I don't know the answer to this, but I suspect I know the answer: does Hilary's printed email dump (which is all that she will provide) include the email headers and associated metadata that comes with an electronic copy of an email?
I rather doubt that she has; but, I ask because she claims that she has fulfilled her obligation by providing printed versions of the emails. So, even if we were willing to concede that incredibly dubious claim, has she really complied with the law by not providing the entire electronic record?
Obviously, this part of the email can be quite important (just ask the NSA), so if she isn't providing that, what is her justification for not doing so?
If the law doesn't specifically make an exemption for that, then it can't be omitted. When she received an email, the header is a part of the email that she received. Therefore, it is part of the official record.
Having worked in academia for some time, I'd like to call bullshit on many of your points.
Actually, though a minority, there are many Republicans (usually leaning more Libertarian) in academia.
Interestingly, this article was in the news just a few days ago: Report: Harvard Faculty Supports Democrats a Whopping 96% of the Time
You want to know why this shit is expensive? I saw a dozen "Non-emergency" patients in the waiting room
Coincidentally, just read this article, today - Surprise: ER Visits Still Going Up Despite Promises Obamacare Would Bring Them Down .
Sure, because that is what happened. I'm not using "anointed" as a criticism of Hilary, I'm using it to refer to the lack of credible Democratic contenders. It's a term that is used to show that possible contenders have stepped aside and have ceded the field to one player. It very much described what has happened to the Democrat's nomination process.
I suspect, however, that you really don't have anything to say about the substance of my post, so you choose to try to make an issue out of the way that I said it -- "it tells me to to ignore the person using it". And then, you go on to say that was my only serious critique - when that wasn't my critique at all. How droll.
Tagatose is a low carbohydrate functional sweetener, very similar to fructose in structure. It is naturally occurring and can be found in some dairy products. Tagatose has a physical bulk similar to sucrose or table sugar and is almost as sweet. However, it is metabolized differently, has a minimal effect on blood glucose and insulin levels and furthermore provides a prebiotic effect. Tagatose is especially suitable as a flavor enhancer or as a low carbohydrate sweetener.
I wonder why it's not more popular.
Many years ago, I read in Omni Magazine (a source to be trusted, for sure) of a breakthrough that was dubbed "Left-handed sugar". The claim was that some lab had produced a compound that was essentially the same as regular sugar, but in some fashion, it's molecular arrangement was a mirror-image. The trick of it was that the taste buds thought it was sugar, but the digestive system would ignore it.
For years, I expected to hear about some real product; but I guess that I was fooled.
We cross-checked the Open Secrets list of the top 100 individuals donating to outside spending groups in the current election against the Forbes list of the world’s billionaires and found that, as of June 19, there were 22 individuals on the Open Secrets list who were billionaires. Of those 22 billionaires, 13 -- or more than half -- gave predominantly to liberal groups or groups affiliated with the Democratic Party. The other nine gave predominantly to conservative groups. (A list of billionaires and how much they donated can be found here.)
The top donor from either party so far this cycle is pro-Democratic -- California billionaire Tom Steyer, who has given more than $11 million and has pledged to spend at last $50 million.
As a side note, the common refrain that 'the U.S. left is "right-wing" compared to the "rest of the world"' conveniently ignores the large percentage of Islamically-controlled countries in the world.
Ya'll hear about the geometer who went to the beach to catch some rays and became a tangent ?
