I meant the start and stop year are each off by 1.

Circumstantially it looks like maybe her mom called Larry King Live to ask for guidance way back in 1993 (the content of the exchange matches, as does the date, but no names were given). Could be unrelated.
Supposedly neighbors were told. Again, who knows.

If zero corroboration was good enough for Ford (Named first hand witnesses said they remember nothing of the sort), then maybe it's only fair to give Reade the same benefit of the doubt?
The double standard is quite conspicuous.

Personally, I wouldn't condemn anyone without physical measurable evidence on which to decide. Talk is cheap.

Maybe she does exaggerate. She wouldn't be the first.

-scheherazade

Some of the link's criticisms are nitpicking.

Calling herself a 'legislative aide' to describe 'working for senator Biden' - that's like when a 'receptionist' puts down 'customer communications liaison' on their resume.

She gets her years of employment wrong by 1 year, decades later. I can't tell you the year I started my current job. I would have to look it up. Same for every job I've had.

Having one of her supposed degrees denied by a university is certainly suspect. Which at this point could still turn out to be a database problem, or some other cock up. *Possibly*. *Possibly not*. It could also be her exaggerating her own qualifications, coming back to bite her in the ass.

In any case, at least her accusations are old and she didn't pop up out of nowhere at a suspiciously convenient time in politics.

-scheherazade

Dream date? Nah man, just anyone that wouldn't be embarrassing to be seen with.

I mean, if the choice is between:

1) Continuing dating a crazy chick, waiting a little longer and seeing who else comes around

or

2) Switching now to a chick that's so dumb it hurts

I pick #1. At least she's entertaining.

I mean, ideally, I'd pick neither, but we don't have the ability to unelect the office and leave it empty.

-scheherazade

As a liberal (without TDS), I would prefer Trump just stay another 4, and we get a real Democratic candidate.

The good thing about Trump is that there is so much gridlock that neither party has the ability to pass any laws. Shit just coasts along without much change.

If Democrats win now, while TDS is in full swing, any law they pass will be an ideological (non-technocratic) over-correction.

I get that he's "the democratic party's man", but FFS, take things seriously for a change. Yang, Tulsi, Bern', all better candidates by far. But since they're not obedient party dogs I guess they're unsuitable for the job...

I mean, what's the logic? Hey, people are dumb enough to vote for a narcissist, so they must also be dumb enough to vote for someone brain damaged? Are they trying to double down on last election?

Really? This guy?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FCGLidQN6M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aA-GoeFGyIc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Nl1b1rngXU#t=11m1s

I mean, his youtube campaign ad has him stumbling around for words. If that train wreck is what his own campaign put out, how bad were his other takes for them to say 'all right, this is the best we're gonna get' ?

If there ever was a campaign that embodied "party over country", this is it.

-scheherazade

I looked into the date of the massacre, and it's May31 and June 1.

The OK Trump rally was originally schedule for Juneteenth (June 19) - ostensibly to commemorate the end of slavery. Then it was pushed back 1 day due to people complaining about using Juneteenth.

The two dates are different.

-scheherazade

I get what the cop was thinking. Everyone goes 5 to 15 over, so it's really weird to see anyone going 5 under.

It's not breaking the law, so this stop should have never happened.

It's stupid to expect people to break the law, because as someone already pointed out, it just means you have an excuse to stop anybody.

-scheherazade

Newtboy,

Ah, I see. I thought it was of the listed population, not the total population.

You are correct, that is quite lopsided.

-scheherazade

I looked up some stats just to see.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1123070/police-shootings-rate-ethnicity-us/

30 per million blacks fatally shot by police.
12 per million whites fatally shot by police.

So cops are roughly twice as likely to kill a black person, per racial group.

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045219gg

US being 76% white and 13% black, that works out to an aggregate ratio of roughly 9 whites killed per 4 blacks, per capita. In the end the death toll is high all around, white people aren't getting away scott free.

We should also consider poverty. Poverty and crime tend to track one another. It's safe to assume that areas with more crime will be more likely to experience police encounters, and hence more police shootings on average.

https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/poverty-rate-by-raceethnicity/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%
22%7D

White poverty rate (9%) is roughly half of black poverty (22%), which implies that crime is also half as frequent among whites, which is roughly similar to the per capita difference in police shooting rate.

30/12 is 2.5
22/9 is 2.44
2.5 > 2.44, so it implies bias against blacks, but not as big as I expected.

As far as total people killed, cops kill plenty people of all races. The numbers don't look as lopsided as I expected, which surprises me.

I appreciate the solidarity among black people. They at least try to hold authorities to account.

White people couldn't care less when cops kill whites. They just shrug it off as 'well the guy must have done something to piss off the cop, so it was probably their own fault anyways'. You can sit on liveleak watching cops kill white people all day, but other white people never get worked up about it. It's a shame they don't have the same sense of unity as black people do.

I wish the protests were about police abuse in general. Or even goverment abuse. There are so many issues that need fixing (e.g. civil forfeiture, repeatedly trying people for the same event by tweaking charges until a conviction sticks, government budget being infinitely larger than a defendant's budget, government freezing a defendant's funds so they can't afford lawyers, etc).

-scheherazade

The scale of sensitivity has changed.

Back then, if a white dude beat up a black dude for being black, people would just say some shit about it and move on.

Today, name calling can land you in jail.

What qualifies as terrible has a lower threshold in today's social psyche.

As racism becomes rarer and milder, any remaining form sticks out that much more, and is that much more offensive.

(Same with violence. We're in the safest time in human history, but people are more worried about kidnappings and shootings than ever)

Basically, it's all relative.

I had a coworker that said to me 'this place is really racist', and I asked why. He said 'because nobody says hi to me as I walk down the hall'. My response was 'So? I never say hi to anybody'. So, I started forcing myself to say hi to people, just to maintain appearances. Otherwise, I'd just be going about my day minding my own business, and people could be getting the wrong impression.

-scheherazade

Looks like the green 'walk' lamp is lit till the 30 second mark, which is right about the instant she is hit.

-scheherazade

Reply to multiple previous comments:



Re:
"Literally no different from a pistol other than it can have better accuracy and sometimes higher caliber"

.38 (9mm), .40, .45 are the calibers you will see used by police pistols

.223 (5.56mm), .300, .308, are the calibers you will see used by police rifles

Unless an officer is using a personal firearm at work, the pistols should all be higher caliber.

The major difference is muzzle velocity damage.
The pistol cuts a tunnel the diameter of the [expanded] bullet.
The rifle leaves an exit wound multiple inches across, and at point blank will grenade the exit side of the target, painting the wall with gibs.





Re:
"Can you tell me why you believe it's "not a great idea" when the criminals already all have guns too?"

Because police should be there to protect citizens lives, at the cost of their own if needed. (Hence the "hero"/"Public Servant" status they so like to remind us of)

If they protect their own lives, at the cost of citizens if needed, then they become a part of the problem they are supposed to be solving.

Just imagine the uninvolved bystander down the street struck down for no fault of their own.

The better path forward is full head to toe level 4 body armor for police, not heavier police firepower in packed suburbs.

That way they have the option to hold fire and assess the situation without shitting their pants and hosing the place down with lead "just in case, so they minimize the risk of getting hurt".

Full L4 body armor means that when things like the VT shooting happen, the police don't pitch tents outside and wait for SWAT (who actually has armor) to show up while people are likely getting killed inside.

Full L4 body armor means that when police open a door to a bathroom with an intruder inside (or a vacuum), they don't have to be thinking "kill or be killed".





Re:
"You are assuming it's a high velocity rifle. It's likely only 9mm, meaning minimal impact and penetration"

The video shows shots of the rifle magazine. It's not a 9mm pcc (pistol caliber carbine) magazine. It's the standard form factor. Meaning it is likely to be one of common the off the shelf calibers for that form factor :
.223/5.56
.300 blackout
6.8 spc
.224 valkyrie
6.5 grendel
None are 9mm. And other than a subsonic .300 blackout variant (used with suppressors/silencers), all pack a world more hurt than a 9mm.






It's true that a faster/heavier round will pass through more walls, and more houses.

Not sure it matters though, as 9mm ball will go through plenty of sheetrock layers, and rifle ammo stands a chance at fragmenting on impact with obstacles.
Which goes farther for any given shot will depend on what each one strikes along the way, and if it's bullet is of type FMJ/ball or HP or frag or penetrator or whatever.

-scheherazade

"Get the answer faster" is not the point.

The left explains why multiplication works, whereas the one on the right is a process for multiplying.

The left makes it visually obvious that scalars are separable.

That : (35*2) = (30*2) + (5*2) = (30+5) * 2


The only thing missing (which may have been covered elsewhere) is that : 35 'IS" (3*10^1) + (5*10^0), and that multi-digit-numbers are already presented as separate scalars in sum.

-scheherazade

Bob said that her line of argument (selling regulation policy changes for self enrichment), is less of an obvious motivation for someone who enters politics already wealthy.

That's a perfectly fine statement to make, as there is less to gain.



Net effect wise, nothing has changed for the average person. So I would argue that POTUS is more ineffectual than able to make things exponentially anything.

-scheherazade

You are both saying the same thing.

The only difference is that the cynicism isn't consistently applied to everyone who warrants it.

(I heavily suspect that when the money doesn't add up - someone is making money on the side. And it just so happens that they are in the position to sell regulatory capture, so it is the most likely candidate.)




In this case AOC is on point (granted that Trump is wealthy prior to office).

If I were to criticize her, it would not be for this stuff.
(It would be for identitarianism [vs individualism])



The guilt so far is the sort of guilt everyone has. Not saying everything is kosher - just saying that everyone is guilty, malfeasance or not.

There is a saying, show me the man, I'll show you the crime.

I'm sure that the FBI can look closely enough to everyone related to trump and find something to convict everyone of. It may not be foreign influence related, but it will be something. They can even drag things out until the prez is out of office before going after the juicy targets.

-scheherazade

Well, looks like they have been working on scramjets too.

Apparently they made the first flying example ever, in 1991.
Not sure how that squares with the earlier U.S. efforts, maybe because it flew on its own? I donno.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scramjet_programs#Russia

-scheherazade