Because.. That's where the engineers are (or so the theory goes).
I don't know many engineering folks who'd relish living in/around Brownsville TX, the Louisiana coast or other available areas on the east side of the canal.
As I read the article, the video evidence shows that there was no possible way to avoid the pedestrian who stepped in front of the car. She wasn't visible until it was too late. Unfortunately by the time the conflict became apparent, there was no avoiding contact.
Now, perhaps a human might have realized the limited sight lines and the possible pedestrian conflict and slowed down before arriving at this location? Maybe, maybe not, I've not seen the video yet so I cannot say. However, I'm guessing this will be litigated by both the woman's estate and Uber and the trial will be very interesting.
Just sayin. It's been well known and if somebody got in thinking that bitcoin was anonymous then they were fooling themselves.
(sarc) But, but.... That's what they SAID it was in all the PR about BitCoin. Are you saying they LIED to me? (/sarc)
I remember when the common story was about how BitCoin was anonymous, unregulated, and totally secure because it wasn't managed by some centralized government. Except for the last thing, none of it was true. Now that last item is up for debate as governments around the world do their best to regulate it.
I'd give you biased, and occasionally quite dishonest, but they're not going out of their way to invent things that did not happen.
LOL.. Oh yes they have gone out of their way to invent things. Specifically about Trump and his administration they have reported stuff based on "unnamed sources" which frequently turned out wrong and/or misleading.
Their motives for doing this are likely more about selling advertisements and making a profit than politics, but they HAVE been doing this kind of thing regularly.
Journalism Ethics are dead in this country, mainly because they don't get you clicks or viewers.. Trump is just a tempting target, who by pointing out the "fake news" actually helps them get clicks and viewers..
It's in The Lancet, after all, and they have a bad habit of occasionally publishing something that's just flat wrong. Vaccines, anyone?
I wouldn't call it a habit of the Lancet per say... Perhaps we should call it more of a profit center.
Most medical journals have a perverse motive to increase circulation, attention by publishing studies that will bring them critical attention. In the case of the Lancet, they published a faked study about vaccines which they later retracted when it was shown to be faked years later by an investigative reporter. One questions their motives and lax editorial review processes because of things like this. But we really should realize that all of these publishers have the same perverse motives.
My guess is one of those "whistle blower" things where they encourage you to turn in your company for violating software licenses for a reward was involved...
So you are afraid that Trump's actions might actually work then... It's not about all the supposed crimes he's accused of committing, you admitted that... Maybe you just don't like him? No?
But you cannot bring yourself to say anything nice here? The tax cuts? The elimination of the ACA mandate? His massive reductions in the burdensome regulations his administration has been undoing? Nothing?
I suggest you actually go take a look at what he's really accomplished here. Not what the talking heads are saying, but what his administration has actually managed to do; look at the actual results.
He's not been perfect, but he's done a LOT of what he's promised and made a good effort on the rest of his campaign. Despite what you may have heard, he's actually been rather effective, especially given his past experience with political office.....
I never said it was a smart thing to do, but Trump CAN effectively fire Muller by firing people until he comes up with somebody who will do what he wants. As you point out, it would not go unnoticed and Congress has the ability to deal with such abuses though the impeachment process.
Comey's firing WAS within Trump's direct purview. The Director of the FBI serves at the president's pleasure and can be let go for ANY reason, including for not following an order to stop an investigation. This would NOT be obstruction of justice... However, while possible, this too would not go unnoticed and Congress could investigate and deal with as they see fit though the impeachment process. Impeachment though is a political process, not a criminal one.
So, in the grand scheme of things, the issue here is you wanting to get Trump impeached, which simply isn't going to happen before the next Congress is seated in 2019, and ONLY if democrats take over the house could it happen. But if you impeach him, you won't convict him. Why? Well, the polling says it might be possible to take the house and conventional wisdom says the party in power loses seats in the house. However, democrats WON'T take the Senate and certainly won't take enough seats to convict the president. So the only other way Trump doesn't serve his full term is if he quits... I just don't see him resigning under pressure and the Senate won't convict him. My guess is he'd still run in 2020 too and if the economy keeps up it's current pace, the hapless democrat will lose again.
So, where are we going to go here? Keep playing political chicken with Trump? I'd recommend you not do that because he's shown that he doesn't blink very often and the electorate is getting very weary of all the trumped up "He's a criminal" hoopla and it's losing it's effect on them... But hey, knock yourself out.
Legally, Trump CAN fire Comey for any reason INCLUDING refusing to stop an investigation he doesn't like. It's happened in the past, no obstruction of justice charges where made at the time. Trump is NOT saying he fired Comey to stop an investigation and gave other reasons which you obviously don't believe, but are plausible. You try to invent something by tying two separate events together, but it is entirely possible they are unrelated and you cannot prove they are.
So, there can be NO CRIME in Trump's firing Comey, and the evidence you point to doesn't prove intent to obstruct justice in the first place.
There can be and wasn't any obstruction of justice involved in the firing of Comey....
Then, you have the whole Mueller investigation thing... IF Trump was firing Comey because he wanted to stop some investigation, what's keeping him from replacing Muller? He CAN do that too you know. He has the power.
I think you are grasping at straws on this and are really overreaching your actual evidence. It's not going to go well for your side if you keep doing this.
Treason has a specific constitutionally defined meaning. I think you are trying way to hard to make Trump's actions meet that definition.
Trump's action may not amount to the legal definition of treason, but there seems to be plenty of evidence that Trump has betrayed the trust of the American people, and has been negligent in his duties as president...
Some people get fired up and claim it's treason, but it's really what Trump denounced to get elected, good old corruption.
So can we admit that this is NOT a question of crimes or treason then? That those who make such claims are not being helpful?
IF you really believe that Trump has betrayed the country, then you will have a chance in 2020 to get somebody else elected. I'm going to offer one bit of advice... It MIGHT be a good idea to save your attacks for the election. At this point, attacking Trump relentlessly about unproven theories will only strengthen his ability to defend himself during the campaign... "They've been attacking me on this since day one, where is their proof after 4 years? There isn't any. This is all they got, but I've got these results..." The only reason for keeping this up now is to stymie Trump's efforts to make things better because you are afraid they might actually work..
You are toting a huge conspiracy theory there AC...
Most of what you point to either couldn't be a crime because Trump is president and has the legal right to do what you claim is a crime... Some things really are not a crime when you consider the actual known facts. The rest are not crimes by Trump no matter how you slice it.
I get the feeling you are just pushing hard to make these claims because you are just upset with Trump having the gall to get elected...
The EPA is one of those necessary evil parts of what should be the smallest government we can manage. I think the issue has been the liberal's approach of making government agencies so they have authority of law to pass "regulations" which carry the force of law and using that ability to further their political, social, and economic views. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, and this stuff is getting rolled back by the other party, they are coming unglued. This shouldn't happen...
The REAL problem here is Congress refusing to actually do their job and make LAWS by just authorizing the executive branch to take care of the day to day regulations. Congress took the easy way out and created all these organizations in the executive branch to manage all sorts of things through regulations... They should take responsibility back and stop this slow motion train wreak by resending this abrogation of their duty and start actually making laws about this stuff. The EPA should be retained to recommend laws but regulations should be passed like any other law, though a bill Congress approves of and is signed by the president.
To be fair here.. Musk is describing TESTING of the spacecraft by sending it on short flights, near earth. This makes sense. You crawl, walk and THEN run.
You really don't want to commit a group of people to a year long voyage to Mars and back in an untested spacecraft. You want to make sure the spacecraft isn't going to kill it's occupants because of some unfixable systems failure. So, you test it in orbit, short trips around the moon and THEN commit to a Mars round trip.
This is not governance in any political affiliation. This is treason and abdication of duty. Prison can't come soon enough for these fools.
Treason has a specific constitutionally defined meaning. I think you are trying way to hard to make Trump's actions meet that definition.
Prison time usually requires the commission of a crime. At this point, we have no direct evidence Trump committed any crimes here. We have a lot of theories about possible crimes being investigated, but being investigated isn't evidence of a crime. No crimes are in evidence and Treason isn't really possible at this point so I think you are rattling on about nothing but wild conspiracy theories for now..
Can we at least wait until the evidence comes out before we make wildly unlikely charges like Treason?
No? Ok.. Then stay with the partisan political craziness that drives all this pointless wrangling...
Slashdot Mirror
Lonestar!
Not quite coming for our jobs. IIRC Most strawberries are picked by illegal immigrants.
How dare you assume my documentation status!
I hate strawberries..
Because.. That's where the engineers are (or so the theory goes).
I don't know many engineering folks who'd relish living in/around Brownsville TX, the Louisiana coast or other available areas on the east side of the canal.
As I read the article, the video evidence shows that there was no possible way to avoid the pedestrian who stepped in front of the car. She wasn't visible until it was too late. Unfortunately by the time the conflict became apparent, there was no avoiding contact.
Now, perhaps a human might have realized the limited sight lines and the possible pedestrian conflict and slowed down before arriving at this location? Maybe, maybe not, I've not seen the video yet so I cannot say. However, I'm guessing this will be litigated by both the woman's estate and Uber and the trial will be very interesting.
Just sayin. It's been well known and if somebody got in thinking that bitcoin was anonymous then they were fooling themselves.
(sarc) But, but.... That's what they SAID it was in all the PR about BitCoin. Are you saying they LIED to me? (/sarc)
I remember when the common story was about how BitCoin was anonymous, unregulated, and totally secure because it wasn't managed by some centralized government. Except for the last thing, none of it was true. Now that last item is up for debate as governments around the world do their best to regulate it.
I'd give you biased, and occasionally quite dishonest, but they're not going out of their way to invent things that did not happen.
LOL.. Oh yes they have gone out of their way to invent things. Specifically about Trump and his administration they have reported stuff based on "unnamed sources" which frequently turned out wrong and/or misleading.
Their motives for doing this are likely more about selling advertisements and making a profit than politics, but they HAVE been doing this kind of thing regularly.
Journalism Ethics are dead in this country, mainly because they don't get you clicks or viewers.. Trump is just a tempting target, who by pointing out the "fake news" actually helps them get clicks and viewers..
How's that? Most of the referenced sites ARE fake news...
It's in The Lancet, after all, and they have a bad habit of occasionally publishing something that's just flat wrong. Vaccines, anyone?
I wouldn't call it a habit of the Lancet per say... Perhaps we should call it more of a profit center.
Most medical journals have a perverse motive to increase circulation, attention by publishing studies that will bring them critical attention. In the case of the Lancet, they published a faked study about vaccines which they later retracted when it was shown to be faked years later by an investigative reporter. One questions their motives and lax editorial review processes because of things like this. But we really should realize that all of these publishers have the same perverse motives.
My guess is one of those "whistle blower" things where they encourage you to turn in your company for violating software licenses for a reward was involved...
Load the guns and Put up the sweeps! Prepare to come about and PAY THE BILL or we will take possession of one of your ships!
Can't do that, it's already full of IOUs disguised as T-bills.
So you are afraid that Trump's actions might actually work then... It's not about all the supposed crimes he's accused of committing, you admitted that... Maybe you just don't like him? No?
But you cannot bring yourself to say anything nice here? The tax cuts? The elimination of the ACA mandate? His massive reductions in the burdensome regulations his administration has been undoing? Nothing?
I suggest you actually go take a look at what he's really accomplished here. Not what the talking heads are saying, but what his administration has actually managed to do; look at the actual results.
He's not been perfect, but he's done a LOT of what he's promised and made a good effort on the rest of his campaign. Despite what you may have heard, he's actually been rather effective, especially given his past experience with political office.....
I never said it was a smart thing to do, but Trump CAN effectively fire Muller by firing people until he comes up with somebody who will do what he wants. As you point out, it would not go unnoticed and Congress has the ability to deal with such abuses though the impeachment process.
Comey's firing WAS within Trump's direct purview. The Director of the FBI serves at the president's pleasure and can be let go for ANY reason, including for not following an order to stop an investigation. This would NOT be obstruction of justice... However, while possible, this too would not go unnoticed and Congress could investigate and deal with as they see fit though the impeachment process. Impeachment though is a political process, not a criminal one.
So, in the grand scheme of things, the issue here is you wanting to get Trump impeached, which simply isn't going to happen before the next Congress is seated in 2019, and ONLY if democrats take over the house could it happen. But if you impeach him, you won't convict him. Why? Well, the polling says it might be possible to take the house and conventional wisdom says the party in power loses seats in the house. However, democrats WON'T take the Senate and certainly won't take enough seats to convict the president. So the only other way Trump doesn't serve his full term is if he quits... I just don't see him resigning under pressure and the Senate won't convict him. My guess is he'd still run in 2020 too and if the economy keeps up it's current pace, the hapless democrat will lose again.
So, where are we going to go here? Keep playing political chicken with Trump? I'd recommend you not do that because he's shown that he doesn't blink very often and the electorate is getting very weary of all the trumped up "He's a criminal" hoopla and it's losing it's effect on them... But hey, knock yourself out.
That's crazy...
Legally, Trump CAN fire Comey for any reason INCLUDING refusing to stop an investigation he doesn't like. It's happened in the past, no obstruction of justice charges where made at the time. Trump is NOT saying he fired Comey to stop an investigation and gave other reasons which you obviously don't believe, but are plausible. You try to invent something by tying two separate events together, but it is entirely possible they are unrelated and you cannot prove they are.
So, there can be NO CRIME in Trump's firing Comey, and the evidence you point to doesn't prove intent to obstruct justice in the first place.
There can be and wasn't any obstruction of justice involved in the firing of Comey....
Then, you have the whole Mueller investigation thing... IF Trump was firing Comey because he wanted to stop some investigation, what's keeping him from replacing Muller? He CAN do that too you know. He has the power.
I think you are grasping at straws on this and are really overreaching your actual evidence. It's not going to go well for your side if you keep doing this.
Treason has a specific constitutionally defined meaning. I think you are trying way to hard to make Trump's actions meet that definition.
Trump's action may not amount to the legal definition of treason, but there seems to be plenty of evidence that Trump has betrayed the trust of the American people, and has been negligent in his duties as president...
Some people get fired up and claim it's treason, but it's really what Trump denounced to get elected, good old corruption.
So can we admit that this is NOT a question of crimes or treason then? That those who make such claims are not being helpful?
IF you really believe that Trump has betrayed the country, then you will have a chance in 2020 to get somebody else elected. I'm going to offer one bit of advice... It MIGHT be a good idea to save your attacks for the election. At this point, attacking Trump relentlessly about unproven theories will only strengthen his ability to defend himself during the campaign... "They've been attacking me on this since day one, where is their proof after 4 years? There isn't any. This is all they got, but I've got these results..." The only reason for keeping this up now is to stymie Trump's efforts to make things better because you are afraid they might actually work..
You really don't want to commit a group of people to a year long voyage to Mars and back in an untested spacecraft.
Depends on who the people are.
Yea, I got to admit that IS true... Problem will getting enough of Congress on board to make a difference...
You are toting a huge conspiracy theory there AC...
Most of what you point to either couldn't be a crime because Trump is president and has the legal right to do what you claim is a crime... Some things really are not a crime when you consider the actual known facts. The rest are not crimes by Trump no matter how you slice it.
I get the feeling you are just pushing hard to make these claims because you are just upset with Trump having the gall to get elected...
I hear you and I agree.
The EPA is one of those necessary evil parts of what should be the smallest government we can manage. I think the issue has been the liberal's approach of making government agencies so they have authority of law to pass "regulations" which carry the force of law and using that ability to further their political, social, and economic views. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, and this stuff is getting rolled back by the other party, they are coming unglued. This shouldn't happen...
The REAL problem here is Congress refusing to actually do their job and make LAWS by just authorizing the executive branch to take care of the day to day regulations. Congress took the easy way out and created all these organizations in the executive branch to manage all sorts of things through regulations... They should take responsibility back and stop this slow motion train wreak by resending this abrogation of their duty and start actually making laws about this stuff. The EPA should be retained to recommend laws but regulations should be passed like any other law, though a bill Congress approves of and is signed by the president.
To be fair here.. Musk is describing TESTING of the spacecraft by sending it on short flights, near earth. This makes sense. You crawl, walk and THEN run.
You really don't want to commit a group of people to a year long voyage to Mars and back in an untested spacecraft. You want to make sure the spacecraft isn't going to kill it's occupants because of some unfixable systems failure. So, you test it in orbit, short trips around the moon and THEN commit to a Mars round trip.
(singing) Daisy, Daisy....
I'm sorry, Dave....
Apparently the science isn't settled in some folks view.
This is not governance in any political affiliation. This is treason and abdication of duty. Prison can't come soon enough for these fools.
Treason has a specific constitutionally defined meaning. I think you are trying way to hard to make Trump's actions meet that definition.
Prison time usually requires the commission of a crime. At this point, we have no direct evidence Trump committed any crimes here. We have a lot of theories about possible crimes being investigated, but being investigated isn't evidence of a crime. No crimes are in evidence and Treason isn't really possible at this point so I think you are rattling on about nothing but wild conspiracy theories for now..
Can we at least wait until the evidence comes out before we make wildly unlikely charges like Treason?
No? Ok.. Then stay with the partisan political craziness that drives all this pointless wrangling...
You look absolutely radiant today
Thanks for the glowing complement.. But I'm a bit blue today..
If you don't read news on your social media outlet, you are uninformed. However, if you do read your news on social media, you are misinformed.