A federal grand jury isn't a replacement for a regular federal trial jury. They're completely different things. A grand jury decides if there is a strong enough case to take the charges to trial, or if they should just be dismissed. When a grand jury isn't used, the trial judge makes that determination themselves. I agree that the terrorism charge will affect how the trial is conducted, but I don't know enough on that topic to comment further.
It's horrible that they plan to change the law to allow that to happen over there, but we here in the US aren't in any position to feel morally superior about it till we finally ban it ourselves.
The question is are they really that incompetent, or are they really that malicious? Add in mislabeling the report as fraud instead of infringement, I lean towards them being malicious, but I guess that could also be gross incompetence. Either way, Brandshield looks terrible.
Mangione's grandparents may be rich, but they're nowhere near the level of a national company CEO rich. So you've got it backwards; this is like a Baron's grandson killing a Duke.
Yeah, I was referring to the health insurance industry, which I do not consider at all a part of the healthcare industry. Aside from that, I'm not sure how any of the good folks laboring away helping others stay healthy are related to the denial rates or business executives I was talking about.
The comment you replied to was referring to this particular murder in that last sentence. If NYPD have some evidence that the shooter fled across state lines, that is likely the justification for the FBI to get involved .
Not so much a lie as speaking from a very twisted point of view. From his perspective, making more money is the only kind of positive change. As the CEO who oversaw the highest denial rate in the industry, Thompson's leadership would of course be seen as positive by his fellow executives.
My brother ate an 8 years expired Twinky we found when we were in boy scouts. We were cleaning out the troop's chuck wagon (food and cooking trailer). Something got lost at the back of a deeper storage compartment, and being the little skinny kid, I volunteered to climb in to find it. I noticed the Twinky slipped into a crack and read the date with amazement. The thing was over half as old as I was, and must have been sitting in that trailer, outdoors, for at least most of that time! After pardeing it around demanding everyone "behold the ancient Twinky" someone dared me to eat it. I never liked Twinkies, but as I'd already confirmed it was still sealed, and my brother was hungry, he didn't hesitate to claim that dare. We all watched in suspense for his reaction, and were disappointed when he just shrugged and said that it tasted a little dry, but otherwise no different than normal.
I just always do that instead of looking at dates on food. If it looks off, smells off, or tastes off I trash it (always checking in that order, of course). Seems fine, I eat it. Never had a problem doing that.
Well, never a food bourn illness problem. I had a big argument with a housemate about expired food. Shortly after she moved in, she promptly trashed any food that was any amount past expiration, and proudly informed me that she had cleaned out the fridge, saving me from eating pickles that were a whole 3 months past safe to eat. To be fair to her, half the things she trashed actually were bad, but the pickle jar went right back in the fridge. If you don't want me eating pickles that have been in the trash, Amanda, then don't throw out my perfectly good pickles! Good call on the bottle of ranch dressing though, I forgot that was in there and it looks nasty.
Professors don't always teach in their actual area of expertise. I had a German language professor whose PhD was in Philosophy and activity published in that field, in English, German and French journals. It does seem like an odd combination, but probably not a lot of students signing up for a class in usability of buttons, even from the fields you would expect to study them .
We have the same thing as your prop 1 on the ballot in South Carolina. It's already illegal at the state and federal level. It's just on there to help get low information conservatives to the polls, since they are convinced the Democrats want to change the law to let "the illegals" vote.
They think this is what everyone does. They publicly virtue signal that they oppose whichever bad thing so they can condemn others for doing it while secretly doing it themselves. It's ok when they do it themselves anyway, because they are good people doing a necessary thing for good reasons. When others find out about their behavior, their reaction is to accuse harder, because they assume we are all doing that too and they are angry that we didn't get caught yet.
A federal grand jury isn't a replacement for a regular federal trial jury. They're completely different things. A grand jury decides if there is a strong enough case to take the charges to trial, or if they should just be dismissed. When a grand jury isn't used, the trial judge makes that determination themselves. I agree that the terrorism charge will affect how the trial is conducted, but I don't know enough on that topic to comment further.