Can anyone explain how a Ca sheriff got a Ca judge to write a seizure warrant for an out of state business over a purely civil matter, or why all 4 officers had any authority whatsoever that far out of their single county jurisdiction?

No fires? It seems dangerous in dry areas like So. CA.

Interesting N Carolina doesn’t disqualify candidates convicted of such things, isn’t it? Some places do, like liberal California. Liberals ACTUALLY care about crime enough to disqualify based on convictions, not “conservatives”.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_2401-2450/ab_2410_cfa_20120430_105724_asm_comm.html

Have you written your state legislature to demand they make a law so criminals can’t be elected officials? Thought not.

Then, again I ask you, why would you have ever supported repeatedly convicted con man (school cons, charity cons, repeated business cons) and racist (payed millions for redlining) Trump?

You SAY wrong is wrong, then you vote for convicted criminals constantly. I am certain you voted for the guy whose campaign harvested and filled out ballots in YOUR county, knowing beforehand that he had done that, he won despite blatantly defrauding the election, and would have again if he had run again. You absolutely didn’t say any Republican on the same ballot should be disqualified despite knowing his campaign also filled out fraudulent votes for any Republican they could. You lied and said he had suffered consequences, but you know full well he did not. None. Not only did he take office, and never was charged, he was allowed to run again in the special election required because of his admitted fraud.

The point here is Republicans (like you) SAY they believe in law and order and criminals shouldn’t be elected officials, then you go ahead and vote for people who admit to brutally murdering their wives and tossing the body in a creek and are awaiting trial and then, idiotically, go on to call Democrats the “party of debauchery”. It’s asinine and transparent.

You SAY you care about law and order, then directly encourage perjury (only from your “team”) elect child rapists, sex traffickers, people who protect child rapists, thieves, cheats, deadbeats, blatant racists, and insurectionists. (In one case, Trump, someone who is all of the above).

I can only find wrong worth mentioning on one side because only one side displays this level of wrongness. Why can you only find wrong on Democrats parts, and not see the 95% of horrific wrongness coming from your choices for representatives?

Democrats abuse their travel funds (but only about 10% as much as Republicans), Democrats commit insider trading (but not 1/2 as much as republicans).
Democrats don’t traffic little girls for sex.
Democrats don’t have cocaine fueled lemon party orgies (ugh, just the thought).
Democrats don’t try to commit a coup then blame republicans when it fails.
Democrats don’t run fraudulent charities for veterans which they steal from.
Democrats don’t have private parties with Epstein and little girls.
Democrats don’t repeatedly try to take guns onto planes (Cawthorn).
Democrats don’t harass young school shooting victims with death threats and claims that they’re not real people.
Democrats don’t put hurting republicans above the good of the nation either….they should start, turnabout is fair play, and hurting actual abusive criminals (not just fantasy crimes) is in the national interest.

Yes, I’m biased. It’s insane you aren’t, knowing what we know about current republicans, and what little we have of Democratic crimes. I find you a new disgusting Republican representative committing felonies daily, and you don’t flinch in your unbridled support of them, you toss out red herrings and whataboutisms without ever turning on the majority of pedophiles, hebephiles, rapists, insurrectionists, etc that keep coming from your chosen party.

I agree with your last sentence, but you do not.
You constantly vote for criminals like this and simply turn a blind eye to their convictions for crimes of moral turpitude. Democrats got rid of Al Frankenstein for a photo of him pointing at a sleeping woman, Republicans are still trying to elect judge Roy Moore despite his pedophilic history, and re-elect Cawthorn, and Boebert, Gaetz, Jordan, even Epstein’s bestie Trump. All directly tied to pedophilia, and you don’t care one bit. Not to mention the seditious coup attempt so many are complicit in, or the coverups afterwards, or the insider trading, etc.

You don’t care about criminal behavior if it’s a Republican, and you just can’t admit it, but you and all here KNOW it’s true.

He is, but he is clear that he thinks Islam is the worst, most violent misogynistic and intolerant. I say that’s equally true of all religions at different times.

While I do like that he can see when his team goes off the deep end, where that line lies has steadily moved to the right as he aged. I’ve been watching him since before he had a tv show. I live in CA, and I don’t have the issues he complains most about….of course I don’t live in the most expensive, most regulated county in CA like he does. He complained for years about getting permits for his solar system and blamed the liberal government, I got my permits in one day with no issue at all.

My biggest peeve is that, even though he’s been a professional comedian for over 40 years, he still doesn’t understand that a groan/clap is approval for a joke in bad taste or particularly pointed. It bugs the shit out of me when he gets mad his crowd groaned while applauding and laughing.

We actually started HBO to watch him there…but he’s changed so much we often don’t bother anymore. I rarely recognize his panel anymore too. New Rules is definitely the highlight of the show these days.

I think he's against all religions, hence making Religulous.

I like him because he's old-school liberal, and not afraid to call out some of the extreme-left insanity of new-school liberals. Probably he sees it more because he lives in CA.

But I don't subscribe to HBO, and only watch his "New Rules" or monolog clips on YouTube (when they're not already 'sifted, of course)

A bit of the story https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/cambridge-man-reportedly-runs-away-from-crash-assaults-person-in-nearby-home-1.5798389

A German mark had value….until it didn’t. Your opinion of “fiat money” isn’t universal by any stretch. You say it’s universally better. I wholeheartedly disagree, and point to Germany and Venezuela as proof. They aren’t outliers either, (looking at Africa).

Gold is useful and valuable. Digital footprints aren’t. Paper notes aren’t. Printed circuits, connectors, anti oxidation, actual physical money, jewelry, etc. gold has intrinsic value, a dollar bill has about 13210 joules, so its intrinsic worth is about 1 small 1 gram stick as kindling and little more….no matter if it’s a $1 or $500 bill or a check for billions. Again, see Germany, where bills were more valuable as firewood than money.

This deflation idea again. Give me 3 examples of deflation harming/ending a nation on the gold standard please, I’ve never heard of it happening. (Edit: as far as I can find, I’m no economics professor, for the most part the gold standard was abandoned worldwide in the early 1930’s and the last remnants removed in the early 70’s by Nixon)

Explain how unsecured notes guard against speculation….don’t just claim it. I don’t see it, people made a mint short selling Venezuelan (and other failed) dollars….speculating they would crash….they did. What?

GDP is the metric that imparts value to unsecured notes offered by countries.

I think you had a mini stroke, the paragraph starting USofA is a word salad with no meaning.

Name 3. I named Germany post ww1….they didn’t get to borrow or ignore their debts. What are you talking about?

So, the only ones that don’t/can’t borrow are all the ones that need to.

Pretending basing your dollar on Bitcoin is the same as basing it on gold is outrageous idiotic bullshit. Just nonsense. Utterly moronic and pure fantasy. Don’t try moving the goalposts, that’s what you said.

Yes, the fed will take gold. They don’t take Bitcoin, do they? How about shells? Pebbles?

Jesus, you just want to argue. You’re rambling, switching positions and going off on tangents.
It’s not about whether someone might accept it, it’s about whether it’s universally accepted at one value and about holding its accepted long term value. People once gladly accepted beanie babies as payment….stupid people.
Arcata Ca printed up Arcata dollars….you could get them cheap, businesses took them. Wanna put your nest egg into them? You say that’s good money, as good as dollars. I’ll sell them to you for gold, and let’s see who’s doing better in 10 years. Or I’ll sell you pebbles for gold. Any currency you want, I’ll sell you for gold. How’s that working with pebbles or shells? Can you buy currency with them?

It has everything to do with how much it’s worth. Stop jumping subjects because your point is failing to convince. An economy based on pebbles fails because their neighbors don’t value pebbles, but if their pebbles are gold, they succeed because gold is valued universally.

What are you talking about, the gold standard’s ability to keep up? Huh?! No keep up necessary, no slow down required, gold trades exactly as fast as everything else. What is this nonsense?!?

You mean you can’t overspend and go deep into debt?! And that’s bad?! In your opinion, not many economists….and what makes you think you can’t borrow against gold? Secured loans are easier and cheaper to come by. WHAT?!?

Yes, unsecured paper money can just be printed forever, you CAN “sell the universe”. (Or sell dollars who’s overall value is based on your country’s value) over and over, then print more and sell 9/10 again, print more, sell again. Eventually that money is worth less than it costs to print, and your creditors get paid off in dollars worth a tiny fraction of what they lent you. Not if it’s backed with gold.

Miracle cure?!? Quote it. I think you misread. Secured notes being better than unsecured notes is not “miracle cure” or perfection, it’s just measurably better, safer, and more stable. No system is perfect.

?
( as in Giga Texas) If you were to invest $10 billion and employ 20,000 workers for next 30 years, would you not shop around for the best location, taking into account taxes among other things?

As state would you want make that deal?

If Ca tax is 10% and TX is 5% would this not make one consider?


Land cost , local / state rates? The influx of people to your area would increase your tax base for decades.


If you were a Musk would you not do the same?

My understanding is that it is legal for anyone to purchase and possess lock picking tools. Seller does have to obtain info regarding purchaser, but just basic stuff.

Here are the California codes regarding such tools.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?chapter=3.&part=1.&lawCode=PEN&title=13.

https://duckduckgo.com/?kl=us-en&q=Humboldt+Ca&ia=maps&iaxm=maps

Humboldt Ca

No. Not access to the cameras farther north…where I am.

That’s fine and good if you live in LA area, but it stops pretty far south….and only gives access to around 1% of the cameras, and they only have still shots. We should have access to every one in areas open to the public in full resolution moving images, IMO.
Again, we paid for them.

https://cwwp2.dot.ca.gov/vm/iframemap.htm Has the whole state, but still in still shots it seems. Not updated often enough.

Oh. You don't have access? http://sigalert.com show them to everyone in my CA from CalTrans.

Congratulations! Your video, Greenville Ca, 8-5-21 After Burning To The Ground Overnight, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 286 Badge!