That’s not from the supreme court ruling. That’s an opinion piece. It holds no meaning over the ruling. Political fear mongering.

But notably, it does shield them from prosecution for crimes which are tangentially related to their official duties. For example, granting a presidential pardon is an official duty. Taking a bribe in exchange for that pardon would be a crime. But now the president is allowed to openly and blatantly take that bribe, because the bribe is tangential to their official duty, and they are therefore shielded from prosecution.

Not at all. While granting a pardon is an official duty, taking a bribe in exchange for a pardon is a criminal act. The decision does not shield the President from prosecution for such criminal conduct. Criminal acts are just as prosecutable as there were prior.

Excerpt from the ruling:

“As for a President’s unofficial acts, there is no immunity. The principles we set out in Clinton v. Jones confirm as much. When Paula Jones brought a civil lawsuit against then-President Bill Clinton for acts he allegedly committed prior to his Presidency, we rejected his argument that he enjoyed temporary immunity from the lawsuit while serving as President. 520 U. S., at 684. Although Presidential immunity is required for official actions to ensure that the President’s decision making is not distorted by the threat of future litigation stemming from those actions, that concern does not support immunity for unofficial conduct. Id., at 694, and n. 19.”

Unofficial conduct includes taking bribes.

Many experts disagree with the second half of your sentence, because ordering an assassination could easily be argued to be an official duty; After all, the POTUS is the commander in chief of the military. According to this ruling, ordering it illegally would be protected, because the illegality is tied to the official duty.

“Many experts” isn’t someone I can talk with or argue against. They’re just weasel words.

Ordering an assassination is illegal. It violates the fifth and fourteenth amendments to the constitution (as they deprive persons of “life, liberty, or property” without fair legal procedures and protections). as well as Executive Order 12333 in which assassination is explicitly deemed illegal.

Who decides what is “official,” or “unofficial?” Oh, that’s right, Federalist Society planted judges.

The distinction between official and unofficial acts is largely guided by precedents set by the Supreme Court. Cases like Nixon v. Fitzgerald (1982) and Clinton v. Jones (1997) provide frameworks for understanding the scope of presidential immunity and the nature of official duties. It’s not just something they drum up out of nowhere. Judicial review and precedent are used for building out what constitutes official duties.

This is exactly why i’m asking people to read the ruling that I linked for your convenience It doesn’t even talk about bribery. At all. People are just saying things without doing any effort to source/reference/research what they’re talking about.

Hey so there’s some echo-chambery stuff going on in Lemmy right now, so I want to provide some clarification:

1. The court decision did not create a new law. It provided clarity on laws already in place. Presidential immunity is not a new thing. It’s a well established power. See: Clinton v. Jones (1997), United States v. Nixon (1974), United States v. Burr (1807), Nixon v. Fitzgerald (1982), Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952)

2. The court decision does not expand on the law either, it clarifies that:

The President has some immunity for official acts to allow them to perform their duties without undue interference. However, this immunity does not cover:

• Unofficial acts or personal behavior.

• Criminal acts, (to include assassination).

The decision reaffirms that the President can be held accountable for actions outside the scope of their official duties. It does not grant blanket immunity for all actions or allow the President to act as a dictator.

People who are giving opinions based on what they read on Lemmy instead of going and reading the supreme court opinion that is totally online and right here for you to reference are spreading misinformation and fear.

It’s called Sodium in English because an English chemist Sir Humphrey Davy discovered it & named it “Sodium” He was able to isolate it via separation of caustic soda (sodium hydroxide) and therefore named it after the caustic soda “soda-ium”. A few years later, a German chemist (Ludwig Wilhelm Gilbert) was able to isolate it and named it “Natronium” Just under a decade later, Jöns Jacob Berzelius coined the term “Natrium” as he felt the name “Natronium” was too lengthy to catch on.

As to exactly why the earlier term was not respected is likely due to nationalism. During the earlier 1800’s a lot of countries were desperately trying to take claim for various rapid advancements in chemistry, physics, mathematics, and medicine. Getting to have the name that “your guy” coined was largely bent around national pride.

10/10 chain jerking

Hackers mad

Hackers mad

Hackers mad

It’s some tiktok cringe thing about autism being a quirky and fun trait instead of a challenging mental disorder.

Would someone really do that? Just go on the Internet and tell lies?

The comparison to modern travel is a bit off though… The vast, VAST, majority of humanity would never travel further than a few villages over in their entire lifetime. The ‘mixing’ of cultures isn’t nearly as pronounced as you’re suggesting. Consider that even medieval “France” was made up of over 6 distinct cultures with often different languages.

I once clicked an ad for syrinscape because it intrigued me. I ended up using it. Loyal customer ever since.

Yeah. I’ve had exactly 0 issues in the past decade. The only people I tend to get op’s complaints from are usually lamenting that they can’t use the n-word or hate on marginalized groups anymore and hide behind “it’s a joke lmao”. Op was too vague to actually say what exactly they mean by sanitization, but it IS eerily similar.

Human-accelerated global warming wouldn’t happen via a handful of deer… But global warming was going to happen even if humans never existed. Global temperatures have waxed and waned since before life existed. The only difference here is that we’re pressing on the gas pedal (literally) and accelerating the process. The idea that global temperatures would have never climbed without humans empowers denialists by giving them a strawman to point at.

The dark ages didn’t happen. They’re a myth perpetuated by protestant historians in the 1900’s who were trying to imply that the era between the fall of the Western Roman empire (600s) and the reformation period (1500’s) were this awful collapse of society due to the Catholic Church ‘straying from gods light’. It’s totally bullshit of course and any modern historian (regardless of religion) wouldn’t use the term.

1. Generally to be “in-demand”, you need about 6 years of experience & highly desirable certifications (at least one security cert such as sec+ or CASP, dns-related cert such as Infoblox CDCA, and typically something else like cloud engineering or maybe automation engineering related). Getting into DNS is usually something that happens after you’ve already been an enterprise network engineer for a number of years. It’s highly specialized and rather difficult.

2. Not possible. While AI can theoretically do the job, error is too expensive. AI already does much of my work, but I have to make risk assessment & I run the automation systems. I already automate much of my daily work. But when big stuff breaks, automation won’t fix it.

Any company that is willing to fire me to save costs isn’t worth working for. The job is so in-demand that if I put “looking for a job” in my linked-in, I get multiple offers within the hour. Not even joking. That’s how I got my current job.

DNS engineer here.

It’s always DNS because no one wants to hire us. We’re prima donnas that don’t work much and demand large salaries. Companies think they can get away with having some random network guy “learn a bit of DNS” and it works!!.. For a while… Then it fails catestrophically and the DNS engineer that was let go to “save costs” smugly watches them crash and burn. The job is super easy and simple until you’re 48 hours into troubleshooting and the CTO is lighting money on fire trying to get the network back online. A big company can easily burn a DNS engineers 10 years salary in costs if they have a single large DNS failure (security or downtime).

DNS engineer here: it’s the bane of my existence. Vanity TLDs were a cash grab for ICANN. They have made defensive domains a nightmare

I couldn’t roll my eyes hard enough. It instantly reminded me of r/atheism titles going “dae religion bad ?😤” 80,000 up votes