I don’t think he meant what the criminals were doing was “honorable.” The way I read it was the transaction is done with a reasonable expectation that they’ll play by the rules (they set the rules of course) and that they will release the assets. Honor among thieves, etc. No one (not even the criminals) thinks what…

“like animals.”

That would work, but we’re keeping Capt. Kirk and Shania Twain, I guess.

I’ll make this brief. In 2015, my all paid for 2007 Miata got crunched by a mini-van on Interstate 26.

I bet they’re listening:

Interesting and makes sense. You might be able to “return” inventory, but the manufacturer/producer marks it as sold once it’s sold to a dealer/distributor. So it’s a different business model.

That’s a good point. I’m no fan of Tesla products (i did recently drive a plugin-hybrid as a rental car and it was legit, but not a Tesla), but while 50,000 are unsold, they still sold hundreds of thousands of vehicles in the quarter as Lawrence pointed out.

Me too. Reporter just doing their job trying to get his side and he lies with sarcasm. That’s what gets me. The “media” gets blamed for getting things wrong so many times and skewing the facts, even when they’re just telling people things they don’t want to hear.

My scooter agrees with you.

Sure, but isn’t the point that it has been billed as an off-road vehicle? Several owners have attempted this. I’m sure some have been successful, but many have not. Most of the 4WDs I see around likely never go off road and never will. But that’s not the point here. They’re selling a capability it doesn’t appear to…

As a subaru driver, that’s the first thing that came to mind. The second was the story about how Subaru went after a specific audience with subtle messaging and how they get Japanese execs to go for it. It’s a great case study of smart advertising.

That is one crazy story on so many levels. Some my neighbors are a bit insufferable, but damn.

It also ensures the right to legal representation during a criminal trial. I think (dude, I’m just guessing here) that might have been what he was going for, but that’s giving him a ton of credit since he wasn’t in a criminal proceeding at the time. Though we can all agree he was headed in that direction, right?

Me too.

That part isn’t clear, but it seems narrowly restricted to non-immigration questions and an extended stop. However, “brief questioning” isn’t well defined.

Yeah he asserted his right to remain silent, but he didn’t practice that right.

Maybe they’re only happy when they’re unhappy?

I’ll take Dunning-Kruger for $5 ... (and a mess of tacos vs. death)