Jump to content

Identifying Trump rioters


Tuco

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Willfully Horn said:

Could have the sequence 666 in it.

Oldest kid went through a cafeteria line once, and the cashier asked her to please buy an additional item, as the total was $6.66. 

So kid had the Mark of the Beast, and literally could not buy or sell with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Satchel said:

The insurrectionists must be dealt with as if they were foreign terrorists who attacked the US Capitol

This. That Copeland guy needs to serve the maximum sentence. Fuck his feelings. And if he truly is mentally ill, lock his sorry ass up in a secure facility. I have zero sympathy for the likes of him. Just because you have PTSD is not a license to be a complete piece of shit and try to overthrow the government. Fuck him. 

Edited by JimmyJames
  • Hook 'Em 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Willfully Horn said:

Pad of butter covered that right up.

About 4 banks ago I had a debit card whose verification code was 666. It got hacked. Probably by the Devil. Or maybe it was just some dude who tried to use it at a casino in Iowa.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Beau Vine said:

“So that everyone knows I go to see the FBI and a judge tomorrow,” Copeland wrote in an April 28 Facebook post, which was also read during his hearing. “I guess peacefully protesting at the Capitol is now illegal and they are trying to hunt us all down to try and teach us a lesson. Unfortunately, only one option remains when we return. We bring guns and take the Capitol building without intention of being peaceful. This ends with the government bombing their own people. I had hopes it wouldn’t. But here we are.”

Jason Bateman Cotton GIF

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RDCanecutter said:

Boy's crazy like a fox. FBI set him to doing this, writing insane screeds to draw out fellow terrorists. For every one he helps them snag, he gets a month off his sentence and a $10 Applebees gift card.

I think Chili's is what these people were missing the most during the pandemic lockdowns.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

A Utah man charged with attacking officers at the Jan. 6 riots at the U.S. Capitol will be evaluated for mental competency after he swore and screamed during a court hearing Thursday.

Landon Kenneth Copeland, 33, is accused of shoving officers and pushing a fence at them on the grounds of the Capitol as part of a group of people trying to breach police lines. The FBI says they matched photos of Copeland to videos of the riot.

Copeland appeared virtually in a courtroom in Washington, D.C., on Thursday.

He screamed that the government is killing people and said it is taking 70% of his income through taxes, prompting United States Magistrate Judge Robin Meriweather to have him muted. Copeland also hung up at least two times during the hearing.

The Daily Beast reported that Copeland invited his friends to join the hearing earlier in the day. Meriweather kicked one of them off for using an inappropriate screen name, according to The Daily Beast. He also told a court clerk she is evil.

Copeland caused a ruckus in other hearings as well, according to The Daily Beast. He apparently tried to object when a defense attorney for another riot suspect, who appeared in court before Copeland, said his client had “Foxitus” from watching Fox News.

Copeland is an Iraq war veteran who was shot and wounded, according to one of his lawyers. She said he has been experiencing severe PTSD.

Meriweather ordered a mental competency evaluation for Copeland. Competency evaluations are used to see if a defendant is mentally well enough to stand trial.

A prosecutor suggested the outburst might have been driven in part by anger because the government says it found Facebook posts of Copeland’s where he said people should bring guns to the capitol next time, since they are being prosecuted for peaceful protests.

Release conditions for Copeland will likely be addressed at his next hearing on May 19.

https://www.sltrib.com/news/2021/05/06/utah-man-charged-capital/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Well Jenna, we can’t have affordable health care because ignorant jackasses such as yourself whine that it is socialism.  And apparently that’s real bad.  Like really, really bad.

I had already tweeted that same thing at her as well.  These people are SOOOOOOOO fucking ignorant.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She's such an idiot.  I think at one time, a lot of doctors did score financially when treatments like chemo were ordered because they may have owned or partially owned the chemo facility, or imaging lab, or etc. 

But I don't think that's legal anymore for the most part, and most chemo clinics are in hospitals, as far as I know.  So the oncologist doesn't make anything.  The cost is all labor, drugs, and facility. But even the most corrupt doc doesn't prescribe chemo for shits n grins.  It ain't a fistfull of opioids.

Should probably ask her how, exactly, an oncologist makes money by prescribing chemo.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Jenna is back on Twitter.  And while I feel bad that her mom has cancer (fuck cancer), she is still an absolute moron who lives in an alternate reality.  Thinking oncologists make their money prescribing chemo for cancer patients.  Her lack of understanding of anything in the real world is completely astonishing to me.

 

 

Jenna can celebrate her patriotism and freedom by doing what the leader of her cult would have her do: thoughts and prayers for her parent and if you can't pay for treatment, then tough luck. Blaming the doctor for outlining treatment options is GOP deflection at its finest. Does she think paying for medical advice is a waste of time? Probably. She thinks she can just use WebMD, make an appointment and tell the doctor what to prescribe. Where was she when our whole family was reeling from cancer and trying to stop the GOP from taking away pre-existing conditions which meant I could never change jobs? Or when my friend was finally able to get insurance thanks to the ACA? I'm sorry her mother is suffering from cancer; it is awful and it sucks, but Jenna is so wrong as she casts about attempting to find whom to blame.

@PenelopeWitherspoonhit the nail on the head in that Jenna's worldview encompasses only those who are afflicted with whatever situation she is in at any given time, i.e. 'no mercy, no mercy for those racial justice protesters.' *Jenna gets arrested for protesting/trespassing* 'Where's the mercy? Where's the mercy?"

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

She’s not wrong about this.  
 

Medicare pays average sales price plus 6% for chemotherapy drugs.  Large oncology practices with buying power negotiate lower than average prices from distributors while smaller practices typically pay more but everyone receives the same reimbursement.  So, yes, oncologists do make money on chemotherapy and, frankly, it has been a obstacle (among others) to the uptake of personalized medicine where genomic testing may indicate a more effective treatment.  
 

In fact, in the early 2000s the Medicare reimbursement changed from average wholesale price plus 15% to average sales price plus 6% which significantly narrowed the margin made on drugs. As a result, the total amount of chemotherapy prescribed increased significantly.  I wish it wasn’t true but like everywhere cost plus payment tends to yield more cost to generate more payments.  In this case, the narrowing of margin produced more cost as physicians seemed to solve back for their otherwise lost income.  
 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, brown water said:

She’s not wrong about this.  

As a result, the total amount of chemotherapy prescribed increased significantly.  I wish it wasn’t true but like everywhere cost plus payment tends to yield more cost to generate more payments.  In this case, the narrowing of margin produced more cost as physicians seemed to solve back for their otherwise lost income.  
 

Link for italicized, please. Thank you in advance.

Edited by washparkhorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

She's such an idiot.  I think at one time, a lot of doctors did score financially when treatments like chemo were ordered because they may have owned or partially owned the chemo facility, or imaging lab, or etc. 

But I don't think that's legal anymore for the most part, and most chemo clinics are in hospitals, as far as I know.  So the oncologist doesn't make anything.  The cost is all labor, drugs, and facility. But even the most corrupt doc doesn't prescribe chemo for shits n grins.  It ain't a fistfull of opioids.

Should probably ask her how, exactly, an oncologist makes money by prescribing chemo.

Much of the migration from clinics to hospitals happened for reasons similar to my prior post.  Many hospitals qualified for even lower drug prices under a federal rule (340b) that was intended to subsidize hospitals that cared for underserved communities. Under 340b the significant drug discount created a windfall profit that was used to hire the oncologists out of private practice often for well more than they were currently earning.  The point remains, the system puts in conflict patient outcomes, total cost to the system and economic incentives to financially rational actors. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Link for italicized, please. Thank you in advance.

I’ll try to run it down from an open source. I was a senior executive at US Oncology when it was acquired by McKesson (drug distributor) in 2010.  The usage data relative to reimbursement model change was part of an internal public policy presentation.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, brown water said:

Much of the migration from clinics to hospitals happened for reasons similar to my prior post.  Many hospitals qualified for even lower drug prices under a federal rule (340b) that was intended to subsidize hospitals that cared for underserved communities. Under 340b the significant drug discount created a windfall profit that was used to hire the oncologists out of private practice often for well more than they were currently earning.  The point remains, the system puts in conflict patient outcomes, total cost to the system and economic incentives to financially rational actors. 

Thanks for the info.  Every little niche has some little racket going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, brown water said:

I’ll try to run it down from an open source. I was a senior executive at US Oncology when it was acquired by McKesson (drug distributor) in 2010.  The usage data relative to reimbursement model change was part of an internal public policy presentation.  

At your leisure, of course, if you able. And thank you. I would like to track the data as a piece of the puzzle.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, brown water said:

I’ll try to run it down from an open source. I was a senior executive at US Oncology when it was acquired by McKesson (drug distributor) in 2010.  The usage data relative to reimbursement model change was part of an internal public policy presentation.  

Uh, no thanks.  We are here for eExperts, not actual experts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^^^^

Quote

“If defendant truly believes that the only reason he participated in an assault on the U.S. Capitol was to comply with President Trump’s orders, this shows defendant's inability (or refusal) to exercise his independent judgment and conform his behavior to the law,” US District Judge Royce Lamberth wrote in a March 8 decision denying Chansley’s request to go home. “These are not the qualities of a person who can be trusted on conditional release.”

Old School Yes GIF

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, washparkhorn said:

At your leisure, of course, if you able. And thank you. I would like to track the data as a piece of the puzzle.

Found this. Not sure how credible the source but it’s consistent with the discussion I mentioned. 
 

https://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2014/08/oncologist-pay-chemotherapy-buy-bill-needs-stop.html

Passage of new legislation: A step in the right direction?

Congress attempted to fix the problem with passage of the Medicare Modernization Act (MMA) in 2003.

The new law did not take away physician’s ability to buy chemotherapy drugs, administer them in-office or bill for them. However, it did alter the reimbursement structure.

To bridge the gap between the price physicians pay for drugs and the pay they collect, the MMA developed a reimbursement model based on average sales price (ASP), plus a 6 percent markup and administrative fee.

As part of this legislation, manufacturers are required to report a drug’s ASP to the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) quarterly to substantiate reimbursements.

This change did not address the problem.

Oncologists maintained their income by altering their practice patterns.

As the reimbursement for established medications decreased, oncologists have chosen to use progressively more expensive chemotherapy drugs with increased frequency of treatment. That’s because under the fee-for-service reimbursement model, each new treatment equals another payment.

It’s difficult, if not impossible, to prove this shift is directly motivated by personal financial gain. But it’s also hard to deny the financial gain that resulted.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

I think Chili's is what these people were missing the most during the pandemic lockdowns.

An idiot I hate-follow spent the very first day of lifted restrictions way back almost a year ago, going to Chili's and posting pics with defiant captions, like "YEAH IDOIT DUMMMYCRAPS DONT YOU WISH YOU WERE ME RIGHT NOW."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

I had already tweeted that same thing at her as well.  These people are SOOOOOOOO fucking ignorant.  

She also set up a new facebook account.  Will screenshot when I get a chance.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

An idiot I hate-follow spent the very first day of lifted restrictions way back almost a year ago, going to Chili's and posting pics with defiant captions, like "YEAH IDOIT DUMMMYCRAPS DONT YOU WISH YOU WERE ME RIGHT NOW."

I honestly cannot remember the last time I went to or had food from a Chilis or an Applebees.  Probably 2012.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

An idiot I hate-follow spent the very first day of lifted restrictions way back almost a year ago, going to Chili's and posting pics with defiant captions, like "YEAH IDOIT DUMMMYCRAPS DONT YOU WISH YOU WERE ME RIGHT NOW."

It was probably better than the slimy carrot meal from Bob's one of the DT hooligans tried to brag about when restrictions were lifted here.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

I honestly cannot remember the last time I went to or had food from a Chilis or an Applebees.  Probably 2012.

Applebee's is for sitting at the bar, drinking a gigantic beer, and talking with a true cross-section of society, at least, that section that drinks gigantic beers in Applebee's.

The last time I was in Chili's (probably more than a decade), they had this damn sticky touchscreen on the table going bloop-bloop and I was supposed to interact with it. IIRC we got up, moved to the bar, and ordered gigantic beers.

For quasi-alternate-Earth flair dining, you want to find one of the rapidly-disappearing Garfields restaurants. It has a certain charm, as a semi-Applebee's for franchise owners who maybe have a prison record way back when or something.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RDCanecutter said:

Applebee's is for sitting at the bar, drinking a gigantic beer, and talking with a true cross-section of society, at least, that section that drinks gigantic beers in Applebee's.

The last time I was in Chili's (probably more than a decade), they had this damn sticky touchscreen on the table going bloop-bloop and I was supposed to interact with it. IIRC we got up, moved to the bar, and ordered gigantic beers.

For quasi-alternate-Earth flair dining, you want to find one of the rapidly-disappearing Garfields restaurants. It has a certain charm, as a semi-Applebee's for franchise owners who maybe have a prison record way back when or something.

A Garfield's in exurban Alabama would be a good place to stash a capo in the witness program.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suggest Jenna’s tweet sprung from her reaction to the bill while having no health insurance. I know it’s not her bill, but the tweet is in reaction to it.

No way she bought into ACA. Maybe her realty gave her insurance options, but I bet she passed. PM Yaba. It fits with the MAGA business owners I know (a very small sample.) Outrages are so plentiful these days, something has to kick one out of orbit.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/6/2021 at 8:50 PM, washparkhorn said:

Crossfit Cult - with all the assorted maladies that accompany narcissism. 

This reminds me of those urban legends about the burglar who was injured breaking into someone's house so the sued the homeowner.  Who was really to blame?  The Democrats for their crime loving ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...