leh-nerd skin-erd

@Irv is a beauty school dropout. Missed his midterms and flunked shampoo. It happens.

I don’t think they play it under these circumstances.

Thanks B. Context is important of course. I was speaking to BillSy on that issue, especially as it relates to the film industry generally and the Hollywood establishment specifically. It seems logical to me that many of the players in Hollywood--big stars, studio heads, producers had to know about Harvey Weinstein's predilection(s). I haven't heard back from BillSy on that note, just wondering what your thoughts are?

For as bad as she allegedly was, Hillary Clinton earned nearly as many votes as Barrack Obama 4 years earlier. Biden earned nearly 16,000,000 more votes than either—agenda clearly matters. But, I agree, Trump outperformed Clinton on the campaign trail.

The system is established to serve the system. It’s not all that complicated. It’s not even bad, it just is. Though, come to think of it, the country burned brightly not all that long ago under the theory that the system established to serve the system is inherently corrupt. The one consistency is that many people pledge absolute trust in the system when it supports their world view, and seek to tear it down and remake it when it doesn’t.

Ah, I misunderstood and jumped to a conclusion. My bad. Would Hollywood defending and protecting Harvey Weinstein for decades be typical liberal behavior, in your opinion, consistent with your feelings on typical MAGA behavior and this movie?

You’re in the nobody knew nothing about Weinstein camp? Seriously? It’s much more likely that most major players in the industry knew what he was doing, with whom it was going on with, and maintained silence in solidarity and/or for personal benefit. It’s a dirty business.

But we won’t hear everything, that not the nature of a trial. It’s a carefully scripted presentation by skilled orators who consider everything from jury makeup to how they sit/stand dress, to when they object, tone of voice and human psychology. In fact, it seems pretty clear you’ve already made your mind up, and I’d be surprised if that’s not due in large part to that which has been said and leaked to the media. That brings me back to the hypothetical….is a gag order fair? I’ll move on, doesn’t matter much one way or the other. Have a good night.

This is the story formally sensible democrats like to hold their nose and tell themselves. Trump was a very electable candidate pre-COVID, in spite of the false claims about his partnership with Putin, and election deniers top to bottom in the Democrat party. The economy was humming, people were working, and corporations were hiring. Post COVID, the democrat party spread vaxx misinformation up to, and including suggesting a vaxx under Trump should not be trusted. They encouraged and often participated in the very behavior we were assured would spike the death count during the height of the pandemic. Death and despair were very good for the democrats. Additionally, the dem leadership shifted the “rich guy target” from $250k to $400k, and floated the student loan forgiveness program to include many, many well-off Americans happy to get the assistance. The intelligence agencies intervened, of course, to limit exposure to Team Biden and his very sketchy relationship (financially, anyways) with his son. In doing so, they positioned Team Trump as involved in spreading Russian information. Certainly, Trump’s style contributed to the loss, but this idea that Biden was anything but the favorite in large part because of his agenda is fantasy.

Illegal or not, it happens, Andy. To be candid, I’m really struggling to understand how you can go from “Trump’s comments = threat” to “Gee, I don’t know why certain things are leaked”. You know why those photos were leaked, and I know why those photos were leaked. We can debate whether it was some low level flunky trying to look important or Merrick Garland himself. We can debate whether it was some malicious and malevolent force trying to divide folks like you and me, or some well-intentioned patriot who truly felt Trump is a threat to all mankind and figured “Screw my ethics”. What is beyond debate is that the photos were leaked to influence opinion. Back to the point. The government holds all the cards here. No budgetary constraints. No limitations on personnel working the case. No personal financial skin in the game whether Smith wins or loses. A one-sided process to return an indictment. The game is played on their home court. They gave unlimited opportunity to leak information and the protection of anonymous sourcing to shape the narrative as they see fit. The defendant, on the other hand, has none of that. If the case Smith is bringing is so strong—-and it likely is—-what’s the harm in sharing/releasing data so long as no significant national secrets are in play (we can even use the Biden Benchmark—anything sensitive enough that it can’t be stored next to a corvette 30 years or older is off limits) and no one is in harms way? I’ve gotten to the point where I realize there’s far too much secrecy in our system, too many people protecting others, too much hidden under the cover of National Security. I remain uncertain about the protective order, but the fantasy that what Trump tweeted is beyond the political pale simply doesn’t hold water with me. That and worse occur daily in Washington.

Pillow talk! What always amazed me was Maddow just nodding along, not a question to be found.

We can pretend for a minute that politicians and activists don’t use incendiary language on an almost daily basis, or that politicians and activists accusing their opposition of being guilty of treason or being an illegitimate president is way cool and not at all dangerous, or senators ominously stating the intelligence community will come for you in any way, shape or form if you cross them. If that makes you feel good,Andy, let’s pretend that. The question was about gag orders. Short of revealing national security issues and exposing individuals to harm, why is it acceptable for the govt to leak as they see fit without recourse, and the defense required to stand down when it benefits them. Again, I’m torn, I’m not sure how I feel about that. If the prosecution is malicious—as has obviously happened with some regularity since the founding of our county, wouldn’t you want to see evidence of same? Assume Trump is not the defendant.

So, Andy, I’m torn by all this. As a law and order guy, I completely understand and appreciate the need to protect our institutions, processes and the people who run them. On the other hand, the simple reality seems to be that the prosecution can leak like a sieve, using the media to create a narrative, and the defense is handcuffed and bullied into silence. I have used the photo of allegedly classified files strewn about on the floor of Mara Lago. These photos were released for effect, and of course, we have no idea what the contents of the file represent. On the other hand, we have no release from DOJ sources of files strewn about in Biden’s garage, office, or any of his homes. So, I’m asking you as a Trump hater. Is a gag order really in the best interest of the public, assuming no lives endangered?

That’s why I’m here.

He won’t. He didn’t. He’s perfectly comfortable with election denialism and attempts to unseat a president.

Kamala Harris posited that Brett Kavanaugh was a serial sexual abuser, effectively attempting a political assassination of a SC justice. Certainly, she harmed him, caused him significant heartache and stress, and did so on a public scale. That was a resume booster for the VP job. Thankfully, she was kept safe and secure as should be the case for all elected officials. Beyond that, many, many individuals on the left do exactly what you’re (situationally) upset about. Here are a couple examples. https://redstate.com/joesquire/2017/05/06/left-wing-journalist-issues-statement-controversial-tweet-wishing-death-republican-families-n71457 https://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-SEB-66238 Kathy Griffin, of course, had her infamous photo shoot, followed by her public implosion as she wondered aloud why people were being mean to her. Bill Maher cautioned the left about just this sort of thing. Do independents have access to the internet (or a basic understanding of human nature)?

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/sep/02/bfi-study-calls-on-film-industry-to-urgently-reduce-emissions I think at some point we have to look away from traditional sacred cows, and move to a model that makes sense for the planet and future generations. Do we really need, societally speaking, scores and scores of people creating stories, setting up film shoots, caterers, elaborate costumes, high intensity lighting, food waste etc? Think of the carbon footprint to tell a make-believe story about make-believe people, often telling stories previously told, and in some cases multiple times. I love a good movie, and in spite of the carbon cost, enjoy seeing a movie in a traditional theater, popcorn and all. At the same time, couldn't the same story be told with artificially generated actors, using artificially generated scripts, streamed exclusively to the home as the only option? Personally, I'm torn. I want my kids to have a planet to live on. I'm not against common sense solutions, feel strongly that sometimes the climate push is a bit extreme, but that we all have to do our part.

Fair take.

According to some, Pence is a horrible human being bent of personally destroying lives and is innately evil. He’ll be political fodder for a bit as he’s positioned as a decent and just man by those who hated him before, hate him now, and will hate him in the future. I think he’s a politician who navigates the bumpy and tumultuous road between his values and what he needs to do to stay relevant in the political landscape. Be that as it may, he did the right thing at the right time, and for that, he should be commended.

He reportedly led a modest life. Again, the assumption that he lost his way in January 2016 seems completely implausible to me. It’s completely inconsistent with his personality, that of a bragadocious blow hard occupying a seat of power. Besides, there were countless ways for him to cash in as a consultant, lawyer, pretend author, whatever, none of which has the sketch factor of his role in Hunter’s business deals.

I actually started typing "Deek and Frankish sittin in a tree!" but changed it up. I am with you and Frankish, generally here. However, as this is a message board and not a court, I'm quite comfortable with the notion that Biden did not stumble into this sort of thing late in life. He's shown his stripes for decades--lying about academics, his accomplishments, what he's done...and more recently partnered with the dems in the Russia scandal. Biden is about Biden, and it seems extraordinarily likely he's been feeding at the trough for a long time. F him.

Deek is a liberal!

Maybe, but you don't suddenly forget the rules of engagement, and the harm to the idea of the Republic. He didn't take a job at a law firm and leverage his power, he was dealing with sketchy nations and even sketchier people. I'd bet he lost his way and sold out long before he retired.

Of course it's as simple as that. In some respects, it's like Trump exposing his throat to his enemies. Surely Biden would know that working in concert with his son, on foreign business deals, in countries perpetually at odds with ethical business practices and the best interests of the US, would raise serious concerns about his integrity. Obviously, he didn't care. That's part of a trend, too, as we see he didn't care about removing or possessing classified materials and documents over the past couple decades. Frank(ish)ly, even if his preposterous "Someone else did it" finger pointing defies common sense and logic is true, it might even be worse--he repeatedly delegated his responsibility in safe, secure handling of classified documents and failed, repeatedly, blissfully unaware. On the other hand, it's probably better in Washington to be incredibly powerful and corrupt, than following rules applied to lesser men.

Yikes. Joe Biden partnering with Hunter in significant business deals is actually evidence of his deep commitment to his critically ill son. God bless Hunter for finding a way to help his father deal with things.