Gromnir

Definition of theft 1a: the act of stealing specifically : the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it b: an unlawful taking (as by embezzlement or burglary) of property so, no, is not theft. if the taking is legal and/or not felonious, then is it is inappropriate to describe as theft. forefathers were against taxation without representation but they most assured weren't against taxation. did gd join the military and use gi bill monies to pay for education? yes he did. so based on gd's own definition he took and used stolen goods. hypocrite. stop. just stop. HA! Good Fun!

Trump Wanted His Justice Department to Stop ‘SNL’ From Teasing Him am no expert, and admitted using trump as a guide for constructing general rules for dealing with narcissists is likely flawed, but we work with what we got. trump were disproportionate concerned with his (self) image as being smarty, successful and strongk. threaten those fundamentals and the pig squealed, yes? is the extent o' our powers o' psychoanalysis. perhaps related... ‘Willing to Go to Jail': Rudy Giuliani Calls Ukraine Investigation ‘Lawless' were s'posed to be an interview 'bout upcoming 20th anniversary o' 9/11. unfortunate, these guys can't help themselves, yes? reports suggest rudy needs money and trump ain't gonna pay rudy's legal bills. is admitted a tough call for trump 'cause pay legal bills is tacit recognition rudy were acting on trump's behalf when he did outrageous and illegal. not pay and rudy motivation to protect trump decreases. what happens when you got multiple narcissists who can't shut up? is fine for the piggies when they need only explain selves to the base or to republicans in Congress. is tougher for the narcissists when prosecutors and/or a judge gets involved. HA! Good Fun!

am current referencing intentional obfuscation, which is political relevant, yes? marco rubio knowing or mistaken posted pictures o' the secretary o' defense in singapore and vietnam as some sorta argument defending an earlier phillipines blunder. skarpen makes a 50% of posts claim ignoring fact every single use o' the searched terms by this poster were either from after his initial search, or referenced trump's sharpie pen. the wrong is similar and is has nothing whatsoever to do with the history o' a former poster. nevertheless, am guessing you are taking a more expansive view and simply want the bickering to end, whether is related to the shortcomings o' a former poster or not. fine. as an aside, notice how marco rubio, in his subsequent post cropped the photo 'o the secretary o' defense in the philipines which were original showing other military officers similar masked and shielded. these guys just can't help themselves, eh? HA! Good Fun! ps edit out repeat word

mind boggling so 30% o' 33 total returns for your first research which is most broad. 50% o' 4 total results from your curious narrow sharpie search (compare https://forums.obsidian.net/search/?&q=sharpie&page=1&search_and_or=and&sortby=relevancy) 75% o' 9 total results from final search. and again, w/o any explanation as to your divination. compare to the most obvious search which yielded 204 total. figment? mostly? again, you clear didn't bother to search before making your mostly and figment observations, or you just lied. what is the reasonable alternative? HA! Good Fun! ps the real question is: why do you keep doing this to yourself? pps am beginning to suspect skarpen is actual a marco rubio alt turns out the secretary were following the masking guidelines o' the Philippines. so, unable to accept he got wrong, he does the follow up post problem is the other photos is not from the Philippines. singapore and vietnam. the thing is, am betting marco stops at two fails.

"Unfortunately there is no such user and the search only returns mostly you referring to this guy so I must assume he's a figment of your paranoia." so, the person o' whom you were unable to discover 'cause there were no such user, you divined alternative names for your search? ok, show us. receipts. show us how you discovered alt naming conventions from near entire before you began posting. show the returns from such searches and the numbers o' responses which result in a finding o' "mostly" compared to the 204 from a simple and obvious search o' the former poster who abandoned the board weeks before you arrived. and again, using the suspended poster's moniker in a search yields literal hundreds o' options which is quite unreasonable to square with your "figment" observation. you are so terrible at this and am taking advantage o' the shortcoming you share with the former poster. HA! Good Fun! ps amusing, but Gromnir doesn't even figure as "mostly" with a search o' "sharpie"? not even close.

book am reading and referenced in another thread reminded us o' regina spektor, a jewish soviet era russian emigre to the US. the school in the video is where her mother, a former professor o' music in russia, teaches music to elementary school children. lucky kids. thought her cover o' "while my guitar gently weeps" for an animated film were great. HA! Good Fun!

so again, you didn't actual search as claimed. you assumed. is same as your grace mistake. based on whatever search parameters you used for your wall o' links, you assumed the usatoday article were relevant to your "tiny" refutation. which is same mistake as the former poster named sharp_one made all too frequent. resort to deflection and indulge hypocrisy as a non response. not bother to read linked content. embarrass self and then declare victory, hoping endurance would replace clever argument or insight. don't be sharp_one. *sigh* am gonna admit we do deserve criticism, but not for the fault you describe. am indeed exploiting your inability to admit error so as to create a kinda perpetual engine o' shame. most folks with common sense would see there is no benefit in giving us yet another opportunity to chastise mendacity and/or error but you cannot resist and so far we has shown no desire to self impose a kinda mercy rule. that said, is not all on you. am taking advantage o' your handicap. point o' diminishing returns is indeed far in the rearview mirror. anywho, HA! Good Fun!

new release but we were getting an advanced copy. is fun so far. HA! Good Fun!

2%? is another example o' you not doing as you claim. you said you did a search for sharp_one, but is clear you did not. can't reasonable get "mostly" from less than 2%. for some reason unclear, you assumed a level of interaction 'tween Gromnir and the bumbling fool who were sharp_one. the sad and funny o' it is if you had actual done as you claimed, you woulda' avoided the embarrassment o' the near identical mistake you made earlier by linking Grace's usatoday contribution. and predictable, you now feel compelled to defend yet another exaggeration/inaccuracy/mistake, just as @Gorth suggested the former poster known as sharp_one were incapable o' avoiding. the clownish behaviour described by Gromnir, and more than a few people in the 204 links, should not be something to which you aspire. recall, the yutz were suspended. nevertheless, you is almost inexplicable repeating the errors o' a poster long gone following his public embarrassment and ignominious suspension. be better. convenient segue: Trump defends his comments about election after release of DOJ notes trump reaction to getting caught is, as always, more extreme and more outlandish gaslighting. that said, is noteworthy trump ain't trying to claim rosen and donoghue or the media is lying. HA! Good Fun! ps @Amentep & @Guard Dog everybody hates the lawyers, until they need one... and then there is a good chance you end up hating your own lawyer even if they is diligent advocating for you 'cause particular in criminal defense, there is a good chance your lawyer loses. and if the lawyer does find a way to get his obviously guilty client freed from incarceration, then is the lawyer's fault and not the law. that said, many lawyers get paid pretty well, so is understandable few is gonna sympathize with them. "the first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers," is from a shakespeare play and everybody laughs, but is a line from the villainous **** the butcher.

https://forums.obsidian.net/search/?&q=sharp_one&page=1&search_and_or=and&sortby=relevancy the guy were a cartoonish schnook so am doubting any here were driven to paranoia by the churlish and juvenile posting which eventual got his account suspended, but if he were a "figment," he qualifies as a mass hysteria event as there are, as you may plain see, 204 results for the aforementioned toolbag, with only four such references authored by Gromnir. speaking o' paranoia, you see less than 2% as qualifying as "mostly"? is fascinating what victory looks like for you. first fascinating contribution you have made in this... dialogue. now, am suspecting will most interest @BruceVC HA! Good Fun!

if is ugly enough, perhaps the demand for laws to prevent future shenanigans will be loud and long. am not sure what to expect. the urge to bury this is gonna be strong on both sides o' the aisle as the blowback will have the potential to affect politicians other than President. nevertheless, is already a thing. is too late to disappear this the way the previous admin tried to disappear ig reports. HA! Good Fun!

tougher for Presidents. the disclosure requirements is ordinarily a bit strict, and am suspecting now that trump's taxes will finally be going to Congress for review, the possibility new legislation will be passed making the limits even more strict is likely. HA! Good Fun!

fatal flaw: you would need run as a republican to pull off the stock buy while in office. HA! Good Fun!

dear lord. you are actual trying to gaslight folks into believing that you inserted a single link, w/o any kinda acknowledgement the link were antagonistic to your pov, into your shotgun list o' critiques o' sb 132 and the transfer o' trans prisoners to women facilities, 'cause you are open-minded and wanted to provide a balanced approach? lordy. the receipts. am recalling @Gorth once observed: "Sharp_One was never man enough to own up to his mistakes. Too much narcissism in that one, would be surprised if he stayed away." you may not recall the poster in question, but sharp_one were hopeless and intransigent to the point of insensibility. he were comical stoopid at times and an utter joke in the minds o' most o' the community. don't follow sharp_one's example. be better. HA! Good Fun!

have mentioned previous that mandatory vaccinations are legal in the US. is a bit tougher to legitimize at the fed level (beyond fed employees or troops,) but at the state and local there isn't any novel question o' law which might be raised to get some kinda serious chance at Court review. pre Constitution, general washington instituted a primitive kinda forced inoculation o' troops at valley forge to protect against small pox. many o' those soldiers died. nyc, just a few years ago, enforced compulsory vaccinations, which is actual a functional step beyond mandate. we got a long history in this nation o' mandatory vaccinations even if most is unaware. ca says no religious exemption? legal. threat might be future outbreak as 'posed to current epidemic? legal. chances are whatever question you raise, unless is batcrap crazy, is gonna be legal. the state interest in administering vaccines has been declared by the Court as reaching the level o' a "compelling governmental interest," which makes mandatory and compulsory vaccinations a veritable auto-win for government. have observed on these boards the irony that the current anti-vaxxer crowd, which is curiously conservative and evangelical, will need embrace a broad reading o' roe v. wade to make their legal argument fly, which particular with the current Court is a non-starter. last year we anticipated the earliest pushback from anticipated mandatory government vaccinations would come from civilians employed at the va. the va were indeed the first fed entity which required mandatory vaccinations. such perspicacity on the part o' Gromnir don't make us special or smart. the reality is there is nothing new or novel 'bout this situation save for the degree o' pushback from the public, which is the real issue. is NOT a legal problem. again, law says mandatory and compulsory vaccinations is Constitutional. end o' story. the real hurdles is practical and political. you got somewhere approaching 30% o' the populace which refuses to take vaccines and no amount o' science or law is gonna convince them they is being obdurate. 30% o' the country knows they got a Constitutional right to refuse vaccines. try and enforce a law with 30% o' populace, including many state governors and county sheriffs, dead set against the law is more than a little problematic. pass laws which you know will be ignored by the people you most need to embrace is not good strategy and is political unwise even if such a law could, in theory, save many lives. regardless, is no genuine question o' law. HA! Good Fun!

see now, that is a white flag declaration, seeing as how you have not offered an alternative to our... imagination. then again, nobody could do so and expect to be taken serious. explain why a person criticizing sb 132 would include your usatoday link? ridiculous. desantis is channeling his inner zorg? HA! Good Fun!

was unaware this existed am not planning on listening to it anytime soon, but am curious. is one o' our favorite books. not favorite kid's book. no prefix or qualification required. might even be disappointing to hear gaiman's voice instead o' the one we listened to in our noggin as we read the book back in 2008. curious even so. HA! Good Fun!

fandango (85) is not our favorite costner film, (a toss up 'tween bull durham and a perfect world) but it makes top five and and typical we get perplexed looks when we reference it. fantastic soundtrack btw. HA! Good Fun!

am always a downer, so... the thing we recall most vivid 'bout chicks is how difficult it is to keep 'em alive if doing so ain't your full-time passion. of course you got a well designed coup with chicken wire buried to keep predators from digging n' all the other basic stuff, but is kinda impressive how much damage a single snake or weasel can do in a night. daytime is slight better, but birds o' prey is a constant threat. funny aside, our grandfather got a fairly good sized disco ball from somewhere and he hung it from a pole in the yard. why? the reflection drove away birds o' prey. am suspecting strips o' heavy duty aluminum foil, perhaps wrapped 'round something more durable, might be a good alternative to the disco ball. string a bunch o' 'em up 'round the enclosure where your chicks roam during the day. no doubt there is hi-tech solutions available nowadays, but the disco ball worked and were more fun. HA! Good Fun!

a broader view does not in any way explain why you would voluntarily post the victim story o' Grace. her victimization is an all too frequent repeated violation o' human dignity occurring in correctional facilities 'cross the US and the reality such happens too often formed the basis for why the ca law were written in the first place. your indifference to rarity o' trans assaults on women in prisons is 1) non responsive seeing as how has noting to do with grace's story o' being assaulted in a male facility, and 2) ignores fact you posted links to the numbers as if such numbers were meaningful or beneficial to your position. if you genuine wish to do so we will once again respond to how little support your unread shotgun o' links helped you make your point, but let's first finish up with your claim you read the story by grace. one blunder at a time, yes? so explain why grace's story is compelling and link worthy as a counter to the espoused rationale for implementing sb 132. HA! Good Fun!

@Skarpensay something more silly. the usatoday article you linked is a personal account o' a trans person suffering from sexual assaults while in a male prison facility and is substantial the raison d'être o' the california law which you origonal were questioning, but you would have us believe that your posting o' such were with awareness and intent given fact you is arguing against what grace is demanding? first freaking line from the article: "I was sexually assaulted in prison. Overhaul the system to protect the trans community." again, the author o' the linked article, grace detrevarah, is a trans person assaulted in a male facility and and you is gonna continue to claim that as a part o' your indiscriminate shotgun spread o' links (most o' which did little to help your cause and largely failed to support your argument) the addition o' grace's harrowing tale o' victimization somehow were an intentional addition? mind boggling the lengths you go to in an attempt to avoid admitting what were an obvious blunder. HA! Good Fun!

am ok with such an end. the black widow character were always kinda "meh" for us, and the weird hulk thing they were forcing on her did not improve our opinion. truth to tell, we were kinda indifferent 'bout scarlett johansson as an actress until recent. lost in translation and isle of dogs (a voice acting part) were our two favorite s.johansson roles... up until we saw jojo rabbitt. like the movie or hate it, but johansson were quirky and funny and vulnerable and strong. she stole scenes. she were fantastic. get her out o' the mcu is fine by us. HA! Good Fun!

but you are proving the point. stefanik isn't an idiot, but 1/3 o' the country is uneducated and/or stoopid. the hardcore trump base, does believe this kinda stoopid and stefanik is knowing magnifying the misinformation in an attempt to get their approval. HA! Good Fun!

y'know, the thing is, unlike a few other members o' Congress, stefanik is not an idiot. with complete awareness she is misrepresenting, she says anyway, and while most o' us will channel the picard facepalm or other meme dujour in response to this bit o' utter nonsense, 1/3 o' the country is cheering her for her willingness to speak truth. mighta' ordinary put the tweet in the politics thread, but our basement for stoopid were exceeded. HA! Good Fun!

this were the usatoday article you linked: is no way to convince anybody with firing synapses you shared the previous after having read. you clear didn't read at least one o' your links, so what convinces us you read any o' the others save for perhaps the titles? try again. edit trump's week gets worse earlier this week, the doj announced the executive were not recognizing trump privilege as a bar against administration current and former employees testifying 'bout january 6. Trump to acting AG, according to aide’s notes: ‘Just say the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me’ this led to a criminal complaint being filed against trump and meadows. Texas loss alarms Trump advisers worried about party clout oh, and back on the 20th... Former Advisor to Presidential Candidate Among Three Defendants Charged with Acting as Agents of a Foreign Government ... this is the point where somebody utters the old saw about not wishing this kinda misfortune on their worst enemy. is true. we wouldn't wish on any o' our enemies, 'cause we respect folks we recognize as genuine enemies. trump? *chuckle* past few days has been a good start. HA! Good Fun!