Hmmm chit chats really slow lately. Oh well...
I WIN!!!
Printable View
Hmmm chit chats really slow lately. Oh well...
I WIN!!!
Darn, I didn't realize it was first to 63,881. That does seem like a kind of arbitrary number, but there's a beauty in that.
That actor smollett has friends in high places as well as a relative. Bet favors were had. Hope the FBI investigation into it will find out the truth. also the Chicago PD is sending him a bill for the investigation expenses lol
Smollett to Robin Roberts on GMA in an answer to why he was targeted by MAGA hat wearing white folk: "I come really, really hard at 45". Trump Derangement Syndrome - what a joke!Quote:
Originally Posted by RobDog888
You can find pictures of him with Mooch and maybe even Barry - those are friends in high places all right.
That's funny. Did they say how much the bill was???? Might have to get creative to get any justice in this case. I usually don't feel so vengeful but the way he keep lying and acting so smug, makes 2 days of community service and $10,000 seem inadequate.Quote:
Originally Posted by RobDog888
The propossed bill they will be serving him with is said to be ~$130,000. Could be a cover up payment in disguise lolQuote:
Originally Posted by wes4dbt
Yea and that horrible female Maxime Waters and Kamilla Harris!Quote:
Originally Posted by szlamany
There won't be a bill. That's just talk. We haven't sunk so low as to say, "we'll investigate your claim as long as you pay us for it."
Prosecutors do this all the time, it's just not always so public. They get to decide whether or not they want to prosecute a case. If they say no, then that's the end of it most of the time. That means that we have some laws (that I can point to, but won't) that are on the books, but which you can pretty much break in front of a law enforcement officer and get away with it, because they know the prosecutor won't take it to court. In the cases I'm talking about, the prosecutors won't take it to court because it's so very hard to prove that the crime was actually committed. This may be similar. As long as he doesn't admit to it, and he is sticking with his story, they have to prove that something didn't happen. That's a heavy lift.
Mayor Rahm Emanuel sent the bill already - $130,000 dollars.
According to the prosecutors office, they used a program that allows for restitution and community service. He was not exonerated at all.
If he pays the 130K it is an admission of guilt.
If he does not pay they can sue in civil court. This does two great things. It opens the case that was sealed and it changes the rules of guilt to be just a preponderance of evidence. That's how they first got at OJ...
I don't think it's a heavy lift at all. You have the two brothers confession, got incriminating text messages, got him giving them money...... I've certainly seen cases less compelling go to trial. Plus the states attorney said she believed they could have proven him guilty.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
I don't really care about if he went to trial or not, what bothers me is him not having to admit guilt and then sealing the records. I know it boils down to lying to the police and staging a crime, not really a major offence. But you can see by the outcry from the people of Chicago that they felt they deserve some accountability. I feel the states attorney has let them down. I just wonder WHY???
I'd have to say that this whole story has never held much interest for me. When I first heard about it, my thought was, "who?" When I heard that the police decided it was a phony report...that was all I heard and left it at that. Frankly, I believe this is only making the news because it was some kind of celebrity (though I still don't know who, or where the celebrity was from). Heck, I didn't know it was Chicago until Rham Emanuel's name came up. I thought it was NYC.
Now that I know ever so slightly more....so what? Are folks really shocked that a rich person gets different treatment? Are folks really shocked that a celebrity gets different treatment? Are folks really shocked that a celebrity did something to attract attention to themselves? I doubt anybody on here would be surprised by any of that. It's just more "stupid pet tricks".
Yeah, I didn't have any idea who he was either. People know who he is now, so I guess his publicity stunt worked. Not so sure it going to work out to his benefit in the long run. But it's a crazy world so who knows???
I would say that it will. There's the old adage that there's no such thing as bad publicity, and that may be even more true today than when the phrase was coined. After all, the audience of today is highly segmented/targeted. If you want to appeal to the broader public, then you have to be somewhat careful not to be too outrageous. However, if you've decided that YOUR audience is X, then it may be better to be outrageous in a way that X will appreciate, even if it alienates Y.
I have no desire to do anything like that, but if your livelihood depends on the support of some segment of society, then it certainly behooves you to recognize that and act accordingly. For the rest of us, our livelihood likely depends on not alienating some broad segment of society, but otherwise it doesn't matter. For him, he needs the active support of X, for the rest of us, we just need not to have the active opposition of X. That's a MUCH lower bar.
Of course, he has angered a fair amount of his group X, as well, so this may work against him....it's just that, if I had to put money on it, I'd bet that it doesn't hurt him. Just a guess, though.
To quote Airheads: "Rock stars don't go to jail. Christ, Vince Neil only got 30 days and he killed somebody."
To paraphrase Shaggy's last post: Don't put all your X in one basket.
Yeah, that's true. Putting things in a basket could hamper your ability to retrieve them.
I don't know whether that last pun is based on a local definition or a general definition.
Just need one of those new processors, with multi-hamper threading.
Just watched "The Dirt", a NetFlix movie about Motley Crue. Very much a movie about Sexxx, Drugs and a little Rock & Roll. Had some funny parts.Quote:
To quote Airheads: "Rock stars don't go to jail. Christ, Vince Neil only got 30 days and he killed somebody."
Yeah, I watched it too. I was a big fan back in the 80s (had the hair and everything). It was fun but, I suspect, a little more complimentary to their rock star image than reality would have been. They were pretty much irredeemable ass-holes.:rolleyes:
They need to throw the damn book at him and make an example or anyone is going to be able to do the same without repercussions. So many damn snowflakes. Time to turn the heat up and melt their arses!
Oh yea, and GET OFF MY LAWN! lol
Who are we talking about? Looking back over the last several threads, I'm not sure who should get a book thrown at them, or what kind of book.
Anyways, it's not so bad anymore, because they're just e-books. As long as they don't throw the reader, as well, it doesn't hurt too bad.
I hate dealing with lenders...
I prefer quoting a different Shaggy. "Just say it wasn't you"Quote:
Originally Posted by FunkyDexter
That Jesse fake your own gay attack empire actor guyQuote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
Ah, back to that. It's hard to keep track in this thread.
Why is that so hard - it was clear to me. He fakes a hate crime - blames white MAGA hat wearing individuals. He set the whole thing up.
Constant attacks from the media and celebs against Trump supporters is really wearing thin.
Twitter is on fire right now about AG Barr. People complaining he's not working for the US people - he's working for Trump! Omg - no one understands the Constitution! And these are reporters! Unitary Executive Power - how come I know what that is? Stupid really gets bigger and bigger every year!
We got on into Motley Crue and a slap on the wrist for Vince Neil....and I don't even know who that last person is, though I could look it up if I cared.
Don't get too outraged. The reason the report went through Barr is because of the way Starr handled the earlier report. That one went EVERYWHERE. In fact, it was in the bookstore. So, the rules were changed to that the AG has to review the independent report prior to it being released. However, the rules do require that it be released to Congress, which he has said he will do next week...with redactions. The actual meaning of that remains to be seen.
Yeah, I do think that the Dems and CNN are shooting themselves in the foot. This constant 24/7 of negative Trump news has gotten me to start tuning out. And believe me, I despise Trump, I think he is completely morally bankrupt. His core beliefs seem to be lying, bullying and infidelity.
I'm not a Dem or Rep but I think the Dems should be focusing on unifying the party and finding someone who has a real chance of beating Trump in 2020. It's very hard to defeat a sitting president when there is a strong economy.
That's a good point...except that they HAVE found a unifying principle: Opposition to Trump. That's not without precedent, as the Republicans focused on stopping Obama (without success, but their leadership did make it their explicit objective).
Frankly, we are solidly into the next election already. I've already had attack ads forwarded to me against various Democratic candidates. They have a bit of a problem with that, of course, since every third person in the country has already entered the race, and another third appear to be considering it. Still, the mud has begun to sling, which at least serves to indicate who the conservatives see as the largest threat.
In 2017, the Democratic bench seemed notably....old. Not any longer, as there are loads of younger candidates that have reasonable shots. It could be an interesting race...unless the economy goes into recession, in which case Trump would lose to a wet Kleenex, cause no sitting president wins in a recession.
Well, Opposition to the Opposition is a given. I was speaking more in terms of unified ideals and a unified allegiance to a candidate. Right now there is just to many people coming from all different directions with views that are mainly mutually exclusive from each other. The Dems don't seem to have an identity.
The dems have a free for all going on right now in that everybody including their mother is running. This diffuses chances of having a focused direction and momentum
The primaries aren't a unifying time - it's a time to stand out among the others. Nothing they say now is guaranteed to make it into the general election.Quote:
Originally Posted by wes4dbt
Trump has Brad Parscale working miracles. That last rally in Texas was 50% democrats, 25% swing voters. The campaign machine they are creating is just amazing.
I'd be very interested in where those numbers came from and how in world they were calculated. Didn't know you had to publicly proclaim which political party you represent when attending a rally. It would be my guess that someone made that statement and someone else decided to report it as fact. Butt then again I don't go to rallies.Quote:
That last rally in Texas was 50% democrats, 25% swing voters.
True but it can give Reps ammunition when the mud slinging begins.Quote:
Nothing they say now is guaranteed to make it into the general election.
Most of my life I didn't care anything about who was in office, to busy doing other things. Since retirement I've got to much time on my hands so I started paying attention to the politics of our country. I think I've decided to go back to work, I was happier. :):):wave:
The mud slinging has already begun.
One thing that people should keep in mind is that, despite the partisanship of our current climate, the reality is MUCH weirder. The partisan positions are really a simplification. For example, I had no idea how much Trump admires Nancy Pelosi. I know he's more complex than he's portrayed as, but that one surprised me just the same.
If we really got talking about issues, everyone would end up purple...one way or another, cause now that I write it, I realize that the phrase could have several different meanings...I keep coming up with new ones. The problem is, there's no way to categorize people if we allow for nuance. We need binary categories yet this is an analog world.
You have to obtain a ticket to get into his rallies - they are using the rallies as a huge marketing campaign. Brilliant stuff. They get your email - your name. What political party you are registered with is freely available. I had that file for CT 15 years ago for a labor union I work with.Quote:
Originally Posted by wes4dbt
If only they could use their briliance for GOOD instead of EVIL. :DQuote:
they are using the rallies as a huge marketing campaign. Brilliant stuff
That's pretty much what political activity is about, these days. Contact information is almost more valuable than donations. For some people, it is. I'm pretty careful about donations simply because of the mailing lists you get on.
Voter registration lists can be good, or not. They're pretty weird in ID, these days. The state is predominantly Republican, but Democratic primaries are open (anybody can vote in them), while Republican primaries are closed. Since the Dems generally put up one person, while the Reps generally put up half a dozen, the Dem primaries are usually meaningless (I have yet to see one where voting was worth the effort, since there was no choice), whereas Rep primaries are where all the heat and fire is at. This creates an incentive to register Republican, because it doesn't preclude you from voting in the Democratic primaries, but it allows you to vote in the, far more interesting, Republican primaries.
However, that will differ by state.
Here is my opinion. The Democrats want to redistribute tax payer money and sometimes pay lip service to capitalism whereas Republicans want to yell about redistribution while simultaneously blowing out the budget. Oh and one cares about a wall whereas another thinks it’s the government’s role to “cure” climate change.
In short, they both suck. A summary of a 27 year old’s take on US politics.
This country never does well when it isn't challenged. Let the Russians put up sputnik and we get to work. Let the Japanese start making far more reliable cars, and we improve our processes to match (mostly). When we rest on our laurels, we get fat and happy...ish. Actually, content or complacent is probably a better word than happy, though nobody is contending the fat part.
Very few people doubt climate change. However, we will only solve it by moving forwards, not backwards. Using less fossil fuels can't be done without technological progress (or total societal collapse, which is always a possibility). That will disrupt some industries, so there will be some losers, but we all stand to be winners, because technological progress hasn't made our lives noticeably worse. Whatever the challenge is, we NEED a challenge to perform well. Climate change is an excellent challenge. Even those who don't believe it's happening should be in favor of it for sociological reasons.