Ya, that's a fucking problem, I agree.
The system has always been vulnerable to cops lying about why they beat or shot the fucking black guy.
The justice system is slow to start stripping away their presumption of good faith.

Because it's kids doing this, and they want apps for everything.
That's why only a fool would think AI has no future- the shit is crack to everyone I know under the age of 30.

Ok? That's my point, did you not read who I was responding to?.

Are we all willing to say Congresspeople have the right to say all of those things and censure for any of these cases is ridiculous?

Files were sealed because investigation was ongoing during Biden's term, Maxwell was sentenced in 2022.

Biden was also like a right proper President and was appropriately hands off with the DOJ. Obviously today respecting 2 centuries of norms is a bit woke.

Is there a huge difference between a criminal organization and a multinational corporation?

I'm not saying that they can't do it, it's that they can't legally do it.

Look at the troll pretending not to be a lost causer!

A perfect example of handling a perceived problem humanely.
You support deportations, so why are you trying to use that as an attack? lol

Erm, so? Are you trying to equate asylum parolees with illegal immigrants? Fascinating. Isn't that like, you motherfuckers whole schtick? You're just against the illegal kind?

Your colors are showing, amigo.

Correct.
Which is fucking widely recognized power of the legislature. What, exactly, about that makes them terrorists?
"We consider this to be a national security concern.".
I warned the dipshits that did foamed at teh fucking mouth for a TikTok ban that this was the can of worms they were opening.
Fucking enjoy.

Go ahead, there's an analog hole and for the most part the industry doesn't care. With your described setup, you're likely to have a great deal of color loss as the gamut of the screen and your camera are not well matched.

The goal of HDCP is to make it inconvenient for a typical user to make a high quality copy of a video or stream (like pay-per-view sports streaming tends to want higher levels of content protection). Stopping all possible avenues of copying media is not the goal of DCP (Digital Content Protection LLC). It's primarily to make the connection between source and sink less attractive of a vector for casual piracy.

And the ability to simply rip a Blu-ray on your home computer is outside of the scope of HDCP, and that's the method I'd recommend. The HDCP link is just a speed bump that annoys end-users, perhaps slows down casual piracy, but without stopping large scale organized piracy.

What country do you live in and ill point out the people who are "forced" to keep society functioning and we can argue if we are "entitled" to it.

Note that none of this should be taken to be me condoning this mess.
However, my real beef is with the law that's on the books from 1996. Lot of dark shit happened while Clinton was trying to placate Gingrich.

I said it twice, because they invoked it as if it were a magic spell twice.
In order to say how it differs from MachineShedFred's understanding, he'd have to have explained what that was.
All I can say is that what he thinks certainly doesn't match reality if he thinks that due process is violated by the arrest.

First problem, is that he's mixing up procedural due process, and substantive due process.
Second problem, is that Congress has explicitly limited the due process of people who are here illegally (Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA)) under certain circumstances.
An example of a due process violation that would be unquestionable, would be if they were engaging in indefinite detention (effectively suspending habeas corpus), unless the court found he could legally suspend habeas corpus in this instance (which it almost certainly wouldn't- not even this Supreme Court, I don't think)
i.e., due process claims are largely overblown, and greatly misunderstood.
To be crass, black-bagging an immigrant off the street if you have reason to believe they are eligible for expedited removal is not a violation of their due process rights.
Putting them in prison indefinitely is.

That's a loaded statement.
I'm saying it's not illegal for those reasons, not that they can break the law for those reasons.
Transferring an arrested person from the point of arrest to a detention center with good faith belief that they have been involved in a crime is not unlawful, as long as the finding of good faith is held by the court.
Supremacy clause says that the Constitution and its laws are the supreme law of the land, which means that no law that doesn't explicitly remove qualified immunity (and is found to be constitutionally doing so) can make what they did illegal.

This might sound weird to you- but it makes perfect sense.

It is not reasonable to say that officers, doing their job, under orders assumed to be lawful, are criminals.

And another thing. Fuckin Benny Johnson, a private media figure, gets a death threat and then he appears at a press conference with fucking Attorney General of the United States

The fucking Vice President of the United States hosted Charlie Kirk's podcast for like weeks.

Unreal.

#1 is correct, but doesn't apply, making it a pointless claim.
Due process does not mean what you think it means.
#2 is also correct, but does not apply, because of Supremacy, and Qualified Immunity.

You're why we struggle.

Due process does not mean what you think it means.

My eyes are open, and I see the desperation in yours. I wish I could soothe it, but I fear you too stupid to be reasoned with.