When visiting Shrewd'm with a laptop, it can be pleasant to hold Command (or Ctrl with Windows) and '+' a few times. The site scales to allow any font size, and the larger font can be pleasant to read even for Shrewds with perfect sight! For luxury Shrewdness, you can combine that with setting the browser to full screen. You'll then find yourself Shrewding a lot.
- Manlobbi
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
No. of Recommendations: 5
He thinks these moronic, puerile 'tweets' are clever? Any normal person, with normal intelligence, would realize he's just making himself out to be flaming asshole.
Here he is rage tweeting about Rep Massie because Massie is the author of the bill to release all the Epstein files.
“Did Thomas Massie, sometimes referred to as Rand Paul Jr., because of the fact that he always votes against the Republican Party, get married already??? Boy, that was quick! No wonder the Polls have him at less than an 8% chance of winning the Election. Anyway, have a great life Thomas and (?). His wife will soon find out that she’s stuck with a LOSER!”
And the guy who cheated on his wives and paid for sex with porn stars and playboy bunnies and grabbed women by the genitals, etc, is trying to shame Massie for getting married 'too soon'. LOL
This is what many MAGA claim is 'the greatest President this country has ever had'.
No. of Recommendations: 9
This is what many MAGA claim is 'the greatest President this country has ever had'.
In ten years, you won’t be able to find anyone who will admit they supported him.
No. of Recommendations: 1
ges,
I watched Massie assert his position on "This Week" with Jonathan Karl this morning. Massie's position doesn't really make sense.
Here's why: On the one hand, he advocates investigating and prosecuting powerful people in the Epstein files. O.K. fair enough (although he specified he has a direct personal political interest in doing this).
However, it's really very unwise to just do a "file dump" to the public if the intention is to also seek prosecution of people named in those files.
In fact, no law enforcement agency would consider that a wise strategy. Most law enforcement agencies would consider investigatory files which may be active or may be re-opened as "confidential" and/or "privileged."
There are numerous reasons for NOT disclosing raw investigatory material to the general public, but especially if there is a possibility of trying to prosecute people named in those files.
Just one of many reasons is you automatically by doing so give the defendants a plausible argument that such nationwide or perhaps worldwide publication of raw investigatory material can deny them the fundamental right to a fair trial and is unfairly prejudicial as it would possibly bias the potential jury pool. There is no change of venue possible in such a case, the material will be plastered in every media outlet everywhere.
Ironically, Massie insisting on this kind of a public file dump seems almost designed to insulate people named from effectively being prosecuted. Of course they may be heavily embarrassed by the contents and Massie may work that to his own political advantage, but what else is new?
No. of Recommendations: 2
wzambon:
Fantasy:
"In 10 years you won't be able to find anyone to say they supported [Trump]".
Reality:
"In 10 minutes, you won't be able to find anyone to say they supported Schumer."
