tkhayes

The collusion of officials from a campaign is yet to be determined....hence why we do things called 'investigations'. And knock it off with the media thing. media this media that. The media is the reason that Trump won the election, he got 600 times the airplay of everyone else. No trump supporters are complaining about that..... Tired of the media idea that somehow everything you do and I do is controlled by the media. The right wing has media too. It's an old argument and I am pretty tired of it. The crisis of credibility comes out of the possibility of the russian meddling actually being a collaborative event, not because of MSNBC reporting that it might be. And credibility actually matters. It is what drives the stock market and a large part of the economy every single day. you blow it off like credibility has nothing to do with anything. It is ABSOLUTELY important when dealing with the leader of the free world. Name a company in the S&P 500 that has lost its 'credibility'.....

That is worth bookmarking for review some 20 years from now....

I have never believed in flying a side by side. given the almost no risk of entanglement, I have no idea why we would not chop a side by side.

nice diversion, so much for staying on subject. I would expect nothing less

From July 1973: Here is the way it is, Richard Nixon is the president. We are so relieved that McGovern lost we have no energy to engage in intellectualism. We have peace of mind. We know that America finally has an opportunity to rise up. Notice, the operative word there is opportunity. ...................... well, THAT worked out well.

The Russian meddling is a fact, confirmed by Yates/Clappers testimony the other day. As well as a dozen other sources at least and pretty much every investigative and intelligence agency in the country. What is being further investigated is whether or not there are ties to that, money and people involved with campaigns and secure positions within the govt. You did listen to Yates and Clappers testimony right? Please tell us that you actually did before you comment on what is and is not a 'fact'. I will even provide you with a link. https://www.c-span.org/video/?427577-1/white-house-warned-general-flynn-compromised What they revealed as fact, under oath, is already disturbing and certainly warrants further investigation. I am pretty sure you got your news from a couple selected sound bites off a click-bait site then.

https://www.amazon.com/Shattered-Inside-Hillary-Clintons-Campaign/dp/0553447084?tag=breitbart035-20 in case no one noticed, Clinton lost the election and in fact is NOT under investigation by any agency of the govt. we are in fact talking about Trump, his campaign, and allegations of ties between his cohorts that received millions and millions of dollars from Russia, Russian officials, Russian businesses and other alleged laundering of money through Cypres and Ukraine, all while working for the Trump campaign and/or then becoming head security officials. We know Hillary lost the election, I do not need to read a book about it.

except for the parts where Manafort and Flynn had contacts with the Russians on dozens of occasions and took money (millions) from them, then lied about it. And knowingly did that while working on the Trump campaign and in national security positions. And that Trump was SPECIFICALLY warned about Flynn before and after the selection of him to security adviser, and chose to ignore that. But sure, other than that, yep....it's all made up You did listen to the statements of undisputed facts given in the testimony of Yates and Clapper right? I watched all of it and the undisputed facts themselves are already very very disturbing if you care at all about a democratic republic and it functioning properly. Tell me that you watched it all please, or did you just pick up the sound bites you liked from rightwingpatriotconservative.com.....

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-05-12/trump-escalates-fbi-fight-with-comey-attack-the-fbi-fights-back And he tweets a cloaked threat this morning, which does raise the question "When does it actually become obstruction of justice" given that Comey is most certainly a witness.....

ahh, the delusion that Trump is not under investigation......

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-fbi-skeptics-james-comey-investigation-1.4111522 touche...others that say Comey would never have told the President that he was or was not under investigation.

"not personally under investigation" I believe the terms and statements were, which were not actually stated by those people if you bother to read the actual conversations. Manafort IS under investigation. Flynn IS under investigation. Russian meddling in the election is under investigation. The links to the campaign and Russia businesses is under investigation, the money is, the businesses, the meetings, the trips, the conversations are all under investigation. Investigations are systems of researching situations and actions, not people....but what the people did. And that MOST CERTAINLY 100% is under investigation. And it may lead to Trump and it may not, but is MOST CERTAINLY is still being investigated and MOST CERTAINLY is about the Trump campaign, and perhaps not (yet) about Donald Trump 'personally'. Trump just hired (2 days ago) an outside law firm to handle this.....hmmm, the WH legals are not capable of defending the president? Or does he need outside independent counsel in case he no longer has access to WH attorneys in the near future? So go ahead and feel vindicated if you choose. Trump doesn't actually have to commit a crime to be impeached. He just has to be linked to enough dirt to demonstrate some level of disrespect or shadiness for the office that he holds. That's in the history books and the Constitution as well. I have to school you on how the internals of your own country work (again) Chris Christie is NOT under investigation either. But his staff, directly beneath him are going to jail and his career is over. So what's your point?????

they are absolutely different. Clinton fired his because the DIRECTOR was the subject of investigation, not Clinton. And even after the fact, the allegations of that investigation appeared to have plenty of merit, but no charges ever came of it. It would appear more and more that Trump has fired Comey hoping to damage/upset/derail/assist the investigation of himself. And with all the talk about what a shitty disorganized mess the FBI is (NBC interview yesterday), as Trump seems to claim, I expect that the insiders and lifers at the FBI will be more than happy to further investigate Trump, and quite possibly leak some more damning evidence. payback is a bitch

whatever you have done medically is in your medical history forever and can and will be used against you at some other point in your insurance-buying lifetime.

there are a few that are already upset about it. Political retribution has an ugly head on all sides. The FBi insiders could undermine Trump's goals and more vigorously pursue his Russia case. lawmakers that think he is being a dick about it could stall legislation if they think this was a political firing even if there was no case. Either way, not sure how Trump could think that the flimsy excuses as to why Comey was being fired are even worthy of acceptance. As usual,different excuses from different people and dept's, and then all backtracking some to correct who said what after the fact. This guy could not order a pizza without fucking it up.

I generally dislike the term 'S-turns' as it seems to indicate that we just sway left and right, which means you are still going forward all the time. The S-Turn is meant to burn off altitude, but that means you have to spend some time flying it as well. 'Figure 8' is a better term, meaning, you have to turn MORE than 90 degrees out from your final path and then MORE that 180 degrees back, to burn off some altitude and end up where you started, but at a lower altitude. Of course, this all depends on your altitude and ability to execute such turns with the time and altitude remaining. Braked turns can help with executing them but a braked turn means you do not lose any altitude either. attached my seminar, I think there is a slightly newer version out there, but this has all the basics in it. Ultimately the best thing is to learn the accuracy trick so that you continue to fly the base leg until you KNOW that the target is in the right place, and then do your final. hope that helps for you

awesome stuff

fucking awesome

I disagree. Jump numbers add experience. Experience helps you analyze situations with a clearer head for a variety of reasons, mostly because you have seen and done 'it' more often and your reactions will likely be more timed, precise and deliberate, with all that 'experience' going into your decision making process when there is a 'problem' or situation. Experience helps you decide on the choice of equipment for a jump. Experience tells you what is and is not an emergency in an airplane or what the pilot is saying when he is talking about the weather Experience helps you decide if the spot is good or not Experience tells you when the dive is going badly and likely how to deal with skydivers everywhere in freefall Experience tells you where to track off and how high to open to make it home (or to not pull to alleviate a risky situation at opening time) Experience tells you how to fly your canopy for best performance, glide and helps you pick your 'out' landing sooner. Experience absolutely gives (the vast majority of) people the ability to make better decisions and see things that inexperienced people do not see. It may very well be an arbitrary number but no more arbitrary than stating that a student should NOT be under a Velo, which we all accept as a sensible decision. That also would still be sensible if we actually wrote it down as a BSR. There ARE far riskier things we do as licensed jumpers but not before we add that 'experience'. Wing loading, Mr Bill's, group sizes are in many cases self-regulating when others speak up based on that person's ability to be in that group or jumping that canopy. That happens through peer pressure, observation, DZ rules, and is 'regulated' through a great deal of 'experience', namely everyone else on the dropzone. So experience matters, you bet it does. The only difference with camera is that 'we wrote it down' and made it a rule. And sure, a course is a great idea. I doubt an AFF instructor teaching a course is the right fix, they may very well have no clue about camera jumping. But yes, a course outline, taught by someone of some level of teaching ability following some standard of a syllabus is always a good idea for everyone. too bad we do not have one.

I do not consider this to be a victory. She is a miserable cunt and a nasty person, and shutting down her speech simply emboldens the causes of the right wing demonstrating how intolerant the left is. Far better to give her free reign to have her speech and then report on how few people showed up to hear her. Instead we will elevate her to a higher platform for her rhetoric.

funny shit....Makes me want to watch Hannibal again....

we try to follow the BSRs and FARs, as we should. I know that there are lots of people on airplanes with cameras that should not be there, and we will intervene when we see it. We really ask that people respect the most basic of rules that exist, and I have every reason to do that, since that I am not asking any more of you than I am asking of anyone else And making an exception for you means I have to make exceptions for someone else or come up with shitty excuses as to why I favor one person over another. So right now, the rule is 200 jumps - completely arbitrary, but that is the rule. I would like to see a videographer 'course' or videographer 'rating' of some kind, at least to cover the basics, then i would actually be Ok with lowering the jump numbers, assuming you have completed a program of some kind. Yet to be invented. I had a camera on my head with far less than 200 jumps back in the 80's. And the number of times I ended up under canopy below 1500' BECAUSE I was wearing a camera. This clearly demonstrates the distractions that exist BECAUSE you put yourself into a new environment long before you are comfortable/competent in the current environment. Same things we discuss with downsizing canopies or wingsuiting, or weird tracking dives.

sure the Republican Party and Democratic party no longer exist, that is why we have an entrenched two party system, that gets 90-95% of the votes in every election for the past 150 years... because they do not 'exist'. Beck is simply wishful thinking, not a statement of fact. The two party system is not going anywhere because the parties are in control of the states, which run elections. and the people that we need to change it are the parties themselves. not likely going to happen There are hundreds, if not thousands fo articles written about how the system has been entrenched for 2 centuries

iheartmedia is not a conservative problem, they operate a bazillion stations and such spanning all spectrums.

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-49520-0_17 300M-600M people are currently at risk due to drought, mostly in Africa, mostly due to climate change, which is also one of the drivers of the wars and conflicts there, exacerbating the problem.