Slashdot Mirror

Those were his prepared statements. What he said during questioning was:

“At one point, [Ms. Lynch] directed me not to call it an ‘investigation’ but instead to call it a ‘matter,’ which confused me and concerned me,” Mr. Comey said of Ms. Lynch. “That was one of the bricks in the load that led me to conclude I have to step away from the department if we are to close this case credibly.”

Mr. Comey said the language suggested by Ms. Lynch was troublesome because it closely mirrored what the Clinton campaign was using.

Acknowledging that he didn’t know whether it was intentional, Mr. Comey said Ms. Lynch’s request “gave the impression the attorney general was looking to align the way we talked about our investigation with the way a political campaign was describing the same activity.”

Mr. Comey told lawmakers that Ms. Lynch’s intervention was a key factor in his decision to buck Justice Department tradition and publicly announce in July the details of Mrs. Clinton’s case and why he decided on his own not to bring a legal case against the former first lady.

Quote source

And if you don't care for that one:

Another.
And another.

The evidence of tampering with the justice system by Loretta Lynch was far more damning than the evidence of Trump.

Then he should know that what he says to the press have grave consequences and that it is stupid to do so unless it is necessary. Your are conflating importance with self-important.

This is a country where the President himself revealed the presence of an inetlligence source with Assads inner circle to Assads closest ally and patron And you are concerned by what Comey releases to the public?

Jeff Sessions rolled back the Obama-era drug sentencing guidelines, resulting in the harshest possible sentences for drug offenders... which went almost unnoticed by the MSM.

Yep, almost no media outlet noticed.

Acutally that isn't true. Historically the weather on the exact days planned for the invasion of Japan would have sunk the US troop carriers and quite a few destroyers. That would have been a new kamikaze in the traditional sense of the typhoon that saved Japan from the Mongols. The other pathway if they had not surrendered would have been problematic as while the US had a third nuclear weapon almost ready, the remaining dozen planned were delayed for a year or so by production problems.

Texas: 2012. Texas GOP Declares: "No More Teaching of 'Critical Thinking Skills' in Texas Public Schools"

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Evergreen College fits this to a T

For more fun go to Youtube and search Evergreen College and watch the spectacular fail by SJW Students and one Jabba the Hut teacher in particular.

Be sure to bring Popcorn.

They raised her to become a person who'd, though only 9 or 10 when 9.11. happened, pick up Pashto, Farsi and Dari languages and join US Air Force as a linguist, where she served for 6 years.
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06...

Not to mention the whole thing where they raised her to speak out about issues of public interest.
Such as evidence of attacks on the USA by a foreign government, while said attacks are denied by both the said foreign government - and the current USA administration which has landed the job in part thanks to said attacks.
At the expense of own liberty, job, future...

Some people really take that oath thing about "support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic" seriously.

How is a double parked Uber different than a double parked Yellow Cab?

The big difference is that taxi companies spend way more on political donations and lobbyists.

not for long http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/315678-uber-triples-its-lobbying-efforts-in-2016

How is a double parked Uber different than a double parked Yellow Cab?

The big difference is that taxi companies spend way more on political donations and lobbyists.

Trump fires [Attourney General] Yates after she refuses to enforce his immigration ban[, which was later found to be illegal by the Supreme Court] (NYT, Jan. 30, 2017).

FTFY

I'm surprised you got this comment in before the Russian trolls started, nice.

But you did miss these from the same citation:

April or May
The FBI focuses on Kushner as a person of interest in their investigation as that effort intensifies. (WP, May 25, 2017).

May 10
Trump fires Comey, citing the recommendation of Sessions (WP, May 10, 2017). In the letter firing Comey, Trump includes a line saying that he appreciates Comey telling him “on three separate occasions” that he is not under investigation (May 10, 2017). The president later tells NBC’s Lester Holt that the firing was because “this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story” (CNN, May 12, 2017). Sources indicate that Kushner was a prominent voice behind the firing (CBS, May 17, 2017).

May 11
In a private meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Kislyak, Trump reveals classified information shared with the United States by an ally, later reported to be Israel (WP, May 15, 2017). He also reportedly disparages Comey as a “nut job” to Lavrov and Kislyak and says that he “faced great pressure because of Russia,” which was now “taken off” with the firing of Comey (NYT, May 19, 2017).

May 12
Lawyers representing Trump release a statement indicating that the president’s tax returns don’t show income from Russian sources, with a few exceptions (NYT, May 12, 2017).

May 17
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appoints former FBI director Robert Mueller as special counsel to oversee the Russia investigation

And to Anon Ivan's complaint that many of these come from the Post, the answer is that you can find the same information elsewhere too.

Trump fires [Attourney General] Yates after she refuses to enforce his immigration ban[, which was later found to be illegal by the Supreme Court] (NYT, Jan. 30, 2017).

FTFY

I'm surprised you got this comment in before the Russian trolls started, nice.

But you did miss these from the same citation:

April or May
The FBI focuses on Kushner as a person of interest in their investigation as that effort intensifies. (WP, May 25, 2017).

May 10
Trump fires Comey, citing the recommendation of Sessions (WP, May 10, 2017). In the letter firing Comey, Trump includes a line saying that he appreciates Comey telling him “on three separate occasions” that he is not under investigation (May 10, 2017). The president later tells NBC’s Lester Holt that the firing was because “this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story” (CNN, May 12, 2017). Sources indicate that Kushner was a prominent voice behind the firing (CBS, May 17, 2017).

May 11
In a private meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Kislyak, Trump reveals classified information shared with the United States by an ally, later reported to be Israel (WP, May 15, 2017). He also reportedly disparages Comey as a “nut job” to Lavrov and Kislyak and says that he “faced great pressure because of Russia,” which was now “taken off” with the firing of Comey (NYT, May 19, 2017).

May 12
Lawyers representing Trump release a statement indicating that the president’s tax returns don’t show income from Russian sources, with a few exceptions (NYT, May 12, 2017).

May 17
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appoints former FBI director Robert Mueller as special counsel to oversee the Russia investigation

And to Anon Ivan's complaint that many of these come from the Post, the answer is that you can find the same information elsewhere too.

Trump fires [Attourney General] Yates after she refuses to enforce his immigration ban[, which was later found to be illegal by the Supreme Court] (NYT, Jan. 30, 2017).

FTFY

I'm surprised you got this comment in before the Russian trolls started, nice.

But you did miss these from the same citation:

April or May
The FBI focuses on Kushner as a person of interest in their investigation as that effort intensifies. (WP, May 25, 2017).

May 10
Trump fires Comey, citing the recommendation of Sessions (WP, May 10, 2017). In the letter firing Comey, Trump includes a line saying that he appreciates Comey telling him “on three separate occasions” that he is not under investigation (May 10, 2017). The president later tells NBC’s Lester Holt that the firing was because “this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story” (CNN, May 12, 2017). Sources indicate that Kushner was a prominent voice behind the firing (CBS, May 17, 2017).

May 11
In a private meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Kislyak, Trump reveals classified information shared with the United States by an ally, later reported to be Israel (WP, May 15, 2017). He also reportedly disparages Comey as a “nut job” to Lavrov and Kislyak and says that he “faced great pressure because of Russia,” which was now “taken off” with the firing of Comey (NYT, May 19, 2017).

May 12
Lawyers representing Trump release a statement indicating that the president’s tax returns don’t show income from Russian sources, with a few exceptions (NYT, May 12, 2017).

May 17
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appoints former FBI director Robert Mueller as special counsel to oversee the Russia investigation

And to Anon Ivan's complaint that many of these come from the Post, the answer is that you can find the same information elsewhere too.

The first comment is copied from a Washington Post news story that gives links to all the stories in the timeline, from all the news agencies.

To be fair, this is actually a tactic that works politically. It doesn't work at making the world a better place, but it does work at staying popular because you are simply tapping into already popular opinion and re-enforcing it. It is the great flaw with democracy, you end up with the leadership you deserve rather than what you need.

I'm not convinced that this is a "tactic" that T or a crony actually thought through before he did it. I'm still of the barely-informed opinion that T's just winging-it up there, and these tweets and phone calls are childish and/or desperate attempts to get some positive feedback for doing something he's already decided to do.

OTOH, I completely agree that, for whatever reasons he does what he does, it works, for now at least, tapping into an already popular opinion and re-enforcing it. The great flaw with democracy? Well, this sure is one of them.

Trump chooses to believe what and who he wants to believe. In this case, it was Kimberly Guilfoyle of "The Five" on Fox News. This is no joke. When it comes to big decisions, Boss-T, the President of the United States, is picking up the phone to TV celebrities on deliberately-biased cable news shows, rather than the leading tech executives in the country, international diplomats, and god knows who else, including, apparently, MIT Scientists.

If Putin invades Poland, I wonder who he'll call to ask whether he should push the button on Russia?

Big win for Kimberly, though... she's got her eye on replacing Sean Spicer in his thankless job as Trump's mouthpiece, this making her the ONLY winner from this announcement.

The EPA was never told to stop doing their job, they were told "until further notice, any new regulation requires the cancellation of 2 old regulations".

That is in effect telling them to stop doing part of their job, actually, since part of their job is making new regulations. It's not eliminating regulations, and it should not be, either.

They have not been told to stop prosecuting or even investigating current regulations.

Bull Shit.

Continued spewing of ignorant nonsense will be considered trolling. You do have a history of such, so I'm not surprised.

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA

Coming from you, that is the finest compliment I could be paid.

UBI doesn't make vast amounts of money for comfortable living appear out of thin air. 29% of the average US household take-home income is under $14k. The poverty line in the US is around $22k.

UBI offers a replacement for welfare, social security, minimum wages, unemployment insurance, and countless other things. Total combined welfare in the US ranged from $16984 (Mississippi) to $49175 (Hawaii) in 2013 (everything from direct payments to assistance for food, housing, energy, etc, both federal and state), according to the conservative Cato Institute. Social Security in the US averages $16k. Minimum wage is $15.1k. Etc. So keep those numbers in perspective. To put $14k a different way, that's $1167 per month - and given that a household is not supposed to spend more than 30% of their income on rent (greater than 30% is defined as "rent burdened"), that would suggest a rent of no more than $350 per month. And we're talking household income here, not individual. And that's income that would be without other added assistance (food, housing, etc), unless your goal is to double up the welfare system rather than replace it.

The big difference with today's welfare patchworks is that UBI is far more efficient (no huge bureaucratic mess, no "hoops" for people to jump through to prove qualifications, etc), doesn't have "cracks" for people to fall through. doesn't have any "cliffs" that disincentivize people to work further, etc. You don't "lose benefits" by working more - any extra work you do is extra income. To move you from poverty wages (UBI) to having the resources to not have to live in a dump, to be able to afford a vehicle, electronics, whatever it is that you enjoy in life. And if you really are the rare sort of person who actually likes living on poverty wages rather than working... well, that probably already describes your situation today.

No, the comment was modded down because it's flamebait. It was modded down correctly. When you make sweeping generalizations about all people within a country, especially when you're insulting them, you're not being constructive at all. You just want people to respond angrily.

Back in November, 71% of Americans supported the Paris Climate Accords. A majority in every US state supported the Paris Climate Accords. Here are some sources:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/11/21/trump-wants-to-dump-the-paris-climate-deal-but-71-percent-of-americans-support-it-survey-finds/
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2017-06-01/a-bipartisan-majority-thinks-the-us-should-stay-in-the-paris-agreement
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/01/trump-leaves-paris-climate-agreement-though-americans-supported-it.html

Most Americans do support the Paris Climate Accords. Trump did not win the popular vote and won the electoral vote by a narrow majority. Russia attempted to influence the US election in Trump's favor, something that is generally accepted regardless of whether Trump's campaign was complicit in that meddling. Trump's approval rating is estimated at 39.1% while 54.8% of Americans disapprove of him. Here's a source for that, too:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

It is completely ignorant and unhelpful to blame and insult all Americans when a majority of Americans do not support Trump and a substantial majority of Americans disagree with Trump on withdrawing from the Paris Climate Accords. Your post and the grandparent post are not factually correct, nor do they contribute any substance to the discussion. They're just attempts to insult Americans and evoke angry responses. That is why your post and its parent deserve to be modded down.

Furthermore, many cities and states are still making strong efforts to address climate change. California, by itself, is the world's sixth largest economy. Trump's decision to withdraw from the Paris agreement will not impede California from continuing to impose measures that go beyond what the US committed to do.

Incendiary remarks deserve to be modded down as flamebait, especially when those remarks aren't rooted at all in fact.

Again, "draining the swamp" means "changing the lobbying rules." It has nothing to do with appointments.

Did you know that Trump just waived his own lobbying rules for members of his administration?

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

You people are incredible: https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Stop trying to twist the truth only because it is inconvenient to your narrative.

Once again, most Americans claim they are exceptional, and live on the greatest nation in the world, yet most have never travelled outside the US, so their uneducated opinion counts for nothing. But that's a common flaw among the American people, they believe that if they say it, is it true. They don't ever let facts get in the way of a good opinion.

• The U.S. is Number 1 in defense spending
• The U.S. is Number 1 in the cost of health care
• The U.S. is Number 1 in abortions of all the developed countries
• The U.S. is Number 1 in medical bankruptcies
• The U.S. is Number 1 in prison populations per capita
• The U.S. is Number 1 in small arms ownership

[What makes America the greatest country in the world?] It's not the greatest country in the world! We're seventh in literacy, 27th in math, 22nd in science, 49th in life expectancy, 178th in infant mortality, third in median household income, No. 4 in labor force, and No. 4 in exports. So when you ask what makes us the greatest country in the world, I don't know what the f*** you're talking about.

-- Aaron Sorkin

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/07/03/21-maps-and-charts-that-prove-america-is-number-one/

Wrong.

You're the one who is wrong. Trump needed to win Ohio, North Carolina and Florida to get into the electoral college. If Trump had lost any one of those states, Hillary would be POTUS today.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/01/donald-trump-now-leads-in-two-of-his-three-must-win-states-but-the-path-forward-is-grim/

Why don't you make that list? Here's a hint: No country will give you any Visa when they know about your uncivilized Caste system https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Not thoughtcrime. Willfully distributing FALSE STATEMENTS. That's a crime in the USA also. The only thing new here is that the court ruled that the LIKE button qualifies as distribution of false statements. This wasn't about opinion. This was about not doing the fact checking before spreading lies.

Here in the wilds of America, "liking" something on Facebook is considered "free speech"

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

It is considered analogous to having a bumper sticker. And make no mistakes, opinions can be wrong, but there is no law against having a stupid or false opinion.

Now what you are not allowed to do on Facebook here in the hinterlands is threaten physical violence aganst someone - just like anywhere else. Libel laws are also in play. But for the person who actually performs threatening or the libel. Harassment can also be prosecuted, such as the man who "liked" some facebook pages of an ex girlfriend who had a restraining order against him - he was forbidden any and all contact with her, and that's contact that was not allowed him. http://www.nydailynews.com/new... Basically anything that would be a crime or offense outside Facebook works inside Facebook.

But no, we heathens do not arrest people for having an opinion. We may have some issues, just like Europeans have some serious ones, but we allow people to speak their mind - or press the like button. You might want people fined, jailed or killed for their opinions, but we don't.

Trump sued someone for libel in the amount if 5 billion doallrs, for claiming he was not actually a billionaire. Donald Trump was unable to prove that he actually had assets worth a billion dollars in court.

The difference is that when Donald Trump sues you, he's not suing you for lying. Donald Trump sues you for telling the truth.

Citation Provided

Like with his treasonous collaboration with Russia's crimes in the USA, Donald Trump was his own worst enemy. When he filed the lawsuit Trump was subjected to a hilarious deposition where is constant lying was the topic of discussion.

Fast forward 10 years and Donald Trump has highlighted the fact that he has been exposed as a traitor by firing FBI director James Comey.

Incorrect: sorry but the has done SEVERAL things pro-Russia. I've listed them above but will list them here as well:

1. He wants to lift sanctions against Russia. There are many articles but here is one: http://www.newsweek.com/how-co...

2. sharing unfiltered classified data to Russia which was been reported by experts to put sources that Russia is not friendly to at risk. again, MANY articles, but here is one: https://www.washingtonpost.com... In addition to Trump trying to stop any investigation into his ties with Russia which even Republicans are starting to agree is getting concerning. What part of this is NOT pro-Russia?

Oh, and the US is a Republic, not a Democracy. . .

Let me suggest that you go and look up the definition of Democracy. Here is a primer for you:
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

I would think that if people wanted him out so desperately and they had the goods they would have provided the evidence by now.

To a republican senate who won't even commit to pretending to investigate him?

Hell, they can't even articulate what crimes may have been committed. All they can do is throw out vague, over the top accusations.

Awful hard to do when no one with any power will actually investigate him.

And when has that stopped a congressional investigation before? We spent seven million dollars investigating whether Hillary Clinton personally led a band of islamic terrorists to murder soldiers and government employees and that was well worth it, she'll spend her prison time she earned from that thinking about what she's done. And of course all those climate change scientists, without congress we'd never have punished them for using a hockey stick to heat up the earth. And obviously, Congress very effectively ended the criminal organization that was ACORN many times, which as you know committed the double sin of trying to get poor people houses and also something clearly involving legalizing child prostitution.

But for every slam dunk case congress successfully prosecutes like that, there are silly nonsense things like investigating the financial crisis.

For those with republican brains, the above things were sarcasm. None of those things I mentioned as good congressional investigations were based on anything. Republicans endlessly pursue investigations based on absolutely nothing while ignoring serious crimes. "You can't even say what crimes Trump should be investigated on" is a massive double standard, and this should be obvious to anyone capable of voluntarily chewing. If voters held Trump to the same standard as we allow liberals to be held to, he would be in Guantanamo bay by now.

It's an issue if you believe that the primary beneficiaries of such a rule are heterosexual males that will use this as an excuse to enter female bathrooms and use the law as an excuse.

Honestly, I couldn't care less if a woman comes into the men's room. I would be concerned for women's sake about men coming into their restroom, but there doesn't seem to be any big resistance to that, so this is pretty much a non-issue.

Nonetheless, people seem to drastically overestimate the rate of sex-related crimes, and the simple fact is that most people just don't do that. Unfortunately, the government doesn't seem to view it that way for issues that have nothing to do with either bathrooms or trannies.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

There's also needless, counterproductive hysteria in this department, namely donglegate and gamergate.

Gillette or any of the other shaving blade manufacturers been investigated by the DOJ or is it just that the gouging was so extreme in the printer market that people stood up and took notice?

No, But they also haven't tried to crowd out Harry's or Dollar Shave Club, either.

Yes they have. Gillette sued Dollar Shave Club in December 2015.

Can you just say, "we paid the people more who asked for more"?

No. It doesn't matter what you "say". It only matters what you "do". If you systematically pay men and women differently on any basis other than their ability to do their job, they you are breaking the law.

Men negotiate more aggressively than women. Whites negotiate more aggressively than blacks. White unemployment in America is about 4%. Black unemployment is about 8%. So blacks are more desperate for the job, and more willing to accept a "take it or leave it" offer. That doesn't make it legal to discriminate.

This sounds fishy. The aggregate does not have a mind. For example if it turns out red-haired people have higher unemployment than others, looking in the mirror and noticing that I have red hair will not make me less likely to negotiate, and your observing my red hair will not change anything about me at all because you and I have separate minds. In your story about black people, you sloppily miswired causality.

It's at the center of the discussion. "It matters what you do": nice sound-bite. However, if you do nothing, but a difference in the aggregate world is indirectly observable through your aggregate behaviour, you have still done nothing.

Anyway, Google only negotiates on salary:
  - when you join (a little negotiation)
  - when you quit and they try to get you back (yuuuge negotiation)

If you threaten to quit if they don't pay you more, they'll tell you, "fine, quit then." They are not a normal company in this regard; they are total dicks about it. This sounds ideal for women who supposedly "don't negotiate as much" because they're afraid of being "perceived as bossy" or whatever is the latest memetic hypothetical.

In fact, it could swing the other way. Women are always leaving to have children, so you'd think they'd do more of the second kind of negotiation than men. I would not be surprised if, having removed the confounding factors and not expecting women to gain experience while they are not working, by your reasoning that aggregated negotiation equals discrimination, there's huge pay discrimination favouring women.

The following anonymous coward putinbot posts are mine. I don't normally bother signing in to slashdot because it isn't worth the trouble:

WaPo, CIA conflict of interest rag
Guccifer 2.0 is a fraud
TL;DR

I'm a Democrat, not a Republican or a Trump fan or a putin bot. I resist propaganda because propaganda is more dangerous than Trump. I resist propaganda because it is a symptom of a system that is so stacked against ordinary citizens that it may be too late to ever wrest control of our government back from the oligarchs, deep state and military industrial complex.

But since you mention bots, I'll mention paid trolls (not claiming you are one): Correct the Record, ShareBlue. Paid trolls working for Hillary, according to sources I think you'll agree aren't Putin-friendly:

How a super PAC plans to coordinate directly with Hillary Clinton’s campaign
David Brock's Army of "Nerd Virgins" Has Hillary's Back
Clinton SuperPac Admits to Paying Internet Trolls
The making of a Hillary Clinton echo chamber

The following anonymous coward putinbot posts are mine. I don't normally bother signing in to slashdot because it isn't worth the trouble:

WaPo, CIA conflict of interest rag
Guccifer 2.0 is a fraud
TL;DR

I'm a Democrat, not a Republican or a Trump fan or a putin bot. I resist propaganda because propaganda is more dangerous than Trump. I resist propaganda because it is a symptom of a system that is so stacked against ordinary citizens that it may be too late to ever wrest control of our government back from the oligarchs, deep state and military industrial complex.

But since you mention bots, I'll mention paid trolls (not claiming you are one): Correct the Record, ShareBlue. Paid trolls working for Hillary, according to sources I think you'll agree aren't Putin-friendly:

How a super PAC plans to coordinate directly with Hillary Clinton’s campaign
David Brock's Army of "Nerd Virgins" Has Hillary's Back
Clinton SuperPac Admits to Paying Internet Trolls
The making of a Hillary Clinton echo chamber

Cars cost a lot to maintain, insure, and fuel, and depreciate over their lifetime. The benefits only outweigh the costs if you have a well-paid job out in the countryside.

Bullshit. Not being homeless is a substantial benefit.

I think we, as a populous, have a dual responsibility to pay attention to these, but not to assume they are indisputable fact. With that said, there is a difference between a candle and a bonfire. When a lot of leaks from different sources point in a certain direction, you should probably start paying attention.

I agree. Though Trump does himself no favours by initially denying allegations with one story, then another, then another, and then finally admitting to them. This was the case with the Comey firing Messaging of this decision should be very easy if you have nothing to hide. Just tell the truth.

It becomes easier to believe new allegations each time a previously denied one is conceded. Even still, we need wait for the findings of the various investigations, and hope that executive obstruction is kept to a minimum.

Oh you mean last year.

From that president who offered the Russians "more flexibility"

You people who think there's much difference from one president to the next, from one party to the next, are so absurd. There is power, and power protects power.

Will it criminalize using a drone to report on crimes against humanity?

http://time.com/4140050/donald-trump-muslims-japanese-internment/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/11/17/japanese-internment-is-precedent-for-national-muslim-registry-prominent-trump-backer-says/

A bit like the lady who was so concerned about vote fraud - that her vote would be switched over to Clinton - that she decided to commit voter fraud...

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Brennen Center, Washington Post, Atlantic, Mother Jones, UCSD, UW, Cornell, Cambridge. There is a mix a academic original research and easily accessible, but thoughtful articles in that list.

If you're a tourist, and you're willing to invest at least $500,000.00 in one of the Trump family businesses, there's no problem getting a visa.

Your dollars (dinars, yuan, rubles) are welcome here.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Arby's employs more people than all the coal companies combined.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

You would sacrifice him at the Alter of Youth? His best creative years may still be ahead of him.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/creativity-can-last-well-into-old-age-as-long-as-creators-stay-open-to-new-ideas/2013/11/21/31487172-52ca-11e3-a7f0-b790929232e1_story.html

I guess you never heard of sulfanilamide

Nor Thalidomide. From 1962:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

LOL! The wiki article is just a collection of the same unsubstantiated BS that the MSM has been slinging around for the past 6 months. "Intelligence agencies" said so, therefore it's fact, eh pleb? The same intelligence agencies that severely discredited themselves over the past decade or so and provide proof like "the hacks happened at night, which is daytime in Moscow. Therefore... Russians!"

But, that's not to say skullduggery didn't occur during the elections. Indeed, there were some evil actors attempting to rig it.

Here's some hard, video evidence for ya, and admission of cheating in the debates in order to deceive voters about their candidate's diplomacy skills. But it implicates the DNC and not the Russians, so I'm sure you'll go apeshit and start frothing at the mouth, claiming it's all a conspiracy.

Oh, and if you're going to claim the Veritas videos are doctored: Prove it or STFU.

Your own link says the average number of tellers per branch has dropped from 22 to 13, and 57 thousand gone in thevlast 2 years.
The number of branches has dropped 10%.

Im guessing you are a city dweller, as the cuts are most of ften in rural and remote areas.

According to figures compiled by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and supplied by the American Bankers Association, the number of U.S. bank employees has remained relatively stable. There were 2,110,276 employees in 2012, and 2,043,480 last year.

But the number of U.S. bank branches has declined precipitously from a peak of 99,540 in 2009 to 91,861 in the third quarter of 2016, according to the ABA.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

The whole proposition that automation will increase jobs in anything other than the short term is patently ridiculous.

I'm with you. As long as you are just as willing to condemn similar threats of violence against the other party, such as those that were directed at Obama,
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

and Hillary,
http://www.nbcnews.com/politic...

you may as well do as you suggest anyway, your depression is entirely justified ... because we're already royally fucked, and we don't show any signs of being able to interrupt or even slow down the melting of the glaciers that Eric talks about ...

http://www.victoria.ac.nz/antarctic/about/events/s-t-lee-lecture/s.t.-lee-lecture-2016

Professor Eric J.M. Rignot, 14 February 2017

Donald Bren Professor of Earth System Science, School of Physical Sciences, University of California, Irvine
Senior Research Scientist/Joint Faculty Appointee at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory

It's very interesting to have the "anatomy" of the glaciers discussed so that we know how the calculations have been made.
His lecture describes the analyses that his team made on each significant sea-facing glacier in the world, and the conservative estimates are alarming. Unless there's a volcanic eruption which causes global temperatures to drop rapidly, we already have an inevitable 1 meter overall sea rise ahead of us, and there's a handful of glaciers that can each deliver 4 meters or more, it's just a matter of time, we're too late to stop it ... enjoy !
That's 1 meter AVERAGE, so you can imagine how that pans out for equatorial sites like New Orleans - they haven't seen nothing yet.

The evidence is clear for all to see - the Totten glacier : https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/03/16/the-melting-of-antarctica-was-already-really-bad-it-just-got-worse/?utm_term=.2889616837dc
- Pine Island Glacier : https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/mar/26/collapse-antarcticas-glaciers-ice-melt-sooner-than-thought-scientists-warn

You're right - what do we care?
It's too fucking late already to stop it, but we could make life a "little" more pleasant for our children, presuming they will live normal lives of about another 60 years ...
If we still don't care, that speaks volumes about us collectively, eh?

It was killed by "dumping" of sets into the US market at or below cost by Japanese manufacturers beginning in the 1970s, and peaking in the 1980s.

http://www.nytimes.com/1983/12...

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Flash in the pan is more accurate than you know.

The American auto industry is 127 years old. For the rest of the world it's roughly 209.

13 years is nothing compared to that record. Additionaly, rare-earth minerals aren't nearly as abundant as fossile fuels, and cannot be syntesized like fuel alcohol or biofuel can. Without any conservation effort the bottom is going to fall out of the market of batteries for *everything*. That means your cellphone is on a short time on this earth also.

Everyone drones on about fossil fuels having a limited supply when the minerals required to produce batteries are far more limited, far more destructive to mine, and much harsher on the environment to process.

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

https://www.washingtonpost.com...
http://www.batteryeducation.co...
http://energyskeptic.com/2013/...
https://electrek.co/2016/11/01...
https://news.slashdot.org/stor...

If Comcast were to selectively throttle traffic from Youtube, Amazon, Pandora, etc., to their customers, there would be actual contractual issue that could be settled in court - either between the website and Comcast (if they buy transit from Comcast), OR ISP that the website buys transit from and Comcast

And Youtube, Amazon, Pandora etc. would lose. Peering is between network providers; content providers aren't part of any such agreement (unless a network provider like Comcast just happens to also be a content provider).

Let's say Amazon hooks up through Level 3, and Comcast is throttling Amazon traffic to all its customers at the last mile. Comcast, OTOH, has it's own shopping site and video streaming service, that don't need to come through the Level 3 bottleneck and goes straight to all its customers with great quality. To Comcast customers, Amazon appears lousy, may not be worth the subscription fee.

Amazon can complain, but they have no contractual relationship with Comcast, so no standing to sue. So, that's that.

They can complain to Level 3, but if Comcast has any evidence to show they're receiving boatloads more traffic from Level 3 than they're sending, then they have reason to squelch Level 3's traffic within the limits of the peer agreement. Level 3 says sorry, Amazon, nothing we can do. Amazon can sue Level 3, for not suing Comcast more effectively, or for not renegotiating the peering contract. And everybody can spend years and years and years in litigation, while Amazon's subscribers on Comcast's network get frustrated and quit. Wall St. gets wind of this, Amazon's stock starts to fall, billions of dollars vanish.

Or.... Comcast can offer a little side deal with Amazon to favor their packets as they arrive from Level 3, for a fee. Because, again, good Mr. Ajit Pai and his FCC would permit Comcast to discriminate packets by content, or by any way they choose. As they say, it's their pipes, their wires, and they have a God-given right to monetize them any and every way they feel fit, such as by offering different levels or tiers of service. You got your base tier, good enough for e-mail maybe, but if you want to be sure all your subscribers receive 4K streaming on Comcast's network, better cough up for the "premium" service. As far as Comcast is concerned, Amazon and Google can afford it, and it's about time they started paying up.

Rather than burn money on contract litigation, Amazon will give in and pay this extortion fee to Comcast rather than risk losing subscribers on Comcast's very big network. Verizon, Cablevision, Cox, AT&T, anyone with that monopoly on the last mile has every reason to get in on this racket and hit Google, Hulu, Netflix, ESPN, Amazon, and every other mass-consumer of last-mile bandwidth for a piece of their action, because, as they say, they're our pipes, their territory, and the FCC is throwing out any obligation for last-mile carriers to "give it away" to the likes of Google, Amazon, and everyone else with a business model based on a content-neutral Internet. That adds up to a lot of extortion fees, passed on as a lot of ads and fees for you and me.