Wouldn't you expect him to react more demonstratively? He looks back over his shoulder, not at the gun in his hand. All the other ICE agents wrestling with Pretti flinch back as though the shot was from the agent who pulls out his own gun (in video 1).
Who fired the first shot (at 21 seconds in the first video)? Logically it should have been the agent in center who pulls out his gun at 15 seconds and points it at Pretti. He obviously fires the second shot at 26 seconds - you can see the slide move and the casing eject. None of the other agents appears to have a gun in hand (other than the guy who pulls Pretti's gun from the holster and immediately turns and walks away).
Listening carefully, the first and second-fourth shots sound different. Does that have any significance?
Genetic Data From Over 20,000 U.S. Children Misused for ‘Race Science’
A group of fringe researchers thwarted safeguards at the National Institutes of Health and gained access to data from thousands of children. The researchers have used it to produce at least 16 papers purporting to find biological evidence for differences in intelligence between races, ranking ethnicities by I.Q. scores and suggesting Black people earn less because they are not very smart.
Mainstream geneticists have rejected their work as biased and unscientific. Yet by relying on genetic and other personal data from the prominent project, known as the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study, the researchers gave their theories an air of analytical rigor. Members of the research group were ineligible to obtain data from the ABCD project. But one of them gained access through an American professor who was already being investigated by the N.I.H. over his handling of another child brain study. Their papers have provided fodder for racist posts on social media and white nationalist message boards that have been viewed millions of times. Some of the papers are cited by A.I. bots like ChatGPT and Grok in response to queries about race and intelligence. On the social media platform X, Grok has referred users to the research more than two dozen times this month alone.
The misuse of the children’s data has validated longstanding concerns that hundreds of thousands of Americans’ genetic information held by the N.I.H. could fall into the wrong hands. The agency grants widespread access to stimulate new medical discoveries. But critics say the N.I.H. has failed to address the risks that the data, even with personally identifiable details removed, could be misused in unethical research, for commercial purposes or by foreign adversaries. The Times learned that in 2024, the same data was improperly obtained by an unidentified researcher in China. The data is not allowed to be shared with people in adversarial countries that could use it for blackmail, spy recruitment or military purposes. But the researcher evaded that prohibition by faking an affiliation with an American university, according to a former N.I.H. official and Dr. Jernigan, who said the agency informed her of the incident.
This debate is extremely opaque currently. For the interested outsider you have to go deep into the weeds of advanced statistics to follow along. Scott has some recent posts on the 'heritability gap' but it still makes my eyes glaze over. Optimistically, GWAS analyses will get more powerful, and environmental racial gaps will close, and the answer will be clearer in a few decades. The 'misuse' of anonymized data (what horrible crimes can the CCP and Ruzzia do with this?) is hardly that big a deal, but it will be kept under stronger lock and key in future.
It's possible that they've reached peak carbon emissions already. US carbon emissions peaked in 2007, a two-decade lag time seems reasonable.
Several EU countries sent tripwire forces into Greenland a few days ago. Now Trump has announced 10% tariffs on imported goods from Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Finland. As a sidenote, despite predictions of economic catastrophe, Trump's tariffs have been smaller and done less economic damage than estimated.
For starters, inflation is running below projections. In December, the just-announced inflation rate was 2.7 percent. The Fed’s favorite indicator was unchanged from November when the core inflation rate, at 2.6 percent, was the lowest since 2021.
Tariffs have had surprisingly little impact on higher consumer prices. “Tariff pass‑through to consumers has been much milder than anticipated,” Olu Sonola, head of U.S. economic research at Fitch Ratings, wrote in a recent research note. Yet revenue from tariffs brought in close to $300 billion in 2025, up from about $80 billion in 2024, and is currently on track to produce over $350 billion this year.
The evidence suggests that most costs are being absorbed by foreign exporters or by domestic sellers accepting lower profit margins. And since the actual tariffs on different countries are a crazy quilt of different rates, producers have also become expert at shifting their supply chains to countries with relatively lower tariffs. In addition, it’s easy to overstate the impact of tariffs on household costs, since imports are only about 14 percent of GDP. In other words, there are no tariffs on 86 percent of GDP.
The high tariff rate on China skews the averages. Excluding China, the effective tariff rate on the rest of the world, adjusting for trade share and exempt categories, is not the average 17 percent. It’s well below 10 percent. Thanks in part to the tariffs, the chronic U.S. global trade deficit has been shrinking. The October deficit was $29.4 billion, down nearly 40 percent from September. The decline continued in November, the last month for which statistics are available.
Still, no one knows what's the next step of Trump's master plan. Will it fizzle like the whole "Canada 51st state" thing? Polymarket estimates 27% chance that Trump will take "part of Greenland" in 2026.
The point is, you should be ruling on easy mode when you have a money printer in the ground, but he still managed to get overthrown, without significant foreign interference.
The oil boom was obviously not sustainable but the Shah's incompetence was unique. Every other oil state managed to not piss off their entire population.
Ultra niche markets would obviously be rife with insider betting. Fool and his money, etc.
It's on page 30 as 'eliminations'.
UHC pays its own doctors more, and in general insurance companies will steer customers towards their own, more expensive facilities, but there's limited studies on how it affects care in general. You'd think that it should increase the number of procedures done at least, but that's not so clear.
The study found that when independent physicians integrated with a hospital, they changed their care practices (for example, by reducing the number of patients they put under deep sedation) and increased their throughput (measured by the number of patients they treated). Specifically, the integrated physicians reduced their use of deep sedation by about 3.7 patients for every 100 treated. However, patients of integrated physicians experienced “a significant increase in both major post-colonoscopy complications such as bleeding (3.8 per 1,000 colonoscopies) and other complications such as cardiac or nonserious GI symptoms (5.0 and 3.3 per 1,000 colonoscopies, respectively).”
The researchers found that the reduced use of deep sedation “at least partially explains the increase in adverse outcomes” and that it was “driven mainly by hospitals no longer allocating expensive anesthesiologists to relatively unprofitable colonoscopy procedures.”
Moreover, integration increased the number of patients a physician was able to treat and elevated reimbursement per procedure—integrated doctors were reimbursed about $127 more per colonoscopy procedure than independent doctors, or about 48% more.
It's at least the reason for high drug costs.
If you look at UnitedHealth's 10-k, Optum (the provider network) made $253b in revenue, but $151b of that was 'internal eliminations' transfers from UnitedHealthcare (the insurance arm) to Optum.
https://www.unitedhealthgroup.com/content/dam/UHG/PDF/investors/2024/UNH-Q4-2024-Form-10-K.pdf
Vertically integrated insurance companies can charge themselves more so it looks like patients get more bang for their buck. The PBM (owned by the health insurance company) charges the health insurance company a high price for a drug, increasing "payout" (numerator of the medical loss ratio) while simply shifting revenue internally. The same thing happens with insurance-owned clinics and pharmacies.
Pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) are supposed to negotiate drug prices between manufacturers, pharmacies, and health plans, since they can essentially pool negotiating power. In practice, they're integrated with the health insurance companies, so they rent-seek and take what are basically bribes from the manufacturers (in the form of rebates) to make the drugs "cheaper" to consumers, while also forcing independent pharmacies to take smaller reimbursements or lose access to their network.
Doctors get paid well but the administrative burden is also a large part of the discrepancy. Providers have to spend way too much time negotiating with insurance companies over payments and what will and won't be covered. There's an entire business around denying as many claims as they can get away with. Part of it is inherent in a multi payer system (Germany's public-private system has higher costs than the UK) but there are plenty of aspects to the 'managed care' system, like provider networks and utilization management, that are unique to the US.
Similarly, drug development is notoriously expensive and the costs have to be passed down to the consumer at some point - but the insurance companies are hardly innocent bystanders forced to pass them through. Pharmacy benefit managers are supposed to negotiate reasonable prices/rebates and formularies between drug manufacturers, pharmacies, and insurance companies - but the three largest companies (Optum, Caremark, Express Scripts) managing 80% of all prescriptions are owned by UnitedHealth, CVS, and Cigna, which defeats the whole 'independent negotiator' thing and just makes them rent seekers at consumer/government expense. It also makes it possible to skirt the medical loss ratio rule by shifting profits.
What will the future of the US healthcare system look like?
The current system is a patchwork of primarily employer-sponsored healthcare (60% of non-elderly Americans), the ACA marketplace (offering government-approved plans through private insurance companies), Medicare for the elderly, and Medicaid for the poor, disabled, and children. About 8-9% of the population is uninsured. Prices are higher and health outcomes worse than comparable developed countries.
Obamacare attempted to reduce the uninsured population by, among other things, implementing Medicaid expansion to all adults under 138% of the federal poverty level and granting tax credits to help defray the cost of marketplace plans (for incomes up to 400% of the FPL). During COVID, these subsidies were increased and expanded to higher income levels, but Congress allowed them to expire this year, resulting in average premium increases of ~114% for about 22 million people, although an additional vote is scheduled this month.
In addition, low-income adults utilizing expanded Medicaid will be required to demonstrate 80 hours of work per month starting in 2027. Mike Johnson framed this as kicking out unemployed young men mooching off the system - even the old welfare queen trope has been de-DEIified. Georgia already implemented a similar work-requirements program as part of their Medicaid expansion in 2023, resulting in the bulk of the money going to administrative costs and only about 9k out of 250k low-income adults enrolled.
As a result of all of this, the uninsured population will likely increase this year, which may even cause premiums for people with health insurance to rise due to a death spiral effect - if more people are uninsured and can't pay their medical bills, the costs may be shifted to covered patients.
The above article takes the pessimistic view that the system is unlikely to improve significantly, because tying healthcare to employment is such a nice perk for employers (the system started during WW2 when companies offered health insurance as a replacement for wage increases due to federal wage freezes). European or Canadian style universal healthcare certainly seems less likely than ever.
Drones have made armored assaults extremely difficult. It's just too hard to amass a strike force without being spotted, much less crossing the killzone. That's why they switched to light 'vehicles' like golf carts and whatnot - the best survivability is speed and concealment. The idea behind "Line of Drones" was to remove the need for frontline infantry - it hasn't lived up to those goals, but it's the reason they haven't collapsed when they have such a manpower crisis.
But I will also point out that what you demand was on offer in 47 and rather than accept them the surrounding Arabs went to war with Israel and lost.
Setting aside the question of whether it was a smart decision to reject the partition plan, it's easy to see why they didn't view it as legitimate. Imagine if Mexican immigrants petitioned the UN to split the American Southwest into a new Hispanic state because they (illegally) immigrated there in sufficient numbers.
Israel has four neighbors, two of which are borderline failed states and the other two are strong American allies. None of these countries are staging an invasion.
That's right below a headline about the hostages on my page.
'You're my life, my hero': Hostages reunite with families after two years
The US didn't lose vietnam because of rules of engagement. Americans and their allies killed a shit ton of civilians, most of which was never brought to trial internally or revealed to the public.
Who should have authority to order executions? It makes sense to push that up to the higher ups. Maybe the burden of evidence could be lower if they simply wanted to arrest him, although tons of people got thrown into military prisons for no good reason in afghanistan.
There's no evidence that they were fired at, although one vehicle did take damage from ricochet fragments of an M203 grenade fired by the convoy. They panicked and fired indiscriminately.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/24/opinions/blackwater-defendants-pardon-trump-opinion-oconnor
The us wouldn't have been driven out of Afghanistan if they decided to ethnically cleanse the whole place and start putting up housing like the Israelis do.
Why would Americans want to live there?
The beard issue is silly ;what's more concerning is Hegseth saying that rules of engagement are for pussies. He advocated for trump to pardon men like eddie gallagher and the blackwater operators at nisour square. At least for now the military is limited to blowing up narco boats and standing around federal buildings.
Saudis have dumped a ton of money into sports ventures like LIV golf and saudi league ft. ronaldo. They've also spent (a lot less) on esports/gaming such as the esports world cup where they crowned their own sponsored org as the victor two years in a row. The end goal, presumably, is to gain positive cultural influence in the west as opposed to simply oil, repressive islam, and terrorism. Maybe for pride as much as anything else.
- Prev
- Next

But the ICE agents didn't shoot him as he was approaching them with gun in holster. They got him down on the ground, one agent took his gun, and the other agent shot him from behind as he was getting up (?).
More options
Context Copy link