By concepts of a plan, he probably means Project 2025, the plan that his “strategists” have drawn up to install him as a fascist autocrat if people are stupid enough to actually vote for him. It is hardly surprising that he does not want to comment publicly on the details of this deeply anti-democratic endeavor.

It’s what AI makes of her, I guess.

That bothers me far less than seeing a single Trump tbh.

You can find a lot of stuff over at hugging face - open source stuff as well. This for example for background removal.

There is no point in arguing about that

It’s the best argument, tremendous, irrefutable.

Damn, you are indeed not joking. I had to double-check because it’s so ridiculous.

Yup, would have been easy to just nuke the guy as well.

The NRA and the like will probably use this again as an opportunity to demand even more and even bigger weapons for the police, the Secret Service and everyone else. Not that it will do any good, but they’ll try anyway, I suppose.

Straight to jail.

Trump is directly responsible for these excesses. In the press conference right after the conviction, he said:

This was a rigged trail by a conflicted judge who was corrupt. (…) This was done by the Biden administration in order to wound or hurt a political opponent.

These are, of course, allegations that have no basis in fact whatsoever. So I wonder: are there no legal means to prosecute Trump for these blatantly false allegations?

Shouldn’t the mere allegation that the judge was corrupt be enough to sue for defamation? I mean, it has to be enormously damaging to the judge’s reputation if someone makes such serious accusations against him.

Indeed. I’ll get to planning then. Maybe we can work together sometime.

We understand that your culture just has a strange lust for genocide which even the shame of the Holocaust couldn’t quell. We understand that Germans are just like that.

Thank you, dear fed up American. I always wondered why I felt this constant urge. I thought there might be something wrong with me. But now that I finally know it’s just my German nature, I feel liberated and full of energy. Oh, what a wonderful time to be alive!

I suppose that was to be expected from a country that has never recognized the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

?

I would be really interested to know if there was ever a company that tried this - a company for the people, so to say. As I said, I’m not aware of anything like that. Of course, there are also privately owned companies that are less focused on the logic of short-term profit maximization. But even these companies, such as Valve, can ultimately only apply the same standards, because otherwise they would be at a competitive disadvantage. That’s why I find it interesting to wonder whether there might have been a company at some point that, despite all the resistance, managed to assert itself with an alternative logic. It’s very unlikely, of course, but I’m asking anyway because it would be very desirable imo.

Are there any examples of large companies, especially stock corporations, that have voluntarily given up short-term profits in favor of long-term calculation or sustainable management? Or examples of cooperation between competitors outside of common (short-term) profit interests? I am only aware of “sustainability campaigns” that have been staged mainly for publicity purposes, which in the vast majority of cases are nothing more than a drop in the ocean.

As far as I know, it has always been necessary to use legal regulations to force the companies to pay even the slightest attention to the common good. One example of this is the ban on CFCs to protect the ozone layer - and that took more than a decade (from 1987 until 1999).

This argument is dangerous and in fact generalizes in an anti-Semitic way. The horrible actions of the state of Israel are not in any way representative of Judaism. How would you like it if I quoted biblical passages to portray you as a fascist conservative US ultrachrist? Your reference to the Throa does nothing more than that: equate a religious group with the actions of a state. Please think before you post on social media.

I think the message of this post is pretty clear: it refers to the simple fact that legitimate criticism of the actions of the state of Israel is quite often and often quite deliberately dismissed as anti-Semitism. That is ridiculous. There is nothing anti-Semitic about criticizing a state for its criminal actions. What is even more ridiculous is the attempt to even try and silence Jews who criticize the state of Israel with crude concepts such as Jewish self-hatred. This is not about religion, but about the rejection of crimes against humanity, for which not a religious community but a sovereign state is responsible.

“According to the brands website” might be an important hint, tho. I mean Trump and his minions are not exactly known for making correct statements.