You know those armed guys in camo?
If most people agreed with them, they wouldn’t need arms and camo.
4 Likes
Breaking: this is amazing news. Meng was thorn in Canada’s backside and the Rumpian administration put it there.
Background:
In August 2018, a judge in the Eastern District of New York issues a warrant for the arrest of Huawei Chief Financial Officer Meng Wanzhou.
U.S. authorities accuse Meng of using a Huawei subsidiary, Skycom, to do business in Iran in violation of U.S. economic sanctions against Iran.
Authorities allege that Meng misled an HSBC executive during a 2013 meeting about her corporation’s ties to the subsidiary. In court, Meng’s lawyers will later claim that Meng’s presentation was not misleading and that none of her actions had been shown to cause any alleged harm to the bank.
On Dec. 1, 2018, Meng is arrested at the Vancouver International Airport by Canadian police. She was on a stopover from Hong Kong, on a business trip en route to Mexico City, Costa Rica, Argentina and France.
In retaliation China arrested the Michaels on trumped up charges
2 Likes
What’s amazing about it? China took two unrelated people hostage until the US basically dropped the charges (Meng just has to keep her nose clean for 15 months and record is wiped clean).
1 Like
Have a good nights sleep. You obviously need it. I was referring to the release of my fellow Canadians but of course……
1 Like
Choose your words more precisely.
Magna Carta, 1215.
1 Like
When the committee gets Dan Scavino under oath, hopefully one of the reps will ask him if he is “Q”.
Looks more like a kid who got caught with his hand in the cookie jar.
Then Kid Hitler, Gym Shortin’, Bobblehead “the rent’s too damn high” Boebert, and Empty Green
Chinese exec hassled for making American half-measures look silly, film at 11…
During this “saga”, many bbl of Iranian oil was consumed by China.
1 Like
Plough him under.
-Batman
1 Like
The best evidence is inferential. DNA, for example.
deer in the headlights
1 Like
In evaluating whether Denisovans might have been responsible for pre-Clovis-culture human occupation of the Americas, DNA is inferential evidence. But in evaluating a rape case, DNA is direct evidence with very little inference needed.
This article is a great idea, and informative, but please dear dog get the basic facts right. Editing is your friend –
- Trump appointed Patel to his position at the Pentagon on Nov. 10, days after his election.
I’m sorry … who is “he” in this sentence. Wouldn’t that be, you know, Biden?
ALL evidence other than eyewitness testimony about the crime (including that subset of eyewitness testimony known as the confession), is circumstantial. Circumstantial evidence is exactly the evidence I referred to as inferential. And DNA is no more direct evidence than rifling marks.
Circumstantial evidence tends to be more reliable than the most reliable eyewitness recollection, because humans suck at every part of the process.
1 Like
In logic and law, doesn’t pryamiding inferences mean you’re stacking conjure upon conjure. As a result, doesn’t that fall short convictable evidence?
In science, inferences might direct experimental hypotheses and interpretation of results?
Who says we’re pyramiding? Inferences can mutually or individually corroborate others, but that’s more like applying flying buttresses than adding levels to a structure.
We learn through making and testing inferences. One thing we can learn from them is whether a person has been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
1 Like
How can these lying imbeciles not perjure themselves, when all they’ve ever done is lie?
The video and documents already in evidence will surely contradict their every utterance, though I imagine they will then claim, “I don’t recall”. I do hope that perjury will be prosecuted for the dangerous crime it is.
2 Likes