Why no mention of zinc? It is actually clinically proven to shorten the length of a cold.

That’s what THEY want you to think.

I’m confused. Guy hires new attorney and old attorneys move to withdraw? Why is this news? Perhaps Gawker, et al. could hire some writers who have SOME clue about legal matters, to write about legal matters.

Or not. But hell, don’t let the facts get in the way of feeding your Trump hatred. That is the true path to making yourself feel morally superior.

The officer could have done anything or nothing. His mistake was being connected to Trump. THAT is unforgivable.

Yeah, especially when you have NO FREAKING CLUE what you are talking about.

Pretty much the standard ignorance about the way most Christians act and what they believe.

Perhaps learn the rest of the story about how the officer and his wife DID try and help the mother and her partner (repeatedly). Or just be an ass because you hate Trump.

There is really something wrong with you.

Curious as to when Trump said such a thing? It wouldn’t surprise me if he said something ignorant, but...

Obviously racist cops.

Yay for Rogets? If someone is going to write about legal issues, they should actually understand the distinction between terms - even when those terms are listed as synonyms in a thesaurus.

“I’m outraged at his outrage.” Irony from the Kings (and Queens and everyone in between) of outrage ‘journalism’ at Gizmodo.

Kate, you clearly don’t have children. Trust me, the herb planter will quickly drop down the priority list if you do. :)

For all the worrying about this, the actual real world impacts seem close to non-existent.

“Obama-era legislation”? Perhaps learn what the word “legislation” means. Hint: It requires action by a Legislature, not simply a “Presidential directive” of dubious constitutionality. Another hint: If a new President (or his appointees) can rescind the action, it wasn’t actually legislation. 

Both, either? There is no study about conservatives being more likely, etc to hold these inclinations. Yet this Gizmodo article and the “scientist’s” tweet asserts there is...without ANY basis. And a bunch of the commentors chime in with “Yeah, totally true!”.

Where does the study say anything about conservatives? The only mention is this article and his tweet “suggesting” that he has “noted” some undefined connection. But folks here are happy to confirm their biases.

So a researcher, with an obvious political bias, “noted” that conservatives are cuck obsessed. No evidence is cited - likely because there is none. Yet the “Party of Science” jumps in with loud shouts of “Of course.” And another myth is born.

You can never be too safe. Think of the Children!