Gromnir

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!

hmmm. maybe am doing it different 'cause am admitting our beef stew, while inexpensive, is not trending towards our easier dishes. our beef stew technique is much like our pot roast with only a few changes and similar it is best a day after resting in the fridge. am also tending towards less fluid but am s'posing such is a matter o' taste. have actual needed change or beef stew recipe a bit over the years as am far less likely to have homemade beef stock on hand. is increasing rare we make many meals which result in leftover beef bones suitable for making stock. better than bouillon is a good way to punch up store bought stock, but am just as likely to use our homemade chicken stock and then supplement with a few umami sources such as tomato paste, soy sauce and worchestershire sauce. am also common adding dark beer to our stewing liquid... or not. is usual a gameday decision. regardless, with homemade stock we do not need add as much flour to our meat or powdered gelatin to the stock to get a nice thick liquid. even so, making stew is a relative labor intensive and multistep process in which we assemble our stewing liquid, brown meats, then brown vegetables. positive: we have found frozen pearl onions work perfect fine btw, so no more hand peeling. am also now browning our beef chunks not in our dutch oven on the stovetop but rather in the oven on a sheet pan. brown the meat in the oven means we don't need worry 'bout over crowding and steaming the meat as 'posed to genuine browning. we also have separate stewing/braising vegetables 'cause the long stew renders the veggies almost tasteless; we remove the stewing veggies during the last hour of cooking and then return our browned veggies and some yukon gold potatoes to the stew mix for the last hour of cooking. during the last hour in the oven we "stew" uncovered to reduce a bit and also to add additional browning. before letting cool and refrigerating, we also simmer and stir on the stove top for a couple minutes as doing so will incorporate the surface browning as well as effective remove the oily sheen from the top layer o' the stew. edit: next day, when we reheat, we will finish with a couple handfuls o' frozen peas... 'cause. am suspecting if our stew were a bit easier, we would have it more frequent, which might not be good for our health. HA! Good Fun!

40k is great tabletop wargaming fodder. nevertheless, have always been ambivalent 'bout rpg 40k and our personal experience with role-play groups don't help. https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/11/19/the-imperium-is-driven-by-hate-warhammer-is-not/ "The Imperium of Man stands as a cautionary tale of what could happen should the very worst of Humanity’s lust for power and extreme, unyielding xenophobia set in. Like so many aspects of Warhammer 40,000, the Imperium of Man is satirical." one would think the satire would be so obvious no mention were required, but... on the positive side, a 40k Crpg does not suffer same hurdles as does a group o' real persons. is more difficult than it sounds to do over-the-top and exaggerated save in limited doses. the 40k audience is 'posed to be aware o' subtilties and nuance o' the setting but the 40k characters are grimdark cartoony and in a rp for 40k, the players is the characters. will always be players who see 40k different, or try and make it different 'cause who can do extreme all the time week after week after week? a Crpg is not the same as a rp group 'cause is the computer doing the work o' being immune to self-reflection. the mythic stuff in wotr were owlcat original content and not created by paizo. from a writing pov, we disliked the mythic content. the exaggeration o' mythic characters and encounters were lacking any kinda subtlety or nuance and for a considerable period o' time we were conflicted as to whether the material were intended as parody. "to the extreme." is funny... in 2023. were always funny for Gromnir. in 1990 vanilla ice were a chart topper and not 'cause people saw as a joke. over-the-top were the selling point. sure, were arguable unintended parody, but the success o' vanilla ice and to the extreme were not 'cause it were embraced as a weird al yankovic kinda thing. owlcat does not do subtle or nuance and they embrace exaggeration... to the extreme. regardless o' Gromnir personal preferences, the fans o' owlcat liked the wotr mythic content and wotr storytelling in general. maybe ain't the way Gromnir would do it, but am thinking owlcat is a good choice for 40k 'cause they will do extreme and over-the-top. for a few 40k fans an owlcat rogue trader will likely be dismissed as insulting parody. will also be a few purists who will be revile rogue trader 'cause owlcat misinterpreted some integral aspect(s) o' 40k lore. however, am betting most fans will dismiss the lore concerns as minutiae and based on wotr, am thinking owlcat fans want more over-the-top as 'posed to less. 40k allows owlcat to go even more extreme than wotr, more extreme than ice ice baby. HA! Good Fun!

how 'bout germany o' 2023? anybody recall why there ain't no kids in the original fallout game? just as were the case in 1997 and 1998, is laws in germany which prohibit depictions o' sexual acts or violence involving kids. more than a few o' the books which parents is trying to ban in desantis' florida would never have been published in germany. and 'course books which involve holocaust denial or show nazis get a different standard than does other books. child pr0n is illegal in the US, but not in the way many understand the term. as children is inherent victimized in the creation o' child pr0n, and minors cannot genuine consent to be actors, models or whatever, there is a specific exception for kid pr0n. 'course if is no living child involved in the creation o' the pr0n, then is no triggering o' child pr0n exception. much o' what is happening in florida and texas is already de rigeur in europe where schools do not necessarily "ban" books, but they do not purchase or display controversial works. and again, more than a couple o' the books routine at issue in the US wouldn't be published in most euro countries. as such, florida and texas is actual sliding towards european norms. 'course the new war on wokeness from the right is, well, new... or maybe old. trying to ban books about rosa parks or roberto clemente? if the daughters of the confederacy is made uncomfortable by a book, then is possible to ban? crt? the thing is... https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/05/23/lgbtq-book-ban-challengers/ "The majority of the 1,000-plus book challenges analyzed by The Post were filed by just 11 people. "Each of these people brought 10 or more challenges against books in their school district; one man filed 92 challenges. Together, these serial filers constituted 6 percent of all book challengers — but were responsible for 60 percent of all filings." also, is all kinda reasons to be disturbed by the chart, but much o' the content the clowns in florida, texas, indiana, idaho and a a number o' other states is stuff routine proscribed by enlightened euros. unfortunate, much o' the new war on wokeness is very familiar and even commonplace. as @Hurlshotobserves, US book banning is not new and the vast majority o' the books current being proscribed is the same kinda books which has been at issue for many decades, which isn't an excuse btw. fact that local US religious leaders and school districts has been trying to ban huckleberry finn since it were first published is not reassuring and so not ok. even so, has been a long time since the book banning thing in the US was other than a local issue; governors and front runner Presidential candidates for a major party running on a platform endorsing book banning is kinda 19th century and way outside the personal experience o' just about anybody living. even so, the current issue is maybe not quite as described or portrayed by the media. HOWEVER, particular given how the gop has made the war on wokeism a core platform issue, and how easily a significant % o' the population were stoopified by the CRT nonsense, prophesying dystopian book burning nightmares is looking less hyperbolic and unreasonable by the day. yeah, maybe the current reality in virtual all the US ain't worse than what is routine in germany, but the fact you got a significant % o' people in the US cheering the war on wokeism is disturbing. HA! Good Fun!

HA! Good Fun!

got around to act v portion o' the ulbrig dlc. there is less act v content for ulbrig compared to act iii. act v gundrun does offer players a few meaningful choices which is hardly surprising 'cause is the end o' the ulbrig content. am having played wotr a few times and am a completionist. as such our level twenty party with the bestest gear wasn't particular overwhelmed (or even whelmed) by the final ulbrig battle(s). the concluding confrontation o' the dlc content is a bit gimmicky but am doubting it provides much challenge for seasoned players. is ez to be dismissive o' the ulbrig end content but am needing recall the dlc must be fun for more casual players as well as level twenty munchkins with end-game gear. is gonna be near impossible to balance 'tween most players and the more hardcore psychos such as Gromnir. overall there is a fair bit o' content provided via the ulbrig dlc, more than we had anticipated. the dlc offers a new companion with a new class, but is also numerous quests and a couple new areas populated by characters which contribute noteworthy amounts o' dialog. "more" hardly = good, but we were pleasant surprised by the value we received from the dlc. no lycanthropes. as we mentioned earlier, there is a merchant in gundrun who sells gear with bonuses when facing lycanthropes. relevant for future content? HA! Good Fun!

HA! Good Fun!

am reading the durham report and it is a bit o' a slog. is only 200 pages, but am not recalling each and every fed statute referenced so we need review 'em all. furthermore, am needing check durham narrative for accuracy regarding persons and dates. exhausting. will give full thoughts once am done. we reread the ig report from 2019 as it covered much o' the same territory and were lambasted by durham when horowitz released his findings. we never did read the full 1000 page bipartisan senate report concerning the same 2016 issues in part 'cause the senate report reached no conclusions... and also 'cause it were 1000 pages. regardless, the 200 page durham report is requiring far more than 200 pages worth o' material review. given the increasing temporal remoteness o' the events, is worth restating a bit o' history which is relevant. 2014 feds begin an investigation into paul manafort "Among the more striking sections of the report is the committee’s description of the professional relationship between former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and Konstantin Kilimnik, whom the committee describes as a Russian intelligence officer. "“Taken as a whole, Manafort’s high-level access and willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services, particularly Kilimnik, represented a grave counterintelligence threat,” the report says. "The report notes how Manafort shared internal Trump campaign polling data with Kilimnik and says there is “some evidence” Kilimnik may have been connected to Russia’s effort to hack and leak Democratic emails, though that information is redacted. The report also says “two pieces of information” raise the possibility of Manafort’s potential connection to those operations, but what follows is again blacked out." -- from the pbs link re: senate report march 29, 2016 manafort joins the trump campaign. july 27, 2016 july 28, 2016 the feds get a call from alexander downer downer, an australian diplomat, met a trump campaign advisor in london to have drinks in may o' 2016. at some point during the eve, the trump campaign guy shared info that the russians had "dirt" on hilary clinton by way o' thousands o' emails. not surprising, downer thought the conversation with papadopoulos were relevant in the wake o' the trump announcement. july 31, 2016 the crossfire hurricane investigation begins fast forward to 2019, post mueller investigation which determines crossfire hurrican's legit predicate were the call from downer, and barr appoints durham to investigate the origins o' crossfire hurricane. ... again, we wanna read the full report before reaching conclusions, but am having noticed in stories recent released contemporaneous with the durham report, the history is already having been forgotten. HA! Good Fun!

hmmm. is ewan's older brother, and episode 1 were only 1999, so likely woulda' required a callsign change for the thirty-something pilot. and again, is the older brother who became a real-life fighter pilot supposed being saddled with obi-two as a nick/callsign, which seems kinda uncharacteristic for brits... and aviators. sounds more like internet meme fodder. we would search for confirmation before spreading this one. HA! Good Fun!

hurl's psychiatrist scribbles something on her notepad and then peers over the top rim of her glasses. "so," she says in a calculated laconic tone, "you chose to categorize "happy" distinct from "normal?" @Sarex am personal not a fan o' the construction and resource gathering mechanic which is a staple in most rts. functional is a race to generate resources and any kinda battlefield strategy is secondary. in classic turn-based strategy games, the player is often commanding squads or full armies w/o the baggage o' needing maintain the perfect ratio o' peasant farmers to sawmills to barracks... or whatever. is no city planning and development in panzer corps 2. no need to search for quadrilonix ore and hydrogen 3 in battletech. yeah, many tb strategy games has resource gathering and base building elements, but is rare the core gameplay feature and is almost never the rush to generate essential units one sees in rts. red alert 2 is an excellent game but for us it is enjoyable in spite o' the all too familiar and kinda twitchy construction and resource elements. HA! Good Fun!

gold is rare 24k gold, and even then if the necklace has a clasp such is likely not gold. am also suspecting more than one person who believes their 24k gold jewelry is pure is mistaken. yeah, maybe your gold is mixed with non-magnetic, but nickel is an increasing popular addition to gold alloys, and nickel is magnetic. how do most o' us know for certain our gold is genuine 24k? as a matter o' policy we would ask for removal o' any metallic jewelry. HA! Good Fun!

possible, but am tending to agree as a general proposition with only a few extreme limited outliers which functional prove the rule. dark omen and shadow o' the horned rat were re-defined after-the-fact as real-time tactical by some folks 'cause they eschewed the resource gathering and building construction features o' many contemporary rts games. is maybe a couple other titles which rank as exceptions. HA! Good Fun!

the thing is, the linked story is hardly the first mri horror story am having heard even if it is one o' the more unique. as such one wonders why the techs don't at least have metal detector wands so they might give patients a quick check for overlooked artifacts which might be magnetic. yeah, the wands is hardly infallible and am not even certain if such a device woulda' detected the offending plug. even so, why not indulge a bit o' extra caution, eh? have had more than a few mri experiences over the years and for the most recent we weren't even asked to disrobe and then don a hospital gown. given how cold were the room with the mri, we were quite relived we were able to retain clothing. 'course without a complete disrobe am suspecting more than one person has overlooked a metal rivet, button or zipper. dunno. am possible overlooking something, but metal detector wands seems like a good way to catch at least a few overlooked jewelry, piercings, clothing fixtures and sex toys. HA! Good Fun!