text:
Posts Tagged 'patriots'
Freedom of the Press #18 – The Big Guns
Thursday, August 10th, 2017
Freedom of the Press #18
The Big Guns
August 8, 2017, was the date set for the government to file their response. They did so in the Government's Reply to Respondent's Opposition to Government's Memorandum in Support of Civil Contempt. That will be the subject of this article, however the recent background, since the May 9, 2017, Jurisdiction Hearing.
As a result of that Hearing, the government first filed the Government's Memorandum in Support of Civil Contempt (June 12, 2017). That was the subject "Freedom of the Press #16 – Jurisdiction Hearing". It appears that since January, when the government sought to have me held in Contempt of Court, they have yet to come up with a case citation that supports their position.
My response was filed as Memorandum of Law in Opposition to the Government's Memorandum in Support of Civil Contempt (July 21, 2017). This Memorandum increases the burden on the government, separating articles published before the "Supplemental Protective Order" and the one article published after that Order. The government has yet to meet any standard of proof with regard to their legal responsibility to do so.
So, the current government Reply endeavors to regurgitate some of the same arguments that the government has relied upon, through the course of this ordeal. For example, they have, from the beginning, relied upon Roviaro v. United States, 353 U.S. 53 (1957), when they state, "The substantial government interest in protecting confidential sources is long established." Where they fail in Roviaro, is that the protection is afforded by allowing the government to protect the identity of the informant. In the words of the Roviaro decision, "What is usually referred to as the informer's privilege is, in reality, the Government's privilege to withhold from disclosure the identity of persons…" What it does not do is to extend any criminal liability to those that disclose an informant's identity. It simply gives the government the right to try to protect the identity.
In the current matter, that was done to the extent that the law allows, the Protective Order that sanctioned those who were given certain information from disclosing that information. It is only that person, whether a defendant, defendant's counsel, or even government employee, was subject to the Court's order not to divulge the identity of the informants.
The government did so even prior to the Discovery being given to the defendants, when they redacted what they believed to be any information that would tend to expose the informants. The informant's names were redacted as where many hundreds of words that the government felt would identify the informants. The government keeping that information away from the defendants (the identification of informants) was their exercise of the protection of the informants, as per Roviaro.
The government continues to persist in stating, rightfully, "this Court had the authority to issue the orders and that it continues to have the authority to enforce the orders." However, they have yet to address the relevant aspect of jurisdiction. To put this in context, if a judge in Mexico issues an order, he has such authority. He also has the right to enforce that order. However, does he have the jurisdiction to first, apply that order to someone not within his jurisdiction? And, second, the authority to enforce the order against someone not within his jurisdiction?
The government wants to spin the context of what I said into a confession that is very, very far from my belief and honest admission as to the authority of the judge.
As the government continues, they make this rather curious assertion:
"When Hunt complains that this Court's orders "prohibit" him from publishing "certain investigative pieces," his factual premise is simply inaccurate. Second, the justification for the original Protective Order continues because there is an ongoing need to protect cooperating witnesses regardless of the status of the trial."
So, let's break this down. I have never complained about anything, except the fact that I was arrested by the government, similar to this current contempt situation, wrongfully applying a statute that did not apply to me, resulting in my spending a week in the Sacramento County Jail. It would have been substantially longer had not Judge Brown seen through the deceitful tactic of the government in attempting to punish me, by simply lying to have a warrant issued for my arrest. See Freedom of the Press #17 – Is This Legal?
Then, the government shysters endeavored to make a point:
"We are not asking this Court to restrain Hunt's ability generally to write about the case — or even the informants — we only want him to observe this Court's Order, which means that he cannot publish the discovery material subject to the Court's Order."
How nice of them to say that they don't have a problem with me writing "about the case — or even the informants." How gracious. However, these shysters are supposed to present facts. My reputation as a journalist (not a blogger) is based on presenting facts. Let's suppose that I wrote about the informants, but failed to justify my conclusions without facts to back up those conclusions. Well, then, I might just be a blogger. However, as facts are a requisite in our judicial system, they are also a matter of principle to a good journalist. To make accusations without presenting the facts makes a mockery of journalism, as it would of the judicial system.
Besides, such accusations are prolific in the patriot community. They tend to lack any substance and are often made over a simple disagreement between two people. Should some rely upon simply my word that so and so is an informant, the informant would simply accuse the accuser of being an informant. And, the louder voice would probably prevail. Surely, the government shysters would love to see an expansion of the "he said; she said" sort of rhetoric in the community.
As we continue through the Reply, we find this rather subjective statement of 'facts':
"[T]he government's interests far outweigh any First Amendment interest Hunt may assert. First, we need to protect our confidential sources for all of the valid reasons identified in Roviaro. Second, the Court has a significant interest in enforcing the terms of its own Protective Orders. Without enforcement, Hunt's defiance threatens to undermine our ability to exchange discovery in future criminal cases."
Now, the first point has already been addressed, with regard to the government's right to endeavor to protect their sources — which they did by denying the defendants the right to call the witnesses against them (6th Amendment). Second, the Court wrote the Protective Order and subjected those identified as subject to that Protective Order. Daniel Ellsberg was the criminal in the "Pentagon Papers". The New York Times was not. Finally, and the most laughable, is that the government feels that the exchange of discovery might be undermined. Well, there is little doubt that the shysters want to keep as many secrets as they can from the defense. However, in an effort to attempt to maintain their unscrupulous cadre of spies amongst us, they would willingly subvert the Constitution.
. (more…)
Tags:Ammon Bundy, Anna Brown, Burns Oregon, Constitution, courts, definitions, demonization, FBI, Freedom of Speech, government, informants, law, Pamala Holsinger, patriots, press, supreme Court, US Attorney
Posted in Articles | 2 Comments »
The Bundy Affair #21 – Batson Challenge – in the Name of Injustice
Monday, July 31st, 2017
The Bundy Affair #21
Batson Challenge – in the Name of Injustice
In "Liberty or Laws? – Justice or Despotism?", I discussed how the case law method provides the government, through judicial proceedings, to move, a decision at a time, away from the intent of the Constitution. In recent events in the second Tier 3 trial, only two-thirds of the trial was declared a "mistrial", while the other third was not declared a mistrial. I say this because the first trial, by the government's design, included six defendants, all of whom were accused of wielding firearms on April 12, 2014, when the Bureau of Land Management returned the surviving captured cattle to their rightful owner. Two defendants were found guilty of some of the charges. The remaining four were not found guilty of any of the charges, though they were also not found not guilty. So, there was no mistrial on the two, but there was a mistrial in the same singular trial of the other four.
Now comes the second trial, and the subject of this article. Jury selection occupied the first two days of the trial and much of the third day. Now, in jury selection, each side, Prosecution and Defense, may challenge a juror for cause. Each side also has what are called "peremptory challenges". This is the definition of peremptory challenges found in Black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition:
Peremptory challenge. A request from a party that a judge not allow a certain prospective juror to be a member of the jury. No reason or "cause" need be stated for this type of challenge. The number of peremptory challenges afforded each party is normally set by statute or court rule.
However, on the third day of trial, the government, apparently butt-hurt over the Defendant's Peremptory Challenges, brought up what is known as a "Batson Challenge", historically exercised by the defense, not by the prosecution. They allege that the peremptory challenges were intentionally applied (state of mind) to exclude certain potential jurors. Well, it appears that the Defendants cannot have a state of mind presented in Court as to why they went from their homes to Bunkerville, but they can be held accountable for their state of mind when it comes to jury selection.
Background of the Batson Challenge
The Batson Challenge is based upon a 1986 United States Supreme Court decision in Batson v Kentucky 476 US 79. It deals with the Defendant's right to challenge a jury makeup if the government's peremptory challenges create a gender or racial bias in the jury. First, a little background based upon earlier decisions. In reviewing these cases, you will see that the original protection afforded to the people by the Constitution is slowly being chipped away. In this current trial, the right protected for the people is now being used to afford the government the opportunity to claim a right that was intended to be a prohibition against the government.
As early as 1879, the United States Supreme Court ruled on the right of the defendant, with regard to the use by the prosecution of Peremptory Challenges, to stack the jury. The case was Strauder v. West Virginia, 100 US 303. Based upon the 14th Amendment, the decision stated, "that a State denies a black defendant equal protection when it puts him on trial before a jury from which members of his race have been purposefully excluded." [Quoted portion cited from Batson v. Kentucky.]
Strauder goes on to say that "A defendant has no right to a petit jury composed in whole or in part of persons of his own race. However, the Equal Protection Clause guarantees the defendant that the State will not exclude members of his race from the jury venire on account of race, or on the false assumption that members of his race as a group are not qualified to serve as jurors. By denying a person participation in jury service on account of his race, the State also unconstitutionally discriminates against the excluded juror." [Quoted portion cited from Batson v. Kentucky.]
Interestingly, that underlined portion from Batson, "By denying a person participation in jury service on account of his race, the State also unconstitutionally discriminates against the excluded juror ", presumes that the juror has a right to sit on the jury, nearly equal to the right of the defendant. This appears to be a very early example of Civil Rights (See Liberty or Laws? – Natural Rights versus Civil Rights), whereby the government grants a civil right at the expense of one who previously enjoyed a natural right.
However, note that since the Bill of Rights, particularly the Fifth Amendment, guarantees the people the right to a trial by jury, it does not grant that right to the jury. If anything, the jury has no right to refuse jury service, unless they are otherwise exempted. The Bill of Rights was to protect us from the government. It was never intended to provide the government the means to remove our protection from the actions of that government.
What the Batson decision does not provide, however, is the background of Strauder. Strauder was indicted for murder. He was an ex-slave, and the indictment was tried in a West Virginia Circuit Court and found guilty. His case then went to the West Virginia Supreme Court, where they upheld the lower court's verdict. It then went to the United States Supreme Court on a Writ of Error. So, taking from the Strauder decision, we find what led to the composition of the jury in the Circuit Court trial, to wit:
In the Circuit Court of the State, before the trial of the indictment was commenced, the defendant presented his petition, verified by his oath, praying for a removal of the cause into the Circuit Court of the United States, assigning, as ground for the removal, that 'by virtue of the laws of the State of West Virginia no colored man was eligible to be a member of the grand jury or to serve on a petit jury in the State; that white men are so eligible, and that by reason of his being a colored man and having been a slave, he had reason to believe, and did believe, he could not have the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings in the State of West Virginia for the security of his person as is enjoyed by white citizens, and that he had less chance of enforcing in the courts of the State his rights on the prosecution, as a citizen of the United States, and that the probabilities of a denial of them to him as such citizen on every trial which might take place on the indictment in the courts of the State were much more enhanced than if he was a white man.'
This led to West Virginia, not a seceding state that would have been required to rewrite its constitution, to revise its laws on jury makeup. This, of course, was a consequence of the due process provision of the 14th Amendment.
As I have said in the past, the presumption of innocence was based upon the fact that the Indictment (the alleged story of events) was on trial, not the defendant. However, we have lost sight of that concept and now perceive the guilt of the defendant (the focus) as the purpose of the trial, not the validity of the Indictment. Subtle, but still effective.
The Batson decision also provides the following:
[T]he Kentucky Supreme Court observed that recently, in another case, it had relied on Swain v. Alabama, 380 U.S. 202, and had held that a defendant alleging lack of a fair cross section must demonstrate systematic exclusion of a group of jurors from the venire.
So, in this citation, the defendant has the burden of proving that the prosecution has not used "systematic exclusion" in their use of their peremptory challenges. However, as we will see, in the current case, that burden will be transferred to the prosecution, and the defendant is accused of "systematic exclusion".
Tags:Bundy, Constitution, courts, definitions, government, history, Judge, Judge Navarro, jury, law, Moral Values, patriots, Resistance, supreme Court, US Attorney
Posted in Articles | 12 Comments »
The Cause – What To Do?
I have been writing about the Bundy Affair since April 12, 2014 and the Burns Chronicles since February 2, 2016. Both evolved out of a common grievance, Public Lands, and the rights that are inherent in them. There are other commonalities, such as some of the players involved in both events and the fact that both had left behind the concept of Civil Disobedience and had entered the realm of Civil Defiance. Those players, unlike most other patriots, had moved along "The Other (not so) Thin Line" to a point where their actions were intended to speak louder than their words.
The first event, in Nevada, the Bundy Affair, was an evolution from an event back in 1993 when Cliven Bundy, supported by hundreds of patriots who went to his ranch to side with him, defied the federal government and first stood for his right to continue both grazing and water permits necessary to continue his ranching business. Cliven Bundy's right to his historical use of the public lands culminated on April 12, 2014, or so we thought, in the "Unrustling" of the cattle that had been rustled by agents of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).
In 2015, in Oregon, Dwight and Steven Hammond had been "resentenced" for a "crime", though they had already served their time. Their "crime" was the use of controlled burn and backfire to do what ranchers and the BLM have done for over a century. The first is to destroy unwanted vegetation, the second, to control an existing fire in order to protect property.
This was not the beginning of their ordeal with the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Their ordeal began almost a decade before Cliven Bundy's first confrontation with an out of control federal government. The FWS had been trying to restrict the Hammond's ranching by cutting of water supply, fencing public corridors, and requiring annual licensing for what were perpetual rights to Public Land Usage. "The Harassment of the Hammonds" dates back to October 1986.
For all intents, the Hammonds were tried, sentenced, served their time, and left prison as free men. The government waited until all of this was done before filing an appeal to the Appellate Court, contending that they should have been sentenced according to the Sentencing Guidelines. Funny, the word guidelines isn't mandatory, simply a guide. But, more on that in a future article.
The resentencing of the Hammonds raised the indignation of some of those players from the Bundy Affair, and others who had, possibly a result of what they witnessed in April 2014, moved further along that "Thin Line". Unable to convince the Hammonds that they should not turn themselves in for the additional 4+ years they would now have to serve, the objective changed to the FWS, the aggressors against the Hammonds.
There had been a planned demonstration in support of the Hammonds scheduled for January 2, 2016, just two days before they were to turn themselves over to the US Marshal Service to begin their second punishment for the first crime. This demonstration, like many others, was Civil Disobedience. However, behind the scenes, a plan of Civil Defiance had been hatched. It was left to those who either went to Burns, Oregon, before or after the January 2 event to decide just how far along that "Thin Line" they had moved. Unfortunately, many who claim that they are "fed up with the Feds" are not fully committed to action. Instead, they chose to act big and criticize what was acted out by those who were more committed and chose to occupy the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge (MNWR), an FWS facility about thirty miles south of Burns, and the adversary of the Hammonds rights for three decades.
For nearly a month, the Civil Defiance brought attention to the country, and the world, that the historical rights of Public Land usage were being trampled upon by the government. The government, possibly absent any legal standing to deal with the occupation of the MNWR, chose to ambush a two vehicle, eight-person convoy going to a public event in John Day, Grant County, north of Burns.
Lying to the Oregon State Police (OSP), the FBI claimed that they were making a "felony stop" (legally, to stop the completion of a felony) and/or to serve an arrest warrant. The warrant, however, was not issued until after seven were arrested and one murdered, while in transit to the event in John Day.
Tags:Ammon Bundy, Bundy, Burns Oregon, courts, demonization, factions, hammond, Honor, Judge Navarro, militia, Moral Values, organization, patriots
May 29, 2017 (Memorial Day)
Memorial Day began as a day of honoring and remembering those soldiers that died in the Civil War. It was practiced beginning in the South in 1866 and the North in 1868. It was a day in which the graves of those soldiers were decorated with flowers, in honor of their sacrifice, and was called Decoration Day.
Recognition as Memorial Day began as early as 1872, though it wasn't commonly used until after World War II. In 1967, it was officially changed to Memorial Day by the government.
It now honors all dead American Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, and Airmen, who died in service to their country, including those who fought for the South.
So, what is a holiday; what does it mean? Well, we can look at the Ten Commandments and get an idea of just what led our Judeo-Christian values to recognize a special day. The Fourth Commandment says, "Thou shalt keep the Sabbath Day holy." That means that the designated day is above all other consideration, on the day so designated.
Whether you hold Saturday or Sunday as the Sabbath is a choice that each of us makes. However, we commonly recognize the last Monday in May to be Memorial Day, and on that day we recognize of the sacrifice of those soldiers; it is to be held above all other considerations.
There is little doubt that those in power have moved our country away from the Constitution that created that government. They have moved the government away from the very reason for those who served, and those who gave their lives for what was intended — and what we fought for.
There are two soldiers that I have particular memories of. First is William "Billy" Prescott. We went through nearly our entire schooling together. Bill was quiet and intelligent, and perhaps the least likely to consider to be a soldier. I found out about Billy's death, Killed in Action, on my first and only visit to the Wall in Washington, D. C. One-hundred and twenty-six of us, the "Prodigy Vets", went to see the Wall, most for the first time, in 1992. Walking down, along the wall, to the apex, then back up the other side, was probably the most emotional event in my life. The magnitude of waste of those lives was beyond my comprehension. Considering that the Vietnam War was nothing that we should have been involved in, rather a consequence of our government gone astray from the principles upon which this country was founded. However, we were naive, and simply did our Country's bidding.
Tags:citizenship, congress, Constitution, government, history, Honor, Military, militia, Moral Values, patriots
Freedom of the Press #13 – Sojourn to Sacramento
Sojourn to Sacramento
Gary Hunt,
This past Friday, April 7, I returned home from a week long visit the Sacramento County Jail. I was in jail based upon a Warrant for my arrest for failing to appear at a show cause hearing on March 10. The Warrant and what led up to it will be the subject of a future article.
I am writing this article to explain a system that, quite frankly, ignores our rights, especially when only accused of a crime. It will give a little insight into life behind bars, at least those of the Sacramento County Jail. I can't say that this compares to the treatment that those currently held in jail in Oregon (Jason Patrick) or Nevada (many still innocent people) are receiving, but, perhaps it will help to understand that they are being treated similarly, or worse.
It will also explain what I have gone through. Now, when I go to Court in Portland, next month, I will be entering the courtroom on the terms that I had to establish. Fortunately, though without a plan going in, the final result is that I achieved a bit more than I could have expected, thanks to Judge Anna Brown.
The Arrest
Around noon on March 30, 2017, a nice, sunny, warm day, here in Los Molinos, California, I received a phone call from FBI Special Agent Catalano. This was the fourth call he had made to me, since back in January when he first provided me a copy from the US Shyster demanding that I cease and desist publishing information obtained from the United States v. Ammon Bundy, et al, discovery evidence. He began by saying, I am here in Los Molinos with the US Marshals, and I suppose you know what this is about." About that time, my wife buzzed me and told me that lunch was ready.
I then asked if it was to arrest me. He affirmed that that was the purpose. I asked if I could have about an hour to explain to my family what was occurring. After conferring with someone on his end, he said that would be okay. I told him that I would call him when I was ready. I must say that I honestly believe, because of the tone of his voice, that SA Catalano did not enjoy his task
I called my team and gave them the simple message, "I am going to be arrested and transported to Sacramento." Please post that on my Facebook pages." I told them that there was no more to report, at this time. Then, I went to the house, planning to do a bit more preparation, after I had eaten.
As I sat down to eat lunch, the task that I had anticipated, though somehow hoped would not occur, became reality. My wife and children know what I do, but our agreement is that my work stays in my office, and out of the house. They had no idea what I had been writing, but that was about ready to explode, big time, as I began, "I am going to be arrested within an hour."
Tags:Ammon Bundy, Anna Brown, Burns Oregon, cops, courts, demonization, government, Harney County, law, patriots, press
Freedom of the Press #10 – Not Served, Again
Not Served, Again
As has been reported by Maxine Bernstein's Tweets (my primary source for keeping track of the doings in the Portland Group 2 trial), I have finally been served with the Order to Show Cause (ECF No. 1901). I say "finally" since the first notice had come from Maxine. Next, I received a FedEx delivery. However, that doesn't satisfy initial service. So, On Wednesday, February 22, I received a call from my favorite FBI personality. SA Matthew Catalano. He is good natured, diligent in his duties, and appears to have not taken a side in this ongoing battle between Judge Anna J. Brown and the United States' chief Shyster, Billy J. Williams, on the one side, and yours truly on the other. I had already made plans for Thursday, and he seemed quite busy with other matters, so we agreed to meet on Friday. When we met, he handed me some paperwork, specifically the Order to Show Cause.
Now, as required, he reported to Portland that it had been delivered (note, I didn't say served), and the Certificate of Service was duly recorded in the Ammon Bundy, et al, trial docket, that afternoon. The text of that Certificate of Service reads as follows:
Pursuant to this Court's February 16, 2017, Order (ECF No. 1900) the government certifies that on February 24, 2017, FBI Special Agent Matthew Catalano met with third party Gary Hunt and personally served Hunt with a copy of the Order to Show Cause (ECF No. 1901). Agent Catalano had previously sent the Order to Hunt by FedEx. Hunt acknowledged that he had already seen and read the Order. Hunt stated that the Order included a time for him to respond to the Order, which he understood to be for civil contempt. Agent Catalano showed Hunt that there was an option for Hunt to call and request a defense attorney, and Hunt acknowledged this. Although Hunt took the copy of the Order to Show Cause, he stated that he was refusing service of the Order.
Now, they did get it right when they stated that I had refused service, though they pointed out that I had taken the Order to Show Cause. I simply want to set the record straight with my notes, taken shortly after the meeting:
Tags:Ammon Bundy, Anna Brown, Burns Oregon, courts, FBI, Harney County, Honor, informants, Judge, judicial tyranny, law, Moral Values, patriots, press, Resistance
Freedom of the Press #6 – "Tilting at Windmills" – Redux
Freedom of the Press #6
"Tilting at Windmills" – Redux
I have noticed over the years, that some believe in quality, as I do, and others believe in quantity. They think that throwing out a massive missive will drown the opposition in, well, paper. It appears this is the new approach by the United States Attorney, and minions, from Portland, Oregon. They have, with their most recent filing (Supplemental Memorandum in Support of Government's Motion For an Order to Show Cause), on February 7, exceeded all my expectations, in terms of quantity. They have cited 30 court decisions. I have reviewed five of the cited cases, though I will comment on more of them. Since their research is of such poor quality, It would be my pleasure to review cases for them in the future. However, if I work for the government, my prices will not be discounted. Considering how poorly their current hired help performs, it just might be worthwhile for them to get it right, for a change.
Now, let's get on with the boring stuff. However, there will be some really good stuff towards the end.
They begin the Memorandum with a statement of what it will address:
1. The District of Oregon is the proper venue for this Court to enforce its own Protective Order against a third party;
2. Third-party Gary Hunt should be held in Civil Contempt of this Court's Orders after he has had an opportunity to appear and Show Cause why he should not be held in contempt;
3. There is a factual basis to conclude by clear and convincing evidence that third party Gary Hunt is aiding and abetting a defendant (or defendants) in this case in violating the Court's original Protective Order (ECF No. 342), the new Order (ECF No. 1691), and the Supplement to the original Protective Order (ECF No. 1692); and
4. There are no prior restraint issues or "press" privilege issues.
So, we will begin with Part I. Under the heading in the Memorandum:
I. The District of Oregon Is the Only Proper Venue for This Court to Enforce Its Own Orders
A. Proper Venue Under the Law
The first case cited is:
Myers v. United States, 264 U.S. 95, 101 (1924). The Supreme Court in Myers held that venue is only proper where the court rendered the decree sought to be enforced.
Well, I did look that one up and here is what I found:
An information charged that plaintiffs in error willfully disobeyed the injunction lawfully issued in equity cause, St. Louis, San Francisco Railway Company, Complainant, v. International Association of Machinists, et al., Defendants, pending in the Western Division of the Western District of Missouri, by attempting, within the Southwestern Division of the same District, to prevent certain railroad employees from continuing at work. The order ran against men on strike, and the cause is treated as one within the purview of the Clayton Act.
Well, that supports my position. The case was in "Western Division of the Western District of Missouri", however, the other jurisdiction mentioned was in the "Southwestern Division of the same District."
Now, that "Clayton Act" does come under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, since it deals with the Sherman Antitrust Act.
Clayton Antitrust Act is an amendment passed by U.S. Congress in 1914 that provides further clarification and substance to the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 on topics such as price discrimination, price fixing, and unfair business practices.
Well, I sought relevance, but did not find. So, let's move on.
Tags:Ammon Bundy, Anna Brown, Burns Oregon, congress, Constitution, courts, demonization, FBI, government, Harney County, Honor, informants, law, patriots, supreme Court, US Attormey
Burns Chronicles No 57 – Collusion or Conspiracy?
Saturday, February 4th, 2017
Burns Chronicles No 57
Collusion or Conspiracy?
On October 27, 2016, shortly after the very just verdict of "Not Guilty" was announced in the Ammon Bundy, et al, Group 1 trial, a meeting was held in the Mark O. Hatfield Federal District Courthouse. The 12 jurors, Judge Anna Brown, and a court reporter, attended the meeting. It lasted about one and a half hours.
It is my understanding that such a meeting is not unusual. However, circumstances surrounding this particular meeting are, to say the least, quite unusual, considering context. That is exactly what we are going to do.
The first irregularity occurred when the Prosecutor moved to have the trial declared "complex", which allowed the Court to circumvent the right to a speedy trial and to break the defendants up into two groups. The first Group (mostly leaders) was tried in September and October 2016, and the second Group to be tried beginning in February 2017. While the delayed trial date was agreeable, as the Defendants needed the additional time to prepare their defense, one drawback is that many of the Defendants were held in custody until the verdict was reached, in the first trial. The latter trial date made the government's case easier, as they had smaller groups to try, and it gave time to elicit plea bargains, thereby reducing the number who would be prosecuted at trial.
Next, during the pre-trial "paper chase", with hundreds of motions filed, answered, and finally ruled on, there is no doubt that bias existed on the part of Judge Anna Brown. Behind the scenes, many of us followed this legal maneuvering for months. It seemed that even when the arguments presented by the defense were well supported, Judge Brown would still rule against the defense and in favor the Prosecution.
During the trial, there were rather strict rules imposed on the defense, especially when they sought to call additional witnesses to testify. Judge Brown ruled that to allow that would be "repetitive". However, the prosecution showed a 1-minute video of approximately twenty of the occupiers firing across a canal. The fact that the Prosecution showed that footage four times, however, was not considered "repetitive".
Finally, and here we get to the meeting, Judge Brown called all of the participating jurors into the meeting, after dismissing the alternate jurors. In that meeting, she explained that she would answer their questions, if they had any. She also asks some questions, and explained that the answers would help the prosecution and the defense. So, just how could it help the defense? The Defense prevailed. It could only help the Prosecution gain insight into the jurors' minds in order to determine what they would need to overcome to obtain guilty verdicts in the Group 2 trial.
Some jurors indicated that had the charges been less serious, like simple "misdemeanor trespass", it would have been much easier to render a guilty verdict.
Let me interrupt, for a moment, and point out that the Judge holds office under Article III (Judicial Branch of Government), and is, in essence, an impartial referee. Her job is to "administer law in a court of justice", "to control the proceedings", and to make "decisions of questions of law or discretion". Her job is not to favor one side over the other, but rather to stand aside, interjecting only to the extent necessary to assure a fair trial.
Tags:Anna Brown, Bundy, Burns Oregon, courts, demonization, FBI, government, Harney County, Honor, Judge, judicial tyranny, jury, law, Moral Values, patriots, Prosecution
The Bundy Affair #20 – The Invisible Witness
Thursday, February 2nd, 2017
The Invisible Witness
I have been so busy writing about the goings on in Oregon that I haven't had much opportunity to consider the situation in Nevada. As I have told those that I been working with regarding the Group 1 trial in Oregon, who have all started concentrating their efforts in Nevada. I told those who I had been working with in Oregon, "You all get to work down where it is warm and sunny, while I'm still stuck up here where there is snow on the ground, and it is cold." Seriously, however, I am in Northern California, about halfway between the two. But, I was spending my time primarily on the Oregon, Ammon Bundy, et al, case.
Then, the government filed a Motion. Upon reading the Motion, I found that the US Attorney has decided to invite me down to Nevada, an offer I couldn't refuse.
On January 27, 2017, the government filed "Government's Motion for Protective Order Regarding Undercover Employee". It is their effort to hide from the defense the identification of an Undercover Employee (UCE).
The invitation is found, beginning on page 9 of that Motion, to wit:
Events subsequently in the courtroom and in the United States v. Ammon Bundy, et al. case in Oregon have shown that the danger to the lone UCE witness in the government's case is particularly great. Although the discovery information in United States v. Bundy was restricted due to a protective order, an associate of the defendants (including some of the seven common defendants in the Nevada case), Gary Hunt, posted discovery material to "out" confidential human sources to his webpage. Litigation is ongoing in the District of Oregon to remove the information from the web. See, e.g., Order Granting in Part Government's Motion to Enforce Protective Order, United States v. Bundy, Case No. 3:16-cr-00051-BR (D. Or. Jan. 11, 2017).
Now, some might think that this doesn't look like an invitation, but, after all, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I see that the United States Government Railroad (USGRR) is in full operation, and flying down the tracks at breakneck speed.
So, getting started in catching up with the USGRR, you will note that they imply a threat when they state that the events in Oregon "have shown that the danger to the lone UCE witness in the government's case is particularly great." On the contrary, they have shown that there is no risk, at all, to the informants in the Oregon occupation — unless you consider that most of the informants have abandoned their old phone numbers, and are not accessible by phone, anymore.
Let's look at some facts about this alleged "danger". On September 21, 2016, AUSA Gabriel, in questioning OSP officer Jeremiah Beckert, asked, "And did you have information about whether the driver [Mark McConnell] was cooperating with the Government?" Beckert answered in the affirmative, and of its own volition, the government hung one of its informants out to face, what, serious bodily harm? Death? Well, that did not happen. And, the government put this informant at risk. That very act disputes the government's entire argument regarding the potential threat to any of the informants.
Tags:Bundy, Bunkerville, Cliven Bundy, Constitution, courts, de jure, demonization, FBI, government, Honor, informants, law, Moral Values, patriots, press, supreme Court, Undercover Agents
Freedom of the Press #5 – "Tilting at Windmills"
Tuesday, January 31st, 2017
Well, it has been almost three weeks since the government's most recent effort to suppress Freedom of the Press. Not really surprising, since they have nothing to go on; they just think that they do. However, Billy J. Williams (aka Don Quixote) and Pamala R. Holsinger (aka Sancho Panza) have spent a bunch of taxpayer's money on "Tilting at Windmills". They just do not seem to believe that the Constitution is the very document that created them, and the government that they represent. Well, it didn't really create them, but it did create the positions that they hold.
Back on January 10, 2017, the government filed the "Government's Supplemental Memorandum in Support of Motion to Enforce Protective Order (1689)". This was discussed in Freedom of the Press #3 – "Contemptuous Postings", published on January 11. That same day, just hours before #3 was published, the Court filed an "Order Granting in Part Government's Motion to Enforce Protective Order (1691)". This, of course, led to my response, on January 12, with Freedom of the Press #4 – The Order. Rather a hectic pace, for three days.
Apparently, the government had some heavy homework, for it wasn't until January 30 that they made their next move. They filed "Government's Motion for an Order to Show Cause (1788)", and, not to be out done, they filed an "Affidavit of FBI Special Agent Ronnie Walker in Support of Government's Motion for an Order to Show Cause (1789)". The Motion (1788) is only 6 pages, but the Affidavit (1789) is 14 pages, 8 of which are actually entering my Article #4 into the record. I sure like it when they expand my readership. Thank you, Don and Sancho.
So, let's look at the Affidavit (1789), first. The first three paragraphs are explanations of Ronnie Walker's qualifications. In that third paragraph, we find this rather curious limitation of her authority:
I am an "investigative or law enforcement officer of the United States" within the meaning of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2510(7), authorized to conduct investigations into alleged violations of federal law.
Now, it says that she is "authorized to conduct investigations into alleged violations of federal law." It does not say that Walker cannot investigate other allegations, but if Walker could, would not Walker have made the point clear. It kinda makes you wonder, since nobody has found the time to provide a statute that I am in violation of. This was first discussed when I received the "Letter- Demand to Cease and Desist", which I reported on in Freedom of the Press #1 – Meeting with the FBI, when "I asked the agent what statute bound me to the Cease and Desist portion of the letter?" I received no reply. Since they have not provided me a statute (federal law), I am just wondering if maybe SA Walker is moonlighting for the US Attorney.
Now, here is the kicker. In the next paragraph in the affidavit, Walker states:
4. This affidavit is intended to show only facts pertinent for the requested motion and does not set forth all of my knowledge about this matter.
So, let's see some facts. In paragraph 15, Walker states that I received:
a Supplement to the original Protective Order, court record #1692, which prohibits any individual or entity from disseminating those materials or any information derived therefrom to any other individual or entity by any means.
Well, that is a fact. Any individual or entity that disseminates those materials or any information derived therefrom to any other individual or entity[,] by any means. Now, that would make almost any person who has read and shared certain of my articles, and presumably, even if you did not read them and only shared them, you have been brought into the "long arm of the Protective Order", and are subject to the very same punishment that they want to try to hang on me. And, as Walker said, that's a fact.
Do not let that scare you, because we still have to see if the Court can find some way to reach out of their jurisdiction and grab me, or you, unless, of course, you live in Oregon. But, even if you do live in Oregon, unless you are party to Ammon Bundy, et al, the trial, which will start, again, with Group 2, on February 14, it would not apply to you, either. The reason I say that it can't reach you is that you have to have aided and abetted a party in the action. That condition exists when two parties work together. We'll touch on that, a little later.
Tags:Ammon Bundy, Burns Oregon, Constitution, courts, FBI, Freedom of the Press, government, Harney County, Honor, informants, intimidation, law, patriots, press, public, US Attroney


As a Mechanical Engineer you will be responsible for supporting and delivering designs for a range of project types and sizes. You will be technically well rounded and able to offer the benefit of your experience to more Mechanical draftsmen within the team. You will be responsible for managing a team of 2-3 draftsmen within a larger team structure led by an Associate. Responsible for meeting with clients, developing and producing reports, specifications and guidance or overseeing several phases of project life cycles, and work closely as a team to ensure we achieve the best results.
You will be self-motivated and confident with excellent interpersonal and communication skills, have a proven track record of exercising technical judgment together with practical knowledge to deliver positive outcomes, you will be collaborative both externally in design teams and internally with peers, and you will be ambitious and energetic, capable of getting the best out of your team.
We are looking for ambitious engineers who wish to develop their career whilst working on an exciting range of projects.
* Excellent communicational skills and the ability to work with other members of the design team.
* Must have initiative, self-motivation and the confidence in his work.


text:
Avec cedram.org
Confluentes Mathematici
Comité de lecture
Tous les tomes en ligne
Derniers fascicules en ligne
Articles à paraître
Afficher les formules en MathML
A propos de MathML
Table des matières de ce fascicule | Article précédent | Article suivant
Davide Rinaldi; Giovanni Sambin; Peter Schuster
The Basic Zariski Topology
Confluentes Mathematici, 7 no. 1 (2015), p. 55-81, doi: 10.5802/cml.18
Article PDF
Class. Math.: 03E25, 03F65, 13A99, 54B35
Résumé - Abstract
We present the Zariski spectrum as an inductively generated basic topology à la Martin-Löf and Sambin. Since we can thus get by without considering powers and radicals, this simplifies the presentation as a formal topology initiated by Sigstam. Our treatment includes closed subspaces and basic opens: that is, arbitrary quotients and singleton localisations. All the effective objects under consideration are introduced by means of inductive definitions. The notions of spatiality and reducibility are characterized for the class of Zariski formal topologies, and their nonconstructive content is pointed out: while spatiality implies classical logic, reducibility corresponds to a fragment of the Axiom of Choice in the form of Russell's Multiplicative Axiom.
[1] Peter Aczel & Michael Rathjen, Notes on Constructive Set Theory, Available from Aczel's webpage, 2008
[2] Bernhard Banaschewski, "The power of the ultrafilter theorem", Journal of the London Mathematical Society 27 (1983), p. 193-202 MR 692524 | Zbl 0523.03037
[3] Francesco Ciraulo, Maria Emilia Maietti & Giovanni Sambin, "Convergence in formal topology: a unifying notion", Journal of Logic and Analysis 5 (2013) no. 2, p. 1-45 MR 3033505 | Zbl 1280.54003
[4] Francesco Ciraulo & Giovanni Sambin, "Finitary formal topologies and Stone's representation theorem", Theoretical Computer Science 405 (2008) no. 1-2, p. 11-23 Article | MR 2454487 | Zbl 1187.54010
[5] Francesco Ciraulo & Giovanni Sambin, "Reducibility, a constructive dual of spatiality", Preprint, Università di Padova (2015)
[6] Thierry Coquand, "Space of valuations", Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 157 (2009), p. 97-109 MR 2499701 | Zbl 1222.03072
[7] Thierry Coquand & Henri Lombardi, "A logical approach to abstract algebra.", Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 16 (2006), p. 885-900 MR 2268347 | Zbl 1118.03059
[8] Thierry Coquand, Henri Lombardi & Peter Schuster, "The projective spectrum as a distributive lattice", Cahiers de Topologie et Géométrie Différentielle Catégoriques 48 (2007), p. 220-228 Numdam | MR 2351269 | Zbl 1131.03035
[9] Thierry Coquand & Henrik Persson, "Valuations and Dedekind's Prague theorem", Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra 155 (2001), p. 121-129 MR 1801410 | Zbl 0983.11061
[10] Thierry Coquand, Giovanni Sambin, J. Smith & Silvio Valentini, "Inductively generated formal topologies", Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 124 (2003), p. 71-106 MR 2013394 | Zbl 1070.03041
[11] Radu Diaconescu, "Axiom of choice and complementation", Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society 51 (1975), p. 176-178 MR 373893 | Zbl 0317.02077
[12] Nicola Gambino & Peter Schuster, "Spatiality for formal topologies.", Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 17 (2007) no. 1, p. 65-80 MR 2311086 | Zbl 1139.03045
[13] N. Goodman & J. Myhill, "Choice implies excluded middle", Mathematical Logic Quarterly 24 (1978) no. 25-30, p. 461-461 Article | MR 509798 | Zbl 0387.03017
[14] Peter T. Johnstone, Stone Spaces., Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press, 1982 MR 698074 | Zbl 0499.54001
[15] Peter T. Johnstone, Sketches of an Elephant: A Topos Theory Compendium, Oxford Logic Guides, Oxford University Press, 2002 Zbl 1071.18001
[16] André Joyal, "Spectral spaces and distributive lattices", Notices of the American Mathematical Society 18 (1971)
[17] André Joyal, "Les théoremes de Chevalley-Tarski et remarques sur l'algèbre constructive", Cahiers de Topologie et Géométrie Différentielle Catégoriques 16 (1976), p. 256-258 Zbl 0354.02038
[18] Henri Lombardi, "Algèbre dynamique, espaces topologiques sans points et programme de Hilbert.", Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 137 (2006), p. 256-290 MR 2182105 | Zbl 1077.03039
[19] Henri Lombardi & Claude Quitté, Algèbre Commutative, Méthodes constructives, Modules projectifs de type fini., Calvage & Mounet, Paris, 2012
[20] Per Martin-Löf, Intuitionistic Type Theory, Notes by Giovanni Sambin of a series of lectures given in Padua, Bibliopolis, Napoli, 1984 MR 769301
[21] Per Martin-Löf & Giovanni Sambin, Generating positivity by coinduction, in The Basic Picture and Positive Topology. New structures for constructive mathematics, Oxford Logic Guides, Clarendon Press, forthcoming MR 1686856
[22] Sara Negri, "Continuous domains as formal spaces", Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 12 (2002), p. 19-52 MR 1887335 | Zbl 0994.06005
[23] Davide Rinaldi, "A constructive notion of codimension", Journal of Algebra 383 (2013), p. 178-196 Article | MR 3037974 | Zbl 1291.13015
[24] Kimmo I. Rosenthal, Quantales and their applications, Pitman Research Notes in Mathematics Series 234, Longman Scientific & Technical, Harlow; copublished in the United States with John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1990 MR 1088258 | Zbl 0703.06007
[25] G. Sambin, Intuitionistic formal spaces - a first communication, in D. Skordev, éd., Mathematical Logic and its Applications, Plenum, 1987, p. 187-204 MR 945195 | Zbl 0703.03040
[26] Giovanni Sambin, "Some points in formal topology", Theoretical Computer Science 305 (2003) no. 1-3, p. 347-408 MR 2013578 | Zbl 1044.54001
[27] Giovanni Sambin, The Basic Picture and Positive Topology. New structures for constructive mathematics, Oxford Logic Guides, Clarendon Press, Oxford, forthcoming MR 1686856
[28] Giovanni Sambin & Giulia Battilotti, "Pretopologies and a uniform presentation of sup-lattices, quantales and frames", Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 137 (2006) no. 1-3, p. 30-61 MR 2182097 | Zbl 1077.03036
[29] Giovanni Sambin & Silvia Gebellato, A preview of the basic picture: a new perspective on formal topology, in Selected papers from the International Workshop on Types for Proofs and Programs, TYPES '98, Springer-Verlag, 1999, p. 194-207 MR 1853605 | Zbl 0953.03069
[30] Peter Schuster, "Formal Zariski topology: positivity and points", Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 137 (2006) no. 1-3, p. 317-359 MR 2182108 | Zbl 1088.03050
[31] Peter Schuster, "The Zariski spectrum as a formal geometry", Theoretical Computer Science 405 (2008), p. 101-115 MR 2454496 | Zbl 1154.03038
[32] Peter Schuster, "Induction in algebra: a first case study", Logical Methods in Computer Science 9 (2013) no. 3 MR 3109604 | Zbl 1277.03065
[33] Inger Sigstam, "Formal spaces and their effective presentations", Archive for Mathematical Logic 34 (1995) no. 4, p. 211-246 MR 1356538 | Zbl 0829.03026
[34] Marshall Harvey Stone, "Topological representations of distributive lattices and Brouwerian logics", Časopis pro pěstování matematiky a fysiky 67 (1938) no. 1, p. 1-25 Zbl 0018.00303 | JFM 63.0830.01
[35] Steven Vickers, Topology via logic, Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science 5, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1989 MR 1002193 | Zbl 0668.54001
Editées par l'Institut Camille Jordan
CNRS - UMR 5208
Et l'Unité de Mathématiques Pures et Appliquées
eISSN : 1793-7434

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Bob Huffman's Kustom 1965 Chevy Wows 'Em At 2019 GNRS In Pomona - Dr Wong - Emporium of Tings. Web Magazine.
Many of the coolest cars at GNRS are not in the main hall or cost a zillion dollars.
Case in point, David Novela's uber bitchin', kustom 1965 Chevrolet Impala built by Tom Chafin for Bob Huffman in 1967.


DevResults provides a number of easy-to-use visualizations and reports for your indicators. Under Results > Overview, you can see thumbnail graphs of indicator results. Click on an indicator for more visualization options. If your site doesn't have data yet, use demo.devresults.com.
The units and legend are included automatically.
Use the left-hand configuration panel to modify the graph.
Select a disaggregation to display.
Toggle between incremental and cumulative views of indicator results.
Change the color pallet with the pallet dropdown.
Use the timescale toggle to label the x-axis with either reporting period names or the calendar year.
Filter the data in your graph to only results for particular activities or particular geographies.
Any graph can be downloaded as a PNG file.
The grid tool is a pivot table that enables you to rearrange the same data into many different summary reports.
The top row lets you apply filters to choose which indicator results you want to include.
The second row lets you choose how to display the data by rows and columns. You can subdivide the rows or columns. If the indicator has targets, you can include them alongside the actuals.
The report can be downloaded to Excel.
Note: Grid will soon be replaced by Matrix.
You can zoom in on the map to examine results for each geographic place.
In the left-hand panel, select a base map.
If your data is disaggregated geographically, you can aggregate the information to larger administrative divisions using the "reporting level" dropdown.
The "result type" dropdown lets you choose whether to view data for a single reporting period (incremental), or all data up to that point (cumulative).
You can filter the data in your graph to only results for particular activities or particular geographies.
The reporting period slider lets you choose which timepoint to view.
The map can be downloaded as a PNG file.
Pie charts might be useful for examining disaggregations, but cannot capture change over time.
Choose: which disaggregation to plot, whether to show or hide the legend, your preferred color palette, and the donut or pie option.
Filter the data in your graph to only results for particular activities or particular geographies and choose which timepoint to view.
The visualization can be downloaded as a PNG file.
DevResults' main query tool, Pito, allows you to make grid reports of multiple indicators.
Use the results frameworks on the left to choose one or more indicators to include in the report. The indicators are shown in italics. Disaggregations, if applicable, are selected under each indicator.
Then, design the report using the same tools as the grid visualization (see above).
If you see the warning, "your report contains uncategorized data," you're trying to divide the data in ways that it can't be divided. Most commonly, you might be trying to view data per activity that was not reported per activity, or to view data per location that was not reported per location. For example, an indicator reported per region cannot be viewed per location.
Resolve the issue by changing your row and column selections to only divide the data in a way compatible with how it was reported.
Saving a report gives it a unique URL (or web address) that you can send to any DevResults user with access to this page.
Any time you visit the report, it will show updated information if data has been edited or added.
You can view any of your or your colleagues' reports at any time.
To modify someone else's report, first make a copy by going to the "saved reports" menu and choosing "copy report" and then "rename report". Next, click on the configuration gear to make any desired changes.


Census rosters are required to be submitted in order for the District to remain in compliance with California Education Code and Title 5. The roster may be submitted on the first day of class until the census date. If you do not submit your census roster you will not be able to access your final grade roster and students will be billed and responsible for any/all fees and may receive a grade. Once you login to WebAdvisor, please be sure to follow the step-by-step instructions to view your class roster/wait list.
Login at https://wa.gcccd.edu and click on "Faculty"
From the faculty menu, click on "Census Drop Roster"
Select the course by checking the box next to the course.
and click on submit. Check the "Inactive" box for each student that is no longer attending your class. Once you have verified the appropriate students have been "checked" check the box "Check to confirm inactive students have been appropriately marked" and click on "Submit"
Congratulations! You have successfully submitted your census roster. If you made a mistake, please contact Vanessa Saenz in the Admissions and Records office.


text:
Michael Kazin/
Newt Gingrich, America's Worst Historian
Newt Gingrich's presidential campaign is finished, although it may be a few months before he admits what nearly everyone who follows politics already knows. In the meantime, the loquacious fellow who once spearheaded the conservative insurgency, ran the House of Representatives, and jousted with President Bill Clinton has now become the butt of predictable jokes about his hefty debts, his three marriages, and the staffers who were smart enough to get off his sinking ship.
But, unlike other failed politicians, the former Speaker and soon-to-be former candidate still enjoys a reputation—at least among prominent conservatives—as a figure of learning and insight. In May, Eric Cantor swooned that Gingrich "has always been an ideas man, and I'm sure will provide a lot of positive input in the [presidential] debate." "No question Newt is an ideas machine, and he'll add intellectual heft to the debate," added Mark McKinnon, chief media adviser to both of George W. Bush's presidential campaigns. Indeed, Gingrich's many books of fiction and non-fiction and his ability to talk at length about subjects ranging from technology to space travel to dinosaurs have won him a kind of intellectual respect from his ideological peers that a Bachmann or Perry will never achieve. What's more, the man has a Ph.D in history and taught the subject for eight years at a Georgia college.
Is the reputation deserved? I am not qualified to judge Gingrich's knowledge of pterodactyls or the merits of establishing a colony on Mars. However, I have just completed his latest book of history: A Nation Like No Other: Why American Exceptionalism Matters. And I can say, with absolute confidence, that it may be the most inaccurate, least intellectual book about our nation's past I have ever read.
LET'S START WITH his premise. One can certainly make a decent argument that the United States is a nation with exceptional ideals and/or a history distinctive for its economic success—whether that success was due more to brilliant entrepreneurs and industrious workers or to the good fortune of settlers and their progeny who conquered a vast land graced with abundant natural resources, a small native population, and an ocean away from European wars. But, to make that argument convincingly, one would have compare those ideals and that history with those of other nations. After all, something is exceptional only in contrast to some other things.
Gingrich, however, has no time for anything but American history. He merely declares, repeatedly, that the U.S. is different and better than any other place on earth and expects readers to take him on faith. Only America, he asserts, is dedicated to individual freedom, to limited government, to human equality and "to the profound religious principle that recognizes God as the ultimate authority over any government." The French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen? The British tradition of divided powers between the monarch and Parliament? The Iranian and Saudi theocracies? Newt the politician-historian seems to have missed all of these.
Meanwhile, in order to squeeze every big event in America's past into his laudatory narrative, Gingrich makes some statements that anyone who's read a high-school history textbook could easily refute. In his view, the Civil War "initially centered around constitutional questions," none of which he mentions. This is a deeply flawed, and bizarrely mild, way to describe the passions that accompanied debates over the Fugitive Slave Act, expanding slavery into the territories, and accepting Lincoln's victory in the 1860 election.
And how can one respond to the statement, "Every time America has strayed from the proposition that all men are created by God, and that they are therefore equal, great suffering and turmoil has ensued"? As usual, Gingrich declines to offer any examples of such "times." The fact that, as Lincoln put it, the partisans of the Union and those of the Confederacy "[b]oth read the same Bible, and pray[ed] to the same God;and each invoke[d] His aid against the other" might have given Gingrich pause. But he does not allow facts to get in the way of his dogma.
Gingrich is also fond of making contradictory assertions that seem designed to give the writers for Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert an easy day at the office. The welfare state, he announces, "is incompatible with human nature because it does not view American citizens as individuals with inherent dignity and rights." This comes several pages after the author has praised Antonin Scalia's dissent in Lawrence v. Texas, in which the conservative justice defended a law that forbade any individual in the Lone Star State from having gay sex.
Finally, when Dr. Gingrich condemns the long reach of the federal state, he actually undermines his own argument for American exceptionalism. The twentieth century, he declares, was "the American century"—just as the previous one had been "dominated by Britain," which then allowed "two world wars and two generations of socialism" to bring it down. (He omits the loss of a global empire as a causal factor, but no matter.) Yet Gingrich bewails the fact that, throughout most of this star-spangled century, Americans kept electing fans of "big government" to run the nation: Progressives, New Dealers, and Great Society liberals who, together, established "massive" programs that ran up the national debt and damaged the economy by increasing taxes. "The American entitlement system," Gingrich intones, "is, essentially, a federally mandated wealth transfer system from one group of people to another." How did the U.S. stay so exceptional with such evil class warriors in charge? Gingrich doesn't explain.
In the 1990s, Gingrich demonstrated a certain skill at political combat and a certain talent for translating right-wing polemics into promises of a better future. But, just as he is now incapable of running a credible campaign, he can't make any sense of the history of the country he loves.
Michael Kazin's latest book, American Dreamers: How the Left Changed a Nation, will be published in August. He teaches history at Georgetown University.
Michael Kazin
Michael Kazin's most recent book is What It Took to Win: A History of the Democratic Party. He is a professor of history at Georgetown University.
Eric Cantor, Not Even Past, America, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Mark McKinnon, Georgia, Newt Gingrich, S START, House Of Representatives


Whether you're an ecommerce pro looking for new products to sell on Shopify or just starting an ecommerce business, you are going to love the simplicity of the Printify app.
Since we're a Shopify print on demand drop shipping service – order production and shipping are all automated. This means Shopify integration makes it very simple to publish new products to your Shopify ecommerce store. Furthermore, dropshipping eliminates the need for warehouse storage space, production, etc.
What is Printify and how do I add it to my Shopify store?
Printify is a Print on Demand Drop Shipping service in the Shopify App Store. In a nutshell, we offer a great software solution that connects your Shopify store with the best print providers, so your customers get the products they want, when they want them. Create your own custom products and start selling in your Shopify store. Gain instant access to a network of bigshot print providers in the US and the UK. For example: ArtGun, T Shirt and Sons, Fifth Sun and others.
Choose any brand from our wide selection – get the highest quality and the best prices. Choose your favorite products from our 100+ custom product range. In addition, you can make them truly your own with our limitless customization options. Use our Mockup Generator to create your own custom T-shirts, custom phone cases and more. Simply upload your design, choose product variants, add several layers and finally get access to stunning high definition Mockups – it's for free. Then easily publish products to Shopify.
For those of you using the WordPress Plugin for WooCommerce, you can easily link your WooCommerce Store in your Printify account.
First of all, it's easy. With Print on Demand you save time and money. That's because there's no need for huge investments, no need for storage space or inventory. Furthermore, you pay only after you sell, you never go out of stock and you never have unsold products – the kind which usually end up as Christmas presents for your relatives. With Printify's technology you get stunning product images for your store – and the creation process is fast and simple. You also have automated Print on Demand order fulfillment and shipping – which means that you have a lot more time on your hands to focus on your designs and growth. Simply Print on Demand with the Shopify Print on Demand Drop Shipping service.


Praise is a choice, not a feeling. It's easy to associate emotions with praise, because praise ushers into your life the manifest presence of God, which often prompts deep feelings of gratitude and joy.
My worship of God is my acknowledgement and gratitude for what He does and who He is. When I face difficulty I can still praise God for who He is – His faithfulness, His love, His power, His presence. Knowing who He is gives me faith to know what He will do.
No matter what you may be facing today, don't let the enemy steal your song. Anger can't remain where worship abides. Depression must give way to the joy of the Lord. God's peace and presence awaits your decision to enter His gates with thanksgiving and praise.
Praise is not merely your gift to God; it is God's gift to you.
← As Long As You Are In Charge, You Are god.


Our laundered linen sleeveless top has an open V neckline and placket trim detail with central pleat enhancements in a sleeveless fit - perfect for off-duty everyday dressing.
Open V neckline with placket trim.
Back yoke with central pleats.


text:
Everything becomes whole
I was sent the link to this video a few weeks ago and, having watched it a few times now, I'm still undecided about it. I'm just not sure it works.
Here's the text of the email I received introducing the artist and the video:
"I wanted to introduce you to the new video from Billboard-acclaimed singer/songwriter, Sarah Fimm, for the song "Everything Becomes Whole".
The video was inspired by real-life accounts of violence against women; whose end result is a visually haunting and emotional short film. The video depicts a relationship that quickly turns from loving to abusive, with the male character overpowering and physically harming the female character. Sarah's hope is to shine light on the issue, and create a call-to-action that inspires others to get involved with organizations determined to bring an end to the issue.
Currently, Sarah is working with both the International Justice Mission and the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, to inspire viewers of the video to get involved and make a difference."
And here's the video: (Trigger warning)
Like I said, I'm not sure what I think about this: I'm not convinced it works, but then I also think the film's probably a bit too arty for my tastes. The song's growing on me though.
Ingrid Murray says:
Less is more. Imagery upon imagery tends to overwhelm rather than open the mind.
RapeNeverFunny says:
Yes it seems a bit too busy to me.
Emily Blackburn says:
Hmm. If I didn't know before watching that the video was supposed to be about domestic violence, I don't think I'd figure it out by myself. I would probably have thought it was just arty-farty, and wouldn't have realised that the depictions of violence and the power dynamic were there as a message.
It reminds me of the Nick Cave/ Kylie Minogue video for Where The Wild Roses Grow, which is basically titillating aesthetic fake snuff. If you hadn't told us there was a critical pro-feminist message behind this, I don't think I would have seen it. I would probably have read the artist's intentions as being quite the opposite. It doesn't build up a picture of the woman's subjectivity. It doesn't seem to be from her point of view.
So after the sinister Derren Brown lookalike another (nice) dude comes along and rescues our helpless victim? Oh and nul points for equating wheelchair user with "captive"….
Frankly I think it's bollocks, and I'm not keen on the song either.
I don't get the whole floating down the river in a bath thing…..
DaveSquirrel says:
I am with the consensus here, in that I would not have figured out that it was supposed to be an anti-dv message. Frankly, it just looks like artsy woman-torture porn.
If someone is going to do the anti-dv message in this type of platform, then the 'consequences' element has to be 1) present and 2) obvious/strong. And, in doing anti-dv subjects, less is actually more, rather than long, lingering gruesome shots. It lacked adequate contrast, either contrast with outside appearances, or contrast life before/after. I think there was some attempt at this, but it was put in backwards (the creepy dude, same dude?) pawing at her at the end. So how the narrative comes off is that he does all these bad things, and THEN he is all smoochy, which comes off as more apologetic for the cycle of violence. The effect is the opposite of intended.
MariaS says:
If a creative project is to effectively raise awareness of violence/abuse it has give voice to the victims/survivors – either directly or on their behalf and with their consent if possible – precisely because the purpose and process of their victimisation was intended to silence or erase them, one way or another. It also has to avoid too directly or explicitly depicting the violence and abuse inflicted on them because there's a danger of calling forth voyeurism rather than empathy within the viewer, making abuse into a spectacle, and also out of care for viewers who have survived similar abuse. I don't know how far this song and video achieves the first consideration, but that is at least the intent – according to Sarah Fimm's website the song and video are inspired by the words of victims of trafficking, and intended to raise awareness of trafficking. I think it does in fact do fairly well with the second consideration, and without any context I personally would have identified it clearly as intending to depict the experience of a woman in an abusive situation. That several people here didn't is obviously a problem – maybe to Fimm's fans and fans of goth/metal music & aesthetics her intent may be clearer.
The video seems quite typical for the music genre, artiness is par for the course – nightmarish, dark, dissonant imagery, with the symbolism laid on a bit thick. Disembodied dolls heads? Being in a straitjacket? Rotting fruit? Floating like Ophelia & appearing to be dead? Not terribly original but there's a reason why all that imagery resonates in creative representations of women's experiences of abuse and violence. The use of the dolls in particular I found hackneyed and naive for example, but at the same time the idea of women turned into dolls or puppets, being dehumanised, with no will or mind, of being perfect use-objects is also still a really effective way of describing the real intent of predatory and objectifying men (a lot of Lynx adverts really evoke this for me).
Also refreshing in that usually this kind of video imagery is used to convey dudely angst or sensationalist horror – makes a change that it is used to convey the horror and entrapment of an abusive relationship. I disagree that there's ambiguity – the scenes that look affectionate and romantic are intercut with the scenes of him drugging her, and I'd read that as portraying the affection as a facade for an abusive reality.
There's no resolution, no rescue in the video – her appearing dead in the bath in the river, and the headless doll floating down the river at the end, seem to represent the woman's fear/expectation of what will happen to her. The recurring lyric (which I had to look up because I can never hear lyrics properly) is "It's in the death of yourself / that everything becomes whole" – it and the video seem to me to convey a sense of being trapped, abused and helpless, and a tension between struggling to survive and resist with no apparent way out versus the prospect that resolution to an unbearable situation will only be found in the death of that resisting self – either by psychological acceptance/accommodation of/with the use-object role she is being forced into, or by literal death, at her own or her abuser's hands.
Agree with you Polly that using the wheelchair to symbolise helplessness, and amputation as metaphor too, is a thoughtless fail.
I don't feel that the woman in the video is sexually objectified. The video avoids exposing her body and mostly avoids actually depicting her being abused. (Which is a mercy and in stark contrast to numerous other things I've watched where the fact that a villain is shown sexually assaulting a woman or threatening to do so is used to convey how evil and repulsive he is, while eroticising the victimisation of the woman for the benefit of the viewer – e.g the films Sin City and 300 spring immediately to mind as having particularly blatant examples of this). Instead it's implied and symbolised – e.g. when the man bites into the apple, and when he is shown drugging her and is briefly touching her torso. The drugging could be meant to be literal or it could be symbolic of the idea that he is doing things to her against her will, a stand-in for non-consensual actions not shown.
Whether the video is from her point of view is debatable – perhaps it could be best described as observing her situation – but what it does is depict her situation as clearly oppressive. Her fear and despair are obvious, her terror of the man, his exercising power over her and drugging her portray his actions as unambiguously abusive.
The Nick Cave/Kylie Minogue video for Where the Wild Roses Grow is a good comparison – I just went and rewatched it (ugh, it starts with a close up panning up Kylie's thighs):
I think that Everything Becomes Whole does well at avoiding the problems that there are in Where The Wild Roses Grow. The latter romanticises the murder of the woman in the video, is sung/shown from the killer's perspective, and is pure fetishisation and equivalencing of dead woman==desirable woman. Although it's a duet, the victim's verses & point of view only serve, until her very last line, to show that she regards her relationship with the killer as a romantic one (had to look up the lyrics for this song too and omg are they creepy). Throughout she is depicted in a very passive way, not only when she's lying prone on the riverbank or in the river, but also even when she's walking and singing she is wholly within the consuming gaze of the man/killer/viewer. There is no resistance, no fear, no agitation – everything even when she's represented as beautifully dead (yet singing) is bright, sunny, idealised. The man touches her body lying in the water and we see him doing this far more lingeringly, far more intrusively, than in the Everything Flows video. When the woman lies on the riverbank in the sunshine, there's no actual contrast or dissonance in the dual possiblities that she's lying there because she's dead or she's lying there for sex – for the killer and for the viewer the difference is disturbingly immaterial. (The Everything Becomes Whole video makes a horror story of its scenario, and as in a horror story the viewer identifies with and roots for the victim, desires her escape – when we see her floating down the river, we're not encouraged to enjoy how her stillness facilitates our visual consumption of her, but to despair at the bad outcome we/she feared). While in Where the Wild Roses Grow the act of violence is not shown (only suggested by showing the man's hand clutching the stone he'll use as a weapon), unlike in Everything Becomes Whole there is no other hint of his violence or abusiveness – the absence serves not to spare the viewer or protect the dignity of the victim, but to make it less problematic to see from the killer's perspective – to facilitate denial, to romanticise what he does.
I'm not familiar with the genre MariaS, so I probably am at a disadvantage there. But I have big issues with what I'm going to call 'victim chic' for want of a better expression. I think the problem with this is that it doesn't focus on the perpetrator, but basically seems to actually celebrate/fetishise/romanticise suffering and powerlessness. I've said it before, and I'm going to keep on saying it, that's a pretty weird message for feminism to send out.
« Petition UK government to sign convention 16 days and counting »


Tyron Brown has extensive litigation, arbitration and other dispute resolution experience in complex litigation. His experience includes business, commercial and construction litigation including contract disputes, product liability, negotiable instruments, UCC Law, business torts, unfair trade practices, business fraud, and civil RICO. Ty has successfully represented some of the most recognizable Fortune 500 companies in lawsuits involving these legal fields. For many years now, Ty has also represented the nation's largest minority construction company. In addition, Ty is experienced in and handles all matters involving architects, engineers and construction managers. He also handles litigation with property managers, marketing consultants, business brokers, business managers and advertisers.
Ty represents clients in a proactive manner by keeping them apprised of best practices and new and developing law that may affect the client, and by assisting clients in resolution of disputes and potential disputes at an early stage. When a client is involved in litigation or arbitration, he vigorously represents the client in a professional, well-prepared manner. He personally meets with potential witnesses, visits sites that are at issue in cases, and researches every possible avenue to best present his clients' positions in cases. Ty's dedication to the law was recognized by Judges who awarded him the 2006 Attorney of the Year by the Judicial Council of the Gate City Bar Association.


text:
COVID XBB.1.5 Variant: Experts Tell People to "Be Careful" and Not Go Outside if They Don't Have To
The new Covid version of XBB is not a problem for India. 1.5 As 90% of its eligible population has been vaccinated and 30–40% have received booster doses, said Dr. M. Wali, a doctor at Sir Ganga Ram Hospital in New Delhi.
1.5 As 90% of its eligible population has been vaccinated and 30–40% have received booster doses, said Dr. M. Wali, a doctor at Sir Ganga Ram Hospital in New Delhi.
But at the same time, Dr. Wali asked people to "be careful" and keep their older relatives and children away from others. He also told people not to go outside unless they had to. He told people to "act like they should in Covid and, most importantly, put on a mask."
Dr. Wali stressed how important immunity is in fighting the virus. He said that a booster dose, strong immunity, the initial infection, and vaccination all work together to make the virus less dangerous. People who are infected only need to be kept apart and have samples of their DNA sent to a lab so that their genomes can be sequenced. They do not need to go to a hospital.
Dr. Wali said that the three foreigners who came to Gujarat by plane from China and Australia with the Covid virus and were found to be healthy were from China, Australia, and the United States. In Rajkot, it was found that a woman and her fiance were both sick. Both of them were coming from other countries with their two-year-old children.
China's Top Health Agency Will No Longer Publish Every Day Covid Case Numbers Rise as Infections Rise
As COVID-19 Cases Rise Again, China Increases the Number of Cremations!!
All international travelers from China, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, and Thailand who are going to India must now submit RT-PCR reports before they leave. From January 1, 2023, on, you will also have to upload a report to the Air Suvidha website.
Also, all international travelers were given random 2% tests when they arrived in India, no matter where they had come from. People said that the test should have been done three days after the trip to India began. The decision was made because of how COVID-19 was changing around the world, especially in the countries listed above.
What Did Alia Bhatt Talk About Her Daughter in the Recent Interview? Let's See!!
Google Unveils Full TV Control Capabilities Within Its Home App To Several Users!!
"During Boarding at Delhi, One Passenger Behaved in an Unruly and Inappropriate…
Union Law Minister "Kiren Rijiju" Comes Amid Ongoing Disputes Over the…
A Spokeswoman for the Us State Department Remarked: "On a BBC Documentary on Pm…
Students in Karnataka Are Petitioning the Supreme Court for the Right to Wear the…


A site with a good selection of bingo variants and stacks of cheap games.
Betfred Bingo offers you an extensive selection of traditional and themed bingo games, including Cash Cubes, Rainbow Riches, and Lucky Numbers Bingo. There's a varied selection of side games to compliment your gaming experience, a mobile offering which allows you to play for the same prizes as desktop players, and promotions where you can win mammoth cash prizes, as well as take advantage of discounted game cards and bonus deals. But, is it the bookies' favourite to win?
The BetFred Bingo homepage is packed with useful information thanks to its latest redesign. It allows you to see the welcome offer, promotional highlights, and links to sections of the site such as recent winners, bingo rooms, side games, and the help pages. The entire website uses Betfred's blue, red, and white brand colours, and there are colourful images that convey a genuine sense of fun. Plus, the Virtue Fusion-powered lobby makes finding your favourite types of games a breeze.
Betfred Bingo provides 24/7 support via Live Help (N.B., look for the tab at the bottom-left of any page), email, telephone, and post.
A key reason to sign up at Betfred Bingo is so that you can claim a welcome bonus of £30 when you deposit and spend just £10 on bingo cards. Better still, there are no wagering requirements whatsoever, and that's a rarity in the online gaming industry.
The majority of promotions are generic Virtue Fusion offers that can be found at multiple sites. Although it's a shame that there aren't more unique offers and brand artwork, the promotions do cover pretty much everything that bingo players enjoy, such as big-money games, value nights, guaranteed giveaways, penny games, and free games.
Betfred Bingo is a site that buzzes without being overcrowded, so there's always a good atmosphere in the rooms. We found chat hosts in abundance, all of whom were eager to answer any questions in between running chat games.
If you prefer to play in networked rooms, look out for Virtue Fusion's BingoLinx games as they aren't just great fun to take part in, but also offer the biggest prizes. The Mini Money Room is a good place to go for bargain ticket offers, and if you want to try out some exclusive game variants, simply stop by the Cash Cubes, Rainbow Riches, and Lucky Numbers Bingo rooms.
If you look out for the "Mobile Bingo" tab on the main menu, you can find out how to play the many different bingo game variants, scratch cards, and slots on your mobile device. There's no need to download any software or app as you can play via the no-download mobile website using the same username and password as you do on a desktop.
There's a good supply of bingo rooms on offer, including the popular variants that come as part of Virtue Fusion's software. It's just a shame that there aren't more exclusive rooms such as the site's After Hours Club to make Betfred Bingo stand out from the other sites on the Virtue Fusion network. However, free and cheap games are plentiful, as are jackpot games, and with the BingoLinx specials, you've got better chances of winning generous cash prizes.
Although though the slots selection is impressive (and you can access even more by visiting Betfred's Casino, Games, and Vegas sites through the main menu using your bingo account), there are no exclusive slots as yet.
You can make deposits and withdrawals to and from your account using Visa Debit, Visa Electron, Maestro, Visa Credit, Neteller, Paypal, Skrill, Paysafecard, Ukash, bank transfer, or by visiting any of Betfred's shops. The minimum deposit and withdrawal amounts are £5 for most payment options, and the most you can withdraw is £10,000. The operator aims to process withdrawal requests within 48 hours of receiving them.
Betfred Bingo has a VIP programme that all funded members can enjoy. It includes six levels (Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum, Sapphire, and Diamond), and all of them allow you to swap the loyalty points you earn through spending real money on bingo games and certain side games for bonus funds or cash.
While the structure of the VIP programme is well explained, there don't appear to be many advantages of moving up the levels bar having to spend less to earn additional loyalty points.
Luckily, there are some other perks available, although they are listed as promotions. For example, every friend you refer to the site earns you a £15 bonus when they register and spend £5 on game cards. You'll also receive a surprise birthday bonus to give you even more reason to celebrate on your special day.
Betfred Bingo is backed by a trusted name in the betting world that also has an excellent reputation for its customer service. The varied bingo variants and a profusion of slots and side games, as well as rooms that open around the clock, mean that there's never a dull moment. The welcome bonus which comes with no wagering requirements gets a big thumbs up from our reviews team. And, although we'd like to see some Betfred-exclusive promotions sitting alongside the Virtue Fusion ones, it's not a deal-breaker.
Have you played at Betfred Bingo? Leave a review and share your experience with thousands of other players.
Never miss out on the latest news and offers. Favourite Betfred Bingo today!


Wrist watches are our most commonly found watch today, merging functionality and fashion in so many different variations that each person can find a number of watches that accent their personal style. Watches worn on the wrist were first seen during the late 1700s as a women's accessory, and were found more frequently by the mid-1800s in men's sizes. However, it was not until the 1920s that wrist watches for both genders really became popular, and heralded the phasing out of pocket watch production for most companies.
The majority of the wrist watches you will find here on the PM Time Service web site will typically have been produced from the 1890s thru the 1970s, with a small part of our catalog, the quartz watches, being made from the 1970s until today.


text:
ElevenWarr Review-what should you need to know
If you love Ohio State sports, you've probably heard of Eleven Warr. The website covers every aspect of Ohio State athletics, from recruiting to NCAA news. In addition to game previews, Eleven Warr is a great resource for any sports fan. Here are some reasons why you'll want to check out this site:
Eleven Warr is a sports blog
Eleven Warriors is a great sports blog dedicated to Ohio State University. Started three years ago, it is now one of the most popular blogs for Ohio State sports news. Eleven Warriors boasts upwards of one million unique monthly visitors and four million page views per month, with only eight other sites garnering more traffic. Eleven Warr is also a great place for general news about Ohio State basketball. It is updated frequently with news about the Buckeyes and the team.
This sports blog is run by a college student who is a huge fan of the Ohio State Buckeyes. They cover everything from the recruiting process to game previews and season reviews. There are also a lot of video stories to keep readers engaged and informed. Many of the contributors to Eleven Warr are former Buckeye players who have an extensive knowledge of Ohio State athletics. They also provide a newsletter with the latest news and analysis of the Buckeyes.
It covers all aspects of Ohio State athletics
Eleven Warr is a comprehensive sports website that provides fans with news, information, and updates on all aspects of Buckeye athletics. You can also participate in a Buckeye fan forum, access game-day news, and find ticket information for games. The site is independent and is not affiliated with The Ohio State University or the athletic department. If you're a fan of Ohio State athletics, Eleven Warr is a must-read!
Eleven Warr has a sports section and a podcast, "The Guys from Columbus." This is the ultimate resource for Ohio State fans, and their podcast features a weekly column by Chris Chip Brammer. This site offers a range of information, from recruiting updates to season reviews. The sports section has numerous video segments that will keep you updated about every aspect of Ohio State athletics. Also, they feature high-quality writers who cover all aspects of the Buckeyes.
It covers recruiting
If you love Ohio State University sports and want to know the latest in college football, basketball, volleyball, and more, check out Eleven Warr. The website has all the latest news and information about the Buckeyes and NCAA as a whole. Eleven Warr is also full of articles about other Ohio State sports. Its writers are top-notch and enjoy expounding on sports. Its articles are also very informative.
The content on Eleven Warriors covers the latest in college football, basketball, and recruiting. With a large video section, recruiting news, and a column written by Chris Chip Brammer, you can't go wrong with this site. It also covers off-day activities, such as recruiting. And if you're a fan of the Buckeyes, you can also check out their live streaming world series games!
It covers NCAA news
If you love college football, ElevenWarr is a great site to check out for all the latest news. With an exclusive video segment and a section from Chris Chip Brammer, the site has something for every football fan. It has everything you need to know about Ohio State football, from recruiting to game coverage. You can also sign up for their podcast for more insider news on the Buckeyes. But what makes this website unique?
While most college football websites are focused on big-name teams, Eleven Warr covers every team sport. The website is written by former Ohio State football player Chris Chip Brammer, who covers the entire college football landscape. In addition to writing about each game, the site also has a calendar of Buckeye events. And because ElevenWarr is part of Fox Sports, you can find all of the latest news about the Buckeyes.
It covers women's soccer
While many people may not be familiar with the Ohio State women's soccer program, Eleven Warr is a great resource to keep up with the latest news. The site is regularly updated, which is helpful if you are a Buckeyes fan, but it's also great for recruiting purposes. ElevenWarr's staff discusses athletics on a daily basis, and there's also a podcast available.
The ElevenWarr website is the most comprehensive sports site for all things Ohio State athletics. They cover everything from recruiting and players to the World Series and everything in between. Their team-specific blog covers everything from off-field activities to major events. You can subscribe to their email newsletter to stay up to date with all of the latest news, so you don't miss a thing. The site's quality content is unbeatable and is a great source for news.
READ MORE: Roblox Avatar Ideas – what should you need
Tags: ElevenWarrElevenWarr 2022
How To Login To Disneyplus.Com Login Begin | Login to DisneyPlus
Alternatives to Emovies IO
Mini Tv Quiz – Enter the Amazon Mini LED TV
by steve cage
Craigslist Portland Motorcycles – Buying A Motorcycle
Videogameoo Reviews : All you need to know It 2022
Sneaky link roblox id – How to Bypass the Roblox ID Code
Valuable Tips in Installing Bathroom Fan Replacement Under Warranty
Zenith Defy Skyline Review – What should you need to know about


text:
William Mattar > Practice Areas > Self-Driving Car Accident Attorney > Liability in a Driverless Car Accident
Liability in a Driverless Car Accident
In 2018, the first pedestrian fatality involving a driverless car occurred in Tempe, Arizona. An investigation into the car accident determined that a self-driving Volvo, being tested by the rideshare company Uber, struck and killed a pedestrian who walked into the road. At the time of the crash, driving assistance technology was activated, and the woman behind the wheel did not have her eyes on the road.
Since this tragic accident, there has been discussion about who is responsible after a driverless car accident. Self-driving car accidents are unique because they involve complicating factors and parties, including the self-driving vehicle itself. Driverless technology is still relatively new and so are the laws surrounding its use on public roadways.
HOW HAVE AUTOMATED CARS EVOLVED?
The safety technology in motor vehicles has evolved to include automated features. According to a timeline created by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), there have been five eras of automotive safety, beginning in the 1950s. Over the years, safety and convenience features have become more advanced, and driving assistance features (such as automatic emergency braking and rearview cameras) have been introduced.
Currently, many cars on the market incorporate partially automated safety features, including self-park and lane-centering assistance. These features are considered one level of self-driving technology. It's predicted that fully automated cars (the highest level of self-driving technology) will be available to the public by 2025.
As software evolves, and self-driving cars become more common, our understanding of driverless cars and safety may change.
BENEFITS AND RISKS OF DRIVERLESS CARS
The NHTSA estimates that about 94 percent of motor vehicle accidents are caused by driver error. Many people believe that autonomous cars will reduce the frequency of car accidents by removing the element of human error. However, existing self-driving cars are not yet fully autonomous, meaning they still require driver intervention and control under certain circumstances.
Some people fear that the risk of self-driving vehicles malfunctioning could put their passengers, in addition to other drivers, pedestrians, and bicyclists, in danger. This has become a concern after a string of publicized accidents involving automated cars. For example, in 2016, a person was killed driving a Tesla when the vehicle crashed into a tractor-trailer that was making a left turn. The Tesla car was in "autopilot"—the company's version of a driving assistance system—at the time of the fatal crash.
COMPLICATIONS WITH LIABILITY AND SELF-DRIVING VEHICLES
As you can see, self-driving technology is still new, which means that it can sometimes be difficult to apply current traffic laws to self-driving car accidents. New York liability laws are more or less the same for driverless vehicles as they are for any other vehicle.
Determining liability is also complicated because self-driving vehicles are often designed and built by multiple companies and manufacturers. For instance, Uber may use a self-driving car for one of their rideshare services but did not necessarily create the operational software. The question then becomes, who is responsible for ensuring these cars are safe enough for the road?
WHO CAN BE LIABLE IN A DRIVERLESS CAR CRASH?
If you're involved in a self-driving car accident, the identity of the liable parties will depend on the circumstances of the accident. For instance, one consideration is whether an automated feature (such as Tesla's Autopilot) was activated when the accident occurred. If the car malfunctioned, resulting in a car crash, the manufacturer who made the software may be at fault. In most cases, the manufacturer will bear some responsibility.
Some partially autonomous self-driving cars require the driver to take control of the vehicle under specific conditions. This may be done through an alert or warning to the driver. If a motorist is inattentive and fails to take control of the car when alerted, he or she may share liability for the car accident.
CONTACT A SELF-DRIVING CAR ACCIDENT ATTORNEY TODAY
If you've been injured in a self-driving car accident, contact William Mattar law offices right away. Our experienced personal injury attorneys can help you navigate the complexity of a driverless car case and fight to get you maximum compensation. Call (844) 444-4444 today, or fill out our online consultation form for a free initial case consultation.
Self-Driving Car Accident Attorney
Potential Problems with Self-Driving Cars