leh-nerd skin-erd

I’m not sure Hollywood exists without cops/soldiers/law enforcement sniffing out and dispatching bad guys. Even now, I believe the redo of The Equalizer with Queen Latifa as a 50 something tough talking real woman badass with a soft side was critically acclaimed and involves the dispatching the occasional law-conflicted-individual.

Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State and Democrat nominee for President, co-mingled classified and personal documents. Joe Biden, former senator, VP, and current President has acknowledged possessing and maintaining classified material in a variety of places, including the garage of his personal residence. Mike Pence, classified material, personal residence. Is it your contention that these three, high ranking government individuals had no personal documents within the 4 square walls of their personal residence(s). No tax documents, medical bills, cell phone bills, children’s artwork, Corvette owner’s manuals etc? It seems fairly obvious that while frowned upon, it’s common knowledge that it happens, often, and there are apparently precious few safeguards to prevent the unauthorized removal of documents. I’ll go so far as to state that upon resolution of the SC Biden investigation, there will be no commentary, nor legal jeopardy, for Biden, nor the individuals who mishandled the classified documents on his behalf on a problem so vast and far reaching that our very nation is in peril. When you factor in the Biden problem spans decades and multiple positions at the highest level of government, it seems clear to me that the stated rules are really more soft guidelines. As for your second question, I’ve answered that multiple times. I urge you to review the transcript if confusion lingers.

Where’s the fun in calling you SoCalSensibleSpendingDeek?

I drove from Albany to Buffalo several times recently. I have a Grand Cherokee, didn’t worry too much about gas mileage, gas cost, but the logjams at the new rest areas sucked somein awful. The I4 is a nice looking car So Cal Richboy Deek.

The teacher said you’re sassy! There’s a way that things should be. You’ll paint flowers the way they are, So repeat after me: Flowers are red. Green leaves are green. There’s no need to see flowers any other way Than the way they always have been seen. Don’t be the teacher, Red.

1. I think he should have left the documents at the WH, in spite of the wrongdoing by Biden, Clinton etc. 2. Because the government allows such things. 3. Yes, because the government allows such things. 4. See #3. 5. I understand how you feel. 6. Addressed previously. 7. Addresses previously.

I appreciate the question, but you seem to be starting with the premise that any player in this sordid game can be trusted. I don't start there, I start with "Question everyone's motives.". You also start at the premise that 'securing the documents was important', I'll reply that 'securing the documents definitely seems like a major issue and threat to our National Security...this time'. As near as I can tell, there is no significant attention paid to removal of documents, no one really accountable for the proper handling of said documents, no real concern about unprotected access online, or the sharing of classified information with others, or wasn't until 2023. It seems to me, Chi, it's a major sh8t show on that level, where the relative aggressiveness of the response is directly related to who the target is. Trump created this problem, Trump is being steamrolled by this problem, and Trump exposed his throat to his enemies and they attacked. As I've said before, the dems were willing to tear the country apart to get him, it was reckless and foolish to give them more ammunition to destroy him. There were other options. There are always other options.

That's no way to treat a moderator. The funniest part was the lead up, as you argued that you didn't want to get drawn into a political conversation. Now, it was also funny that the other poster clearly wanted to debate the political element and prodded accordingly, presumably un-pointed. Btw, I don't really find anything about the US Team (men's or women's) all the compelling. I used to love the amateur element of it all (or at least the appearance of it), but now, watching professional athletes banging away in b-ball is sorta boring. By the way--are you Farley? Is Farley you?

I think I was pretty clear on H Clinton and the FBI. I'm not sure why you're struggling with what I wrote? On the second question, you've positioned the choices as: Trump gets to keep the material; The FBI has to storm the castle; That reflects a closed mindset and limitation of thought. There were additional options, including providing Trump more time to review the material to see if there were personal items intermingled with classified docs, allowing Trump to shred/destroy items he felt were beyond the scope of the government authority, and engaging in civil discourse as to the ultimate resolution of the matter. I do agree that bustin the door down was an option as well. Your commentary on RReagan is interesting. Not to me, per se, but maybe to someone else. My commentary was limited to the subject at hand. I think you addressed the Irv and Farley question to yourself, but in case you don't answer, I have no idea. I do think the @Irv reply to Simon in the thread about the Women's Soccer team is one of the funniest I've seen in a long time. Kudos to Irv in that regard, and if he is Farley, Kudos to @Chris farley as well.

Hillary Clinton's actions cost her the election, the special treatment allowed her to stay in the game and walk away unscathed. It didn't move the needle for dem loyalists to any great degree, many of whom are up in arms today over safety and security of our nation's secrets. I agree that Trump's handling of classified material was an unforced error, and didn't need to happen. The argument, however, that the only option to resolve the matter involved an armed raid makes little sense. It makes even less sense when considering how it all played out when the agents conducted the raid. It makes less sense, still, when it seems logical to assume that national security issues aren't really all that big a deal on that level, given the treatment of Clinton, Pence, and Biden. It seems that those folks can remove documents at will, stash 'em wherever, share as they see fit, but must be prepared to say "Geesh, I never knew I had 'em!" to beat the system. As I said, it's an emotional issue when it comes to voters any way you slice it. The persecution in question commenced in 2015, Kemp. It's well-established, documented, and has been discussed by leaders of the free world regularly. You may not like those people, but it's true nonetheless.

It's not on the average voter to follow each case closely, and it never is. In many cases, probably most, the average citizen votes on emotion. The typical politician leverages that emotion, in many cases manipulating, embellishing or lying to appeal to as many voters as possible. Voters are not prosecutors, defense attorneys, experts on classified document handling, but most have a strong ability to detect bull sh8t when it is served up. The challenge is Dems see bs when it's served by Rs, and Rs see bs when served up by Dems. The facts are, from the R point of view anyway, that Trump was a victim of extreme political persecution by DOJ, FBI, dems. There's plenty of evidence to support that, and there's plenty of evidence to support very questionable practices--up to illegal behavior. It's not just Hillary Clinton getting special treatment, it's well beyond that. The DOJ raids Trump's place, sets up a photo shoot of allegedly classified documents strew about on the floor and leaks said photos. They spend hours there and 'accidentally' grab client/attorney documents, tax returns and private material, then suggest everybody trust them with the documents. Meanwhile, the Biden SC investigation is locked down tighter than a drum, though classified and illegal documents were found in a garage. Then there's this, of course, where one of the most powerful men in the world tells truth. Which leads to this (from the notoriously right wing ACLU): https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/do-us-politicians-need-fear-our-intelligence And of course, reinforces the point that nobody trusts everybody, and just about everybody distrusts somebody, but it's usually limited to the guy who doesn't vote like you or run the agenda you like. "Whataboutism" isn't really the problem, and the average voter using it isn't the problem, either. The problem is the political class is completely and irrevocably untrustworthy. The other problem is that people forget what they were upset about when the last guy was in office, and remember that it's not really a big deal when their guy is running the show.

I responded earlier, didn’t like how it made me feel and deleted it a short time later. I had a very cool Saab for about 5 years (one of those you really like, or really hate), love grapes and am not much of a runner. I did roller skate through a very nice public park in Minneapolis in the late 80s. Have a good night, Kemper.

I’m getting old—that was 2005. My buddy reminded me his son was in kindergarten and he graduated from UCLA not long ago. I had forgotten about the Niagara Falls airshow tragedy. On a video, your friend talked about trying to pass within a few feet of each other, that’s incredible. What a shame. Very cool story about Top Gun! My oldest son has a nice movie theater style set up in his basement, we had a family movie night a couple weeks ago and watched the original.

One of my old friends was born/raised in San Francisco. His parent's house was shown in the opening credits of the old Streets of San Franscisco TV show, it's in a great location with views of the Bay and Alacatraz. I visited him a decade or so ago (probably longer), and he showed me around the city. Beautiful, majestic, awesome and his family treated me like gold. He is a liberal leaning fellow, his family is as well, yet they powered through 😇. Of course, I'm delightful, so there's that. He told me not long ago the downtown area was really a problem, for all the reasons noted, and it was hard to see. He lives in Morin now but still works in the city. @sherpa, just remembered that I was there when the Blue Angels did their air show for Fleet Week. It was an amazing thing to behold.

No one cares about nothing (except when the other guy does it, then it's fascism)

You don't have to whisper...you're not a particularly complex people.

This story is sad, but it seemed destined for a tragic ending. While much is made of her issues with the church, she also spoke about physical and sexual abuse at the hands of her mother. I’m not sure how one ever recovers from that, and it seems she never really did.

Your truth is yours, Kemp, and I applaud you for your commitment to your cause.

I am happy that you have reached the enlightenment stage. I understood you from the get-go, but if repeating yourself multiple times helps you work through issues, I'm happy to have partnered with you here.

And it was known very, very early on by CIA, Obama and Biden that the Clinton campaigned with a hostile foreign national to disrupt our election. Sadly, that fact was kept from the American people because it went against the disinformation campaign of Trump conspiring with Russia. Still, the calculus by dem leadership seemed to be their base really didn’t care about election denialism and claims of treason, and they were correct.

On cue, and on brand-- of all the people involved in that absurd theater, "Barr" is on a "slippery slope"---when he says what we both agree is true: Russia, the red bear, the KGB etc...attempted to influence the election; After an exhaustive, multi-year, multi-faceted investigation by seasoned, well-trained, well-experienced and arguably fervently anti-Trump prosecutors revealed: The Special Counsel's investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election," Barr wrote in a letter to leaders of the House and Senate judiciary committees on Sunday afternoon. That was despite "multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign," he wrote. In other words, Trump did not conspire nor coordinate elections interference, ever, and 4 years of innuendo, lies and coordination with the media was designed only to stir the base, rile up the naive and divide the country. AG Barr was the hero of the tale, Frank. You should listen to him. Meanwhile, Russia gets pretty invadey when democrats are in office, and lots of money floats around to their well-placed friends....

@The Frankish Reich Witness ye, one of the faithful. Hawk: https://www.npr.org/2019/03/24/706318191/trump-white-house-hasnt-seen-or-been-briefed-on-mueller-investigation-report "The Special Counsel's investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election," Barr wrote in a letter to leaders of the House and Senate judiciary committees on Sunday afternoon. That was despite "multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign," he wrote.

Kemp, I understood what you wrote. Did you think your comments were hard to follow? Now, on the subject of what may/may not be on topic, I think we have a breakdown in communication. Your preferred method is to make a declaration, indicate you are unwilling to consider context of any sort, and demand an answer to whatever narrow question you have constructed. In my opinion, that's not dialogue or a reasonable exchange of thought, that's a cross-examination. I have no interest in being cross-examined, I think it's silly to assume I would, but it's really ok. I don't care.

Frank, I'm exceptionally reasonable and smart enough to get out my own way. I actually like the religion analogy. True believers believe, and for about 3 years, a substantial number of the 80,000,000 faithful believed the preachers and the message that we had Russians in the WH. It was a masterful strategy...use the government to bring the heat, partner with the media to spread perpetual stories that never quite come true, quote anonymous sources that never materialize. By the time the reckoning came, the dems switched tactics to talk about obstruction, and a substantial majority of the 80,000,000 faithful just adjusted their beliefs to align with the message point. It worked well, and here we are with you trying to reimagine the "Trump was not legitimately elected", "Trump stole the election" and "Trump = treason" into something....less. I would absolutely acknowledge that Trump's version of the 'stolen election' is vastly different than that of the dems. The dems were much more subtle, certainly knew the workings of the federal government and what their 80,000,000 would buy, but the fact remains that the 80,000,000 had no issues whatsoever believing that there vote was stolen, that Trump was not legitimately elected and whatever. Truth and decency only became an issue when faced with the same game they supported.

I don't know, I was asking. I just think it's sort of a travesty to speak about the Church of Stolen Elections (2020) without including a conversation about Our Lady Of lllegitimate Presidencies (2016). Thanks for clarifying.