I guess it depends on what OP meant by "immediately". If they meant the same day, maybe. If they meant within seconds or a few minutes, which is what I interpreted it as, then probably not. It takes time to transfer data out of a secure network, unless they gave the company direct access to a feed from the website, which would be really risky for a bank to give any organization a direct, real-time feed of any kind that is on the same network as financial data. I mean unless the bank also owned the spamming company, but that seems risky for reputation.

No they still need to be a part of our society and this should have the right to control it. I'm just talking about consent. People under 25 generally are more easily manipulated due to both physiological and sociological characteristics. And there's not a specific age, everyone is different of course, but as a general rule I find it unethical for someone over 40 to date someone under 25. But I wouldn't find it unethical for someone over 60 to date someone in their 30s or 40s for example.

Treating mental health issues, because they apparently don't exist.

I think under 25 is still not a full adult. There's research that the brain isn't fully developed. And personality is still in flux as well. I couldn't care less about huge age differences, but only when older than 25-30.

One piece of toilet paper. Just enough to get it mostly dry.

I tried a live USB image of Ubuntu and couldn't get the touchscreen to work. I didn't try out everything, but that was the first major issue.

Only computer I have Windows on is my laptop and that's only because it's fairly new and laptops are notorious for proprietary hardware that's hard to get decent drivers for. My desktop has had Linux for a couple of years and everything else runs Linux.

I don't even think this ruling allows for impeachment, TBH. This ruling was pretty broad. As long as the act is done in an official capacity and it is within the president's powers, even if only under certain circumstances which you can't prove the circumstances didn't exist if you can't prosecute, then there is immunity. Immunity means no one can even investigate officially, much less bring a case. The only thing you can investigate is if you can prove that he did it while not acting in an official capacity, which sex is one of the few things that applies to and even that could probably be manipulated, or that the president has no authority whatsoever over the subject, but that's pretty limited since he has full authority over the military and the entire executive branch as well as our nuclear weapons. I mean he can't go into the Supreme Court, take the place of a Justice and issue a judgement. But he definitely can use the CIA to assassinate a Justice to change something. And you would only be able to prosecute the CIA agents, not the president.

Yeah, not only that, there were already plenty of protections in place to prevent being restricted from doing what needs to be done. But this ruling now makes all of the laws that specifically target the president and executive branch from being enforced in addition to the existing protections. This includes implementing martial law for no good reason, which Trump already said he was going to do to get revenge on the people that stopped him from winning in 2020, changing all executive branch employees to political appointments, obeying term limits which Trump also said he deserves a third term, keeping appropriate records which Trump refused to do to the point that staffers had to tape together documents that he ripped up on a regular basis, or plain old murder which again Trump has said he was planning to murder his enemies using the military.

Hmmm, I live only a couple of miles from them. Guess I'll have to check them out. I've been looking for a good tea shop.

Because we're exhausted and can't afford to lose what little we all have. Even one day in jail can mean losing your job, even if charges are dropped. And a conviction could mean being stuck with only jobs that don't pay a living wage for the rest of your life and few of us have enough savings to survive that for long.

Problem is that with this, proving that it fell under one power basically means all other laws, even ones that specifically were meant to restrict that power, are meaningless. What he did could be 100% illegal, but he can't be prosecuted for it, so he can't be removed from office or punished after he leaves office.

If he was making that call as the official president of the United States, speaking in an official capacity, then it doesn't matter if the order he gives is illegal if it was within his power to order the Governor of a state to do anything at all. If it's not in his power for him to give an order to the Governor, then he just has to say it was an official suggestion as the president of the US. There's no restriction that says a president can't suggest that the Governor of a state does something to benefit the president. Doesn't matter that the thing he asked for was illegal because it can't be questioned in court at all to determine its legality.

Now it depends on if the Governor were to actually do it. And if as president Trump decides to order the assassination of that Governor once he refused, that would not be prosecutable. The assassin would be the only one who could be punished for the illegal act.

Immunity from prosecution doesn't mean the thing you're doing isn't legal, it means that no one has the right to punish you for that act. It's still unethical to break the law, but there is no enforceable consequence.