Artificial Intelligence: Chat by AirShape is a new app from your search

Artificial Intelligence is a brand new trend of 2023 - the ultimate question-answering companion! With the power of advanced AI technology, AI Chat can provide accurate and reliable answers to the most complicated questions. The main advantage of the AI Chat is that it will clarify all the missing details to make the perfect text or find the right answer. This means you don't have to worry about typos, missed information, or searching for the right answer. With an AI Chat App, you can simply ask and receive the information you need in a friendly, conversational manner. Whether you're looking to improve your personal or professional texts, AI Chat is the perfect solution! Simply type in your query and get a comprehensive and organized response, perfect for research or everyday use. This is your pocket AI bot, which can help unleash your creativity. It gives you an opportunity to write any essays, solve math tasks, and get the information you need, faster than ever before! Start exploring the world of Artificial Intelligence. Features: – Quickly get answers to your questions with the help of AI technology – Organized responses provide comprehensive information – Browse through an extensive database of knowledge – Keep track of your searches with a history log – Enjoy a sleek, intuitive user interface – Meet deadlines using top content – No ADS Discover the limitless potential of Artificial Intelligence with the new AI app. Terms The AI Chat has in-app purchases. Try your first query for free, then purchase a message packs to send new messages. Read our Terms of Service at: https://ift.tt/Bs6a3vp For the Privacy Policy, please visit: https://ift.tt/0lx7YnZ

Comments

Trump's Attempt to Unilaterally Control State and Local Funding is Dangerous, Dumb, and Undemocratic

The Trump administration has not been subtle in its desire to use federal funding for political punishment. Whether threatening to cut off grants to sanctuary cities, to block financial assistance to states that push back against the president’s demands, or to freeze all federal grants and loans for social services across the country, Trump and his allies want us to believe they can wield the federal budget like a weapon. The reality is that the administration’s ability to withhold or condition funding is far more limited than they let on. The Constitution, Supreme Court precedent, and long-standing federal law stand firmly in the way of this brazen abuse of presidential power. Trump’s Attempted Funding Freeze? Blocked Immediately A week into his second administration, Trump attempted to freeze trillions of dollars in federal grants and loans that fund a vast array of critical services already approved by Congress. If allowed to go into effect, this unprecedented and far-reaching...

Documents Reveal Confusion and Lack of Training in Texas Execution

As Texas seeks to execute Carl Buntion today and Melissa Lucio next week, it is worth reflecting on the grave and irreversible failures that occurred when the state executed Quintin Jones on May 19, 2021. For the first time in its history — and in violation of a federal court’s directive and the Texas Administrative Code — Texas excluded the media from witnessing the state’s execution of Quintin Jones. In the months that followed, Texas executed two additional people without providing any assurance that the underlying dysfunction causing errors at Mr. Jones’ execution were addressed. This is particularly concerning given that Texas has executed far more people than any other state and has botched numerous executions. The First Amendment guarantees the public and the press have a right to observe executions. Media access to executions is a critical form of public oversight as the government exerts its power to end a human life. Consistent with Texas policy, two reporters travelled t...

The Supreme Court Declined a Protestors' Rights Case. Here's What You Need to Know.

The Supreme Court recently declined to hear a case, Mckesson v. Doe , that could have affirmed that the First Amendment protects protest organizers from being held liable for illegal actions committed by others present that organizers did not direct or intend. The high court’s decision to not hear the case at this time left in place an opinion by the Fifth Circuit, which covers Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, that said a protest organizer could be liable for the independent, violent actions of others based on nothing more than a showing of negligence. Across the country, many people have expressed concern about how the Supreme Court’s decision not to review, or hear, the case at this stage could impact the right to protest. The ACLU, which asked the court to take up the case, breaks down what the court’s denial of review means. What Happened in Mckesson v. Doe? The case, Mckesson v. Doe , was brought by a police officer against DeRay Mckesson , a prominent civil rights activi...

Search This Blog