Jump to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Surly Horns

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

TwiceHorn

Full Members
  • Joined

Posts posted by TwiceHorn

  1. Welp, Asurion is replacing the phone free of charge.  So I will get a newish S8, 10 days after commencing the claim.

    I'm liking this Moto G7 although I can tell it's a cheaper phone in a lot of ways.  Not daily operation for the most part, but the S8 installs things much faster.  I kind of like the pure-ish Android.  Also the visual voicemail app doesn't seem to be 100% working.

    If I take the G7 back, I incur a $45 restocking fee.

    My current thinking is to sell the S8 on swappa for about $200, which will zero me out, and stick to a steady diet of cheap fones from here on in.

    Other thoughts welcome.

    Anyone want to buy an S8?

  2. As far as election law violations go, I see no necessity for "quid pro quo."  Trump solicited, end of story.  It was a thing of value, but was it an election contribution?  I dunno. Nothing in the code requires quid pro quo.  The solicitation doesn't have to succeed even.

    It's nasty shit and should be impeachable regardless.

    Somewhere else in our vast federal criminal code, there has to be another statute that this would violate.  Certainly if it were Trump leaning on a domestic official to investigate a poltiical opponent/enemy. 

  3. 3 minutes ago, Yesh said:

    I agree with you but since I don't see much changing this year, I am at least trying to stay positive since we almost certainly won't have a coaching change.

    I also don't think it was just more experience.  We didn't have a stud B-backer like Ossai in 2017 and still managed to be successful.  Does Orlando need talent at certain positions?

    My theory on 2017, in keeping with mine and bschoolprof's posts, is that Bedford wasn't a gimmick coordinator, but maybe just a mediocre coach hampered by even more mediocre staff in Jennings.  Thus, the 2017 players weren't taught some fucked up system they had to unlearn, but did get some degree of fundamental coaching that served them well while starting on the Orlando gimmick plan.  There was some unique talent there, also.

    Same-ish for 2014.  The team was recovering from Diaz' fucked up gimmicks and had been fundamentally coached by Gerg.  Also Chris Vaughn was pretty decent as a coach/teacher.

  4. It's been alluded to, but I think a lot of DCs without experience in the B12 (and/or experience generally) seem to think that they need to come up with the defensive "answer" to the spread-ish offenses in the conference.  And that leads them to flailing around with "exotic" or gimmicky schemes that detract from playing solid, fundamental defense.  In year 1, the "scheme" is only partially implemented, and fundamental defense concepts prevail. In years 2 and 3, the "scheme" starts to take over practices and everything goes to shit.

  5. 6 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

    The point of that video is that the roles as described in the constitution have been upended. Congress should be making declarations of war and the commander in chief should be executing those wars. I don't think that you can call a house resolution that doesn't really do anything unconstitutional, but it seems pretty clear that our process around war making is not as intended, at least based on my reading of the constitution.  

    Yet another instance of Congress abdicating its authority because it might be unpopular.

  6. One other thing.  Although the kid's act was intentional, which will almost never be covered by insurance, the parents' liability will be premised on negligence, so there might be coverage by the homeowner's policy.  Maybe.

    What you need is a personal injury lawyer.  Hank Scorpio and Bob Lives, among others, can refer/advise.  Also probably thujone.

  7. 16 hours ago, Aqua Buddha said:

    That's prolly tops.  That was a legit valuation whereas WeWork's value was just speculation.  Similar flameouts, though.  Just a few probing questions got the ball rolling.

    Well, it was a legit valuation based on assets no one apparently understood, so arguably equally speculative, I guess with some fraud mixed in.

    That's one grim thing about any attempt at corporate/Wall Street reform.  As acknowledged by Lewis in multiple of his works (Big Short, Flash Boys among others) and Markopolos in regard to Madoff, the financial guys are so far ahead of the regulators I don't see how we ever catch up.

  8. 7 hours ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

    ^^^

    I think Twice took the long way around of saying if I were you, I'd try to get them to voluntarily help with the bills first since it was indicated they might.  If that doesn't work move on to considering a suit.  Sucks that it happened.  

    I said that in the first two sentences.

    But the rest of it kind of guides OP in what to ask for.  The idea is that you voluntarily purchase insurance to defray costs and you pay premiums, so you are entitled to the "value" of the medical services received, not merely your out-of-pocket, which is low because you already paid for it in premiums because of the happenstance that you have medical insurance.

    A smooove way to do it might be to say, "Iiiifffff we were to file a lawsuit, we'd get this, plus pain and suffering, but let's not go there and just stop with this."

  9. Great ride today at collarbone park.  Temps in 60s, overcast.  Hero dirt everywhere and no swampy sections, particularly nice on the creekbed crossings (always dry, but can get soupy after a rain).

    Been off the bike for 9 days.  Some mild climbing that I could feel a little bit, so I know I lost some conditioning.  I rode that damned skinny twice and bailed at the end of it twice.  Both times, gear was probably too high.  For better or worse, I think I need to pedal and maintain momentum for balance, but not too fast.  Or I probably could have punched it and not bailed.  I dunno, there aren't many skinnies of this length round here.

  10. 40 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

    I love the argument that executive privilege somehow applies over the "transcript," but also that Congress should call all the people who heard the call in to talk about (testify about?) the call.  Sheeit's "arguments" are theater of the absurd.

    Trump and this situation aside, I think there's a fairly compelling argument that non-public conversations between the President and a foreign leader should be initially confidential.  But I don't think that should fall under executive privilege.  National security or "state secrets" might cover it, but I'm not sure that's the right rubric either.

    I'm not quite sure what the conditions should be when the confidentiality is breached.  Certainly here, I think there's an argument that it's been waived by disclosure of the summary.  Also a "wrongdoing" or crime/fraud exception.

  11. ·

    Edited by TwiceHorn

    1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

    The president lies multiple times a day and people are dying and TwiceHorn is concerned that we are calling people liars on the internet.

    Accuracy remains a thing. Truth even.

    It matters or it doesn't. I think it does.

  12. 24 minutes ago, G650 said:

    Eh, I'm not sure about that is entirely accurate. In theory yeah, but people discount the 'in control' bit. I've built some motors pushing the 1400bhp mark that are essentially useless for the vast majority of drivers and would frankly scare the shit out of them. Everyone feels like they want to go faster until they cross that very fine line to too fast and then it's PTSD every time you are behind the wheel.

    And/or a pranged ride.

  13. ·

    Edited by TwiceHorn

    10 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

    Its sheeeit. He isnt ill-informed, he is intentionally disingenuous. It is his thing. But, maybe he comes on here and admits it isnt a transcript. I doubt it.

    I havent been keeping up.  I thought he was just ill-informed.

    Still, I think the "liar" and "lying" terms are tossed around too freely around here and elsewhere.  Hanlons razor and all.

  14. ·

    Edited by TwiceHorn

    20 minutes ago, HOOK'EMHOOAH said:

    I'm not referring to a subpoena for anyone, that is an entirely different issue from the question I asked. I'll go find the post that laid out this dilemma succinctly. The issue I'm referring to is using someone not in the executive branch to conduct business for that branch or the US government in general.

    There's not all that much law on executive privilege, unlike attorney-client privilege.  The privilege applies to deliberative communications and processes within the executive branch.  I think there's a pretty good argument that if you bring in someone who isn't a part of the executive branch, you blow the privilege.  Crimes and wrongdoings notwithstanding.

    Also worth noting that the privilege is not absolute, as is the attorney client privilege.  It can be pierced in the interest of justice even when no exceptions or disqualifications apply.

  15. 9 hours ago, Asithappens said:

    A couple of things. One, I don't remember calling the US "special", although we do have a system of government that, imo, is superior to many others (US Constitution) and does offer a better than average chance of weathering these types of storms. Maybe you disagree with that assessment. And while I'm in no way a Nationalist, we are exceptional, at least there's nothing wrong with thinking so. It's fine to do so. It's fine for the Swedes to think they are exceptional, too. 

    And nothing I have said means that I don't think we are at risk of imploding. Of course we are at risk. Take your argument to those who have explicitly said such a thing. 

    But you seem to think the sky is falling a lot of the time. I guess one of these times you'll be right.

    The flip side of American exceptionalism, or the lack thereof, is that we are neither exceptionally good, nor exceptionally bad.

  16. ·

    Edited by TwiceHorn

    24 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

    Thanks for this perspective.  I think if this is the defense, it also negates the people who are arguing this has nothing to do with race.  I have a hard time seeing how this defense works in a white, upper middle class suburban neighborhood.

    For arguments' sake, you can take race out of it.  This neighborhood (where it happened) has a high crime rate.  Rivercrest or Tanglewood (affluent, mostly white hoods) have almost zero crime rate.

    For reference, here's a crime map.  Generally speaking, FWs worst hoods are to the southeast of downtown, and its best are due west of downtown.  https://www.crimemapping.com/map/agency/128  This occurred on Allen Avenue, which runs parallel to 30, a couple of major streets south of it on either side of 35.

  17. 4 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

    Once again, the most important thing is that this guy is found guilty of something that prevents him from ever working in law enforcement again for the rest of his life. Nothing will bring the victim back, and society's primary concern should be preventing this from happening again, not necessarily vengeance.

    Given the current state of police work in this country, though, I am willing to support sentences that might be "too long" for a guy that was just a scared pussy in order for there to be a deterrent effect on other officers. The idea of sentences as deterrents is oversold in most cases, but I really do believe there needs to be a critical number of officers convicted of and sentenced to prison for murder (like Guyger) or manslaughter (possibly this guy if he says it was an accident because he was a scared pussy with terrible trigger discipline) so that police nationwide realize that they don't have carte blanche to kill people anymore.

    Good post.  I agree about disqualifying these types as LEO, as that community, among its other defects, seems to be waaay too forgiving of professional errors and omissions that seriously call into question fitness for the job.

    I also wonder if homicide convictions are a ham-handed way of exacting professional discipline, at least in the context of the above sentence (setting aside for the moment that they actually commit homicide).

    Finally, I think you are right about deterrent effect for the LEO community.  Unlike most criminal types, you know they are watching these cases like hawks, so this is probably an effective way to send the message that society is fed up with this.  Also, I think a spate of convictions with serious consequences is probably a better solution than trying to legislate something that has unforeseen effects.

  18. ·

    Edited by TwiceHorn

    Yes, a lawsuit is a possibility.  Probably to be avoided if you can.

    Historically, you could recover the medical bills, as billed by the provider (as opposed to your copay, deductible, etc.) plus pain and suffering damages (usually some multiple or fraction of the out-of-pocket medical bills).

    Now, it's what the insurer actually paid for your bills, as opposed to the billed amount or whatever your portion was, if any.  That is, if a treatment is billed at $5000, paid at $2000, and your copay was $200, the damages are $2000. (could be misstating here, someone will be along to correct me).

    You could theoretically do such a lawsuit yourself in small claims court, if the total is under $10k, armed with the medical bills and payouts by your insurance.  You actually sue the parents, not the child, and you have to prove that the parents were negligent in their "supervision" of their hellspawn.

    If the amount is greater than $10k, you'll need a lawyer.  Most lawyers are going to charge 33-40% of your recovery if they have to file suit.  Probably less if they don't.  But, odds are pretty good that they will raise the recovery substantially.

    "Pressing charges" is not (necessarily) the route to financial recompense.  It might happen that an adjudication in juvenile court results in restitution for your costs, but it's not the classic way to go.  A civil suit, as above, is your direct ticket to compensation if the parents are financially good for it.

  19. 14 hours ago, RPM said:

    Denton County SO shot a man in the back in September. They claimed he pointed a weapon at the deputy, but he was shot in the back. They still haven't released his name and refuse to comply with public information requests. Nothing suspicious about this at all.

    https://dentonrc.com/news/in-fatal-sanger-shooting-denton-county-sheriff-again-holds-back/article_92b2891c-2b55-5cc6-b64b-db0688aaca08.html

     

    That's disgusting.  Something needs to happen there.

Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.