> "The doors remain open for the U.S. to reenter in the future, as it has in the past with the Paris Agreement," [UNFCCC] said in a statement. "Meanwhile, the size of the commercial opportunity in clean energy, climate resilience, and advanced electrotech remains too big for American investors and businesses to ignore"
> Can you give us
a little bit of the history of the ICC
investigation? You and I both worked on
the OAS process to investigate the
possible Commission of crimes against
humanity in Venezuela which led directly
to the article 14 referral of the
country to the Court by six member
states of the Rome Statute back in 2018. That was the first such referral in the
Court's history. The ICC prosecutor then
formally opened an investigation in
November of 2021.
Does the US arrest of Maduro preempt or parallel the ICC investigation of crimes against humanity in Venezuela?
Given the US's history of defiance of ICC, would the US accept evidence collected by ICC for their prosecution of (additional) crimes against humanity?
(It's relevant, though, to note that they maintained their anti- Roe v Wade position only until shortly before the election. Shortly before the election, Trump flip-flopped on abortion; on forcing rape victims to carry to term)
> After 1898, the Monroe Doctrine was reinterpreted by lawyers and intellectuals as promoting multilateralism and non-intervention. In 1933, under President Franklin D. Roosevelt, the United States re-affirmed this new interpretation, through co-founding the Organization of American States.[7] Into the 21st century, the doctrine continues to be variably denounced, reinstated, or reinterpreted.
This is fairly routine -- for Democratic executive administrations to unfuck financial / other poor performance / bad health promulgated by prior Republican ones:
Republicans since Reagan have prioritized tax cuts as an end in themselves, treating deficit concerns as secondary
Democrats have generally accepted the post-1990s norm of PAYGO (pay-as-you-go) budgeting more consistently
Trump has been remarkable effective and impactful, for a US President.
His term makes me think maybe we DON'T want Presidents, as they're too powerful and it's too risky a structural design.
Democratic measures against Republicans is always one step forward for every two steps back. It’s not enough and has never been enough because liberals don’t fight a fraction as hard to help people as conservatives do to fuck people over. Every single democratic administration wastes months to years trying some sort of reconciliation path with people who actively hate them and wonder why politics as usual isn’t working.
I agree, but believe jacquesm is pointing to a larger problem: even with diligent and committed efforts by a different administration or a series of them, the rest of the world is not going to trust the US any more for a very long time. Partly thanks to social media, it's obvious that the political realignment we're seeing is not just the work of a few political strategists and manipulators, but that about a third of the US is consumed by a revanchist mindset with whom accommodation is impossible.
Indeed. Even Canadians, who - as a rule, and of course only in my experience - are fairly mild mannered are now outright aghast at the way their Southern neighbor is behaving. This is something I never expected to see and here we are, and that little bit of damage alone is going to last for a decade or more if it doesn't get much worse compared to where it is today.
The damage we're talking about will last for generations.
His age or mental capacity never seemed to be a dealbreaker for his supporters previously. I'm not sure how or why that would change. Obviously number go up but if they still trust him it doesn't really matter. They will handwave and talk about advances in medicine & health
ICE is going to have a hell of a time feeding the souls of a thousand foreigners to the golden throne every day to keep him alive. Maybe that's what Venezuela's for.
You're recklessly optimistic assuming damage is temporary, reversible, and that there will be a different kind of administration subsequently when the current occupant has already voiced that _their next inauguration_ will be held in the forthcoming demolished east wing Epstein-Trump memorial ballroom.
Does obstructing campaign finance prosecutions, obstructing prosecution of one's own non-official criminal actions, and interference in Georgia's presidential elections qualify that Trump (who didn't remember his ex wife in the E Jean Carroll deposition) is a Usurper, in US law?
But the US is withdrawing from UNESCO.
states with neural data privacy laws https://www.google.com/search?q=states+with+neural+data+priv...
reply