Turns out, Trump was, once again, totally wrong. Once again, betting on the wrong horse (errr... dog). Not such a hero, after all:https://babylonbee.com/news/cnn-uncovers-evidence-hero-dog-sniffed-butts?fbclid=IwAR0zucm3faFUyDOJdT555E4TvtapxxHvbwl8o5s0lqoB_JyFvYlF7drd5ss
A team of NVIDIA researchers has defined new AI techniques that give computers enough smarts to see a picture of one animal and recreate its expression and pose on the face of any other creature. The work is powered in part by generative adversarial networks (GANs), an emerging AI technique that pits one neural network against another.Before this work, network models for image translation had to be trained using many images of the target animal. Now, one picture of Rover does the trick, in part thanks to a training function that includes many different image translation tasks the team adds to the GAN process.
What? I seem to remember Obama touting this on his re-election campaign, "Osama is dead and Detroit is alive," along with other variants said plenty of times in 2012.
Turns out, Trump was, once again, totally wrong. Once again, betting on the wrong horse (errr... dog). Not such a hero, after all:
Obama saying "Osama is dead" is a simple, undeniable fact. He did not take personal credit for it.
Amazing. I'd never heard of that site before, and my attention has been drawn to two links in 24 hours. (This is the other.)Jeremy
Amazing. I'd never heard of that site before, and my attention has been drawn to two links in 24 hours.
It's a website known for Satire...
Happens every time. The discussion starts with a serious statement and ends with a joke.
Especially when you try to treat a joke (impeachment) as a serious statement
Well Tom Brokaw, on MSNBC none the less, said, “The big difference is … they still don’t have what you call 'the goods' on this president in terms of breaking the law and being an impeachable target for them." It's important to remember that (a) aid was not withheld and (b) the investigation was not implemented. Even if you think Trump's words were concerning helping him in the 2020 election, he did not follow through with it.
I think that's not correct, or even relevant. He did solicit for a foreign nation to influence the national elections. That's the ground for impeachment, and from the looks of it there is enough first-hand evidence to prove that. It was only made worse by the attempted cover-up, and the going outside of the official diplomatic channels (making it more difficult for Congress to do its duty) doesn't help either. Then the coercion of witnesses to not testify raised more suspicion, what (else) are they trying to hide. Cheers,Bart
... In other news though, it really getting bad for the dog!
All of these can be explained by other possible actions and motives. Sorry Bart, but there is no clear cut evidence. They don't have the goods. I am half expecting the vote to fail on Thursday; as of this morning, at least one Dem in the house is saying he will most like vote against the resolution.
Speaker Pelosi will not bring a vote to the floor that she will lose. I don't know how you can say there is no clear cut evidence. We have already seen several credible witnesses come before the inquiry panel that lay out the problem. In addition, the President only released an edited transcript of the phone call and put the actual phone call in a lock box. There is also the significant matter regarding the role of Giuliani, who may or may not have been delegated with carrying out the President's foreign policy and other goals in the Ukraine. The bigger problem for the President is obstruction of justice which will likely be one of the Impeachment articles 'if' they bring a charge to forward to the Senate. There are going to be some difficult votes to take by both sides though I think more will be of consequence in the Senate if there is an Impeachment vote. The Republicans who seem only to be attacking this on procedural grounds and not trying to seek the truth are leading the US to a dangerous place. Many of them have argued in the past that the executive branch has grown in power and much of this results from poor Congressional oversight. Now that we have some Congressional oversight, the Republicans are lining up to argue against the process. I've done my share of Congressional testimony during my working career and it's never very pleasant (I got severely upbraided by Senator Boxer on an environmental issue that we were actually the 'good guys'). The Senate can ultimately vote not to impeach but they ought to welcome oversight. the only Senate committee that is doing a passable job is the Intelligence Committee that is chaired by Senator Burr with Senator Warner as the ranking member.
