Engorgeous George

The article I linked is 7 months old, but it does seem that of the less than 2 billion needed the State already has recovered 350 million from the insurer. Seems then that 1.5 billion would be more than needed and so more than generous. At 8 billion it seems we are inviting waste and fraud.

Curious, and I truely do not know and have not been following the matter since the collapse, but it looks like the State has estimated the cost of the rebuild at under 2 billion dollars, so why would it need a federal grant of 8 billion? Would that expedite the rebuild? If so why would the Bridge Commission not be responsible for pay back as it seems it may be insured? Certainly getting this up and running would have some economic benefits beyond Baltimore. it would seem to inure to the benefit of our economy generally, but why is this gift needed? See the link for the figure I have referenced... Maryland officials release timeline, cost estimate, for rebuilding bridge | AP News

Send her Congressional office a link to this place.. Let's get her as a member. Let them know she is up for a high honor from our membership. Contact | Representative Nancy Mace

The Best part of any ambassadorship is the absolute privacy in your diplomatic pouch as you travel. Also immunity from local laws is pretty sweet. Myself, i would want the ambassadorship to Columbia or Peru. Geeat blow and hot senoritas. peru you have the added benefit of them having jurisdiction over the Galapagos Islands which would be sweet to visit.

I'm picturing Mike Honcho riding down from the sky at work as he blares Ride of the Valkyries over his onboard stereo.

Most jurisdictions have an unlimited number of challenges for cause. It is the preemptory strikes which are of limited number, those are the strikes where one just sort of has a bad feeling, though that bad feeling better not be about a person of color, see Batson challenges. What is a Batson Challenge? | Appeals Law Group

No more red taffic lights, stop signs, or road hogs. Would be difficult to go through a drive through lane, though.

That is what I was thinking.

So, highly competitive with many E.V.'s in the market for both price and range.

And no Irish or Chinese.

I have now been on the phone for an hour and 15 minutes with Kaiser Permanente. They called me to tell me there is a billing problem. It was an auto-call. When I went through their phone tree I got an operator, finally. Three operators and an hour later we are finally getting to the fact that the billing error is their fault and on their end. Frankly I have a bit of a murderous rage going at Kaiser right now.

Mike Lynn is long gone.

Flip that over and you have an owl.

By the Way, the questions on a juror questionaire are some standard ones the Court always asks and then questions submitted by both the Defense and the prosecution to the Court and then argued over before the Court agrees to include them. the longest questinaire i was ever associated with amounted to 112 questions and it went out to a venire of 500 potential jurors. How much of that information we really processed who can say, though we believe we had a handle on it all.

In most high profile and first degree murder cases, and capital cases The jury pool gets sent a questionaire, often fairly in depth, before they report. We Prosecutors have a fairly in depth profile just from that. We can, and do, frankly, conduct additional searches on some of the jurors, if not all of them. Doing so is not unscrupulous. Only contacting them or their family and employers would be unscrupulous, but information we humans put out there in the ether, reputations we have, records we have created or have been created on us that are in the public domain are free game.

The difficulty is that idiots think their fantastical doubts and fantasies are reasonable doubts. A good defense attorney looks for that juror, tries the case to them, and in closing tries to butress that jurors self-image by implying only the truely uniquely insightful can see things as do they.

No responsible judge would allow that irrelevant and immaterial information as it is not a legal defense that you don't like the industry. So maybe Judge Merchan.

Getting 12 Americans to agree gravity seems to work pretty consistently on this planet is a difficult proposition. Getting 12 Americans to agree on anything is a difficult proposition, particualrly getting them to agree beyond a reasonable doubt. That said, that is what Prosecutors do, routinely. In this instance, if they feel the defense is making a run at jury nulification because folks don't like insurance companies the Prosecutor, in their close needs to address that. We Americans also don't like bankers, lawyers, real estate agents, telemarketers, auto repair places, the post office, congress, the DMV and a host of other occupations or agencies. In closing the Prosecutor need simply argue that persons in those occupations are not deserving of vigilante executions with the vigilante being exonerrated. The Prosecutor need only list the occupations of the jurors themselves as not justifying vigilantism as there is a good chance the jury can be packed with persons from unpopular occupations.

I am confident he will be properly welcomed back into his community by those he wrongfully sentenced, those who were educated in an institutionalized environment and who are now in their twenties and thirties.

Looks like we may have a Trinity.

I like it. Mine is equiped with a speaker and I blast Mike Oldfield's Tubular Bells through it. Tthinking of changing to Pink Floyd's Meddle album tonight.

Life boats have a capacity limit. Those who out of compassion seek to take in more than the capacity end up sinking the boat and killing all on board..

Ahhh, payback. A time honored tradition. Revenge, the dish best served cold. Seems possible.

You clearly do not understand the highlighted words. "is" is a present tense. "was" is the past tense. As for "whole" it means entire or sole. Being a refuge for citizens of another country, if it were and remains our entire raison d' etre would have been enshrined in our Constitution. It is not. Sure, at one time, primarily before we were an independent country of our own, one of the motivations for settlement here, against the better interests of the natives I might add, was as a religious and economic refuge. That was one of the reasons, but not the primary reason as the primary reason then was exploration for exploitation. Early on as a country we tolerated or welcomed immigrants as we had space, did not spend government resources on immigrants, and perceived ourselves as weak and in need of a population to maintain our selves as a country least we be conquered by the very State we rebelled against. You may have heard of their efforts to do so, we named it the War of 1812. Again, at that time we did not amend our constitution to enshrine being a refuge as our reason for being. The world has changed over the centuries. You might have heard something about it. There has been an industrial and then tech revolutions, women can own property now and vote, we no longer enslave Africans physically, we simply economically enslave Uighers. In this new age persons seek government resources when they come here. That would be alright by me if government had resources, but they don't, they take their resources confiscatoraly from folks like me. We cannot be a country if we do not control our membership. That does not mean cutting off immigration, but it does mean cutting off illegal, uncontrolled immigration.