Sua Sponte

You’re waiving a bs flag at my college experience, one you don’t have any frame of reference to? Okay. At my school a few Poli Sci professors were attorneys, so unlike the peanut gallery of people who assume to the know the law, they actually did, unlike the Social Media Law School that most of the society apparently has recently gone to. According to this 2017 Pew Research Center Poll, Democrats are more educated than Republicans, with postgraduate experience being two-to-one ratio of Democrats to Republicans. Might explain why “it is a rare bird that doesn’t learn hard left.” Republicans apparently are not going to college. https://www.people-press.org/2018/03/20/1-trends-in-party-affiliation-among-demographic-groups/

I was a Political Science major at a state college in Washington. Never once did I have professor try to impart some bias in class. I was also in my mid-30s when I graduated, so it would’ve been easier to see than compared to an 18-22 year old. I currently go to Georgetown for my masters and haven’t experienced a professor trying put a certain narrative towards a political ideology. In this day in age of the “woke” movement, professors are walking on egg shells trying not to offend anyone and possibly losing their jobs. I guess I could see a bias at an Ivy or Berkeley, but I haven’t observed that in my personal experience.

Better than peanut butter like the French.

The one I don't understand is the fact they tore down Cervantes. The guy who was imprisoned for five years and was enslaved, never even stepped foot in the Americas, etc.

At Manas years ago some idiot called crew rest for people walking up and down the hallway in one of the dorms with those pants on making too much noise.

WSO/CSO/Nav/ABM's become pilots, not the other way around. When someone washes out of another flight training course, they don't go to UPT, but if they wash out of UPT, they could go to another flight training training course for another crew position. Consider that message.

Yep https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/two-defendants-charged-murder-and-aiding-and-abetting-slaying-federal-protective-service

There’s also other ways to get the VA to pay for school, for longer than the G.I. Bill. I’m in the VA’s Voc Rehab (Chapter 31) and they back paid me for money I personally spent on school, paid for my undergrad, and currently paying for my graduate program at Georgetown. They also pay me E-5 BAH. You can get approved for the program even after your G.I. Bill is exhausted, transferred, etc. the VA considers it an “employment” program, not an “education” program such as the G.I. Bill. Some people have used it to go to law school, medical school, pilot training, etc.

Make sure your clearance is good. You’ll get offered positions in that you’re not experienced in solely based on you having a current clearance. Especially true with a TS/SCI. I also recently found out you can rehack your year of LinkedIn Premium after it expires.

Electoral votes, yes. Popular vote, no.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/06/james-mattis-denounces-trump-protests-militarization/612640/

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/28/business/american-airlines-delta-employee-buyouts/index.html

Really? Last I checked people give up individual freedoms all the time for the “greater good” by joining the military.

This. How often do commanders say no? Of course they write their little op-ed in the base paper saying the one time they pushed back, but it's very rare. That's a sign of looking weak, especially when Congress is telling you to do something.

That ~$160 Billion yearly budget gets eaten up pretty fast when you were planning on retiring a MWS to buy another MWS, but you're going to keep both MWS's, which involves the associated aircrew/maintenance/support personnel, training for said personnel, R&D, construction on support buildings (hangars, sim buildings, etc), and other associated costs. Oh yeah, you're buying that KC-46 thing too, upgrading the KC-135, buying more C-130J's, etc. You are mandated by Congress to keep aircraft, keeping people over 100% manning, which people are your most expensive asset, is going to really eat away at your budget.

Well, he allegedly perjured himself to the judge in question by pleading guilty, which he did twice under oath, to lying. Now he's saying he never lied. So, he's either lying then (that he never lied) or he's lying now. That's what the judge wants to know by appointing a former federal judge to investigate if there's probably cause to charge him with contempt/perjury. Considering arguendo, if the FBI interview "had no basis" then why would he: 1. Talk to them 2. Lie to them If the lie doesn't matter legally, then why is the judge considering a contempt/perjury charge? And as for the "de facto prosecutor" you mean retired federal judge? He seems about as a disinterested party as the AG who was appointed by a president, confirmed by the majority of the president's political party in the Senate, who then dismissed criminal charges against the president's former pick as the National Security Council, even though the accused plead guilty twice in federal court to lying.

Welsh spoke to all the SNCO’s at Altus when I was there back in 2013-2014. It was just him, Chief Cody, and the SNCOs. He flat out said he loved the A-10, it was the first fighter he flew, but he couldn’t afford it. Every career field he had manned over 100%, he had to pay for out of hide, which is why he did the Great Hunger Games, Congress told him to STFU that he was keeping the A-10, getting the F-35...so the only thing he could do was cut personnel. Pretty tough place to be put in, and a good example of how one can be the CSAF and still be told by civilians to STFU and color on how their branch was goin to run.

Rat works for Boeing because he knew he was blacklisted from every major.

No, I read the indictment, not Fox & Friends hot take on the “facts.” I’m the last person to have faith on the DOJ/Feds, it’s called a “court of law” not a “court of truth.” If the Feds didn’t disclose exculpatory evidence, that’s a Brady violation and it should absolutely be dismissed. But that also doesn’t negate the fact Flynn lied to Pence, which was the reason why Trump fired him. And no one can be compelled to talk to law enforcement. Apparently Flynn was too stupid to realize that. The irony in this is the same guy who started chants to “lock her up.” I guess what you view as “good” depends on where you fall on the partisan line.

I’m sorry, I guess I missed the part where Flynn didn’t admit to lying, then admitted again to lying during another pre-trial hearing to the judge during the plea inquiry? Even when he wanted to change his plea to not guilty he still never said he didn’t lie. What was he fired for again? Something, something, lying to Pence? You can do three things when law enforcement is “interviewing” you: tell the truth, lie, shut the fuck up. I recommend doing the latter. I don’t really want to hear about “entrapment” coming from a career military officer, who was a commander at various levels throughout his career, which meant he probably “interviewed” and gave Article 31 right advisements to people suspected of committing a crime. Since Barr is Trump’s personal lapdog, the dismissal isn’t surprising. It was either that a pardon. I expect to see Roger Stone’s pardon by the end of the year.

At least no one here is slapped with a $162,000 bill for their training.

Seven years today. We’ll make sure no one forgets you. 🥃🥃🥃

The Oracle of Omaha wishes the airline industry "well" after Berkshire Hathaway exited, in holdings, all four of the major airlines. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-02/buffett-says-berkshire-reversing-course-on-airlines-again?srnd=premium https://apple.news/AgPUrIpFORa6bB1PRV4HQsw

If he was read his rights, and chose to still make a statement, that's on him. If he was wasn't read his rights, then asked to make self-incriminating statements, that's a 5th and 6th Amendment violation (Miranda v. Arizona). However, SCOTUS holding in Frazier v. Cupp (1969) that law enforcement deception with regard to a target's confession is legal. Either way, regardless what anyone every tells you, no U.S. Citizen can be compelled to make a self-incriminated statement in any form. And if law enforcement, or really anyone, is questioning you about details about an alleged crime that you're the target of, they're never there for your benefit. https://repository.law.miami.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1020&context=umrsjlr