A Horse Named Stranger Posted January 10 Author Share Posted January 10 2 hours ago, timmett said: That was pretty much Boeing this week. I have the strange feeling this might be more an Alaska Airlines maintenance issue than an actual Boeing issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 19 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said: I have the strange feeling this might be more an Alaska Airlines maintenance issue than an actual Boeing issue. United has also found loose parts on the 737 MAX planes. A Horse Named Stranger and DireWolfSpirit 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timmett Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 (edited) 23 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said: I have the strange feeling this might be more an Alaska Airlines maintenance issue than an actual Boeing issue. Those door plugs are installed before delivery according to model configuration and (as I understand it) are not a typical maintenance item for airlines. United has found loose bolts on its 737s as well. Quote United (UAL.O), the other U.S. carrier that flies this Boeing model with the panels, said its preliminary checks found bolts that needed tightening on several panels. The disclosures heightened concerns about the production process of the MAX 9 jets that have been grounded. A source familiar with the matter said United has so far found close to 10 airplanes with loose bolts during its preliminary checks, up from an initial five first reported by industry publication The Air Current, and the figure may increase. Boeing relies heavily on outside contractors these days, including this not-very-reassuring one. Also, it's their name on the plane. Also, the 737 MAX has form. Like its tendency to wrest yoke control from pilots on takeoff and auger into the ground based on faulty airspeed sensors, kind of thing. Edited January 10 by timmett A Horse Named Stranger 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 Boeing admits mistake over plane door blow-out https://www.bbc.com/news/business-67930977 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Horse Named Stranger Posted January 10 Author Share Posted January 10 (edited) Thanks. Just recalled how Alaska Airlines maintenance was so shit at some point, that the Horizontal Stabilizer on an MD 80 came loose midflight, because they figured a good way to cut costs was not using enough grease on the jackscrew operating it. Needless to say, that didn't end well. Edited January 10 by A Horse Named Stranger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 6 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said: I remember watching Robocop 2 with a friend on TV during a sleepover (or random VHS) watching. This scene had us laughing like crazy. I guess I'm lucky, because I remember a sleepover where we took one of the films his parents rented and, erm, had a different experience: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DireWolfSpirit Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 8 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said: I have the strange feeling this might be more an Alaska Airlines maintenance issue than an actual Boeing issue. I have a positive feeling its called shitty Boeing management. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 (edited) Trump’s attorney argues, with a straight face, that a President who uses the US Military to assassinate a political rival cannot be held criminally accountable for such an action unless removed from office by the impeachment process and we’re talking about… Robocop and Boeing in the US Politics thread? Really? Edited January 10 by Ser Scot A Ellison kissdbyfire and LongRider 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rippounet Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 6 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Trump’s attorney argues, with a straight face, that a President who uses the US Military to assassinate a political rival cannot be held criminally accountable for such an action unless removed from office by the impeachment process and we’re talking about… Robocop and Boeing in the US Politic’s thread? Really? To lighten the mood, perhaps? You know, in all honesty, a year ago, I might have bought Trump's attorney's argument... Because the French president does have immunity... It's only because I read a few articles that I know the US president does not... Ser Scot A Ellison 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Horse Named Stranger Posted January 10 Author Share Posted January 10 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Trump’s attorney argues, with a straight face, that a President who uses the US Military to assassinate a political rival cannot be held criminally accountable for such an action unless removed from office by the impeachment process and we’re talking about… Robocop and Boeing in the US Politic’s thread? Really? Hey, not our problem that RoboCop offers a less crazy storyline than Trump in the appeal court... I mean, a RoboCop prototype for less than 200m? The Pentagon would take that deal in heartbeat. (see we even manage to cover inflation by means of RoboCop). I mean Trump's immunity claim is going nowhere, that's the same court that shut this absolute immunity claim down in Blassingame. They will probably modify Chutkan's ruling a bit to make it more in line with Blassingame. The case is a loser and just there to delay things. Only question is apparently whether they have jurisdiction now, or if they want to send it back to Chutkan first. Edited January 10 by A Horse Named Stranger Ser Scot A Ellison 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 (edited) 29 minutes ago, Rippounet said: To lighten the mood, perhaps? You know, in all honesty, a year ago, I might have bought Trump's attorney's argument... Because the French president does have immunity... It's only because I read a few articles that I know the US president does not... On NPR a law professor pointed out the absurdity of the “has to be removed from office” requirement by taking the logical step from ordering the US Military to assassinate a political rival. What is to stop a President with such immunity from then ordering the assassination of Congress to prevent their removal from office while remaining legally “immune” from criminal sanction? Edited January 10 by Ser Scot A Ellison kissdbyfire 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 4 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: On NPR a law professor pointed out the absurdity of the “has to be removed from office” requirement by taking the logical step from ordering the US Military to assassinate a political rival. What is to stop a President with such immunity from then ordering the assassination of Congress to prevent their removal from office while remaining legally “immune” from criminal sanction? We already have the established DoJ rule that the president cannot be prosecuted while in office (which is a problem). If the President wants to start executing political opponents, there is little reason to assume that the judiciary could stop him. Extending that protection once he's out of office is also a problem, but seems far less relevant than a blanket ban against all prosecutions while in power. Ser Scot A Ellison 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kissdbyfire Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 50 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Trump’s attorney argues, with a straight face, that a President who uses the US Military to assassinate a political rival cannot be held criminally accountable for such an action unless removed from office by the impeachment process and we’re talking about… Robocop and Boeing in the US Politics thread? Really? Interesting. Can Biden then send a special ops team to take out Mango? Phylum of Alexandria 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 Just now, kissdbyfire said: Interesting. Can Biden then send a special ops team to take out Mango? That’s the argument Trump’s attorneys are making. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kissdbyfire Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 42 minutes ago, Rippounet said: To lighten the mood, perhaps? You know, in all honesty, a year ago, I might have bought Trump's attorney's argument... Because the French president does have immunity... It's only because I read a few articles that I know the US president does not... I didn’t know this. Wasn’t Chirac prosecuted? Or indicted? My memory may be playing tricks on me… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kissdbyfire Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said: That’s the argument Trump’s attorneys are making. Yeah, I know. I’m thinking though that it doesn’t seem to be a very well thought out argument? Maybe? Prince of the North 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 Just now, kissdbyfire said: Yeah, I know. I’m thinking though that it doesn’t seem to be a very well thought out argument? Maybe? They’re trying to keep Cheeto Jesus out of Jail by any means necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 17 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: On NPR a law professor pointed out the absurdity of the “has to be removed from office” requirement by taking the logical step from ordering the US Military to assassinate a political rival. What is to stop a President with such immunity from then ordering the assassination of Congress to prevent their removal from office while remaining legally “immune” from criminal sanction? It's what our founding fathers would have wanted Fragile Bird, Ser Scot A Ellison and Prince of the North 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kissdbyfire Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said: They’re trying to keep Cheeto Jesus out of Jail by any means necessary. I get it, and I’m not a lawyer. But it just sounds like such an incredibly stupid argument to make that what crosses my mind is either the whole thing is so absurd that there is no valid argument and this is the best they could come up with or they’re just counting on the corrupt justices + trump appointed justices being enough to win the day for them. Didn’t one of his lawyers basically said so on Fox (or oann or newsmax)? That Kavanaugh basically owes trump? The cheek, really! Prince of the North 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fionwe1987 Posted January 10 Share Posted January 10 1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Trump’s attorney argues, with a straight face, that a President who uses the US Military to assassinate a political rival cannot be held criminally accountable for such an action unless removed from office by the impeachment process and we’re talking about… Robocop and Boeing in the US Politics thread? Really? Well, this would also mean the President could order RoboCop to unscrew bolts in Boeing planes without being prosecuted, so it's kind of related! 12 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said: Interesting. Can Biden then send a special ops team to take out Mango? I'd kind of love it if they did a demo of this. Biden should send Seal Team 6 to go surround Orange Jesus and point their guns at him. If he believes his own argument, he shouldn't even protest, since Biden is doing exactly what his lawyer says he can do, except for the pulling the trigger part. 3 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said: I get it, and I’m not a lawyer. But it just sounds like such an incredibly stupid argument to make that what crosses my mind is either the whole thing is so absurd that there is no valid argument and this is the best they could come up with or they’re just counting on the corrupt justices + trump appointed justices being enough to win the day for them. Didn’t one of his lawyers basically said so on Fox (or oann or newsmax)? That Kavanaugh basically owes trump? The cheek, really! The Republican judge in the 3 judge panel also didn't seem enamored of this argument, and I suspect neither will Kavanaugh. It is so laughably absurd only Alito and Thomas will go for it. Maybe Gorsuch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts