I’m actually having a similar problem. I’ve had my pothos for maybe 6 years now, and I reported them for the first time in a long while a month ago… they’re not very happy now, but I’m hoping they’re just adjusting.

I have no advice but I hope yours recover!

Except those who dissented publicly, right? Pretty sure Sotomayor was pretty publicly pissed off at the rest of the court.

Probably. But who knows. And the fact that the only cope is “it’s just a negotiating tactic” like MAGA after prices increase from tariffs is giving me a headache. What a time to be alive.

Here’s another

https://www.ft.com/content/ce9eb7e4-7989-45f6-a3b3-3cdec73a8540

A Nato official confirmed the message’s authenticity.

I can only provide some sample articles that reference a confirmation from Rutte’s office. I don’t think they put out a statement or a release, I think reporters called the office and got confirmation that way. Not sure you’ll be able to find a public statement.

https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20250624-trump-posts-nato-chief-gushing-message-praise-extraordinary-iran-action-rutte

Here’s a French one that theoretically isn’t bound to gobble Trumps knob.

“Congratulations and thank you for your decisive action in Iran, that was truly extraordinary and something no one else dared to do. It makes us safer,” Rutte wrote in a message shared by Trump on Truth Social – and confirmed by the NATO chief’s office.

I regret to inform you Rutte’s office has confirmed officially. I took massive psychic damage when I discovered this was a real post of a real text not a real post of a fake text.

Of course it is, LLMs are inherently regurgitation machines - train on biased data, make biased predictions.

International “law” is a misnomer, as you’ve noticed… it’s only enforceable at the end of a pointy stick, physical or economic. “Conventions” are a more appropriate phrase. This is indeed disappointing.

Yeah probably, he has the foresight of an infant. Doesn’t mean NATO countries will respect an attempted invocation of Article 5.

Trump can act as he wants, that doesn’t magically make other nations forget what NATO agreements actually say.

NATO was never involved in any of the other US-lead wars. Western countries may form a coalition for a war but that’s independent of and unrelated to NATO and purely at their own discretion, not out of any obligation. Feel free to protest your national government if they choose to get involved, but don’t act like they have no agency and Trump forced them to do anything.

NATO also only works defensively - the US struck first, and as a result no NATO country has any obligation to get involved, even if it were an attack on home territory.

I emotionally agree with you, but really the problem is that… anyone could do that in the future. Denying someone owed care because of political belief is a horrendous situation to explicitly allow, regardless of political affiliation.

/sigh

affirms that free and open communication between State and local law enforcement and their Federal counterparts remains the bedrock of public safety

Objectively true and aligns with Newsom and other’s critiques of why the LA situation is bad in the first place

expresses gratitude to law enforcement officers, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement personnel, for protecting the homeland.

You can’t just cherry pick shit you dislike - this statement was part of a compound resolution EXCLUSIVELY about the Boulder terrorist attack, in which DHS and ICE were positive forces. That’s what all the “whereas” means, it means “in the context of”… stop intentionally misinterpreting things to be mad about it.

You can keep quoting the same Newsweek article at me, it doesn’t become truer the more its linked.

Meanwhile you’re funding the engagement machine and directly padding their bottom line - arguing with dipshits on websites who profit from visit duration is exactly the psychological trap they encourage.

??? The mayor of LA, who has so far been against state escalation against the protests, indicated a small section of down town LA was under curfew because of opportunists looting. She was explicit that other protest sites were not being interfered with by LAPD.

I don’t see why we wouldn’t believe her in this case given her history and the context.

Re: helicopter thing, yes that comment was apparently made but hit me up when something happens. Very easy to make yourself upset when you get to invent scenarios to be mad about.

No, it isn’t, a section of downtown only where opportunists were looting.

Whoever downvoted this, heres proof: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2025/jun/11/la-protests-los-angeles-curfew-ice-california-governor-donald-trump-us-politics-latest-updates-news

Literally in the byline: Mayor Karen Bass issues curfew for one square mile area in downtown, beginning at 8pm local time on Tuesday until 6am local time on Wednesday

These things are not hard to find!

Bass told reporters that while vandalism had caused significant damage downtown, it was not a citywide issue, hence the curfew applying to a contained area. She warned people who do not live or work in the affected area to stay away or face arrest, should they break the curfew.

Bass again called on the Trump administration to end the raids, saying if LA was to be “peaceful again” the raids needed to stop.

Can you show me where they’re opposing the people opposing ICE? Thus far, Newsom has been strongly critical of the crackdown, and the LA Mayor has only enforced a curfew in a single area of downtown where there was legitimate looting by opportunists - other protest sites are untouched by that policy.

Please, explain.

You shouldn’t trust NewsWeek, it’s considered unreliable. That house resolution they’re discussing is about the Boulder CO terror attack, nothing to do with LA situation.

RESOLUTION

Whereas, on June 1, 2025, Mohammed Sabry Soliman, an Egyptian national illegally in the United States, committed a terrorist attack in Boulder, Colorado, against marchers peacefully demonstrating in support of the release of hostages held captive by Hamas;

Whereas, while shouting “Free Palestine”, Mohammed Sabry Soliman attacked the peaceful demonstrators with homemade Molotov cocktails;

Whereas Mohammed Sabry Soliman stated he planned the terrorist attack for more than a year, “wanted to kill all Zionist people and wished they were all dead”, and would “do it [conduct an attack] again”;

Whereas the terrorist attack committed by Mohammed Sabry Soliman wounded at least 14 people who suffered burns and other injuries;

Whereas, reportedly, at least one of the victims was a Holocaust survivor;

Whereas everyone should pray for the quick healing of the victims of Mohammed Sabry Soliman’s antisemitic terrorist attack;

Whereas Mohammed Sabry Soliman was issued a tourist visa to travel to the United States;

Whereas Mohammed Sabry Soliman was admitted to the United States at Los Angeles International Airport on August 27, 2022;

Whereas, one month after his arrival in the United States and seemingly in violation of the terms of his nonimmigrant visa, which required that he not intend to remain in the United States permanently, Mohammed Sabry Soliman filed an asylum application with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services;

Whereas Mohammed Sabry Soliman failed to depart the United States prior to the expiration of his authorized period of stay pursuant to his visa;

Whereas the case of Mohammed Sabry Soliman highlights the need to aggressively vet aliens who apply for visas to determine whether they endorse, espouse, promote, or support antisemitic terrorism or engage in other antisemitic or anti-American activity;

Whereas the case of Mohammed Sabry Soliman demonstrates the dangers of not removing from the country aliens who fail to comply with the terms of their visas; and

Whereas Colorado law enforcement officials have encountered Mohammed Sabry Soliman multiple times since 2022: Now, therefore, be it

That the House of Representatives—

(1)

condemns Mohammed Sabry Soliman and his antisemitic terrorist attack on peaceful demonstrators supporting the release of the hostages held by Hamas;

(2)

affirms that free and open communication between State and local law enforcement and their Federal counterparts remains the bedrock of public safety and is necessary in preventing terrorist attacks; and

(3)

expresses gratitude to law enforcement officers, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement personnel, for protecting the homeland.

Ok where in that news article is there anything about democrats supporting ICE? and how is it possible that no matter how bad the stuff the Republicans do, it’s the democrats fault?