I agree with you completely. The legal system (read lawyers) tries to nitpick every single term despite a common understanding of the meaning.

Take the issue being debated as to whether the President in an "officer" when it comes to Section 3 of 14A "shall not hold office..."

Why is POTUS "Commander in Chief" of the military where "officers" are in charge?
Why is POTUS referred to as "the highest office in the land"?
Why is there "Office of the President"?

I fear this whole thing will d**g out to the point that Trump is finally convicted of something posthumously.

I don't understand the argument being made by many people on both sides of the political ravine, including Trump's competitor candidates, that the court should not be deciding who is on the b****t. The 14A specifies what criteria can be used to disqualify someone, and it seems to me that is within the court's purview to decide.

Why should it be left to the people?

If you think "We The People" have a say in everything then why not just get rid of the government AND the judicial system and put everything up to a v**e (we have the technology).

Speeding ticket? Let the people decide on the fine.
Bank robbery? Let the people decide the punishment.
Murder? Let the people decide the guilt or innocence.
I**********n or not? Let the people decide (by giving the reward of POTUS to Trump if they feel he was innocent).

In a way this is simply letting every American be part of a jury. It doesn't matter I guess that the average v**er is not a legal scholar like the judges who ruled in Colorado. It doesn't matter what is legal or illegal, or right or wrong. It just comes down to what "We The People" want.


Heck, why not put a petulant child in as POTUS. Oh... wait...

I just take the dictionary meaning, or similar.

From Wikipedia:

F*****m (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/ FASH-iz-əm) is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement,[1][2][3] characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.

Sound like it fits Trump and his followers to a T.

And based on his recent rhetoric taken from "Mein Kampf" I believe comparisons between Trump and Hitler are well founded.

Good luck, America. Don't say you weren't warned. "Those who don't learn from history are... " You know.

As you have been told many times, you use "f*****t" with absolutely no understanding of its meaning.

You have a right to your opinions, but you certainly are fighting an upstream current without a paddle when you try to redefine dictionary definitions according to your personal whims and fantasies. You talk about people being illiterate and poor communicators, but whenever you use "f*****t" incorrectly you are showing your complete inability to converse coherently.

There is no shame in telling the t***h. Trump is a despicable person who belongs in jail. He should NEVER have become POTUS, and he SHOULD NEVER GET THE CHANCE to become POTUS again.

I have no beef with Conservatives/Republicans. Go find a decent person to lead your charge.

DUMP TRUMP, for God's sake!!!

Don't be silly. I have no proof that Stoltenberg and others were lying... just as you have no proof they were telling the t***h.

What I am telling you is that -- IMHO -- the "world at large" does not like Trump. Also, IMHO, the world at large is wondering what is wrong with you folks who support Trump.

And my opinions are as valid as your opinion that you think Trump is great and good for the country.

Of course, if you want "facts" to back up opinions regarding Trump all you have to do is look at who lost the last p**********l e******n and how the Republicans have been doing in the midterm e******ns.

If I had the (mis)fortune of meeting Trump I would probably tell him I like him, I like his polices, and I would love to see him back in the White House.

Why would I do that (ie, lie)?

First, it's because it would be the polite thing to do (rather than telling him the t***h of how I feel about him). And second, it's because I know how he gets off on (false) praise, and I love to see him gobble up crap. I find him entertaining as the buffoon that he is, and the last thing I would want is for him to become a decent human being; much rather he would just disappear.

I can't believe that there are people out there -- Trump supporters -- who believe Trump is respected by other world leaders. Feared (as in you never know what an unhinged person with power will do) maybe; but certainly not respected or admired.

Hey, Rac, even KJU lied about Trump when he wrote him "love letters." And you can bet Putin, Xi and KJU all have the same opinion of Trump... "Yes, put (the i***t) back in as POTUS" (so that we can manipulate him by dangling false respect in front of him).

What did you expect in a public statement? Even Republicans lie about their feelings about Trump while diminishing him in private.

Trump and friends know all about that.

Hey, Rac, it was not the point of your argument. But it was a question posed to you since you raised the issue of money owing. So the one deflecting is YOU because you are avoiding answering the question.

I, too, am curious as to whom you think the money was owed.

I like your “hang test,” but I am sure there are places where this image would be hung on the wall… with pride.

I recall an image from many years ago of a model wearing a bikini made with diamonds. The “photographer” explained how he had “processed” the image, which included skin blemish removal, making her waistline slimmer and even relocating her navel. With AI today one might simply ask the computer to modify the texture/colour of her skin, the shape/size of her breasts, her waistline, her smile, her lips so as to look like any or multiple named people without having to do the manipulation yourself.

So for me, AI is simply another level of processing, but not really anything revolutionary. And whether I click individual pixels myself (I actually did a B/W self-portrait with blocks of “pixels”) or let a computer algorithm do the work, it just comes down to time and effort.

I have no idea whether or not there was a real human as a starting point, but the real problem is deciding where image processing has crossed a line into the domain of AI. NO ONE using software to “touch up” a digital image works with individual pixels; virtually ALL mods are done by computer algorithms that apply specified gradations of change over a limited region of an image, be it brightness, colour, noise, sharpness, etc. AI is just smarter “photoshopping” in my view.

You are, of course, absolutely correct.

But taking the notion a bit further, people know to avoid certain named sites because of the known and expected content. UHH is a photography site that has a section for nudity where, for the most part, viewers “look” because they are OK with nudity and expect to see a certain style/quality/content. Let’s not turn UHH into a site that is avoided because of objectionable images.

That said, after seeing an image viewers have the option of giving an opinion, not only of the photographic merits but also on the appropriateness of the image. In that way, the viewers are the ones who establish the guidelines for content.