All Activity

Ya, you'll have to excuse my cynicism, it just gets worse the further out of service I get and the more I read about our leaders, past and present.

If that airline tries to make a good (in their view) business decision and merge, but the government disallows that merger due to "competition issues," which forces them to die, how is that fair? If you're going to play the fairness game, they should have stayed out of the merger and then I'd 100% agree with you. Also remember that some of their woes are due to getting planes that are unusable because of engine manufacturer defects.

He allegedly was using non-public (classified) information to make wagers. He pulled a Pete Rose, except he bet on his team to win 100%.

Both can, and are, bad. The government bailing out certain industries of US companies (e.g., airlines) when times get fiscally difficult just rewards poor business decisions.

The same government stopped it from merging with another airline because less competition is bad... So now they let them go under leaving one less competitor....yay competition!

Isn't capitalism letting it fail and go under?

Of a sort, yes.

are you saying the army dude was 'insider trading'?

U.S. Government eyes using Title 3 ‌of the Defense Produc...Trump administration could invoke Title 3 ‌of the Defense Production Act that allows the U.S. government to invest in industrial capacity to ensure supply chains for national defense. The Defense Pro

It's only fraud when someone other than Congress does it.

Just stopped in to see what was up after a many year hiatus. Reads and navigates like it has since 2004. Carry on!

Insider trading and fraud. Classified info or not, this is pretty clear cut.

Really?

Lol, so they're not even driving down the OPSEC path, just the, he could have slipped the word out before we officially made the announcement. If there is one thing those in power hate, it's stolen thunder. What's funny is those in leadership/government are probably going to try to rail against this guy because of "ethics." 🤣

He placed the bet after the op, but before the announcement.

What are we arguing about here? The fact a president cans/blocks people who don’t align with his plans/policies? Welcome to every administration ever.

Just like every other 21st century conflict, it’s essentially unlimited thanks to the purposely vague AUMF. The cries about “illegal war,” “Congress has to approve,” etc. are nothing more than hot air. AUMF needs to change for any of that line of thought to be valid.

What's the timeline for a limited operation again?

Lol. Nice ad hominim. They've tossed those not in charge of the war effort. Those in charge of administrative roles. On top of the firings last year. Held promotions forcing retirements. Blocking promotions of what appear to be worthy, but minority officers, for...no clear reason breaking with prior R and D administrations. No general running the Iran campaign has gotten axed yet. No commander of a base where air defenses "failed," and Americans died or major strategic assets were lost. So your comparisons are trash. But go on about how I'm hyperventilating. Note - I don't think those CCs should get fired. Just showing the contrast in your comparisons.

If only we had the same zeal in going after military officers in positions to influence contracts that magically end up in high paying gigs at these defense contractors after retirement.

I think the Army should: A) Give the dude a medal for the mission, B) Commend him for his outrageous confidence level sufficient enough to bet $33K of his own money but chastised him for a potential security violation and C) Require him to donate the money to a veterans charity like Wounded Warriors.

I was in SFO, TV on local news, story on housing. TV is interviewing a local lady, 50s, question is on affordable housing. Oh yes, absolutely... liberal blah blah blah. Next question, a developer is trying to build a 50 unit affordable at that vacant lot. Thoughts? "Oh, that's not a good idea. They shouldn't do that".... not in my backyard type of blah blah blah. I actually LOLed.

How old are you?

3 parts to the D party: That part, this part: “East Village residents who voted for New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani by a 40-point margin are now suing to stop a building in their neighborhood from becoming a temporary homeless shelter.” I hope they lose their lawsuit. The last part: otherwise generally reasonable people who are still holding on because they want the 90s Dems, but haven’t admitted to themselves the current Dems are so far off the deep end, that the only rational response is jump ship and do something different.