Alue42

But it can dictate how federal agencies refer to geographic regions.

A private company or private citizen can do as it sees fits.

This year in particular, conservatives are not just a boomer thing. There was a surprising amount of young male voters for Trump this year, mostly led in by the podcasters/commentators favored by that demographic (Joe Rogan, Andrew Tate, ya know, assholes). So it’s no surprise Trump changed his tune on the tiktok ban because he now wants to make sure these people (and people taking about these people) can still share their ridiculous thoughts and therefore become a hivemind and then all support him. Initially Trump wanted to ban tiktok, and it had nothing to do with user security or Chinese data mining, though that’s what the people around him made it into - it was because tiktok was how word was spread to embarrass him at his rallies.

All this to say - age has nothing to do with conservatism. Even back when I was in high school and college, there were always those asshole kids that cared way too much about their parents’ wealth and how it was taxed and had the views of an old white man.

Didn’t this also happen on Reddit when people were posting the alternatives? Links/posts got removed, the subreddit about alternatives got shut down

Everyone that lives in California (and thus the evac zone) would know to check CalFire (ie, www.fire.ca.gov) for any wildfire maps before looking at any other source because it would be the most accurate and most up to date.

Wildfires are such a common thing (car off the side of the state/interstate hwy, brush fire set off by a homeless encampment in public land, massive forest fire, etc - all would be on CalFire; for a local building fire you would have to check local authorities). We all know if we see smoke to check CalFire to get the details and if it’s heading our way. It even shows things happening in Mexico and nearby states in case it’s heading towards us.

Could be dishonest opportunistic propaganda from this guy

This, or someone completely unfamiliar with California

For such a major claim by the accused and his lawyer, you’d think they would have an assessment by a psychiatrist or psychologist to diagnose Dissociative Identity Disorder and therefore would be noted in the article. Otherwise it would seem like he’s just using the commonly misused term as an excuse. But hey, I’m not a lawyer that leaves places open for the other side to poke holes, what do I know?