All_Pro_Bills
-
Posts
6,901 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by All_Pro_Bills
-
-
3 minutes ago, aristocrat said:
So his defense is going to be heart issues from covid and drugs? People are not going to like that
Some tidbits of what the defense might site:
When called to the scene due to Floyd allegedly passing counterfeit money, Floyd denied using drugs but later said he was “hooping,” or taking drugs.
The autopsy did not conclude that Floyd died from asphyxiation (though a family pathologist made that finding). Rather, it found “cardiopulmonary arrest while being restrained by law enforcement officer(s).” The state’s criminal complaint against Chauvin said the autopsy “revealed no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation. Mr. Floyd had underlying health conditions including coronary artery disease and hypertensive heart disease.” He also was COVID-19 positive.
Andrew Baker, Hennepin County’s chief medical examiner, strongly suggested that the primary cause was a huge amount of fentanyl in Floyd’s system: “Fentanyl at 11 ng/ml — this is higher than (a) chronic pain patient. If he were found dead at home alone & no other apparent causes, this could be acceptable to call an OD (overdose). Deaths have been certified w/levels of 3.” Baker also told investigators that the autopsy revealed no physical evidence suggesting Floyd died of asphyxiation.
The toxicology report on Floyd’s blood also noted that “in fatalities from fentanyl, blood concentrations are variable and have been reported as low as 3 ng/ml.” Floyd had almost four times the level of fentanyl considered potentially lethal.
Floyd notably repeatedly said that he could not breathe while sitting in the police cruiser and before he was ever restrained on the ground. That is consistent with the level of fentanyl in his system that can cause “slowed or stopped breathing.”
The restraint using an officer’s knee on an uncooperative suspect was part of the training of officers, and jurors will watch training videotapes employing the same type of restraint as official policy.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:
If the guy is not sentenced to death the country will burn.
From the set up it sounded like a 3rd degree manslaughter (not murder if I got it right) is the most likely conviction. Whether or not that's enough to appease the mob is an unknown.
-
12 hours ago, oldmanfan said:
Some folks do not have ready access to a driver’s license bureau..
I think we'd all agree that going to the DMV is never convenient or a pleasant experience.
-
1 hour ago, daz28 said:
This is about more than voter ID. As I said I have no problem with the government sending me a voter ID card, so I won't ever have to worry about not being registered ever again. The real issue here is limiting ways and means of voting with no evidence to support why. Why not address REAL issues like why my vote is worth less than other's votes, and why ANYONES vote is basically thrown in the trash can, and counted as a statistic, because it's winner take all. The flyover states already have far more representation in Congress than anyone in a heavily populated area. They're double dipping.
Our national government is a republic and not a democracy. A union of States. The electoral college was created and designed with the intent of prohibiting a few large high population states from dictating national polices to the remainder of the States. This was a condition for the ratification of the Constitution along with two Senators per State and proportional representation in the House. This issue is no less true in 1789 than it is in 2021. Absent this we'd have a few large states, California, New York, and a few others dictating all Federal policy to the rest of the nation. What's so fair about that?
-
1 hour ago, daz28 said:
My issue is that Georgia loses bigly(and Trump spreads the big lie), and then decides it's time for voter law changes. The end game of being "proofed" is keeping substances out of the hands of children, because it's a FACT that they will try to obtain them illegally. These laws were passed based on LIES about voter fraud. Huge difference. I'm all for voter ID if the federal government recognizes voting as a RIGHT, and provides them for everyone. Trust me, the government knows who each and every citizen in this country is. if you thinks it's easy to get lost in the shuffle, try not paying your taxes. If you'd like to show me "fact based" reasoning FOR voter ID, then I'd appreciate that. 1.000 cases of voter fraud out of billions of votes doesn't show a need for voter ID.
From a statistical perspective its a certainty there was some form of voter fraud. No system or process is 100% effective in eliminating "defects". Certainly not a mail in process that was thrown together rather quickly and not subject to much testing and validation. The question is how much of it was there. Sure there was no evidence of any "widespread" voter fraud and for all I know there wasn't but when you're not looking for something its hard to find it.
If you want examples of voter fraud look no further than Mayor Daley's Cook County political machine of the 1960's. Many of the 2020 claims of fraud are consistent with the practices of the past which were also denied. Such as in many densely populated Democratic districts were vote counting was stopped for no practical reason. Why stop counting when the votes are right there to count? The allegation was to wait for the rest of the state to be counted so you know how many "fake" votes you need to win the State.
Specific to Georgia there is a court case pending where the judge is deciding whether or not unseal the votes and allow investigators to "match" specific ballots to specific valid voters in specific counties. The concern is how to protect the identities of the voters. Given there was no funny business it seems logical nobody would object to this scrutiny as there is nothing to find and nothing to hide.
-
8 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:
A standard federal voter ID should be made available to all over the age of 18. And it needs to be a uniform way to get it that allow those in rural areas, or inner cities where travel is difficult, or for the elderly to have equal access.
That might work but States have some leeway in how they handle elections so it might be at that level. But I am still not clear on what fact based and objective concerns people have against the requirement of people identifying themselves as "valid" voters? What is so difficult or such a big imposition of having to show some form of valid ID? What keep citizens, specifically objections about how it impacts minorities, from acquiring a valid voter registration ID? Many of us are "proofed" almost daily and I'd expect those same objections should apply to these other requirements but I hear no objections to those situations.
-
19 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:
This is not good. China is showing its true intentions here. There’s little doubt. They could’ve ignored Iran like everyone else is but instead they’re getting in bed with them. The time of choosing may be upon us.
This all just didn't happen overnight. But it did take most people a long time to figure out we're screwed here already and its too late to reverse the course.
So maybe the architects of the China "most favored nation" designation back 30+ years ago could explain to us all what they were thinking at the time? Did they not foresee any of this? Assisting a communist and dictatorial regime with favors.
In the process businesses and whole industries were shipped off to China from all over the country resulting in a loss of jobs and communities in thousands of small towns and cities. But it did give us "every day low prices" for all the crap we consume that's made in China.
Or failure to enforce IP laws and restrictions per international law and trade deals along with forced joint venture arrangements.
Or sending trillions in funds to China by way of the US trade deficit.
Or a general trend in US foreign relations favoring coercion, sanctions, and consequences for non-compliance with US direction vs. cooperation and mutual benefit.
China was playing the "long game" while our leadership has been focused on diversity while sitting clueless as our country is strip mined of assets and productive capacity. To be certain, a world led by China will care not one bit abut diversity or what pronoun somebody wishes to be address by.
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, Big Blitz said:
"In the final analysis, however, despite all the damage he caused, O’Brien is just a drone, one of the many neo-Brownshirts who think that they’re fighting fascism by employing the tactics of the fascists of old (the original Nazi Brownshirts used to conduct energetic smear campaigns against those who dared to oppose them)."
I expect at some point these "cancel culture" people are going to mess with the wrong person and they'll be found chopped up into about a hundred pieces stuffed in a big plastic garbage bag.
-
22 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:
@Niagara Bill suggests a tax of a 1000% on gang dues, plus restricting access to criminality.
Chef Jim, you’re on the clock.
For gangs I suggest sensitivity training and assigning a social justice "coach" to each gang. Holding anger management sessions where they can discuss their feelings and maybe even hug each other and cry together.
-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, Niagara Bill said:
You have no ideas except constitution. That us a true joke.
Military guns are obvious. Whether I can define that is not necessary in concept. But easy to say a gun with a primary use to kill multiple people in a short time.
I am not into animal cruelty. You are obviously just an as?! It only takes a short period of time for a skilled hunter to reload. But I am into stopping human cruelty with the killing of people and multiple people with the use of non essential guns.
Ok 400% tax. Slow down the purchase of guns. There are enough guns on the market now.
Training for people who work in the gun industry to assist us them transferring to new employment. There are 1000s who would be put out of work producing and selling people killing weapons.
Do something useful Chef and add the peppercorn sauce. At this point it appears you Chef skills are only producing Big Macs.
I've got a question to both sides which is slightly off topic but still relevant to the gun control debate. If ownership of these weapons is made illegal should police, public and private security forces that protect rich people, officials, and politicians also be banned from owning and using them? After all, why would police and private security need to be militarized like SWAT teams similar to a Navy Seal team on a covert mission if nobody has these weapons on the streets? Why should they receive an exemption? Why should I as a private citizen be subject to living in an environment where domestic law enforcement and security are armed like the military? Like some occupation force. After all, they are people and they may be more than capable of shooting a lot of people for one reason or another. If expectations in the politicial sphere is the ban works then there is no reason for these organizations to be armed for urban warfare.
If the answer is "no" because criminals being criminals don't follow the law and they will still have access to these weapons to do harm then there's not much benefit in passing any new law other than to pursue an objective of systematically disarming private citizens.
-
5 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:
Exactly
This is getting really close to being behind the iron curtain. And Tibs was worried about Putin?
Most curious is not that the administration has invoked the "cone of silence" (for the younger among us A Get Smart analogy). They've screwed the pooch here and the President's suggestion that Trump is to blame is laughable. Why would they want to shine a light on their failure here?
Its the fact the free and fair media is letting them get away with it. Contrast with the previous administration where the press filled the role of Spanish Inquisition interrogator in grilling the WH press secretary every day. They should be filing all kinds of legal briefs and challenges, going to court to get access, and making a big stink of the issue in their coverage.
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, T master said:
Every American of legal age to vote should have some form of identification (preferably with a picture) in their possession babies are given SS numbers shortly after birth so there is no earthly reason why people of voting age shouldn't have and be able to produce identification when going to vote if asked pretty simple to me .
If there is some excuse that a person cannot get a ID there could be volunteers to help them get one . Each party get Millions if not billions of dollars donated to their campaign cut back on other things in the campaign like signs and such and put the money to things more important like helping those that for what ever reason say they can't get legal ID to get it if having their person win is important as they say they will make it work .
Excuses are so much easier to use or to make up as a reason to keep people from voting people are suppose to be the most intelligent animals on earth so use that intelligence to get it figured out instead of whining about it and the amount of money donated can help .
Money talks and BS walks and there is more than enough donated so get er done ...
Legislature in Georgia must have read your post as Governor signs election reform bill yesterday. Some of the key provisions.
"It would require voters to provide a driver’s license or state-issued ID card number to request and submit absentee ballots, and it would curtail the use of ballot drop boxes, limiting their placement to early-voting locations and making them accessible only while the precinct is open.
The legislation also gives the Georgia State Elections Board the ability to effectively take over county elections boards in areas that it determines are in need of oversight. The secretary of state would also be removed as chair of the State Elections Board, a proposal that critics say would strip the state’s top elections official of a key power. The bill also takes aim at the state’s absentee-ballot request period, setting the deadline for voters to request absentee ballots at 11 days before an election".
Needless to say some people are not happy with this turn of events. I would expect some level of court challenges to follow.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Tiberius said:
So Trump trying to get black peoples vote thrown out was no big deal because he tried doing it in the courts? That’s really messed up.
it’s also wrong. He pressured all sorts of government officials to eliminate votes to steal the election. Yet you claim others view things through a filter?
No its not messed up. It is no big deal. All candidates are allowed and entitled to file briefs and challenges according to election law and procedures. What's messed up is you refuse to comprehend the concept of due process and application of the law. If there was something illegal, such as the claimed pressure on exerted on specific officials, then where are the charges? If they could nail Trump with anything in Democratic controlled States and jurisdictions I can guarantee they'd be falling all over themselves to get charges filed. But nothing to this point. What you are engaged in is believing uninformed speculation and hearsay generated by third party sources interpreting conversations to support their biases.
-
1
-
-
29 minutes ago, Tiberius said:
Does not take critical thinking skills to see Trump was trying to have black voters votes thrown out.
Or that the GOP is targeted minority voters in its voter suppression attempts
Your comment has absolutely nothing to do with the theme of my comment. Other than concluding you are trying to change the subject I don't have a response other than to suggest you are helping in proving the message I'm trying to get across about irrational thinking so I thank you.
As far as trying to get votes thrown out wasn't all that done through proper and legal challenges as supported by laws and procedures governing the electoral process? I don't believe any of it was what could be called illegal. So your claim seems to be an example of lying through omission.
Sure the campaign challenged some votes. But it was all legal. So they did nothing wrong. While you suggest they did.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, B-Man said:
This is an example of how the irrational mind works. There are many others I could cite. They are not thinking critically or logically or subjecting their views to inspection by available facts or changing their views and conclusions when new facts become available. These are people that hold a specific ideology or belief. It might apply across the political spectrum. They view themselves as moral, ethical, and intelligent but they are none of those things. It seems our society is facing an epidemic of irrational and illogical thinking at a time when the opposite is needed to solve a lot of issues.
I'm talking about people that have "filters" in how their mind processes information from the environment with which they draw conclusions. They start with a conclusion and selectively use subjective, objective, anecdotal facts, information or data that supports their conclusion while ignoring subjective, objective, anecdotal facts, information or data that don't support their conclusion. Some might calling it lying by omission.
In the case of hate crimes against Asians the prevailing narrative is the attacks are caused by a white supremacist mindset. This is what most media and politically active individuals and organizations are running with now. But looking at hate crime statistics where the target was Asian...
A fact is the victims are Asian and a percentage of the attackers are white.
Another fact is the victims were Asian but the majority of their assailants were non-white. This according to FBI statistics.
So if the majority of attackers were non-white how could a white supremacist mindset be the root cause of the attacks? A critical thinker would be inclined to look elsewhere for the motivation for these attacks.
The prevailing narrative is drawn from lying by omission and ignoring non-supportive facts. And by omitting facts a false conclusion is being used which drives an incorrect response to the problem. Critical thinking and rational people need to challenge this epidemic of irrationality and challenge the people pushing these false conclusions. I know a lot of you are out there.
-
18 hours ago, Tenhigh said:
Then why not just say that in the first place? Personally, I think solving the education gap will fix most of the employment gap. It's huge and no one wants to talk about it, and it starts at very early ages and gets wider.
From the article:
For instance, black students at the end of their high school career are almost four years behind white students in reading; the gap is comparable in other subjects. A study of 26- to 33-year-old men who held full-time jobs in 1991 thus found that when education was measured by years of school completed, blacks earned 19 percent less than comparably educated whites. But when word knowledge, paragraph comprehension, arithmetical reasoning, and mathematical knowledge became the yardstick, the results were reversed. Black men earned 9 percent more than white men with the same education—that is, the same performance on basic tests.
How would you feel if you were passed over for a job based on your skin color?
Or passed over because of your age? Or some other thing?
My view is pretty simple. I don't support the concept of grouping and judging people based on the characteristics assigned to that group. Which basally steals and eliminates the person's individual identity and renders it unimportant. In order to judge people equitably labeling and grouping to determine their identity needs to stop. Equality means the system is "color blind" or "gender blind" or "gender identity" blind, or "age blind", or blind to any other attribute an individual might display or possess. Like being left handed or right handed, or their weight, or if they are judged to be attractive or not, or their eye color or their blood type. You get the idea.
The person needs to be viewed as a unique individual with traits and characteristics of their own and not of some group. Here, more or less if the goal is to eliminate racial bias then stop focusing on race being something that makes people "different".
-
1
-
-
Every year you start at 0-0. The difference between the Bills and Sabres is EFFORT! Under McDermott this team puts up a fight, gives it their all, every weak. Leading by example Josh Allen. Contrast this with the talented Jack Eichel. A guy that I suspect was always the best player on the ice coming into the league and just doesn't have the same "hunger" a guy like Allen has, or has just lost his drive because of all the losing.
Plus the Sabres are a physically and mentally weak team and the coaching staff doesn't seem to be able to get this group motivated. What said it all to me was a game a few weeks ago where the team needed a spark and got it from Cozens engaging in a fight. Wow, a rookie being the only guy to step up. Pathetic. I've seen more contact and physicality in pairs ice dancing than these guys show night after night. Contrast this with Feliciano and Dawkins getting into it against the Chiefs coming to their QB's defense. The Bills have heart and passion for the game. The Sabres are a bunch of guys going through the motions for 3 periods cashing big paychecks a couple times a month. Bad goaltending sure but even teams with bad goaltending go out there trying to win.
-
1
-
-
40 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:
It's interesting. ATL is mostly Asians it's racism racism racism. Boulder was all white it's guns guns guns. For the thinking people it's mental illness mental illness mental illness. In my mind that's what ALL these mass shootings have in common. We have to figure a way to identify the people that are likely to commit these crimes and make sure they never ever have access to a weapon and/or ammo.
Mental illness combined with anti-psychotic and anti-depressant drugs with lots of side effects like suicidal thoughts and paranoia. The drug companies don't want anyone to bring this into the conversation nor do the politicians receiving lots of loot and contributions from the industry.
-
3 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:
Let me say I’m not a big gun guy. But...most of the ideas tossed around on this issue are just noise to make people ‘feel’ like they did something. (It’s like banning plastic straws to save marine life.) You pretty much have to go all the way or leave it alone. Ban guns entirely (which didn’t work with alcohol during prohibition) or nibble at the edges just to say you did something. Neither of the recent shooters would’ve been stopped by the typical go-to ‘common sense’ regulations. These are crazy people. They don’t have ‘common sense’!
The plastic straw ban is a good one. Picking an obvious but incorrect solution to a problem. A better solution to the problem might be to identify how all these plastic straws are finding their way into the ocean and stop it. I think the problem is the US "exports" a lot of garbage to overseas locations and the junk falls of the ship or gets tossed overboard to cut disposal costs when they reach the destination. So stop doing this. Problem solved.
But the gun thing. All these proposals are just diversions. It's more a social and behavioral problem than a weapons issue. This guys was clearly unhinged but nobody wanted to get engaged in confronting him because he'd cry "discrimination" and hearing the mating call of SJW all the useful idiots would run to his assistance. So maybe all the people so quick to charge and call everything a bias issue should shut up about that for a while and think it through. Heaven forbid anyone gets offended!
-
I get all the chat and ribbing about the Carolina connection. But based on results and the way Beane has reformed the roster, worked the draft and free agency, and along with the coaching staff and the players they've assembled got to the AFC championship game this year I'm more than willing to defer to his judgment and trust he's making smart and good player moves. And this might be another of those.
-
1
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Chef Jim said:
Have you ever seen someone change clips? It’s pretty amazing how fast. But if taking away the scary guns will help you sleep at night have at it. But if it doesn’t, then what?
So you take away the scary guns you assume these shootings will subside? The mental healthy of the shooters plays no part in this? I’m pretty sure you take away the scary guns these mentally ill people will still kill. Demons don’t care the caliber or the level of scary.
I love hollow points. If im going to protect myself from someone breaking in to my house I want the best ammo to take them out. Yes bullets kill people but how many bullets have killed that are either in someone’s closet or in a loaded weapon that’s not racked? I think even you know the answer to that one.
Regarding your nuclear device comment. You went down with your ship on that one.
The truth is the cops are not going to be there to protect you and your family from an intruder when it happens. They'll respond afterward to zip up the body bags and do some investigation. They are not going to protect you. They respond to crime, not prevent crime.
The problem with all the calls for more gun control is they don't do anything to address the fundamental problems that can stop or eliminate most of these mass shooting events. They are not going to take guns out of the hands of criminals or those bent on doing harm to others. All these gun control initiatives calling for more laws and restrictions do is give the government more power and control over its citizens. Why do we want to give an already overly-intrusive government, one that spies and collects all sorts of information and reconnaissance on almost every citizen through whatever means they have available even more power? A government that has over a short time militarized local and state police organizations. A government that preaches from the Capitol building, the seat of power for the federal government surrounded by fences and barriers along with thousands of armed troops and armed bodyguards and agents? A government that is somehow afraid of its own citizens but is more than willing to let you go about life in the environment outside of their fence perimeter that's safe enough for you to take your chances in every day.
How about this, let Congress pass more restrictions and add an amendment making it illegal for government officials to have armed bodyguards and security forces. If its safe for us then its safe for them? Lead from the front, right?
Why is it that states with the most restrictive gun control laws generally have the most crime? Simply put, because they have the most criminals resulting from social and economic conditions that drive people to crime and criminal activity, Much of it just for survival. Generally, these states blame "out of state gun purchases" for their problems but the real cause is their inaction to solve the fundamental problems of poverty. These are social issues that never seem to gets addressed and resolved.
These mass shooters either hold some ideological extreme or are mentally imbalanced. What's curious about a lot of these cases is the individuals involved are "known" to the FBI and other law enforcement organizations but they never seem to do anything. Why is that? Maybe they should start checking into these leads with a little more enthusiasm?
-
10 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:
it really all depends.
Can you describe the race of the driver and the victim, and then the political parties that the two respective companies support?
Those are all required to help form the narrative.
A bit sarcastic but true to the point. Isn't it wonderful to live in a time where politics and virtue signaling are the determining factors in all circumstances and situations?
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Unforgiven said:
Weird.
Cigna Responds to Claims That It Excludes White Men in the Hiring Process
“Given the hiring practices they have in place where white, male candidates are blocked, regardless of qualifications, I have to say, ‘Yes, there’s obvious discrimination at this company,'” an anonymous employee told the Washington Examiner.
An employee also suggested a candidate with years of industry experience, but the hiring manager said the candidate, a white man, could not be interviewed because he did not meet the diversity criteria.
Before tibs and company trump trump trumps me...I see all around me - at every level
of employment - federal, state, private and entertainment - many black employees, in
some cases for instance my local MV, 90% of the employees are black females.
Where's the racism?
As CIGNA hires sub-standard candidates and ignores more qualified applicants their business will suffer. The quality of their workforce will suffer. Lawsuits will be filed. They will lose customers and providers. A management system perceived to be merit based will transform to one of "diversity" and performance will suffer as top performers perceive their efforts are going unrewarded. Top performers will quit and seek employment elsewhere. Competitors will exploit their weaknesses and gain market share at their expense. Earnings will suffer and the share price will fall. Money still talks so regardless of the desire to virtue signal the board of directors will fire senior management, most likely the CEO presiding over this situation along with the architects of this hiring model. This is how this will play out over time. That's how socialist approaches always resolve themselves as everything sinks to the lowest common denominator.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:
Democrat media inspired terrorist attack
Am I doing this right?
No. I'm not. But I'm using Leftist Alternative Reality logic that's been shoved down our throats for the last 4 years.
Implicit bias is rampant among libs.
Stunning.
They should be mandated more training
Pack up the news vans and get out of town. The shooters not a white guy so there's nothing to see here. 21-year-old Ahmad Al-Issa a devoted Trump hater. So I suspect the spin on the story will turn from playing up the white supremacist terrorists angle to some poor victim triggered into rage and violence by Trump. So Trumps fault on CNN and MSNBC and other MSM outlets tonight. Wait for it...
-
1
-
Derek Chauvin Trial
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
I'm not certain about your conclusion that riots, looting, property destruction, and attacks on people in the streets won't take place because the Biden/Harris team is going to keep a lid on any blowback of a "not guilty" or least serious charge conviction. But they will somehow contort the outcome to blame Trump.