That's the way it always is with an adverse inference. For example, one party requests discovery, the other party destroys it -- adverse influence instruction. Nobody knows for certain what was destroyed (if they did, it would be actual evidence because there'd be a copy or something like that) -- but the jury is allowed to infer (i.e guess) that it would be damaging. That's the whole point of the adverse inference instruction -- by destroying possible evidence, it is presumed you are destroying evidence that would be damaging, even if in actual fact the evidence would not have been damaging. It's the best we can do in that circumstance and the evidence destroyer, whether Olly North or HRC, should get fucked hard over it.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
The fact that I recognize HRC for a neo-con warmonging surveilling Democrat makes me a Republican? Funny -- I can't tell the difference between the New GOP (aka Democrats) and the Old GOP (aka parody of itself). If Nixon had a godchildren, they'd be named GWB, Obama, and Clinton. These latter three get to do way more than he ever did, and Obama even got Nixon's health care plan passed.
Anyway, go take your partisan bullshit and fuck yourself with it in the eye. I hate them both, GOP and DNC alike because they are exactly alike.
But if a Clinton get's elected again, I know at least one thing for sure, that is that she won't start approving tax cuts while boosting spending (gotta boost that Military industrial complex or they might not get their checks at election time) like the Republicans want.
When HRC was agitating to get a war started in Iraq back in the early 2003, she said exactly that, which is awesome if you consider starting a war in Iraq a good thing:
- 1:40 HRC enters room
- ~ Code pink intro: war in Iraq will harm American and Iraqi families and cost a lot.
- 6:30 HRC parrots the WMD arguments, blames the danger to Iraqis on Hussein, ignores harm to Americans, financial costs, and the fact that Iraq was not a threat to the US nor involved in 9/11.
- 8:52 HRC lies about careful review of WMD info. HRC never even read the National Intelligence Estimate which while suggesting WMDs existed, also contained significant disagreements with that conclusion that a reader not interested in a particular outcome would have agreed called the whole thing into question.
- 10:00 Audience member: not up to the US to disarm Hussein, up to the world community, Iraq has no connection to terrorism, not only are Iraqi people in danger, so are US people, and will harm the economy. It's reckless.
- 11:14 HRC: The world community would not take on difficult problems without US forcing the issue. Goes on and on about Bosnia. Segues into how GWB tax cuts are a bad idea.
- 13:29 Interesting note on the negative effect of the tax cuts: "Here at home, this administration is bankrupting our economy forcing us to make the worst kinds of false choices between national and homeland security, which they don't fund
- -- IOW, HRC would have preferred GWB raise taxes for more war and domestic surveillance. --
- 14:12 HRC is given a pink slip
- 14:20 HRC goes off: "I am the Senator from NY I will never put my people at risk
- -- Yeah, like Saddam had anything to do with 9/11
However, destruction of evidence leads to an inference that the information would be damaging.
Astroturfer, and a bad one.
Clinton is PUBLIC official.
I am a PRIVATE citizen.
That a public official should be required to save absolutely everything says absolutely nothing at all about what a private person like me can do with my email. Even the spam. Who knows, they could be be making deals with cleverly spam-appearing emails and so those need to be stored for analysis too.
Obama has had almost 8 years to stop being Bush III. He obviously is much of a police-state neo-con as the one who went before.
None of them were subject to the draft, so your point may have value actually.
I was just thinking this. I'm a gen-Xer, had a TRS-80 CoCo when I was a kid, went through DOS (including DR-DOS), and all that. I never had to learn to solder -- switching jumpers maybe but that was it.
Anyway, I've been fooling around with arduinos recently and it's been a lot of fun and frustration. Arduino lowered the barrier to using tiny low power microchips but it hasn't yet been lowered so far that people are just button pressing on apps. As a result, the youth of today have a great opportunity to learn some very interesting skills at a price point bordering on free, at least compared to the cost of computers when I was a kid in the 80s.
Mostly, I think articles like this are just generational click-bait. I would suspect that millennial's issues are in part due to there being a glut of other millennials. Of course, gen-X had its own issues in the other direction, there being a glut of boomers ahead of us and that glut creating different problems we got stuck with.
Are you fucking high? The same SCOTUS that ruled corporation are people and opened the floodgates for same corps to buy elections?
They could always try a telephone or bullhorn and ask some questions including permission to enter.
The difference between ISIS and the USA, is that when the USA tortures or murders innocent people, it forces news organizations to sue under the FOIA for pictographic or video evidence. When ISIS does that stuff, it posts the evidence to youtube. Either way, the actions are despicable, ISIS is just less media savvy (the US having learned from Viet Nam the importance of limiting what gets published).
That makes sense for tomatoes, but nuts store really well.
You jest, but why has it become such a novel concept to grow nut trees where there is no need to water them at all, that it can be seen as joke? I don't know about almonds -- maybe they need hot weather -- but walnuts grow fine over large swathes of the country without ever being watered by anything but the rain.
Gazzilions of years ago or whenever it was, when the oil we use now was floating around in the form of giant mats of algae, some belching deadly hydrogen sulfide as they decompose, there was a lot more life on the planet. But do we really want to live on a world choked with so much scum? Over time, that algae turned to oil and the carbon really was sequestered -- but now we're putting it all back into circulation -- I suppose it could become more animals, more corn, more people, but it could also become massive amounts of stinking toxic slime.
This is marked funny, but think about it for a minute. Our computers, phones, tablets -- even watches -- are collecting way more information than this Barbie is and yet how many people think these ubiquitous machines are creepy? Not many. The lesson here might be this: the shape of the surveillance device doesn't make it creepy -- what it collects is what makes it creepy. Oddly though, very few people are creeped out by their own phone.
Two conclusions based on "shape irrelevant":
1) Barbie, phones, computers etc. etc. have become extremely creepy surveillance devices (this is where I am, which is depressing, because I've loved technology for so long).
2) Barbie, phones, computers etc. etc. are surveillance devices and surveillance is totally not creepy -- just don't care.
To mix and match 1 & 2 though, making barbie creepy and siri not, is inconsistent and illogical.