acquaint the secretary of the marine with all his proceedings relative to the service; and to attend him, on his return home, with an account of his voyage or expedition, and to deliver a copy of his journal.

Much more might be observed on this occasion. It appears however by the general outline which we have sketched, that the office and duty of an admiral requires greater skill and more comprehensive abilities that is generally supposed necessary to the command of a naval armament. And that he ought to be duly qualified to assist the councils of government, and enter into the enlarged system of protecting his country from an invasion by sea, or of mediating a descent on an enemy's coast; as well as to improve navigation, and open new channels of commerce.

Vice-ADMIRAL, (vice-amiral, Fr.) the officer next in rank and command to the admiral; his flag is displayed at the fore-top-mast-head.

Rear-ADMIRAL, (contre- amiral, lieutenant general des armees navales, Fr.) the officer next in rank and command to the vice-admiral, and who carries his flag at the mizen-top-mast-head.

Source: Naval History and Heritage Command

[meret118]

Legal and political experts were stunned by the Supreme Court announcing Wednesday it will take up Donald Trump’s claim of presidential immunity, despite there being no contradiction in the lower courts. Compounding experts’ surprise and concern over granting certiorari was the length of time it took to announce the decision, and that they will not hear arguments until April 22.

“The Supreme Court heard and decided Bush v. Gore in THREE DAYS. THAT was expediting a case of national importance,” noted Tristan Snell, the former New York State prosecutor who led the successful investigation and $25 million prosecution of Donald Trump’s Trump University.

“The Supreme Court apparently now thinks expediting means THREE MONTHS. Clearest evidence yet that SCOTUS is corrupt and broken.”

. . .

Weissman Thursday morning noted that the Supreme Court’s actions essentially make Trump “de facto immune.”

-----

All they had to do was uphold the lower courts decision on a no brainier case.