Beet L. Jooz

SoftBank and AeroVironment are ready to conduct flight tests of its experimental solar-powered drone that can deliver 5G connectivity to anywhere in the world, reported Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).

Dubbed Hawk 30, the drone is a curved “flying wing” design. Filings with the Federal Aviation Administration and the Securities and Exchange Commission show the drone has ten electric engines and an operational altitude of over 12 miles.

According to a Space Act Agreement signed with NASA last November, the drone could lift off from NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center in California as soon as this month.

AeroVironment’s previous prototype drone, the Helios, was the largest winged horizontal aircraft in the world. The plane was wider than a Boeing 747 but weighed less than just one of the jet's landing wheels.

Helios came to an abrupt halt in 2003, when NASA was testing the drone off the Hawaiian coast, high winds caused the plane to disintegrate in mid-flight.

In 2010, AeroVironment designed and built another prototype, called the Global Observer, for the Pentagon. The drone carried top-secret communications and surveillance payloads. The program ended one year later after a crash landing.

The technical difficulties surrounding AeroVironment's drones did not prevent Facebook and Google from attempting to develop ones of their own.

"Google bought a company called Titan Aerospace in 2014, and carried out numerous tests of a 5G system called SkyBender at Spaceport America in 2016. Its parent company, Alphabet, eventually grounded the drones in 2017 to focus on Loon, which is now an Alphabet subsidiary delivering commercial Internet service from high-altitude balloons. Facebook also wanted to test its enormous, stratospheric Aquila drones at the Spaceport, but shelved its plans last year after fragile prototypes were damaged on landing," wrote IEEE.

In January 2018, SoftBank and AeroVironment formed a partnership called HAPSMobile to develop a solar-powered HALE drone for commercial operations.

Wahid Nawabi, CEO of AeroVironment said, “For many years, we have fully understood the incredible value HALE unmanned aircraft platforms could deliver to countless organizations and millions of people around the world through remote sensing and last mile, next-generation IoT connectivity.”

Although filings provide limited details of the Hawk's intended communications payload, it does say "tests will address integrating the transceivers at different altitudes in the solar environment."

IEEE notes that Google and Facebook have dropped out of the internet drone race, but the Hawk 30 still faces several competitors including Boeing subsidiary Aurora Flight Sciences' Odysseus and Airbus' Zephyr.

We'll know in several weeks if the Hawk 30 can overcome the mishaps of AeroVironment's previous drones. If the test flights are successful, Hawk 30 could be in the running to provide 5G connectivity to the world.

A California family is outraged that a doctor told their elderly relative his lungs were failing and he was going to die imminently - via a telepresence robot.

(CLICKONDETROIT) — A Detroit pastor been charged in the murder of a transgender woman who was found dead in December in the city’s Palmer Park neighborhood is due in court Monday afternoon.

Albert Weathers, 46, of Sterling Heights was charged Monday with murder in the death of 36-year-old Kelly Stough.

The post Pastor charged in murder of transgender appeared first on WND.

Authored by Graham Noble via LibertyNation.com,

Why a future Democratic president will never declare a national emergency over gun violence...

President Donald Trump has encountered criticism from both sides over his declaration of a national emergency on border security. Beyond the discussion of whether the situation warrants such action, many in the political world have raised the prospect that Trump is setting a dangerous precedent that will give future chief executives the opportunity to declare national emergencies to address any domestic issue by fiat, bypassing Congress.

It is a weak argument on several levels, but it appears to be the reason why a growing number of Senate Republicans have buckled to objections from Democrats and will support a joint resolution to terminate the president’s declaration. Trump still has the veto, though, so the resolution will prove meaningless and the fight will be taken to the courts, where the president’s clear authority will be upheld.

No Need For A National Emergency

As the president himself pointed out during his CPAC address, he is not setting any precedent because a future Democratic president would invoke national emergency powers if they saw fit to do so, regardless of what Trump does in the present. How quickly people forget that the most stunning example – in recent years – of a president completely bypassing Congress to take action on a major issue of national concern was Barack Obama’s creation of the DACA program. In that instance, the president simply ignored Congress, commandeered its authority to legislate, and changed federal law. Obama did not even declare a national emergency to do so and Congress put up no fight.

The idea, then, that Trump’s national emergency declaration will embolden future presidents to use the same tactic is nonsense. Congressional Democrats have shown that they are willing to simply cede unlimited authority to a president, should they choose to do so.

The argument – strawman that it may be – has been put out there, though. Specifically, Democratic presidential hopefuls have suggested they may use the measure to deal with gun violence. Could a national emergency declaration do anything to reduce gun crime or would it merely be an excuse to further erode the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens?

Democrats have volunteered no explanation of what the threatened national emergency on gun violence would look like. The truth is, the threat is empty. There is no possible legal basis for a president to unilaterally alter federal firearms laws. National emergency statutes do not grant any authority to impose new laws or to alter existing ones.

Once again, Obama’s creation of the DACA program shows that a future Democratic president need not declare a national emergency to impose draconian new gun restrictions. In fact, using the national emergency statutes would actually limit a president’s power, in this respect.

2A Rights Guaranteed During National Emergencies

In 2006, the 109th Congress passed the Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act which prohibits the confiscation – either permanently or temporarily – of privately-owned firearms during times of national emergency. It also prohibits the establishment of a gun registry and the imposition of restrictions on the carrying of firearms. This law does not, of course, override any existing federal, state or local firearms regulations already on the books, but it explicitly prevents a national emergency declaration being used to justify the creation of new restrictions.

There is certainly an argument to be made that the situation with the influx of illegal aliens across the southern border should never have gotten to this point, but the fault lies squarely with Congress. Both Democrats and Republicans have failed, for decades, to adequately address the issue. The president elevated the problem to the level of national emergency in order to appropriate adequate funds to construct border barriers and provide the resources necessary to expedite the processing of illegal border-crossers.

As with previous national emergencies, however, this latest one does nothing to infringe upon the constitutional rights of American citizens. A dangerous precedent would be to declare such an emergency as a way of depriving Americans of a right protected in the very founding document that forms the basis of all U.S. law.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has already hinted at the possibility of a gun-related national emergency and it is clearly a talking point that her party has adopted and intends to promote. Julian Castro, who is competing for the Democratic presidential nomination, told MSNBC: “I will come into office with a strong belief … that the fact that so many people in this country die because of gun violence, that is a national emergency.” Castro has also suggested, in a tweet, that climate change may also be a policy area over which a national emergency could be declared.

Another presidential candidate, California Democrat Kamala Harris, dutifully parroted the party line by hinting that, in addition to gun violence and climate change, healthcare may require a national emergency.

I stand in solidarity with those rallying across the country against the President’s manufactured national emergency. It’s time we address the actual emergencies plaguing our nation: gun violence, lack of access to health care, and climate change.

— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) February 18, 2019

Is any president justified in using executive authority to mold domestic policy without legislation from Congress – even to address a major issue that Congress has consistently proved unwilling and/or unable to deal with? Even to those who view with skepticism any expansion or overreach of presidential authority, it is difficult to dismiss the argument that, where the legislative branch fails to resolve an ongoing national problem, the executive branch should take action. Certainly, those Democrats – and Republicans – who uttered not one word of objection when Obama legalized illegal aliens with the stroke of a pen would agree.

On the other hand, a president has no constitutional or moral authority to deprive citizens of their rights in the name of what they have decided to call an emergency; whether that be the right to own and carry a firearm or the right to choose a health insurance plan.

Defining An Emergency

The second question to consider is: How does one define emergency? The abuse of America’s immigration laws has taken place over several decades, so is it really now an emergency? The same can be said of gun violence, the affordability of healthcare or the effects of climate change. The (Merriam-Webster) dictionary definition of an emergency is “an unforeseen combination of circumstances or the resulting state that calls for immediate action,” or “an urgent need for assistance or relief.”

None of the aforementioned situations are unforeseen and whether any of them require urgent relief is an entirely subjective argument. If emergency measures are needed in order to save lives, then why not declare the consumption of alcohol a national emergency – or smoking, for that matter?

According to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, some 88,000 Americans die every year from alcohol-rated causes, making this “the third leading preventable cause of death in the United States.” Smoking – incidentally – is number two. This figure for alcohol-related fatalities dwarfs the number of annual gun-related deaths, so why would gun violence warrant a national emergency but alcohol consumption not?

Empty Threat

Clearly, a future Democratic president would have no credible basis for declaring gun violence a national emergency and no legal authority to use such a declaration to enact any additional gun restrictions. The threat is empty. Any future president who wants to deprive Americans of their Second Amendment rights will attempt to do so without invoking national emergency powers.

Democrats using this threat are being outrageously disingenuous. Republicans going along with them are either entirely out of touch with reality or they are willingly perpetrating a ruse and assuming the American people are gullible enough to believe them.

Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT) defended Fox News from the Democratic National Committee’s decision to ban them for the 2020 primary debates during his interview on CNN Monday morning.

“I want to ask you about the DNC decision not to hold debates on Fox. You go on Fox, you’re interviewed by the folks over at Fox. Do you think that was the right decision from the DNC,” CNN anchor Alisyn Camerota asked.

“Well, with all due respect to the DNC, no, I don’t think it was the right decision,” Himes replied. “You know, look, it’s no surprise to anybody, including the Fox News watchers that Fox is largely an instrument of the right wing of the Republican Party. It’s a propaganda arm for the White House. However, and the reason I go on Fox, is that it’s watched by millions and millions of Americans.”

Himes said because of Fox News’ large audience, he gets to talk about what the Democrats want for America in front of an audience that may not hear about otherwise.

“But it’s interesting, Congressman, since you believe it’s a propaganda arm for the White House, but you’re trying to get your ideas out there and you think that you need to speak to the Fox audience, have you ever seen your interviews move the needle,” Camerota followed up.

“Well, you know, one of the secrets, not so secret secrets about television, of course, is that they say that, you know, 70 percent of the impression that is formed is formed with the — with the volume off. And, you know, again, I think our candidates will make a far better impression with the volume off,” Himes said.

“So, look, you know, a debate is a very carefully orchestrated thing. I go on Tucker Carlson, I go on Fox & Friends, it can get uncomfortable because when they don’t like where you’re going they cut you off, they go somewhere else, they throw a lot of the nonsense out there,” he continued. “But a debate is a very highly structured moment, right? It is in some senses fair. It’s not like, you know, Sean Hannity can jump in and challenge Bernie Sanders. So, again, with all due respect to the DNC, that’s a huge audience.”

Watch above, via CNN.

Twitter is having a hard time with the social media platform’s new algorithm arbitrarily banning users for tweeting the phrase “learn to code” after learning Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey himself tweeted that phrase years ago.

On the famous Joe Rogan podcast recently Dorsey and his attorney Vijaya Gadde said they created the automatic suspension of people who tweet “learn to code” because people were using it to mock journalists who lost their jobs at BuzzFeed a couple months ago. Ironically, the phrase first originated in 2014 after a BuzzFeed journalist suggested coal miners in middle America, who were losing their jobs due to industrial advancement, should “learn to code.” It eventually became a phrase adopted by memers on the right.

“The ‘Learn to Code’ is coming from inside the house!” tweeted Mediaite’s Julio Rosas.

Others complained about the platform’s arbitrary suspension of numerous users who had tweeted the phrase, while allowing others to keep their accounts.

What are the rules on this website? I am so confused. https://t.co/Vj6j9WY515

— Tyler Grant (@The_Tyler_Grant) March 11, 2019

The "Learn to Code" is coming from inside the house! https://t.co/xabEKdFPxr

— Julio Rosas (@Julio_Rosas11) March 11, 2019

What does he mean by this! https://t.co/Hl2vluswuy

— Author Jack Posobiec (@JackPosobiec) March 11, 2019

So if you tell a journalist to #LearnToCode you get suspended, but if you call someone a Nazi you’re good to go. One of the many issues I’ll discuss with @Timcast tomorrow… pic.twitter.com/JpfiCLEqBy

— Dave Rubin (@RubinReport) March 6, 2019

I don’t really care about this other than the ridiculous double standard. How is #LearnToCode more of an offense than this? These people libel and slander freely (all while playing the victim) because their progressive political stance give them all the cover they need.

— Dave Rubin (@RubinReport) March 6, 2019

This whole trend of banning people for merely TYPING "learn to code" on Twitter is getting out of hand. For one thing, it was clearly a joke in this context. For another, most people probably should learn to code. https://t.co/RXLPEkUz6B

— Esoteric Jeff (@EsotericCD) March 11, 2019

TIm Cook is saying that EVERYONE should Learn To Code.
Right in front of the president.
You better ban him @Jack thems fighting words.

— Sarah Eaglesfield (@zenxv) March 6, 2019

I have been locked out of my account for the past 12 hours for quote-tweeting an article about Rod Rosenstein and trying to offer him some simple life advice. pic.twitter.com/zm5kmBGkad

— Kate Hyde (@KateHydeNY) March 9, 2019

Horrifying hate speech. @jack should be ashamed https://t.co/T6aoN9qgDG

— Charles Fain Lehman (@CharlesFLehman) March 11, 2019

Hey @jack! Suspend this guy! https://t.co/sWh1aaVJ6a

— Yossi Gestetner (@YossiGestetner) March 11, 2019

did you get suspended for posting that hate speech Jack?

— Tony Bruno (@TonyBrunoShow) March 11, 2019

Another old tweet from Dorsey also surfaced several times recently: one in which Dorsey’s friend “Adam” colored the area surrounding his mouth black, a costume some described as blackface.

Jack can you clarify what this was referring to please. Is Adam an elected official from Virginia?

Just want to make sure you’re not being racist… https://t.co/UDPXN0xhRw

— Austen Fletcher (@fleccas) February 9, 2019

Perhaps it's time to revisit this tweet https://t.co/OFyEDxi2IK

— Author Jack Posobiec (@JackPosobiec) February 7, 2019

What’s was the costume jack https://t.co/yZsToj7J30

— art boy (@ka5sh) December 9, 2018

On the one hand, we don’t know this is in fact a blackface reference. ON THE OTHER HAND, Twitter is filled with violent, racist, misogynist, all-in-all shit bags, Jack favors the Proud Boy hair style and he loves to meditate with mass murderers. So. https://t.co/18w7237bjN

— john r stanton (@dcbigjohn) February 8, 2019

Would Twitter founder @jack ban himself and his friends? https://t.co/2TCcfJNqvn pic.twitter.com/EKOf6edEOt

— Nerd City (@nerdcity) December 9, 2018

“Would Twitter founder @jack ban himself and his friends?” one user mused.

"off the lows" ... or "off the highs" - it appears sell-the-news was the order of the day as yet another headline proclaiming a US-China trade deal is close sparked overnight gains, but met a wall of selling at the cash open...

China was up once again overnight - with SHCOMP back above 3,000 - but the afternoon session was notable selling...

European markets opened gap higher but faded into the close with Span and Germany ended unch...

US Futures show the day's actions best as stocks gapped open overnight after the WSJ trade headlines and then dumped at the cash open, not helped by construction spending and McConnell headlines...

Today was the worst day for the Dow since Jan 3rd before the panic bid lifted everything back...

Trannies are down 7 days in a row (longest losing streak since Nov 2017)

TICK showed the biggest selling pressure since Jan 28th hit around 1215ET, before stocks bounced on a series of buy programs...

S&P 2,800 confirmed the Quadruple Top...

The algos BTFD in a desperate attempt to get us back to 2800...

Nasdaq futures tested the 200DMA...

Tesla stocks hit a 5-mo low and caught down to bonds...

VIX topped 17 intraday, but compressed back as stocks bounced...

We note VIX broke above its 200DMA before pulling back...

Bonds and stocks decoupled as the latter rebounded...

Treasury yields fell on the day - after 3 big up days - with the long-end outperforming...

30Y yields fell around 4bps...

The Dollar refused to be impacted by the weakness in stocks and continued to trend higher in a tight range...so much for Trump's weak dollar call...

However, overnight strength in the yuan on the WSJ trade headlines, were erased...

Cryptos had another ugly day...

Despite dollar gains, WTI managed to rally as PMs and copper slipped lower...

Gold extended its losses against the Yuan...

Coincidence?

What happens next?

Tesla's new price cuts have been so extreme and so unexpected, that some buyers who purchased vehicles recently and have been forced to watch them depreciate significantly (sometimes overnight) have launched impromptu protests in Taiwan and China according to electrek.

One of the sub-plots to Tesla announcing that it would finally be launching its $35,000 Model 3 last week was the announcement that it was also making price and option changes to its Model S and Model X lineup. These changes included a new Model S battery pack and some enormous price drops, including ones up to $12,000 in the United States. This comes on top of price cuts that the company has already twice made so far in 2019. With Musk admitting last week that the company won't be profitable in Q1 2019, it is obvious that Tesla is trying to keep demand steady, while moves like shutting down all of its retail stores make it obvious that the company is also doing everything it can to cut costs.

Overseas, however, price reductions on some of these models have been even more significant. For instance, the higher end versions of the Model S and the Model X saw overnight price reductions of over $30,000. Also, in Taiwan, the price of a Model S P100D was cut nearly in half by Tesla's latest price changes, resulting in about $100,000 in savings.

This rightfully angered owners so much that they started to organize and protest at Tesla stores and superchargers.

Did anyone see what’s happening in Taiwan? Taiwan Tesla Owners protesting about the price adjustment outside of the Supercharger Station and Store/Service Centre in Taiwan. Have they solved the issue? @TeslaOwnersTwn #Tesla #TeslaTaiwan $TSLA pic.twitter.com/mIKPFPigAf

— JayinShanghai (@ShanghaiJayin) March 4, 2019

More $tsla protests in China. Banner reads:
Don’t buy a Tesla today, wait and buy it at a discount tomorrow pic.twitter.com/5ZBOxqGKTk

— BertelSchmitt™ 🎩🎩🎩🎩🎩 (@BertelSchmitt) March 3, 2019

In China, price reductions have also caused protests, some of which have been reported by the Chinese media.

.@Tesla’s price cut ignited anger among #Chinese buyers, and some are reportedly put up banners at local retailers to #protest the price cuts. pic.twitter.com/LzsHdm3j13

— All Tech Asia (@alltechasianews) March 4, 2019

Global Times reported on one Tesla owner, who stated: "I received Tesla’s Model X on February 25, and I only drove this car for five days before Tesla announced a price reduction of 174,300 yuan ($25,989.87). I’m probably the most unlucky new buyer…That’s unfair."

While the remaining members of the Musk "cult" continue to defend the company under the guise that all price reductions will be good for Tesla over the course of the long-haul, consumers certainly appear to be feeling rejected by Tesla's "fly by the seat of its pants" management style. We wonder how long Musk and his gang can keep this line of thinking up before the inevitable protests in the United States start.

And they say the ones who voted for Trump are crazy. pic.twitter.com/MRWjZKwPwh

— Slightly Offens*ve (@ElijahSchaffer) March 4, 2019

Leftist activists recruited white men to don “Make America Great Again” hats, act like dogs and be paraded up and down Hollywood Boulevard on leashes by women on Sunday, culminating in a canine frenzy on Donald Trump’s star on the Walk of Fame.

The activist group Indecline explained its “performance” with more than two-dozen “men and women of color and members of the LGBT community” was based on a recent Twitter battle between rapper Cardi B and conservative pundit Tomi Lahren, reported the Gateway Pundit.

Cardi B told Lahren, “Leave me alone, or I’ll dog walk you.”

Indecline said in a press release the “project” was titled “Hate Breed.”

The group explained it “speaks to race relations in America, specifically the patience exhibited by those most affected by racism and bigotry and their willingness, despite having the greatest right to anger, to walk their attackers down a path to empathy.”

The men wore dog collars with tags that each bore the name of a “racist white man.”

The Gateway Pundit noted there was a casting call for the actors:

Male Caucasians for Human Dogs
Male/Female People of Color to be Dog Walkers
Male/Female LGBTQ to be Dog Walkers

To submit for a role in this project, please RSVP and DM us asap and tell us a little about yourself, as spots are expected to fill up fast. Tag your friends!!!

Trump’s star on the Walk of Fame has been vandalized repeatedly. It has been destroyed twice with a pickax and defaced on many occasions. In April 2017, for example, someone wrote the words “F— Trump” on it with a black marker.

The Gateway Pundit noted a rise in attacks on Trump supporters.

A Massachusetts woman last month knocked “Make America Great Again” hat off a stranger’s head at a Mexican restaurant, resulting in an assault and battery charge. At the University of California at Berkeley, a member of the conservative activist group Turning Point USA was attacked. Among others was a woman who posted video of herself harassing an elderly man in a thrift store wearing a Make America Great Again hat. Also, a couple wearing MAGA hats while shopping at a Sam’s Club had a gun pulled on them.

The post Leftists bark, growl like dogs on Trump's Hollywood star appeared first on WND.

WASHINGTON – Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has become the fourth GOP senator to pledge a vote for the disapproval resolution. Forty-seven Democrats and their independent allies would provide 50 votes, and Paul’s vote would make 51. Just one past the majority required. Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Susan Collins (Maine), and Thom Tillis (N.C.) have […]

The post Rand Paul Publicly Opposes Trump’s National Emergency Declaration appeared first on Accuracy in Media.