Maybe yes, maybe no. It could be strategy to make sure representatives who might get voted out in the midterm if they did not vote to impeach, will not have to go on the record, and thus hold their seats.

In other words, rather than having them save Hegseth and then lose their seats, they delay the impeachment, potentially sacrificing Hegseth, to save multiple seats.

From the article:

“This time around, the AP said that the 824.9 million euro fine was calculated as the maximum penalty that’s derived from four percent of a company’s worldwide annual turnover.”

Annual turnover is revenue, so top line money, before taxes, expenses, etc. They profited a little over $10 billion last year, so a nearly $1 billion fine is a little less than 10% of their profit.

I wouldn’t call it insignificant - as a percentage of profit, it’s not bad. But when we’re talking about billions, it’s still probably not enough to get them to stop.

Clinton bombed a medicine factory based on weak/nonexistent evidence it was making nerve gas.

Obama used drone strikes ten time more than Bush, to the point he felt comfortable making a joke about drone striking the Jonas Brothers.

I’m not trying to “both sides” this. The two sides are not equal. But this type of post, that tries to pretend one side has no scandals, only makes the other side stronger. People see things like this and dig their heels in. They (justifiably) criticize things like this for not being impartial, and dismiss the people posting them as untrustworthy/unreliable.

We shouldn’t be playing these games. If you want to take them down, steelman them, and show that even at their best, they’re worse.

The bicameral legislature, with proportional and equal representation, has valid arguments to support it. That isn’t to say it’s perfect, but it was a compromise made for some justifiable reasons. Where we really went wrong was the Reapportionment Act of 1929, that capped the size of the house, and guaranteed small states at least one seat. This has given small states extremely outsized impact, that gets worse every year (as the growth of other states continues to out pace them). Even with a single chamber legislature, capping the members in this fashion would lead to the same problem. If the house was truly proportional, as originally intended, we’d be a very different country, regardless of the senate.

To see why this really matters, see this CGP Grey video about the electoral college and it’s relation to Congress (equal voters as reps in Congress). Then consider how the President gets to nominate judges, and consider the cascade of nonsense that follows.

Pretty sure this is for people to thank their departing friends and teammates. Not the other way around.

This is incorrect. People do make over a million, e.g. Sundar Pichai makes $2 million base. The reason the tax is a lower percentage for a millionaire is because the social security tax is capped. You only pay it on the first $184,000 (this increases yearly) that you earn.

It is important to note social security tax is basically forced retirement savings. In theory, you are funding your own retirement through it (the more you pay in, the more you get out later). This is very different than ordinary income tax, which is not capped (that’s not to say it’s high enough, or that there aren’t ways to hide, defer, or obscure income, and pay less than expected or reasonable).

https://youtu.be/EBb1bYakqMw?t=11m55s

“Even the hands?!”

If you haven’t seen Detroiters, do yourself a favor, and go binge it.