Can lottery winners be anonymous through a trust or other entity?
I know that most lotteries state that the winner(s) cannot remain anonymous. I kind of understand the logic behind this to "somewhat" ensure that the winner is not associated with the lottery. From what I understand, you don't "have" to appear in public getting pictures taken, etc, but the lottery board will still make your general info publicly available. Things like your town, state and last name of the winner(s). Let's say I win $10 Million and want to remain anonymous. There are a lot of reasons for this - not wanting to get bombarded by people trying to get your money is probably one of the biggest, but what about the the potential security risks involved with the general public [good and bad] knowing who you are, how much you won and where you live... it's not really that hard to dig up info on people. Could I get away with opening a Trust Fund [or similar], assign an executor with implicit instructions as "me" as the sole benefciary and let the trust fund cash it in?
What if California, Oregon, and Nevada suceeded from the union during the Civil War to create a Pacific Republic separate from both the confederacy and the union?
Without the Transcontinental Railroad (1869) or Panama Canal (1913?) there wouldn’t be much the Union could have done (let alone with the Great Sioux War going on in Minnesota and Kansas-Nebraska-Missouri still a mess.)There are Union forts in California like Fort Ord, Alcatraz and the Presidio , Fort Lewis in Washington, Forts Laramie, Kearney, and Smith in Wyoming, with stripped resources or quite obsolete equipment at that point. The largest would probably be Fort Laramie in Southern Wyoming with several thousand troops along the California and Oregon Trails, currently fighting the Ogalala Lakota along the Bozeman Trail there. Best case would be Fort Laramie troops to take several months to get to any of these key spots, San Francisco and Sacramento probably.So they probably could have gotten away with it, Oregon and Nevada are just territories at this point. Adding Washington, Idaho, and Montana would make sense for ports and gold/silver/copper and lumber (already going in Oregon.) Not many people but tens of millions of dollars in gold are currently coming out of those gold camps with silver and copper already noticed.Adding Utah as an ally, perhaps a mutual defense pact?, would make a real mess for the Union to intervene, having just had a brief war with the Mormons in Utah in 1856–7, that’d be an easy deal to make.Probably works both initially and over time.
As a white ally to the BLM movement, how can I best reply to people who say "all lives matter"?
That’s a great question and a hard one to answer, so I’m sure you’ve received half of the answers you deserve. I will try…“All lives matter”, though true, eliminates the inconsistency between how African-Americans are treated (in some situations/places) and caucasians (or any other race).“All lives matter”, though true, feels like another muzzle, saying that we’ve no right to point out that we’ve been mistreated and feel we deserve better because EVERYONE who’s been mistreated deserves better. And though that’s true, it muffles our cry. It downplays it. We cannot deny it, and therefore, it humiliates us. And if we resist the muzzle, it demonizes us, because then we are saying that black lives are the MOST important lives. And that was not our original message. Our original message was that we are here, we see pain, we’ve seen this pain inflicted upon us in the past, and we are coming together to cry out against it. To ask people to truly SEE us. To ask people to respect us.“All lives matter”, though true, says that we should be ashamed of speaking up for our race because there are other humans.“All lives matter”, though true, feels like another whip to our back telling us to keep quiet and get back to work.
Can a car loan company garnish wages on my repo car?
They can go after you for the deficiency balance. Though they must follow the repo laws for your state in order to legally collect on the deficiency. (but, the ball would be in your court to defend yourself if they failed to follow the proper procedures. And also to defend yourself if the repo has passed the collection SOL, which is 4 years from the date the vehicle was sold creating the deficiency) What they can do depends on if they file suit and win and also what your states exemption statutes allow, not all states allow wage garnishment. ++++++ Joseph -- Before you make claims that someone is wrong in their answer, you might want to do your homework. Read the UCC § 9.506 for the deficiency notices (which is also mirrored in many states RISA and MVISA statutes) A deficiency can not be claimed unless all of the required notices were properly and timely given, and all of the allowable redemption and cure time limits were adhered to And read Article 2 of the UCC for the SOL period case law -- FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY v. GILBERTO ARCE +++ I don't see anywhere in the OP's question where they actually do have a judgment against her/him - so as far as any answerer on here knows - the deal is not done . There are a couple dozen states that do have cure (redemption) statutes that legally have to be followed
Would Rep. Ilhan Omar be facing the same level of backlash over her recent comments if they had involved any other foreign country other than Israel?
My guess is you don't understand that Israel nation is NOT the same or to be even comparing with any othe nations for several reasons. First, it is Jewish that were always singled out suffering atrocity, discrimination, and ethnic clenching. They were suffering holocaust and lost most people by percentage in WW2. We helped to create Israel and we vowed to support them and stand with Israel. So historically and politically we are connected with them. What I see from your question, is that you didn't know that Israel is not just some country we find on the map and decided to support. This is our eternal friend that we help to create.Second, this is the only real friend and ally we have in the middle east region, and Israel is the only one there truly civilized nation, meaning with democracy most closely resembling ours. All the other nations are Islamic ruled, with totally different cultures and rituals, and different mindset. Some, like Palestinians are being rulled by terroristic group called Hamas. Their barbarians rulings are providing $150,000us rewards to the families of suicide bombers who kill Israeli civilians. This money usually comes from what we paying them for being peaceful and not committing any terroristic acts. That's how ironic the situation became.So as you see it takes knowledge to make a judgment in this case. First of all we have no vetting in place to screen candidates to Congress, which in the result brought us people like Omar and few others. Their candidacy never even supposed to see the daylight. Now we are stuck with them and ironically Democrats are the ones who will suffer the most from it.
If your country would be invaded from your neighboring country, which country would it be, and would you help or flee?
If it was Canada (highly unlikely) I would just sit back and see what happens. and the same goes for Mexico. At least we would reduce the gun toting redneck idiot population by at least a few thousand (Trumps base). We could sue Canada and get cheaper maple syrup and do the same with Mexico to get cheaper winter holidays in the sun.Viva Mexico!
What does 25 to life mean?
Any sentence of "A" (25) to "B" (life) simply means this:B = the actual sentence be served A = the minimum amount of time that must be served before you can earn release on parole So a 25 to LIFE sentence, is a life sentence. People tend to look at the minimum portion for whatever reason, but the fact is that the "A" (release to serve your sentence on parole) IS NOT A GUARANTEE!The only thing that is a guarantee is serving out your maximum sentence (B). So what happens is that people delude themselves when they focus on the low (potential) end of a sentence. Some people who accept a plea bargain will take something like a 2-10, with the expectation of getting out in 2 years (usually because their lawyer implies that they will), and they wind up doing most, if not the entire 10, behind the walls of the prison. Sometimes they get out, briefly, on parole, but wind up getting sent back behind the walls for a minor parole violation.On the other hand, society and the victims of crime tend to think along similar lines. They think that the minimum portion is too little time and that it is a guarantee. The fact is that parole isn't easy to get granted. I've had my parole denied, and witnessed many other denials, for some really unbelievable reasons.Just remember that the "A" is only possible if the person who receives a sentence is a model inmate and everything else necessary to the granting of parole goes in their favor (things such as a job, housing, and other supports that will increase the chances of a successful re-entry of the prisoner). The system does a good job of keeping people in prison once they get there.