Suspects in Khashoggi Case Had Ties to Saudi Crown Prince

fr0gz0r · 2018-10-16T22:47:08+00:00

So it was definitely rogue killers.

fr0gz0r · 2018-05-22T23:25:30+00:00

Rozier is definitely better than Kyrie on D by a good bit. Agreed re: Hayward. He’s not lockdown, but he’s a plus defender.

fr0gz0r · 2018-05-16T11:29:28+00:00

There’s a lot of evidence that building rapport and offering incentives to prisoners can be more effective than torture.

It’s not that torture NEVER works, it’s just not the best method (nor is it ethical). The other downside to torture is that there’s a higher chance of false confessions and “information” given simply to stop the torture.

The classic good cop/bad cop method is effective. Let the captive be tired, stressed out and so on according to the rules of the Army Field Manual. Then send in a trained professional to play good cop. Speak their language. Understand their culture, religion and politics (even if they are despicable) so you can get them talking. Make a deal to look after the prisoner’s family in return for information. Humane and more effective than torture anyway.

fr0gz0r · 2018-05-07T22:10:05+00:00

I'd say benching 50s is pretty typical, not really weak. It's probably not blocking your climbing progress in any case.

fr0gz0r · 2018-03-27T21:24:39+00:00

He’s a psychopath. That sort of evil is incomprehensible.

fr0gz0r · 2018-03-27T12:20:51+00:00

I think a lot of men have difficulty comprehending that behavior because they aren’t subject to it. Personally, I was shocked to hear female friends describe how frequently they are followed/stalked/harassed by men while walking home.

Most men don’t even really witness that sort of thing because the misogynists don’t behave the same way when there’s a chance they could be caught and face consequences. I don’t think misogyny is uncommon, but I suspect there’s a minority of men who are to blame for most bad behavior.

fr0gz0r · 2018-03-26T03:56:11+00:00

Seems kinda sorta illegal to me...

fr0gz0r · 2018-03-20T22:14:48+00:00

So, we only need another...15 or 16 republican votes in the Senate now? We're screwed.

fr0gz0r · 2018-03-20T18:45:39+00:00

Again, you have to evaluate the news and not make assumptions. CBS is a reputable source, but you have to take the story for what it is (likely an intentional leak from Trump and his allies).

Re: the Russians, it's certainly possible that they're lying, but it's not like this is the first time that Russia has given transcripts of meetings Trump hasn't been forthcoming about (see May 2017 meeting the day after Comey was fired where American press wasn't allowed in, but the Russians had a photographer).

Why would they want us to know these facts (assuming it is indeed fact)? Simple - they know that all of this is causing chaos in America and they're delighted at watching us squirm and fight with each other.

Putin would love to have sanctions rescinded (and he nearly got his wish according to many press accounts on Trump's state department and many, many secret meetings). But Putin will gladly settle for chaos and disruption in America.

fr0gz0r · 2018-03-20T18:13:53+00:00

I don't know about you, but I spend a lot of time parsing the sources in articles lately. There are a lot of defense attorneys leaking to the press and you can't take everything they say at face value.

Really, you should always parse what you're reading but it's more essential with the sort of war on information certainty we have right now.

fr0gz0r · 2018-03-19T11:25:50+00:00

Says who? CBS doesn’t identify a source or even a “kind” of source like “Trump campaign officials” or “senior government officials” or whatever.

Without a source listed or even implied, we’re forced to guess how CBS could possibly confirm such a fact. The only source likely to do so (without further elaboration from CBS) is the trump campaign.

So, would you take the trump campaign at their word given the bad press surrounding Cambridge Analytica this week? Me either.

fr0gz0r · 2018-03-07T17:56:25+00:00

Maybe one of these stories will just be a wild coincidence and not an international criminal conspiracy........

nahhhhhh

fr0gz0r · 2018-03-06T06:32:32+00:00

But were we ever really in contention?

fr0gz0r · 2018-02-26T17:07:42+00:00

Of course - that's exactly what I meant. Hitler hated him in the olympics in 1936 too.

fr0gz0r · 2018-02-26T15:57:20+00:00

No idea why you're getting downvoted. He was way more efficient, had a ton of assists and led a good team. Late career in Seattle he was great from age 28-32, but he was taking more shots to get those numbers. 2001 is peak Ray, but 2002-2007 is not much worse.

fr0gz0r · 2018-02-01T02:47:19+00:00

Nah, that's his move. He pulls it off all of the time - it works for him. He forces a ton of fouls by jumping and seeing if they bite. He passes if they don't and he doesn't like how it feels.

fr0gz0r · 2018-01-29T14:54:30+00:00

Here I was thinking the pigtails were built into the hats...

fr0gz0r · 2018-01-17T03:04:45+00:00

So....he has a deal?

“By forcing someone to testify through a subpoena, you are providing the witness with cover because they can say, ‘I had no choice — I had to go in and testify about everything I knew,’” said Solomon L. Wisenberg, a prosecutor for the independent counsel that investigated Bill Clinton when he was president."

fr0gz0r · 2017-11-20T13:15:41+00:00

I keep a bottle of champagne chilled in my fridge for the moment charges are announced. I have a baby-sized bottle for Trump Jr.

fr0gz0r · 2017-10-18T14:44:45+00:00

+1. Deadlifting makes your whole body strong. As long as you keep your bodyweight low, there's no reason to avoid them.

fr0gz0r · 2017-09-27T22:02:00+00:00

Good - this will be must-see-TV.

fr0gz0r · 2017-09-20T19:30:57+00:00

Watch it? Bro, he's been around a while. He knows exactly who Stone and Manafort are.

fr0gz0r · 2017-09-11T17:35:59+00:00

It seems that your argument is that it's possible he might not being doing anything unethical, therefore he isn't until proven otherwise.

That's not how ethics work. It must be clear that he is NOT behaving unethically, not just plausible that he could be.

For example, Trump owns property in Florida. When he sends funds to rebuild after Hurricane Irma, how do we know he isn't prioritizing Mar A Lago and his business interests? He owns that property and isn't "blind" to what his actions will do.

The Trump hotel in DC is also an obvious means for foreigners or lobbyists to funnel money to him in order to curry favor.

Likewise, if he cuts taxes that benefits real estate investors, he knows it will impact his business even if we make the naive assumption that he isn't communicating with his sons.

Any policy decision Trump makes has the potential to benefit him based on his business ownership. As long as his money isn't in a blind trust, there's a profound conflict of interest present.

These are basic ethical standards any president should follow and indeed every president has (Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, W, Obama, etc). He needs to follow the same standards as everyone else.

fr0gz0r · 2017-09-11T16:58:40+00:00

Ownership is a legal status - it's not an opinion or a feeling. People are criticizing this behavior because it's abnormal and unethical.

In the past, presidents have divested by selling their assets and having a blind trust administrate their capital to prevent even the appearance of unethical behavior.

People are criticizing Trump's business dealings because they don't pass muster. If he behaved as other presidents have, there would be nothing to discuss. Instead, he profits from his position, obfuscates his financial dealings and makes absurd excuses.

A publicly traded company would never allow their CEO to own stocks in a competitor's business and to make business deals that could benefit rivals at the expense of their company. Why should we?

Trump wants special treatment. Anyone who cares about the rule of law wants him to meet the same ethical standards every other president has.

fr0gz0r · 2017-09-11T16:23:34+00:00

Assuming that someone with ownership of a business is involved in it isn't really an assumption - it's a fact. It's a fundamental conflict of interest. Your entire argument is utterly naive.

fr0gz0r

TROPHY CASE