Well he is Russian, after allIvytalk wrote:Well, Vidav says “pogrom”.93henfan wrote:I'm watching the Nick Saban/Tua going pro presser on ESPN.
Why do southern people say "progrum" instead of "program"?
It's almost as bad as New Yorkers saying "standing on line" instead of "standing in line".
Thanks for clarifying for the unwashed CS masses.CID1990 wrote:Well he is Russian, after allIvytalk wrote: Well, Vidav says “pogrom”.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Haha. Thatsa gooda one.93henfan wrote:Contrary to popular belief, public school kids also study world history.
Well, good thing they got that house they live in completely rebuilt while still on the public payroll. Plus that lavish wedding as well. Wouldn't have been able to get all of that without first being "senior royals". I guess now that Harry would be so far removed from the throne every time Will and Kate have kids that it wasn't as glamorous to be in the background. Going to be harder to afford those carbon footprint offsets now, though, unless Megan can get back into acting or Harry can actually find a job. They could write a book and then go on a speaking tour, that normally does the trick for money.Ivytalk wrote:Harry and Megan want to take a time-out from their grueling (?) duties as members of the royal family, to split their time between the UK and Malibu.
Harry: “Is that quite all right with you, Grandmother?”
QE2: “Bloody hell! You never should have married that shvartzeh!”
Meh. Statistics show that, historically, a large percentage of the projects continued on as originally planned. Sometimes it took years of litigation to get it, though. That litigation enriched lawyers and environmental consultants. The change brings minimal risk.JohnStOnge wrote:https://www.npr.org/2020/01/09/79485752 ... mental-law
https://www.rollcall.com/news/trump-adm ... l-projects
You know, I have historically taken the position that environmental regulations are somewhat over the top. But do you REALLY want a combination scam artist/real estate developer at the head of doing this sort of thing?
I think that this is inevitably going to create some stories about environmental damage as well as human health consequences if it actually goes into effect. There will be some horror stories. It's just a question of whether Trump will still be in office at the time and suffer from it.
A Justice Department inquiry launched more than two years ago to mollify conservatives clamoring for more investigations of Hillary Clinton has effectively ended with no tangible results, and current and former law enforcement officials said they never expected the effort to produce much of anything.
That was interesting, thanks for posting.Chizzang wrote:this is really educational right here...
Do we think that's because they're innocent or because they were too smart to get caught?Ibanez wrote:First Benghazi and now this...boy those Clintons are so smart even the GOP can't pin them down.
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/ju ... li=BBU4PL8
A Justice Department inquiry launched more than two years ago to mollify conservatives clamoring for more investigations of Hillary Clinton has effectively ended with no tangible results, and current and former law enforcement officials said they never expected the effort to produce much of anything.
I’m going with innocent. With the technology and surveillance we have today, I doubt many high profile people can get away with crimes when they’re enemies are investigating them.UNI88 wrote:Do we think that's because they're innocent or because they were too smart to get caught?Ibanez wrote:First Benghazi and now this...boy those Clintons are so smart even the GOP can't pin them down.
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/ju ... li=BBU4PL8
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Can you provide some details on the statement that a large percentage of projects continued as originally planned? What is the percentage? What is the percentage of instances in which plans were modified due to environmental impact assessments?CAA Flagship wrote:Meh. Statistics show that, historically, a large percentage of the projects continued on as originally planned. Sometimes it took years of litigation to get it, though. That litigation enriched lawyers and environmental consultants. The change brings minimal risk.JohnStOnge wrote:https://www.npr.org/2020/01/09/79485752 ... mental-law
https://www.rollcall.com/news/trump-adm ... l-projects
You know, I have historically taken the position that environmental regulations are somewhat over the top. But do you REALLY want a combination scam artist/real estate developer at the head of doing this sort of thing?
I think that this is inevitably going to create some stories about environmental damage as well as human health consequences if it actually goes into effect. There will be some horror stories. It's just a question of whether Trump will still be in office at the time and suffer from it.
I don’t know of anything illegal she did other than allowing classified on an unclass system.Ibanez wrote:I’m going with innocent. With the technology and surveillance we have today, I doubt many high profile people can get away with crimes when they’re enemies are investigating them.UNI88 wrote:
Do we think that's because they're innocent or because they were too smart to get caught?
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hey now, it's not illegal if there isn't intent.CID1990 wrote:I don’t know of anything illegal she did other than allowing classified on an unclass system.Ibanez wrote: I’m going with innocent. With the technology and surveillance we have today, I doubt many high profile people can get away with crimes when they’re enemies are investigating them.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What other illegal activity was she accused of?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
BENGHAZI!!!!!CID1990 wrote:I don’t know of anything illegal she did other than allowing classified on an unclass system.Ibanez wrote: I’m going with innocent. With the technology and surveillance we have today, I doubt many high profile people can get away with crimes when they’re enemies are investigating them.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What other illegal activity was she accused of?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think we have to consider unethical in addition to illegal. While there is no proof there is a whole lot of smoke around the Clintons, especially the Foundation.Ibanez wrote:I’m going with innocent. With the technology and surveillance we have today, I doubt many high profile people can get away with crimes when they’re enemies are investigating them.UNI88 wrote:
Do we think that's because they're innocent or because they were too smart to get caught?
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don’t disagree. I’ve spilled a lot of ink about the wrongness of her server.UNI88 wrote:I think we have to consider unethical in addition to illegal. While there is no proof there is a whole lot of smoke around the Clintons, especially the Foundation.Ibanez wrote: I’m going with innocent. With the technology and surveillance we have today, I doubt many high profile people can get away with crimes when they’re enemies are investigating them.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
The Uranium One bribe allegation.CID1990 wrote:
I don’t know of anything illegal she did other than allowing classified on an unclass system.
What other illegal activity was she accused of?
Now why didn't I read about this in our daily newsletter?kalm wrote:You’re fired! Don’t let the door (and that $62 million payout) hit you in the ass!
https://www.krem.com/mobile/article/mon ... a8b7b8f4e1
Need to know basis. Get back to work.SeattleGriz wrote:Now why didn't I read about this in our daily newsletter?kalm wrote:You’re fired! Don’t let the door (and that $62 million payout) hit you in the ass!
https://www.krem.com/mobile/article/mon ... a8b7b8f4e1
