Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[iam416]

I really try not to stop. I hate that drive. It rivals the drive to Warren I did yesterday. But, apparently voters aren’t just in I-71 cities!

[Dr. Strangelove]

I really try not to stop. I hate that drive. It rivals the drive to Warren I did yesterday. But, apparently voters aren?t just in I-71 cities!

A couple years back I fulfilled a vow to visit all 88 county seats. Warren was one of the few places I was scared to get out of the car.

[iam416]

The town center is nice. There’s a half block buffer max, though. My grandparents are from there, so I know it well. Jefferson County seat is worse.

[Dr. Strangelove]

The town center is nice. There?s a half block buffer max, though. My grandparents are from there, so I know it well. Jefferson County seat is worse.

Oh God, yeah, Steubenville is a hole. I have relatives (through marriage) from there. Take every river city between East Liverpool and Portsmouth and, except for Marietta, you're in another century. Still, at least it's scenic. Which is more than I can say for Bucyrus or most of NW Ohio.

[iam416]

Bucyrus can go fuck itself. The river is a hard scene, but actually there’s modest opportunity for growth in some of those places. Unlikely to happen, but there are lots of good industrial sites down there.

[AlabamAlum]

You know, I just had to drive up there a couple weeks ago. Northern Wood is really developed and pretty damn close to Toledo. It actually made an impression. There?s still squat by BG, the Cornell of Ohio.

I am pretty sure that any Kornelle sass requires a tip of the hat in my direction, counselor.

[iam416]

You’ve long piggybacked my right-minded sassery of the Ivy League starting with my efforts, with some help from RU, to displace Ghost and bring class to the Ivy thread. That, of course, led to my own thread where I continued to dispense harsh justice to those who paid $500,000 to be a low rent consultant. And I have relented rarely, if ever, since.

In short, STFU.

[AlabamAlum]

My "Cornel is DeVry with worse architecture" was the harbinger of all Ivy sass. It predates the Ghost sass by a good bit. I first took that rapscallion "jrg98" around the scruff in 3200 BCE (Buggery? Cornelle Excelsior)

[millenwasmyfavorite]

Only legal mind I trust is Alan Dershowitz. He said that obstruction of justice can not fly if the president is executing “constitutionally authorized acts”



so no.

This is precisely incorrect on a number of levels. Though, I do agree that Dershowitz has often been a cornerstone of layman's legal analysis.

Dershowitz has been under fire for his commentary on everything relating to Trump-Russia -- guilty of either obvious bias or legal anachronism.

Dershowitz has operated, and continues to operate, under the premise that the special counsel shouldn't really exist (he has a legal, although erroneous, reason... Not "Mueller hasn't told me everything so there is no evidence cuz Hannity")

Why, you ask? Because Dershowitz analogizes the current investigation to the Clinton investigation. This is a problem, because:

* The Clinton investigation was authorized by congressional statute, which means...
a. A crime must be found
b. Investigator is subject to political and/or congressional oversight

If this were actually the case for Mueller (meaning, technically the case... Not the spun-up witch hunt narrative) it would OBVIOUSLY be problematic.

But, it isn't. Why? How?

1. Congress doesn't even commission those sorts of statutes any more
2. Mueller investigation is commissioned through DOJ authorization and regulation

Which means.............

A. Mueller isn't subject to the oversights mentioned in the Clinton investigation
-he is overseen by the DOJ, but not by specific appointees (recused or not recused -- doesn't matter)
-Makes the investigation technically inherently nonpartisan
-only dismissed for just cause
B. Mueller isn't commanded to find a crime
-one of the key points Dersh shits on the special counsel for doesn't exist.

In summary:

Dersh is normally synced, but he has been out of touch on mostly everything Trump-Russia related --- and has certainly erred on the side of Trump when interpretation allows. The nitty-gritty on "constitutionally authorized acts" will get pretty dirty considering how exposed Trump is in every conceivable facet.

[millenwasmyfavorite]

....so you would not have fucked them if you had the chance...?

Frankly, the President who was a "morally bankrupt adulterous habitual liar" was Bill Clinton. When Trump acted out, it was with famous and beautiful women. Clinton stuck cigars into the pussies of subordinates, let the cigars marinate, and later walked around his office with those cigars in his mouth. That, to me, seems depraved.

BTW, Hillary claims they have an open marriage. Why would it be so strange for Trump and Melania to have the same arrangement?

Such a weird rebuttal.

I don't think anyone is searching for moral high ground on banging pornstars -- that isn't even the concern.

This would be 100% non-story if Trump had just come out and said he fucked Daniels.

The issue exists in all acts to obscure/conceal the alleged event

I wish he had embraced the machismo like so many of his supporters are willing to do for him. At least then we'd have a baseline for what he is transparent/honest about.

Instead, we have the possibility that he fucked Daniels, went to considerable lengths to conceal it, then shit on her at the first sign of his poorly executed plan falling apart.

Which yields the less obvious concern:

This guy will do almost anything to conceal/deny. So, unless all this Trump controversy is 100% manufactured, which seems more unlikely every Friday, it seems increasingly likely that our president can or IS a pretty leverage-able piece of work.

[Kapture1]

This is precisely incorrect on a number of levels. Though, I do agree that Dershowitz has often been a cornerstone of layman's legal analysis.

Dershowitz has been under fire for his commentary on everything relating to Trump-Russia -- guilty of either obvious bias or legal anachronism.

Dershowitz has operated, and continues to operate, under the premise that the special counsel shouldn't really exist (he has a legal, although erroneous, reason... Not "Mueller hasn't told me everything so there is no evidence cuz Hannity")

Why, you ask? Because Dershowitz analogizes the current investigation to the Clinton investigation. This is a problem, because:

* The Clinton investigation was authorized by congressional statute, which means...
a. A crime must be found
b. Investigator is subject to political and/or congressional oversight

If this were actually the case for Mueller (meaning, technically the case... Not the spun-up witch hunt narrative) it would OBVIOUSLY be problematic.

But, it isn't. Why? How?

1. Congress doesn't even commission those sorts of statutes any more
2. Mueller investigation is commissioned through DOJ authorization and regulation

Which means.............

A. Mueller isn't subject to the oversights mentioned in the Clinton investigation
-he is overseen by the DOJ, but not by specific appointees (recused or not recused -- doesn't matter)
-Makes the investigation technically inherently nonpartisan
-only dismissed for just cause
B. Mueller isn't commanded to find a crime
-one of the key points Dersh shits on the special counsel for doesn't exist.

In summary:

Dersh is normally synced, but he has been out of touch on mostly everything Trump-Russia related --- and has certainly erred on the side of Trump when interpretation allows. The nitty-gritty on "constitutionally authorized acts" will get pretty dirty considering how exposed Trump is in every conceivable facet.

funny that you say he's been under fire for his Trump Russia commentary. Not that he is overlooking facts, not that he's changed his political views, just that the left doesn't like what he has to say haha.


He voted for Clinton, he donated to Clinton. He is a democrat. And I trust his legal opinion above all others because he is the only one I have seen that has been able to remain objective.

And i agree with him, that there never should have been a special council.

[millenwasmyfavorite]

What are you talking about?

That post literally details why he is being seen as less credible than he usually is:

He is critiquing the Special counsel on a fundamental misunderstanding.

Unfortunately for you, and I figured you would do this so I stopped just short:

Dershowitz still advocates for a special counsel -- he just thinks it shouldn't be set up how he thinks it currently is (it isn't), and that it should be set up in a way that provides non-partisan operation/non-political oversight (again, ironically, how it is).

Thanks for playing.

[Kapture1]

ok douche.

"obvious bias"

lol

[millenwasmyfavorite]

funny that you say he's been under fire for his Trump Russia commentary. Not that he is overlooking facts, not that he's changed his political views, just that the left doesn't like what he has to say haha.


He voted for Clinton, he donated to Clinton. He is a democrat. And I trust his legal opinion above all others because he is the only one I have seen that has been able to remain objective.

And i agree with him, that there never should have been a special council.

Classic deception.

Dersh has been all over the place over the past 2 years.

Not interested in disputing his voting record, but pretending he hasn't caught Trump's attention and played that admiration up a little bit is just as lazy as your initial endorsement/conclusion on Dersh in the first place.

Yes, I am a douche because you couldn't read a whole post, posted a response which highlighted that fact, and got called for that exposure.

[Kapture1]

Classic deception.

Dersh has been all over the place over the past 2 years.

Not interested in disputing his voting record, but pretending he hasn't caught Trump's attention and played that admiration up a little bit is just as lazy as your initial endorsement/conclusion on Dersh in the first place.

Yes, I am a douche because you couldn't read a whole post, posted a response which highlighted that fact, and got called for that exposure.

I stopped reading when you accused him of "obvious bias"

That's fucking rich coming from you lol