leh-nerd skin-erd

Bigger question imo, is was it within their control to limit what they took to the documents they were authorized to seize? They had complete control of the area being searched, empowered to detain, arrest or dispatch anyone who did not comply or got aggressive. I believe Chi is a proponent of application of Occam’s Razor…in the calm light of day, the DOJ seized documents outside the scope of the investigation (some purported to include documents protected under attorney-client privilege) and is fighting tooth and nail to avoid an objective review of documents. What seems more likely….an “Oops” or “the full weight and power of the United States government” coming down on a political figure?

We keep having the same discussion, Chi. I’m not a lawyer, I don’t work for the government and am simply a citizen looking at what has happened. In your world, at least as far as Trump is concerned, it seems to me you’ll bend over backwards to defend practice without regard to optics and damage it does to the national psyche. In my world, if the DOJ is going to go to the extreme and raid the guys house, they should have the professionalism to avoid the appearance of impropriety and not seize documents outside the scope allowed. If it takes 10 hours, spend 10 hours. If it’s 40 hours to do the job “right”, spend 40 hours. If 75 people are needed, get 80. From a legal perspective, it seems reasonable to me that the law considers the appointment of a Special Master and a pause in review while things get worked out. Again, I’m not a lawyer, but a judge considered the argument and allowed for it to happen. Was this an egregious example of judicial misconduct, or an opinion allowed within the scope of the law? DOJ disagrees, within the context of the law, appeals and wins. The story there is “Trust us, all is fine.”. If you’re going to raid a guys house after 4 years of trumped up scandals, political manipulation and innuendo, do it right. I understand this barnyard explosion can happen legally, I just don’t think it should happen.

My God, you really were sorry. I've reconsidered everything. @716er is a total cry baby.

This is wrong on so many levels. Medically. Societally. Why, the Freudian aspects alone give one reason to pause.

It's a shame, really, that this is happening. Had the government been more diligent and disciplined in their approach, they could have avoided the appearance of impropriety and tyranny at work. Turns out they can get court permission to storm the castle, organize and dispatch law enforcement officials armed to the teeth, spend hours on site, photograph documents purported to be classified, provide them to the press, and yet still gather an enormous number of documents unrelated to the seizure. On top of that, they resist any objective review of the seized documents by an independent third party, in essence stating "You just gotta trust us.".

How could there be one of him born every minute, Ned? That's vaginically impossible.

Dark. Unsettling. Troubling. I don't think you're really apologizing at all.

And me, I think I need an apology as well. I’m hurting.

Some people have the ability to see an agenda, Tibs, see a narrative and push back or go around it. These people often defy the odds on societal expectations, intergenerational poverty, hold themselves accountable for what they can control is spite of injustice in whatever form it comes, and push forward in spite of all the reasons it makes sense not to do so. In less than 3 full pages, @JaCrispy has been lectured, accused of being a racist and been challenged as to whether or not he's Black. Along the way, he's responded in a thoughtful, reasoned way with facts as he sees them, and with good humor to boot. I don't know JaCrispy personally, but read what he shares in the threads I frequent. The people described in paragraph one frequently seem to behave like the person described in paragraph two. Maybe this time..listen, consider, and possibly learn something new?

We don’t say “cry baby” in here any more. It’s age-ist, hurtful and unnecessary. And, your language is offensive as we have ladies present!

I don't know what you think, but more importantly, you don't know what you think. As for tagging the site owner, man, thank you for explaining how you thought he might want to put aside the important personal and professional issues he surely deals with to share his thoughts on the value of PPP in the middle of the Pelosi attacker thread. It probably happens all the time. I usually call my plumber around 2:30am to ask him what he thinks about copper v pex v galvanized pipe in my home. The guy loves me. I get that you are sort of the Associate Site Consigliere, but I do want to offer a suggestion. Perhaps in your next private conversation with him, you should discuss whether or not namedropping the site owner should violate terms of service, even when it's only for the sake of clarity. To be completely honest, I have not felt safe in my posting since 11/19, known now and forever to me as the Sundancer Saturday Slaughter. Have a good day, though. You now hold all the top spots for lamest posts in PPP history.

I've deleted the preamble on the inane points you've offered previously, and you're rambling no less now than you did then. You're welcome to feel anyway you choose, but that doesn't change anything you've said or done. As usual, you're juggling a few different points of view and just can't keep to stay on track. On 11/19, you went on a weird screed about the PPP site and tagged the site owner---the freaking site owner--- presumably to get me in some sort of trouble. Your post was just about the saddest thing I've seen on this board over the years, and that says a lot. A little bit of a snitch, a little bit of a rat, a little bit of a weasel, and a quick look at how you view problem-solving and dispute resolution--that is to say, ya call the principal. This time, it seems the principal didn't take the call? The good news is that this post is about 10 times more pathetic than that one because you were focused on the tough talk and not what you said previously. The bad news is you now occupy spots 1 and 2.

This is bigger than you, English.

Yet another regurgitation of a falsehood, one of several as you changed your story from post to post. As for party crashing, the first time you darkened my doorstep with your silliness, you responded to a post I sent to @B-Man . This time, you chimed in on a post directed to @Chef Jim. While neither interaction would constitute a party in my mind, the consistent element was you reaching out to me in some strange quest to be validated.

This is from 2021, so perhaps a bit dated in the world of cable newsformation shows. https://ci-magazine.com/home/explaining-tucker-carlsons-democratic-demographic “These numbers only account for October but reveal that Fox News’ and Carlson’s sizable audiences are not that easy to define.” “Some Carlson viewers may identify as Democrats, but are more right-leaning — or may agree with some of Carlson’s opinions — whether they have been disillusioned by COVID and government’s response or disagree with ‘woke culture,’ — concerned about movements like ‘defund the police,’ etc. Additionally, there is spillover from earlier Fox News programming with more fact-based reporting, and some may be frustrated by programming on other networks.” ******* From earlier this month, there’s this report: https://www.mediaite.com/daily-ratings/cable-news-ratings-wednesday-november-2-tucker-carlson-wins-demo-by-more-than-100000-viewers/ Tucker Carlson scored a whopping 583,000 viewers in the key 25-54 age demographic on Wednesday night. ********* People are complicated, Frankish, but this is why a guy talking for an hour a night, offering opinions from the mundane to the outrageous, ends up being paid $40m per year and have a net worth of $500,000,000+.

We gotta figure out which Russians though, Frenkle. The 2012 Russians were Russians that then-President Obama really seemed interested to work with, speaking of the post-election flexibility he would have in working with Vlad. They seemed nice. The 2014 Russians we can’t be so sure of. They had that whole Crimea thing going on, and annexation sounds painful enough. In fairness, there were only a handful of Russians that seemed responsible, at least based on the initial response. In the other hand, maybe that was part of that whole flexibility thing. The 2015/2016 Russians were tricky devils. They apparently directly and irrefutably changed the course of American history by partnering and conspiring with then candidate Trump. In fact, the actions undertaken were so devious that a couple dozen diplomats were expelled from the country just a couple weeks before the-then Prez vacated office. Apparently it took nearly the full 8 years for their deception and treachery to be discovered and nothing could have been done about them until late December. The 2016-2020 Russians were interesting. Between participating in the coup, helping to get a president elected illegitimately, convincing dem leadership that there was treason afoot, and confounding the special investigators that spread out over several years. Those Russians were just plain sneaky, I guess. The 2022 Russians, also known as the Biden-Watch Russians, it’s sort of universally agreed that those Russians are bad people. They sort of resemble the 2014 Russians, the ones active during the Obama flex years, but much more deadly and much more aggressive. Russians, go figure.

Not this time, Chef!

I suppose that depends on each individual’s perception. Taking politics out of it, I think when a family sees the type of decline exhibited by Joe Biden, relative to where he was a few short years ago, they are having difficult dialogue about taking away the car keys if he still had them, having folks check in on him every few days to ensure he is safe, providing him a medical alert button, and moving him to a facility where he would have assistance if there was no family member to take him in. I don’t follow HW to any great degree, but bringing politics back to the table, I think Biden’s condition is very troubling.

Sunny D can’t keep track of his own posts, expecting him to follow yours is a big ask.

It never was, so why all the handwringing from people on the left? It seems obvious that the desire to control the narrative far outweighed the desire for a free and open platform to communicate ideas.

For those of us that have been paying attention to the obvious, sustained and age-related decline of Joe Biden, it’s actually impressive he hasn’t already made this type of comment. On top of everything else…gibberish…wandering aimlessly..even with him being a political dbag he can’t recall where his son died, and that’s just sad. Given time, vampires probably make an appearance in JoeSpeak,

Oh! That Patrick Swayze song!

I can take a guess—we have an abundance of cheap wind in this country, but there are concerns that over-harvesting of wind is harmful to the environment and indicative of America’s imperialistic tendencies and complete disregard for emerging economies in developing nations. The answer is to ration wind, recycle that which has already been used, apply a wind tax, allow people to purchase wind credits if their wind consumption exceeds reasonable standards, and if necessary, to import wind from India or Pakistan.

Life in prison /no parole is no guarantee imo. Lemuel Smith comes to mind. And while I get that a while lot more lifers don’t end up killing prison guards, I think the propensity of those types of people continuing to victimize is pretty well established. Death kills.

It also substantially reduces the likelihood that the guilty party victimizes another innocent individual. I’m against the death penalty, but only insofar as it’s uncorrectable when someone is wrongly accused.