It is from the link you provided, it was written by a supreme court justice.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf Page 29

Looking beyond the fate of this particular prosecution, the long-term consequences of today’s decision are stark. The Court effectively creates a law-free zone around the President, upsetting the status quo that has existed since the Founding. This new official-acts immunity now “lies about like a loaded weapon” for any President that wishes to place his own interests, his own political survival, or his own financial gain, above the interests of the Nation. Korematsu v. United States, 323 U. S. 214, 246 (1944) (Jackson, J., dissenting). The President of the United States is the most powerful person in the country, and possibly the world. When he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune.

Taken directly from the supreme court ruling.

We had known that birds are descended from dinosaurs well before the general public and the majority of paleontologists starting saying "birds are dinosaurs". So simply saying that "we discovered that birds are descended from dinosaurs" is not sufficient to answering your question.

Traditional taxonomy allows for paraphyletic groups, meaning that not all of the descendants of the most recent common ancestor of the group are required to be in that group. So in this case, even though it was known that birds are descended from dinosaurs, they continued to be considered two separate groups, with dinosaurs being a paraphyletic group. Birds were known first, dinosaurs were later discovered and were considered a distinct group, then the link between the the two groups was discovered, but how they were grouped did not immediately change. That birds were not considered to be dinosaurs was a rather arbitrary effect based on how they were discovered and not on any scientific basis.

One book on dinosaurs from 1997 wrote:

In a phylogenetic sense, dinosaurs are not extinct, for birds are theropodan descendants (but see Feduccia 1996 for a dissenting view). For the purposes of this review, however, the term dinosaur connotes what cladists might term "non-avian dinosauromorph." We thus (unrepentantly) use a paraphyletic rather than monophyletic (holophyletic) "Dinosauria." Whatever the scientific merits of the latter, the former is widely understood, and avoids such circumlocutions as "non-avian dinosaur."

A later edition of that same book from 2012 not only uses "non-avian dinosaur" extensively, it also has an entire section on birds.

So why the change? There is a trend in science to prefer cladistic classification, which requires every group to be a clade, meaning that all descendants of the most recent common ancestor of a group are in the group. This effectively means that paraphyletic grouping is being abandoned. So with cladistic taxonomy birds are dinosaurs.

There are other traditionally paraphyletic groups that are still in the process of changing. For example traditionally monkeys were a paraphyletic group, but any clade that includes all monkeys necessarily includes the apes, so in cladistics apes are monkeys. Though, you will still hear many people say 'apes are not monkeys'. Fish was also a paraphyletic group, which included all vertebrates except tetrapods, but of course in cladistics, tetrapods are fish.

Shinto should probably be further down considering the crimes committed by Japan when Shinto was the state religion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency_illusion

The new deaths bring the total reported so far by various countries to 577, according to an AFP tally.

The do cite their source.

At least 60 Jordanians also died, the diplomats said, up from an official tally of 41 given earlier on Tuesday by the Jordanian government.

Do you think it's impossible that 41 people could die, reported on, and then more people die?

In geology, rapid is still a very long time, even up to a few million years.

That's not the ingredient list, the list is to the left, and that's not a version number, it's a reference to a food category system.

12.6.1 Emulsified sauces and dips
Sauces, gravies, dressings based and dips, at least in part, on a fat- or oil-in water emulsion such as salad dressing (e.g. French, Italian, Greek, ranch style), fat-based sandwich spreads (e.g. mayonnaise with mustard), salad cream, and fatty sauces and snack dips (e.g. bacon and cheddar dip, onion dip).

So Jesus was poorer than he would otherwise have been, that still doesn't mean he was wealthy or had clothes equivalent to a $10k suit.

The birth narrative is a complete fabrication by the authors of Matthew to conform to supposed prophecies from the old testament that were either ignored by or unknown to the authors of Mark, therefore not relevant to whatever wealth Jesus may have had.

And the mention of Judas being the treasurer is from John, the last gospel written and the one that diverges from the others the most, making it the least reliable. And the greek wording is that Judas is the one that holds the money-bag, a long way from indicating they had a lot of money.

Great. That is a state issue, so pay attention to your state government, vote for state representatives that support better voting methods, and contact your state representatives to push for reform.

That doesn't change this trolley problem.

Fascist societies rhetorically cast their enemies as "at the same time too strong and too weak". On the one hand, fascists play up the power of certain disfavored elites to encourage in their followers a sense of grievance and humiliation. On the other hand, fascist leaders point to the decadence of those elites as proof of their ultimate feebleness in the face of an overwhelming popular will.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur-Fascism

It's not a bug, it's a feature.

And even further back, the systematic use of rape by Zionist militias throughout the course of the 1948 war as an instrument of ethnic cleansing and dispossession led to the displacement of around 750,000 indigenous Palestinians to make room for the nascent Jewish state. Palestinian women, who are entitled to “birth the nation,” to borrow from Rhoda Kanaaneh, have been particularly targeted by this eliminationist Zionist practice, as a way of disposing of an undesirable population.

They have always been doing this, since the founding of their country.

Did you forget what the article is about? Those churches are likely getting kicked out.

The late, legendarily brutal campaign consultant Lee Atwater explains how Republicans can win the vote of racists without sounding racist themselves:

You start out in 1954 by saying, “N*****, n*****, n*****.” By 1968 you can’t say “n*****”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “N*****, n*****.”

https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/exclusive-lee-atwaters-infamous-1981-interview-southern-strategy/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

This is the foundation of the current Republican party. There is nothing redeemable.

Jesus committed a terrorist attack against the Jewish temple.

The fresh vegetable section is the first aisle in most grocery stores that I can think of. Any fresh fruit or vegetables she got would be at the bottom.

Or he expects there to be no vacancies, giving him the option to say whatever he thinks might get him votes without ever having to follow through on his promises.

Accepting of homosexuals so long as the never act on their feelings. Catholics accept anyone so long as they follow Catholic rules. That's always been their position.

The pope never intended to express himself in homophobic terms, it's just that he is so homophobic that it slips out sometimes.