Not a lawyer and haven’t read the law, but it seems logical that “stalking” isn’t a separate crime from premeditated murder when it’s just determining the location of the target and traveling to reach the target.

From what little I have seen, right wing outlets were interpreting the video as proof the officer was hit by the car because of the way the phone gets jostled at the end. You also can’t see in this video exactly when he draws his gun, or how the shooter is positioned. It’s damning when combined with the other videos, but on its own it’s a lot less clear.

And they also see it as proof that these were “agitators” obstructing “law enforcement” based on the confrontational tone with the woman outside the vehicle. They want to frame the issue as law enforcement vs criminals, rioters and radical domestic terrorists. They want to blame the victim and undercut the narrative that this was an innocent bystander.

Obviously a sane person would recognize that it doesn’t matter if the victim was politically active or even obstructing police, it’s still murder. But these aren’t moral, rational people and they aren’t trying to persuade an audience with legal arguments, just feeding the US vs them mentality.

Does this mean humans are the same species as vulcans, klingons, romulans, betazoids, trill, ocampa, and ktarians?

There is no statute of limitations on murder.

The feds will protect him, but that’s only guaranteed for as long as the current regime is in power. Even if the next administration (or the one after that, or the one after that, etc) isn’t inclined to make a federal case out of it, they could easily decide to just not obstruct justice and cooperate, handing everything over to the state.

She was clearly performing a Y turn to steer around him. You can see him pull his gun out as she’s switching from reverse to drive, and he fires the first shot while she’s barely moving. She continues to accelerate after getting shot and yet he doesn’t get hit, but he does continue firing.

Her intent was obviously to escape, not to inflict harm. His intent was obviously to inflict harm, not to escape.

I really hate how many people resent the idea of any kind of student loan forgiveness.

Billionaires set up vast financial systems for the sole purpose of dodging taxes. No bid contracts get handed out like candy to politically connected scumbags. An obscene amount of money gets dumped into insurance companies that only make your healthcare worse. Giant corporations violate laws and rob both workers and customers, and if anything is done at all it will be a tiny fine that’s smaller than the profit from their crimes.

All those things that actually harm the rest of us? No big deal. But you suggest that maybe it’s a bad idea to keep generations ensnared in crippling debt? THAT’S A FUCKING OUTRAGE!

I mean obviously it wouldn’t be fair to have a policy that directly benefits some people but not others. Why should student loan borrowers get special treatment? Sure, I’ll fucking riot if anyone touches my tax credits for having kids and a mortgage, but that’s different, that’s good for society… unlike education. Besides, it’s not my fault your generation don’t buy houses and start families. Oh don’t bitch to me about how you can’t afford it, maybe you shouldn’t have taken those loans out then…

Babylon 5

deleted by creator

Every few years I get someone into B5 and rewatch the series along with them. And every time there’s one or two more cast members gone.

Have to make a few assumptions to make this workable. Im assuming we’re only allowing things that were made as a TV series, so not counting specials or anything that jumped from another medium like radio or theatrical releases. And we’re only including fiction, so news and the like wouldn’t count. And we only include things that have ended and only count the original run of a series.

With all those caveats, my best guess is I Love Lucy. Started in 1951 and the actor that played their kid is still alive, though he didn’t join the cast until 1955.

I’m confused. I thought the hostile takeover was supposed to work by appealing to the shareholders directly, presumably through some mechanism that allows a vote. If it just went back to the same board that had rejected their previous offers and accepted the deal from Netflix, how was this “hostile takeover” any different from a normal bid?

On body-worn camera video played in court, Wasser was heard saying she wanted to check the bag for bombs before removing it from the McDonald’s. Despite that concern, she acknowledged in her testimony Monday that police never cleared the restaurant of customers or employees.

Unless they had probable cause to believe there was a bomb, that’s absolutely no excuse for a search. Might as well just get rid of the fourth amendment altogether if police can just imagine the possibility of a dangerous object and excuse searching anything at any time.

If she really thought there was a bomb, she is recklessly handling this herself instead of calling in a properly trained and equipped bomb squad. But far worse, she claims she needed to check it so as not bring a bomb to the station, but apparently has no problem potentially handling a bomb around a bunch of innocent bystanders.

That she is lying in order to justify what she knew to be an illegal search is actually the least damning interpretation. Either way though, the evidence should be thrown out along with her career.

When my SO does this I always reference this scene in Duck Soup as a way to gently point out what they’re doing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcbglml9KRo

1. Don’t make promises unless you know you won’t have any problem keeping them.

2. Depending on the context, being early can be just as bad as being late.

3. Taking ownership is good in an environment where honesty and accountability is respected. There are far too many people that are just looking to assign blame, especially when it involves nuance or technical details they don’t fully understand.

4. Assuming reasonable discussions where everyone is acting in good faith. There are absolutely times when you need to shut down an argument before it gets a chance to grow.

5. Don’t be a dick. But you don’t have to cover up everyone else’s dickish behavior, particularly when it negatively impacts the rest of us.

6. Communicate clearly. But sometimes maybe is the correct answer. Uncertainty is a part of life and needs to be factored into decisions.

7. Bring solutions if you have them. But not every problem has obvious solutions and sometimes it’s more important to point it out quickly than it is to be the one with the answer.

8. Under promise and over deliver is generally good advice, but there are also plenty of situations that are strictly pass / fail and extra effort is wasted. Be efficient with your energy and only spend it on stuff that matters to someone.

9. Be supportive and build others up… within reason. Don’t be full of shit.

10. Honest feedback is important. Unless it’s a numerical score used for performance metrics, in which case the requirements are almost certainly unreasonable and anything less than perfect or nearly perfect is basically a disaster.

11. Learn and think, don’t just jump to conclusions. Hard to object to that as long as you aren’t wasting everyone’s time or showing an embarrassing level of ignorance.

12. Don’t let your emotions stop you from thinking clearly. But that doesn’t mean you should ignore them completely. If nothing else, needing to be dead inside to do your job is probably a good indicator that you should find another job.

The sound… of MEAT

According to Grok, the threshold is 50% of humanity. Apparently Elon Musk dying is as bad as or worse for humanity than a Thanos snap.

The reasonable solution would have been to include a mechanism for quickly and efficiently overruling these decisions when needed. They have to report to congress about anything that is withheld, but as far as I know they didn’t include a provision that would allow them to reject the given justification and order the release.

I’ve seen people object to a 13 month calendar based solely on the idea that you can’t divide the year into quarters. But it’s actually really easy to remember. A quarter is 13 weeks, or 3 months and 1 week. So Q1 ends a week after month three, Q2 ends 2 weeks after month six, Q3 ends 3 weeks after month nine, and q4 ends after month 13 aka the end of the year. And since the calendar doesn’t change, you don’t even need to remember it, just mark the quarter ends once and you’re done forever.

Just compare that to the unnecessary complexity of the Gregorian calendar and the effort it takes to remember basically anything that changes from year to year, or what day of the week any given date or holiday falls on, or even just which months have 30 days and which have 31.

To achieve the status of measles elimination, a country must have no ongoing local transmission of the disease for at least one year. It will lose that status if it has a chain of cases that spread from person to person for more than one year.

We’ve been heading in that direction, but we won’t have officially lost our measles-free status until the current outbreak has continued for a full year.

In this case, the post was asking for people’s expectations regarding this story specifically, and the response is entirely valid. It’s very reasonable to think that this one news story isn’t likely to be the tipping point.

It’s different when people reply to every story that is in any way bad for Trump with a comment about how none of it matters, nothing will change, and no one cares. As though anything that doesn’t result in Trump being immediately impeached, incarcerated, or inhumed is completely worthless. Much like how sit ups are useless because no matter how many I do today, I still won’t have a six pack when I’m done.

All those comments do is demoralize people and discourage them from trying to support opposition to Trump in any way.