leh-nerd skin-erd

40 with this gem….”…the former President filed a bull### motion…”, that is, he availed himself of his rights under our system of justice. That’s not bull####, son. Next up from 40…”He didn’t turn surveillance off….obstruction” and concurrently “Why doesn’t he just submit if he has nothing to hide???”. 🤦🏼‍♂️

$100 a month x 2 x 12 x 35 years @ __%…If Tibsy’s friends don’t turn into chubby winos getting their lunch drank on regularly, they can make some headway here. They can probably save up enough to pay a lawyer if they get in another financial pickle down the road.

This has been an awesome read. S3 bloviating about whether or not something is material to a voter. 940 howling at the moon and letting the vulgarities fly like a truck driver at rush hour. I’ll answer the question posed, Chef. The number of presidents who left office and took confidential/top secret information with them is likely 100% of the presidents who left office. The number of high-ranking officials who handled classified and top secret intel inappropriately is likely quite high as well, up to and including maintaining documents at their private residence(s).

You must see the glass as half empty. When considered as a whole, the equities market has offered opportunities in abundance since 1929. The world didn’t end then, either! What I’m saying is for your friends, the low water mark (1929) was when they were besieged with debt that was clearly beyond their control. Now that the obligation has been neutralized, they can push forward and use the savings on expenditures important to them. It won’t happen overnight, of course, and it will at times be a struggle. Maybe the newest iPhone is delayed or out of stock. Maybe their favorite restaurant is booked. Maybe they want a BMW but have to settle for a Kia. All I know is they are Survivors and #studentloanstrong.

Nothing has ended the world, Tibs, yet you opine as much as anyone. I'm just glad you and your friends got out of the coal mine for lunch. Btw--I'm not certain is REM took the PPP loan option or not. I'll do some digging. https://variety.com/2020/biz/news/guns-n-roses-eagles-pearl-jam-ppp-loans-1234700398/

Hard working folks take loans. Hard working folks prefer not to pay the loans. Hard working folks catch the break thrown their way by Presidential intervention. Hard working folks immediately celebrate emancipation from obligation with booze-fueled over-priced lunch with liberal hipster friend. Just listening to their story, it's like 1929 all over again. #thestruggleisreal

If only there was a lawmaker, a man of power and principle who could have addressed the tax credits to multi-billion dollar businesses in the last 50 years…..

You are assuming MA is the only/prime target of the litigation. I'm not so inclined. I also have no idea what assets are in play, who the parties are to litigation, whether or not there are other defendants the plaintiff may add later on or anything else. If I were to assume cash grab--and I'm not--then the decision to supersize the lawsuit into a national story by involving a guy called "the punt God", the Buffalo Bills and an NFL not exactly known for championing women's rights cannot be underestimated. How do you reconcile the comments made by the plaintiff that an apology and donation may have solved the problem for Araiza? Does that make any sense to you given what has been alleged?

"In that case" are critical words in that sentence. In that case involved a plaintiff who viewed the outcome as in question, that is to say, a chance exists that a jury might determine no liability exists on Araiza's part, or on the lower end of the spectrum. If Araiza feels he's being extorted, settlement might well be to avoid "embarrassment, scrutiny and death threats", which from his perspective would be a cash grab. My point only was that in the case against Araiza, cash may ultimately be the goal. As I said, it's also possible it's not a cash grab at all, though I would wonder why the plaintiff suggested an apology and donation might have solved his problems.

That's how you read my reply? Interesting.

Point 1: It would indeed show they tried to pay to make it go away. My issue was with that being "damning" from his perspective; Point 2: It would not show that at all, though that is a possible interpretation and may be correct. However, it's also possible the plaintiff attorney is considering whether or not Araiza may avoid prosecution, it's also possible he's weighing whether or not he will be held liable for damages to his client in civil court. In that case, perhaps team Araiza offers a $10,000 settlement to avoid embarrassment, scrutiny, and death threats to simply be done with it, while plaintiff sees the cost to exit under those terms at closer to $75,000. Ah, I see you meant from the perspective of his involvement with the Bills. Ty.

What, exactly, would be "damning" about it if true?

I don’t know the details of what a college might look at in California, but a Title IX investigation by a university is completely different than a police investigation. Different training, different goals, different standards, different outcomes. If a violent sexual assault occurred, I’d think the last thing the university should be doing is investigating this matter.

This site references the US Department of Education and suggests the average Yale graduate will qualify under the Biden plan. Interestingly, the same site suggests the median student loan debt is $13,500. In that regard, the data suggests that 84% of Yale graduates were actively paying their loan v the national average of 47%. https://www.collegesimply.com/colleges/connecticut/yale-university/salaries/ It’s an interesting conundrum that when applying for FASFA, household income is considered as a critical element yet family ability to repay post-grad not so much. Finally, it isn’t just Yale or Harvard, there are many high profile schools that cost a ton and have significant endowments not contributing to solve the problem. The easy bankruptcy out is another problem in the country. One of the major reasons Trump won the election was the recognition that establishment Republicans were not all that different that establishment Democrats. Lots of words, lots of talk, same old men in power. If I hear Lindsey Graham suggest one more time to “Stay tuned” I’ll vomit. Stepping back a bit, it’s common knowledge that corporations and unions have a tremendous amount of power in our system. We’ve all heard it. Pharma. Oil. Finance. Health Insurance. Somehow, though, education is talked about, raged about, emotions raw….and nothing changed. While I don’t necessarily ascribe to @Chef Jim approach to “Ah, f*** it”, he’s not wrong on the shell game aspect of it all. Some people win, some people lose.

Well, that’s pretty clear. It seems ironic that folks who have judged Arazia guilty as not yet charged would call and threaten his family members with serious injury or death. Then again, some people are absolutely nuts.

As long as the c is silent in your version, no one should have a problem with it.

Who said it’s bad publicity? That’s all in the eye of the beholder. Oh and on the “style of rhetoric”… PAGING MUPPY VAN WINKLE! PAGING MUPPY VAN WINLE! This is nothing new.

That’s part of the challenge if you’re someone interested in the facts before deciding anecdotally whether or not he should be on a football team you follow. I understand the Kennedy and Smollette families getting a pass due to influence, but does a San Diego State football team player generate the type of juice to tamp this down in 2022?

He’s gotten national attention for his work thus far, elevating his status and his style of practicing law. One could argue it all makes sense, and he’s doing exactly what he set out to do.

We don’t hate you. We hate what you did. Maybe.

So far, the attorney has alleged the police are slow walking this, the DA is handling it politically, that the Bills are enablers of sexual assault for drafting a guy to kick footballs, and now, that an Ariaza apology and donation for participating in this horrific incident involving gang assault and piercings being ripped out might have solved the problem for him and he might still be kicking for the Buffalo Enablers. Interesting.

You're getting ornery. Settle down, take an edible, and breathe in through your nose and out through your mouth. You'll be fine.

I'm not sure what you think we disagree on. I didn't suggest there was a pure 'needs based' requirement for PPP, though I'd think when the government shuts the economy down and places restrictions on just about everything, then comes up with a relief plan to keep the economy afloat, it's pretty obvious a needs-based plan. PPP is an acronym for Paycheck Protection Program. If you want to argue that point, that it's not a program designed to protect paychecks, have at it, but it's silly. It's interesting that you included "owners" like it's some sort of hidden, under the radar part of the program. Owners get paychecks, too, and things like "rent, mortgage etc" are part of the cost of running a business. When paychecks covered under the PPP program were issued to employees, the employees receiving the paycheck presumably used the funds for similar expenses. PPP is a federal program, not a state program. "Florida" has nothing to do with it. That said, if you believe businesses in Florida were not impacted by COVID, you haven't been paying attention. As for Matt Gaetz qualifying, or not, what does that have to do with anything other than you not liking Matt Gaetz? The original point was that comparing PPP rules and regs to Joe Biden's student loan debt scheme. It's a foolish comparison.

To reimagine the PPP program as similar to Student Loan forgiveness under the Biden proposal requires both a manipulator, and someone easily manipulated. It would be interesting to engage in dialogue with a manipulator, sadly all we have here are the dupes who are easily manipulated. You hit key points about the government locking down the economy under threat of criminal and civil penalty, and the havoc that created for most businesses and employees not given special dispensation to thrive. The PPP program was designed to keep people working, or at least keep paychecks moving to the masses. To qualify, a business owner filled out an application and provided documentation to support the request. If approved, a loan was offered based on need and payment disbursed. If, after meeting the terms and conditions of the program, the business owner met the requirements of PPP, the loan converted to a grant. If terms and conditions were not met, the loan did not convert and as I recall, repayment was due within 12 months. The most vital element of the program was keeping employees employed while the govt kept society and the economy locked down. Failure to do so resulted in repayment terms that might be considered predatory if offered by a private bank. So, successful navigation of the PPP landscape required strict compliance with term and payments as dictated by the government. Student loan forgiveness, for better or worse, approve of it or not, invalidates terms and conditions of the loan based on the political whims of the party in charge to the level the debt is discharged. In what can only be described as a tragically ironic scenario, individuals who made their student loan payments during the COVID lockdown may not actually have benefited from the PPP program, and those benefiting from PPP may actually have allowed their student loan debt to grow in anticipation of the Biden buy out.

https://nypost.com/2022/08/25/nate-silver-liberal-elites-pressured-pfizer-to-delay-covid-vaccine/ Of course they did. The virus, death and COVID spread to at-risk communities was good for the Democrat party.