If an open carry permit is valid in Oregon because it was obtained under Oklahoma law, should I also be able to obey the higher speed limit (hypotetically) of Oklahoma in Oregon if I am in possession of an Oklahoma driver's license?? Because we aren't really talking about the right to drive and own a gun, but to do specific things with the car and gun, namely drive a certain speed and carry them in public.
If i can't go legally to USA, then i will try move to another country like Portugal, since i have Portuguese ancestry and Portuguese is my native language, will be not hard for me to live in Portugal. Will not be good as USA, but will be better than my home country. To live in USA i need to improve my English, mainly the strong accent and my grammar.
@SorcererV1ct0r I'm from Portugal, and I hope you won't be offended by what I'm about to say because I'm actually trying to help you, but if you come to Portugal you'll have the exact same problems you'd have if you went to the USA. Everyone here will see you as an "outsider". You know as well as I do that the brazillian accent stands out from the portuguese one. You should also consider the image that most portuguese people have of brazillians. You will suffer "racism". It doesn't matter if you're white, what matters is that you're from brazil. People will judge you without actually knowing you. And since you openly admit that you think brazil is a hellhole I'm sure you can understand why. We have a long (bad) history of brazillian immigrants here.
Having said that, and now that I've scared the crap out of you, please come over. You'll be much better off here than there, and I'm not being sarcastic. We're not a rich country, far from it, but if you're a smart hard-working man I am absolutely sure you can be happy here. I just wanted you to be aware of some things before you chose to do it. Also our food is great!
Bring over some zuêra.
Well, i partially agree. You are right, but is not "racism" , discrimination based on race and on culture are two different things. Sure, i will suffer discrimination based on my home country but not based on my race. What is discrimination based on race? What my cousin suffered. She will not study medicine exactly due discrimination laws. Affirmative action is racism against those who abolished slavery.
Other example? My mother. She lived on a place wich almost no white lives on Minas Gerais, very close to São Paulo. She was the unique white in her classroom and received terrible "nicknames" like "Leite Azedo". Since i was raised in Curitiba, i never suffered this problem, my skin tone is not "uncommon" here...
I have a friend who lives in Germany and he said that never suffered any kind of discrimination, in fact people don't believe that he is from Brazil until he shows his documents. In Portugal, i will talk with someone and will be obvious that i an from Brazil tanks to my accent. And Portugal is not my unique option. Argentina, Chile and Uruguay are much better than Brazil.
When i visited Bariloche, i was amazed. Everything is so beautiful. A lot of blonde woman on clubs, the streets are so clear, no strong sun even in summer and the architecture is gorgeous, i will gladly live in Bariloche if i can. To be honest, i think that the quality of life in Bariloche is better than most European cities. And will visit this city again, this year, in winter
For those who wanna know how Portuguese is different in Brazil and Portugal, see this video, is a interview in Portuguese(unfortunately not subs on English). In fact there are differences in Portuguese spoken here in South to "Northeast" part of the country
In regards to how big a disaster Rudy's 36 hour press tour has been, just listen to the interview last night when Giuliani tells Hannity the money was funneled through a law firm. You can hear Hannity's soul leave his body in his response. I want to offer this analysis from a reader at a site I frequent who I think is onto something:
I know everyone has a take on this Rudy/Cohen shit-show, but I thought I would give you some perspective from someone steeped in anti-corruption enforcement (both domestic and foreign) on the prosecution and defense side.
As we already know, Michael Cohen is the prototypical fixer or bagman. In Mexico, as discussed in glorious detail in this NY Times expose on Wal-Mart’s massive corruption scandal in Mexico , a lawyer-fixer like Cohen would be known as a “gestore.” The bagman’s job is to get bribe money to people while insulating and giving deniability to the ultimate payor of the bribe. Having a dirty lawyer as a bagman provides a number of advantages.
First, bribe money can be laundered from the “client” through the lawyer as fictitious legal services. The lawyer can issue bogus invoices to the client in amounts sufficient to cover bribe payments, a commission to the lawyer, and a gross-up for any taxes the lawyer would have to pay on the fee income (bagmen, after all, don’t want to be stuck paying taxes on amounts they pay out as bribes). Sound familiar?
Second, by disguising the bribes as payments for legal fees, businesses can try to write them off as expenses (bribes are not deductible). This is tax evasion, of course, but it is common practice for the corrupt. Third, the lawyer-client relationship can be an impediment to law enforcement. It can be very difficult for prosecutors to pierce what appears on the surface to be a legitimate attorney-client relationship.
So now we have Giuliani confirming that this is exactly how Trump and Cohen operated. Hush money to Stormy Daniels is one thing and certainly raises potential serious campaign finance violations, but she is not a public official. What I find most significant about Rudy’s admission is what it says about the nature of the relationship between Trump and Cohen and how it suggests an M.O. for other more serious crimes.
Trump is a major real estate developer in NY who has openly bragged about his ability to cut through red tape and get politicians in his pocket. We now have serious SDNY public corruption prosecutors and FBI agents in possession of a massive amount of electronic data from his bagman. They likely already have all of his financial records as well. And Rudy has now given them the roadmap for how Trump may have laundered bribes through Cohen as purported legal fees or retainer payments. Every invoice Cohen has ever issued to Trump is suspect. Every corrupt payment Cohen has ever made or facilitated to building inspectors, councilmen, pornstars, or whomever can potentially be tied back to Trump. In addition, I suspect Trump and his kids had a false sense of comfort that their communications with Cohen would be privileged. I am convinced this is why Trump and his family are freaking out about the Cohen raid and the possibility he could flip. The SDNY is sitting on the mother lode of evidence and Rudy has given them the connection between purported legal fees and payments by Cohen to third parties.
Incidentally, Giuliani today is now not only calling for the Mueller probe to be shut down, but ALSO for the investigation into Michael Cohen to be ended as well.
I think @Mathsorcerer meant 'able-bodied male citizens between 18 and 42 years old', not all private citizens. There was a time when all citizens meeting those prerequisites were required to own a gun in case they needed to be called up for military duty. I guess the logic was that those folks would familiarize themselves with their weapon(s) and also save the government money by supplying their own.
And that is well and good in the time of the colonists and no standing army. But what are our militia of today doing? Are they augmenting the federal army and going out for defense of the nation as their civic duty like those old days? No. In those days they were well regulated, presumably general Washington called people in to practice their gun duties and told them to come back in 6 months or what not after looking them over.
Today, there is no regulation at all. There should be something. You can't just gloss over a major section of the ammendment and say everything is good.
Does the First Amendment apply to e-mail, blogs, and tweets or does it apply only to ink on parchment or mass-produced documents compiled via a printing press? Does the Fourth Amendment protect your right not to have the trunk of your car searched without a warrant? If advances in technology apply to those amendments then it similarly applies to the Second, as well.
... in the same way that States recognize each other's drivers' licenses. The same logic should apply to carry permits--if I receive one in Texas it should be valid in Oregon. Oklahoma not requiring any sort of license or permit to carry a gun swings the pendulum a little too far, though. Despite the fact that I am typically a Libertarian in my views, I agree that if you want to carry a gun you really should have some sort of State license as well as certificates that you passed both a safety/maintenance course and a "practicum" course which covers the gun-related laws in your State.
I'm good with that for majority of guns. Assault weapons are another matter.
That brings us back to the necessity of defining "assault weapon" in a legal sense.
*************
I could have sworn that I saw a story about workers removing Cosby's star from the Hollywood Walk of Fame; I cannot find it now--can someone else confirm it? If true, they are going to have to remove every other celebrity star who had engaged in similar reprehensible behavior over the years. End result--there won't be very many stars left.
If an open carry permit is valid in Oregon because it was obtained under Oklahoma law, should I also be able to obey the higher speed limit (hypotetically) of Oklahoma in Oregon if I am in possession of an Oklahoma driver's license?? Because we aren't really talking about the right to drive and own a gun, but to do specific things with the car and gun, namely drive a certain speed and carry them in public.
That isn't how "full faith" works. If the speed limit in Oregon is 60 on a highway then the speed limit is 60; driving faster than that will allow you to win the special prize of a moving violation.
Incidentally, Giuliani today is now not only calling for the Muelle probe to be shut down, but ALSO for the investigation into Michael Cohen to be ended as well.
That dovetails with the House putting pressure on Rosenstein that I mentioned earlier. They want him to turn over documents under the threat of impeachment, presumably so they can subsequently turn them over to Trump and Giuliani.
Bill Cosby and Roman Polanski were both removed from the Motion Picture Academy today if I remember correctly. Cosby also had his honorary degree from Yale taken away, the first time it has ever happened.
I hadn't heard about Cosbys Hollywood walk of fame.
I know they let Trump keep his thing there even though it was vandalized and he's pretty much despised in LA.
So they let you keep your star if you admit to grabbing em by the hooha.
That's why I was looking for confirmation. Also still looking for confirmation on the Oklahoma State Legislature story--I linked their official .gov site for browsing bills but couldn't read the blurbs on all of them at work.
I hadn't heard about Cosbys Hollywood walk of fame.
I know they let Trump keep his thing there even though it was vandalized and he's pretty much despised in LA.
So they let you keep your star if you admit to grabbing em by the hooha.
That's why I was looking for confirmation. Also still looking for confirmation on the Oklahoma State Legislature story--I linked their official .gov site for browsing bills but couldn't read the blurbs on all of them at work.
Going to R-Gov for signature. She knows where her bread is buttered. She might as well be signing her own check when she signs that bill she'll be getting more NRA donations.
If an open carry permit is valid in Oregon because it was obtained under Oklahoma law, should I also be able to obey the higher speed limit (hypotetically) of Oklahoma in Oregon if I am in possession of an Oklahoma driver's license?? Because we aren't really talking about the right to drive and own a gun, but to do specific things with the car and gun, namely drive a certain speed and carry them in public.
That isn't how "full faith" works. If the speed limit in Oregon is 60 on a highway then the speed limit is 60; driving faster than that will allow you to win the special prize of a moving violation.
The SCOTUS considered the applicability of the full faith clause in Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt. They took the line that the clause applies in an unrestricted fashion in relation to state court judgments. However, in relation to state statutes a law from one state could not overcome an opposing public policy position in another. Logically that has to be the way things are resolved. Otherwise how can you get round the position that one state permits actions that are forbidden in another - which state's laws take precedence?
To get round the problem of conflicting regulations the House passed the CONCEALED CARRY RECIPROCITY ACT OF 2017. Effectively this tries to make concealed carry into a federal issue rather than a state one in order to require states to recognize each other's permits. However, there were a number of Republicans who opposed this measure - not because they opposed the loosening of gun controls, but due to concerns over extension of federal powers. The constitutional support for this bill comes not from the 2nd Amendment, but the Commerce Clause and some people are concerned that mechanism could be used in the future to further extend federal jurisdiction. It seems very possible to me that if this bill is eventually passed it would in due course be ruled unconstitutional by SCOTUS anyway, but that's probably a discussion for another day.
A correction was issued on the story earlier today on the wiretap of Michael Cohen's phone. Apparently it was actually a pen-register, meaning they were monitoring where the calls were coming and going to and from, but not actual conversations.
Three American’s have been allegedly released from North Korea in the lead up to the summit with the US.
It was another consession Korea agreed to show they are serious about these peace talks.
Trump also asked Congress to limit the amount of troops stationed in South Korea recently, so there is some give and take going on between the two sides.
Things ARE looking better than they were 6 months ago, but I still skeptical about this whole ordeal. It takes one misstep to have this all crumble back to 1967.
There's an interesting article in the Times today arguing that the otherwise globally unpopular Israeli position on Palestine and its neighbors is justified and the sheer amount of criticism of Israel in the U.N is unfair.
Unemployment dropped to 3.9%, a good sign for the economy.
There's an interesting article in the Times today arguing that the otherwise globally unpopular Israeli position on Palestine and its neighbors is justified and the sheer amount of criticism of Israel in the U.N is unfair.
Unemployment dropped to 3.9%, a good sign for the economy.
Doesn't do much good when being employed means working 20 hours a week on minimum wage. You still need welfare services to survive.
A correction was issued on the story earlier today on the wiretap of Michael Cohen's phone. Apparently it was actually a pen-register, meaning they were monitoring where the calls were coming and going to and from, but not actual conversations.
Trump, predictably, latched on to this correction.
“NBC NEWS is wrong again! They cite ‘sources’ which are constantly wrong.” Trump tweeted: “the sources probably don’t exist, they are fabricated, fiction! NBC, my former home with the Apprentice, is now as bad as Fake News CNN. Sad!”
What a motherscratching hypocrite. Like how many times has he changed his story on the Stormy Daniels porn star payout? Has he ever bothered to correct the story of any of the lies he intentionally tells? No.
And he thinks he has the moral authority to jump on NBC for correcting a distinction that they got wrong?
Trump has never once apologized or corrected any of the record number of lies he's told. He is out there right now intentionally telling more lies, then jumping on others when they can't keep his stories straight. This guy's a loser and a liar. Sad.
There's an interesting article in the Times today arguing that the otherwise globally unpopular Israeli position on Palestine and its neighbors is justified and the sheer amount of criticism of Israel in the U.N is unfair.
Unemployment dropped to 3.9%, a good sign for the economy.
Doesn't do much good when being employed means working 20 hours a week on minimum wage. You still need welfare services to survive.
Yup. It doesn'y help get the truth of the real situation out when unemployment is calculated by number of those getting unemployment benefits. There are still many out of work that are not included in the standard govt. used calculation because they are not eligible for benefits any longer. Now that the period of time that one is able to receive benefits has dropped, plus the amount one can receive, it is like a slap in the face. Back in 2008 things were very different when people lost their jobs.
Trump during his campaign, to my surprise, actually talked about this. Of course, now in office he reverts back to the standard' everything's all good' politicians reply, just as Obama was doing. Once they get into office they just can't seem to help themselves by calculating these rates the same old ways they have done for years.
There's an interesting article in the Times today arguing that the otherwise globally unpopular Israeli position on Palestine and its neighbors is justified and the sheer amount of criticism of Israel in the U.N is unfair.
Unemployment dropped to 3.9%, a good sign for the economy.
Doesn't do much good when being employed means working 20 hours a week on minimum wage. You still need welfare services to survive.
Yup. It doesn'y help get the truth of the real situation out when unemployment is calculated by number of those getting unemployment benefits. There are still many out of work that are not included in the standard govt. used calculation because they are not eligible for benefits any longer. Now that the period of time that one is able to receive benefits has dropped, plus the amount one can receive, it is like a slap in the face. Back in 2008 things were very different when people lost their jobs.
Trump during his campaign, to my surprise, actually talked about this. Of course, now in office he reverts back to the standard' everything's all good' politicians reply, just as Obama was doing. Once they get into office they just can't seem to help themselves by calculating these rates the same old ways they have done for years.
What @Zaghoul , are you implying that politicians are hypocrites? Scandalous!
These two stories both came to light just in the last few days. One, a black man moving into his new apartment had the cops called on him for....being a black man moving into an apartment. The other involves two Native American brothers taking a campus tour at a Colorado college:
Here is my hot take: white people need to stop calling the cops every time their fragile, paranoid sensibilities are shaken. This is what systematic racism leads to. Majority demographic citizens who think their right to feel 110% secure and wonderful at all times supersedes the right of minority citizens to exist. When cops get called on minorities for no reason, sometimes it gets people killed. Sometimes it gets 12-year old children killed. Piss your pants and go cower in a corner if you can't handle society. Or better yet, do everyone a favor and don't even leave the house. The world in the United States isn't that scary. Despite what Donald Trump may tell you, people of color aren't raping and murdering people around every street corner.
I understand the first guys position, and I am glad he wasn’t blaming the police as they do not know the real situation until they roll up. They really can’t dismiss it until after they talk to the individual in question. Hopefully the cops carried some boxes up for him.
It was the same ordeal with the Starbucks incident and the same ideal with the black women golfers (where the cops showed up but even said they shouldn’t have been called). The police are coming to do their jobs (and in all three of these incidents, did their jobs properly) and I’d rather them show up then second guess the severity of the call and guess wrong like the incident of the teen who died in his car after calling 911 twice for help.
The rent-a-cops in the second incident failed miserably though. They have school aged kids taking a university tour, they should have been left alone, at most, followed from a distance to see if anything was a miss where if they observed for a few minutes would of realized they were part of the tour.
I am glad the school reached out to the family and hopefully can schedule them another tour and pay for their transportation to and from the university for the inconvenience and you know, train their security better.
The Reagan appointed Judge in one of the two Manaford cases seems completely biased. As in he is what Trump and Republicans are claiming anyone who might rule against Trump to be - biased. Comey does his job - biased against Trump, Mueller - biased etc.
But this judge, U.S. District Court Judge T.S. Ellis, said Mueller's team seemed to be pursuing the case — which involves bank and tax fraud — in order to "tighten the screws" on Manafort, in the hope that he will testify against others including President Donald Trump. When you are a judge you are not supposed to speculate as to the reasons for a prosecutor is bringing the charges. You are supposed to evaluate the situation in front of you legally. Maybe he knows Trumps watching and is auditioning for the Supreme Court. After all Trumps saying Gorsuch is a liberal.
Or Maybe the judge knows there's a connection between criminal activity of Manaford and the President and he like other good boy Republicans is determined to provide cover for the criminal in chief?
The Reagan appointed Judge in one of the two Manaford cases seems completely biased. As in he is what Trump and Republicans are claiming anyone who might rule against Trump to be - biased. Comey does his job - biased against Trump, Mueller - biased etc.
But this judge, U.S. District Court Judge T.S. Ellis, said Mueller's team seemed to be pursuing the case — which involves bank and tax fraud — in order to "tighten the screws" on Manafort, in the hope that he will testify against others including President Donald Trump. When you are a judge you are not supposed to speculate as to the reasons for a prosecutor is bringing the charges. You are supposed to evaluate the situation in front of you legally. Maybe he knows Trumps watching and is auditioning for the Supreme Court. After all Trumps saying Gorsuch is a liberal.
Or Maybe the judge knows there's a connection between criminal activity of Manaford and the President and he like other good boy Republicans is determined to provide cover for the criminal in chief?
He went on a bizarre political diatribe and is going to rule in favor of the prosecutors anyway. However, I can't remember a time I have ever heard a judge come out and try to divine the MOTIVE for the prosecution. Is he channeling Ms. Cleo?? What completely unprofessional conduct.
Federal judges are becoming more biased all the time. A lot of recent rulings really amount to nothing more than "I don't agree with that policy position" or "I don't like Trump/Republicans".
Federal judges are becoming more biased all the time. A lot of recent rulings really amount to nothing more than "I don't agree with that policy position" or "I don't like Trump/Republicans".
Activist judges - it's a problem. In this case, he's conservative. I'm guessing the memo is still sufficiently to pushing this through to the next stage in any case.
Federal judges are becoming more biased all the time. A lot of recent rulings really amount to nothing more than "I don't agree with that policy position" or "I don't like Trump/Republicans".
To be fair to the judges, that's usually because Trump/Republicans are trying to do something they are not legally allowed to do or is unconstitutional. Not because of any personal bias.
From what I've read I don't actually see bias, though I do see unprofessional behavior.
Essentially Ellis, the judge, wanted to know why Mueller was handling this instead of the US Atty for Virginia. In response the prosecution produced a heavily-redacted memo with Rosenstein's approval, which was the seemingly legal equivalent of "trust us". The judge gave them two weeks for the intelligence agencies to review whether the judge could read a (sealed) version of the full memo. I actually don't have a problem with any of that; AFAICT this seems to be routine legal wrangling. Worst case this gets kicked from Mueller to the US Attorney and the trial proceeds.
However, the judge's statements during the proceedings--especially the 'unfettered power' remark--strike me as deeply unprofessional, as it's beyond the purview of the case at hand. I'd be curious what @booinyoureyes has to say about all this, being as he seems to be our resident law-talkin' guy.
I don't see how the comments by Ellis are any different than if Lance Ito had told Marcia Clark and Chris Darden the only reason they were prosecuting OJ Simpson was because he was a celebrity. His opinion about the special counsel (which is clearly a negative one, as there is NO evidence to indicate that they are trying to "take down Trump's Presidency") is immaterial to the legal questions at hand. If he can't keep his mouth shut about it, he should recuse himself. The only person who brought up Trump was the judge. Looking at his previous track record with a case involving Blackwater and crooked Democratic Congressman William Jefferson, he seems to have a pattern of sympathizing with powerful defendants with clout.
Facts don't matter to these people. It's how they "feel". They are scared, often insecure, they feel safer with a gun.
Once they have that gun, the likelihood that they will shoot themselves or someone else goes from 0% (percent you will shoot someone with no gun) to some positive number more than 0. The odds that these fine fellow will shoot either themselves, their loved ones, or people they are mad at or whatever go from 0% to a positive number.
And it won't even necessarily happen right away. So that guy's friends and neighbors probably have to listen to this jerk for years be like "Guns don't hurt people! I've got a gun, I've never hurt anyone!" up until the point where the guy gets upset at his ex-wife and shoots her and her new boyfriend or more likely accidentally shoots himself.
That is some spectacular bad luck. The gun either hit both of them in one shot, effectivey making gravity more accurate than the average police officer, or it somehow went of TWICE due to the impact.
That is some spectacular bad luck. The gun either hit both of them in one shot, effectivey making gravity more accurate than the average police officer, or it somehow went of TWICE due to the impact.
My first thought was about the improbability of one shot hitting both.
But then I considered ricochet as being possible, article isn't really very detailed.
Comments
Other example? My mother. She lived on a place wich almost no white lives on Minas Gerais, very close to São Paulo. She was the unique white in her classroom and received terrible "nicknames" like "Leite Azedo". Since i was raised in Curitiba, i never suffered this problem, my skin tone is not "uncommon" here...
I have a friend who lives in Germany and he said that never suffered any kind of discrimination, in fact people don't believe that he is from Brazil until he shows his documents. In Portugal, i will talk with someone and will be obvious that i an from Brazil tanks to my accent. And Portugal is not my unique option. Argentina, Chile and Uruguay are much better than Brazil.
When i visited Bariloche, i was amazed. Everything is so beautiful. A lot of blonde woman on clubs, the streets are so clear, no strong sun even in summer and the architecture is gorgeous, i will gladly live in Bariloche if i can. To be honest, i think that the quality of life in Bariloche is better than most European cities. And will visit this city again, this year, in winter
source southernconeguidebooks.blogspot.com/2012/12/bariloches-burning.html
source http://travelshus.com/2013/01/17/weekly-photo-cerro-catedral-argentina/
--------------------
For those who wanna know how Portuguese is different in Brazil and Portugal, see this video, is a interview in Portuguese(unfortunately not subs on English). In fact there are differences in Portuguese spoken here in South to "Northeast" part of the country
I know everyone has a take on this Rudy/Cohen shit-show, but I thought I would give you some perspective from someone steeped in anti-corruption enforcement (both domestic and foreign) on the prosecution and defense side.
As we already know, Michael Cohen is the prototypical fixer or bagman. In Mexico, as discussed in glorious detail in this NY Times expose on Wal-Mart’s massive corruption scandal in Mexico , a lawyer-fixer like Cohen would be known as a “gestore.” The bagman’s job is to get bribe money to people while insulating and giving deniability to the ultimate payor of the bribe. Having a dirty lawyer as a bagman provides a number of advantages.
First, bribe money can be laundered from the “client” through the lawyer as fictitious legal services. The lawyer can issue bogus invoices to the client in amounts sufficient to cover bribe payments, a commission to the lawyer, and a gross-up for any taxes the lawyer would have to pay on the fee income (bagmen, after all, don’t want to be stuck paying taxes on amounts they pay out as bribes). Sound familiar?
Second, by disguising the bribes as payments for legal fees, businesses can try to write them off as expenses (bribes are not deductible). This is tax evasion, of course, but it is common practice for the corrupt. Third, the lawyer-client relationship can be an impediment to law enforcement. It can be very difficult for prosecutors to pierce what appears on the surface to be a legitimate attorney-client relationship.
So now we have Giuliani confirming that this is exactly how Trump and Cohen operated. Hush money to Stormy Daniels is one thing and certainly raises potential serious campaign finance violations, but she is not a public official. What I find most significant about Rudy’s admission is what it says about the nature of the relationship between Trump and Cohen and how it suggests an M.O. for other more serious crimes.
Trump is a major real estate developer in NY who has openly bragged about his ability to cut through red tape and get politicians in his pocket. We now have serious SDNY public corruption prosecutors and FBI agents in possession of a massive amount of electronic data from his bagman. They likely already have all of his financial records as well. And Rudy has now given them the roadmap for how Trump may have laundered bribes through Cohen as purported legal fees or retainer payments. Every invoice Cohen has ever issued to Trump is suspect. Every corrupt payment Cohen has ever made or facilitated to building inspectors, councilmen, pornstars, or whomever can potentially be tied back to Trump. In addition, I suspect Trump and his kids had a false sense of comfort that their communications with Cohen would be privileged. I am convinced this is why Trump and his family are freaking out about the Cohen raid and the possibility he could flip. The SDNY is sitting on the mother lode of evidence and Rudy has given them the connection between purported legal fees and payments by Cohen to third parties.
Incidentally, Giuliani today is now not only calling for the Mueller probe to be shut down, but ALSO for the investigation into Michael Cohen to be ended as well.
That brings us back to the necessity of defining "assault weapon" in a legal sense.
*************
I could have sworn that I saw a story about workers removing Cosby's star from the Hollywood Walk of Fame; I cannot find it now--can someone else confirm it? If true, they are going to have to remove every other celebrity star who had engaged in similar reprehensible behavior over the years. End result--there won't be very many stars left.
************* That isn't how "full faith" works. If the speed limit in Oregon is 60 on a highway then the speed limit is 60; driving faster than that will allow you to win the special prize of a moving violation. That dovetails with the House putting pressure on Rosenstein that I mentioned earlier. They want him to turn over documents under the threat of impeachment, presumably so they can subsequently turn them over to Trump and Giuliani.
I know they let Trump keep his thing there even though it was vandalized and he's pretty much despised in LA.
So they let you keep your star if you admit to grabbing em by the hooha.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/capitol_report/constitutional-carry-bill-authorizing-carrying-of-guns-without-a-license/article_af094a36-e26f-5495-aef2-9263eac6afa0.html
To get round the problem of conflicting regulations the House passed the CONCEALED CARRY RECIPROCITY ACT OF 2017. Effectively this tries to make concealed carry into a federal issue rather than a state one in order to require states to recognize each other's permits. However, there were a number of Republicans who opposed this measure - not because they opposed the loosening of gun controls, but due to concerns over extension of federal powers. The constitutional support for this bill comes not from the 2nd Amendment, but the Commerce Clause and some people are concerned that mechanism could be used in the future to further extend federal jurisdiction. It seems very possible to me that if this bill is eventually passed it would in due course be ruled unconstitutional by SCOTUS anyway, but that's probably a discussion for another day.
It was another consession Korea agreed to show they are serious about these peace talks.
Trump also asked Congress to limit the amount of troops stationed in South Korea recently, so there is some give and take going on between the two sides.
Things ARE looking better than they were 6 months ago, but I still skeptical about this whole ordeal. It takes one misstep to have this all crumble back to 1967.
Unemployment dropped to 3.9%, a good sign for the economy.
“NBC NEWS is wrong again! They cite ‘sources’ which are constantly wrong.” Trump tweeted: “the sources probably don’t exist, they are fabricated, fiction! NBC, my former home with the Apprentice, is now as bad as Fake News CNN. Sad!”
What a motherscratching hypocrite. Like how many times has he changed his story on the Stormy Daniels porn star payout? Has he ever bothered to correct the story of any of the lies he intentionally tells? No.
And he thinks he has the moral authority to jump on NBC for correcting a distinction that they got wrong?
Trump has never once apologized or corrected any of the record number of lies he's told. He is out there right now intentionally telling more lies, then jumping on others when they can't keep his stories straight. This guy's a loser and a liar. Sad.
Trump during his campaign, to my surprise, actually talked about this. Of course, now in office he reverts back to the standard' everything's all good' politicians reply, just as Obama was doing.
Once they get into office they just can't seem to help themselves by calculating these rates the same old ways they have done for years.
http://pix11.com/2018/04/30/cops-called-to-uws-apartment-for-burglary-in-progress-but-find-black-tenant-former-white-house-staffer-moving-in/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/colorado-state-university-tour-police-called-native-american-students/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab7e&linkId=51327290
Here is my hot take: white people need to stop calling the cops every time their fragile, paranoid sensibilities are shaken. This is what systematic racism leads to. Majority demographic citizens who think their right to feel 110% secure and wonderful at all times supersedes the right of minority citizens to exist. When cops get called on minorities for no reason, sometimes it gets people killed. Sometimes it gets 12-year old children killed. Piss your pants and go cower in a corner if you can't handle society. Or better yet, do everyone a favor and don't even leave the house. The world in the United States isn't that scary. Despite what Donald Trump may tell you, people of color aren't raping and murdering people around every street corner.
It was the same ordeal with the Starbucks incident and the same ideal with the black women golfers (where the cops showed up but even said they shouldn’t have been called). The police are coming to do their jobs (and in all three of these incidents, did their jobs properly) and I’d rather them show up then second guess the severity of the call and guess wrong like the incident of the teen who died in his car after calling 911 twice for help.
The rent-a-cops in the second incident failed miserably though. They have school aged kids taking a university tour, they should have been left alone, at most, followed from a distance to see if anything was a miss where if they observed for a few minutes would of realized they were part of the tour.
I am glad the school reached out to the family and hopefully can schedule them another tour and pay for their transportation to and from the university for the inconvenience and you know, train their security better.
But this judge, U.S. District Court Judge T.S. Ellis, said Mueller's team seemed to be pursuing the case — which involves bank and tax fraud — in order to "tighten the screws" on Manafort, in the hope that he will testify against others including President Donald Trump. When you are a judge you are not supposed to speculate as to the reasons for a prosecutor is bringing the charges. You are supposed to evaluate the situation in front of you legally. Maybe he knows Trumps watching and is auditioning for the Supreme Court. After all Trumps saying Gorsuch is a liberal.
http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/384073-trump-complaining-that-gorsuch-is-becoming-too-liberal-report
Or Maybe the judge knows there's a connection between criminal activity of Manaford and the President and he like other good boy Republicans is determined to provide cover for the criminal in chief?
Essentially Ellis, the judge, wanted to know why Mueller was handling this instead of the US Atty for Virginia. In response the prosecution produced a heavily-redacted memo with Rosenstein's approval, which was the seemingly legal equivalent of "trust us". The judge gave them two weeks for the intelligence agencies to review whether the judge could read a (sealed) version of the full memo. I actually don't have a problem with any of that; AFAICT this seems to be routine legal wrangling. Worst case this gets kicked from Mueller to the US Attorney and the trial proceeds.
However, the judge's statements during the proceedings--especially the 'unfettered power' remark--strike me as deeply unprofessional, as it's beyond the purview of the case at hand. I'd be curious what @booinyoureyes has to say about all this, being as he seems to be our resident law-talkin' guy.
http://abc13.com/3429256/
Once they have that gun, the likelihood that they will shoot themselves or someone else goes from 0% (percent you will shoot someone with no gun) to some positive number more than 0. The odds that these fine fellow will shoot either themselves, their loved ones, or people they are mad at or whatever go from 0% to a positive number.
And it won't even necessarily happen right away. So that guy's friends and neighbors probably have to listen to this jerk for years be like "Guns don't hurt people! I've got a gun, I've never hurt anyone!" up until the point where the guy gets upset at his ex-wife and shoots her and her new boyfriend or more likely accidentally shoots himself.
But then I considered ricochet as being possible, article isn't really very detailed.