ROTFLMFAHS!!!
Trump’s team won’t cooperate with their own special master by defending Trump, saying which documents they claim Trump declassified, because they’re saving that for trial….so his defense team is demanding he be indicted for espionage!?!

Of course, since there is no evidence he declassified these documents anywhere, and even the president can’t declassify documents without going through the declassification process and leaving a record they were declassified, this means that no matter what lies Trump spouts and who believes them, he’s toast, he committed treason, espionage, and theft of government documents. Caught red handed with nuclear secrets in his desk that he swore under oath to the FBI he didn’t have.

Also, Trump was indicted in New York today. His children are included in the lawsuits that seek over $250 million and to remove all Trumps from any leadership or controlling positions in any companies in New York State and bar them from any real estate purchases for 5 years.
More to come, because criminal complaints surrounding his “staggering” bank and tax and wire frauds have been forwarded by the NYAG to the IRS.

I wonder if his $3 million criminal defense lawyer has returned to Venezuela with his retainer yet, you know he’s going to before the feds try to recoup those ill gotten funds too.

BTW- the US Senate unanimously condemned Trump today for his public attacks against the FBI and for spurring threats of violence and death against the FBI, it’s agents, and their families including young children by his cultists who have followed through by trying to murder FBI agents and their families up to and including trying to plant dirty bombs at FBI buildings. Not sure why the media didn’t cover that one whit, but they didn’t. So much for the liberal media doing all they can to hurt Trump, right? This time they covered for him 100%.

Hilariously, Trump’s spokesperson came out today whining and complaining that the Biden whitehouse isn’t full of “leakers” like Trump’s was. How unfair that Biden hired trustworthy people and Trump hired sycophants only interested in their own personal gains.

Also came out today that Trump is pissed DeSantis “stole” his idea of shipping immigrants to blue states and Trump wants credit, but at least he didn’t go as far as Trump planned by hand selecting the worst violent criminal migrants to ship to “blue states and cities”, not deport, not incarcerate, but traffic them deep into the US.
Murder, rape, debauchery, death and destruction….the actual Trump plan.

Your Trump descriptor of the day- perfidious- deceitful and untrustworthy. Never has one word described Trump better.

I love it when a plan comes together. 😂

PS- because I know you’re confused, here’s what a real leader looks like. Notice he barely glances at his notes the entire speech because he actually knows what he’s talking about, unlike another president that could barely read a speech and never once read one 1/10 as coherent and thoughtful as Biden gives without assistance. So much for that theory that Biden’s mind is gone, sorry friendo, it’s a steel trap.

https://videosift.com/video/Biden-UN-Address-Russia-Climate-Change-and-Food-Shortages

Edit: Ruh Roe…New York just revised its sexual assault laws to essentially remove statutes of limitations, meaning Eugene Carol, the woman he defamed by calling her rape claims lies and is currently sueing him for deffamation can now sue for rape, and she indicated she intends to file Nov 24, the first day the law is in effect. A new felony case for Trump every day. This is you guy? This is you pick? 😂

His poor overworked emotional support aides, hired to give baby snowflake Trump daily ego stroking and kudos for nothing by surfing the web to find any positive tweets or troths about him.

Terrible, scary, but to be fair this happens in America too. Overworked, undertrained staff make mistakes….sometimes deadly mistakes. At least the people involved are admitting it, that’s better than many cases I’ve heard of.

Refusing a vaccine should be like smoking, being a heroin addict, or not wearing your seatbelt, a legal reason for insurance companies to deny coverage.

I heard some major multinational corporations are charging their employees who aren't vaccinated $200+ a month extra for medical benefits. A good start, but it should be more if not just a complete forfeiture.

In Florida doctors did a walkout this morning to protest the huge numbers of unvaccinated morons needing hospitalization, and how they've overwhelmed an already long term overworked and understaffed industry to the breaking point.

Being vulnerable is a choice, one with very expensive consequences. Those making the choice should pay their own bills...they're invariably the same people that scream about taking personal responsibility when it comes to others. 100% of hospitalization and deaths in the last months in my county have been unvaccinated people, and they're unable to treat anyone else because they're over capacity now.

It's FDA approved, it should be mandatory.

Imo, anti vaxers should be given fournier's gangrene in icu, then told there's no one available to treat it.

What on earth are you talking about?
Do you believe the government dictates your vows? What "rules"? You just cannot grasp the concept of no fault divorce or prenuptial, can you?

I guess you never planned on kids or shared assets. If you do, not having a marriage means you almost certainly will pay for them for 18+ years but won't have many rights to be in their lives, and may lose your rights to any assets if she grabs first. Uncle Sam is in your relationship, married or not....without a marriage contract, he makes ALL the rules and you have no say.

My brother paid well over a hundred thousand dollars for his divorce in Texas that in my state would have cost under $10K and you congratulate him? You are one strange person.

Again, your perception, not based in fact since the 60's. You assume women take off time to raise the kids and take care of parents and assume fathers don't take paternity leave or have obligations outside work. How 50's. You start from a false position that men work both harder and better, but you have no data to back that up. It certainly hasn't been my experience, I've seen women in the workplace working harder and longer for less pay, sacrificing just like their male counterparts if not more, putting off having families until it's too late while men can have kids long after normal retirement age, putting themselves in dangerous situations where those with power over them have opportunities to abuse that power and abuse those women in ways that rarely happen to men. These aren't exceptions, they're the norm.

Um...so since you admit many women outearn men and the trend reinforces that, meaning soon women in most catagories will out earn men and have more to lose, you admit you're wrong in your position now, right? Of course not, I expect you will still start from a point that hasn't been correct since the era and sexual revolution, early 70's at latest.

No, many of the studies I've seen compared people in the same exact positions in the same industries, even same companies, and women consistently get paid less for the exact same job and hours, and women rarely work less today, and just as often out work their male counterparts knowing they are often token hires not valued by the bosses so have less job security. If I recall correctly, 80% of job losses due to Covid were women, and the men are getting rehired faster. I think you are thinking of some studies from the 80's that made those assumptions and accusations. Comparing apples to apples, women still get shortchanged and as often as not overworked.

Bullshit. You said you would immediately dismiss any woman who has...
"Long dating history? Too much risk
Tends to have short relationships? Too much risk
Likes attention? Too much risk
Single mother (non-widow)? Too much risk
Any mental issues (depression, bipolar, narcissist, anxiety, etc)? Too much risk
Older (why you still single...)? Too much risk
Likes to party? Too much risk
Drinks? Too much risk"

And again, prenuptial. Do you not know what they are? Specify what you expect and agree, and you walk with exactly what you agreed to, no government rules or split involved. Geez. You speak as if you had never heard of them.

Most divorces may be initiated by the woman (if that's true, I expect it's just another assumption) because their husbands are more likely to break their vows first, but are not willing to pay to end the marriage, including penalties for breaking the marriage contract, and we're too dumb to get a prenuptial (or got one that spells out harsh penalties for cheating). Yes, I am assuming men cheat on their spouses more often than the reverse, because men are wired that way.

You are not more likely than not to face a divorce, because it's unlikely any woman meeting your criteria would give you a second thought, and you need to get married to get divorced.

I bet if you show your significant other this thread your 20 year relationship will be in big trouble, or at best enter a long dry dark spell. Women don't like men that believe wholeheartedly that all women are just lessers, leeches that take more than they deserve or even could give back and destroy you whenever they think it serves them. It's probably a good thing you aren't married.

Laws and family court aren't as you describe. Maybe when you enter the 21st century you'll recognize that. The rules of your marriage can be whatever you agree to, including the specifics of the split if it ends.

It's a sad thing you can't grasp that a codified, delineated, agreed to partnership is almost always better, more fulfilling, and has many benefits cohabitation lacks.....almost always unless one or both of you are total douchebags.

Odd, there are correct answers in other countries that are doing exponentially better that America.
Trump has no correct answer. FTFT

If it's a state issue, why are Trump and Devos trying to force them to open no matter what states say?

By no one you mean Trump. Fauchi knew, CDC officials knew, doctors knew, basically anyone with an average IQ knew. Only nobodies DIDN'T know, and you all are willfully ignorant, not honestly questioning professionals but obstinately backing an ignorant moron's dangerous and inconsistent "plan".

Dual shifts?! Are you fucking kidding? Your plan is make overworked underpaid teachers work twice as long, doubling their exposure and workload?! They'll walk week one.

Open to varying work south? Are you suggesting we outsource teaching to Mexicans? What?

Fuck you asshole, you said you work from home less than two weeks ago, or did you forget? Fucking liar.


Again, your plan is to let up to >5% of Americans die and 10% be permanently disabled....not to mention the insane medical costs, most not covered by insurance....all to avoid social distancing.

Your anti American sentiment is showing, your suggestions amount to 15 million dead Americans and 30 million more disabled is way better than wearing a mask and distancing. Only America's enemies would consider such a thing....comrade.

Any chance this guy is underpaid or overworked?

A better title might be 'cops bend over and lube up for Harris feed lot owners'. They didn't come out for the drone, they came out in force because the feed lot owners/managers asked them to....over nothing....at least twice.
Fresno police better not EVER claim they are overworked or that there are too few police. If they can come out in such numbers twice for possible trespass in the countryside on public land, they either have way too many officers there with nothing to do, or they are so incompetent that they ignored actual crimes to cow tow to a major local employer. Either case should lead to firings.

overworked into a stupor Where was this in the story?

I'm not here to bitch at you I just don't get the argument you make.

You then implied that these workers have to work 2 to 3 jobs ( hence stupor) just to make ends meet because those at the top are making too much.

What about the guy ( gal) at the top making fat stacks. I agree it does rub me wrong but still how does it directly hurt the minimum wage employee?


If the employee has has / develops skills he makes more. According to you logic this would be like robbing his fellow workmates, stealing money that can go towards them.

If you started you own company struggled to make ends meet and slowly built up a company should you not receive the fruits of you labor?

When you have an entry position what should you pay? Dishwasher should not be making 30K /yr ( 15$/hr). This is what you are generally saying.

My Boss had a 5 Million bonus and salary hike to near 4 million. Yes this pisses me off but it does not correlate to what I make.
Even if you took that and spread it across all employees ( 300k) it would only be about 30 bucks each.


Would you rather just see a cap of salaries to 1 Million?

They what if you suddenly became the next Gates or Jobs would you want to be paid what you are worth?

If you are going to go to 15$/hr why not more? Some could argue that this is too low? What about the company that made all salaries 70K the other year? 15$/hr seems pretty stingy.

I think perhaps your reading comprehension is lacking, not my logic.
I guess you missed the part where I mentioned the overworked employees being worked into a stupor...or didn't understand that it's because they have to work 2 or 3 full time jobs to afford both food and shelter that they are overworked zombies, unable to think well enough to stop the other higher ranking employees from instructing them to do stupid things. Increase the base pay so full time employees can afford food and shelter in the area they work in (or near) and you increase base competence because they no longer have to work 120 hour work weeks to survive.

AHHHH, but those at the top HAVE had their 'wages' go up far more than inflation, but not those at the bottom who would be making about $22 an hour if minimum wages were tied to inflation since their start.
A rising tide lifts all ships, OK, except for those already artificially 'lifted' WAY above the tide line. If all 'ships' floated on the tide, that saying would mean something. They don't.
OK, I'll go there, lets say everyone deserves to make >3 times what they used to make when the national minimum wage was started. That means a HUGE pay cut for those at the top, probably a 90%+ pay cut in most cases. Do that, and there's no problem at all affording the cost of paying the bottom 50% a living wage, which means anyone working full time is paid above the poverty line, no exceptions.
Yes, doing that will raise prices, which will require raising wages, which will raise prices...IF the top don't stop taking an obscenely unfair slice of the pie. If THEY pay themselves in the same manner they pay employees, there's no problem. They won't though.

Um....most likely the manager took the call, and directed the employees to smash the windows...and most managers already make over $15 an hour. Perhaps if they paid $15 an hour to everyone, they could hire someone who's not overworked into a stupor or with common sense enough to stop the other idiots from following anonymous, phoned in directions without question.

Much like crack, it's an easy way to keep US prisons full of poor black folk who rely on overworked public defenders after getting busted holding...

And while it's illegal, various law enforcement agencies get to inflate their budgets to deal with the war on drugs.

All comes down to money.

I think in the US, some neighborhoods are considered "safe", and others not. It's probably driven by statistics and reports of lost/stolen packages by customers.
As for being home and the package still being at the door, some packages don't require a signature of receipt or person-to-person delivery, it could have been outgoing mail, or they were in the back when the postman rang. The most likely reason is that most delivery people are too lazy/busy/overworked that they will just assume you're not home because (statistically) most people aren't during the day, they'll dutifully ring the doorbell, drop the package, and hoof it back to their vehicle to get to the next address as fast as possible.

Not entirely their fault. I've seen those poor dudes out running around on duty at 9pm at night now.

There's not much to it I'm afraid.

Plenty of successful treatments are available. It's simply a matter of funding.

From my experiences in Australia, both close and friends who work in mental health. They're overworked, the pay sucks, there's no budget to hire more staff and the rooms are crowded.

There has been multiple instances when a patient who needs to be admitted, will be left in a bed in emergency and ferried about as needed, while a bed in the mental health ward frees up.

This is the sort of funding mental health workers are dealing with.

If your patient is already at home and their low risk, you'll be told to just try to keep them at home and manageable for as long as possible. You're on waiting list, so just hope nothing happens in the mean time during their relapse.

What people fail to understand, is if all the workers are so stressed out to the point of trying to shuffle just getting some one a place to sleep. How in the hell do they have time to do any sort of actual therapy?

They get criticised for just pushing drugs and pumping people out after 2-3wks and yet no one appreciates that they must. Because they just got a new patient that is severely ill and a person with mild schizophrenia is going to be sent along on their merry way, regardless if they needed another month or two to fully stabilise. They're doing ok and they can just revolve back around when the meds wear off, perhaps they'll have another room then.

It's sad but it's reality and it's not their fault. You can point fingers and demand better this and that and this. Or you can realise just the mere fact that these people have these terribly shitty jobs means they care a whole lot more fucks than you or I ever have or will.

They need more money, simple.

What part of "do not have a choice" do I not understand? How about the subject of the 'choice' you are denied. Now that you have clarified that you don't have a choice about how the electric company pays you, or how solar works, I'll reiterate, you still DO have a choice about how to use the power you generate. Making better use of that choice would serve you well, but you seem intent on claiming it's all out of your control (and that you're forced 'at gunpoint' to sell all your production cheap and buy it back expensive rather than find a way to use it directly). I'm intent on making the best use of the choices available to me (and I bet to you) in order to make intelligent choices about my energy, choices that have saved me thousands to date, and should save me tens of thousands in the long run, and save uncounted tons of CO2 from being produced. You have instead invested in a system that now serves your needs terribly, and now want to tell others how solar is not economically viable or green, both of which are absolutely backwards from my experience and research.

You were not kidnapped, you walked into that guys home and put his gun to your own head. I wonder if you've even investigated 'net metering' in your area, it could make your system work for even you.

OK, so energy cost VS energy produced is ALL you want to compare. Then you MUST include all energy costs to be reasonable, including the energy cost of cleanup of coal waste failures (that right there already totally tips any scale against coal, it can't come close to making the energy that cleanup takes), the energy used in upkeep of coal waste storage for centuries, the energy costs of habitat destruction/reconstruction by coal mining itself, the mining itself, transportation of the coal, power plant operation (construction, upgrading, and maintenance), and the cost of mitigating the 20-40 times the amount of CO2 pollution, health issues, loss of sunlight (solar dimming is real), etc. The list of energy costs goes on and on for coal, while the list for the energy cost of solar panel production and use in some cases is damn near zero (where it's made with leftover chip wafers in solar powered factories it barely takes any extra energy at all, but I do understand that most aren't made that way now).

Double return VS coal, because you get twice as many KWH per dollar with solar PV, or better.

Again with the 'spend more energy to produce one KWH of PV than with coal', show me some data. Everything I can find shows you're 100% wrong if you look at the lifespan of panels which become energy neutral in well under 3 years on average (some much sooner) and last 20-30 years, while coal continues to need more energy to produce more (filthy) energy. Perhaps in the extremely short term you have a point about cost/production, but any time period over 3 years puts PV ahead of coal in energy costs/energy produced, and in their 20-30 year lifetime they do much better.

Coal made power is NOT cheaper than solar made power. If it was, I would not save money with a solar system. I have already saved money with solar VS buying the same amount of coal produced power, therefore solar PV is cheaper than coal. Period. If it wasn't, our electric companies would not be 'farming solar' here as fast as possible, they would be building more coal plants.

Some people support coal because they have been misinformed about alternatives. That's why I have continued our discussion here, because your information is wrong based on my personal experience and research, and I fear you might convince someone to not even look into solar enough to see how wrong you are, how much money they could save (if they do it properly), and how much pollution they could not create.

Um...I DO grow my own vegetables in my backyard too. It's cheaper, and I get far better produce with zero carbon footprint. Another statement you've made that I take personal exception with. It's not a HUGE effort, but is some effort, but the returns are great and totally worth it. I think many people stopped subsistence farming because they're lazy, overworked, and/or live without any place to farm. I've been doing it since I was 12 and ate my first self grown corn, and I've never had reason to question that decision. I've read about people spending $50 to grow $5 in tomatoes...I'm not one of them. I spend $50 on manure to grow >$1000 in produce yearly, and have enough to give >1/2 of it away.

Not a single one of your examples are 'more viable' than PV in every situation, and private owned home solar doesn't take public dollars away from public power projects. I looked into wind-it's way more expensive for the same generation power along with numerous other issues, nuke-also far more expensive with other long term major issues, solar thermal-hardly working as hoped yet in the few, hyper expensive plants in existence, wave-not yet but fingers crossed, hydro-DISTEROUS for the environment and short lived. (You left out geothermal, which is excellent where it's possible.)
Also, most of your examples are not viable for residential use (what we're talking about here), as you said are more expensive (so are bad economic choices), and/or have other serious ecological issues that PV does not.

Money is the only reason to stick with coal or nuclear, and that's only because the companies that use it get away with not paying for most of the true long term costs, and even with that it's now FAR more expensive to buy that coal/nuke power than it is to make your own with PV, leaving NO real reason to stick with coal or nuclear....so what are you talking about?