I agree with the statement that the changes should be positive. But we have already seen that practically every poll, survey, questionnaire, etc. shows that a very large majority (60-70%) has voiced that the US is NOT heading in the right direction and we have NOT been for quite a while. I think that this has already been mentioned quite a few times in other posts on this discussion board. The biggest question I feel that needs to be asked is who would you trust to at the very least to attempt to put this country on the right track?
What I see by both candidates actions in this campaign is that one candidate is less experienced, boisterous, and somewhat egotistical (okay, very egotistical) and promotes fear. The other candidate has experience (good or bad is up to you to determine), condescending, has shown that they do not always tell the truth, and is not adverse to use underhanded, bordering on illegal, tactics to convince us that what they are doing is for the benefit of the US.
Personally, I don't care WHO digs up the information. Hackers, Private Investigators, whatever. It does boil down to this: If you're going intelligently elect a leader, you need to know all there is to know about them. There can be no secrets.
This is what scares quite a few politicians and especially ones with agendas contrary to the public interest. They do not want informed decisions, they prefer obedient and ignorant citizens. This is used on both sides.
Trump can't win now, he can only undermine confidence in the vote and his own party, which seems to be his aim now. It's not surprising that Putin is taking advantage of Trump's tantrum, but you astroturf lot need to ask yourself why you're going along with it.
I am going to laugh my a$$ off if this ends up becoming another Dewey vs Truman statement. As most polls still are within the margin off error, this could be a possibility
Here are three possible law that she may have violated. The cased I provided in my previous comments ARE cases that prosecution DID take place and EXACTLY why an indictment should have taken place. There are examples in there that exhibit the SAME behavior (no intent, but negligent)
I fail to see why you can not see the facts.
Remember, ignorance of the law will never be an excuse that is accepted in a court of law. Nor should it. And since EVERYBODY who handles classified information acknowledges (signs a document) they have received instructions on said handling (refer to prior ignorance statement) the excuse for the determination was NOT applied equally (e.g. they let her skate)
Intent or no, gross negligence (see Title 18, US code 793 section (f)) IS a prosecutable offense that is why Comey did not explicitly state there was negligence, just "extreme carelessness".
Because tritium in particular is an integral part of certain thermonuclear devices (though in quantities several thousand times larger than that in a keychain), consumer and safety devices containing tritium for use in the United States are subject to certain possession, resale, disposal, and use restrictions.
Hmm, I wonder?
The articles' logic is flawed. If everyone (car, bicycle, pedestrian) is following laws of the road and the above logic is used, this could be considered homicide almost to the point of premeditated. I bet if this logic is used some countries will ban the sale of said vehicles.
The thing that should be considered is if a collision is unavoidable, the person in the vehicle will have WAY more protection than a bicycle of pedestrian. In other words the car should hit the wall, not the pedestrian.
Mercedes needs a new Manager of driver assistance systems.
I'm always looking for a new idea that will be more productive than its cost. -- David Rockefeller