i ran across this episode of jay leno's garage on youtube today.
all i know is it seems very similar to j f rutherford's much-vaunted 16-cylinder cadillac.
watch the episode and let us know what you think.
As an illustration of the degree to which these cars could be personalized (And the rarefied financial strata of the people who owned them...) here are a few examples:
Robert Montgomery with his 1933 Sport Phaeton:
Marlene Dietrich with her 1934 Town Car:
Al Jolson's 1933 All Weather Phaeton (Similar to Rutherford's East Coast model which is sometimes misidentified as a sedan))
Al Capone's 1930 Imperial Sedan:
i ran across this episode of jay leno's garage on youtube today.
all i know is it seems very similar to j f rutherford's much-vaunted 16-cylinder cadillac.
watch the episode and let us know what you think.
I hope this doesn't sound too geeky. (What can I say? I like cars...)
It's true that VIN numbers, as we know them today, did not exist at the time, but the 452 was not a regular production line vehicle.
These vehicles were hand made, (Often to the customer's order) and the bodies were therefore marked with either Style/Body or Model/Copy numbers, which do serve as unique identifiers today.
(The engines were also numbered, but that is a far less reliable identifier for obvious reasons.)
Rutherford had 452's at his disposal on both the East and West coast. The California model was a convertible coup and the New York model was a four-door convertible phaeton with the distinctive two-piece speedboat style windshield.
Given that both appear to be 1930 models and the sheer uniqueness of these vehicles, it would not be too hard to track down surviving examples, if any exist today. Tying one to Rutherford and the JW's would be a different story, as provenance can be pretty shaky.
Rutherford was apparently no stranger to the Cadillac. Here, for example, is picture of him with an earlier 1928 model similar to one that Al Capone owned. (Note the visor and reverse swing of the rear door)
If we were keeping count (LOL) this would be a third ultra high-end Cadillac that we can tie to the Judge.
i was recently doing some research and came across this curious quite from dr beduhn - i can't say how valid it is or if he actually said it (source linked).
but this got me thinking i don't think there is anything in any bible where it is a "deliberate" distortion or the words go against the "possible range of meanings the greek" could have.
i know beduhn is not considered an authority however he does have a point - if its in the range of meanings it is by no means a mistranslation & cannot be pointed out as such.
Dr. BeDuhn (IMHO) makes a valid point. A verse is not mistranslated when the rendering still falls under the umbrella of what definition and grammar will allow.
At the same time though, plugging in the dictionary definition that most suits your theological view is not a valid translation practice, especially when we're talking about a far less common usage of the word.
(In its noun form, we're talking about the name of the Greek god of fear here.)
certain forces appear to be trying to make sure donald trump never runs for president again.
some republicans are clearly abandoning trump and of course the democratic press has been saying trump is done!
is trump’s goose cooked?
You would think after misinterpreting the law, improperly asserting jurisdiction and getting slapped on the wrist pretty hard by the Eleventh Circuit Court, Judge Cannon would be a bit more careful, considering her lack of experience.
Here is one of the kinder recaps of what happened just a few months ago:
I don't believe Judge Cannon's demand for a brief is a rebuke in and of itself. Exactly what law or federal guideline does she think is in question here?
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_6
This was an NSU law professor's comment: (The gentleman's name is Tom Jarvis and the article is behind a paywall, so I'm going to quote it here.)
"There is no issue...Obviously prosecutors are entitled to use multiple grand juries and can empanel grand juries in each and every district where they believe a crime or part of a crime has occurred."
I also think the term, "submitted under seal" might be misinterpreted. The "seal" prevents the document from becoming a public record for a length of time (Usually specified)
You can go to Court Listener, for example, and read the entire docket if you want. What the general public won't be able to read are those filings submitted under seal, but it would be a mistake to infer from this that the filing is also concealed from the judge and defense attorneys.
This actually connects to yesterday's (Friday) D.C. hearing. (United States v Donald Trump) The DOJ's concern is that Trump will disclose sensitive information, as in names of witnesses that were sealed. --To which John Lauro, Trump's own attorney said (In apparent frustration) that he was unable to "babysit" his client 24/7.
certain forces appear to be trying to make sure donald trump never runs for president again.
some republicans are clearly abandoning trump and of course the democratic press has been saying trump is done!
is trump’s goose cooked?
I'm not aware of jurors outside of the Grand Juries in Florida and D.C.
Grand Juries are convened by prosecutors as a matter of course. The actual trial were both defense and prosecution get to screen jurors is a ways off yet.
I don't believe Mike Pence is actually connected to Trump's phone calls to Georgia officials and in any event, the propriety (Or lack thereof) is for a Georgia Grand Jury to decide. (Assuming of course, one is convened, which I don't believe has happened yet.)
Jack Smith was scolded by Judge Trevor McFaddon for causing a delay to an unrelated January 6th, hearing, but to my knowledge, the only person of import claiming misconduct of any sort vis-à-vis Trump's indictment is Alan Durshowitz, who has not held any official capacity for years
I listen to Mark Levin from time, but was not aware that MSN was agreeing with him and would like to read the article, if it's out there.
---
My mention of Pence was specific to the alternate (aka Fake) electors and Trumps' degree of involvement. (If any)
Trump's attorneys have soft-pedaled this as political theater of the type that happened in Hawaii in 1960, but there is a helluva difference. Hawaii's recount did, in fact, reverse the results in that state and the three alternate electors were vindicated in the end. (The gun in the diamond store conundrum again.)
That didn't happen this time around.
The 16 fake electors in Michigan have been formally charged with forgery and fraud and are out on bond right now. The 8 fake electors in Georgia have accepted immunity deals in exchange for their testimony. There's currently criminal investigations in Wisconsin and Arizona. (The Trump electors in Pennsylvania and Florida wisely added a caveat that will probably prevent prosecution.)
certain forces appear to be trying to make sure donald trump never runs for president again.
some republicans are clearly abandoning trump and of course the democratic press has been saying trump is done!
is trump’s goose cooked?
How is it a conundrum? That's why criminal mindset - the mens rea - is necessary.
It's a conundrum inasmuch as you can't afford to be mistaken on what the law does and does not allow you to do. The consequences of being wrong are so severe, that if there's any doubt in your mind, you're better off doing nothing.
In this case, it's not whether a gun has been drawn, but whether Trump's efforts were at any point, more than simply requests. His attorneys are soft-pedaling and dancing around some of the more serious elements of the indictment. I'm not faulting them for this, as it's their job, but the questions remain.
I could be wrong, but I therefore believe a major focus of the upcoming trial will Mike Pence, the alternate electors and what exactly Trump expected of them. What Pence is willing to testify to and who (If anyone) can corroborate it remains to be seen.
certain forces appear to be trying to make sure donald trump never runs for president again.
some republicans are clearly abandoning trump and of course the democratic press has been saying trump is done!
is trump’s goose cooked?
--The gun in the diamond store conundrum.
You enter a jewelry store with a drawn pistol to stop a violent felony, you're a hero.
You enter a jewelry store with a drawn pistol when there's no robbery in progress , then you are the felon.
The indictment has clearly anticipated the, "I truly believed the election was stolen and acted in good faith" argument. (By noting that Trump ignored the army of attorneys in the Justice Department, his own hand picked Attorney General, his own head of Homeland Security, his own Vice President, etc., etc., and deliberately surrounded himself with lunatics.)
Lauro (at least) seems to be focusing on Trump's right to believe what he wanted to believe without getting into the "why" of it.
certain forces appear to be trying to make sure donald trump never runs for president again.
some republicans are clearly abandoning trump and of course the democratic press has been saying trump is done!
is trump’s goose cooked?
I've been listening to John Lauro's interviews, as he seems to be laying the groundwork for what will be Trump's defense.
It appears to be (speculating a little) that A. He was following legal counsel in good faith and B. That his efforts were aspirational (i.e. covered by the first amendment) and not criminal.
certain forces appear to be trying to make sure donald trump never runs for president again.
some republicans are clearly abandoning trump and of course the democratic press has been saying trump is done!
is trump’s goose cooked?
I made it to the 52 second mark.
Every law school in the U.S. has a lengthy online article on 18 USC § 371
had lunch with a friend, whose a lecturer in the accounting dept.
of one of australia's best universities.
he told me he expects to lose his job at some point in the next 5 years, as the accounting dept, will disappear, as all accounting will be done by ai programs, so why teach it.. if his fears are correct, that means that any profession that involves the mind, may one day face the same future.
Judgement, as in understanding your information may be biased or inaccurate in any number of ways manifests itself in a human physician's ability to discern that a patient's symptoms may be psychosomatic or misreported, or a human engineer's ability to determine an Architect may be mistaken on anything from materials to the application of mathematics, or a human judge's ability to interpret the intricacies of existing case law.
AI lacks judgement and there is not a consensus of opinion even within the field on how this hurdle may be overcome.
I'm not saying it can't be overcome, but I am saying that quantum leaps can't be predicted or scheduled.
