According to the authors of the 14th amendment, the citizenship clause was meant to be retroactive, to right the wrongs of slavery, not a forward motion statute for the world.
Supreme Court to Debate Birthright Citizenship Case.
Are you stating that is true, or that that’s the argument the Trump administration is making right now?
Because the notion that the 14 amendment was supposed to be retroactive only is definitely not captured in some of those quotes here by the senators who debated it:
The simplest way imho would be to use Windows configuration designer.
It generates a file that automate windows oobe when put on a USB key connected to the pc during setup.
It's an open source textGUI powershell suite with hyperlinks to all the toggle tweaks, maintained by one talented MS engineer and contributed to and eyeballed by a hundred odd contibuters.
"Clinton has said that she never used her personal email to send information that was marked classified at the time, although some of her emails had been retroactively classified.
Comey says that's not true. Of 30,000 emails Clinton turned over to the State Department in 2014, FBI investigators found 110 emails containing information that was classified at the time the email was sent. Eight of those were top secret, the highest level of classification."
"Another 2,000 emails have been retroactively classified since they were sent, Comey said."
In reading deeper, many or most of these "classified" emails are comments on news stories that revealed information that another department would rather keep secret, such as news articles about CIA drone strikes, while the CIA at the time wouldn't acknowledge they had a a drone program.
Clinton argued at the time that such emails aren't and shouldn't be classified, since she didn't discuss any information sourced from the CIA, but only the publicly available news article. That seems to me to be at least a reasonable stance.
> Clinton argued at the time that such emails aren't and shouldn't be classified, since she didn't discuss any information sourced from the CIA, but only the publicly available news article. That seems to me to be at least a reasonable stance.
It's absolutely a reasonable stance. However, the rules aren't reasonable. For instance, as someone who held a clearance at the time, discussing/disseminating the Snowden leaks that were published in national news was considered a violation.
You just proved my point, thanks. Citing two known sources of lies and lack of credibility.
The ADL even backed Elon defense, saying "It seems that @elonmusk made an awkward gesture in a moment of enthusiasm, not a Nazi salute, but again, we appreciate that people are on edge.”
No, they did not take back what they did. They still defend him. They are NOT defending his puns. Two different subjects. Stop moving the goal post, take the L.
I have to say, "Does someone refuse to call what Musk did as a Nazi salute when he did it deliberately, in front of hundreds, twice, and we have video" has become a pretty good litmus test for "Can I ignore this person's opinion and never lose anything of value."
You... you realise that that's a work of fiction, right? And even given that it is a work of fiction, the character in question has every reason to lie about this!
In real life, wind turbines pay back the energy cost of construction in 6 months to a couple years, depending on scale, placement, etc etc.
This is not a new tactic, incidentally; back in the day, people used to, bizarrely, make much the same claim about _nuclear_ plants, too! It's, I suppose, not a _bad_ tactic; it's the sort of thing that sounds clever if one happens to be rather stupid, even though if you do the numbers it should be obvious that it cannot possibly be the case.
Please reflect for a moment about why you believe a fictional TV character who works for the Oil and Gas industry would have accurate information to how Wind energy works in real life.
Do you have a source that backs up that information that does not come from a fictional character who has a vested interest in promoting oil and gas?
Supreme Court to Debate Birthright Citizenship Case.