Trump has argued that he was never an officer of the United States to the Supreme Court. He says he wasn’t the president.
In 1982, Nixon v Fitzgerald, the court established that the president IS an officer of the United States, specifically the Chief Constitutional Officer of the Executive Branch, so if he wasn’t an officer, he wasn’t president. Apparently Habba doesn’t know how to google, much less how to research case law or she would have known. Fail #1

They also argue he didn’t personally engage in insurrection (he did, the election denial was an insurrection, all the fake electors were an insurrection, trying to invalidate millions of votes was an insurrection, trying to “find” enough votes to steal states he had lost is an insurrection, sending thousands to the Capitol to physically “stop the steal” was an insurrection) but they have completely ignored the “or given aid or comfort” part of the clause because he has absolutely given mountains of aid and comfort to those convicted of seditious insurrection by raising money for their defense, defending them publicly, calling them patriotic heroes, creating a song he sold for their benefit, and promising them pardons, so they have no defense to having given aid and comfort to insurrectionists along with most MAGA congresspeople. Prepare for their expulsion after Trump loses. Fail #2

Since he claims he was never an officer, so not really president, his immunity claims don’t even need to be litigated, only the actual president, highest OFICER in the American government AND the American military has any immunity and he says that was never him…and it’s only severely qualified immunity, not 100% total complete omnibus immunity…otherwise Biden/Harris would simply have Trump’s plane secretly shot down and claim total immunity….duh. Fail #3

Thanks Habba! Worst lawyer in American history trying some of the most important cases, and putting on invalid defenses she hasn’t thought through and in many cases completely forgetting to put on any defense at all. She’s the best lawyer in America that will stoop to defending Trump, and is guaranteeing he loses every case!

You can’t be that dumb.

1) these rich people pay our “leaders” to write unfair tax code so they can not pay taxes. Legalized by Republican pushes to allow unlimited corporate donations and bribes. In many cases, they DO in fact write the code, then hand it to those “leaders”.
2) these “leaders” writing tax loopholes for the super rich, all Republicans, are also rich people, legislating for personal gain.

If the top 1% made 80% of all income, they underpayed by more than half if flat tax were the law or in any way fair. In the 50’s, the time period conservatives want to return to, the top 1% paid 91% tax rates, and America was booming. Today it’s actually <24% and you whine.
How much did they pay AFTER their last massive tax cut, much less than 40%….not that I’m taking your word for those statistics, you are hardly a trustworthy source, the actual number in 2018 is 37% of personal income taxes, which ignores a lions share of non income taxes we all pay.

If you count ALL federal taxes, they payed <24% of taxes collected.
Their highest income tax rate for the rich was +-25% (before deductions, exemptions, loopholes, tax heavens, etc), 66% less than in the 50’s. Under Clinton they paid almost 40% income tax (not 24%), and the economy was again much stronger and growing much faster.

Edit: it was possibly the highest share of that portion of federal taxes paid by the top 1% since 1982, although your track record indicates that’s also a huge exaggeration, but if it’s even remotely true that would be because they took (not really earned) that much more income, not because they paid a higher percentage of earnings. In the 90’s they paid 40%, not today’s 25%…yet today they pay more….can you understand what that means? It means they take almost twice as much “income” as they did in the 90’s when the economy was strong.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/fact-check-richest-1-dont-pay-40-of-the-taxes.html

Republicans are ALL stupid people who do not think, proven every time they are forced to think and realize they have everything backwards. You idiots think Covid is a fraud, the election was stolen, and CRT in grade school is a thing.

Such a nonsensical blatant red herring. They often do “just write a check to the irs” btw. I’m not rich, but I don’t take deductions I legally could because I want to pay my share, not weasel out of it. That’s called being patriotic, not attacking congress and shirking any and all civic duties.
Pushing for a fair tax code, unlike Republicans who plan to raise taxes on anyone making under $250k AND end social security, Medicaid, Medicare, and any other social safety nets they can think of, is not just the ethical and moral thing, it’s the only sane economic move based on ALL economic history ever.

Right, stop wasting, like billions wasted on useless monuments to failure (Trump’s failing fence), trillions more on stupid failed trade wars, billions on political stunts like blockading the border (Texas), trillions to try to fix the disastrous Covid (lack of) response thanks to insane mismanagement and the removal of safeguards, billions to fight the non existent CRT in grade school nonsense…etc. you are ecstatic to waste billions-trillions on idiotic Republican nonsense with absolutely zero return for the money, not complaining once while Trump tried to double the debt in 4 years (nearly succeeding), but not on programs that keep the poor from turning to crime because they have literally nothing to lose, or start to fix our crumbling infrastructure, you call that pork. 🤦‍♂️

So fucking stupid, bob. Delusional, dumb, prejudiced, and always wrong. You must be playing the character of ignorant moronic trumptard, no real human being is this deluded or dumb. Even a broken clock is right twice a day, you are like a clock specifically designed to NEVER show the correct time….you actively avoid being truthful.

Massachusetts VS Grendle's Den - 459 US 116- 1982
A case in Massachusetts where the state deferred to the church in issuing liquor licenses, allowing them to veto any licenses they wished for their own reasons.
The supreme court voted 8-1 in favor of Grendle, stating clearly that it's extremely unconstitutional to allow a non governing body to apply the law based on their personal beliefs...and a blatant violation of the separation between church and state. This case is from 1982.
This means precedent is set, and the Texas law will be tossed....unless the new court ignores precedent and the constitution, which thanks to Trumpists is a possibility.

Works with most hot liquids with powders, I think I first noticed it in a mug of instant hot cider......

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_chocolate_effect

The hot chocolate effect, also known as the allassonic effect, is a phenomenon of wave mechanics first documented in 1982 by Frank Crawford, where the pitch heard from tapping a cup of hot liquid rises after the addition of a soluble powder. It was first observed in the making of hot chocolate or instant coffee, but also occurs in other situations such as adding salt to supersaturated hot water or cold beer. Recent research has found many more substances which create the effect, even in initially non-supersaturated liquids.
It can be observed by pouring hot milk into a mug, stirring in chocolate powder, and tapping the bottom of the mug with a spoon while the milk is still in motion. The pitch of the taps will increase progressively with no relation to the speed or force of tapping. Subsequent stirring of the same solution (without adding more chocolate powder) will gradually decrease the pitch again, followed by another increase. This process can be repeated a number of times, until equilibrium has been reached. Upon initial stirring, entrained gas bubbles reduce the speed of sound in the liquid, lowering the frequency. As the bubbles clear, sound travels faster in the liquid and the frequency increases

Your video, Jack Black 1982 Atari Pitfall Commercial, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 172 Badge!

Your video, Coleco Mini-Arcade 1982 Handheld Games Commercial, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 147 Badge!

No matter....once I drink the potion in the purple jade badger, my kung fu will be far superior!

Start at 1:24:04....it's Kung Fu Hulk!

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

Summary-https://ninjasallthewaydown.wordpress.com/2015/10/17/jade-dagger-ninja-1982/

Theoretically, science works great. However, as has already been noted, in the real world in certain fields, the pressure to publish something "substantial" combined with the inability to get grants for certain experiments because they aren't "trendy" right now causes scientists to self-limit the kinds of research they undertake, which is not at all great for increasing human knowledge.

Another problem is the "expert opinion" problem--when someone with little reputation in the field finds something that directly contradicts the "experts" in the field, they often face ridicule. The most famous recent case of this was 2011 Nobel Prize winner Dan Shechtman, who discovered a new type of crystal structure that was theoretically impossible in 1982 and was roundly criticized and ridiculed for it until a separate group of researchers many years later actually replicated his experiment and realized he had been right all along. This web page lists several more examples of scientists whose breakthrough research was ignored because it didn't match the "expert consensus" of the period.

Finally, in the humanities at least, one of the biggest problems in research that uses a quantitative approach (i.e. statistics) is that researchers apply a statistical method to their data, such a as a t-test, without actually demonstrating that whatever being studied follows a normal distribution (i.e bell curve). Many statistical tests are only accurate if what is being studied is normally distributed, yet I've seen a fair share of papers published in respected journals that apply these tests to objects of study that are quite unlikely to be normally distributed, which makes their claims of being "statistically significant" quite suspect.

There are other statistical methods (non-parametric) that you can use on data that is not normally distributed but generally speaking a test of significance on data taken from a normally distributed pool is going to be more reliable. As is noted in this video, the reason these kinds of mistakes slip through into the peer-reviewed journals is that sometimes the reviewers are not nearly as well-trained in statistical analysis as they are in other methodologies.

I remember playing that game at 1:30 back in 1982. Looking at it now it looks like tic-tac-toe.

September 1982, Pacific Coliseum, Vancouver. One of my favourite concerts, awesome showman. Freddie threw his mic stick into the audience at the end and beaned some poor girl.

Desi Arnaz Interviewed on Entertainment Tonight in 1982 has been added as a related post - related requested by lucky760.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Desi-Arnaz-Interviewed-on-Entertainment-Tonight-in-1982

Oh dear god not this song. I thought they buried 1982 in a time capsule, how did this get out.

While 99% is obviously a bit high, I did a quick search and found some data. Out of 62 mass shootings between 1982 and 2012, mass being more than 4 victims per incident, 11 shooters were black. In the other cases, 45 shooters were white males, 1 was a white female, and the rest were asian or latino.

So 18 percent of the mass shootings during that period were done by blacks. A whopping 74 percent were white.

You can find the list here: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data

Your video, Early CGI - BBC Tomorrow's World 1982, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.