The correct solution for an outlier event is to set up a proper Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The U.S. still thinks it's above that, but it's not. A TRC would have worked after 1/6 because it was an inherently partisan event. You cannot have it be bipartisan for the same reason the Nazis didn't get to be judges at Nuremberg and neither Shining Path nor the former government officials in Peru got to sit on their TRC. The group that perpetrated the violence shouldn't get to adjudicate it.
I'm curious where this narrative that the case only began in 2023 came from. Smith was appointed in November 2022 and the investigation doesn't necessarily start when the public finds out or when the prosecutor (special or otherwise) is announced.
To be clear I'm just talking about federal prosecutors. State and local tend to be political and, as a result, that tends to be where you see way more corruption. Ironically, it's also why state AGs will have policies that are entirely different from the governor's: they're a separate political office.
It's a norm because prosecution is both an executive and judicial function. It straddles both branches and you want it to be neutral in exercising prosecutorial discretion. When the chief executive steps in to direct prosecution, it has a strong tendency to become political and lead away from democracy.
You only linked one? The other is referenced in an article. The way these studies were conducted and the populations used does not immediately translate to fluoride being the issue since that wasn't the only variable. It's worth exploring, but it's really not enough to change decades of dental hygiene improvements.
Respectfully, I'm going to be immediately suspicious of any study that uses IQ as the measuring standard. IQ is not an objective measure of intelligence or cognitive ability. The same person taking the test will probably have a different score every time they take it. I'm not saying fluoride does or does not have an effect on cognitive ability or intelligence. But IQ is hardly going to be the way to figure that out.
Edit: I also don't know how you'd conclude it's fluoride and not literally anything else they're consuming.
This may surprise you but they don't really need as many nukes as Russia claims to have on paper. As long as they have enough that work, or hell, even just one, MAD is in play.
As we've recently found out in the last few years, conservative bastions are not as solidly red as we believe. If you're a Democrat in Idaho, fucking vote Democratic. It matters.
Whereas, and forgive me if I'm mistakenly assuming you're advocating not voting for Harris, your worldview is just defeating. Every candidate but Harris will ensure that Palestinian suffering increases. Not voting will deny Harris a vote, therefore necessarily increase the odds of someone else winning and Palestinian suffering increasing. Palestinians are saying to vote for Harris. Votjng for a third party (all choices there, by the way, either actively endorse Trump (RFK Jr.) or are funded by Russia (Stein) so supports the genocide of Ukrainians) remove a vote for Harris and increase the odds of Palestinian suffering increasing. There is no scenario where if you're an American citizen you can be a neutral bystander.
At this point, if you don't vote for Harris, you're voting for ethnic cleansing and genocide, quite possibly at home as well as abroad.
I don't love the Times editorial/opinion boards but they're hardly the same as WaPo and the L.A. Times. They also happen to be one of the only places to get decent coverage of global conflicts, along with Bellingcat and War Nerd. They should absolutely make significant changes in their, frankly, shit tier Gaza coverage. They're also reporting on increasing attacks against the LGBTQ+ community in the Ivory Coast.
So yes, NYT has awful coverage of Israel's ongoing genocide in Gaza. Institutions are complicated and agenda-driven. They also have better coverage of conflicts in the rest of the world than most news outlets.
They also, unlike the Post and L.A. Times, actually picked a side, which is what's specifically relevant to this post.
It's a sport where you can walk, talk, and do a sport. Decent way to get very moderate exercise while also doing work. I can see why it's popular. My guess is most presidents (except Trump) who golf do so to get outside for a bit in a secluded area while working given the job is nonstop.
What national government anywhere in the world specifies the federal programs paid for by taxes on an employee pay stub?