Thanks to the Mean Value Theorem , one can conclude that there was at least one moment in between the two camera shots where the car’s instantaneous speed was the same as its average speed.

You can ride the Paris Metro in Paris, TX:

For decades, if people did talk about this event, it was called the “Tulsa Race Riot”. This invited deliberate confusion with the Watts Riots and others. Just exactly which party was doing the “rioting”, hmm? It’s not the same between Tulsa and Watts.

The “Race Massacre” name was not formally selected as a more accurate description of events until 2018.

You can* sue CBP and Secretary Noem in her official capacity for collecting illegal tariffs from you.

*Probably. I’m not a lawyer. Don’t take legal advice from the Internet.

I failed to actually read the post, so I don’t have any point that hasn’t already been made.

It’s not like the Saturn program was exactly Nazi-free either…

That’s because he tried to open the door. Everyone knows that on Boeing planes, only the door plugs can be opened in flight.

DB also made sure to select a Boeing 727 aircraft that has a rear stairway exit. It’s much easier to deplane that way into the slipstream.

In normal flight, the pressure differential between the inside and outside is pushing the doors against the frame with thousands of pounds of force. So it’s not possible to open the door.

If you really want to go sky diving, then be sure to dump the cabin (button is on the flight deck) to equalize the pressures. It will also help to slow down below normal cruising speed. If you do dump the cabin, keep the altitude below 15,000 feet or make an emergency descent to that level. Hypoxia is a beast.

This is a really awful tactic:

1. Immigrant with an ongoing removal case shows up to court date.
2. At the hearing, the immigration “prosecutor” moves to dismiss the case without prejudice.
3. The immigration “judge” agrees. The case is dropped.
4. At this point there is no removal proceeding against the immigrant, and they are free to go.
5. Out in the hall, ICE arrests the immigrant.
6. ICE starts expedited removal proceedings which don’t even have court or an immigration “judge.”

So these people who were previously following the rules, out on parole, are now locked up, and they no longer have access to the flimsy due process of immigration “court”.

Expedited removal was created by Congress in the 90s, and it was intended to be used at ports of entry, and maybe in the immediate border context, where you see people jumping the fence. But the deadline Congress put on it is two years; anyone in the country less than two years can end up in expedited removal.

On the director’s commentary, he states that the ultimate cause of Granger’s illness is deliberately left vague and unexplained. That’s kind of like a plot hole, sort of. Or maybe it’s mystery box, and not a plot hole.

Reverse Hackintosh.

I remember back in the days of the Commodore 64, games still took 2-3 minutes to load.

But then who says what the statutes that Congress passed mean…?

In this case, the court has determined that notices in English only, that give a 24 hour deadline, with no information about how to contact an attorney, are illegal. That amount of notice is not due process as guaranteed by the 5th amendment of the Constitution.

The constitution overrides all parts of federal law, including the Alien Enemies Act. There is no power to suspend the constitution here. Not even a war power. The constitution applies to the plaintiffs in this case, because they are in the territory of the United States. Full stop.

The government has argued to the court, without citing any specific clause of the constitution, that the President enjoys broad “war powers” that prevent the court from looking into any aspect of what the administration is doing here. The court has clearly rejected that argument* with respect to the 5th amendment concerns.

So that is what the law is, and that’s what the law is not. That’s a final decision.

*The court has not decided yet on whether the government can use this reasoning to block any interpretation of the meaning of the words “invasion” or “predatory incursion.” The lower courts that have ruled are something like 4 or 5 to 1, on the side that the judiciary can interpret those words.

EDIT: Actually, I think the one judge that ruled for the AEA proclamation did so by interpreting “invasion” by looking it up in a dictionary. She just used a modern dictionary, while the others have been using 1798 dictionaries.

Everything the Supreme Court orders is “legal”, by definition. That’s what Supreme means. They have taken up the duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. There is no further appeal.

The Ocean.

Historically speaking, USSR / Russia, China, and NK have loved to talk up the capabilities of their kit, and these parades were a big part of that. They have frequently failed to deliver on all of their promised capabilities.

In the United States we have done the opposite. We don’t talk about our latest gen aircraft programs; we hide them out in the desert. When we do talk we remain cagey about what we have for years and decades, until long after we’ve started selling it to allies.

I understand that this parade will not show off our real capabilities (not at 25 tanks anyway), but I am saddened that the man feels like he needs to stoop to the level of the adversaries we’ve held for so long.

The alternate exit she allegedly sent them to led back out to the same hallway where ICE was already waiting. An ICE agent rode in the elevator with the guy and his attorney from the sixth floor to the ground floor. ICE agent contacted his confederates from inside the elevator. They confronted the man while crossing the street in front of the court house. The man was arrested after a brief foot chase.

In NASA’s lessons learned database, there’s one where the probe made out all the way to its destination, but the pictures came back all black. Because they forgot to take off the lens cap.

There’s a conspiracy theory that every Pope has been illegitimate since 1958. The reasoning is pretty dumb, but I’ll put it out here:

• The reforms made during Vatican II are blasphemous.
• No legitimate pope could endorse the blasphemy due to infallibility
• Therefore the popes have been illegitimate.

I’m not Catholic, but I can see the fallacy there.

Interesting enough, the sedevacantists think the entire line after 1958 are pure antipopes, there’s a splinter group of sedeprivationists, who think like you said: the post-1958 line can regain legitimacy once they renounce the so-called heresy.