Nah you’re right I’m confused. Post the year lynch left office maybe I’m misremembering.

Lynch was ag into 2017 that’s all I posted and I get blown up with ass mad reddit posts. Trump left her AG into the next year and left Yates as her interim. Those are both correct statements.

Nope? But yates was AG into 2017 iirc

Sorry yeah Loretta lynch not holder. Stayed on for a year into the presidency. Just figured if he was purging lynch would be first to go and Yates wouldn’t have even been sat

He literally kept Eric holder and Salley Yates on as AG so if he was doing that he was pretty fucking shit at it lol

To be fair it can be quite vague in a lot of cases. For example if someone is accused of a violent assault and then flees toward a group of people when police approach them is it reasonable or unreasonable to think he could harm someone if he’s able to reach the group. Or if someone is wanted for murder and flees police should police be held accountable for another murder they commit after escaping when they could have shot the person while they were fleeing?

This all hinges on reasonable belief and of course this calculus changes if it’s drug related and no weapon is involved or something but personally when it comes to fleeing felon type rules there’s reasonable arguments in both directions.

Right? Need a job, place to stay and some money? Just find some rube to kill then say you’re sorry.

Clown world. As if their opinion should matter since arresting them would primarily be so they don’t rob and kill other people lol

Honestly it’s possible she was behind most of it. The info access from alameda to FTX was pretty one way and SBF continues to maintain he is confused and doesn’t know shit.

Is this stupid, yes, but it’s not outside the realm of possibility that she set him up to fall after she embezzled the funds. If the government feels the same she’ll still get jail time but this also depends on what text messages and shit she’s given them though.

So the original conversation was about regulation regarding lines and distance to trees. My post is about regulation not being the solution to everything and pitfalls that can be encountered when assuming it is.

There is no need to be hostile. We agree that regulation in some areas is worthwhile just not to stop damage from falling trees.

Companies will already try to limit damage to lines because that’s a bill they’re going to foot. A useful regulation could be something that ensures they can’t pass the cost of damaged lines onto consumers so they would be more incentivized to clear trees but they are already doing this and it’s usually severe winds that blow shit into the lines and not the lines being built directly under trees anyway. Which may not really be a problem regulation can fix especially not the government creating an arbitrary distance between line and tree lmao.

So no the government doesn’t just tell someone to do a thing when it comes to most regulation.

There is usually a compliance process which requires frequent disclosures as well as audits, an entire lobbying process before hand because without some industry input the government tends to actually do some pretty stupid shit and periodic feedback periods as well. All of this requires man hours for some pretty intelligent and well paid specialists and it doesn’t materialize out of thin air like in some kind of a time paradox. If they’re working on compliance disclosures, lobbying and audit compliance and fixes then they aren’t doing other shit for the company they are still expected to do so the cost is there regardless if they’re on salary or retainer anyway.

So I’ll pose the question again. Why add all this extra cost for trees when the company literally already does it?

Right they already do this. So if they had to also hire lawyers to navigate a compliance process just to do the same thing they already do then you’d be paying a lot more for power

Tbf this is a shit proposition if anyone lives in a lightly forested area and not the solution you think it is.

Without regulation tree falls on power lines. With regulation anyone that lives near trees needs to pay a fuckload extra for power to go through so superficial approval process where the government gets to approve of a transaction between two parties who are already accepting the risk that trees might fall on a line