Gromnir

we often get thickened soup with a surfeit o' bones, but am admitting this last iteration were... unique. we could slide our soup outta the container and cut off slices as needed. heck, am suspecting that with a transparent straw driven in the center, we could sculpt a venus de milo analogue outta the mass and it would retain its shape... although with the greenish-yellow hue and bits o' animal and vegetable matter it would be a venus + toxic avenger kinda monstrosity. maybe something to think about for next halloween. as an aside, am knowing we mentioned once or twice, and am suspecting shady were already keen aware, but for others reading, powdered gelatin will replicate the thickening and moisture retaining properties o' bones or veal. gelatin is fantastic stuff. the collagen from veal which keeps your meatloaf or meatballs tender may be included via a bit o' gelatin powder sans the veal. in fact, nowadays we never use veal for squeamish reasons, and gelatin makes us feel the loss almost not at all. also, instead o' thickening a stew with cornstarch, potato starch or flour, it is possible to achieve similar results with gelatin... although you gotta add the gelatin earlier in the cooking process than you would flour, so it takes a smidge more practice to get the quantity just right. part o' the problem with reducing a liquid is that as you cook off liquid, you are also cooking out flavour... the more wonderful is the cooking aromas in your home when making a stew, the greater (if still small) the tragedy 'cause all that beautiful smell is escaped flavour. 'course you are also concentrating the flavour by reducing, so... in any event, instant pot and gelatin is nifty options for keeping the flavour in a dish which ordinarily requires long cooking times and/or significant reductions. bone broth umami won't be replicated by gelatin, but in some instances you won't need the extra meat flavour. HA! Good Fun!

yeah. am having reflected on this more than once. in ye goode olde days (maybe twelve years past?) if a politician said something objective wrong before facts were known, there were consequences as all major news outlets would lambast the yutz for his/her stoopid. political foes would seize on such a moment and even political allies would seek to distance themselves from the wrongdoer. sadly, in the post algorithm age, getting out in front o' the narrative with the most extreme take possible is how you get views and go viral. the speaker reveals self as alternatively clownish (ignorant) or sinister (mendacious) but those is ephemeral flaws which will disappear when the next viral take grabs the national attention. worst is that kinda mentality has filtered down so that we see as increasing normal behavior amongst ordinary people ands not just politicians and media personalities. have linked previous. the two we share here is the offerings which show how much has changed as 'posed to remaining the same 'cause is specific dealing with politicians dealing with press. gotta politician saying he would never lie to the press 'cause doing so always turns out bad... and most o' the people, some o' the biggest brains in america in 1989, is nodding their heads in agreement? feels positively surreal, no? @Zoraptor actually, the last example we specific highlighted were your purposeful gaslighting about the time-frame for iran to build a nuclear weapon. recall when you selecta-quoted Gromnir, cnn and others as you fumbled repeatedly to make coherent sense outta an original bad take? what you are describing with your gaslighting on the cognitive test is not actual the same is it? is hardly a rush to frame a narrative before evidence is available as much as you wanna smash a round peg into a square hole. after all, 2017 were the cognitive test zor misremembers as trump distancing himself from not-yet-candidate biden... so, hardly the same. our pointing out that 2017 is a long time remote and we still don't have reliable reasons for the test being administered is so not same as a few o' the clowns making up facts to fit a preconceived narrative regarding contemporaneous events. heck, am the only guy in that linked exchange who shared the insights o' actual experts. but you keep pluggin' away little fella. eventual, if only by accident, you might trip over a valid argument instead o' repeated stepping on rakes. aside, who in their right mind boasts about remembering "person woman, man, camera, tv," ff to 11:45ish we still don't know why trump doctors keep giving trump the cognitive test no other President has received... and again, zor's biden excuse is pure fantasy as biden weren't running for office when trump were first tested, and it sure seems unlikely trump is measuring himself against biden in 2025. typical wacky stuff from triggered zor. thanks. edit: "Last line from my previous post still applies, I'm not going to bother arguing with you so no need for a thesis length word soup (yep, not just Trumpists used the technique) reply." am not thinking we need to point out how funny it were zor had to add this... after his triggering. another rake. *chuckle* HA! Good Fun!

am more likely to make pierogi, but am finding we like most dumpling variations, regardless o' cultural origin. however, am posting 'cause o' your mention o' bone broth. made chicken soup. is one o' the few soups we don't need add broth to 'cause am making the broth by boiling the chicken, right? the thing is, we still have a bunch o' frozen turkey bones from our thanksgiving birds and so we added turkey bones (which we had roasted in an air fryer before freezing) when we were boiling our chicken in anticipation o' making soup. ... perhaps we added a few too many bones, 'cause the couple quarts o' soup we did not freeze and instead refrigerated has become a solid mass o' gelatin. we got a weird looking and extreme dense jell-o mold instead o' what you would expect from a soup. tastes delicious, so... whatever. HA! Good Fun!

am thinking @Malcador and similar posters learned their lesson and am not seeing the need to embarrass them with their initial failure o' imagination (reasonable and understandable) followed by a curious obstinate reluctance to ignore just how different were the trump threat compared to previous examples o' bad Presidents from post ww2. converse, people who has invoked TDS as a response to those critical o' trump post january 6 deserve the same scorn and ridicule as the seth rich conspiracy nutters... and people who set off fireworks after midnight multiple days before or after holidays such as new years, chinse new years and the fourth of july. it were raining here on new years, so once the weather cleared a few folks in our neighborhood felt justified in firing off their unused arsenals a couple days later. not cool. sadly, suing kriti noem for her defamation is gonna be difficult... and perhaps surprising, her dhs post ain't what is insulating her from deserved legal punishment. maybe hurl has heard us caution people against speaking out before facts is clear. has been a few doozy examples where we highlighted that the rush to craft a narrative in the absence o' evidence has a tendency to mark the lightning quick pundits as clowns and fools... not that such happening over and over again has slowed those most egregious purveyors o' stoopid even a little. so it goes. unfortunate, the lack o' facts, or at least the possibility o' a counter-narrative before accepted facts is widely available, results in a legal defense to slander even if such behavior is moral repugnant. most o' us believe that government figures should have facts straight before they make accusations o' criminal behavior or moral turpitude, but that ain't a rule for kristi noem anymore than it is for the clowns posting on this board. when discussing matters o' public interest, or when speaking o' individuals who is loosely defined as public figures, you may only receive damages if you are able to prove that the speaker knew (or should have known... which gets a little fuzzy at the margins, eh?) they were lying when they made their outlandish utterance. krisit noem has shown time and again that she is not only extreme ignorant but that she will speak before it is even possible to know a truth. as far as we can tell, her definition o' domestic terrorist is less a legal identifier than it is a label o' political affiliation, and at the moment, there is literal millions o' fox news, newsmax and oan viewers who has only seen selected video o' the incident which could be interpreted in such a way that the victim o' the minneapolis shooting were trying to run down an ice agent. go after kristi noem for her abject stoopid is no easier than winning a court judgement against your fellow boardies who misspoke about police shootings in wisconsin or the unfortunate events at Uvalde. is functional your right as an american to blow your ignorant load. ... also, and am feeling gross even mentioning, but the victim o' the shooting is dead, so kristi is further insulated from legal pain. is much more difficult (although not impossible) for surviving family members to be successful plaintiffs in defamation cases. if the victim had survived, brought a defamation claim, and then died, her family might be able to continue her defamation claim, depending on the state. regardless, as a general rule, you cannot defame a dead person... except in texas. aside, even if kristi noem were held legal responsible, american tax payers would cover the damages. HA! Good Fun!

made our two new years mainstays: pork and sauerkraut hoppin' john black-eyed peas freeze better than hoppin' john, so before we added the rice, we set aside half o' the peas. our family don't particular like black-eyed peas or hoppin' john. as such we got a fair amount o' leftovers. our grandfather became a fan o' pennsylvania dutch style pork and sauerkraut, so our grandmother made it yearly and everybody in our family grew to enjoy the recipe. no leftover pork and sauerkraut. we also made collard greens and cornbread muffins. our clan appreciates our collard greens, but that is 'cause we sauté with 'em with a fair bit o' molasses. genuine southern-style collard greens is too sloppy, wet and bitter for our delicate relatives. in any event, the collard greens and cornbread muffins has vanished. also made a charred cabbage salad which includes hazelnuts, bacon and gargonzola as well as a sweet dijon and vinegar dressing. not a hit with the kids, but the adults liked it. we bought a pie for desert. *shrug* am not a fan o' baking and we already made the cornbread muffins, so... in any event, we do have a fair bit o' black-eyed pea leftovers, which am admitting were part o' the plan from the get-go. HA! Good Fun!

the harder your cutting surface, the quicker your knives will become dull. am not aware o' a common cutting board material which will dull your blades faster than titanium. metal cutting boards o' any type are annoyingly loud and the surface also tends to be slick to the point o' being dangerous. regardless, the biggest drawback to titanium is the speed with which they will dull your knives. a thick ( at least 1.5 ") wood board (teak, maple and walnut are all excellent materials... am personal a fan o' teak,) is probable the best all round option, but if you do not like wood, that narrows the field considerable. composite and bamboo or other grass boards is not great in our opinion, but japanese rubber boards are an interesting alternative as they do not suffer from the microplastic issue and will not warp when exposed to the heat of a dishwasher the way some plastic boards do... not that am ever personal using the dishwasher to clean a cutting board. rubber boards is also thinner and lighter than wood boards, although they tend to be a smidge thicker than plastic boards as they are manufactured with a rigid wood or composite core. it is worth noting that japanese boards are better suited for japanese knives as 'posed to western a chef knife style which relies on rocking as much as slicing, but they are a nice compromise if you absolute refuse to go with a wood board. our recollection is that japanese rubber boards tend to be more expensive than wood boards o' the same size, but as an alternative to plastic, they are worth considering. @Bartimaeus louise brooks were a tragic enough figure that am thinking the tibetan death mask is less disconcerting by comparison. curious, whenever we think o' louise brooks, am first recollecting sally bowles from fosse's cabaret am knowing bartimaeus is not a fan o' musicals, but louise brooks were the inspiration for sally bowles. HA! Good Fun!

New Year’s Eve Concerts at Kennedy Center Are Canceled Richard Grenell, the Kennedy Center’s chairman, said in a statement on Monday night that the artists canceling shows were “far-left political activists” and that they had been booked by previous leadership. “Boycotting the arts to show you support the arts is a form of derangement syndrome,” he said. After Mr. Redd canceled the Christmas Eve concert, Mr. Grenell called it “classic intolerance” and threatened a $1 million lawsuit. HA! Good Fun!

history is difficult. in the south, the united daughters of the confederacy were successful in their efforts to promote the lost cause narrative which established that the civil war weren't about slavery so much as state's rights. https://time.com/5013943/john-kelly-civil-war-textbooks/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/costs-confederacy-special-report-180970731/ even so, in high school, Gromnir were taught that slavery were a profound evil and that it were shameful it persisted so long after the founding o' the republic. that so many generations o' enslaved had needed to suffer and that the pernicious practice were entrenched in our culture to such a degree that a bloody civil war were needed to end it were a source o' national shame and regret... which in part is why the maga folks is so torqued 'bout woke education. later, at university, we discovered that most o' the founders were educated men who viewed slavery as morally repugnant but they nevertheless went along with the 3/5ths compromise 'cause the economic and political costs o' ending slavery were seen as too high. most founders believed slavery were already on its proverbial last legs in any event, but they lacked the courage to drive a stake into slavery's putrefying heart. educated men, who no doubt saw themselves as just and moral, nevertheless knowing made a deal to prolong a practice they viewed as vile, which is maybe not so surprising as more than a couple o' those educated founders were personal relying on slave labor to maintain their expansive farms. contrary to what we were taught in high school, the founders weren't simple men o' their time, ignorant o' slavery's evil. they knew what they were doing. they knew it were wrong. they did it anyways. 'course eli whitney's cotton gin fundamental changed the economics o' southern agriculture almost overnight, which not surprising changed the politics o' slavery as well. as an aside, even today most is taught that the US civil war were an insular fight 'tween northern and southern states... is right there in the name, no? civil war. the thing is, the confederacy's goals for slavery were a bit more grand as they envisioned an agricultural slave empire which included further conquest in latin america. even less well known is how some forms o' chattel slavery and debt peonage persisted in the US long after the 13th Amendment was ratified... heck, long after juneteenth. https://www.pbs.org/video/slavery-another-name-slavery-video/ btw, even though debt peonage were finally ended as the US entered ww2, the final debt slave were not emancipated until 1963. furthermore, as difficult as it might be to believe, we ain't genuine ended slavery in the US. we mentioned the 13th Amendment, yes? section 1. neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. section 2. congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. kinda a big exception, no? oh, and our recollection is that brazil were literal the last nation in the western hemisphere to abolish slavery, so... as we said, history is difficult. HA! Good Fun!

miller's family didn't exactly come over on the mayflower... arrived in 1903 after fleeing russian pogroms. am having mentioned how US refugee laws didn't come into being until post ww2. given his family background, you would think miller would have some kinda empathy for immigrants and refugees. counter to star trek visions o' the future, am suspecting prejudice and bigotry is fundamental to the human condition. when afraid, social predators seem to have an instinct to attack perceived weakness from within the group, though admitted, cultural, racial and religious differences equating weakness is a distinct human perversion. in any event, nativism, as a distinct flavour o' bigotry, has reared its ugly head a number o' times in US history. extreme income inequality and fundamental changes in the labor force is common characteristics o' rising nativism. https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtid=2&psid=3432# in the late 1890s, +40% o' the US population lived and worked on farms. by 1920, the agriculture accounted for ~1/4 o' the US workforce. at the same time, while the economy were s'posed booming, from a practical pov, most people were getting poorer. rise in political populism blame o' immigrants for all woes nostalgia for "traditional" values etc. just as the US never brought back all those family farms, the lost manufacturing jobs ain't coming back to the states, and ai is gonna disappear many entry-level white collar jobs young people has counted on for decades. an eat the rich moment is coming for the tech oligarchs if the income inequality issue ain't addressed, and no amount o' social media manipulation is gonna convince people that everything is wonderful when they cannot afford minimal health insurance and rent. given how similar is the economic and social reality o' 2020s US when compared to the 1920s, spawning objectively hypocritical and ridiculous proto fascists such as miller is perhaps a feature as opposed to an aberration o' the times we find ourselves. HA! Good Fun!

yeah, just imagine what frank sinatra might say to stephen miller. late 1800s and early 1900s US nativism has been forgotten by too many. let's hope it don't take another world war to once again snap us out o' our collective stoopid. HA! Good Fun!

gonna suggest J. Kavanaugh's efforts to retcon earlier stoopid is significant not only 'cause he is attempting to fix an error (not that a Justice is gonna readily admit a mistake,) but such inelegant gaslighting represents the possibility o' a shift in the Forces of Evil on the Court. judicial deference to legislative and executive prerogatives is a Court virtue and has been the explicit and assumed (given all the shadow docket nonsense, we are left guessing at reasons far too often) rationale for scotus' time and time again refusal to intervene in cases o' executive branch excess. however, when exercised w/o wisdom and common sense, the Court's faith in the motives and behaviors o' individuals such as trump, kristi noem and stephen miller is revealed to be not only imprudent, but also complicit. if one or two additional members o' the Court come to the realization that they need not be deaf, dumb and blind, then perhaps there is hope for more enlightened scotus rulings in the near future. please note am leaning extreme hard on equivocation. am not seeing one footnote as evidence o' a sea change, but if you are looking for hope... HA! Good Fun!

cthulhu and ghatanothoa got nothing on the south park guys for instilling outrage and horror amongst the faithful. warning: am personal able to see the humor, but am also able to understand the outrage the song inspires in "good" christians. you have been warned. nevertheless, in spite o' our descent into sacrilege, am genuine wishing a merry christmas and happy holidays to all. HA! Good Fun!

the leaked email which were the impetus for the current 60 minutes bruhaha specifically references your déjà vu. "CBS spiked the Jeffrey Wigand interview due to legal concerns, nearly destroying the credibility of this broadcast. It took years to recover from that “low point.” By pulling this story to shield an administration, we are repeating that history, but for political optics rather than legal ones." ... just as an aside, 'cause the point keeps being ignored/overlooked, but the people sent to cecot by the US were not deported. w/o due process we transported residents o' the US to a dystopian hell hole where they were to serve sentences for an indeterminate duration. we paid a central american dictator millions o' dollars to incarcerate and torture people-- not deportations. trump correct recognized that americans wouldn't care if he made theatre outta cruelty as long as those suffering were part o' a disreputable them. a few hundred venezuelans? so what? they were possibly gang members and they weren't american citizens regardless. virtual nobody were gonna rush to the defense of them. additional aside bob dole literal fought nazis in europe. this generation is increasingly nazi curious? HA! Good Fun!

WATCH: The 60 Minutes CECOT Segment - by Allison Gill

no doubt karoline were dreaming o' her annie leibowitz portrait, and instead... ... is as if hoon had never seen a vanity fair photo shoot. glamour with more than a hint o' satire is de rigueur. am suspecting this group thought they were too clever to fall for anything subversive, but they nevertheless wanted to be immortalized... these jokers is never gonna be on rushmore and maybe having a public elementary school in florida or ohio named in their honor after they is dead is not gonna be a meaningful ego stroke. an eventual sight gag for something like futurama? no thanks. a vanity fair photo op were gonna be a way for this group o' clowns and ghouls to be cool. HA! Good Fun!

there is somebody, multiple somebodies, at vanity fair who dislike karoline leavitt warning: you will not be able to unsee. make sure this is not the last thing you view before going to bed. gonna admit, we only read the nyt article which shared details o' the vanity fair piece, so am not sure how good or bad it were. looks as if susie got caught in a few lies and even more unfortunate truth reveals, but regardless, that karoline pic is... unfortunate. HA! Good Fun!

have tried braeburn and is not quite firm enough for a julienne, but your suggestions makes us think am being too narrow-minded. granny smith is perhaps the right firmness but not exact the taste profile am looking to achieve. even so, there is no reason we can't use multiple apple types, yes? we use parsnips and carrots together in the same dish, so why not multiple kinda apples? am gonna try a box grater for our "juicy" apple and then lazy-man julienne a granny smith, but the y-peeler option will likely be part o' our next attempt when our initial efforts near inevitable fail. thanks for the suggestion. aside, six years past we received a stocking stuffer. am only ever having used the green one. carbon steel means we need clean and dry immediate after use, but am shocked at how well these work in spite o' the fact they likely cost about 10¢ apiece to manufacture. HA! Good Fun!

and pretty much every major hospital in the US, as well as thousands o' oncologists and cancer patients... although am understanding that fentanyl patches has become less ubiquitous as a "treatment" for late-stage cancer pain management in the last few years. am guessing there is some specific grant o' executive power related to wmds, similar to the way in which 2001 Congressional authorization to use force against al-quaeda and anyone with a "nexus" to the 9/11 attacks were used by bush, obama, biden and trump do acts o' war against any and all accused "terrorists" without the need for Congress to declare war. don't know the specific lever and fulcrum trump is trying to exploit, but am assuming there is such a thing... although am admitted not certain how vaporizing accused drug smugglers transporting cocaine from venezuela to other nearby nations constitutes an act o' war, even based on some o' the sketchy logic embraced by obama to assassinate anwar al-awlaki. ... am admitting the trump administration efforts around deportations and boat strikes makes otherwise fantastical slippery slope arguments look far less ridiculous 'cause there is no too extreme or too far for these clowns. if the dangers o' fentanyl is the raison d'être for labeling individuals as narco terrorists, and anybody even tangential related to the narco terrorists is subject to extra judicial murders, then what is the point o' the new wmd identifier? what sinister new article 2 sooper power has stephen miller and the project 2025 folks imagined into being? not sure, but given the current state o' affairs, that authority will be deemed valid until scotus says otherwise, and there is all kinda reason to be suspicious o' the Court's wisdom these days. HA! Good Fun!

misunderstanding. as part of article 1, sec8 (clause 18?) powers, Congress has implied power and duty o' oversight and investigation... of the other branches o' government. take care clause of article 2, based on understanding of language in 1787, creates a duty/obligation on the part o' the President to see that laws passed by Congress is implemented and enforced. ... and 'cause the current Court's embrace o' the unitary theory o' the executive authority is complete and extreme, it follows that the President is indeed the chief law enforcement officer o' the United States. Congress gets oversight and may investigate the executive in its law enforcement capacity, but other than impeachment and conviction, the ability o' Congress to interfere with considerable the discretion o' the President in matters o' law enforcement is largely limited to funding decisions. HA! Good Fun! ps keep in mind that originally there were no US Law Enforcement. we had fed judges created by Congress (1789) but initially the job o' attorney general were a part-time gig-- one guy advising Congress and the President. took 'bout one hundred years and the civil war to change things. fbi didn't get its start until early 1900. before the fbi we had US marshals and postal inspectors... not even customs and border protection until 1940s as each state handled its own customs inspection efforts and there were no real immigration policy. that the President were the chief law enforcement officer o' the US was largely meaningless for most o' US history.

... HA! Good Fun!

just a reminder, the trump boat attacks is one o' the only current issues on which trump is not substantial underwater... excuse the pun. a recent cbs poll had approval at 53%. yougov were more even spilt but still positive with 43% approval v. 42% disapproval. one excuse for the double-tap, 'corrding to Congressman tom cotton, were that the two survivors clinging to the capsized and still burning boat could conceivably have flipped it over, at which point they mighta' been able to get a radio working. with a working radio, the survivors possibly coulda' called for aid from their fellow narco-terrorists, narco-terrorists who woulda no doubt saved the waterlogged cocaine and delivered it to the US where it necessarily woulda' resulted in the deaths o' untold thousands in the US. as such, killing the survivors were not only justified but necessary to save americans from further drug deaths. republican response: prove it wouldn't have happened that way. edit: ... these people are freaking nuts. but again, most americans, either 'cause they is ignorant or callous, approve o' the boat strikes, so the current revelations about the double-tap events or where the drugs were actual headed changes nothing. maybe trump sacrifices hegseth or bradley, but am not seeing why the still-very-much-illegal-and-pointless boat strikes would end. welcome to the usa in 2025. HA! Good Fun!

it's legal(ish) and has been sop for years. is US fed law as well as UNCLOS and specific international agreements which give (enough) legal justification for drug inspections o' vessels on the high seas such that complaints o' lack o' jurisdiction has failed as a defense o' drug traffickers in both US and international courts time and again. also, ... The administration's lethal approach marks a huge shift from the traditional maritime interdictions the U.S. has long done. Those operations involve the U.S. Coast Guard intercepting a drug boat at sea, boarding the vessel, seizing the narcotics, arresting the crew and bringing them back to the U.S. to face prosecution. The U.S. Coast Guard works off information gathered from U.S. law enforcement and intelligence community sources. The U.S. military, meanwhile, has a hand in detection, monitoring and coordination. "We used to call it a self-licking ice cream cone," said one former FBI official who worked transnational crime and maritime interdictions. "You stop a boat, you get the bad guys, you use the leverage of prosecuting them to turn them into cooperators." Investigators would use those cooperators to intercept more drug boats, arrest more low-level traffickers, leverage some of them into cooperators to get more intelligence. This way, over time, the former FBI official said, investigators have been able to work their way up to cartel leadership. Even when the people detained on a boat didn't have information that helped in a prosecution, they often had tidbits that helped illuminate the cartel network, which American officials then use for intelligence purposes. "Forgetting the philosophy of whether killing people is right or wrong, when you kill them you can't talk to them. When you grab them, you can," one former senior DOJ official said. The information that leads to an interdiction comes from human sources as well as what's known as signals intelligence, or electronic surveillance. Current and former officials said in interviews that that information is generally accurate and reliable. It allows the Coast Guard, for example, to put a cutter at a precise location of a drug boat in the Eastern Pacific Ocean, which is roughly the size of the continental United States. The current and former officials said the intelligence isn't always 100% accurate. Sometimes the vessel the Coast Guard intercepts is a resupply boat carrying food and fuel for the traffickers, not the actual drugs. Still, the intelligence that allows the Coast Guard to be in the right place is often built upon a piece of information provided by a human source, which then allows the U.S. government to put its vast electronic spying powers to good use. These officials said blowing up boats instead of interdicting them will have a compound effect over time on the quality of intelligence. With the lethal strikes, the U.S. is no longer gathering phones and other electronics off of crew arrested on the high seas, nor is the U.S. questioning the low-level drug runners about who and what they know about the broader trafficking network. "You need something to tell you where to look," the former DOJ official said. "If you're killing all these people, you just dried up the human intelligence." ... again, the coast guard has been stopping, searching and questioning those on the suspected drug boats for many years, typical with the cooperation o' south american, caribbean and european nations, 'cause particular in the case o' venezuelan drugs (cocaine) the drugs is more likely bound to end up in caribbean and euro nations than the US. often the drug boats is destroyed by the coast guard, but only after the people and drugs is removed from the vessels. in spite o' the fact the boats is being stopped often many thousands o' miles remote from the US, the drug interdictions has ordinary been the task o' the coast guard, although the overall efficacy o' the operations has been... suspect. ... As the intelligence dwindles, the U.S. government's understanding of the cartels, their money laundering networks, supply chains and business strategies will start to go dark. In the past, the OCDETF-led interdiction model intercepted around 4% to 6% of known maritime cocaine shipments annually on non-commercial vessels. In fiscal year 2023, for example, the rate was 3.71%, according to a Department of Homeland Security watchdog report from February. This fall, the Trump administration shuttered OCDETF, and transferred its cases to new Homeland Security Task Forces jointly run by the FBI and Homeland Security Investigations. For those who spent years working on combating drug cartels, there's deep skepticism that the Trump administration's new policy of military strikes will be prevent more drugs from reaching America. "All this strategy is doing is killing people and the same amount of drugs is getting into the U.S.," the former senior DOJ official said. "You didn't save anybody or increase the number of people you're saving in the U.S. It's extraordinarily shortsighted and I don't think it gets you the goal you want." ... the recent shift in policy and practice appears on its face to be performative. at least if there were some kinda compelling argument or evidence that blowing up drug boats headed for trinidad and tobago is saving american lives, you could see a rationale for engaging in lethal interdictions, but that ain't the case. recall, the US sent people to cecot w/o due process. explanation for cecot efforts were that tren de aragua is not just a terrorist organization, but is an active para-military group active involved in the downfall o' the US. if trump had been successful, he coulda' sent anybody he disliked to cecot or someplace similar, 'cause sans due process, explanations and justifications is replaced with faith in the administration. the boat strikes is an effort to do something similar to cecot and is arguable worse 'cause as bad as cecot is, summary executions means there is no way to correct mistakes. trump doesn't provide proof before the maritime murders take place and the justification for the killings is that narco terrorists is involved in what amounts to military actions directed at the US. the double-tap clap trap is a kinda red herring 'cause it ignores the complete lack o' legitimacy o' the boat strikes. am bothered by the focus on the double-tap accusations because doing so means you are already pretending as if the people being murdered on suspected drug boats is analogous to enemy sailors who is fighting a war with the US, a claim which is transparent false and... stoopid. if rando fisherman working for drug cartels in venezuela may be subject to summary executions 'cause drugs are bad and americans die because of drugs, then try and imagine who else and where else trump could do murder w/o needing proof o' any kinda crime. the only thing slowing down the administration's authoritarian efforts is their utter incompetence... a fact which is not near as reassuring as we would hope. HA! Good Fun!

Trump’s attack on DEI may hurt college men, particularly White men Nationwide, the number of women on campuses has surpassed the number of men for more than four decades, with nearly 40 percent more women than men enrolled in higher education, federal data shows. Efforts to admit applicants at higher rates based on gender are legal under a loophole in federal antidiscrimination law, one that’s used to keep the genders balanced on campuses. But the Trump administration has consistently included gender among the characteristics it says it does not want schools to consider for admissions or hiring, along with race, ethnicity, nationality, political views, sexual orientation, gender identity or religious associations. HA! Good Fun!

HA! Good Fun!

am sudden realizing am having been imagining rl shady all wrong HA! Good Fun!