Leaderboard

"I actually had the ability to speak to him three weeks ago," Bailey said, during an on-camera interview with NBC New York on Feb. 16, the day the judge's decision was due. "I saw him in the corner [at the courthouse] and I told my client, 'I need to go.' And I walked over and we started talking … I wanted him to know what I think and why…I really want him to get it right." "No ex parte conversation concerning this matter occurred between Justice Engoron and Mr. Bailey or any other person. The decision Justice Engoron issued February 16 was his alone, was deeply considered, and was wholly uninfluenced by this individual,” said Al Baker, a spokesman for the New York State's Office of Court Administration, in a written statement The New York State Rules of Judicial Conduct state that "a judge shall not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications, or consider other communications made to the judge outside the presence of the parties or their lawyers." The rules do allow an exception to "obtain the advice of a disinterested expert," if a judge gives notice to the parties in the case and gives them the opportunity to respond. If this ends up being true, it could void the entire case.

We’re losing our intellectuals and critical thinkers. Almost all political commentary on mainstream media is uncritical repetition of government talking points. Rex was too smart and decent for the woke mob running Canada.

Some people claim there is a campaign of genocide in Gaza which has been ongoing for many years. If so, it's the most ineffective and incompetent campaign of genocide in world history. This link is from 2016 but you get the idea. https://apnews.com/article/middle-east-israel-united-nations-palestinian-territories-gaza-strip-0b9fbb989fc2411495afd811da4ac6d0 https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN1491QF/ From 2022: https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/israel-palestinians-gaza-population/ All they do is make babies, rockets, bombs and tunnels.

Al Gore once said some 30 odd years ago that by 2020, Miami would be under water. Well, where is the water? I am still waiting so i can buy a boat. 😁

Like I said...you do you, freak. In the meantime, I'll do me...and post reality.

Illegal immigration is not any sort of economic metric. Neither are gas and food, aside from the fact they show up to some degree in actual metrics, inflation being the obvious example. Gas prices are the product of a global oil market, and adjusted for inflation they are not historically high. In fact, they are the about the same/less than they were in 2017 and 2018 under Trump. Food (and gas, for that matter) are compound answers starting with a war in Europe's breadbasket and a global supply chain that's still all jacked up from the pandemic. But because it's a strong economy job growth is high, unemployment is low and companies are competing for scarce talent. As a result, wages are growing faster than inflation. Gas and food cost more, but Americans have more to spend. And we're closing in on negating the "damage" from peak inflation. You're 0 for 3 on identifying metrics--well, maybe partial credit for identifying items within inflation. But their effects are being exaggerated for political drama. Any way you want to slice it, the economy is miles better than what Biden inherited. Oh, and BTW, foreign military aid is mostly arms and equipment. It has the same sort of stimulating impact on the economy that war does, though clearly in a smaller scale.

I have detailed in other posts why this story interests me. Just because someone does not share your views or religiosity... does not mean that their interest is not as valid.

Well, there it is. The Union runs the country LOL I live in Ottawa and am very secure in saying since the pandemic shut down, the burbs have been a traffic jamb in the burbs every day. Most workers are public service and they are all out of their offices (homes) instead of working. Shit is taking longer because there is no one working. If you want to complain about slow public service,. that is it, no one in the office. I know many, they are our neighbours, friends and kids of friends. They all love "working" from home. They turn on their computers in the morning and then do whatever they want. They do not have to pay for daycare, for transit, for parking, for work clothes, for lunch and they got a raise because... they were underpaid??? I know managers that have to go into the office 4 times a week...they have no one to manage LOL They have online meetings and some employees just do not even log on and the managers cannot do anything about it. Lazy assed public servants are even more lazy now and have the union backing up their unproductive lifestyle. Pure BS!!!.

Now you are trying to differentiate a problem that requires integration.

The problem with the U6 is that it relies on the subjective opinion of a survey respondent. To deem that they are unemployed or underemployed for "economic reasons" is so subjective. When the U3 rate backs up their argument.. they use it. When it does not, well then it is garbage.

My favorite is when Fox News helped conservative America discover U6 unemployment for the first time. Suddenly that was the "real" unemployment number and the media was cheating for Obama by using U3, which, of course, is what's been used almost universally for unemployment figures, unless some specific alternative is called out. And the #3 crowd (despite being wrong about "real" jobs) should be loving Biden, but they won't.

LOL... "AHHH!!! WE ALL GONNA DIIIEEE!!!"

That's an absurd misapplication of "appeal to authority." It should be pretty obvious that people utterly lacking the intellect, training, or time to do their own scientific research on a specific subject MUST rely on authority to inform any decision. Indeed, one would have to be a brainless fool to ignore authority in the acquisition of knowledge. That's would negate the entire competitive advantage of written and oral knowledge transfer.🙄 Aside from that, what you claim is regarding AGW consensus is patently false. There IS an overwhelming consensus on human-driven climate change across all sciences, but especially scientists in the field. There is not a single major scientific body on the planet that rejects the premise. Since 2007, when the American Association of Petroleum Geologists released a revised statement, no longer does any national or international scientific body reject the findings of human-induced effects on climate change. And there is only one non-committal body. Yes, that's right. The Petroleum Geologists moved from "nope" to "no comment." 🙄 Every other body accepts AGW as fact. And the actual research leaves no question. More than 99.9% of studies agree: Humans caused climate change You can be a flat-Earth kook, rejecting all science and sense. That's your prerogative. But you can't successfully pretend that the scientific question isn't settled. It is. Humans are driving climate change. The "if" is over. The details of how much, how bad, how soon, and what we can and should do about it are less settled to varying degrees, but everyone knows it means getting to carbon-neutral or negative ASAP.

However, that is not how it will unfold. Person X makes inflammatory comment, they called out on it, and now they claim that they are being oppressed and ganged up on. They knew the lay of the land and still proceeded. It is not society's problem that they chose to say something unpopular and do not like the response.

You are conflating an awful lot of things here. "community" / "consensus" / "unanimity" / "entire scientific community" Um, at the heart of all of this is the logical fallacy of argument from authority. That aside, what there is, is a very tiny segment of the "entire scientific community", that specializes in so-called climate science and out of all the papers written on the subject, if you review them generally speaking, you find a consensus regarding climate change being real, generally speaking. Thats it. There is no near unanimous consent among all scientists as if every astro physicist or Nuclear Engineer agrees... Hell, among so called claimed scientists, there is no consensus on how bad climate change is, what should be done about it, how much humans contribute, what humans can realistically do to stop it... etc... You boil this down, what you have is a general understanding that climate is changing, it appears to be slightly increasing and is on pace to continue to do so... and humans contribute some part to that. It pretty much ends right there.

Lol. No, you haven't. You've shown that a handful of people (a tiny minority) held that opinion of a paper from 30 years ago. That's fine. They were entitled to that opinion. And indeed, that's a self-correcting feature of science. But in this case their objections were not meaningful to the rest of the community and the consensus now approaches unanimity. You're busy boasting about climate change response being "over" while countries and corporations around the world are actively investing in mitigation strategies. You will likely be dead by the time things get really bad, but your kids aren't going to thank you. They'll wonder how their crazy old dad thought he knew better than the entire scientific community and why you didn't do more. And you are entirely clueless about economic data. I could give you all the charts and figures in the world and you'd be helpless to evaluate them. That's why you're linking to articles that directly contradict the point you'd like to make. That's not really my problem. You don't vote here. Laypeople are still shaken from the pandemic economy. Their view of the economy is emotional, like you. We'll see how many can catch up to the economic reality before the election.

Is that why they're titled: "Remote Work Might Not Be As Productive As Once Thought, New Studies Show" and "Remote workers aren't actually more productive. Will bosses finally call them back this year?" Because they're positive about working from home? First, I didn't say or claim anything about your sources. I spoke generally about the early research, and took issue with your claim that all of the reports/research about remote work show it improves productivity, which is absolutely not true. Second, if we do examine your sources, they don't even support what you're saying. The first is a statscan link that has no data whatsoever on productivity. The second is a fluff-piece from "Axios", whoever that is, that once again provides no data, and the third is an article from the National Post which, (awkwardly for you) concludes: “If remote work boosts productivity in a substantial way, then it should improve productivity performance, especially in those industries where teleworking is easy to arrange and widely adopted, such as professional services, compared with those where tasks need to be performed in person, such as restaurants,” Fernald and his co-authors wrote. But after controlling for pre-pandemic trends by industry, they found little statistical relationship between productivity and the prevalence of remote work since the pandemic. So, let's "recap": You claimed that all of the reports say remote work improves productivity (categorically false), and your junky defense is that you are right because the lame-duck links you provided are more recently dated. 🙄

To answer the OP. EVERYTHING!

The stench is all on Engoron and his banana court. There has to be a way that we can throw his ass in jail along with that fat ass AG, Letitia James.

You'd have a point if this was a real trial in a legitimate courtroom with a legitimate judge, but this is more like a 1938 Germany 'enemy of the state' trial. Trump was already guilty of 7 counts of "whatever we can make up" before he was indicted. If he does get out of this one unindicted, CNN's headline tomorrow may as well read: "Trump was just found guilty of two hundred forty seven felony counts of something, but the DOJ hasn't decided what to call it yet. Trial set to start in September."

You're welcome. Enjoy the election.

LOL - hey @taxme, you notice how this works right? I gave recognized economic factors but they show biden's economy is weak so he ignores them. You give legitimate economic factors which impact people so he claims they're not economic factors and tries to substitute his own He knows damn well he's wrong Biden is spending a tonne of money to create the impression that the economy is good when really it's just being temporarily propped up by gov't spending. But - he doesn't want to have to admit it so he won't accept any metric other than the ones that are in his talking points hand out This is why the dems will most likely lose the next election.

How all very true! By the way, I noticed the traffic during off times and it is heavy. Those silly servants must be working from the car. LOL

LOL...He's so desperate that he has no idea what he's for and against anymore.

How It’s Done Trump, unchecked, has been free to repeat those lies over and over again, even when the falsehood has been thoroughly exposed and his claims debunked. So it was refreshing to read that Judge Merchan was having none of that in court in Manhattan Friday morning. On Thursday, Trump lied, telling a gathering of reporters outside of the courtroom where he is on trial that he would not be able to take the stand and testify in his own defense, because of the gag order imposed by Judge Merchan. Of course, that’s a lie. Trump has been promising he would testify—perhaps he was looking for a way to walk that back as the reality of being on trial settled in. But Trump was peddling trash in classic fashion, blaming the Judge and lying about the gag order. Judge Merchan got right to the point Friday morning in court, before the jury was brought in. He told Trump the gag order “does not prohibit you from taking the stand.” He continued, “As the name of the order indicates, it only applies to extrajudicial statements.” That means Trump is only limited in statements he makes outside of the courtroom. In other words, Trump is free to testify in court; the choice is his. That’s it, just like that. The authority Trump was lying about refused to bend the knee and called Trump on the lie. Fortunately it's ONLY the MAGA CULT (like WCM) who believes Trump's LIES.

Notice they aren't counting Biden's lies? Hell he probably told the story about how his son was killed in Iraq and the BS "Joey baby" story about 1000 times alone. I am pretty sure that recent CNN interview alone matched that number. Biden told some whoppers during that one. That man actually said with a straight face that when he took over we had a 9% inflation rate. It isn't about the number of lies its the size of the lies, almost of a Trump "lies" were hyperbole because I know for a fact WaPo fact checked whether the burgers really were stacked a mile high at the White House banquet honoring the college football champions or it was something subjective that they deemed a lie.

LOL... Your desperation is fun to watch.

I made it clear that Israel's allies are also culpable in their punishment. The result of its creation is most certainly a disaster - all because we didn't want the Jews either. A big chunk of Germany should have been turned into a homeland for European Jews. Too late for that though so Israel's allies need to bite the bullet and go fix what they broke. It'll cost trillions. Like I said it was a disaster. Probably the single worst act of geopolitical vandalism in the history of geopolitics given the sheer scope and scale of the blowback. And now we're leaving it to our grandkids to deal with. A real heritage we can all be proud of for sure.

IMO it's more than 50% actual terrorists, but if you count active supporters of Hamas, it's probably 2/3+. Consider this: 1. When you consider that 50% of people are men to start with, you'd almost expect 40% of people injured in a surprise bomb attack to be military-aged men, 90% of whom would either be Hamas terrorists or terrorist supporters. That's 36% of the population right there. 2. These aren't surprise attacks, so a lot of non-terrorists have fled the war zones, meaning these war zones have an unusually high concentration of men - especially military-age males - and by the same token, a far lower concentration of women and children than normal. In the war zones it's probably something like 75% military-age males. A bomb going off in any random location there would probably affecting about 66% terrorists and terrorist supporters. 3. Don't forget that Hamas are terrorists and murderers, and aiding and abetting murderers makes one a criminal themselves. Therefor, a 30 yr old female that helps hide weapons and ammo, and provides shelter and other logistical support to people whom she knows to be terrorists, actually IS a terrorist herself. So not only active Hamas fighters and male Hamas supporters count as "terrorists", a fair portion of the women there count as valid military targets as well. 4. Israelis are specifically targeting places where the terrorists are known to be, and if those Hamas guys have any humanity at all, women and children aren't right beside them at that moment. So if a bomb is aimed at a certain spot and detonates, it's probably going to be an 80% terrorist to non-terrorist ratio. 5. At least 95% of people who are killed by small arms fire would be combatants. The other 1-5% would be peculiarly close to actual combatants. IMO, for all the reasons above, it's not unreasonable to guess that a bare minimum of 50% of the people killed are actual terrorists, and 2/3 of the rest are active supporters. That's 33 of the other 50%, so probably 83% or more of all the deaths are among terrorists and supporters. And that's as a minimum. If Hamas fighters have any humanity at all, and try to keep women and children away from them, then it would be more than 83%. Of the remaining 17%, most of those would be adults. I think that the propagandists pretending that a lot of innocents are being killed are way off base.

Trump keeps warning us about his second term. Are you listening?

No, at least 1/3 of those are Hamas militants killed in a war. The rest are the tragic collateral damage from killing that 1/3 because Hamas is fighting from among their people and, instead of helping to keep their people safe, they willingly endanger them just so they can get folks like you to play the stupid games you are doing right now.

Very Sad. He was a hell of a man and a canadian icon.

Really. So NONE of them were combatants? NO hamas soldiers have been killed? ALL of those 30,000 people were just innocent people who had absolutely nothing to do with hamas in any way shape or from. This is your claim. As we know that's complete bullcrap. So again the fact you feel the need to lie like that shows even you don't believe what's happening is that bad, you have to make it sound worse. As to 'not responsible' - we've addressed that plenty too. They are responsible for their gov't. They are responsible for supporting hamas using them and their children as meat shields. A country and it's people are responsible for their gov't. And the polls are pretty clear by this point that they do support hamas - soooooo Not to mention none of the 'protest groups' are calling for hamas to surrender or end the war or even to stop using the civvies as meat shields so obviously they support the death of the children as well as part of the war effort. Hamas can end this tomorrow. If they don't they're the ones who are ok with the killing.

The 30000 Palestinians that have been killed since October are victims of collective punishment for something they're not responsible for. Israel and it's allies should be changing the regime in Iran instead.

Biden has a problem called no spine, no brains, no integrity, no general worth as a human being. Biden has TWO problems ......

Cite? Cite? Biden has a problem called no spine, no brains, no integrity, no general worth as a human being.

Do you have proof of that, it seems history says different...Israel has offered many times a peace deal that would include a 2 state solution, why would they offer if they had no interest in a deal.... Why so dramatic ,Nobody in Gaza is starving, or near starving.... Is that your objective here to get them to like you... they hate everyone that is not muslim...If palestinians are hungry it is because Hamas allows it...I think one has to remember a few key points here, One that Palestinians voted Hamas in during free elections...once in, they killed their political opponents, and have not had an election since...Got to be a red flag....Second the palestinian people seem alright with that as their has been no one group to stand up to them. even with Israel having Hamas on the ropes they the palestinian people still do not stand up and fight for their freedom...I know you don't have the answer.. It seems almost everything that has been tried is not working, most try's have been total failures....and since they hate us anyways, why not some tough love...show them that the rest of the world is sick of their shit, and cut off the taps...or perhaps your one of those that prefers continuing on beating our heads against the wall hoping to get different results...

That and he had classified documents from when he was Senator that he was never supposed to have personal possession of

It beats freezing to death.

robotears is struggling with free speech again, the poor little marxist...

Happened to read Mark Oshinkie's substack this morning: Admitting error—or outright complicity with the Scam—during the Covid overreaction would entail losses of face and credibility. After all the harm the media has done, those consequences would be just and proper. To avoid this result, the media and bureaucrats are backpedaling slowly to try to change their views without too many people noticing. In so doing, they’re very belatedly adopting the views of those, like me, who from Day 1, called out the hysteria driving, and the downsides to, the Covid overreaction. But while they’ve incrementally changed parts of their message, they hold tightly to the central, false narrative that the Covid was a terrible disease that indiscriminately killed millions. The Covophobes continue to falsely credit the Covid injections for “saving millions of lives” and “preventing untold misery.” The mythology is that, even if the shots injured people, they were a net positive in a world facing a universally vicious killer. Relying on that false premise, Coronamaniacs, columnists and the commenters assert that no medical intervention is risk-free and that a few metaphorical eggs were inevitably broken while making the mass vaccination omelet. In their view, such injuries are a cost of doing business. To begin with, where was such risk/reward analysis when the lockdowns and school closures were being put in place? To many, modern medicine is a religion and “vaccines” are a sacrament. Their pro-vaxx faith is unshakable. But these ostensible Science devotees unreasonably overlooked Covid’s clearest empirical trend: SARS-CoV-2 did not threaten healthy, non-old people. Therefore, neither non-pharmaceutical interventions (“NPIs”) nor shots should have been imposed upon those not at risk. The NPI and shot backers weren’t Scientists. They were Pseudo-Scientists. And many commenters to the Mandavilli article, emphasize that “correlation isn’t causation.” The persuasiveness of correlation is typically questioned only when one would viscerally prefer not to apply Occam’s Razor and adopt the most straightforward explanation for symptoms that begin shortly after injection. And ultimately, doesn’t the cited “millions saved” study assume that correlation is causation? While the peremptory assertions that the shots saved millions of lives are very questionable and poorly supported, many who read these statements will cite these as gospel because millions is a memorable, albeit speculative and squishy figure, and because, well, The New York Times said so! While the columnists use this phony stat to justify mass vaccination, only one in five-thousand of those infected—nearly all of them very old and/or very sick or killed iatrogenically—had died “of Covid” before VaxxFest began. The vast majority of these deceased were likely to die soon, virus or no. Thus, how can one say that the shots saved millions of lives? For how long were they saved? They never acknowledge—and may not even know of— the statistical sleight of hand that’s have been used throughout by the jab pushers. I’ve described these tricks in prior posts. For example, there was “healthy vaccinee bias:” those who administered the shots strategically declined to inject those who were so frail that the shots’ systemic shock might kill them. And those who injected weren’t counted as “vaxxed” until 42 days after their first shot. As the shots initially suppress immunity and disrupt bodies, one should expect the shots to increase deaths in the weeks after the shot regimen begins. Injectees who died within this initial 42 days were falsely categorized as “unvaxxed.” FWIW, my wife and I and all other non-vaxxers I know have predictably been fine. The shots didn’t save any of our lives or keep us out of the hospital. Our immune systems did. The virus’s lethality was badly overhyped. And more medical intervention doesn’t necessarily improve health. To the contrary, and especially regarding the shots, less is often more. Many of NPI and shot backers have taken refuge in “We-Couldn’t-Have-Known-ism.” But millions, including me, did know, based on widely available information, that the NPIs and shots were bad ideas. And as we knew that only the old and ill were at risk and that the NPIs would cause great harm, those who are very belatedly admitting that “mistakes were made” not only also could have known; they should have known. Their failure to know reveals either a willful, opportunistic, tribalistic disregard of plainly observable information or a lack of intelligence. They also fail to mention that hundreds of thousands have suffered apparent vaxx injuries or deaths from heart attacks, strokes or cancers and that overall deaths have increased in highly vaxxed nations. Thus, when one considers all causes of death, the shots seem to have caused a net loss, not gain, in life span. The Times writers ignore the tens of thousands of American post-vaxx deaths listed in the user-unfriendly, and therefore underused, VAERS database and the excess death increases in the most highly vaxxed nations in 2021-22. Unlike the vaxx injured, who are still alive, dead vaccinees tell no tales. Nor do most of their survivors because, as with families who’ve lost a young man in a war, those left to mourn don’t want to believe that their beloved has died avoidably or in vain. The reluctance to attribute deaths to the shots is particularly acute if the bereaved encouraged the decedent to inject. Commentators now begrudgingly report that the shots may not, despite all of the ads and bureaucratic assurances, have been so safe after all, conceding that the shots have killed people is a bridge too far. At least for now. Nonetheless, in order to discourage additional public health, political and economic chicanery, we must continue to say what’s true: the whole Scamdemic was a massive, opportunistic overreaction that most people were too naive to apprehend. Truth is intrinsically valuable. Regardless of outcome, telling the truth is our obligation to posterity.

I do not understand in the slightest why this is a battle Trudeau wants to die on. It's obvious that the unions and their people want this. Further, there doesn't seem to be a good reason not to give it to them. All of the reports indicate that not only with government service but with most industries that are able to work remotely productivity goes up. It reduces pollution because there's less transportation. It's significantly reduces the strain and cities on transit and roadway infrastructure. It doesn't cost the government anything. In fact it reduces the amount of space the government needs in offices and other stuff. The only negative comment I've heard at all is that downtown Coors don't like it when the employees aren't coming downtown anymore because there's less foot traffic for their businesses. But that seems like a kind of stupid reason for the government to say no. So why in god's name is Trudeau alienating and infuriating a huge number of government people who would otherwise be likely to vote for him? He's already honked off the first nations, he's already cheezed off the environmentalists, He has infuriated the youth who are looking to buy homes and afford food, so now it's absolutely critical for him to do something pointless to aggravate one of the last remaining groups that might stand beside him? Fun fact, he spends a lot of his time working from home.

This guy: Richard Lindzen - Wikipedia This guy: Nir Shaviv - Wikipedia This guy: William Happer - Wikipedia This guy: Steven E. Koonin - Wikipedia This guy: Dr. Matthew M. WielickiDr. Matthew M. Wielicki's home page (matthewwielicki.com) This guy: Patrick Moore (consultant) - Wikipedia This guy: Ross McKitrick - Ross McKitrick Research Archive This guy: Willie Soon - Wikipedia This guy: Roy Spencer, PhD (drroyspencer.com) This guy: Henrik Svensmark - Wikipedia This guy: Who Is Tony Heller? | Real Climate Science This guy (who won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2022): John Clauser - Wikipedia Here's my prediction for where this post goes - MH will quickly google one or two of these people, find an article that calls them "climate deniers" or some such and immediately dismiss them without even hearing what they have to say. MH, if you have an hour, most of these people express their views and reasonings in this video: (But I know it's YouTube, and you've already said you dismiss anybody who posts anything on YouTube. You've made your mind up already and anything that points to a different analysis will not be something you check out.)

Not that I recall. If you want me to opine in what Biden said, show me the quote. Most of you are not even marginally economically literate and there's like an 80% chance you just didn't understand the information presented and hopped on the faux outrage bandwagon. And 20% allowance for decrepit Uncle Joe to have said something crazy.🤷‍♀️

Oh BS you mouthy little muppet. You interpret what MSNBC says as 'true' and that's that. Did "economists" say that there was "no inflation" when Biden was saying that there was no inflation? Were they lying too? How did prices end up being so high with almost no inflation? Can you tell me how Biden's economists explained that? You're such a lying weasel it's embarrassing to the whole English-speaking world.

One of the differences between you and I is that I don't have to parrot anyone. I'm quite capable of reading data, tracking what economists say etc. You're the sort of person who needs to look up the difference between deficit and debt, so WTF are you on the internet arguing about the state of the economy?

I would like to add antisemitism to my worries about a Biden second term.

Depends on the geography but yes.. mostly crime is not on the rise. Why? That would demand pages upon pages but I can say that Biden is not the reason.

It is as ILLEGAL after the fact as was Al Gore's attempt to seize power and illegally disenfranchise millions of voters. Let me know when you want to quote something specific from the article you want me to review that you agree with.

Now you are making stuff up. There is ZERO evidence that Trump was part of any plan to engage in violence. Trump did not go to court over any of his plans because he never executed them. He walked out of office peacefully. Trump did not send a mob, Trump engaged in a peaceful protest and left.