If I asked my close friends to endure the torture of reading my posting history in this forum, I don't think they would be at all surprised by my views. Like most people, I'm sure that I am more polite in person than I am on the internet, but I don't have an alternate internet personality that is meaningfully different from my non-internet personality.

And some people don't. If asked I would guess Bobo, OP and you and a handful of others are the closest to your real world persona's.

But AGAIN that is me speculating based on nothing as I do not see you in that realm. That is my point, that we all have thin and incomplete information and because some people may be true to life and others may the opposite we never truly know.

I happen to believe you, but that too is really based on thin evidence (your posting persona) because if you were inclined to create an alt persona and stick to it, I could never know.

Metagame ITT. What level would that be?

Limited liability maybe. I don't know. Here's a little interesting (for me) blurb though.

https://hbr.org/2010/04/what-the-fou...hers-real.html

As always the FF's were aware that institutions may become too powerful and unaccountable. Also, they knew corporations weren't people. So at least they were wiser than Mittens.

Who cares lmao. He's a hero, hero's don't pay for ****!

The Founding Fathers were almost all obscenely wealthy, it’s not a stretch to assume they’d be 100% on board with our modern corporatist society.

+1

I think the Founding Fathers were typically more pragmatic.

I often refer to those in power in China now being long term greedy as opposed to short term greedy. That means they recognize the long game of allowing China and its middle class to grow will provide for far more sustained wealth for all and a more powerful nation that the Russian oligarch model of trying to divert every penny possible into their personal accounts while harming the growth and competitiveness of the country.

Xi can still be very rich but he could be much richer if he went the Oligarch model, even as China declined. The question becomes 'How rich does someone need to be' as Putin can never realistically spend the money he is stealing in 100 lifetimes so why not then allow for Russia to grow and enjoy more of the spoils?

The Founding Fathers, IMO would fall more into the Xi mode. Be greedy yes, but not destructively greedy such that you are harming the golden goose.

I think that view mostly prevailed in the US until the 1990's and it was working as MC wealth continued to grow and overall the Nation and richest enjoyed the fruits of that.

However as MC wealth grew and massive pots of wealth were trapped in Housing Equity, SS and a few other areas they became irresistible to Wall Street and other American Oligarchs. With globalization making it tougher to get the growth type gains they enjoyed since WW2 they turned on finding ways to loot the Home Equity of the MC and SS and any other MC poorly protected pot of wealth.

They succeeded largely in engineering a way to gut the Home Equity owned by the MC and to push much of it up to the Oligarch's. Job well done! And the focus on SS and the other remaining pots continues.

If that weakens America long term (and it does) they, like Putin, don't care as long as they hide away enough for 100 lifetimes.

Word.

Is there a lull in the KR trial or are you guys choosing a unrelated tangent on purpose?

Yes, jury is out deliberating.

Defense moved for a mistrial on the ground that the state withheld evidence -- specifically, that the version of the drone video given to the defense was 3.6MB but that at the jury instructions conference, the state showed an uncompressed and clearer version of that same video that was 11.2MB. The state never gave that second video to the defense.

Interesting, but I would think that motion has no chance of being granted.

Unfortunately there's no way to find out.

Is any of this being live streamed anywhere, or are you reading about it?

Read about it. Tweet with motion papers was linked on Breitbart, which I usually read daily along with Fox, CNN and Slate.

What do all the parties do while they wait for the jury? Do they just hang about the courthouse? How do they file a motion while the jury deliberates?

my neighbor shot himself. he was a nice guy with a great family. very good looking and successful guy. I think he went thru a mid life depression of sorts but for whatever reason he was telling his family he didnt feel great. so the dr put him on antidepressants. well, some of those cause suicidal thoughts. combine that with the gun and thats that.

really messed up and my telling doesnt do justice to this guy and his family. like of all the people I have ever known he is one of the last that I would expect to kill himself. I am sure that he would still be here if guns werent so easy to get here.

Breitbart? lol

Courthouses usually have conference rooms where lawyers can wait. Many have offices near the courthouse, and they're often on call in these circumstances -- typically a ten or fifteen minute call.

Motions get filed with the court clerk and can be written from a laptop in a conference room or by an associate back at the office. No problem at all to write motions during deliberations, although motions are usually few and far between at that point in a case.

Apparently, a plan is being orchestrated to respond to a not guilty verdict by rioting and throwing bricks which are currently being found all over Kenosha at this time. Things will get ugly.

Recording from police transmissions about all the bricks starts at the 1:11 mark https://files.catbox.moe/l94xxt.mp3

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Welcome back, PB.

It's very important that I don't own a gun or be around them. 95% of the time I'm pretty cool, but 5% of the time I have the worst temper out of anyone I've ever known. It's been a part of me since I was a little kid. The SSRIs help, but being a professional poker player doesn't...

It would improve American society immensely if we were to dramatically reduce the availability of guns. Unfortunately, I have no suggestions other than the incremental stuff.

Maybe we should disband all the hundreds of the "well-regulated militias" in this country that have this constitutional right to "bear arms". Oh that's right, conservative law people have said this means "every adult gets a gun!" for some reason I don't remember, nevermind.

Well this PB guy seems legit.

You must surely be familiar with his body of work in the riggie thread, no?

These right-wingers and conspiracy-minded right-wing adjacent types like Playbig2000 would looooooooooooove for there to be mass rioting when Rittenhouse gets off. Nothing gets them harder than seeing some libs get their heads caved in by the police.

Sadly for them, there will be at absolute most 10% of the rioting, protesting and violence there was after the Zimmerman trial or after George Floyd was murdered.

This army of ANTIFA SUPERSOLDIERS ready to revolt at the second we hear "not guilty" is yet another boogeyman the right uses to work up their rube followers.