Jump to content
LOTROCommunity

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 01/27/2020 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    Okay, we're back. The migration/upgrade process went much faster than expected. Unfortunately, during the upgrade process 2 posts were lost. One in this topic, one in the US elections topic. Sorry about the inconvenience.
  2. 1 point
    Soo.. time to kick this back up. Tomorrow evening will be the day. I expect to shut the forum down temporarily at 22.30 GMT. Expected downtime is anywhere between 15 and 45 minutes.
  3. 1 point
    Happy Brexit Day everyone! Since there are no traditions in place yet, it's a good time to start making some for the years to come. On that note, I'm going to be having a nice big steak from a local farm, a bottle of British cider (rare for me to drink, but it's a special day), and a pear pie with custard using pears straight from my garden. I just need a playlist of appropriate songs, and a film to watch, and I'm set. Maybe Shawshank Redemption... it feels fitting.
  4. 1 point
  5. 1 point
    This article basically touts everything that has gone wrong with the game (my personal views) as being everything they've done right. I was never in it for the cloaks and my house, but for the challenging and sometimes overwhelmingly difficult game play. At least we agree on the store and monetization. After giving the LS a try which held my attention for a few months I can say I have finally cut the cord on Lotro. There is no non store fix in sight for the LI debacle and Im way too far behind to even try and catch up, and that would have to be first and foremost for me to even consider this game again.
  6. 1 point
    Yes Dershowitz has tarnished himself, it was a poorly worded argument at best. Regarding more investigations, there is the small matter of the election which is coming sooner rather than later. Washington in classic form has operated in a bubble, again. Both sides seem to be pandering to a base of voters that doesnt account for the majority. This isnt completely a new phenom because you always start with your base but demographics are changing fast. As an example, I had a chat with a die hard conservative who told me "Texas will always be a red state". I then explained to him the curious case of California who up until 1992 had gone republican in every election save 1964. The point here is washington and the presumption of washington action is static. They seem to operate in this never ending Dem V republican regardless of what the rest of the country wants. It's high likely that the legislative branch flips again, either the house of the senate and possibly the executive. 2020 should be a highly mobilized vote, many people on both sides are vulnerable so the presumption that more investigations happen, assumes that democrats retain the house. That might not occur. It's also possible that the senate flips as well and not only does another impeachment happen but it is ratified by the new democratic senate on a reelected President Trump. We'll see.
  7. 1 point
    The entire process is wrought with constitutional issues, which Trump will likely have legal recourse to challenge. I operate under the assumption he is guilty as all politicians are corrupt to some degree, and nothing I have seen so far is precedent setting given the many other shennanigans that have gone on in washington. The main constitutional issue Trump has as his fall back (thats assuming the senate convicts which is unlikely) is Senators are required to take an oath for the impeachment trial, I believe this is in Clause 6 in the constitution under Article 1. This oath requires all senators to uphold impartial justice, which seems dubious given 3 senators are running for the nomination of the opposing party to replace Trump. Their interests conflict clearly with this mandate and that alone is a basis for Trump to argue the validity of those 3 votes, again assuming that there are enough votes to convict him in this matter. I think Trump is a blowhard and a snake oil salesman but based on what he has done so far he's been a better than average president. I think the real issue here is not the narrative that the democrats want to undo 2016, but they are acutely aware that they dont have a good platform or candidate for 2020. Trump went populist in 2016, a very simple message meant to appeal to masses and it worked. The question the democrats arent answering is why did it work? They are attacking the pied piper and not understanding why his tune got so many to flock to his banner. Many of the same working class people that voted for Obama voted for Trump for the same reason, they want washington to dial back globalism. This talk of 3d chess being played by Trump is laughable, he's a populist, and populists always succeed when they time the message right.
  8. 1 point
    actually it is you who is not understanding. so let me help a Brit out. the US has 3 Branches of Government & key to those 3 branches is the separation of powers. the US Government Accountability Office (US GAO) is a branch of the Legislative. the same branch as the Congress. The US Government Office of Accounting was created in 1921 & in 2004 changed Accounting to Accountability, (i am sure nothing else changes as a result *snark) yes the legislative does make laws & if those laws are sound & do not harm the separation of powers, or extend the power of Congress (the legislative) to the detriment of the other 2 branches, the Executive (the President) & the Judiciary (Supreme Court & lesser courts) they tend to go on year after year unchallenged. The US GAO ruling is non binding. they aren't the Judiciary. to get that ruling to be binding, they need to involve the Judiciary (civil suit.) so whilst the timing of this ruling, 2 weeks ago, is no surprise. it means next to nothing without trial. just ask Barack Obama: Seven Times the GAO Found the Obama Administration Violated Federal Law. and no i am not saying this excuses anything. just pointing out these rulings aren't exactly as incriminating as you seem to think. so if the Judiciary is involved, you need to ask... how was Congress harmed by the timely Deferrals of Ukrainian Aid by the US Office of Management & Budget (US OMB) & President Trump? you should also consider the US OMB & the President part of the Executive branch with its own "Separate Powers" additionally how historically has the Judiciary reacted when reviewing spats between the Legislative and Executive Branches? perhaps drop that British mental framework and understand this is the US with a whole different rule set. OK so tell me, have you read section: ยง686. Reports by Comptroller General of the Impound Control Act? it is a pretty important provision should a President fail to transmit a special message. if you have read it do you understand it? and if yes, can you tell me what went wrong? the January 16, 2020 GOA decision really isn't all that surprising & i am really looking forward to November 2020!
  9. 1 point
    Even that wouldn't work. They'd claim the brick was a plant by the libtard cuck snowflake brick consortium. Perhaps the brick is a member of the "Deep State." You can definitely forget it if you use recycled paper, that save the environment horseshit is for liberal(removed, because I came to my senses) Staple it to Tim Pool's hat. The one he is clearly wearing to keep is brain from oozing out.
  10. 1 point
    Okay, I didn't even bother with the rest because it's obvious you're just being an ignorant dick.
  11. 1 point
    "Firms urged to crack down on office football chat" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51261999 The unfortunately named Ann Francke, a person nobody has ever heard of before, has somehow managed to get on the radio and voice a retarded suggestion: companies should stop so-called "football banter" in the office. Why? Because women feel left out. Ignoring that lots of men also don't like sports, lots of women do like sports, and there's no suggestion to ban stereotypical female topics like shoes/handbags and what trashy telly was on last night, why the fuck does she expect people who aren't interested in a subject to have to feel included when said subject is discussed by other people? Fucking hell, these sorts of women give women who feel comfortable in offices a bad name. It's always got to be stepping on eggshells and trying to make women feel better in a space they shouldn't be in if they feel that way to start with. If you don't like football banter and can't bear other people talking about it, leave. Or do what I do and just tune it out. Much easier than trying to dictate speech AGAIN.
  12. 1 point
    Biden will get the Democratic nomination. The process to get the nomination is governed (largely) by the democratic national committee. In U.S. politics, once you get the nomination most candidates swing back to the middle, biden can do that quicker than the rest due to his decades in politics. You've got about 30-40% of the electorate (less so now perhaps) that switches parties regularly. As an example I've voted both dem and republican in the past as at various periods I thought the other could do a better job. Biden has been near or at the top of polling for democrats since before he declared officially. I dont think its going to make much difference though, I dont see Trump losing. It's been non stop negative press on Trump for 3 years and his approvals ratings still hover 40-45%, any other president in history with this kind of negative press would be in much worse shape. If the economy keeps humming along Trump should be okay. I think it will be another case of he wins the electoral college but not the popular vote.


×
×
  • Create New...