Engorgeous George

Just exercised my franchise.

80,000 acres ablaze 11 miles from a home I own in Story Wy. Weather relief by way of rain and snow is not in the cards for at least 48 hours. The prevailing winds and topography have it likely moving towards Story. The Home is a family home originally built by my wife's grandfather. The home is log construction as is the barn and tack shed and stables. The current renter just notified me he recieved a pre-evacuation order. The nice thing is the property is on the right side of a road and a stream so the area may be defensible. If not, well there is insurance. I think my wife's brother and sister are happy I bought the home off of them a few years back. If it burns I will rebuild.

I apologize but I do not take your meaning here.

I worry more about the general area than the second home. The area is quite beautiful and after fire will come rain and snow runoff which will fould streams and lakes for some time and the fire will also reduce ahbitat for a few years, though often in the aftermath the land produces miricles of meados and wildflowers supporting renewed animal life.

I am down in Colorado so no worries for myself, just the property. Unlike folks in N. Carolina this is not my primary residence so I will have inconvenience and my wife will suffer some emotional loss, but in the end we will be just fine. Some of our neighbors there will not be nearly so luck. also there is a water treatment plant and a fish hatchery which are both threatened which could effect fishing in Wyoming for years to come and could really cripple Sheridan. I was going to be up there next week to do a bit of hunting, but not now.

The over running of the Capital building was disorderly, it was in many instances riotous. Did it rise to insurrection seeking through disruption to delay certification of an election, not in my mind. There was no attempt to coopt the military or to achive command and control of the country, but it was close to insurrection in a few regards, including the hope by some that they could install new electors not properly approved of by their State's processes. I think we need a new term and definition to define and describe what happened, something short of insurrection but beyond petulent acting out and rioting. May I suggest the new term Trumpgasm to describe the event.

I am socially liberal, or at least laizze faire, fiscally and constitutionally conservative, and I abhor the orthodoxies pressed by the woke left and the MAGA right. There is no political home for a fella like me, at least not right now.

Why stop at water towers? Why not try to project something on to the moon? I believe the moon will be full tomight. It would take a fairly large and sophisticated lazer array, but go for it.

I hope those poor souls are not still languishing there in the desert. Maybe notify FEMA.

Was Jordy Nelson not available?

And on the second amendment we have this ... https://x.com/i/status/1836841464686424493

So you moved from union workers to all workers. I get that workers like overtime as the pay is typically time and a half or even double time. The thing is paying overtime as opposed to regular time increases costs. It is often cost effective to hire additional workers as opposed to paying overtime. Also, overtime being available may actually increase the motivation to not finish a task on regular time. it may incentivize delay so that overtime can be earned. Overtime may also result in increased injuries on the job. Frankly long hours are precisely why OSHA and the FAA have time limits for pilots, truckers, and ship pilots. I have no doubt you are correct as to Trump generally as I have read multiple more or less undisputed accounts of him looking for every advantage, fair and unfair (at least in my mind) to avoid paying bills. I just fail to see your original argument as to Union workers. No worries. I often fail to see matters clearly.

I fail to see how hiring larger crerws to spread the work out in manageable chunks and to avoid overtime thereby is anti-union. Others of his stances may well be, and his traack record of paying workers and vendors is poor, but the argument reflected in your post makes no sense to me. Perhaps you can elaborate further so that I might understand.

Dow up over 43,000 right now.

Deserves got nothin to do with it.

Took me a minute to determine whether you were writing of Pelosi or me.

How big are your wife's mudflaps? Like african elephant ears large?

Nancy Pelosi disagrees about the ability to profit off of information.

I was addressing only the oner asked question in that post. If you rerad the others of my responses I agrere that some counts will be dismiswsed and that remittur will happen on any remaining disgorgement, if any. i had many problems with this prosecution as apparently does the Court though the latter is not certain. As for the time of the ruling i note that historically that Court is quicker than many but the issues are many so it may take time. With so few days to thre election it could well come after. I know some who follow that Court who believe it may be otherwise, but time is ticking away.

After the State's time was expired there was one question from the bench pertaining to sanctions. There was no begging from the State. I would have termed the matter a more or less collateral and insignificant issue. The discussion referenced a point in a submitted brief which I did not read so perhaps I do not fully understand that issue, but to me it seemed the Justice asking the question was referencing the States request for sanctions against the Trump team for raising again in the appeal a matter previously ruled upon. All in all I would characterize the Blogger's take on the hearing as extremely inaccurate. The State did not take hours to try to come up with arguments, explanations, or evidence to answer the Court's questions. The state got its 15 minutes of time and ran over by three minutes with the blessing and permission of the Court.

The Justices did seem to favor Trump's position. I have learned, however, to not make assumptions based upon their questioning in oral arguments. Sometimes they are playing the Devil's advocate. In this instance I tend to believe that at worst Tyrump can expect a substantial reduction in the disgorgement fine and perhaps much more. Still, I have been surprised in the past so I may be surprised here as well.

I should have found that. I was looking in the October file, not the September file. My Mistake. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.

You may, of course, be correct, but I believe the video will be posted in due course, likely Monday or Tuesday, as seems the routine.

I went to the Court of Appeals website. They have a rebroadcast feature for oral arguments. In this instance the argument in question is not yet posted. If someone has a link to the arguments, the complete arguments, i would be interested in listening to them. Maybe i will look around some more later.

I agree, which is why Trump has done fairly well thus far on his appeals. The higher courts are finding that incompetence and stupidity. This is not to say that Trump will excape in all instances, as he is arrogant and stupid and his advisors and attorneys are incompetent to the extent that he overrides their advice and gets them to do what he wants, not what they know is advisable. Trump always has been, and remains, his own worst enemy.