I don't know about Hawaii land sales but in most places the government loves to get their 2 cents worth of any transaction so unless they can pay the taxes on their $100 billion bids they would default and it would go back to either the next highest bidder or back up for a new auction.
When you submit budgets that your own party tries to prevent coming to the floor for a vote and even when they do, receive votes in the single digits between both houses I don't think you could really say a real budget proposal was submitted.
I don't have links but from news reports I saw before they stopped the recount they found that in heavy Clinton areas that used certain types of optical scanners the numbers may have been inflated due to mishandling of ballots. Essentially, the person had an issue running the ballot through the first time and then retried but the machine actually registered both attempts as a vote for Clinton (assuming they were Clinton votes because they were in heavy Clinton districts). They were finding a larger number for their scanned totals than they actually had physical ballots for the recount.
While not voter fraud per se (since there was no intent shown), it definitely put a spot light on a major flaw in the system that apparently was well know from prior elections.
Both phone OSes let you turn off Amber alerts as well as emergency alerts but without rooting and some modifications, if you are in the US, Presidential broadcasts cannot be disabled.
General alerts up to emergency level can be blocked but Presidential WEAs are not considered normal alerts and can only be blocked if you actually root the phone and dig a little deeper into the OS.
The Charter of rights is no where near as strong as the 1st amendment.
While the 1st amendment protects all speech, including hate speech, with the limited exception of direct calls for action (incitement) or libel/slander laws, our Charter gives lots of wiggle room for people who are merely offended, even if what was said was 100% true, to bring the speaker/writer in front of the kangaroo court system of our Human Right's Commissions. The HRCs are designed for convictions, not honest airing of facts, and place so many limits on the defendant as to make sure their nearly 100% conviction rate stays in place.
HRCs regularly stretch 'trials' over years and while the plaintiff's costs are 100% covered the defendant is on the hook for every penny spent on their defense. At the end, the plaintiff receives whatever fines the HRC imposes (free money since they had to spend none of their own to effectively sue someone) and the defendant, on top of their already staggering legal fees, must now pay an often exorbitant fine.
At one point the primary user of the HRC system was one of their own lawyers who filed multiple suits (few if any of which involved a targeted group of which he was a member) and made over $50,000 in just a couple years off of fines.
As far as I can tell the anti-Semitic claim comes from a statement from his ex-wife during their divorce proceedings. Hardly an unbiased source but when you want to demonize your opponents you'll grab at anything.
At this point it's just become a talking point and is repeated, without any supporting evidence, by every late night comedian and most reporters.
The biggest thing stopping this type of implementation on a large scale in the US is their odd requirement to have every f^%#*&! elected office/initiative voted for on the same day. Limit Super Tuesday to Federal offices and then have another day for State and possibly a third for local and you can have simpler ballots with only 2 or 3 positions which are easier to have paper trails for.
Instead now you have ballots in some districts that closer resemble an AP calculus exam which makes counting and verifying exponentially harder than it should be.
How do you gerrymander a Federal election? Did Idaho redrawn their border with Oregon to push some of their 'undesirable' Dem voters into a blue state to help them go red or are you just throwing out words to try and make yourself look smart without any understanding of their meaning?
Well in every poll I've ever been to the handling of the ballot, outside of the actual booth, is done in plain view of pretty much everyone else in the room. They can't see what was placed on the ballot but everyone can see you going to the poll worker and getting a new ballot.
As there is no law about arriving in a group, for someone so inclined to buy or force a person to vote a certain way, it would just take 1 person to arrive with the group and stand in the back so as to go last and be able to watch everyone else hand in their ballots.
You can ruin you ballot and request a new one in, as far as I know, every poll in the US. That doesn't solve the issue with coercion that the banning on photos prevents since the ruining of the ballot and request for a new one occurs outside of the booth and anyone present at the poll can see you doing it.
So as for the examples given above of an abusive or controlling spouse, they would most likely see you ruining your ballot and requesting a new one and then demand you show them both pics of your ballot.
The laws/statutes regarding the mishandling of classified information do not involve intent as part of their requirements to be in violation. The mere existence of classified information in the wrong location or in the wrong hands is a violation of the law.
For anyone running a bootloader there is already an easily available app on XDA which bypasses SafetyNet.
Instead of installing a custom ROM I simply enable developer mode so I could fix the KitKat Bluetooth bug on my LG. SafetyNet detects just having the developer option menu visible, even if turned off, as a violation. The only way I can fix this is through a factory reset (since my LG doesn't give other options to remove developer mode), which was the option I was trying to avoid by enabling developer mode in the first place.
So now, if I want to play Pokemon Go I'll have to do a factory reset on my phone every 2-3 months when the Bluetooth log maxes out.
I believe the actual study refers to 90% of driving done in a day could be done using EVs. They don't seem to break it down to individual drivers overall behavior, just that on any given day 90% of driving activities fall within the range and abilities of an EV.
It would be like saying, 90% of the time I can live on $10/day. That might be true but if I get a relaxing job that only pays me $70/week, those 3 days a month when my bills come due and I have to spend exponentially more than my normal $10 makes the idea of a $70/week job ridiculous. That being said, for a segment of the population who don't have to worry about housing/transportation/utility costs (kids for example) a $70/week job could be the perfect solution.
To add to this, many areas are already looking at removing subsidies and in fact adding charges to EV costs due to the loss of revenue for fuel taxes.
EVs do as much damage to streets as ICE vehicles but get away without paying for any upkeep by avoiding gas taxes. As the numbers shift toward EV or Hybrid vehicles, communities that rely on gas tax revenue are trying to find new ways to keep their coffers full. At least one proposal I've seen was to charge a mileage fee when renewing the plates on EVs. So renewing your plates on your Chevy Cruze could be $100, your Chevy Volt (hybrid), $100 + x/mile and your Chevy Bolt (pure EV) $100 + y (greater than x)/mile.
So you can save skipping the gas all year and then have to pay $300+ at year end to simply renew.
Apple isn't stupid, arrogant maybe, but not stupid.
But in many instances arrogance can lead to stupidity. Puck Mouse anyone? Metal cased phones that ground out the cellular antenna if you 'hold them wrong'? Phablets that bend at unexceptionably low pressure values?
Apple make a lot of nice things but that doesn't prevent them from doing some very stupid things. They usually get their act together at some point but that has sometimes meant abandoning the path they were on and going back to what worked.
... if history is any predictor, if Apple does away with the headphone jack, you won't be able to find 5 phones with one by next year, and zero in two more years.
Is that why it's so hard to find a smartphone with SD expansion.. oh wait.
You're own link points to the fact that 2 of the 3 S7 models (the S7 and S7 Edge) passed Consumer reports water resistant test; only the Active failed (oddly enough) but was fully covered by warranty. How many iPhones 6's have the same level water resistance (5 feet for 30 minutes)?
Most of those laws have to do with interfering with a person in the process of making the emergency call, as in taking away the phone or hanging up their call. Few, if any laws, actually deal with preventing cell signals through passive means otherwise all underground parking structures could be deemed in violation of those states laws.
All of the statutes regarding document retention and the handling of classified material were in place during Clinton's time at State and for the most part several decades before that. Some additional guidelines/clarifications were put in place after her time in office but they had no fundamental impact on her violations.
For example, Obama put in force a direct time table as to how long before documents had to be transferred to archives whereas before it was more of a vague "in a timely manner" type wording. On document retention charges Clinton could argue that 2-3 years after leaving office and under threat of subpena was timely (and she has several times in the press) and it's possible she could find some jurors to agree with her, whereas Kerry wouldn't be afforded that excuse because it's now set in stone the exact number of days he has to send all his work documents to be stored. On the more serious charges of handling of classified materials, on the other hand, the same rules apply to Kerry as they did to Clinton.
This was one of the statutes Clinton's server violated. Subsection F specifically mentions gross negligence and up to a 10 year prison sentence without any regards to intent.
The secure email system is not like opening up a second version of Outlook on your PC, they are usually stand alone terminals that are specialized to do one thing, keep the information they are transmitting secure.
So in this case there were actually 3 email systems in play.
#1: Clintons private server with all kinds of security flaws. #2: The standard State Department email system (the.gov email address) which while mostly secure, has internet access and is therefore not permitted for high level classified materials either. #3: SIPRNet, the real secure servers which are not connected to the internet and are used for actual classified materials (including top secret).
Various agencies have had their own internal severs hacked but SIPRNet data has only been leaked by people with direct access to a connected terminal (Chelsea Manning).
One of the issues here is that SIPRNet data was found in some of Clinton's emails and the only way for that to happen was to have someone transcribe it from the secure terminal in her office to the standard State system.
In the US, mens rea also includes the the 'reasonable person' standard which basically says that while the person who committed the offense may have had no intent of committing a crime through their actions, if a hypothetical average person could have foreseen that possibility then they can be convicted.
In this case in particular that is moot since the statutes she was accused of violating equates intent with gross negligence, meaning either is grounds for a conviction.
Senators and Congressman (as well as Governors since that comes up a lot too) are not actually bound by the same rules of conduct or record retention laws as employees of the federal government which is all the SoS is. Elected officials have a lot more leeway in how they handle their internal office documentation.
That being said, the mishandling of classified materials, even by an elected official, can have repercussions but it's very hard to pin on them since they rarely do it directly and tend to use proxies (such as a friendly reporter) who aren't willing to reveal sources.
It's like letting off the bank robber because Mr. and Mrs. Smith got a mortgage from the same bank. Sure both parties got large sums of money from the same place but the rules in place and methods used to get that money were very different.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know about Hawaii land sales but in most places the government loves to get their 2 cents worth of any transaction so unless they can pay the taxes on their $100 billion bids they would default and it would go back to either the next highest bidder or back up for a new auction.
When you submit budgets that your own party tries to prevent coming to the floor for a vote and even when they do, receive votes in the single digits between both houses I don't think you could really say a real budget proposal was submitted.
I don't have links but from news reports I saw before they stopped the recount they found that in heavy Clinton areas that used certain types of optical scanners the numbers may have been inflated due to mishandling of ballots. Essentially, the person had an issue running the ballot through the first time and then retried but the machine actually registered both attempts as a vote for Clinton (assuming they were Clinton votes because they were in heavy Clinton districts). They were finding a larger number for their scanned totals than they actually had physical ballots for the recount.
While not voter fraud per se (since there was no intent shown), it definitely put a spot light on a major flaw in the system that apparently was well know from prior elections.
Both phone OSes let you turn off Amber alerts as well as emergency alerts but without rooting and some modifications, if you are in the US, Presidential broadcasts cannot be disabled.
General alerts up to emergency level can be blocked but Presidential WEAs are not considered normal alerts and can only be blocked if you actually root the phone and dig a little deeper into the OS.
Most of these emergency alerts (Amber Alerts/WEAs) will cause your phone to ring regardless of the sound settings; it's kind of the point.
The Charter of rights is no where near as strong as the 1st amendment.
While the 1st amendment protects all speech, including hate speech, with the limited exception of direct calls for action (incitement) or libel/slander laws, our Charter gives lots of wiggle room for people who are merely offended, even if what was said was 100% true, to bring the speaker/writer in front of the kangaroo court system of our Human Right's Commissions. The HRCs are designed for convictions, not honest airing of facts, and place so many limits on the defendant as to make sure their nearly 100% conviction rate stays in place.
HRCs regularly stretch 'trials' over years and while the plaintiff's costs are 100% covered the defendant is on the hook for every penny spent on their defense. At the end, the plaintiff receives whatever fines the HRC imposes (free money since they had to spend none of their own to effectively sue someone) and the defendant, on top of their already staggering legal fees, must now pay an often exorbitant fine.
At one point the primary user of the HRC system was one of their own lawyers who filed multiple suits (few if any of which involved a targeted group of which he was a member) and made over $50,000 in just a couple years off of fines.
As far as I can tell the anti-Semitic claim comes from a statement from his ex-wife during their divorce proceedings. Hardly an unbiased source but when you want to demonize your opponents you'll grab at anything.
At this point it's just become a talking point and is repeated, without any supporting evidence, by every late night comedian and most reporters.
The biggest thing stopping this type of implementation on a large scale in the US is their odd requirement to have every f^%#*&! elected office/initiative voted for on the same day. Limit Super Tuesday to Federal offices and then have another day for State and possibly a third for local and you can have simpler ballots with only 2 or 3 positions which are easier to have paper trails for.
Instead now you have ballots in some districts that closer resemble an AP calculus exam which makes counting and verifying exponentially harder than it should be.
How do you gerrymander a Federal election? Did Idaho redrawn their border with Oregon to push some of their 'undesirable' Dem voters into a blue state to help them go red or are you just throwing out words to try and make yourself look smart without any understanding of their meaning?
Well in every poll I've ever been to the handling of the ballot, outside of the actual booth, is done in plain view of pretty much everyone else in the room. They can't see what was placed on the ballot but everyone can see you going to the poll worker and getting a new ballot.
As there is no law about arriving in a group, for someone so inclined to buy or force a person to vote a certain way, it would just take 1 person to arrive with the group and stand in the back so as to go last and be able to watch everyone else hand in their ballots.
You can ruin you ballot and request a new one in, as far as I know, every poll in the US. That doesn't solve the issue with coercion that the banning on photos prevents since the ruining of the ballot and request for a new one occurs outside of the booth and anyone present at the poll can see you doing it.
So as for the examples given above of an abusive or controlling spouse, they would most likely see you ruining your ballot and requesting a new one and then demand you show them both pics of your ballot.
The laws/statutes regarding the mishandling of classified information do not involve intent as part of their requirements to be in violation. The mere existence of classified information in the wrong location or in the wrong hands is a violation of the law.
For anyone running a bootloader there is already an easily available app on XDA which bypasses SafetyNet.
Instead of installing a custom ROM I simply enable developer mode so I could fix the KitKat Bluetooth bug on my LG. SafetyNet detects just having the developer option menu visible, even if turned off, as a violation. The only way I can fix this is through a factory reset (since my LG doesn't give other options to remove developer mode), which was the option I was trying to avoid by enabling developer mode in the first place.
So now, if I want to play Pokemon Go I'll have to do a factory reset on my phone every 2-3 months when the Bluetooth log maxes out.
I believe the actual study refers to 90% of driving done in a day could be done using EVs. They don't seem to break it down to individual drivers overall behavior, just that on any given day 90% of driving activities fall within the range and abilities of an EV.
It would be like saying, 90% of the time I can live on $10/day. That might be true but if I get a relaxing job that only pays me $70/week, those 3 days a month when my bills come due and I have to spend exponentially more than my normal $10 makes the idea of a $70/week job ridiculous. That being said, for a segment of the population who don't have to worry about housing/transportation/utility costs (kids for example) a $70/week job could be the perfect solution.
To add to this, many areas are already looking at removing subsidies and in fact adding charges to EV costs due to the loss of revenue for fuel taxes.
EVs do as much damage to streets as ICE vehicles but get away without paying for any upkeep by avoiding gas taxes. As the numbers shift toward EV or Hybrid vehicles, communities that rely on gas tax revenue are trying to find new ways to keep their coffers full. At least one proposal I've seen was to charge a mileage fee when renewing the plates on EVs. So renewing your plates on your Chevy Cruze could be $100, your Chevy Volt (hybrid), $100 + x/mile and your Chevy Bolt (pure EV) $100 + y (greater than x)/mile.
So you can save skipping the gas all year and then have to pay $300+ at year end to simply renew.
Apple isn't stupid, arrogant maybe, but not stupid.
But in many instances arrogance can lead to stupidity. Puck Mouse anyone? Metal cased phones that ground out the cellular antenna if you 'hold them wrong'? Phablets that bend at unexceptionably low pressure values?
Apple make a lot of nice things but that doesn't prevent them from doing some very stupid things. They usually get their act together at some point but that has sometimes meant abandoning the path they were on and going back to what worked.
... if history is any predictor, if Apple does away with the headphone jack, you won't be able to find 5 phones with one by next year, and zero in two more years.
Is that why it's so hard to find a smartphone with SD expansion .. oh wait.
You're own link points to the fact that 2 of the 3 S7 models (the S7 and S7 Edge) passed Consumer reports water resistant test; only the Active failed (oddly enough) but was fully covered by warranty. How many iPhones 6's have the same level water resistance (5 feet for 30 minutes)?
Most of those laws have to do with interfering with a person in the process of making the emergency call, as in taking away the phone or hanging up their call. Few, if any laws, actually deal with preventing cell signals through passive means otherwise all underground parking structures could be deemed in violation of those states laws.
All of the statutes regarding document retention and the handling of classified material were in place during Clinton's time at State and for the most part several decades before that. Some additional guidelines/clarifications were put in place after her time in office but they had no fundamental impact on her violations.
For example, Obama put in force a direct time table as to how long before documents had to be transferred to archives whereas before it was more of a vague "in a timely manner" type wording. On document retention charges Clinton could argue that 2-3 years after leaving office and under threat of subpena was timely (and she has several times in the press) and it's possible she could find some jurors to agree with her, whereas Kerry wouldn't be afforded that excuse because it's now set in stone the exact number of days he has to send all his work documents to be stored. On the more serious charges of handling of classified materials, on the other hand, the same rules apply to Kerry as they did to Clinton.
This was one of the statutes Clinton's server violated. Subsection F specifically mentions gross negligence and up to a 10 year prison sentence without any regards to intent.
The secure email system is not like opening up a second version of Outlook on your PC, they are usually stand alone terminals that are specialized to do one thing, keep the information they are transmitting secure.
So in this case there were actually 3 email systems in play.
#1: Clintons private server with all kinds of security flaws. .gov email address) which while mostly secure, has internet access and is therefore not permitted for high level classified materials either.
#2: The standard State Department email system (the
#3: SIPRNet, the real secure servers which are not connected to the internet and are used for actual classified materials (including top secret).
Various agencies have had their own internal severs hacked but SIPRNet data has only been leaked by people with direct access to a connected terminal (Chelsea Manning).
One of the issues here is that SIPRNet data was found in some of Clinton's emails and the only way for that to happen was to have someone transcribe it from the secure terminal in her office to the standard State system.
In the US, mens rea also includes the the 'reasonable person' standard which basically says that while the person who committed the offense may have had no intent of committing a crime through their actions, if a hypothetical average person could have foreseen that possibility then they can be convicted.
In this case in particular that is moot since the statutes she was accused of violating equates intent with gross negligence, meaning either is grounds for a conviction.
Senators and Congressman (as well as Governors since that comes up a lot too) are not actually bound by the same rules of conduct or record retention laws as employees of the federal government which is all the SoS is. Elected officials have a lot more leeway in how they handle their internal office documentation.
That being said, the mishandling of classified materials, even by an elected official, can have repercussions but it's very hard to pin on them since they rarely do it directly and tend to use proxies (such as a friendly reporter) who aren't willing to reveal sources.
It's like letting off the bank robber because Mr. and Mrs. Smith got a mortgage from the same bank. Sure both parties got large sums of money from the same place but the rules in place and methods used to get that money were very different.