Jump to content

TwiceHorn

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    34486
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by TwiceHorn

  1. 5 hours ago, Tylerocks said:

    I can't remember a coach that is as universally hated than this chick.

     

     

    Who do y'all think is the male equivalent to her in basketball or football?

    Bob Knight was a huge asshole, but still kind of likable for whatever reason.

    Coach K?  

    I know Scott Drew is persona non grata here, but do random CBB fans hate him?  I doubt it.

    Knight and K are or were intense. Knight let his intensity get the better of him on several occasions. 

    But they had the capability, demonstrated, to be good sports to their opponents and the press although both could be quite surly. 

    Mulkey never lets up as far as I can tell. 

    • Hook 'Em 2
  2. On 3/13/2024 at 2:55 PM, FirstTimeCaller said:

    Anyone else never update apps on their phone? If I have something that is glitchy, I'm going to delete it, not update it.

    If it works, I don't want to update and find that it's been "updated" with a user experience that now sucks. Used to use a podcast app that I liked. Updated it and it started showing ads all the time. Nooooope.

    Hahaha yeah, long ago, I looked forward to OS updates on devices and app updates. Now they come with a sense of dread. 

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Like 1
  3. 39 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

    I don’t know anything about her because any minute spent on non-Texas women’s basketball sucks the life force out of me. Why is she supposedly such a pos?

    Her sportsmanship, or complete lack of it, is astounding and virtually unparalleled in the world of sports. 

    She never has a good word for an opposing coach or player. She's a sore loser and doesn't hide it. 

    She’s arrogant and rude to opponents, officials, the press, and everyone in sight and defends the indefensiible from her players, who are generally dirty. 

    • Hook 'Em 7
  4. 8 minutes ago, Satchel said:

    She’s a butter biscuit grifter without peer.

    This term butter biscuit is new to me, can you explain a bit of the etymology? 

    • Hook 'Em 1
  5. 3 minutes ago, Superhero said:

    How many institutional investors do you think (or know) this and will buy these shares? Hopefully they are competent and stay away, but from what I’ve read, it seems like institutional investors are ready to jump in.

    Regardless of whether they are institutional or retail investors, in the end as long as it’s the MAGAt that get hurt, I don’t give a shit. 
     

    It’s collateral, but he’s gonna lose it all anyway. 

    Stock makes shitty collateral, see, eg, margin loans. Stock itself is not going to help Trump very much as its collateral value is less than half its current trade value if that. 

  6. Sort of a general question. Do you guys make use of "skills areas"? 

    There are several trails around town with various types of skills areas. I could use more skillz, but find them kind of boring and I guess I am not really sure what to do with them. I am not particularly interested learning to jump at my age, so those hold little interest. 

    Also, any workout aspect (at least half of why I do this) gets repetitive, like running laps or doing sprints. 

    There's a pump track at Katie Jackson that I think provides useful skills and is a workout, but it's in the midst of jumps and not well marked or delineated, so you start to get pumping and boom find yourself about to hit a gap jump. 

    One thing I would like to do is get more comfortable with drops, but afaik, none of these skills areas have any sort of progression on drops. 

  7. 2 hours ago, FirstTimeCaller said:


    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-poised-land-3-5bn-145441121.html

    On Friday, shareholders in Digital World Acquisition Corp, a listed cash shell, voted to approve a merger with Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG), the company behind Mr Trump’s social network Truth Social.

    It means TMTG will join the Nasdaq exchange as early as next week. Mr Trump will own a majority of the combined company with a stake worth around $3.5bn.

    TMTG lost $49m in the first nine months of 2023, while revenue rose from $237,000 in the first nine months of 2022 to $3.4m.


    I'm sorry, how does a stake in a company that lost $49 million and only took in $3.4 million equate to $3.5 billion? 

    Well, if serious, this DWAC thing has a share value, based on pure speculation, that is mostly independent of TMTG except to the extent the speculation is based on acquiring TMTG. So like all speculation is stupid af. 

    Then DWAC acquires TMTG and its share price becomes TMTGs share price along with it its shares. 

    Then the reality of a shit acquisition target hits and the share price goes into the toilet. Meanwhile, the shares should be locked up from insider trading for six months while they assume what should be a realistic value,ie dogshit. 

  8. 1 hour ago, C-Man said:

    Thanks -- I saw somebody else mention "double jeopardy" which you acknowledged. I guess what I'm asking is that if the case is dismissed due to some colossal fuckup by Cannon herself, could he be re-charged and the process starts all over again? In other words, is she simply trying to kill a power play or could she completely fuck up the entire game? Maybe she's the one playing chess, not checkers. LOL

    Well, in the scenario I envision, the government dismisses voluntarily to avoid going to trial on wrong jury instructions.  The government doesn't have unfettered discretion to do that, it needs court permission.  And, in some cases, the dismissal might be with prejudice (meaning can't be re-indicted).  So this would be a last ditch strategery.  Classically, "jeopardy" does not attach until the jury is sworn, meaning up until then, usually, any dismissal can be re-indicted.

    There's all kinds of dismissal types and outcomes, mistrials, voluntary, prosecutor misconduct, blah blah blah.  

    The other possibility in the event of terrible instructions is a mandamus appeal, which is a kind of rare deal that I'm not even sure is available.

    Bad jury instructions, usually in a subtle way, are common in civil cases and a fruitful area for appeal.  When you get stuck with shitty ones and you're the government in a criminal case, I'm not sure what you do.

  9. 32 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

    lofl.

    i have a ton to say on this stupidity but I'll have to wait until after work. 

    but this sounds a lot like "some people are saying that these people falling down and shaking are actually sick! everyone knows it's demons and if they pray harder and ignore their disease it'll go away."

    She seems to use a lot of anecdotes and stereotypes of dubious validity to prove her points, or actually generate outrage.  Like her generalization about how US troops are treated for PTSD.

    Some of her points are probably valid to a degree, though.  There is a lot of overindulgent parenting going on, but I don't think it is in any way exclusively a librul phenomenon or centered around polarizing ideas like gender identity or whether kids are getting good therapy.

  10. Just now, dcbc said:

    Let the first Surly Lawyer who hasn't had to deal with a high level of trial court fuckery during his/her career step forward.  I've spent my career observing the good, the bad, and the ugly, and Cannon's decision-making hasn't approached a level of weirdness or what-the-fuck that I've seen on the ugly end of the spectrum when considered in a vacuum.  The difference is that this case is important for our country and I'd like to think we deserve way better (some might argue we are getting what we deserve).  But as someone pointed out, there is a reason for judicial review.  We are in an awful hurry here, and the anxiety we who are concerned citizens feel is real.  Her fuck-ups are magnified.  Hopefully, they will be corrected, either by her or someone above her pay-grade.  But those of us in the business have seen it all.  If the stakes weren't so damned high, it would be a bit more laughable.

    That is some valuable perspective, right there.

  11. 4 minutes ago, dcbc said:

     

    I'd be in over my head too.  But in that circumstance, I'd fall back on "no reason to reinvent the wheel" and K.I.S.S.

     

    And, at least in my realm, I'd be willing to posit that appellate experience does not wholly prepare someone to excel in a trial setting, nor does trial experience wholly prepare someone to excel in an appellate setting, particularly at the judge level.  There are people who do both well at the practice level.  See, e.g., BrisketTexan, et al.  But they are distinct skill sets.

    Agreed on reinventing the wheel.  But, in this particular case, the wheel was never really invented in the first place because, again, we are looking at some novel legal questions.  There's not much law on the interplay between the PRA and the courts and zero on the interplay between the PRA and Espionage Act.  Not that either of these pose particularly difficult questions.

    She definitely seems overawed by the fact that this is the first presidential prosecution in history and seems to be wanting to find differences in this case and others that preceded it that don't really exist.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  12. Just now, High Plains Drifter said:

     

    Bring it again and get a different judge? 

     

     

    Who fucking knows.  Smith played the venue choice straight as an arrow to begin with:  he went to the closest division within the SD Fla to Trump with a virtual certainty that she would get the case.  I don't think he had to go by division, he could have filed anywhere in SD Fla and let Trump try to contest it.

    Obviously, he wouldn't want anything to do with Cannon again.

    Then again, he may be able to straighten her out on this and minimize any harm.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  13. 8 minutes ago, dcbc said:

    It's either one, the other, or both.  I don't think neither is an option.

     

    Optimistically, I tend to think that she was appointed for her loyalty as opposed to her potential as a skilled jurist and that she's in way over her head in this case, i.e., doesn't know what the hell she's doing.

    She has most of the right creds, except judicial experience.  I think I noticed she spent substantial time in the appellate section of the US Attorneys office, so she may be taking what my first mentor called a "law review" approach to trial issues that really aren't that juicy or complex.

  14. 17 minutes ago, Captainant said:

    Member when that would get you labeled as hysterical? I member. 

    I have never not contended she is apparently stupid af.  So stupid in fact that it camouflages any corruption and makes it damn near impossible to tell where one ends and the other begins.

    • Hook 'Em 6
  15. 19 minutes ago, dcbc said:

    So is the only option for the Government to seek mandamus relief?  The judge has no discretion to misstate the law to the jury, and you've just made a good case for inadequate appellate remedy.  It would mean more delay, but that beats the alternative.  I know they aren't actually jury instructions at this point, but just looking down the road.

    Yeah I don't know what interlocutory appeal options the government may have. 

    Because she denied the vagueness motion to dismiss, but not the PRA, I initially thought this was some gambit to paint the government into a corner on it, making it easier to dismiss the indictment.

    But the "extended" idea of her giving really bad/wrong jury instructions didn't initially occur to me. 

    One thing I believe I have seen is that despite the federal civil practice of lengthy and detailed jury questions, federal criminal questions are short and singular, generally. 

    Here is an example of the questions in an espionage act case.  https://knightcolumbia.org/documents/5c5cdc7f03

    And here's what the instructions look like in a different case.  https://knightcolumbia.org/documents/2f9194cd67

     

     

    • Hook 'Em 1
×
×
  • Create New...