Found the vatnik. You getting paid for this or are you just a useful idiot, doing it pro bono?

It's a smart move. We all know the "problem" can't actually be solved; there is no feasible way to prevent sanctioned nations from getting ahold of pallets full of microelectronics after they leave the factory and get shipped all over the planet. But it will motivate Western companies to be more circumspect about who they're dealing with, if only to avoid embarrasing headlines, and this will create higher costs for Russian arms manufacturers, a.k.a. the Russian government. Russia is in deep economic shit that is rapidly becoming catastrophic, and higher costs will add to this pressure.

This is a chat bot that answers questions about books.
Turning it off is merely not using it.

A better example of what you're complaining about is Google's AI shitpost at the top of every query.
This isn't it.

Frankly, this kind of thing is going to have huge adoption. It's precisely the kind of shit that people are using AI for right now.

You're going to have to decide if AI has agency, or is just a tool used by a person. You can't have it both ways.

It's that little dark urge that exists in most humans- the need to win by any means necessary- even if it means corrupting something.

I've got family in Arkansas. They love Jews as long as they show proper deference to the Christian interpretation of Jewish texts.

How original- fascist declares political opponent to be non-person.

FTA:

Just be honest. You don't think it's a jobs program for Democrats (since the articles says nothing to that effect).
You're just pissed off that they don't limit their Republican representation to pro-Trumpers.

When you arrived in Nuremberg, did it feel like you had finally made it home?

In short: All of this is the consequence of post-WW2 ultra-empowerment of the executive by the legislature.
We like to blame the guy instead of the laws that enable him.

The system was designed to survive a mini-mussolini. The system was not designed to protect against a legislature that did not jealously guard its power.

This is hand-wavy bullshit.

This is ignorant bullshit.

The grounds are dubious, because the laws that allow for it are ambiguous as fuck.
Those troops are doing nothing but protecting Federal property, because that's all he can do with the ambiguous laws selected.

I don't think Trump cares about the law in the slightest.
But yes, there absolutely is an entire system to stop him, including the troops you're so afraid of.
They have a duty not to follow illegal orders. The best he can do is do a shitty job of coloring in the lines.

Your political talking-head regurgitations aren't helpful.

Don't tell Lincoln that.

It changes from decade to decade, cause to cause- in both political parties.

I can't think of any Washington engaged in, but Jefferson for sure impounded Congressionally allocated money- though not for the purpose of trying to dictate policy to the States, and Congress didn't fight him on the matter. i.e., it wasn't contentious.
In fact, many Presidents have done that. It wasn't really a problem until Nixon. Impound Control Act was a result of that, and the Supreme Court authorized it as legal. Today, it looks like Impound Control may be about to collapse to the pre-Nixon state, depending on what SCOTUS says about the Harvard case- assuming Trump's DOJ appeals it.

Ultimately, Congressional authorization isn't required for all things. The President is individually empowered along side them for many things- like impoundment- it was considered a normal Presidential power until the 1970s- 200 years after its first assertion. Took us that long to get a real crook in office. I think that actually you misjudge how broad the job description is. I think modern people would perhaps be terrified of the Constitutional Convention debate notes. They envisioned a very powerful "Chief Magistrate" (President) that would be controlled by the impeachment power. They hadn't experienced the Party-over-Country politics of political parties yet- they literally didn't exist.

The theory behind checks and balances required that control of the 3 branches wouldn't be united by any common cause other than those which an independent thinker would come to. Party politics shot that out of the water 200 years ago. System was broken by the time its second President was inaugurated.

Agreed. The ruling party shouldn't be acting like it's in the fucking opposition. Especially at times when it was fucking critical for it to lead.

Where in the hell have you been?

Trying? Dude has succeeded. The ICA is dead. All he has to utter are the words, "foreign policy", or "national security". But yes- it was the protection from this kind of bullshit happening, before it had been entirely neutered by the Supreme Court.