he was also all geared up to run in 2016, but then his son died. If I recall, Hilary Clinton actually waited for Biden to decide he couldn’t run before she entered the race.

Article says the ceasefire was originally planned for 4 days, so they made the hunger strike coincide with the end of the ceasefire. But then the ceasefire was extended. But they went ahead with hunger strike anyway? Ok…

Is this news current? Isn’t the conflict in like day 3 of ceasefire? Are they still on hunger strike?

It’s obviously an overly legalistic and technical argument that doesn’t speak to the merits. But it’s an appeals case, you have to argue legal errors not factual ones. I’m not a lawyer and have no idea how likely it is to succeed, but I think “throw everything at the wall and see what sticks” is best legal practice, so I don’t see how this filing hangs him out to dry. It’s bad optics but I don’t think is gonna matter to anyone.

Did you not read the article?

and that Trump technically did not swear an oath to “support” the Constitution. Instead, during his January 2017 inauguration, Trump swore to “preserve, protect and defend” the Constitution during his role as president.

You’re talking about the reasoning in the ruling by the district judge. This article is about trump’s argument in filings to the appeals court.

Here’s wiktionary:

Although sometimes used, normalcy is less common than normality in American English. It is very rarely used in the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. It is frequent in India and Zimbabwe however.

So it’s a regional thing.

Although the claim that in US English the “normality” form is more common does not match my experience as a speaker of US English.

I did not recognize that form and assumed it was not a word. I stand corrected.

the word is “normalcy”

Oh it’s Trotsky

Stalin on top, Lenin on the right, Marx in the middle. Who is the guy on the left?

Even if dems win a majority in the house, they may not have a majority of state delegations. the house vote is by state delegation.

The point wasn’t that ranged attacks or siege or cavalry weapons are more important than melee weapons, though depending on the battle or the century, that may well be true.

The point was that when it comes to melee, the weapons used by your infantry was never swords. Swords are prestige weapons, expensive and heavy, wielded by wealthy knights and nobility for ceremonial purposes, duels, or tournaments. The king cannot afford to equip a thousand infantry with swords (the way you see in movies like Braveheart or LotR), and even if he could, the infantrymen have neither the skill nor strength to wield them for an extended duration.

Swords weren’t the weapon of last resort. They just weren’t included in the loadout at all, of the soldiers engaging in melee combat. So what did they use? Spears. That’s probably why the OP says spears are king.

But take it with a grain of salt cause I don’t actually know anything about medieval warfare. It’s just a thing I heard.

Modern conceptions of medieval warfare drastically overestimate the amount of usage that swords saw in battle. At least that’s a thing I’ve heard.

For the record, I don’t think safari works this way. Every incognito window has its own session I believe

but the encryption keys are not stored on the 1password cloud systems

1password user data is encrypted, right? so even if a hack had allowed a bad actor access to user pw databases, it’s not like they would’ve just scored everyone’s passwords… right?

We call this pose “the strong arm”

So atoms don’t have color because some photons have wavelengths outside of the visible range? That’s irrelevant and in no way justifies the claim

Why is the answer no?

Atoms have emmission spectra. That’s color. Average them if you want an aggregate.