Califan007 The Constipated

1 hour ago, Cooked Crack said:

 

 

Britt practicing her rebuttal speech with a GOP consultant...

2 hours ago, Cooked Crack said:

That's from two weeks ago. I'm sure the fight contributed to the suicide but not in the way that's legally actionable

Since it's in today's article I'm assuming that nothing has changed over the past two weeks in that regard.

And manslaughter charges could be sought if it's determined that both the physical fight and the bullying are tied together as playing a role in the suicide.

9 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

 

Terrible for a different reason now

From the article:

"a spokesperson for the (Owasso police) department clarified that the fight had not been ruled out as having contributed to or caused his death."

Kid most likely only went to the hospital because it's school procedure when a kid starts barfing for no apparent reason lol...

1 hour ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

I recommend retiring at 40. I've been a fan so far.

I recommend winning the lottery at 18 and never working a day of your life. 👍

Mind you, that usually requires you dying at 19, but…

2 hours ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

People grieve in different ways. I find her family smiling in a pic with an autographed photo of their dead loved one a little weird though.

And not just a dead loved one, but a murdered loved one.

And I'm wondering whose idea was it to get Trump's signature on the photo...did they ask him to sign it, or did he just sign it on his own like some obtuse B-grade celebrity who thinks anyone who puts anything within arm's reach of them for any reason, is a sign they want an autograph lol...

3 hours ago, Spearfeather said:

 

 

 

He's  right. She's mischaracterizing what Hur said in the report.

She's being slick with her words. She says " date year,"  and then goes and uses " month ", however, Joe started the subject of Beaus death himself, ( Hur never asked him about month and day ) and was asking himself " When did Beau die ? " And then he answers himself " May 30th ", and then a staffer reminds him " 2015 " to which Joe responds " Was it 2015 when he died ? "

So Hurs statement about Biden not knowing within a few years when his son died, is correct.

 

What Hur wrote, that she felt he should correct:

"He did not remember, even within several years, when his son Beau died."

Not even slightly accurate.

Accurate would be: "While President Biden recalled the month and day his son Beau died, White House attorneys provided the year."

From the transcripts and reports:

HUR: "So during this time when you were living at Chain Bridge Rd & there were docs relating to the Penn Biden Center, or the Biden Inst, or the Cancer Moonshot, or your book, where did you keep papers that related to those things that you were actively working on?"

BIDEN: "I don't know. This is, what, 2017, 2018, that area?"

Hur: "Yes, sir."

Biden: "Remember, in this time frame, my son is either been deployed or is dying." (then much later) "And so, what was happening though--what month did Beau die? Oh God, May 30th--"

White House Lawyer: "2015"

Person 2: "2015"

Biden: "Was it 2015 he had died?"

Person 2: "It was May of 2015."

Biden: "It was 2015."

Biden's personal lawyer: "I'm not sure of the month, sir, but I think it was 2015."

***********

The way Hur wrote it, though, it came across as if Biden just drew a complete blank when it came to remembering his son's death. Not to mention, Biden never attempted to give a year for Beau's death...the closest he came to doing so was to say if was during a time frame when he was "actively working on" a number of papers. Guess what--he very easily could have been working on those papers while still Vice President. So Biden's comment about his son either being deployed or dying "in this time frame" isn't referencing a specific year...and when his attorney's chimed in with the year, it wasn't because Biden asked them which year it was or was drawing a blank, they just let him know the year. But as I and numerous others have already mentioned, 1) not remembering the specific year of a loved one's passing means absolutely nothing...Hur, though, made it mean far more than he should have...and 2) saying "Was it 2015?" also means absolutely nothing, as tshile perfectly pointed out. It's just how human beings talk, it's not a sign that Biden's mentally confused.

Hur's description of that interaction with Biden was unnecessarily negative and completely ignores the reality for a large part of the population when it comes to things like remembering the year a loved one passed away. What Hur wrote is far more a reflection of his own perspectives about Biden than a tell-tale sign of Biden's memory.

29 minutes ago, China said:

 

The judge also ordered that the former president seek permission before making future motions before the trial starts on March 25.

 

"Effective immediately, the parties are hereby directed to obtain leave of the Court before filing any additional motions prior to March 25. 2024."

 

44 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

Eh, they're all smiling so not reading too much into it.

5 minutes ago, Die Hard said:

 

Once you eliminate Trump… DeSantis is the only candidate that that had some steam. And he was castrated early. Even without Trump.

 

I'ma steal that part in bold lol 😂

6 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

Actually I think Brian got it wrong...sounds more like Hur said "2001 TO 2002" and not "2001 OR 2002"...and sounds like he's associating that time frame with his own term, not with the Supreme Court making the decision, although I have no clue why he's even bringing it up from that clip.

24 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

Abso-****ing-lutely spot on by Schiff. I've said this before, but when I had to give testimony in a deposition, lawyers told me ahead of time to ALWAYS say I can't remember or recall unless I remember something with amazing clarity. That it was miles better to say "I can't remember" than to guess at what I think the answer is. And what Hur did was absolutely done to give the GOP talking points against Biden for the presidential campaign. Hur turned "President Biden said he could not recall" into something like "President Biden constantly struggled with memory issues as he said he could not recall even the most basic facts surrounding the documents, he would be seen as a sympathetic grandpa if he were to be charged."

Just now, Die Hard said:

Moderate Republicans aren’t getting their party back. They’re not the base any more…. it’s a niche (they’ve been alienated) and completely toothless/inconsequential politically now.

 

Even the Magas will be divided once Trump loses. And they’ll never support the Rinos.

 

It’s going to be chaos for a few election cycles…. 
 

Canadians generally hate Trudeau. And yet he’s won the last 3 elections… because the Conservatives have had a leadership vacuum after Harper.

 

 

That's why I mentioned the Whigs and why I said "possibly" lol...the Whigs were in power for like 25 years, and Repubs were basically the "other" party before them and after them. I don't expect MAGA to hold any power that long, and may never hold any actual power again, but they will exist as the "other" party for awhile before Republicans come back to replace them. Meaning, we're not gonna ever have a one-party system...MAGA crashing and burning would leave a political vacuum that just a TON of people and factions would be desperate to fill. Traditional Republicans would have a huge leg-up on everyone else to be the ones to fill it.

10 hours ago, balki1867 said:

Serious question— what happens after the Republican Party destroys itself? I’m pretty liberal but a system where there’s only one major party is not a good thing— we need a legitimate conservative party that actually has conservative values. All of the third parties waiting in the wings are also wackos. 

Check out the history of the Whig party for a general possibility. Long story short, the Republican party in it's previous form would return to fill the void, possibly more moderate than before MAGA took over but probably wouldn't be.

2 hours ago, China said:

Too bad that's not a self-realization.

Freudian slip, maybe? lol...

8 minutes ago, Spearfeather said:

 

Just trying to clarify what exactly transpired.  Make of it, what you will.

No you weren't lol...come on, now. A lot more than just that transpired during Hur's questioning of President Biden...you just highlighted that one thing to make a point.

Not to mention, asking someone to remember the year of a specific event is not the way cognitive decline is detected or measured. They ask the person what year it is now, who the president is, what month it is now, show them a picture of a dog and ask them what animal it is...stuff like that. As well as Hur is not a cognitive specialist! lol...he has no clue how to detect nor analyze things of this nature, so his observations are worthless, at least in terms of determining Biden's mental capabilities.

If the GOP is smart, they won't even slightly ask Hur about Biden's alleged memory issues. That would be the absolute dumbest thing they could do...which is why I expect them to do just that lol.

6 minutes ago, Spearfeather said:

From the WP:

 

 

You apparently think this is, what...damaging to Biden? I can't easily recall the year my sister died, my mom died, or my dad died without doing some mental math...and even then I get it wrong half the time. I have literally asked my siblings which year our sister passed away before. Hell, I can't even tell you the year now if anyone asked. How many people do you think are the same? I can remember what I wore to my sister's funeral, what the bathroom tile in the church felt like against my skin as I laid down on it sobbing alone away from everyone, what the weather felt like as I placed a rose on my sister's coffin, what color pants I wore to her funeral, and what my aunt said to my nephew--my sister's child--as he broke down in the car crying. But I can in no way tell you what year she passed away without doing a bunch of adding, subtracting, and free form associating to figure it out first.

9 hours ago, Fergasun said:

Well, this is interesting.  Hur is testifying tomorrow. Not as a DoJ employee (apparently he is official not as of today).

 

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/11/politics/robert-hur-special-counsel/index.html

So he is not bound by DoJ ethical rules or standards.  This testimony will be intended to inflict maximum damage on Biden.  He is colllaborating with GOP operative, William Burck.  Don't recognize the name? 

 

He is the guy who helped vet the Brett Kavanaugh records and documents.

I no longer hold any belief that anything whatsoever that the GOP does in terms of hearings or testimony will ever, EVER, be anything other than a complete and utter failure for Republicans lol...have they succeeded even once yet? Twitter Files, Hunter Biden, Impeachment Inquiry...it all flames out, usually due to the testimony of the GOP's own "witnesses." That, plus Dems have become really ****ing good at calling out the obvious stupidity and logic flaws, as well as puncturing Hindenburg-sized holes in what little witness testimony that is potentially damaging.

3 hours ago, EmirOfShmo said:

 

If I ever did that, every single female in my entire family would destroy me for several decades...I'm talking mom, sisters, daughter, aunts, cousins, 2nd cousins, in-laws, ex-in-laws...all of them.

2 minutes ago, Chris 44 said:

Chase land anywhere yet?

I forgot all about Chase Young lol...

3 minutes ago, Conn said:

I was referring to your older past as a homer, we’ve all been here too long lol.

 

I think we can do better than the surface level comparison you’re drawing, but I won’t give you too hard a time about it because this is a hard franchise to get behind even after the changes. I’m not even advocating for assuming the best—just not immediately drawing the most shallow comparisons possible. Other than Samuels, every Panthers player Rivera brought in here was already bad or washed up. Quinn is bringing in younger players who haven’t hit their ceiling, who have played well. I’d say it’s very different. Biadasz is not Norwell or Turner (who some talked themselves into at the time, but were clearly washed). Biadasz is a solid starter at worst, which is already better than Norwell/Turner, and nobody is deluding themselves into thinking he’s elite. 
 

I agree with your point that new coaches are almost always supplied with their former players by their FO. Especially when “establishing a culture”. 
 

But to say this is feeling the same after 3-4 signings is simplistic. It seems like you want engagement from people. 

I had to literally "lol" at the part in bold lol 😂...way, waaaaay too long lol...

And I think I've been here long enough for everyone to realize I pretty much never post whatever I post for mere engagement, not to mention I have stayed out of the stadium forum for about the last 6 months or so. Even when I post something like "Just needed to stir the pot in here lol" it's never meant literally.

And I'm not just referring to players, I'm also referring to coaching staff decisions...found myself thinking about Joe Whitt Jr. the same way I thought about Scott Turner.

tl:dr version: I'm in heavy wait-and-see mode, and seeing the same types of comments this offseason that I've seen repeated for years isn't helping me. 😂 ...Ah, well, I'll get more into it soon with the draft.

2 minutes ago, Est.1974 said:

...I hope to see some unexpected moves that give insight into Peters being different, be it creative or imagination. Just something different.

I think that was me, too...wanted to see something that strongly indicated he was different, not just better than Rivera/Bruce/Snyder/etc. As you said, if all he is is "Better" then time will tell how much better (hopefully a ****load better lol). I do have legit hope that will be the case at the very least.