Bobski....

I'm on the wrong side of truth?! Well, you think the Trump (and or Russian) side of truth is the correct side to be on....I prefer the honest side. To each his own.

Lol. That's why he has so many convictions and guilty pleas for fraud, right? Including his most recent, defrauding veterans out of millions in donations he diverted for personal use. He was forced to return the money and pay millions in fines, and dissolve his "charitable" foundation scheme.

See, if you hadn't been saying exactly that since the story broke but before any details were released, mindlessly repeating it with your fingers in your ears since, you might sound more believable....but you have.

How many court battles did he win last month? How many did he lose? And what were those battles about? They were all about trying to hide his actions, because many are illegal and all are immoral and unethical. He lost almost every attempt at obstruction, and he's running out of appeals fast.

Can't wait for another red tsunami. It is to laugh.

Just a side note, Trump was fined $2 million today for his fraudulent and clearly illegal misuse of his charity, specifically for stealing about $2.8 million in donations he solicited and collected for veterans and misusing it for personal and political purposes and repeatedly, intentionally ignoring his legal oversight duties. His "charity", the Trump Foundation, has also been dissolved, with all remaining funds split between multiple actual charities.


Who's guilty of stealing from charities?
Hint, it's the same person who plead guilty to running a fraudulent school and stealing from students.

No, Bob, that's called projection. Your head has always been in the clouds.

There is obstruction there. No question. It will be assumed to be felonious obstruction without a full release of the investigation, something already being fought against by Trump even as he tells you he wants it released. This report specifically did not exonerate Trump, so of course he lies and says it does...and of course you take his word over the report summation itself about the report itself. *facepalm. I wonder why I talk to you, you tell me you think I'm intelligent, knowledgeable, and communicate well, but never does a fact make it past your ears (eyes). You admit Trump is a massive, professional liar and fraud, yet you believe every word he tells you. It's simply asinine and mirrors the actions of someone with serious mental deficiencies or disorders.

YOU want to play this game another 6+ years....with Clinton, a private citizen already cleared by multiple investigations over multiple never ending politically motivated accusations already spending 10 times the money and effort to nail her, and your bubble was burst and your dreams of charges went bust....but you want more...More...MORE.

No, I am not the one of us in a bubble....never was. I held no illusions that this investigation would publish any findings that would make a difference, being politically stymied as it was, nor that there would be any consequences if it did because it was led by republicans, controlled by republicans, and any consequences relied on republicans to do their job and not kowtow to their great exalted leader. Since you people are all brain dead sycophants who love Trump exponentially more than America I never had any illusions it might matter or change any minds. I was correct.

Funny how as recently as last week this report was all lies and a purely political hit piece, a witch hunt created by unprofessional frauds and liars and based on lies that should be discarded out of hand because it's so tainted it's worthless, and this week it's an unimpeachable Trump vindication (even though it's blatantly not) prepared by honorable professionals that did a great job. *facepalm

Now, the multiple felonious state charges in states not controlled by republicans, those might stick, but won't matter a whit to your ilk. He won't be jailed, so you'll gladly vote for a felon....again.

So the great divider gets to lie more about the findings and erode our international standing, political discourse, and civility farther and you get to kiss his feet and prepubescently thumb your nose at anyone not following suit....while our union dissolves and we slide towards dissolution. Enjoy. Your kids get to live in the hell you're creating.

Even limestone? Fossils? ;-)

Also, I think you're conflating the particles age with the stone's age. There are almost zero stones that old on earth, most has been dissolved and reconstituted a few times over by now, with new (and new old) dust added constantly from space.

I think the value was in the insane impossible to recreate pattern, something the universe manufactured on it's own timeframe for it's own reasons.

Also This:

"Initially the band hat contacted me way back in 2014 to produce and record their live debut album. They had a monthly residency at the well known domicil jazz club in Dortmund at the time. Titled “Filou presents…” the band hosted a show with a guest band every third Wednesday of the month, often sharing the stage altogether for one massive jam at the end of the night. The guest bands included well-known German jazz acts but often bands that push the boundaries of jazz in some way or another (Sommerplatte, Cosmo Klein, Xaver Fischer, among others). The monthly residence gave Filou the chance to experiment with unusual stage concepts. As a result, they came up with the idea to dissolve the barrier between stage and audience for the live show.

So instead of going to the studio to create a regular album, Filou wanted to create a live recording capturing all their energy and live show experience as their debut record. The concept of making the audience become part of the stage setting also sparked the idea of abandoning a PA system and providing headphones for the audience instead. It’s a very unique experience for the concert goer and obviously turned out to be a slam dunk for me to ensure the best possible audio quality without the usual PA and monitor trash in the mics

Looked like a cell wall issue. First it became permeable, then it dissolved completely.
That said, this is the way I've always said I wanted to go....
horribly.

Lol....yeah, you get your news from Twitter, Facebook, and Trump himself and I'm the one who buys the lies. No surprise you and the walk away people won't admit it, you've never admitted to being duped even though it's a daily occurrence. Funny they didn't disavow these memes until well after they were debunked, and they still claim the spread through conservative media is somehow proof of a mass exodus from the Democrats, even though every example they have is either stock photos or well known long term conservative activists and most retweets are Russian bots.

BTW, not from MSM......https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/walkaway-campaign-stock-photos/
And
https://videosift.com/video/Stephen-Examines-The-Conservative-Walk-Away-Memes

You're doing the Russian's work for them, trying to hand America to Putin. I expect you to respond "that's better than a liberal".

Edit: The funniest part here is there is a huge walk away movement happening....lifelong Republicans walking away from the Republican party because some are intelligent enough to see it's been co opted by unpatriotic morons who seem intent on dissolving our system of government and international standing in favor of Russia, who they still remember is our enemy, not NATO.
Oops, looks like you bought more Russian lies.....Again.

Really? WE sponsored a VIOLENT coup? So you take the purely Russian viewpoint.
Wiki-
After the breakup of the Soviet Union, Ukraine endured years of corruption, mismanagement, lack of economic growth, currency devaluation, and problems in securing funding from public markets.[38][39] Successive Ukrainian governments in the 2000s sought a closer relationship with the European Union (EU).[40][41] One of the measures meant to achieve this was an association agreement with the European Union, which would have provided Ukraine with funds in return for liberalising reforms. President Yanukovych announced his intention to sign the agreement, but ultimately refused to do so at the last minute. This sparked a wave of protests called the "Euromaidan" movement. During these protests Yanukovych signed a treaty and multibillion-dollar loan with Russia. The Ukrainian security forces cracked down on the protesters, further inflaming the situation and resulting in a series of violent clashes in the streets of Kiev. As tensions rose, Yanukovych fled to Russia and did not return.[44]

Russia refused to recognize the new interim government, calling the overthrow of Yanukovych a coup d'état, and began a military intervention in Ukraine. The newly appointed interim government of Ukraine signed the EU association agreement and agreed to reform the country's judiciary and political systems, as well as its financial and economic policies. The International Monetary Fund pledged more than $18 billion in loans contingent on Ukraine's adopting those reforms. The revolution was followed by pro-Russian unrest in some south-eastern regions, a standoff with Russia regarding the annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol, and a war between the Ukrainian government and Russia-backed separatists in the Donbass.



The thing to remember about Crimea is it WASN'T PART OF RUSSIA, so no it didn't hold Russia's only black sea port not ice blocked in winter, it held a Ukrainian port Russia LEASED for use by it's black sea fleet from the Ukraine.
It's utter bullshit that Russia found a democratic way to invade and annex Crimea, they militarily invaded, seized and dissolved the democratically elected government by force, created and installed a new pro Russian sham government, then IT signed fake illegal treaties with Russia in violation of international laws and multiple binding treaties.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation

Russian masked troops invade and occupy key Crimean locations, including airports and military bases, following Putin's orders.[2][3]
The head of Ukrainian Navy, Admiral Berezovsky, defects, followed later by half of the Ukrainian military stationed in the region.[4][5][6]
Russian forces seize the Supreme Council (Crimean parliament). The Council of Ministers of Crimea is dissolved and a new pro-Russian Prime Minister installed.[7][8]
The new Supreme Council declares the Republic of Crimea to be an independent, self-governing entity, then holds a referendum on the status of Crimea on 16 March, which results in a majority vote to join the Russian Federation.[9]
Treaty signed between the Republic of Crimea and the Russian Federation at the Kremlin on 18 March to formally initiate Crimea's accession to the Russian Federation.[10]
The Ukrainian Armed Forces are evicted from their bases on 19 March by Crimean protesters and Russian troops. Ukraine subsequently announces the withdrawal of its forces from Crimea.[11]
Russia suspended from G8.[12]
International sanctions introduced on Russia.

You sound distinctly Soviet or ridiculously ignorant in your misrepresentation of the situation. They militarily attacked, invaded, and seized their neighbor, so not a bit restrained, they were not invited in by the government and welcomed....or would you insist they are also exceptionally restrained for not attacking and retaking Anchorage Alaska, their only non winter ice bound port in North America, a port clearly more strategically important than Sebastopol and just as Russian?

And the solution is?

Only let the passing of a small amount at ones death?
Or to say cap inheritance it a 1 Million / child and dissolve the rest of the estate?




At 70K I think this is middle middle class. I don't think the 10%ers are keeping me poor. I think the lessening of the value of the dollar is.

What a cock tease! Water dissolving, and water removing!

There are far more 'common threads' between Daesh and the Bakers than there are with Daesh and the left.

Did that guy just say the Soviet Union funded nuclear protests world wide in the 80's? When they were dead broke, starving, and the union was dissolving? I'm pretty certain that would be news to my aunt and uncle who have run an anti-nuclear protest group since the early 70's.

John Guanadolo?!? Really? "Foremost terrorism expert"?!? Don't they mean "disgraced and fired ex FBI agent caught having numerous affairs, including with witnesses he was protecting, among numerous other complaints, most notably his rabid anti Muslim stances and actions but including coercion and extortion"?

Not really a surprise from people who believe in talking snakes, tout incestuous communities (Adam, Eve, and their progeny), and who worship a zombie, but still disappointing.

@ChaosEngine
that article was utter shit.

"friend zone" is a term used to shame women?
how can that possibly be considered an even remotely true statement?

she makes a valid point in that women are not binary creatures,and are mutli-faceted,nuanced and complex.well of COURSE they are,but the "friend zone" is from the guys perspective,not a woman's!

do you know why the majority of some men end up in the "friend zone"? or should we just change that term to be more accurate "i am not interested in you because you put all your cards on the table in the first five seconds,so while i think that is sweet,i no longer am curious about you,because i already got you".

you know..the "friend zone",or as chris rock put it "emergency dick,just break glass".

the problem here is that while relationships are a long slog of compromise,negotiation and mutual respect to work towards a common goal.romantic courtships are akin to a game,a playful dance fueled by curiosity,intrigue and of course:lust.

the men who who get relegated to the "friend zone" do not understand this very basic tenant of courtship.they reveal all their cards up front,and while that may be the most honest approach,and one that women have been openly asking for,it ignores that underneath it all,a woman wants romance,mystery and a sense of discovery that will continually peak their interests.

they want to be woo'd,they want courtship and romance.
when a man shows all his cards he takes that way from the woman,and now that she knows she can "have" him.he no longer interests her.

and what the author of this article so callously ignores is that the "friend zone" is not really a friend at all,but a surrogate for a boyfriend.having a bad day?she calls her "friend".feeling bloated and unattractive? has her "friend" come over to make her feel better about herself.needs a date for her company christmas party and doesn't want to go alone? get her "friend" to come along.

so it should not be a surprise that some men find this hurtful and degrading.

but she has a point,the woman owes them nothing.the woman was honest and forthright and it is the man who has put himself in this position.

and let me be clear before i am accused of being a misogynist pig.

some men do the exact same thing,and i am guilty of it myself.

i grew up with three sisters,so i tend to be more aware and sensitive to women's choices,and i respect their space.i have never been one to push myself on any woman.i was never the one to pursue or as this article describes "persistent",because i saw that as a bit "stalky".

so if i was interested in a woman,and that interest was not reciprocated,i shifted to "friend" mode with no issue.to me it was a win-win.ok,so she was not interested in me in that way,but she is super cool,and interesting and now i have a really interesting and intriguing friend.

now here is an interesting thing that happened maybe half of the time.my new friend and i would hang out,go to pubs,clubs,movies and sometimes just make dinner and watch movies.friends right? she was upfront and honest with me that she was not interested in me in that way,and i can respect that.

and then one day she would have her college friend over for dinner (this is a true story btw,one of many).her friend was cute,smart,witty and had a sick sense of humor.yep,i was digging on my friends college friend,and we were flirting up a storm.we were vibing hard,clicking like we knew each other for years.

now what do you think happened?
i bet you can guess.
and you would be right.
my friend,who was honest with me about not being interested,started to get real shitty with me.like offensive shitty and i really did not understand why.it came out of nowhere,and now she was acting like some jealous girlfriend.

so i pull her aside and i am like..what the fuck is wrong with you? you are being an asshole!

you know what she said to me? and i can remember this clear as day "watching my friend flirt with you,and seeing how much she is into you.i began to see you in a different light.i can see how she sees you,and that you are amazing but you are MY steve! not hers!".

and then she tried to kiss me,which was just awkward,because to me? she was in the "friend zone",and had been for over 6 months.i didn't want her that way.the irony here is that she could not handle that,and our friendship dissolved.which just fucking sucks.

this scenario has played out in my life quite a few times.so while anecdotal,i suspect women have had similar experiences.

so the "friend zone' may be considered a woman's thing directed at men,but in reality it is non-gender specific.most likely because woman are pursued more than men,but both men and women can be put in the "friend zone".

so what can we learn from this?
don't be a sap.
have some self respect and do not allow another person to use you for their own well being and sense of self.
if they are not interested? move on.
if they just want to be a friend? then be a friend,but do not expect anything more.if you cannot handle that,then move on.

pining away from a distance in the slim hopes that the focus of your affections will one day change their mind,is just pathetic.

and for fuck sakes,stop blaming that person for your heartache.
you put yourself in that position,and you can pull yourself out.

and the term "friend zone" is not used to shame women,that is just fucking stupid.the "friend zone" is a place that you put yourself in,because of flawed sense of romance,and you allowed yourself to be used for the betterment of another human being.so while you may be hurt and angry,you only have yourself to blame.

respect yourself yo.
/end rant

The teacher herself brings up the controversy in the video.

I don't have a dog in the fight, as all our children are home-schooled. A child is put at a tremendous disadvantage when they are taught that they can not learn anything except through formal schooling. This is the inevitable life lesson all children are taught in schools (public or private).

But for those who do wish to so delegate the sacred honor of teaching one's own child to a third party government agent, she seems like a good spokesperson. I wish her all the best in her endeavors - it is a never ending battle to raise up children apart from their parents. Many parents in the US see this act of delegation as a cultural norm and their fundamental right, so her role is not likely to be dissolved any time soon. She needs all the help she can get.

Is there a signed treaty? No. But the US SoS (James A. Baker III) and the German Foreign Minister (Hans-Dietrich Genscher) are on the record in 1990

Genscher is on video tape stating very clearly: "Wir waren uns einig, dass nicht die Absicht besteht das NATO-Verteidigungsgebiet auszudehnen nach Osten. Das gilt übrigens nicht nur im Bezug auf die DDR, die wir da nicht einverlaiben wollen, sondern das gilt ganz generell."

In English: we are in agreement that there is no intention of expanding the NATO security zone eastwards. This applies not only to the GDR, which we do not intend to incorporate, but in general."

Or how about Baker's words, Feb. 9, 1990, St. Catherine's Hall at the Kremlin:
"If we maintain a presence in a Germany that is a part of NATO, there would be no extension of NATO's jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the East."

And the minutes show Gorbachev as having said:
"Certainly any extension of the zone of NATO is unacceptable."

To which Baker replied:
"I agree."

Again, no treaties, nothing. But some people, myself included, make the argument that unequivocal statements of a nation's highest-ranking diplomat are to be taken seriously, unless overruled by explicit, written agreements.

And from what we've heard from Gorbachev over the years, he took them for their words.

Admittedly, having been replaced by Yelzin who received massive "help" from the US might have made Gorbachev a little grumpy.

What remains at the end is this: NATO was created as a defensive alliance against the Soviets and wasn't dissolved when the Soviet Union collapsed. The highest-ranking diplomats of the primary players at that time (US, FRG) are on the record with promises that NATO wouldn't expand eastwards after the German reunification. Now NATO is closer to Russia's border than ever and the Ukraine had a democratically elected government (they were thugs, but elected) overthrown by forces that had massive support from the US. As a result, fascist militias wearing SS insignia are roaming free in Novorossiya, with government support.

If I were Russia, I'd be pissed.

But I'm in Germany, so now I have a strongman in charge of Russia, a thug who has journalists and opposition in general killed, on the one side, and the Americans who installed a Nazi-sympathising regime in Ukraine on the other.

What's not to like about it.

So when the US establishment then goes on a full-blown bender to position Russia as a scapegoat for now having to live with President Trump, they are playing with fire just to distract from their fucked-up domestic policies.

And we're not even touching on the hypocrisy of the US being outraged when some foreign nation meddles in their internal affairs. Of course Russia tries to influence US politics in their favor. Guess what, so does the UK, France, Germany, NZ, China, Japan, even bloody Luxembourg for all I know. Just like the US exerts influence on German politics (ie German Marshall Fund, Atlantikbrücke, etc), and on politics of every other nation of significance.

Water normally has some dissolved air in it, which is expelled and trapped when it's frozen leading to the white spots in the ice. To make clear ice you need to avoid the dissolved air being trapped in the ice.

One way to do this is to boil the water before freezing, which reduces the amount of dissolved gases.

What I think is happening here is that freezing only part of the water, and relatively slowly, lets the dissolved gases remain in the liquid part of the water.