But that's just a slander that was posted on the interwebs by short sellers
[citation needed]
The fact that they left the MCAS in place is not a good sign. The MCAS was an ugly patch to ameliorate the flight characteristics of the 737 and if it is still there, it means that the 737 MAX is still an ugly duckling and not a swan.
really very, very few real examples of any of these things
Which in a "winner takes it all" system matter really, really a lot.
Further, we really do care more about the stupid shit he does more than the stupid shit he says.
Really.
Judging by most Slashdot stories of late, I'd say not at all. There has been a deluge of idiotic news about childish, political tit-for-tat, like this one.
You didn't actually defend the providence of the laptop, and responded with a deliberately dumb take on what the OP said. So you were just adding noise and the mods reacted accordingly.
He actually listed quite a lot of useful information that you could just search online by yourself: the FBI (that took the laptop), the shop owner (who said it was Hunter's laptop), the lawyers involved, the witnesses (the recipients of the emails, the business partners of the Biden's etc.), the actual photos of Hunter Biden. He was making fun of the dumbness of those who say "faake", when there are literally dozens of independent confirmations of its authenticity and of the authenticity of its contents.
I suppose a Biden botnet is possible, but it is more likely that China or some other country hostile to Trump (every Western democracy + Iran) is doing it.
So one day the narrative is Russia (!), China (!1!), Iran (!11!!1!) try to spread chaos by delivering fake news and conspiracy theories, the other day the narrative is that they are trying to suppress a story that could sow chaos more than anything they allegedly have done? Totally coherent logic.
Like Beau would mention Hunter's laptop.
Hush, hush, you should not mention it too. Or at least mark your message as "adult only", given the shit they found in it.
However he resigned after they refused to publish this article about Biden's businesses in China and Ukraine.
The plight of the Uyghurs is fairly well known at this time, unless you're willfully not paying attention.
There is so much propaganda around it, that it is quite difficult not to pay attention to it. As for this bill, I am fairly sure that it will hold back economic development in Xinjiang and cause more harm to Uyghurs.
Tesla admits that a problem with Model 3 vehicles led to them losing the body panel on their rear bumper when driving in puddles of water. Early on, the Model 3 had some issues with the body panel on the rear bumper falling off after driving through what drivers have described as heavy rain or water puddles. That’s obviously not normal, and Tesla said that it was investigating the situation, but we never heard back from the automaker. Some owners had issue with Tesla performing the repair under warranty as the company argues over how deep the water was that car owners drove through.
Remember Anthony Weiner? Al Franken? Contrary to your perceptions, Democrats actually hold their members accountable in general.
Meanwhile the GOP props up men like Trump, Roy Moore, and the rest despite doing FAR WORSE than Al Franken ever did.
Cough... Joe Biden... cough... cough... Tara Reade...
Seriously, Weiner and Franken were held accountable only because they were indefensible, not because of some higher standard. If there were a picture of Roy Moore groping Tina Johnson, none would have defended him, like none defended Al Franken: that's it.
Photo after photo of him chumming it up with Epstein (not just one or two, but dozens) and the woman pimping out girls for old men. And speaking of that madame, when she got caught, he told the press, "I wish her well." Used campaign funds to pay off the porn star in violation of FEC regs.
And you have the hypocrisy to claim that these two men are equal? Bill Clinton being a scumbag does not mean he is as equally a scumbag as Trump.
Now, I would not go down that road, if I were you. Bill Clinton was a registered passenger of the Lolita Express at least 26 times between 2001 and 2003 (Trump just once in 1997). There is a photograph of Chauntae Davies, one of Epstein's victims, massaging Bill Clinton when both were waiting to get back on the Lolita Express (no pictures of Trump with known Epstein's victims). Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's most famous accomplice, was an invitee at Chelsea Clinton's marriage in 2010 and allegedly met Bill in 2014, when she and Epstein were already under scrutiny. Trump cheated Epstein in 2004 and, after that date, there are not known interactions between the two. Trump met Epstein because they were both socialite from New York, but none, as far as I know, ever fully explained why the Clintons, two Arkanans, knew Epstein.
Neither was he accused of sexual assault nor did he pay a "massive sum" to Lewinsky.
Sigh! Give me a good reason not to call you an idiot. Let me google it for you and, please, read the results before posting again.
And: it is his damn right to lie. WTF is wrong with you? If they can not proof you did something wrong, under what damn law can you non lie and say "oh, no!! I did not do it!!" ???
This is distinctly different from the GOP who impeached a president over a blow job. No, not because of "perjury." If an elected officials private life is their own, the question who never had been asked as to whether oral sex counts as sex or intercourse.
Not this shit again! Clinton lied and obstructed justice in a trial for sexual assault (which ended with him paying a massive sum to his accuser) and then objected that "receiving oral sex" was not a sexual intercourse to him, so the whole argument was then about a blow job: it was Clinton that made it all about the "receiving oral sex" part, i.e. the blow job, not the GOP, you fake-newser.
He was asked if he used to have/require sexual relationships with his female subordinates, he said that he never had such relationships with any subordinate of his; however many subordinates/collaborators testified that he, in fact, had or tried to have sexual relationships with them or assaulted them, so he asked for the evidence and the lawyers acquired the proof of that blowjob: at that point Clinton said that he was in good faith because "receiving oral sex" was not sex. #MeToo my ass.
It's a naive, domestic operating system without any breeding, but I think you'll be amused by its presumption.