This is not a pardon. Pardons absolve convictions and nothing else. It is a grant of immunity, and that is not allowed to a president. Calling a horse a "zebra" does not make it a zebra.
Moreover, actual pardons do not vitiate civil charges and claims....
A pardon is an absolution of a conviction. It is more commonly bestowed after the person has served their sentence, so as to give them a clean criminal history. If there is no conviction, there is no need for a pardon. If you are indicted, but not tried, there is no criminal outcome. If you are tried, but not convicted, there is no criminal outcome.
We have to clearly make the point that Biden---in attempting to give a pardon effect to avert any indictments---is NOT awarding a pardon. He is granting immunity, and THAT is not a power given to the president, nor was a pardon ever intended to be taken as such.
I had to laugh at the phrase "people close to Musk" as being sources of information. That's like saying "the TV camera close to the tornado." The time rate of change for everything around Musk is too high for much prophecy.
I agree. In my experience, clearances are only for required use. Once you cease being employed in a capacity that requires a clearance, you are "read out" and the clearance is revoked. I suppose a private citizen might be allowed to retain a clearance if he is "retained" as a consultant or advisor, but I can't imagine any other way it would be legally possible.
Something to keep in mind: the use of chipped wood as ground cover for plantings around the foundation. A former manager of mine was building a house and had chipped bark ground cover for the floral beds surrounding the house. It caught fire from a spark and the house burned totally to the ground. He advises the use of peat moss instead of Beauty Bark. This finally surfaced in memory several hours after I responded to your post. When I grew up, the beds were only dirt with no covering. Sometimes, simpler is better.
I have long used the principle of judging good guys by the enemies they make. Now, I guess we must also judge them by the friends they keep. Nice to wake up to good news.
I worked DEW (lasers) for decades. Something DEW is not happening. Everybody thinks DEW is magic, but nobody realizes that all the laser weapon systems are designed for air targets. They point UP.
Not an uprising or an insurrection. Just a public psychodrama. For all their avowals that they will not be silent, their signs don't say what their issue is and you cannot make out what they are chanting. Communication effect = zero. They might be as (or more) effective if they wore pink bunny rabbit suits. If they are a headache, spray them with water.
I notice this has been reposted from a previous appearance. In an effort to spread the baseless "theory" without any pesky criticisms attached?
Whatever he says about trees elsewhere don't apply to trees in this scenario that he did not test. No evidentiary confirmation.
Houses burn like stoves, with an enclosed main fire fed by indrafts (no threat to nearby trees or houses) and the flames and smoke exhausting by vents burned into the roof. This is why if anything remains standing, it is usually walls. I've seen a neighborhood house burn out this way, and the adjacent houses (10-ft spacing) were untouched.
Aluminum melts and glass sags at temperatures easily reached by a fully-involved wood fire, or by burning rubber. And molten aluminum will trickle in a path until it cools and hardens. Following trickles will go over the hot metal and make the path longer. Just like lava flows.
Nails in fenceposts conduct heat into the core wood, where it has nowhere to go (wood is an insulator) and chars the wood by heat, not by combustion. (Think branding iron.)
Not the work of a microwave weapon, which has no effect on materials that are not moist. And would flash a lot of sparks from conductive metal. No technique for aiming control. Very hard to incite ignition over the tens of thousands of acres involved. And no microwave weapons have been designed to shoot anywhere but up. (And lasers can't work through smoke.)
Looking to blame this on fantasy DEWs is a poor move when they are already arresting arsonists. Pretty clever psy-op to get you to believe in a distractive fantasy when whoever-it-was probably used 19th-century kitchen matches.
And when were the houses built? Back when the "fire war" was being put in place?
Prove otherwise. It is too pervasive. At all levels. It would be the same result if more than a majority were involved in a cheating conspiracy. I've seen it happen at a lower scale: in a labor union. Most of the members were conservative in outlook, but the Council was always the playground of the liberal outlook. Whenever I asked a complaining conservative member if they would run for a Council seat and improve matters, they would always turn it down. "I don't want to be involved." Well, work that up to 350 million people and we get the same thing: tyranny by a liberal minority. Lots of carping, but no show. Plenty of excuses.
I notice you have no argument against my point that tinkering with the rules, in order to avoid citizen responsibility, will only lead to tyranny.
Sharper Image had the Ionic Breeze unit, which mainly produced ions for an "ion wind" airflow and electrostatic precipitation effect. Customers complained it didn't work very well. (Had one. It was a pest, causing particles to settle on nearby furniture and walls.) Not clear if ozone production was either intended or significant or an issue. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharper_Image#Bankruptcy
I've breathed it. I've also breathed ammonia, sulfur trioxide, isoprene/terpene, tolulene, turpentine, and gasoline. Ozone can be innocuous at a low enough level. Curiously, I am a non-smoker. (But, for God's sake, stay far away from any metalorganic compound. They can be deadly.)
I agree. There are too many "solutions" that attempt to dodge the fact that the PEOPLE ARE RESPONSIBLE. If you tinker with the governing "algorithms" in order to compensate for a feckless citizenry, that direction necessarily leads to tyranny.
Trump boarded AF1 today for his flight from West Palm Beach to WDC. Is this a hint that he may be sworn in on board instead of at any ground location? Ahead of schedule? Hit the ground running? Just free-wheeling...
It's a flight designation, not an airframe designation. They were boarding the 757-derivative presidential plane (twin-engine), not the 747-derivative (4-engine). But it's still a good question. If Biden is using Marine-1, then there would be no designation confusion (I think).
Thanks for the information. It's a little hard to understand the setting discussed in the article. It seems to concern a freshly-constructed building, which is yet another prudent argument to let such buildings air out for a period of time. But one must take statements that compounds "could possibly" be formed as being somewhat open-ended. The cup "could possibly" be full. Or empty.
I looked up an EPA discussion of ozone generators (https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/ozone-generators-are-sold-air-cleaners#conclusions) and they came up with expectible blanket recommendations against any use of ozone. But their logic begs question in some cases. They cite an experiment where an ozone generator designed for a 3,000-square-foot room was placed in a 350 ft2 room, set to maximum, and---horrors---discovered the ozone concentration was 10x the design value. To which one can only respond with "Duh." (What else would one expect?)
It is certainly true that it is not good to use an ozone setting that results in raspy breath; a setting should be used that is compatible with comfort. (And also out of consideration of pet health, because ozone is heavier than air and will tend to settle near the floor if not vigorously mixed with the room air.) But the blanket claim that it does nothing to eliminate odors is not borne out by my experience. They do define safe levels, and they point out that the levels inside an airplane are higher than on the ground (due to atmospheric properties), but they don't seem to understand that if it is safe on an airplane, it should be equally safe on the ground. Finally, let us remember that ordinary oxygen can be a killing poison if you breathe it at concentrations above normal partial pressure (about 3 psi). This is why divers require highly diluted oxygen in their deep-diving breathing mixtures.
I have to wonder at what the EPA would think about anyone using Clorox to clean sinks and bathroom fixtures. Or ammonia to clean windows and mirrors. Or using 3% hydrogen peroxide as an antiseptic or gargle?
I'm not suggesting anything imprudent. But this IS the same government agency which attempts to micromanage our environmental life and they have incentives to be stringent.
At least these fire officials are informed enough to realize that "fighting" a lithium fire is fundamentally futile.
Nonsense. It is an oxidant and combines with hydrocarbons as I mentioned. It is wise not to crank up the concentration, which is why ozone generators have an adjustable output. Ozone is the fresh smell that appears after a thunderstorm. I have had them in my household for years, with no harm whatsoever. Kitchen (and other odors) are effectively eliminated by its chemical digestion action.
What, pray tell, was the "stuff that was previously inert"? I am curious. And who says so?
A Spoonerism converts him to "Garlick Merrand." No improvement.
Actually, it is an explosive on its own. A detonation can cause it to decompose explosively into water, CO2 and nitrogen. There are notable port disasters of AN explosions (Beirut was the most recent). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ammonium_nitrate_incidents_and_disasters
I think formaldehyde has been a constituent in modern rug manufacture, giving rise to the "new rug smell." It will outgas and be gone, but it can be chemically eaten up by ozone from an electrical ozone generator (turns it into water and carbon dioxide). Just don't go nuts on the ozone level. Ozone also eats up any organic smell.
I will not be surprised if this subject never comes up under Trump's presidency.
I understand that five states have withdrawn their ratifications previously. My position is that they have a right to do that under the 10th Amendment. All unspecified rights are left to the states---including the right to withdraw an amendment ratification. No Constitutional language forbidding it.
I have also seen reference to a time limit imposed by the legislation introducing the amendment, which has elapsed.
Yes. Isn't it curious that Newsom couldn't be bothered to monitor the status of fire control in California---but he was presto-changeo with the land developers to drool over the ruins (and shake his booty in a victory dance)?
That would be 11.94 mm caliber. Loaded to the same muzzle velocity as a 10 mm, with a 500-grain bullet, it would pack quite a punch.