Bubba Clem could be heard on the full tape saying that if he ever wanted to retire, he simply needed to release the video.
Clem originally claimed that Hogan, whose real name is Terry Gene Bollea, knew that he was being recorded. But after striking a settlement with Hogan, Clem walked that back.
Clem, who has denied being responsible for the tape's leak, has resisted Gawker's efforts to call him as a witness to be questioned about whether Hogan knew he was being filmed.
A lawyer for Clem filed a motion on Friday asking to be eliminated from the case. "Should these statements prove to be differing, and we do not concede that they are, Mr. Clem could be subject to a state prosecution for perjury or a federal false statement prosecution," the motion stated.
His attorney had previously said Clem intends to invoke his Fifth Amendment right to not testify against himself. Clem's request will be considered Monday.
Bubba really REALLY didn't want to be on the witness stand about it, because he'd likely be in jail.
"I think any free-tiered service is not fair.... is built on the back of my work and that of my peers. That's how I feel about it. Strongly," said Reznor
That's hilarious, because I doubt Reznor or any of these other artists would bitch that MTV/VH1 was stealing from them, yet it does exactly the same as Youtube, presenting their music to the populace for free with ad revenue paying the bills.
It would depend on how many they own, and how influential they are personally over that portfolio. Like Rupert Murdock owns Fox News, but Roger Ailes is the one actually pulling it's strings.
Gawker outed Thiel as a fag. So that's why he's got it in for them.
No, they did not. Thiel's sexuality was known around Silicon Valley, Theil just didn't want some people (The Saudi's in particular) knowing because he was trying to get them to invest in his dodgy hedge fund. Theil's more pissed off that Gawker exposed his crappy businesses, his influence over Facebook, his rather backwards views on women and his Libertarian lunacy.
The video in the Hogan case wasn't "secretly recorded". Bollea knew the video was recorded which is why he was freaking out about it going public because he knew it showed what a racist piece of shit he is. Bollea talked about having sex with Bubba's wife with Bubba's permission on Howard Stern's show several times, which is why the video was news in the first place.
But layoffs are the quick and easy way to help out the share price in the short term.
This, so very much this. Large corporations barely exist anymore for any purpose other than churning the short term stock. Nobody "invests" in a company anymore, they gamble and hedge on femtosecond stock trades by computer algorithms. It's pathetic.
The stock market should be treated as the gambling establishment it's become and be taxed comparably. Maybe then people will actually invest money in long term growth again instead of trying to get rich before it all burns to ashes.
Microsoft is a large corporation. They could have made an investment in a new direction using these people. Layoffs are just the quick and easy out.
They didn't have to buy Nokia in the first place. They completely wasted the resource and all their investors money for no net return because they never really wanted to be a phone company, it was just a bullet point on the "How do we measure compared to Google and Apple" powerpoint slide.
It would be nice if corporations saw people as the resources they are rather than just expendable cogs. It's not the workers fault Microsoft's board of directors couldn't figure out how to run a phone division.
When will politicians stop believing corporate promises (lies)?? Corporations are only in it for themselves, they have zero concern for the communities they are present in.
Giving corporations sweetheart deals for promises of jobs or investment is the worst possible use of public money. It's corporate welfare, except these welfare recipients are spending the check on hookers and blow.
Yes, artificially inflating the price of the product that's being dumped into your country at a price that would eliminate competition and thus local jobs is the point.
Prove that all foreign goods are "best" products. Go on. What good is the "best" product anyway if no one in your country can afford it because they don't have jobs?
When the day comes that an Indian, American, European or Chinese laborer can work for the same wage and pay the same cost of living anywhere on the planet, then we can all be happy global citizens. Until then, when you live in a country with an economic disadvantage your government should do what it can to balance that disadvantage.
What are you and others talking about 'build' the robots? They're going to be pumped out of a factory in China like every other consumer good, not a bunch of guys with some Raspberry Pi's and some servos hacking them together in their garage.
For a while they'll be serviceable, until economics breaks down enough that it's cheaper to just swap the robot with a new one.
Robots break. When your burger robot breaks your entire store is out of commission vs calling in another worker to cover their shift. Robots can be hacked, robots will not notice of someone introduces foreign substances into the food, leaving the owner liable.
On the up side, robots will not riot when there are no jobs and nobody has any money.
Franchisee looses out, because every time a new menu item is introduced they have to buy a new robot rather than retrain existing staff. Franchisee will also need to buy duplicate robots as any downtime will dramatically cut into their restaurants ability to serve meals and generate revenue. Franchisee continues to loose out when 12 your old script kiddie figures out how to hack the robots and stages a robot gladiatorial battle in their kitchen.
Here's the thing though, that $15 wage is a strawman. They are already planning on buying the robots, they're just using the wage increase as a smokescreen. If the wage continues to stagnate they will still buy the robots and dump those workers! They've been talking about centralizing the drive thru to a call center so they don't have to staff the window for years.
Personally I think robots are the worst thing they'll ever do, for a lot of reasons.
Robots won't stop teens from coming into the store and spray painting penises on all the terminals.
Robots won't notice when the homeless guy who smells like a tuna sandwich that's been in the sun for a week decides to take a nap in the store.
Robots won't stop the aforementioned homeless person from shitting on the table.
Robots have no idea how to deal with humans who give no fucks and want to be destructive.
Why is it programmers are the only people who feel breaking into your house to show you how bad your locks are is a reason for congratulations and adoration?
Regardless of his objective, he broke the law. The courts were very lenient on him, so no harm was done.
A very real problem is that genetically modified plants spread and outfight the existing varieties, leading to less diversity. Which isn't just a moral problem, but a risk - if some disease attacks the one remaining plant strain, we have no alternatives.
None of the crops humans plant for food are their original state. They've been bred and hybridized so much they barely resemble the original untouched strains, which are vastly vastly outnumbered by the varieties humans found favorable. So your argument is already a wash. We've been breeding out diversity for centuries, long before GMO became an issue.
As for diseases, that's already a problem and has been a problem for so called 'natural' plants since the dawn of time, and nobody on that side of the argument ever likes to point out that GMO techniques can make foods more disease resistant. But that doesn't play into the narrative of GMO being a danger. Humans didn't kill off the Gros Michel banana, nature did. It's currently working hard to kill off the Cavendish, but GMO might save it.
Another problem is that resistance to weed killers also means more weed killers will be used, because more weed killers can be used. Which diminishes other flora too, as well as fauna that's either directly or indirectly affected.
That is some circular ass logic there. Like farmers just want to dump weed killer 24/7 because they have nothing better to do with their money. Weed killer is targeted and sprayed only when it's necessary and most effective, otherwise it's just useless.
But the biggest problem is that you can't put the genie back into the bottle if something goes wrong. GM crop research always has a non-zero risk for ill side effects (which is why there is crop research and not straight from lab to market), and a non-zero risk of escaping and spreading. Quite possibly cross-pollinating with existing species. That cannot be undone.That companies are allowed to decide on that risk being acceptable for all of us is at least problematic.
Again, why is GMO treated so differently from our other attempts at making our lives better? You can't just stick your fingers in your ears and pretend GMO will go away. You say corporations are making the choice for us, but so far every regulatory attempt has been a thinly veiled stand by the ecologically deluded to block GMO at all costs rather than rational investigations of it's efficacy and safety. There needs to be a middle ground.
There are people today who are concerned that there is DNA in their food. They will not believe this report any more than the people who think global warming is a lie or that the creationist 'museum' is factual..
The issue of GMO food has passed rational debate and entered into religious fervor. Some silly report isn't going to change a thing.
I'm actually asking that the current tyrant in the White House get replaced with someone that understands the role the federal government should play in our lives. Also, how am I preventing the government from getting anything done? I didn't vote those fuckers into office. Since I'm not protesting outside their office, or otherwise interfering with their work, I don't see how I keep them from doing the most basic government tasks like approving a budget. They seem to get all tied up in their own bureaucracy on their own without my help.
Also, it's precisely because they can't seem to get things done that I believe that the states should take the federal government down a peg. If the states weren't held hostage by the federal government to do things like funding public schools then their failure to pass a budget would not lead to the firing of teachers. It would also prevent the federal government from telling public schools that they have to let boys use the girls locker room.
You prevent government from getting anything done because you demand a tyrant in office when it's a candidate that you approve of but when it's not suddenly you want states to go their own way. You're a hypocrite and an obstructionist.
Also, to address your off-topic comments, the federal government pays states for school from it's own budget, not the states. The state's inability to manage their own money has nothing to do with funding the schools and a lot more to do with cutting corporate taxes to the bone in the blind faith conservative religion that if they turn their states into 3rd world economies then all the jobs will come to them. If anything the federal school grants allows the states to mostly ignore their school budgets because Uncle Sam's picking up the tab.
For another matter, the federal government's done a lot more forcing states to let GIRLS into the boys locker rooms, because surprise most states ignore girls sports and only build facilities for boys football or baseball. Title IX forces them to treat both genders equally.
The only men I've seen forcing their way into women's restrooms lately have been all conservative grand standers and derp warriors.
I just did a search for recent polls on nuclear power and depending on the poll the people that want more nuclear power varies from 51% to 67%. People want nuclear power. Also, should not this be a local matter? Should not a state be able to decide if they want a nuclear power plant? Since Obama is not a fan of nuclear power then the people's desire for more is unmet.
As I said, the people who do want nuclear DON'T WANT IT NEAR THEM. You talk about the state's taking control over nuclear regulation? NY is fighting hard against the Indian Point nuclear plant right now. The people don't want nuclear waste being transported on the roads or railways, they don't want it stored in their state, they really just seem to want to wish really hard and make it go away.
I have no idea what that means. Why would I be checking flags for anything?
Well hey, you're not as insane as I first assumed. Good for you. You googled up a poll on nuclear energy, google up flag gold fringe controversy if you're curious. Careful though, don't fall down the rabbit hole.
The coal industry needs to be destroyed. I'm sorry that will put a lot of coal miners out of work, but are we supposed to feed our kids coal dust because a few hillbillies can't move to where the jobs are?
I'm sure the asbestos miners, DDT manufacturers and the guys who bury cans of toxic waste under schoolyards all really wanted to keep their jobs too, but you know the rest of us felt moving on was for the best.
You anti-government types are such hypocrites at times, it's hilarious to me that you're advocating electing a president who will be a tyrant and go against the will of the people to force nuclear power plant production on the states, while simultaneously saying we need to" knock the petty despots in DC down a peg". People like yourself are exactly why government can't get anything done.
It's the voters who don't want nuclear plants, not government. Even the ones who do admit we need nuclear don't want a plant anywhere near them and make no bones about tearing down any elected official who tries.
Slashdot Mirror
How about this? http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/12/media/hulk-hogan-gawker-settlement/
Bubba Clem could be heard on the full tape saying that if he ever wanted to retire, he simply needed to release the video.
Clem originally claimed that Hogan, whose real name is Terry Gene Bollea, knew that he was being recorded. But after striking a settlement with Hogan, Clem walked that back.
Clem, who has denied being responsible for the tape's leak, has resisted Gawker's efforts to call him as a witness to be questioned about whether Hogan knew he was being filmed.
A lawyer for Clem filed a motion on Friday asking to be eliminated from the case. "Should these statements prove to be differing, and we do not concede that they are, Mr. Clem could be subject to a state prosecution for perjury or a federal false statement prosecution," the motion stated.
His attorney had previously said Clem intends to invoke his Fifth Amendment right to not testify against himself. Clem's request will be considered Monday.
Bubba really REALLY didn't want to be on the witness stand about it, because he'd likely be in jail.
"I think any free-tiered service is not fair.... is built on the back of my work and that of my peers. That's how I feel about it. Strongly," said Reznor
That's hilarious, because I doubt Reznor or any of these other artists would bitch that MTV/VH1 was stealing from them, yet it does exactly the same as Youtube, presenting their music to the populace for free with ad revenue paying the bills.
It would depend on how many they own, and how influential they are personally over that portfolio. Like Rupert Murdock owns Fox News, but Roger Ailes is the one actually pulling it's strings.
Gawker outed Thiel as a fag. So that's why he's got it in for them.
No, they did not. Thiel's sexuality was known around Silicon Valley, Theil just didn't want some people (The Saudi's in particular) knowing because he was trying to get them to invest in his dodgy hedge fund. Theil's more pissed off that Gawker exposed his crappy businesses, his influence over Facebook, his rather backwards views on women and his Libertarian lunacy.
The video in the Hogan case wasn't "secretly recorded". Bollea knew the video was recorded which is why he was freaking out about it going public because he knew it showed what a racist piece of shit he is. Bollea talked about having sex with Bubba's wife with Bubba's permission on Howard Stern's show several times, which is why the video was news in the first place.
But layoffs are the quick and easy way to help out the share price in the short term.
This, so very much this. Large corporations barely exist anymore for any purpose other than churning the short term stock. Nobody "invests" in a company anymore, they gamble and hedge on femtosecond stock trades by computer algorithms. It's pathetic.
The stock market should be treated as the gambling establishment it's become and be taxed comparably. Maybe then people will actually invest money in long term growth again instead of trying to get rich before it all burns to ashes.
Microsoft is a large corporation. They could have made an investment in a new direction using these people. Layoffs are just the quick and easy out.
They didn't have to buy Nokia in the first place. They completely wasted the resource and all their investors money for no net return because they never really wanted to be a phone company, it was just a bullet point on the "How do we measure compared to Google and Apple" powerpoint slide.
It would be nice if corporations saw people as the resources they are rather than just expendable cogs. It's not the workers fault Microsoft's board of directors couldn't figure out how to run a phone division.
When will politicians stop believing corporate promises (lies)?? Corporations are only in it for themselves, they have zero concern for the communities they are present in.
Giving corporations sweetheart deals for promises of jobs or investment is the worst possible use of public money. It's corporate welfare, except these welfare recipients are spending the check on hookers and blow.
Yes, artificially inflating the price of the product that's being dumped into your country at a price that would eliminate competition and thus local jobs is the point.
Prove that all foreign goods are "best" products. Go on. What good is the "best" product anyway if no one in your country can afford it because they don't have jobs?
When the day comes that an Indian, American, European or Chinese laborer can work for the same wage and pay the same cost of living anywhere on the planet, then we can all be happy global citizens. Until then, when you live in a country with an economic disadvantage your government should do what it can to balance that disadvantage.
What are you and others talking about 'build' the robots? They're going to be pumped out of a factory in China like every other consumer good, not a bunch of guys with some Raspberry Pi's and some servos hacking them together in their garage.
For a while they'll be serviceable, until economics breaks down enough that it's cheaper to just swap the robot with a new one.
So some people in China then?
Until you buy a lawn mowing robot.
Robots break. When your burger robot breaks your entire store is out of commission vs calling in another worker to cover their shift. Robots can be hacked, robots will not notice of someone introduces foreign substances into the food, leaving the owner liable.
On the up side, robots will not riot when there are no jobs and nobody has any money.
Franchisee looses out, because every time a new menu item is introduced they have to buy a new robot rather than retrain existing staff. Franchisee will also need to buy duplicate robots as any downtime will dramatically cut into their restaurants ability to serve meals and generate revenue. Franchisee continues to loose out when 12 your old script kiddie figures out how to hack the robots and stages a robot gladiatorial battle in their kitchen.
Consider that the low wages is a large part of the high turnover.
Better buy 5 fry bagger robots, because at least 3 will be constantly down for service during the lunch rush.
Here's the thing though, that $15 wage is a strawman. They are already planning on buying the robots, they're just using the wage increase as a smokescreen. If the wage continues to stagnate they will still buy the robots and dump those workers! They've been talking about centralizing the drive thru to a call center so they don't have to staff the window for years.
Personally I think robots are the worst thing they'll ever do, for a lot of reasons.
Robots won't stop teens from coming into the store and spray painting penises on all the terminals.
Robots won't notice when the homeless guy who smells like a tuna sandwich that's been in the sun for a week decides to take a nap in the store.
Robots won't stop the aforementioned homeless person from shitting on the table.
Robots have no idea how to deal with humans who give no fucks and want to be destructive.
Hi! First day on the internets? You must be new here.
Why is it programmers are the only people who feel breaking into your house to show you how bad your locks are is a reason for congratulations and adoration?
Regardless of his objective, he broke the law. The courts were very lenient on him, so no harm was done.
A very real problem is that genetically modified plants spread and outfight the existing varieties, leading to less diversity. Which isn't just a moral problem, but a risk - if some disease attacks the one remaining plant strain, we have no alternatives.
None of the crops humans plant for food are their original state. They've been bred and hybridized so much they barely resemble the original untouched strains, which are vastly vastly outnumbered by the varieties humans found favorable. So your argument is already a wash. We've been breeding out diversity for centuries, long before GMO became an issue.
As for diseases, that's already a problem and has been a problem for so called 'natural' plants since the dawn of time, and nobody on that side of the argument ever likes to point out that GMO techniques can make foods more disease resistant. But that doesn't play into the narrative of GMO being a danger. Humans didn't kill off the Gros Michel banana, nature did. It's currently working hard to kill off the Cavendish, but GMO might save it.
Another problem is that resistance to weed killers also means more weed killers will be used, because more weed killers can be used. Which diminishes other flora too, as well as fauna that's either directly or indirectly affected.
That is some circular ass logic there. Like farmers just want to dump weed killer 24/7 because they have nothing better to do with their money. Weed killer is targeted and sprayed only when it's necessary and most effective, otherwise it's just useless.
But the biggest problem is that you can't put the genie back into the bottle if something goes wrong. GM crop research always has a non-zero risk for ill side effects (which is why there is crop research and not straight from lab to market), and a non-zero risk of escaping and spreading. Quite possibly cross-pollinating with existing species. That cannot be undone.That companies are allowed to decide on that risk being acceptable for all of us is at least problematic.
Again, why is GMO treated so differently from our other attempts at making our lives better? You can't just stick your fingers in your ears and pretend GMO will go away. You say corporations are making the choice for us, but so far every regulatory attempt has been a thinly veiled stand by the ecologically deluded to block GMO at all costs rather than rational investigations of it's efficacy and safety. There needs to be a middle ground.
There are people today who are concerned that there is DNA in their food. They will not believe this report any more than the people who think global warming is a lie or that the creationist 'museum' is factual..
The issue of GMO food has passed rational debate and entered into religious fervor. Some silly report isn't going to change a thing.
Since the Pi3 only has 1GB of RAM on board, you don't really get a lot of benefit having a 64-bit kernel.
I'm actually asking that the current tyrant in the White House get replaced with someone that understands the role the federal government should play in our lives. Also, how am I preventing the government from getting anything done? I didn't vote those fuckers into office. Since I'm not protesting outside their office, or otherwise interfering with their work, I don't see how I keep them from doing the most basic government tasks like approving a budget. They seem to get all tied up in their own bureaucracy on their own without my help.
Also, it's precisely because they can't seem to get things done that I believe that the states should take the federal government down a peg. If the states weren't held hostage by the federal government to do things like funding public schools then their failure to pass a budget would not lead to the firing of teachers. It would also prevent the federal government from telling public schools that they have to let boys use the girls locker room.
You prevent government from getting anything done because you demand a tyrant in office when it's a candidate that you approve of but when it's not suddenly you want states to go their own way. You're a hypocrite and an obstructionist.
Also, to address your off-topic comments, the federal government pays states for school from it's own budget, not the states. The state's inability to manage their own money has nothing to do with funding the schools and a lot more to do with cutting corporate taxes to the bone in the blind faith conservative religion that if they turn their states into 3rd world economies then all the jobs will come to them. If anything the federal school grants allows the states to mostly ignore their school budgets because Uncle Sam's picking up the tab.
For another matter, the federal government's done a lot more forcing states to let GIRLS into the boys locker rooms, because surprise most states ignore girls sports and only build facilities for boys football or baseball. Title IX forces them to treat both genders equally.
The only men I've seen forcing their way into women's restrooms lately have been all conservative grand standers and derp warriors.
I just did a search for recent polls on nuclear power and depending on the poll the people that want more nuclear power varies from 51% to 67%. People want nuclear power. Also, should not this be a local matter? Should not a state be able to decide if they want a nuclear power plant? Since Obama is not a fan of nuclear power then the people's desire for more is unmet.
As I said, the people who do want nuclear DON'T WANT IT NEAR THEM. You talk about the state's taking control over nuclear regulation? NY is fighting hard against the Indian Point nuclear plant right now. The people don't want nuclear waste being transported on the roads or railways, they don't want it stored in their state, they really just seem to want to wish really hard and make it go away.
I have no idea what that means. Why would I be checking flags for anything?
Well hey, you're not as insane as I first assumed. Good for you. You googled up a poll on nuclear energy, google up flag gold fringe controversy if you're curious. Careful though, don't fall down the rabbit hole.
The coal industry needs to be destroyed. I'm sorry that will put a lot of coal miners out of work, but are we supposed to feed our kids coal dust because a few hillbillies can't move to where the jobs are?
I'm sure the asbestos miners, DDT manufacturers and the guys who bury cans of toxic waste under schoolyards all really wanted to keep their jobs too, but you know the rest of us felt moving on was for the best.
You anti-government types are such hypocrites at times, it's hilarious to me that you're advocating electing a president who will be a tyrant and go against the will of the people to force nuclear power plant production on the states, while simultaneously saying we need to" knock the petty despots in DC down a peg". People like yourself are exactly why government can't get anything done.
It's the voters who don't want nuclear plants, not government. Even the ones who do admit we need nuclear don't want a plant anywhere near them and make no bones about tearing down any elected official who tries.
Go back to checking flags for gold fringe.