Search Results: no response

https://news.yahoo.com/bragg-sues-jim-jordan-over-185559794.html?.tsrc=1026
Bragg sues Jim Jordan over ‘campaign to intimidate and attack’

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg (D) sued House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) Tuesday, calling his investigation into Bragg’s prosecution of former President Trump a “transparent campaign to intimidate and attack” his office’s work.

The suit, filed in federal court in New York, is the most aggressive pushback yet from Bragg in response to Jordan, who in recent days subpoenaed a former prosecutor who worked on the Trump investigation and last week asked another employee to turn over personal emails about his hiring process.

“Congress has no power to supervise state criminal prosecutions. Nor does Congress have the power to serve subpoenas ‘for the personal aggrandizement of the investigators or to punish those investigated,’” Bragg’s office writes in the suit, pointing to a case initiated by Trump that ultimately limited Congress’s subpoena power.

Bragg has also resisted efforts from Jordan to secure his testimony, arguing in prior letters that Jordan’s requests would violate the rights of those involved in the process, including Trump himself.

“The charges the District Attorney filed against Mr. Trump were approved by citizens of New York,” the suit states.

“Rather than allowing the criminal process to proceed in the ordinary course, Chairman Jordan and the Committee are participating in a campaign of intimidation, retaliation, and obstruction.”

The suit earned a swift response from U. S. District Court Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil, who declined to immediately block Jordan’s subpoena but gave the committee just short of a week to respond in court.

Jordan started his own review of Bragg’s investigation just days after Trump predicted he would be arrested in connection with the probe and called on his supporters to protest.

Are you the type to like to people please?

Here are some signs that you might be a people pleaser if you aren't sure:

Agreeing with whoever is in front of you. Many of us learn how to politely listen to others as part of our social skills. That can veer into people-pleasing behavior if you constantly agree with people because you want to earn their admiration and not because you believe what you’re saying.

Apologizing for things that aren’t your fault. People pleasers often make themselves responsible for the emotional responses of others. If someone feels bad, you may blame yourself or fear that person thinks you’re the problem. It’s good to say you’re sorry if you’ve hurt someone, but there may be a deeper issue if you’re frequently apologizing for things you have no control over.

Not being able to say no. If you find it difficult to tell others no when they ask you for something, you may be a people pleaser. Many people pleasers prefer making up excuses later to get out of a commitment instead of saying no from the start. If you do follow through, you can regret not having the strength to stand up for yourself.

Changing your personality depending on who’s around you. People pleasers tend to shift their behavior and attitude to match that of the person or group. That can lead to you acting in ways that are out of character or participating in actions you disagree with just to fit in socially. People pleasers tend to do anything possible to avoid conflict, even if it means turning into an entirely different person.

Your worth depends on how others see you. People pleasers need validation from others to feel good about themselves. They can go to extremes to earn words of praise from others. The confidence of a people pleaser rises and falls based on how others perceive them.

Does any of this resonate with you? feels like things you do?

At 44, with far too much dating experience, I’ve only recently heard this repeatedly from a potential partner. One thing I know sure is that I know more about her than she knows about me.

In other words, while I’m far far far far from perfect, I know for a fact that our conversations are not overly focused on me.

Seems like she says it whenever we talk about things going on in the outside world not directly related to us.

I don’t want to say “thank you” or “that’s not true”. In fact, I see no good response to what I’ve come to believe is quite obnoxious. But maybe I have no idea what the hell I’m talking about.

Reference article 1: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/federal_income_tax.asp

Reference article 2: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/progressivetax.asp

Note 1: This question is a follow-on to another question…

Do the “rich” in the USA pay their “fair share” of taxes?

…and was specifically inspired by @richardcory ‘s opinion on that question.

Note 2: There purposely is NO OTHER ANSWER-OPTION in the poll to this question. Choose the answer-option that most closely matches your response to this question — which is…

”The USA has a “progressive” tax system (with “tax brackets”)…should the USA KEEP or CHANGE this fundamental aspect of US individual income taxation?”

I matched with one on Tinder, have messaged her twice in a row (but not at the same time), and still have gotten no response from her at all.

Reference article 1: https://news.yahoo.com/nancy-pelosi-roasted-over-trump-083229719.html

Reference article 2: https://www.lawinfo.com/resources/criminal-defense/is-the-presumption-of-innocence-in-the-consti.html

Note 1: Per reference article 1, former Speaker Pelosi released a statement saying that “No one is above the law, and everyone has the right to a trial to prove innocence…”

Note 2: Choose the answer-option that most closely matches your response to this question — which is…

”Isn’t it VERY SAD & TROUBLING that former US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi does NOT know that people are "innocent until proven guilty"?