The only way I could see this as being politically motivated is if Hillary asked the Obama Administration to launch an inquiry in order to find her 100% clear of the charges, so as to remove that bugbear from the debate in the future.

So basically what you're saying is that you'd like to see the Obama Administration sink the same level as the Bush Administration when administering justice? Wouldn't it be better if Obama's Justice Department did the right thing and set the bar high for future administrations? Or is this just a case of "Their team got the kid gloves treatment, so mine should get it as well?"

Aside from the 120 million year old part...

Does caffeine count? What about marijuana? It seems like it would dull your reaction time, but it might make you more calm, so it's hard to say. How about coke or meth? Seems like those would make you too jittery.

Yeah. Ability to put up with B.S. is a big part of the job qualifications. Sadly, they don't include that in the description when we recruit candidates.

Where I work it tends to mean, "ability to cope with extreme disorganization and non-existent project management, and all the inefficiency and duplicated effort that entails, without becoming murderous".

I'm basing this off the fact that I got my current job around three years ago, when I was 37, without much trouble. That and the volume of recruiting emails I get (including two from Google in the past 6 months) despite my age being pretty obvious from my LinkedIn profile.

I'm 40 and I'm pretty sure I could get a job within a couple weeks if I lost my current one tomorrow. We'll see what the landscape looks like when I'm 45.

For what it's worth I've known "old" tech workers who don't "act" old, and I've known ones who do. So even though many companies may use "culture fit" as coded language for "too old" (or "too foreign"), there is still some truth to it. I've had to work with someone who acted like a grouchy old man and it wasn't enjoyable.

Can't just be the recruiters. Someone above them has to either be actively allowing them bring people back in who have already been rejected three times before or they're just so disorganized they don't keep records on that kind of thing. Given who we're talking about that seems less likely, but you never know. I can see maybe bringing someone in a second time if the first on-site interview is a "near miss", but four times? That's just weird.

Or something like this?

Because the people who can afford rhino horns & tiger penises can also afford to bribe the officials.

The supply side isn't as lucrative for the legal-industrial prison system.

Conservatively, let's say we could earn 2.5% annually in real terms (i.e. after inflation) on $10B. That's the rate the economy is projected to grow at long-term. So, $250M/year in perpetuity. That'd fund a lot of basic research, if that's what you're into.

I'd also feel better about spending $10B on a manned moon mission if the U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio wasn't about 70% higher than it was 8 years ago.