Gromnir

okay, that one made us chuckle. HA! Good Fun!

anti-establishment? the guy is one o' the 5g + bill gates + covid vaccine microchip kooks, and he continues to promote that bit o' crazy. shared such with rogan in fact. am not saying rfk jr. is a bad person. already mentioned him overcoming his addiction is a plus in our book. additional, he has championed the causes o' more than a few indigenous peoples, and if you told us he had saved a puppy from drowning by risking his life, swimming into dangerous cold waters, we wouldn't be surprised; we would cheer his humanity. seems like he means well. unfortunate, we wouldn't want a person so divorced from reality as rfk jr. to be President... anymore than we would champion joe rogan for the office. tinfoil hat legionnaires, regardless if they is anti-establishment or even if they have a meaningful and practical plan to address income disparity and national debt problems (he doesn't,) should not be serious considered as President. a lack o' shared belief in facts and reality is an increasing problem in this nation and to have somebody who believes school shootings is the result o' the invention and prescribing o' prozac is literal dangerous to have sitting behind the resolute desk in the oval office. as to age... am recognizing how different people age... different. however, am having noticed old people is often the last to admit they need help even if most people around them see how the aged person is increasing incapable o' driving safe, handling a gas stove, or being a US Congressmen, SCOTUS Justice or POTUS. biden did recent take speaker mccarthy's lunch money during the debt ceiling negotiations, so score one for the octogenarians, but another four years? ... not to be morbid, but perhaps an upside to biden being elected to another four years is am suspecting such would lead to support for the passing o' an amendment xxviii calling for age limits for those serving in specific enumerated article i, ii or iii offices. HA! Good Fun! ps 'pon reflection, is no reason to not speak the silent part. "anti-establishment" insofar as rfk jr. is camouflage. the vast majority o' rfk jr. fans is people who thought covid were a hoax, that vaccines were/are a hoax, that fauci were selling a hoax and that lock downs and mask wearing (which americans never actual supported enough to be as effective as were the case in south korea, taiwan, new zealand or elsewhere)were authoritarian tactics used to promote the hoax. don't just buy the anti-establishment claims without considering the source.

... what do you mean the magic trick video is irrelevant? from the sudden turn o' the thread, it looked like we were sharing ways to distract children when we run out of things to say. whatever. WATCH: Investigation shows Minneapolis police show pattern of violating rights, Garland says the doj findings significant undermines the one bad apple narrative. weren't just derek chauvin and his nine and a half minutes. unfortunate, has only been a day after the garland news conference and the story has already faded from most headlines. DOJ accuses Minneapolis Police Department, city of using excessive force, racial discrimination as usual, am posting the fox coverage not 'cause o' the spin on the story so much as for the comments from readers which follow. am recalling many euros cannot access the comments portion, so, an unedited sampling follows: no shared fact. no shared reality. complete polarization. so it goes. edit: @Gorth but let's say you had read mein kampf and didn't like. understandable. the writing is, at best, clumsy and hitler offered little more than grievance and outrage, promising struggle but avoiding a worker's paradise reward such as were teased by marx. curious, struggle and outrage were all hitler were selling. meh. so, again, for sake of argument, say you didn't like hitler's book after reading. now assume hitler released hundreds and even thousands o' similar works, but with each new release, hitler fans insisted you were being unfair to hitler by not reading each "new" work. silly, no? rogan has recorded thousands o' podcasts. we reference one such in the following post: just how many rogan or rfk jr. contributions does one need indulge before it is fair to not read or view the next? how many minutes o' the next three hour conspiracy laden and fact starved podcast must you suffer before concluding, no más? is our no más HA! Good Fun!

again, you are asking for something irrational. am not enduring the entire interview to criticize anymore than we would play an entire pc game or watch all of firebirds before we were justified in offering a critique on rfk jr and rogan whom we has seen and heard many times previous. we read books by mao and marx in their entirety. read the motorcycle diaries AND guerilla warfare by che. rogan is an entertainer who admits he is talking out his arse, which is s'posed part o' his appeal as well as a defense to his inevitable nonsense. converse rfk jr has done nothing to convince us he deserves more consideration than rogan. have seen the ridiculous retort many times that one needs watch or read something in its entirety before making the reasonable choice to stop the bleeding. crazy talk. but knock your self out. far less than three hours. heck ff to 7:20 and feel free to stop after 9:30. notice we ain't even suggesting a full viewing is required for context? is the farewell address immediate before kennedy became President. again, read kennedy's/democrat's 1960 platform. the military industrial complex speech were in part a warning 'cause o' the threat eisenhower saw in the campaign rhetoric o' the golden goose. military industrial complex out to get kennedy? sure. @Bartimaeus is not the first time the US had to endure ultra partisan and polarized politics. perhaps ironic it took world war 2 to change the dynamic o' nativism and fear which drove politics in the US from the last decade o' the 19th century. am s'posing such were the theory behind ozymandias' scheme from the watchmen comic-- fear o' an even more terrible enemy were needed to unify naturally fractious and adversarial human beings. 'course is doubtful we can count on a costumed sooper genius to manufacture an alien threat and only insane people would would advocate ww3 to solve our dilemma. obviously antebellum civil war through reconstruction were horrific and so not the kinda blueprint one would look to replicate in extracting the nation from the current polarized mess o' tribalism and paranoia. ... hard to believe, but our sad national response to mccarthyism might be a best case scenario? a chilling thought. HA! Good Fun! edit: rfk jr. whackadoodle positions on prozac being the cause o' school shootings, suggesting the link between hiv and aids is myth, blaming vaccines for autism, as well as a few o' his easily debunked covid conspiracies should preclude reasonable voters from taking him serious as a Presidential candidate. however, am gonna concede the oft mentioned heroin addiction he dealt with does not bother us over much, and perhaps less than it should. overcoming heroin addiction isn't exactly a positive résumé bullet point for a candidate running for political office. nevertheless, am admitting we cannot help but applaud the fact rfk jr. overcame such a terrible personal demon. good on him.

don't take our word. educate yourself. we added links to get you started, but is gonna be up to do the hard part. oh, and we know very little about gardening, non english poetry, post colonial south american history (genuine feel bad 'bout this one,) tibet, any recipe which includes rhubarb and probable a trillion other subjects. and is no way am listening to the entire "interview." insanity. walked out of firebirds after thirty minutes. why on earth would we give rogan more than that? kennedy started in on the conspiracy silliness and am thinking we deserve a medal (albeit a minor civilian medal) for sticking it out as long as we did. HA! Good Fun!

rfk jr and rogan? is there enough aluminum to craft the hats both these jokers need? rogan ain't educated enough or is too immersed in conspiracy crazy to push back on the obvious untruths kennedy spews. https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2023/06/06/rfk-jr-makes-unfounded-claims-about-mass-shootings-covid-19-here-are-all-the-conspiracies-he-promotes/?sh=41f1b6753acc https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/robert-f-kennedy-jr-conspiracy-theory-twitter-elon-musk-1234747479/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/06/05/rfk-jr-democratic-primary-biden/ https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/05/08/robert-kennedy-jr-measles-vaccines-226798/ etc. was only able to take so much bs about kennedy from the rogan lovefest. revisionist history 'bout jfk didn't help neither. after all, eisenhower (republican) were the "dove" who had warned about the military industrial complex and kennedy's literal number one campaign issue in 1960 were national defense (long, but if you don't read, you won't learn nothing): the idea the military industrial complex were out to get kennedy only works 'cause +90% o' americans don't recall or never learned much 'bout kennedy save the post dallas revisionism which became popularized following the assassination. kennedy were the freaking golden goose for the military industrial complex. whatever. and trump's popularity increased with republicans after the indictment. is terrible, and is bad for america, but democrat leadership actual wants trump to be the republican candidate 'cause he is the one guy democrats, and an Increasing number of independents, will crawl across broken glass to vote against. yeah, with trump as the gop candidate, the rhetoric becomes more extreme and chances for violence increase, but biden is not a good candidate and democrats perhaps need an existential crisis alternative to win. just as with the midterms, democrats is willing to risk extremism and violence to actual aid the most fringy gop candidates 'cuase recent history has changed the democrat voting dynamic. in the past, democrats only bothered to come out and vote if they were hopeful or enthusiastic about a candidate. now, democrats will vote if they are afraid... afraid enough. and yeah, there is indeed a chance trump gets a second term in part 'cause biden is so not great for democrats. pretend trump can't win 'cause he lost in 2020 is naïve. so democrats quiet cheering as trump solidifies his frontrunner status with the gop is questionable even if it might be a winning strategy. COVID-19 research updates: does wearing tinfoil hats pose neurodegenerative threats to conspiracists and the general public? HA! Good Fun!

aside, since @majestic is such a fan o' covers, we will share a couple favorites... one is even from an animated movie. have mentioned we originally thought led zeppelin were a blues cover band. am so not a nirvana fan, but their version o' in the pines is fantastic. prince being prince. 'nuff said. which brings us to... am disappointed the film (as well as the soundtrack) didn't get more love. HA! Good Fun!

What Iowa Republicans are thinking after Trump’s federal indictment

"we never harvested a single leaf" ... am finally able to appreciate the final scene from planet of the apes (1968.) HA! Good Fun!

have mentioned previous how impressed we were by the music o' both icewind dale 1 & 2. different composers, but similar evocative. am not having a favorite anime music/tune, but paranorman was animated and include one o' the most underrated scores am able to recollect. HA! Good Fun!

"the wound is the place where the light enters you." am forgetting the origin or attribution at the moment. *shrug* our personal experience suggests we learned far more from our failures than our victories. our query is for any and all obsidian developers who would care to answer and am hopeful responses need not be limited by the twentieth anniversary event; am genuine curious and would welcome any and all developer answers. regardless, our question is as follows: what memorable error related to a game development made obsidian (or individual obsidian developers) better at crafting games? please offer details 'bout the mistake which 'brought about enlightenment as well as the resulting epiphany. thanks in advance. HA! Good Fun!

as o' today, snow peas are available from a local farm, so for the next month am gonna be on a snow pea diet. got a handful o' recipes which star the delectable legume, but they are so good we typical just steam 'em for 1:30 to 1:45 and perhaps sprinkle with a bit o' salt. we also purchased a fair amount o' fantastic looking pickling cucumbers. 'cause of late season cold rain, july 8 is projected first day corn will be sold local. melons and some o' the best poblano peppers anywhere should also be purchasable sooner rather than later. once tomatoes begin being harvested here in the valley, we enter a kinda produce nirvana for a couple months. ordinarily we would take advantage o' a u-pick option at .40¢ per lb.--$20 minimum. unfortunate we had an injury last december which prevents us from bending our right knee more than a tiny fraction, so squatting to pick veggies is nigh impossible and far too much effort. even so, u-pick won't start until the aforementioned july 8 and the snow peas is not an option through u-pick regardless. snow peas typical is sold local for a bit more than a month... HA! Good Fun!

an admitted obscure anniversary: june 14, 1953, President Eisenhower (republican) delivers commencement speech at dartmouth speech begins at 22:25. am highly recommending listening at least for a couple minutes from 28:20. HA! Good Fun!

as a general rule, the guy in the video does a good job o' covering basics. but... couple quibbles... or maybe additions. 1) the kinda notes taken by trump attorney 1 (corcoran) were atypical. 2) christina bob gets only the most brief mention in the video. for decades we took copious notes. is indeed an essential practice to protect client and to protect self. however, memorialize exact comments and gestures o' a client in the manner corcoran did were not an effort to advance trump's case and to make certain corcoran's memory could be suitable refreshed in the future regarding pivotal questions o' law and fact when advancing trump's interests. trump attorney 1 were taking the kinda notes most lawyers need never consider, 'cause were obvious corcoran weren't memorializing just to make sure a proper record o' happenings took place but rather were meant to insulate him from possible future prosecution. corcoran's note taking were so outside the scope o' normal note taking and am thinking such shoulda' been mentioned. also, and perhaps this is the kinda thing you are more likely to recognize only if you has witnessed more than a few trials and are knowing how attorneys ordinary behave, but the admitted brief mention o' trump attorney 3 in the indictment is disproportionate important. the legaleagle guy failed to describe the significance o' trump attorney 1 not signing off on the june 3, 2022 certification that trump were in compliance with the grand jury subpoena to be handing over all documents with classified markings. bobb, trump attorney 3, made the certification 'cause trump attorney 1 refused to do so. after corcoran searched for remaining documents with classified markings and he sealed the documents he found in a redweld folder, he refused to sign the certification. https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2023/06/trump-indictment.pdf am highly recommending reading pp 21-26 if nothing else. those pages illustrate the clumsy shell game nauta and trump alleged engaged in to hide documents from trump attorney 1. in spite o' being the attorney who conducted the search for documents, corcoran called bobb to act as custodian o' documents and to sign the certification regarding the search. ... corcoran is gonna eventual be called as a prosecution witness and he is gonna need testify 'bout his unusual note taking as well as his refusal to certify the search he completed. explain why he took unusual notes and refused to sign is gonna be memorable. noteworthy. side note: have seen tv lawyers mention that judge aileen cannon could throw out corcoran's testimony as inadmissible. false. before corcoran testified in front o' the grand jury there were already a hearing insofar as admissibility and aileen cannon is stuck with that ruling. IF trump is found guilty, then am certain his team is gonna appeal the conviction based at least in part o' the decision to pierce attorney-client privilege, so even if there is a conviction o' trump the story won't end immediate; a nightmare for a future date. however, am not seeing any way judge cannon could exclude corcoran testimony, and am thinking corcoran will be extreme compelling for the prosecution. regardless, legaleagle did a better than fair job o' explaining. thanks for the link. HA! Good Fun!

we checked before posting 'cause our first reaction were it could not be legit. HA! Good Fun!

... we have sailed beyond the edge of the map (edit:)... again. hic sunt dracones.

proof that the notion o' evolving standards of decency which mark the progress of a maturing society is utter hogwash. corruption and regression is equal plausible as is enlightened evolution. ... mostly kidding. HA! Good Fun!

one more thought on the trump documents case, albeit one we has mentioned previous: discussing the relevant law o' the mar-a-lago documents case is itself beneficial deflection for trump. 'cause is now a legal matter, near everybody in media and politics is talking 'bout the law o' the espionage act(s) and Presidential records and article ii powers. am not sure how many times we need repeat, but legal is not same as right. will exoneration of trump in a court of law make anybody here change their opinion 'bout whether trump's hoarding o' the nation's secrets in his hotel were wise... right? should it? whether trump goes to prison or not is largely incidental to the issue o' whether trump's handling o' the sooper-secret documents as right or wrong. ... some fraction o' a percent o' americans understand the legal minutiae o' the espionage act and its subsequent amendments, but every tv lawyer and US Congressman is sharing their expertise claiming some section coupled with specific evidence dooms trump, or in the alternative, makes charging trump unjust. yeah, whether trump eventual goes to prison may indeed hinge on some technical aspect o' how SCOTUS reads dicta from a single obscure case nobody can recall at this moment, but how does such impact the question o' whether it were ok for a former President to knowing take and keep highly sensitive national defense intelligence down with him to mar-a-lago? IF trump had sooper secret documents at mar-a-lago and he knew he had such documents when the national archives and fbi asked for their return... and IF trump did act to hide and mislead his attorneys as well as the feds regarding those documents in his possession, then does it matter if there is some kinda legal loophole for ex Presidents clarence thomas imagines into being IF you are trying to decide whether trump did right or wrong? the only meaningful defense we see for trump when addressing right v. wrong is whether all the evidence jack smith presented (more than a few facts already admitted by trump or established previous in proceedings before the grand jury) is real or fantasy. as such near the entire legal debate is as much deflection as is invoking hillary's emails. aside, 'cause we often share useless trivia: the blindfold added to the statues o' roman or greek goddess o' justice weren't a thing until the 16th century and it started as satire. to show how ignorant o' injustice were the law, people in europe began adding blindfolds to statues o' lady justice. social commentary. however, in a classic own the libs move, the powers that be began constructing lady justice with blindfolds already carved in stone and reimaging as a positive attribute. so it goes. HA! Good Fun!

there is intelligent people who still believe mueller exonerated trump? possible. unlikely. mueller's report were extreme damning for trump on multiple levels. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/ap-fact-check-trump-falsely-claims-mueller-exonerated-him Bipartisan Senate Report Offers Strongest Evidence Yet that Trump Lied to Mueller Judge sharply rebukes Barr’s handling of Mueller report the trump campaign met with russians expecting to get dirt on hillary but there weren't enough evidence for a conspiracy charge in part 'cause trump and his campaign lied or witheld information necessary for mueller and with trump as President it were not possible to compel compliance or to prosecute the lies. were also a whole lotta evidence o' trump obstruction but again, with trump being President, meuller literal could not charge or accuse him o' a crime. barr (successful) gaslit before the mueller report and multiple federal judges admonished him for lying to the public and the Courts regarding the report. worse, Congressional democrats, instead o' focusing on how damning were the report to trump even w/o a recommendation o' criminal prosecution, a prosecution which were never on the table btw, kept trying to get mueller to say trump had done illegal. wasted effort. mueller's report painted trump as bumbling and mendacious actor. mueller cautioned that if Congress did not pay attention and take serious the very real efforts o' a US political campaign to solicit and foreign interference in a US election, future elections would be endangered. and so it goes. jack smith's indictment is arguable less damning than were the mueller report. is actual less evidence o' obstruction in the current indictment than were memorialized in the mueller report and again, the corruption o' trump as it relates to the "russia hoax" *snort* established a terrible precedent which makes it possible for future US Presidential candidates to utilize foreign influence to interfere with national elections. and am sick to death o' hearing 'bout "hillary's emails." takes more willful stoopid to invoke the hillary email situation when speaking o' trump's current problems. after considerable investigation, there were never any evidence o' willful obstruction by hillary. is the reason why @Wrath of Dagon and others were trying to convince themselves that hillary shoulda' been prosecuted under the gross negligence aspect o' the relevant statutes. however, comey, for all his faults, did a fair job o' illustrating the law regarding mishandling and retention o' government intelligence. "In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice." a subsequent ig report during the trump admin found comey screwed the pooch in his public handling o' the hillary emails but that he were correct about the law and that hillary should not have been prosecuted. ironic, saw this on cnn a few days past: for those who likely do not recall, gonzalez were the bush administration's version o' hillary's emails. from the aforementioned ig report: c. Previous Section 793(f)(1) Declinations The Midyear prosecutors also reviewed at least two previous investigations where prosecution was declined under the gross negligence provision in Section 793(f)(1). The Midyear prosecutors told us that these declinations informed their understanding of the Department’s historical approach to Section 793(f)(1). We discuss these previous declinations below. Gonzales Declination Decision One of these previous cases involved an OIG investigation into the mishandling of documents containing highly classified, compartmented information about a National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance program by former White House Counsel and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. In 2004, while Gonzales was the White House Counsel, he took handwritten notes memorializing a meeting about the legality of the NSA program. The notes included operational details about the program, including its compartmented codeword. Although Gonzales did not mark the notes as classified, he said that he used two envelopes to doublewrap the notes and may have written an abbreviation for the codeword on the inner envelope. On the outer envelope, Gonzales said that he wrote “AG – EYES ONLY – TOP SECRET.” He stored these notes in a safe in the West Wing of the White House and said that he took them with him when he became the Attorney General in February 2005. Gonzales said that he did not recall where he stored the notes after removing them from the White House, but that he may have taken them home. Gonzales also stored the notes and several other documents containing TS//SCI classification markings in a safe in the Attorney General’s office that was not approved to hold such materials. The OIG referred investigative findings to NSD for a prosecutive decision. According to information reviewed by the OIG, on August 19, 2008, NSD analyzed Gonzales’ handling of the notes under the gross negligence provision in section 793(f)(1). NSD concluded that prosecutors likely could show that the documents were removed from their proper place of custody, but that the question was whether that removal constituted “gross negligence.” After discussing the legislative history of Section 793(f)(1), NSD stated that the government likely would have to prove that Gonzales’ conduct was “criminally reckless” to establish that he acted with gross negligence under Section 793(f)(1). NSD concluded that Gonzales’ inability to recall precisely where he stored the notes detracted from prosecutors’ ability to “show a state of mind approaching ‘deliberate intention’ to remove classified documents from a secure location.” there were no prosecution o' gonzales and that earlier declination decision were one o' a couple similar declination conclusions which guided the doj in their ultimate conclusion to not pursue criminal charges against clinton. nobody mentions gonzalez, bush's attorney general and a widely recognized republican, serious undermines the suggestion hillary were treated different, special or in some way benefited from a partisan doj process. witch hunt? trump were given more than a year to return documents which regardless o' the classification red herring were documents which did not belong to trump. when the national archives finally lost patience with trump and referred the matter o' document retrieval to the fbi, not only did trump lie, but he attempted to have his attorney lie on his behalf. is audio recordings o' trump discussing the mishandling o' documents and is video o' him physical going through boxes with national secrets. refer back to the earlier comey comments in this post for the kinda documents cases which result in fed prosecutions. in the trump case there is considerable evidence o' both obstruction as well as intentional mishandling. oh, and... etc. am not knowing what the affirmative defenses o' trump may be, but nothing mentioned public by trump as yet would constitute a meaningful defense or an excuse for his actions. the clinton AND gonzales situations were fundamental different, lacking the brazen willfulness and p00p storm o' evidence provided in the jack smith indictment, so those invoking hillary's emails is either ignorant o' truth or intentional mischaracterizing the facts regarding the former secretary of state's admitted Colossal and mind boggling stoopid handling of state secrets on her private server. tell us hillary's brobdinagian stoopid and cavalier handling o' sensitive US info should have excluded her from consideration as a legit candidate for the Presidency o' the US and we would have a difficult time coming up with a decent rebuttal. even so, hillary emails so ≠ trump mar-a-lago documents. oh, and do we need mention how not a defense is the Presidential records act for trump? the act says that trump, as a former President, had a duty to return documents to the US. am not sure how such helps trump. the so-called sock drawer case is also a red herring. the state secrets trump were hoarding in his public accessibly resort were not personal recordings or the result o' trump's individual work product. is not possible to legitimate argue that somehow an unholy alchemy o' the Presidential records act and the sock drawer case result in state secrets being transformed into trump's personal property when he left office. sorry, but that argument is utter nonsense although am having seen it made a few times by republican figures who know better. did we miss anything? all o' which ignores the very real possibility trump will be found not guilty. we keep reminding folks all trump needs is one florida juror who believes the feds were indeed involved in a witch hunt, manufacturing evidence... oh and what about hillary's emails? am warning in advance a not guilty verdict is more than just possible. aside am thinking @Agiel deserves credit as before trump were elected he voiced concerns 'bout trump handling nuclear secrets. HA! Good Fun!

oj makes a couple valid observations 'bout the current nfl rb situation, but seeing as this is the politics thread... should be one o' those too obvious to need be said bits o' pith, but is true that it is in a criminal defendant's best interest to stfu and never speak 'bout the case save when communicating with the defendant's lawyers. whatever your feels 'bout oj, his observations 'bout dalvin cook appear reasonable... and the stfu advice for trump is also money. HA! Good Fun!

link is to the doj original appeal o' judge cannon's appointment o' the special master to review materials taken by the fbi as part o' their mar-a-lago search. if you wanna read the unsealed indictment, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/read-the-full-trump-indictment-on-mishandling-of-classified-documents gotta admit we were a smidge confused by the 18 U.S. Code § 1512 charges being included 'cause the section relates to witness tampering. is so rare one need consider the possibility o' a defendant's attorney being a witness in a case against the defendant that it didn't initial register for us when we saw sections listed. counts 32-34 involve trump and nauta efforts to affect "trump attorney 1" representations to the feds, and am gonna assume for the nonce corcoran is attorney 1. aside, were pleased to see the following: couple hours following our previous post. HA! Good Fun!

HA! Good Fun!

kinda. our understanding is what they (at least the reputable attorneys on the team) are doing is setting their retainer extreme high and the retainer account must be maintained or else the attorney may recuse for "fundamental differences." am gonna wait 'til we read full indictment before commenting 'bout trump's situation vis-a-vis mar-a-lago documents. however, 'cause am assuming this scene is gonna be invoked more frequent in the coming days... obvious trump and his cronies were not fans o' the wire, to their detriment. edit: am gonna observe how following a quick read, the charge(s) we were surprised by were 18 U.S. Code § 1512 - Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant related. is not shocking trump co would do such (alleged) but is the first time am having heard mention o' witness tampering in the context o' mar-a-lago. HA! Good Fun!

aside: most home cooks is aware cornstarch does not thicken cold sauces/liquids. what gets overlooked is that cornstarch loses efficacy as a thickener once your stew (or whatever) cools. luckily with stew the gelatin from the connective tissue in the meat should thicken your sauce after it has cooled, so what you lose from the cornstarch you likely gain from the gelatin from the meat. potato starch also suffers from the same cooling problem as cornstarch. nevertheless, for any large quantity recipe which is gonna see significant quantities refrigerated after the initial preparation, flour is likely a better choice than cornstarch as a thickener. HA! Good Fun!

speaking o' the continuing stoopid which is the war on wokeism, https://www.newsweek.com/lauren-boebert-north-face-boycott-pride-drag-queen-1802788 *eye roll* am not a regular north face customer, but am admitting 'cause o' the story we checked out the north face site and their pride collection. am not the sort who would purchase just to make a statement, though we do boycott sellers who embrace policies which offend our sensibilities. however, after a quick looksee, am considering the Hydrenaline Jacket 2000—27'' Length | The North Face. $100 for a groovy windbreaker with a hood? definite maybe. HA! Good Fun!