Engorgeous George

They should give the Vice President something to do along these lines. Maybe they can be given the power to annul marriages.

Will he pardon Jill?

My DEI experience. My office brought in two women of extremely limited experience to supervise the litigation department and the operations group. At the time I was senior in the operations group and third in the litigation department litigating a narrow band of specialty issues. I had no problem with the hires. I did not apply for the openings myself as I did not want the responsibilitiers involved being towards the end of my career and being paid actually more than those positions were rated for.. I did have serious reservations over whether these hires had the experience for the jobs. I thought other candidates were much better. (I do note that the among the stated reasons for the hires was diversity though that was not the only reason as our office was more than 50% female and had representation at the managerial level. The real reason was cronyism, they were friends of an insecure boss looking to surround himself with sycophants). Shortly after the hires we had a motion served on us. The notice was served on me though it should have been served on the new head of litigation or operations manager (She was out as usual while I was available to accept service). I took the notice immediately to the operations manager and to the new head of litigation (turned out she was in after all, she just did not want to accept service). I hand handed it to each and I did an e-mail notification to the big boss along with a sample notice to our elected officials so that he could forward that notice if he wished. I then washed my hands of the matter as was appropriate. 19 days after receiving the notice of the motion I was speaking with the chief administrative professional for the litigation group in the elevator on the way down from work. I liked speaking with her as she possessed all the assets a toxic male such as myself prizes. I learned that our office had not drafted a reply to the motion, more less filed a response. Our response ws due on day 20. There being no bosses around I retuned to my desk and drafted up a sample response and then e-mailed it to the big boss, the head of litigation, and the operations manager. This took me into the early morning to research and draft the responsive pleading. I did not leave the office that night. I showered in the gym and returned to work When the muckity mucks arrived they had no thanks for my efforts nor was there any consequences or even opprobrium for them having dropped the ball. Instead I recieved criticism for one section of my response which the head of litigation thought inappropos. She demanded I take that section out. I told her she was free to do so as ultimately it was her responsiblity to file our reply. She did. The matter was set for a hearing. The new head of litigation was to be lead council with a junior attorney second chairing. I went to the motion hearing as it was in the courtroom over from where I was appearing that morning and I had some interest in the matter having drafted what became our response after editing. The head of litigation had not shown up and neither had the second chair. The matter was called. The head of operations informed the bench that our attorneys were running late. The court continued the matter for half an hour. When that time had run neither the lead nor second attorney had appeared, nor had they contacted our office nor the court though our office was frantically trying to contact them. The court told our operations manager she,the court, was about to grant the motion as being unopposed. The court was pissed. The operations manager looked around unsure what to do. I stood up, entered my appearance, and told the court I was ready to argue the matter. The hearing was held and in addition to the arguments from our pleading I raised the arguments that had been deleted from our pleading by the head of litigation. The court ruled in our favor based upon those deleted arguments. (This later really pissed off the litigation manager who thought I argued the issues to show her up. In reality the court sort of directed the arguments in that direction and luckily I was familiar with that case law having read it and written on it in preparation of the sample response.) Walking out of the courtroom the operations manager told me thank god I was there as she had Never argued a case or motion before any court and she could not have done what I did, which was to argue for the better part of an hour with no preparation or expectation I would be arguing the motion. I was stunned. How could our office have hired such inexperienced incompetants. Upon return to the office I recieved no thanks from the boss nor the two attorneys who had shat the sheets. (Turns out they were late due to not having planned for routine traffic. I had warned them that they could not expect to commute from their homes to the court for a 9:00 AM hearing in less than two hours as traffic was always horrendous that time of day. I always planned to arrive at that courthouse by 7:30 for any hearings or trials set at 9:00 AM or before.) The head of litigation did, however, prevail upon the boss to have me removed from the litigation roster as I had overstepped my bounds by not demanding a continuance in the face of the judge threatening to rule against us, or such was her opinion. That was fine with me. Then she noted that on my last e-mail to her I had not listed my pronouns which she stated was office policy. i pointed out that such a policy had been discussed but had not been adopted and that even were it adopted I would not comply with such nonsense. I stated the office could change my e-mail signature block lines, but that I would not. I recieved a written repremand in my personnel file for insubordination. I tendered my resignation. I did so by e-mail and that final e-mail did not have my preferred poronouns listed in the signature block. The head of litigation has since been moved out. She now works for a neighboring jurisdiction. The head of operations is still there. The policy of listing our preferred pronouns has been sacked as it was perceived as pandering and unprofessional. Me, I have done a lot of kayaking, rafting, fishing and hunting and have taken quite a few road trips to visit old friends and to attend concerts I loved. I was fortunate I was close to the planned end of my career and could afford to essentially tell them to shove it.

Apparently we are gullible.

I love corruption stories as they inform us as to the possible behavior of our electeds, and they inform us about the biases and motives of the opposition party and of the press. Are they a Roschach test for us observers as well, no doubt they are. I suspect your current dislike of this has to do with your political affiliations and the administration which just abused the power. You would like the story to fade away so it causes you no cognitive dissonance. Do i have any proof of that opinion, no, just an abidding suspicion .

Maybe also make it such that if a President pardons a campaign donor that the Presicdent must personally repay all of the donations not to the donor but to deficit reduction and if the presidnet canot make that payment then they cannot issue the pardon.

This subject comes up at the end of every administation. I do not have an answer for the problem of abusing the power. It would be nice if there was an amendment stating that if a sitting President vows publicly to not pardon a person at any time while he or she is sitting that they cannot thereafter go back on that pledge or vow. without themselves serving any sentence in the stead of the pardoned person. That might eliminate insincere vows used in campaigns.

This might reduce the pool of folks willing to run for president as well as those willing to serve in an administration. Then again, who knows, maybe it would not. I know the founders had some conceerns along these lines, but who knows how it would work in practice unless we actually implement it. Would you eliminate the power entirely, or just as to members of the presidential family, administration, and donors? Meaning what about those requests from convicts wholy unassociated with the administration. There are always a few such applications that may have some merit, you know, actual miscarriages of justices.

So he would know, then.

I remember the prosecutions of Hunter Biden being touted as proof the DOJ was impartial, as proof the prosecutions of Trump were not lawfare. That "proof" seemed weak when Hunter's first plea deal, the one rejected by the judge as unconscionably insignificant in scope of punishment and responsibility came to light. The "proof" seems weaker still in the light of this poardon, a pardon pledged not to be coming as the candidate was trying to sell himself.

Has Trump implied or indicated he would go after Hunter? If the worry is about who Trump might go after why not pardon Jill, and Joe's brother as well as Trump might go after them.

I had no doubt this would happen, Imagine anyone believing the pledge made by a politician. I think most simply did not believe Biden's statements on this which is why, of course, the press asked about this over and over, the pledge was not believable and so now here we have the proof of it.

I am unclear why we think that is Hunter Biden in that video clip. Are his back tatoos unique and well known? What is the original source of this video and why is it being asscribed to Hunter? Oh, and a gentleman would have gone back out into the hallway to pick up the ladies bag.

I agree. Seamon is key.

Every bone in her crotch. That's what I'm gonna break. -Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry

i figure he is too in love with himself to have sex with anyone else, forced or unforced. I suspect he he gets his pleasures alone, in front of a mirror, listening to his own voice and cleaning his firearms collection each with a girl's name.

Like a Norwegian Blue?

How so? The nearly limitless supply of power will be in the hands of a few. They will undoubtably charge for providing it to others thereby becoming exorbitantly wealthy. That they might provide it at less relative cost to us than we currently pay would be nice, if that happened, but how does it solve our every problem? Does it resolve our health issues? Does it cure the human condition removing greed, covetousness, ambition, ignorance, bigotry, religious intolerance or the desire some have to have dominion over others so that they can feel superior and important? Will it clean our air and water and remove toxins from our soil? Will it make us be kind and tolerant of our fellow humans? In history whenever new, great sources of power were harnessed they were harnessed for both production and destruction. How would this be any different than fire, steal, gunpowder, rifling, internal combustion and oil production or fusion? They were all great power and greatly misused from time to time to gain advantage and to oppress. Certainly less reliance on carbon based fuels will have some positive impacts on the environment and will negate some of the leverage some have in regional conflicts but I see it shifting playing fields (conflict points), not curing the human condition, and it is the human condition which needs to be cured. We are petty, jealous and vengeful creatures. We are likely better having less destructive power, not more.

I have often wondered why trafficers do not load plastic tubes which do not have a big sonar signature with coke and tow them behind slow moving boats looking like trawlers. Seems to me that the loads could be released if boarding were imminent, and in many areas in the caribbean at least, the waters might well be shallow enough to recover the loads if they GPS'd where they cut them loose.

225 metric tons. that is 225,000,000 grams of blow if it is not cut. Maybe twice that cut. That is more or less a heavy party weekend for the U.S back in the 80's

More likely they have come to dump others like her off. They don't want that on their world(s). Like Castro in the 80's and Maduro now they may be clearing out their insane asylums.

This did catch my attention, yes.

May your turkey be moist and all your parleys hit. My best to you and yours.

Antelope backstrap and pheasant for lunch, traditional turkey and fixin's for dinner. No squirrel.