His job is to support and defend the Constitution of the United states. You certainly can argue that protecting the integrity of the voting system is part of that job.
Reasonable
Who's to say what's reasonable.
when challenging the election, that is not an official act
Why not? He could make the argument that the election was stolen and ignoring it is in the best interest of the United states.
Future post - How do I get rid of raccoons in my yard?
Stand-ups can become so proforma. What did you do yesterday? I coded. What are you doing today? I am going to code. Do you have any blockers? No. It gets a little repetitive after a while.
It is a methodology to develop software quickly. It has some good things about it. But it can be very heavy on meetings and agile idealists are not very flexible. As many of the other comments say, a mixture of agile and some other methodology or starting with agile and developing your own process that works for your team or project is the best way of managing a project. I don't understand why so many people don't seem to write requirements when using agile. Even with agile I will not start coding until I have relatively clear requirements. It is not too bright to start speculative development without really knowing where you are going. https://agilemanifesto.org/
The rich own the people that decide taxes. They own the media that influences the masses. In many cases, they even own the prisons thereby giving them incentive to "encourage" lawmakers to make more stringent laws to put more citizens in prison. The rich own everything. Our entire culture is rigged to give them more money and more power. The only advantage we have is numbers. Sometimes, violence is the only choice. They certainly wouldn't hesitate to use it against you. They would just get the "authorities" to do it for them.
The joke is on them. I don't back up anything.
As a DevOps guy, I can tell you we're black magic sadists. You should feel the pain. Not us.
You forgot the banking and insurance industries as well.
Don't blame me. I voted for Kodos.
The supreme Court is specifically saying the order is legal. He could say it's part of his official duties, in which case the order itself would be legal. His official duties include commanding the armed forces. If the president gives an order, a marine or a Navy SEAL cannot choose to not follow that order on legal grounds. They can choose to not follow on moral grounds but that refusal in itself would be illegal. Should it come to that, I would hope the vast majority of the armed forces would refuse the order.
In her dissent, justice Sotomayor specifically said that the president could order an assassination and could not be prosecuted for it. I am assuming she knows more than you are I about how the legal system works.