Ok then, let’s organize it in a proper and civil manner, though. Everyone that wants to advocate for a civil war gets brought to the Gettysburg field in PA and they can have a “publicly” sanctioned battle to the death.
The winners get a commemorative plate, the losers get a very large memorial center with statues built in their honor in Huntsville, Alabama.
I nominate Shane Gillis as Trump for Kamala’s VP pick.
11 hours of 500mbps bandwidth usage.
It was obviously a joke to imply the voter demographic in question are acting like babies.
Don’t be an Aussie Senator.
This sounds sideways, as FOIA processing is a part of city services, and state services, and federal services.
Treating it otherwise has always seemed to invite abuse.
We also have a rule regarding conversion of electronic data from internal proprietary format to something the requestor can read that allows us to refuse if responding to the request would cause an undue disruption to city services.
How is that a legal workaround against FOIA? Literally every response to FOIA causes a ‘disruption’ to city services in that context. This sounds like a strategy from management that is incompetent or intentionally unethical trying to avoid processing FOIA requests. “Undue disruption” reads as a convenient scapegoat to hide things from the public, a public that the government is there to serve in the first place.
It would have taken about 6 months for a full-time employee, and our city only has 11 staffers, so we were able to tell them “no.”
~165 hours for ever 10k documents to review at 1 min avg per doc.
45k documents = 750 hours = 25 work weeks @ 30hrs.
That’s $11,250 @ $15/hr wages. Call it $16,000 for FTE total costs as a govt employer.
You can engage 10 local contracted temp workers to process the data in a under 3 weeks.
Once you have done the review, the dataset to that point has been compiled and can be used for other such requests without additional expenditures towards recompiling data up to that date.
I’m sure budgets are carefully crafted to avoid including FOIA processing.
“Honestly, it’s going to be a whole different speech now. It is a chance to bring the country together.”
Anyone else worried that his definition of brining ‘the country together’ may be more along the lines of trying to instigate coordinated violence against his perceived enemies and adversaries?
You need to cover the chain for safety during operation.
You need foot straps and side leg protectors/support.
Could this possibly exercise leg and foot muscles of people with no lower mobility due to spinal/nerve injuries?
That was my first thought, hit up that ‘other’ site and saw a video on /r/interstingasfuck and it looks like he grabbed his ear immediately after first two(?) shots so I think he was actually grazed.
Now I’m very curious. It looks like the question revolves around how, exactly, the police got a hold of the ammunition involved?
Were you not ‘very curious’ enough to actually look at literally any of the real and active reporting on this before your comment?
There was no question as to ‘how, exactly, the police got a hold of the ammunition involved’ and it is a core fact among the details of why case was dismissed.
They even played the officer’s bodycam footage of an early formal interview of the former officer that brought the bullets in as evidence (that the officer on the stand pitifully tried to pretend wasn’t an interview) in which the prosecutor was present. The evidence was intentionally filed under another case number so it wouldn’t be associated with Baldwin’s case (or the Reed case that I believe was ongoing when it was actually brought in). And THEN, cherry on top, they also discovered while looking at the undisclosed bullet evidence in this court, despite the prosecutors claims that the bullets were not associated with the Rust set thus not counted as evidence, that there were matching bullets of the type that were on the Rust set.
Some link to this as the moment the case fully unraveled: https://www.youtube.com/live/0VEoEvcJNhE?t=28995s
Where the prosecutor has put herself on the stand and opened herself up to answering defense questions under oath: https://www.youtube.com/live/0VEoEvcJNhE?t=32578s
It’s among the craziest prosecutorial malfeasance shit I’ve ever seen from a high profile, video recorded court proceeding. One prosecutor resigned and LEFT earlier in the day as things were unraveling, and then the prosecutor that was still there put herself on the stand as-a-prosecution-witness to give testimony about the bullets, which even allowed the defense to question her about witness statements that she called Baldwin a cocksucker, about witness statements that she called Baldwin an arrogant prick, and about witness statements that she would ‘teach him a lesson’. In the context of a lawyer, putting oneself on the witness stand as a lawyer in the case, even as a prosecutor, is mental breakdown levels of personal desperation, even if they want to claim it was an attempt to preserve an appeal of the dismissal.
This is the real answer. ‘This is stupid, because I don’t understand’ seems to be a common theme with people around the world.
I do try to remain reasonable.
I was commenting on the garbage decision of the governor to leave the state, rather than the garbage decision of OP to make up or repeat misinformation that it was outrage over a Cruz vacation. I’m with you on avoiding manufactured outrage.
“It’s not a vacation. He’s there on a planned political trip.” can be seen defense of the governor when you omit the details.
You didn’t just call out OP’s bad information garbage, you implied, whether intentionally or not, that there was no issue of what the governor was doing.
That is what compelled my reply.
I hope you learn to appreciate the irony of burying your head in the sand while you tell others not to bury their heads in the sand. Reality is exactly what I recognize.
Fear feeding fear. Stop it.
No, he isnt, thats just fear feeding fear.
Always include the /s because otherwise you sound like several batshit crazy relatives of mine that would froth at the mouth with all that and mean it.
We’re in the alternate timeline.
A hurricane has a serious impact on the people and infrastructure of a state. A governor unwilling to put an emergency among the people he was elected to represent ahead of a foreign investment trip deserves every drop of the outrage that he brings upon himself.
This is an example of when outrage is real and deserved rather than manufactured. Your hand waving is out of place.
Its the “Free State of Florida” now per the new interstate signs.
It’s strange so many comments keep experiencing it, almost like it’s something else entirely, but it couldnt possibly be Candleja
I assume they chose €400k as the top bracket to make sure it never actually gets passed. Seems like political theater for votes and soundbites.
Not exactly a panacea of rigorous scientific study.