mkwt

joined 3 years ago
[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 7 points 46 minutes ago

There's a provision in the law where they can't do any mass purges within 90 days of an election. So this ruling is limited to "individualized queries" for the rest of the 2026 cycle. But you can expect it to be a much bigger deal in the 2028 cycle if it doesn't get overturned.

(This is a situation where Congress has the power to change the law. Hint, hint.)

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 8 points 6 hours ago

What source control doing??

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 7 points 9 hours ago

Within the first amendment law, there are distinctions between the White House press briefing room versus other events in other parts of the white house. There's a stricter standard for denying press access to the briefing room, because it was designated as a non public forum. Whereas the rest of the white house is simply non public / non forum.

That's why some of these issues likely need separate litigation and motions.

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 3 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

The current Lake Shore Limited route is 1,543 km. Doing that in 2.5 hours requires an average speed of 617 km/hr. At TGV top speeds of 320 km/hr it is a 4.8 hour trip.

As far as I know, 600 km/hr requires the development of additional technology not in operational use in other countries.

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Before two days ago, there was a period of several months where the African deportations were legal because everyone's favorite Supreme Court decided to allow them during the litigation.

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Update: in a recent filing, the white house claims all press passes are restored, but it took like all morning to find and process then

EDIT update: lol

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Judge ordered the gov to provide some response by 12:30, on about half an hour.

This is apparently direct contempt of court by the white house, and it's going to be very well covered because guess who the plaintiffs are.

Meanwhile, the government may also be defying the 1st circuit order that bars no-notice third country deportations to Africa. But it's hard to tell. There's evidence that some planes may be heading to Africa today. But who is on the planes? ADS-B doesn't tell us that.

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Linux requires at least 32 bit machine words, and it always has. Linux was originally written for Intel 80386.

Linux requires a hardware MMU to support virtual memory. There are patches that can make a no-MMU kernel, but it drastically changes the experience to do so.

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago

He's actually been in prison since 2020 and he's already served about 6 years of the 15 years announced today.

This happened because he was found guilty and sentenced. Then that conviction was thrown out and a new trial was ordered. This is the second trial outcome.

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 16 points 2 days ago

Messup one is the alternating "butterfly" design on the ballot as shown in the image. It was deemed too confusing because the candidates aren't listed in a single order.

Messup two is a hole punch was used to punch holes in the central area on the ballot, but it wasn't very good at its job. The hole punch system left a bunch of ballots with only partially punched holes, and "hanging chads" where the punched out piece of paper is still attached and dangling. During the recounts the election board had to make a bunch of individual decisions on how to interpret these ballots.

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 30 points 2 days ago (3 children)

In addition to recovering human remains, the search of East Texas also recovered several parts of flight deck panels.

Just as in the Challenger accident, several switches were determined to have been moved their nominal positions.

By correlating the recovered switches with the telemetry data that was transmitted after loss of voice signal, the investigators concluded that at least one person in that orbiter was alert and working the problem within <1 minute of when molten metal started to penetrate the crew cabin and the seat belts started to fail.

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

Update: the hearing on the proposed restraining order is scheduled for Wednesday afternoon.

 

Courthouse News has identified nearly 100 cases this year in which the government was ordered to pay attorney’s fees to an immigrant it unlawfully detained, totaling more than $1.1 million.

 

The Trump administration has dropped its case against a former Olympic canoeist charged in connection with damage to the Reflecting Pool, acknowledging their allegations against David “Davey” Hearn don’t hold water.

officials obtained information that undermined “the evidentiary basis for the indictment” against Hearn.

 

After the supreme court denied Trump's petition for cert in the $5 million defamation case, the district judge has ordered the clerk to pay out the now $5.8 million judgement to E Jean Caroll's lawyers.

The original judgement was for $5 million, and it earned about $800k interest during the appeal. The money is coming directly from the court because Trump earlier paid the full amount into the court registry in lieu of posting an appeal bond.

Trump immediately appealed the pay-out order. But since there's no stay, it's still effective.

E Jean Caroll also has a separate judgement against Trump for about $80 million. That case is still on appeal.

 

Washington, DC resident Sam O'Hara noticed a couple of national guard soldiers patrolling the streets, and he decided to follow them around playing the Star Wars "Imperial March" on a portable speaker.

For this he was handcuffed and detained for about 20 minutes. Now he has reached a settlement where the government will pay him an undisclosed amount of money in compensation.

59
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by mkwt@lemmy.world to c/Epsteinfiles@lemmy.world
 

Breaking now, Judge Emmet Sullivan has granted a preliminary injunction that orders the Department of Justice to either release a number of specific Epstein files to the public, or to "show cause" why they shouldn't.

The government has until July 2 to file responses.

Lawyer and journalist Katie Phang filed suit to enforce the Epstein Transparency Act. The judge has evidently determined that she has suffered harm from being unable to report on the unreleased files, and therefore has standing to sue.

This decision seems like it might be headed for an appeal, but Judge Sullivan declined to stay, or delay implementation, to allow the government time to appeal. So the clock to July 2 is currently ticking.

Bates numbers that are mentioned:

Ordered to unredact names:

  • EFTA00749245
  • EFTA01187999
  • EFTA01930501
  • ETFA01928255
  • EFTA00628112
  • EFTA02648868
  • EFTA02504630
  • EFTA01022356
  • EFTA01703108
  • EFTA00038227

Ordered to produce underlying FBI notes:

  • EFTA01245620
  • EFTA02858481
  • EFTA02858491
  • EFTA02858495

Opinion: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.291779/gov.uscourts.dcd.291779.16.0_2.pdf

Full court docket: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73246595/phang-v-blanche/

UPDATE: July 2 is now here. In a move that should surprise absolutely no one, the government decided to produce no additional documents, and they filed a lengthy response explaining reasons why they should not. Short version:

  • All of the redacted email addresses are either victims; or the email address appears in both the name and email fields (like "jsmith@gmail.com" jsmith@gmail.com); or in one case Thomas Massie already outed the guy, so there's no need for the government to comply with the court order (?)
  • The government claims that they count people as "victims" if they started out as victims, but later performed reprehensible acts (according to the files)
  • One indictment was over-redacted, but they claim it's okay because they unredacted some of the same names in some other documents. Another indictment only contains redacted "victims."
  • No need to produce FBI interview notes because the FBI always types up exactly the stuff in their notes into the final report.
  • Reviewing foreign language documents for release is just too darn hard to do.
  • The government plans to publish the redaction log as required, but the law doesn't put a deadline on that, so the judge shouldn't either.
 

A lawyer working with the Minnesota attorney’s office said she just wants some sleep, after working so hard to try to get ICE to follow court orders.

“I wish you would just hold me in contempt of court so I can get 24 hours of sleep,” Le said. “The system sucks, this job sucks, I am trying with every breath I have to get you what I need.”

Edit clarification: This attorney works for the federal government, not the State of Minnesota.

 

Over the weekend, Judge Nachmanoff made it clear that a large amount of discovery material is to be delivered to James Comey today. The prosecution team from North Carolina seem to be engaging in a series of stall tactics to delay this.

The eastern district of Virginia is known informally as the "rocket docket" because of its fast resolution times for cases.

 

While sitting for a deposition in a defamation lawsuit that she filed, Laura Loomer was asked to explain under oath what she meant by the phrase "Arby's in her pants" (which she earlier penned in a tweet).

Transcript:

Q  Can you explain to me what it means to say to her that "the Arby's in her pants"?
A  Well, Arby's --
    MR. KLAYMAN:  Objection.  Relevancy.
BY MS. BOLGER:
Q Answer the question.
A  Arby's sells roast beef.
Q  Right.  Can you tell me what -- why you were talking about "the Arby's in her pants"?
A  Well, it's just a -- an expression.
Q  What is the expression trying to convey?
A  It conveys the reason why she got a divorce by her own admission.
Q  Because she had roast beef in her pants?
A  Yeah.
Q  She'd put roast beef in her pants; that's what you're trying to say there?  You're literally saying she put Arby's in her pants?
A  I'm saying she literally -- it's so ridiculous.  I'm saying she literally put Arby's in her pants.  Yes.
    MR. KLAYMAN:  Objection.  Relevancy.
BY MS. BOLGER:
Q  You're not making a slur about her?
A  No.
Q  You're literally saying she put an Arby's sandwich in her pants; is that right?
A  Yes.  That's correct.  That's correct.
Q  Why are you laughing?
A  Because I just think it's so funny.
Q  What is your basis for saying she put Arby's in her pants?
A  I just think it's so funny.  I just think it's so funny.
Q  What is your basis for saying she put Arby's in her pants?
A  She carries roast beef in her pockets.
Q  What is your basis for saying she puts roast beef in her pockets and in her pants?
    MR. KLAYMAN:  Objection. Relevancy. Harassment.
view more: next ›