leh-nerd skin-erd

I converted my old, dirty wood burning fireplace to natural gas about 8 or 9 years ago. The suggestion here is that if I’m concerned about impact to the environment, I drop $5-7000 to get an electric model with a cool led light and fake crackling w/ no heat, or $15-20,000 to return to a less dirty but dirty wood burner. I’m not feeling it, and am currently exploring the ways to beat the system in the event Gas Fireplace Prohibition becomes a thing. So far, the prevailing wisdom is to offer protection money to the politicians/authorities implementing the rules for the greater good. I’ll stay with this story…stay tuned.

Entirely possible, but if all goes as planned, there will be no subsequent gas leak.

October 11, 1993, 9:30pm @ChiGoose walks into a club, surveys the throng of sweating, heaving danceflesh, and yells to his posse "YOU WON'T EVER SEE ME UP THERE DANCING THAT DAMN MACARENO! BUNCHA LOSERS!". October 11, 1993, 9:51pm, Chi Goose...

“…at least rowing in the same direction” means nothing in the context of the Russian collusion narrative. With all the time, effort and money that went into tying Trump to treason, these are nickledick words to justify your belief in a disproven narrative. We know what happened. We know the democrats spread election disinformation to unseat Trump and scuttle his agenda, and we know you were ok with that. We know that Biden defeated Trump in 2020, and that Putin launched his invasion a short time later. These are the facts.

Unfortunately, we've seen plenty of reason to view what's passed as an objective Intelligence assessment with a jaundiced eye. From spying on American citizens, selective leaking to influence the opinions of ordinary citizens, unmasking, the withholding of critical information that might better inform citizens on issues of national importance, and massive/huge misses on stories like the Biden laptop, it's in one's best interest to question what is passed as fact. There was a time, probably, when prominent members of the left knew and warned about that sort of thing, but it seems the suggestion these days is for people to be all in on whatever narrative is being sold. That said, what the Russians may/may not have wanted is largely irrelevant to the question of whether or not DJT was elected illegitimately, or his election resulted from a coup, or if he committed acts of treason in an effort to get elected. In that regard, the democrats who spread knowingly false information about the legitimacy of our election in 2015 did more to aid the Russians in any effort to upset out apple cart than any troll farm could possibly hope to achieve. We know the conclusion of the Special Counsel and AG assessment of it. This is a matter of record--Trump was a victim of democrat political persecution. You may not like those facts, but they are the facts nonetheless.

I would think the only bigger waste of time is taking the time to declare how much time you are wasting wasting time.

The Dems were absolutely spewing anti-Trump stuff. Absolutely demolished the concept of safe and secure elections in our country. Lots of people didn’t care then, it seems presumptuous to demand more of them than you demand of yourself.

Being “pissed” has nothing to do with supporting claims of an election that was illegitimate and treasonous behavior to put a president in the WH. I want to be clear—you supported that, and now want to draw some sort of moral equivalence between anger that the favored candidate was trounced with running a 4 year operation to unseat a lawfully and legitimately elected president. You, and people like you, are the reason we get stop the steal and claims of Russia in the WH. You, and people like you, did not accept the results of the Trump election, you supported the very behavior you claim to abhor. I would care about Putin hacking the Dems, the Rs, or anyone else. Same for the Chinese. Sadly, after seeing how our current industrious leader has violated laws of the land and the guidelines of common sense, I would not be surprised at all to find it has happened regularly over the past 20 years. Btw, I also care about unsubstantiated claims of illegitimate elections and those that are stolen. Of the two of us, I seem to be the only one who consistently cares.

This is complete poppycock. Leaders of the House and Senate called Trump’s election illegitimate, a coup, and in at least one case, suggested he was guilty of treason. Adam Schiff (RIP intel committee) lied regularly about the alleged connection and claimed to have evidence of direct ties to Russia. 50+ former intelligence experts spread disinformation to assist Joe Biden in the run up to the election. The Dems launched 2 efforts to impeach Trump. That was just leadership…..what some extremist Dems supported thereafter was perpetuation of the Russia myth that morphed into claims of obstruction, the attempted public disembowelment of Brett Kavanaugh, spread mistrust and disinformation on the vaccines developed under Trump. Now, you’re up to raiding houses of opponents, taking about the threats to national security posed and just a few short months later finding egg of your face as we find out your boy Joe has been dabbling in the removal of top secret material for decades. You guys call that “spillage”, smart folks call it predictable.

I don’t always get the part about being “destroyed”, but he sounded both reasoned and reasonable in his reply. Tbh @redtail hawk seems less concerned about the Dems being bounced than he does about McCarthy’s character.

Apparently the new plan is you get a resume when someone is trying to bludgeon you with a blunt object, review it, and consider whether or not that person’s past is filled with decency and kindness before allowing them to continue on assaulting you.

I don’t think so, generally speaking. The question in my opinion is whether or not the duty to exercise care can be delegated to another individual, and whether or not his actions violated the standards expected. So, someone hands him a gun, he points it away from people in the area to test fire, something jams and shrapnel hits the person next to him. In that case, I see the application of your logic. In this case, knowing there was live ammunition on set, knowing there were safety concerns, and pointing the guy at two individuals, pulling the trigger and subsequently saying he didn’t…seems reasonable to charge. These rules are well established generally, and on a movie set, I would think the standard would be higher still.

If reports are to be believed, the entire production sounded like it was chaotic. Live rounds intermixed with props, members on set using the weapons for target practice, people leaving the set due to safety concerns, and Alec Baldwin pointing the gun at two individuals and pulling the trigger. After the tragedy, he makes a series of odd statements and apparently misleads investigators on his actions. It seems to me the charges make sense once you get past the fact that people can be charged in scenarios where a series of unfortunate events lead to death. As for pushing forward with the movie, that’s pretty pathetic imo. Creepy.

I don’t think it’s surprising at all, really. I think it’s business as usual in Washington, with high profile characters from all parties doing the same thing. They have the rules established, the rules are onerous at times so they work around them. In fact, I’d bet if you looked, most major players from both parties would be caught up in this sort of thing. Trump used it politically, and it was an effective strategy. Certainly no major political player was going to declare that it’s pretty common. Certainly, Joe Biden could have stated emphatically that he had lots of material from his days in the senate and that as VP, he removed and stored Top Secret documents in quite a few places, including in an old file box on the floor of his garage. That would have gone a long way to normalizing the action, everybody does it etc etc. Now, we’ve got this scandal where folks have to come up with explanations like as @ChiGoose says, there can be “slippage”, and sometimes that slippage results in documents slippaging off to 5 or 6 different places over 10 -15 years.

I considered that, Dude, that’s why I sought out an unvarnished opinion. I was disappointed you used that as an opportunity to lash out at B, comments I found quite scandalous. In retrospect I feel horrible for exposing him to that vitriol. He was just trying to provide a public service. It’s like watching the guy ringing the Salvation Army bell getting swung at by a chubby guy in pajamas outside the Walmarts.

My perspective hasn’t changed because the facts are clear. The Dems alleged the election was rigged in 2015. They did that many, many times up to and including statements that evidence existed to support that claim. Trump and certain Rs alleged the election was stolen in 2019. He did that many, many times up to and including statements the evidence existed to support that claim. I wish you didn’t have blinders on as you worship your false idol, but that’s not my problem.

Thank you, your objectivity and thoughtful reply was exactly what we needed to hear at this time. For the record, those who compare you to BillSy are silly. In this case, I quite literally asked @BillStime for his thoughts. I see three reasonable answers: 1. I offer no opinion, submitted for discussion only; 2. I believe the author is onto something here; 3. I thought it was kind of funny in a crazy conspiracy way; You are correct in the assessment that I had a pretty good inkling that BillSy would chucklef&ck around, send a meme, send a Trump photo etc. In that regard, it’s on me for trying. I also know that means that the scope of the inquiry or subject is beyond his ability to converse on, or he knew he pitched garbage on the board and was called out on it. Both are sad. Thank you again for offering a little sanity here today.

Thank you for clarifying. Do you have an opinion on the article BillSy linked, suggesting the Trump team cuckholded Comey and the FBI and in doing so, illegitimately seized the election in “plain sight”?

@B-Man I’m looking for some quick feedback from a reliable source. Upthread, BillSy posted a link to a story that suggests that the FBI was co-opted by the Trump team, that the recently arrested FBI agent was somehow in cahoots with the Russians and Trump to overthrow or “steal” if you will, the 2016 election. I think the story is rubbish for reasons outlined above. I asked BillSy to share his thoughts on the article, pro, con, whatever. I only asked him because he posted it, and figured it was something worth discussing. He replied with something about Hillary Clinton going to jail, and about someone named Powell, who I assume is Colin Powell. When I inquired a second time, he indicated my question about the post he shared lacked clarity. As an objective poster with no skin in the game, can you share your thoughts with me on the following: 1. Do you feel my initial query was confusing, at least to the levels it would trip up a person of average intellect? 2. Do you feel that I inadvertently requested Billsy to offer an opinion on Hillary Clinton going to jail, or on Colin Powell in general? Worse yet, did I somehow trick BillSy into offering an opinion on Mssrs. Powell and Clinton? Thank you. I was going to ask @Irv but he’s ever a mod I don’t want any appearance of impropriety.

So, you’re a supporter of the BillSy published Huff Po theory as outline in the link? Trump co-opted Comey, etc etc?

You’re losing track of your commentary, Powell wasn’t mentioned in the article you shared. What are your thoughts about the opinion piece you shared originally?

I’m about to have a bagel and nice hot cup of coffee. What we learn from this story is that people are corruptible, that money can make people do things they never would consider doing in the absence of the money, and that power corrupts. I learned that in elementary school. I couldn’t be less fake selectively outraged if I fake tried. You sent the tweet over, presumably for consideration and to add value to the dialogue. Maybe you agree with it, maybe you don’t. I just pointed out that the premise makes very little sense given what is widely known. What are your thoughts on the author’s thoughts?

This is an interesting spin. Clinton violated the law with respect to safeguarding top secret/confidential material, to the extent that her biggest supporters described her as extremely reckless. The DOJ allows her to scour tens of thousands of emails, make a subjective determination oh what should/should not be there and delete whatever she wanted to delete. The Director of the FBI, with the benefit of hindsight clearly and unabashedly working to scuttle the Trump agenda and targeting individuals in the admin, acknowledges the illegal and reckless behavior but declares no prosecutor would pursue the case. The election comes and Clinton wins prom Queen pop vote, but gets steamrolled where it matters. She and her supporters cry foul, suggest Trump stole the election, and the Mueller probe commences. Mueller launches an all-out scorched earth search for Russian collusion. Doors are kicked in. Non-related crimes are pursued. Selective leaking occurs to tilt public opinion. The media engages in circular reporting. The probe ends with a dull thud, lots of hurt feelings and complaints he didn’t bow down and submit . Meanwhile, the Clinton campaign was promoting stories that spread misinformation, conspiring with a disgraced foreign national to mislead the voter, and that’s treated as business as usual in American politics. The people listened, considered and voted. Turns out the Mueller team completely missed this gem of a human selling out, and FBI leadership under Comey and Wray missed the snake in the grass in their house, and this supposedly reflects the gold standard for leadership in Washington. That’s a whopper of a tale for sure.

It’s a damn shame when a guy excoriates a political opponent for risking the safety and security of the free world and then gets questioned for 13+ year pattern of treating classified material like an old Kit Kat wrapper on the floor of his corvette. Obviously he’s cooperating by breaking the law, jeesh. A damn, damn shame.