Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, February 12, 2018

OTP 12 February 2018: Jeff Samardzija explains why politics and baseball rarely mix

However, there were several curveballs that forced Giants’ players to think outside the box, including one from a fan who asked a trio that included catcher Buster Posey, reliever Cory Gearrin and starting pitcher Jeff Samardzija whether they think baseball players should have a role in voicing their political opinions like football and basketball players have in recent years.

The question temporarily stumped Gearrin and Posey, so as his teammates waited, Samardzija decided to jump in and share his perspective.

“I don’t think so, not necessarily because we’re here to entertain you guys. Every time we step on the field, it’s important,” Samardzija said, before pausing temporarily while a loud round of applause petered out.

(As always, views expressed in the article lede and comments are the views of the individual commenters and the submitter of the article and do not represent the views of Baseball Think Factory or its owner.)

Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: February 12, 2018 at 07:41 AM | 2005 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: off topic, politics, san francisco giants, spring training

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 18 of 21 pages ‹ First  < 16 17 18 19 20 >  Last ›
   1701. The Yankee Clapper Posted: February 17, 2018 at 09:21 PM (#5626510)
John Delaney may not have the field to himself - Joe Biden Tiptoes Toward 2020 Run:
Former Vice President Joe Biden is tiptoeing toward a potential run in 2020, even broaching the possibility during a recent gathering of longtime foreign policy aides. Huddled in his newly opened office steps from the U.S. Capitol, Biden began a planning meeting for his new diplomacy center by addressing the elephant in the room. He said he was keeping his 2020 options open, considering it a real possibility. He insisted he had made no decision, and didn't need to yet, according to five people who either attended the meeting or were briefed on it by those who did.

Biden would only be 78 by Inauguration Day - that's 2+ years younger than Nancy Pelosi!
   1702. BrianBrianson Posted: February 17, 2018 at 09:39 PM (#5626511)
Every current and former Democratic Senator and Governor is thinking about a 2020 run, except Rod Blagojevich. Finding out someone actually isn't running is news. This is like a weather forecast in Caernarfon calling for rain ... totally unnecessary to tell anyone.
   1703. BDC Posted: February 17, 2018 at 09:47 PM (#5626513)
I wonder what the odds are of the actual 2020 Democratic challenger being older than 74-year-old Donald Trump.

Anyway, these “Biden/Kerry/Pelosi contemplates 2020 run” stories are a bit like Rafael Palmeiro contemplating a return to the major leagues, and about as realistic.
   1704. CheersUnusualPlays Posted: February 17, 2018 at 10:19 PM (#5626514)
Why not just tell people they can't have guns?
   1705. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 17, 2018 at 10:32 PM (#5626515)
Good idea. I wonder why nobody's thought of that.
   1706. OCF Posted: February 17, 2018 at 11:02 PM (#5626521)
Every current and former Democratic Senator and Governor is thinking about a 2020 run, except Rod Blagojevich.

Not Jerry Brown. Not this time. I'm pretty sure he's retiring for for real this time.
   1707. The Yankee Clapper Posted: February 17, 2018 at 11:29 PM (#5626522)
Not Jerry Brown. Not this time. I'm pretty sure he's retiring for for real this time.

But Brown is only 2 years older than Nancy Pelosi. Surely, he can't be done already?
   1708. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 17, 2018 at 11:39 PM (#5626523)
.
   1709. BrianBrianson Posted: February 17, 2018 at 11:51 PM (#5626524)
People who live in rural areas needs guns as tools. And people who go to rural areas looking for a few good meals need guns too. As much as we kvetch about guns, driving into a deer kills ~200 Americans a year, a number that'd be fearsome higher if a bunch of 'em didn't get shot.
   1710. OCF Posted: February 18, 2018 at 12:03 AM (#5626526)
The deer are flourishing inside the city limits in a lot of places, where they can't be hunted. And while there are still hunters, there are fewer of them than there used to be.

Most gun-control advocates have no problem with those who are hunters having bolt-action rifles with small magazines.
   1711. Lassus Posted: February 18, 2018 at 12:04 AM (#5626527)
People who live in rural areas needs guns as tools.

Nah. Regarding high schools, mine was public, 400 total, 7-12, definitely rural. We still play 'abandoned or not?' with various houses. My dad grew up on a farm halfway between ass-nowhere and bumfuck, north of Watertown NY and south of Canada, maybe 10 houses within 5 miles. We didn't have guns growing up, and neither did he, never shot one.

You're not wrong about the deer, but the necessity of guns for rural folk is certainly overstated.
   1712. CheersUnusualPlays Posted: February 18, 2018 at 12:35 AM (#5626531)
#1705 Because Americans are gun-obsessed? Most of the rest of the First World does fine with gun control
   1713. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: February 18, 2018 at 12:52 AM (#5626532)
Can someone clue me in on why ^^^ comments revert to [Ignored Comment]?

^^^ is the artist formerly known as SugarBear Blanks. I assume you put him on ignore while he was posting as such.
   1714. tshipman Posted: February 18, 2018 at 01:55 AM (#5626537)
Not Jerry Brown. Not this time. I'm pretty sure he's retiring for for real this time.


Jerry Brown has been a pretty great governor (again).

One of the most interesting men in politics. Shame that he wouldn't consider it.
   1715. Stormy JE Posted: February 18, 2018 at 03:51 AM (#5626542)
Jason, please. You cite #### with phrases like this all the time.
No, Lassus, I rarely, if ever, cite articles with such flimsy sourcing* and, if I do, qualify the #### out of whatever is posted.

* "A person with knowledge of the probe?" It doesn't get more tenuous than that.
   1716. DJS, the Digital Dandy Posted: February 18, 2018 at 05:02 AM (#5626543)
This would be genius:

I fail to see how. There would just be a different organization with the same NRA money advocating for gun rights.

There are only 3 million members of the Sierra Club. Do you really think that 5 million Republicans joining could end advocacy for environmentalism? Or that Republicans flooding the membership of the 1.2 million-member NARAL can ban abortion as a result?

The only result would be a powerful lobbying group, The National Gun Rights Association. Or the National Rifle Guild. Or the United States Rifle Association. Or whatever. Without the people supporting the mission statement and funding it, the NRA is just a logo.

It's shocking that anyone would actually think this would be an effective tactic. I'm assuming greenback was kidding, but Jolly...uh...yeah.
   1717. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 05:03 AM (#5626544)
From the Why-Andy's-ideas-are-silly Department comes this NYT story: Florida Agency Investigated Nikolas Cruz After Violent Social Media Posts:
PARKLAND, Fla. — A Florida social services agency conducted an in-home investigation of Nikolas Cruz after he exhibited troubling behavior nearly a year and a half before he shot and killed 17 people at his former high school in Florida, a state report shows.

The agency, the Florida Department of Children and Families, had been alerted to posts on Snapchat of Mr. Cruz cutting his arms and expressing interest in buying a gun, according to the report. But after visiting and questioning Mr. Cruz at his home, the department determined he was at low risk of harming himself or others.

...

The report noted that a mental health center had been contacted in the past to detain Mr. Cruz under Florida’s Baker Act, which allows the state to hospitalize people for several days if they are a threat to themselves or others. The center determined that he was not such a threat. Had Mr. Cruz been involuntarily committed, state law could have prohibited him from buying a firearm.
The article notes that some of Cruz's circumstances had changed since these evaluations. But the point is, "Why didn't the FBI just talk to him and then they could tell that he's nothing like Sam and shouldn't have a gun and could have taken his guns away" argument -- even if you ignore the whole due process angle -- does not offer a panacea. Even if confiscating someone's guns on a whim were acceptable, oh-it's-obvious-he-shouldn't-have-had-a-gun is actually true only in hindsight. Two different evaluations did not deem him a threat.
   1718. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 05:19 AM (#5626546)
In response to dejarouehg's proposal that every school have its own (mini) police station inside:
Why don't we just move classes to the grounds of the state penitentiary, just to prevent these events that almost never happen anyway?

They seem to be almost never happening at a substantially increased rate, and setting aside 400-800 sf in a school for a police office is a far cry from what you are suggesting. The fact that the odds are admittedly and fortunately slim that you or someone you care about will be in a school shooting situation doesn't mean that you don't take relatively easy and inexpensive steps to create deterrents.
It's not at all inexpensive to not only hire multiple extra police officers, but have extra rooms set aside for them. My school district had to wait extra years before implementing full day kindergarten because they did not have any extra classrooms for the classes. And you want to dedicate rooms to having cops there, just in case? There are roughly 100,000 public schools in the U.S. (plus another 30K private schools). What you're proposing would be at least several billion dollars. For something that, yes, almost never happens.


People: stop panicking. It's a tragedy. But not all tragedies call for a Do Something.
   1719. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 05:22 AM (#5626547)

I'm guessing that men would be more comfortable being armed in a school than women. This has certainly been the case when this scenario was discussed with a number of school personnel that I know.

Well obviously. Women don't have the same insecurities about penis size.
It's hard to tell who's stupider: people who make this argument, or SBB. Except when SBB makes the argument; then it's a tie.
   1720. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 05:33 AM (#5626548)

that FL HS has more than 3,000 students, which I find amazing.

how many were in your high school? mine had about 800, or 200 per year
Mine had roughly 1,200 (300/year). Yeah, a school of multiple thousands of students seems weird to me.

I mean, unless the school is in a very densely populated area, you'd think that a school that size would require drawing people from a large area. And you'd think if that were the case they'd build another school closer to some of those people, rather than making the school that big. (I know that this particular school is in the Miami metro area, but the specific town that the school is in isn't very big, and while I don't endorse the NJ policy of one school for virtually every town regardless of the size of the town, I would think that it would take some travel time to get that many people into the school.)
   1721. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 05:41 AM (#5626549)
Again, as a teacher who could be armed if I wanted to be, I would worry about the far more likely scenario where I lose control of a weapon. Cops devote a lot of attention to making sure that their weapons are secured, and yet you read reports of weapons lost, stolen, or grabbed during an altercation. To carry concealed I'd have to go around with a suitable outergarment all day, some kind of secure holster assembly underneath, and I'd still be freaking out about losing track or control of the gun.

This certainly seems plausible. We often flip these concerns off to make our partisan points, but one of a cop on the streets worse fears is that the suspect, or person stopped for whatever reason, will overcome him and take his gun away and use it on him. This accounts for much of the overreaction we righteously ascribe to policemen's behavior. Getting shot really hurts and can have dire consequences, like death. Often, cops have this happen to them when they forget about how easy it can be to take their weapon.
No, often cops do not have this happen to them. (I mean, I guess it depends on what one means by "often.") And seriously, that's not really one of a cop's worse fears; if it were, they would do what BDC says for himself: not carry weapons. Revealed preference. And BDC's worries say a lot more about him than about the real risks.
There's something that doesn't make sense with the idea of fighting the spread of gun violence by making it easier for there to be more gun violence by allowing more guns in public settings. It's like fighting poisonings by feeding poison to the populace in hopes it becomes immune. That's really not attacking the problem head on.
Um, you realize that this is how many vaccines actually worked/work, right? In any case, as the number of guns has proliferated, and as gun carry has been dramatically liberalized, gun violence has in fact gone way down. Whether there's a reverse causal relationship or not, there's certainly a reverse correlation.
   1722. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: February 18, 2018 at 07:38 AM (#5626550)
--
   1723. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: February 18, 2018 at 07:38 AM (#5626551)
The article notes that some of Cruz's circumstances had changed since these evaluations.


Right -- the change in those "circumstances" being that he started talking seriously about shooting up schools. You're distorting again.

But the point is, "Why didn't the FBI just talk to him and then they could tell that he's nothing like Sam and shouldn't have a gun and could have taken his guns away" argument -- even if you ignore the whole due process angle -- does not offer a panacea.


The police asking him non-custodial questions and asking him to consent to a search of his home accords entirely with due process. And taking away his guns of course does provide a "panacea," in that it deprives him of the weaponry he used to shoot up a school.

Two different evaluations did not deem him a threat.


Both done before he started talking about shooting up schools. You either didn't do your homework on this point, or are intentionally lying. And of course those of us who don't subscribe to freak show political philosophies and actually know about human beings know that people change between 17 and 19.

   1724. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: February 18, 2018 at 07:42 AM (#5626552)
People: stop panicking. It's a tragedy. But not all tragedies call for a Do Something.


LOL. The adults are talking rationally about this, with poise and without panic. If you want an example of actual "panic" look no further than your unhinged "pathetic troll" rant a day or two ago.

And honestly, no one here would or should see fit to listen to a Leninist lecturing them about anytihing panicking; same thing applies to a doctrinaire Randist. You're in no position whatever, by ideology or temperament, to start taking on a "People: Do what I say" tone. It's a highest-order example of beclowning self-delusion.
   1725. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: February 18, 2018 at 07:46 AM (#5626553)
No, often cops do not have this happen to them. (I mean, I guess it depends on what one means by "often.") And seriously, that's not really one of a cop's worse fears; if it were, they would do what BDC says for himself: not carry weapons. Revealed preference.


No, this is another of your dumb, "Well, if people really believed what you say they'd believe, they'd do X," wherein you advocate ignoring what those people say in favor of what you stupidly imply about them.

Of course, in fact everyone who isn't a hardened ideologue understands that certain things have both good and bad features, and the conclusion can be drawn that the good outweighs the bad.

Cars carry some danger, and some people's worst fears are that their kid will get hit by a drunk driver. That doesn't mean they would never let their kid drive.

Do you not understand this simple concept ... or are you distorting and misleading again?
   1726. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: February 18, 2018 at 07:49 AM (#5626554)
It's hard to tell who's stupider: people who make this argument, or SBB.


It's not an "argument," it's a straightforward sociological observation bordering on the obvious, that virtually every non-ideologue understands. Even honest Second Amendment devotees like Ray understand it.
   1727. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 18, 2018 at 07:56 AM (#5626555)
From the Why-Andy's-ideas-are-silly Department comes this NYT story: Florida Agency Investigated Nikolas Cruz After Violent Social Media Posts:

PARKLAND, Fla. — A Florida social services agency conducted an in-home investigation of Nikolas Cruz after he exhibited troubling behavior nearly a year and a half before he shot and killed 17 people at his former high school in Florida, a state report shows.

The agency, the Florida Department of Children and Families, had been alerted to posts on Snapchat of Mr. Cruz cutting his arms and expressing interest in buying a gun, according to the report. But after visiting and questioning Mr. Cruz at his home, the department determined he was at low risk of harming himself or others.

...

The report noted that a mental health center had been contacted in the past to detain Mr. Cruz under Florida’s Baker Act, which allows the state to hospitalize people for several days if they are a threat to themselves or others. The center determined that he was not such a threat. Had Mr. Cruz been involuntarily committed, state law could have prohibited him from buying a firearm.

The article notes that some of Cruz's circumstances had changed since these evaluations. But the point is, "Why didn't the FBI just talk to him and then they could tell that he's nothing like Sam and shouldn't have a gun and could have taken his guns away" argument -- even if you ignore the whole due process angle -- does not offer a panacea. Even if confiscating someone's guns on a whim were acceptable, oh-it's-obvious-he-shouldn't-have-had-a-gun is actually true only in hindsight. Two different evaluations did not deem him a threat.

Well, no solution will be a "panacea" if the officials involved screw up from beginning to end, as is obvious from the very article you're quoting:
The report is the latest indication that Mr. Cruz was repeatedly identified by local and federal agencies as a troubled young man with violent tendencies. The F.B.I. admitted on Friday that it had failed to investigate a tip called into a hotline last month by a person close to Mr. Cruz identifying him as a gun owner intent on killing people, possibly at a school. The local police were called to Mr. Cruz’s house many times for disturbances over several years.

Mr. Cruz also worried officials at his former school, Marjory Stoneman Douglas High in Parkland, Fla., who on at least one occasion alerted a mobile crisis unit to get him emergency counseling, according to the state report.

Broward County Public Schools disciplinary records obtained on Saturday by The New York Times show Mr. Cruz had a long history of fights with teachers, and was frequently accused of using profane language with school staff. He was referred for a “threat assessment” in January 2017, the last entry in his record, two months after the Department of Children and Families closed its separate investigation into Mr. Cruz’s worrisome behavior.

Howard Finkelstein, the Broward County public defender, whose office is representing Mr. Cruz, said the report was further evidence that Mr. Cruz needed serious help long before the shooting but did not get enough of it.

“This kid exhibited every single known red flag, from killing animals to having a cache of weapons to disruptive behavior to saying he wanted to be a school shooter,” Mr. Finkelstein said. “If this isn’t a person who should have gotten someone’s attention, I don’t know who is. This was a multisystem failure.”...

As I mentioned yesterday afternoon in #1626, one possible way of preventing some mass shootings would be along these lines:

Five states allow guns to be seized before someone can commit violence

In the wake of massacres similar to Wednesday’s school shooting in Parkland, Fla., a small number of states have passed “red flag laws” that allow the seizure of guns before people can commit acts of violence.

California, Washington, Oregon, Indiana and Connecticut have statutes that can be used to temporarily take guns away from people a judge deems a threat to themselves or others. Lawmakers in 18 other states — including Florida — plus the District of Columbia have proposed similar measures.

At the federal level, Rep. Salud Carbajal (D-Calif.) and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) introduced legislation last May that would encourage states to adopt the approach.

Mental illness, escalating threats, substance abuse and domestic violence are among the circumstances in which a judge can order weapon restrictions under the statutes.

“This morning I heard the sheriff [in Parkland] lament the fact that he did not have the tools to remove the firearms from the shooter,” Joshua Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, said Thursday. “Had he lived in one of those states where this law is in place, he would have had the tools, and this shooting may have been averted.”

The nation’s patchwork of federal and state gun laws mainly involves background checks and actions to prevent people who pose a threat from buying firearms. The approach of the red flag laws is to seize guns from people who have them and to restrict their access until they are no longer deemed dangerous....

The laws allow family members or law enforcement officers to ask a judge for a “gun violence restraining order” or an “extreme risk protection order” against someone who behaves the way 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz, the alleged Florida gunman, did in recent years.

According to news reports, Cruz killed squirrels with a pellet gun, trained his dogs to attack a neighbor’s piglets, posted on Insta­gram about guns and killing animals and eventually threatened at least one teen. He showed signs of depression and had been treated at a mental health clinic....

Note that this doesn't require armed teachers, or a squad of policemen to be stationed in every school. It just allows the common sense remedies that law enforcement officials should have at their disposal when someone like Cruz appears on their radar screen.

It won't prevent all mass shootings, because (duh) not all mass shooters give off early warning signals the way that Cruz did. But if such a law had been in effect in Florida, there's a good chance that this particular tragedy might have been averted.

And what's the downside to that?
   1728. BrianBrianson Posted: February 18, 2018 at 08:01 AM (#5626557)
#1705 Because Americans are gun-obsessed? Most of the rest of the First World does fine with gun control


This is true, but well overstated. Most of the rest of the First World has high levels of gun ownership (by global standards), and guns are easily and widely available. In the US felons and stuff can't buy guns, and there're other restrictions (mostly at state levels). It's not really right to say Canada or Sweden have gun control and America doesn't, but that America has somewhat less gun control than Canada.
   1729. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: February 18, 2018 at 08:13 AM (#5626559)
Dothan, Alabama:

A 15-year-old Dothan High School student was arrested and jailed Friday after other students told school officials he threatened to "shoot up the school," according to Dothan police.

This arrest makes the fourth student charged on Friday for making terrorist threats against a school and a fifth student arrested for making threats since last week.

On Thursday, Dothan High students told school officials about the threats made against the school.

School staff notified the school resource officer, who took the student to the Dothan Police Department for questioning, police said.

He was later charged with making a terrorist threat, police said.


But what can be done?!?!?!?!? What can anyone do?!?!?!?!?!
   1730. BDC Posted: February 18, 2018 at 08:52 AM (#5626560)
BDC's worries say a lot more about him than about the real risks

I don't know your level of gun skills, David, but I suspect that if you were teaching in a campus-carry state, you'd leave your weapon at home. As we've both noted, the chances of getting into a gunfight with an active shooter are extremely infinitesimal. So the liability risks if you somehow mess up and your gun is stolen, grabbed, accidentally discharged, etc. are significantly greater than those of being able to re-enact Die Hard during the next crisis.

You may answer that you don't read much about problems with professors having problems with their guns, either, and that's true (though one reason might be that so few are armed). But the issue is not one of abstract statistics at that point: it's whether you yourself want to introduce a level of continual real risk into your life, in exchange for the unlikely, uncertain, or purely theoretical good it might bring.
   1731. McCoy Posted: February 18, 2018 at 08:53 AM (#5626561)
Relying on 15 year olds to do the responsible and rational thing seems like something you can rely on day in and day out. We should do that for all of our societal problems instead of having laws and things.
   1732. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: February 18, 2018 at 09:05 AM (#5626563)
There are laws against making terroristic threats.
   1733. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 18, 2018 at 10:08 AM (#5626566)
As a public service to JE and Clapper, here are your Official Talking Points for today, presented to you by your Ghostwriter-in-Chief:

‘They are laughing their asses off in Moscow’: Trump takes on the FBI, Russia probe and 2016 election

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — President Trump questioned the intensifying special counsel investigation of his 2016 campaign and his administration while attacking his own national security adviser, the FBI, Hillary Clinton, former president Barack Obama, Democrats in Congress, CNN and others in a remarkable nine-hour span of tweets that included profanity and misspellings....

“I never said Russia did not meddle in the election, I said “it may be Russia, or China or another country or group, or it may be a 400 pound genius sitting in bed and playing with his computer.” The Russian “hoax” was that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia — it never did!” he posted around 7:30 a.m Sunday.

About 30 minutes later, he added: “If it was the GOAL of Russia to create discord, disruption and chaos within the U.S. then, with all of the Committee Hearings, Investigations and Party hatred, they have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. They are laughing their asses off in Moscow. Get smart America!”

While unleashing fury on a number of targets, the president had nothing to say about the 13 Russians who have been indicted, their allegedly elaborate operation and the Russian government....

Trump has wavered publicly on whether Russia interfered to benefit him, even though all the intelligence agencies of the United States has conclusively said Russia did. After H.R. McMaster, his national security adviser, said Saturday that Russia was to blame, Trump mocked him publicly, calling attention to ethical issues of Clinton’s and conspiracy issues he has fanned. He has, at times, clashed with McMaster and finds McMaster to be too professorial, aides have said.

“General McMaster forgot to say that the results of the 2016 election were not impacted or changed by the Russians and that the only Collusion was between Russia and Crooked H, the DNC and the Dems. Remember the Dirty Dossier, Uranium, Speeches, Emails and the Podesta Company!” Trump said....

He also revived a news story about Obama sending $1.7 billion to Iran in a separate tweet and said it should have been investigated. The payment was the settlement of a long-standing arbitration claim.

It was unclear what any of those had to do with Russian meddling the election.

He further attacked “Finally, Liddle’ Adam Schiff, the leakin’ monster of no control,” the Democrat he often sees on television talking about the House Intelligence Committee’s investigation. He noted that Schiff said Obama should have done more on Russian interference Saturday. “Thanks Adam,” he wrote.

In the end, the tweets seemed distilled to this, which he posted around 8 a.m.

“The Democrats, lead by their fearless leader, Crooked Hillary Clinton, lost the 2016 election. But wasn’t I a great candidate?” Trump said.
   1734. Count Posted: February 18, 2018 at 10:09 AM (#5626567)
Trump blamed the FBI for focusing too much on the Russia investigation and missing signs about the school shooter, which is somehow a new low. It's disgusting and nonsensical and will be the position of 30% of the country within a few days.

Not sure if this has been mentioned: one of the issues with having cops at schools is that disciplinary action ends up getting routed through criminal justice system instead of regular school discipline. So kids end up getting arrested more when they really should just get suspended etc.
   1735. Lassus Posted: February 18, 2018 at 10:26 AM (#5626569)
People: stop panicking. It's a tragedy. But not all tragedies call for a Do Something.

Tragedies, plural, counselor. Which is why people want to actually do something.


And that's a coke to the same David, Count.
   1736. dejarouehg Posted: February 18, 2018 at 10:42 AM (#5626570)
Not sure if this has been mentioned: one of the issues with having cops at schools is that disciplinary action ends up getting routed through criminal justice system instead of regular school discipline. So kids end up getting arrested more when they really should just get suspended etc.
I think David mentioned it. However, that's not an absolute and frankly if it were the case, I'm not so sure there aren't circumstances where it's warranted.

   1737. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: February 18, 2018 at 10:49 AM (#5626573)
Russian destabilization games would probably be less effective if Trump were literally on their payroll in an official capacity. The USwill not be stable or useful in the world until The Cockholster In Chief is removed.
   1738. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: February 18, 2018 at 10:50 AM (#5626574)
No one is surprised that the regular chorus wants a police state.
   1739. Zonk cooks his superfish with raisins Posted: February 18, 2018 at 10:59 AM (#5626575)
Your ###### up president is losing his ####.
   1740. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: February 18, 2018 at 11:37 AM (#5626581)
Again.
   1741. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 18, 2018 at 11:55 AM (#5626584)
This is what our train wreck in the White House has brought us. Can anyone imagine a story like this being written about any other president?

Top U.S. officials tell the world to ignore Trump’s tweets
MUNICH — Amid global anxiety about President Trump’s approach to global affairs, U.S. officials had a message to a gathering of Europe’s foreign policy elite this weekend: pay no attention to the man tweeting behind the curtain.

U.S. lawmakers — both Democrats and Republicans — and top national security officials in the Trump administration offered the same advice publicly and privately, often clashing with Trump’s Twitter stream: the United States remains staunchly committed to its European allies, is furious with the Kremlin about election interference and isn’t contemplating a preemptive strike on North Korea to halt its nuclear program.

But Trump himself engaged in a running counterpoint to the message, taking aim on social media at his own national security adviser, H.R. McMaster, because he “forgot” on Saturday to tell the Munich Security Conference that the results of the 2016 weren’t affected by Russian interference, a conclusion that is not supported by U.S. intelligence agencies. They say they will likely never be able to determine whether the Russian involvement swung the election toward Trump.

The determination to ignore Trump’s foreign-policy tweets has been bipartisan.

“There is a lot more support for continuing our past policies than it might appear from some of the statements,” Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) told an audience on Sunday that was comprised mostly of Europe’s foreign-policy elite. “The unanimity comes from those folks who are actually operationalizing policy.”

“The values are the same, the relationships are the same,” said Rep. Michael R. Turner (R-Ohio). “What you do see is this administration willing to put pressure upon the systems.”

The question of whom they should believe — the president or his advisers — has befuddled European officials. German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel confessed Saturday that he didn’t know where to look to understand America.

“Is it deeds? Is it words? Is it tweets?” he asked.

He said he was not sure whether he could recognize the United States....

But gee, how could we ever have known that this was going to happen?
   1742. dejarouehg Posted: February 18, 2018 at 11:58 AM (#5626585)
It's not at all inexpensive to not only hire multiple extra police officers, but have extra rooms set aside for them. My school district had to wait extra years before implementing full day kindergarten because they did not have any extra classrooms for the classes. And you want to dedicate rooms to having cops there, just in case? There are roughly 100,000 public schools in the U.S. (plus another 30K private schools). What you're proposing would be at least several billion dollars. For something that, yes, almost never happens.


Clearly some districts are better suited both logistically and financially than others. For many, there is room and there is no need to hire any additional personnel. It's a relocation of some, and I'm guessing that most police forces have the capacity for internet access so that communications are not hampered. And if your figure of several billion dollars were accurate, I'd say it's a relative drop in the bucket. And if you want to talk about spending money on things that almost never happen, please justify the cost for all the nuclear warheads above 1000? (I figured I'd give you 1000 to play with, but for the other 3000 or so that remain active?) Or the costs for environmental clean-ups where EPA spends absurd amounts on incredibly unrealistic scenarios? Or even $55 Million on a Presidential blow-job!!! (I'm on all side of the political spectrum - both extremes have their imbecilic qualities.)

You want to say that it's absurd on the basis of a cost-benefit analysis because the odds are so small, well, if we're being intellectually honest, that's statistically fair. No doubt, this has a large emotional soothing component to it. Except that there is very little downside - to say that this brings us closer to a police state is silly - and I disagree with your cost evaluation.
   1743. dejarouehg Posted: February 18, 2018 at 12:41 PM (#5626590)
This is what our train wreck in the White House has brought us. Can anyone imagine a story like this being written about any other president?
Narcissists live for chaos. They don't respond to an even-keeled lifestyle well. A reporter recently noted that even when things are stable (for Trump, anyway,) he feels the need to put out incendiary tweets, especially on slow news days, i.e. Saturday AMs. The reporter noted that he "seems to thrive on chaos," without realizing that this is the symptom of a Narcissist.
   1744. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 18, 2018 at 12:51 PM (#5626591)
This is what our train wreck in the White House has brought us. Can anyone imagine a story like this being written about any other president?


Narcissists live for chaos. They don't respond to an even-keeled lifestyle well.

True for Trump himself, but here the irony is that Trump's most fervent followers claim that the reason they support him is that their lives have been thrown into chaos**----the "browning of America", gay marriage, etc. It's a bit along the lines of "We have to destroy the village in order to save it", but it'll likely work about as well for them in the long run as it did for us in Vietnam.

** Though in some cases around here it's more the apparent psychic destruction brought about by Obama and the thought of Hillary Clinton than it is by anything actually tangible that their policies have (or would have) brought about.
   1745. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: February 18, 2018 at 12:59 PM (#5626593)
You want to say that it's absurd on the basis of a cost-benefit analysis because the odds are so small, well, if we're being intellectually honest, that's statistically fair. No doubt, this has a large emotional soothing component to it. Except that there is very little downside - to say that this brings us closer to a police state is silly - and I disagree with your cost evaluation.

I mean very little downside, other than the billions of dollars a year? But even then, I would strongly disagree. I am about 95% certain, that having armed police in schools would end up killing more kids than it saves. The police in the US does not exactly have a stellar track-record when it comes to unjustified killings. Putting them in a position of oversight over millions of kids on a daily basis is just begging for more of those "mistakes".

And I do think it is one step further towards becoming a police state. What do you think a police state is? Having police oversee parts of everyday life, that they have no business overseeing. Monitoring private citizens, without cause. Overbearing restrictions over personal freedom in favor of national security... That is essentially the definition of a police state. And is exactly what you are advocating.

And if you think the police will just sit in their office all day long, and do paperwork, well then I have a bridge to sell you. If they have an active presence in schools, they will attempt to justify it, and become more involved, and more active in running the school, and maintaining their version of order.
   1746. dejarouehg Posted: February 18, 2018 at 01:09 PM (#5626599)
True for Trump himself, but here the irony is that Trump's most fervent followers


I think the true irony is that Trump has reveled in screwing over the type of people who make up his base. The number of contractors who did work for him that he didn't pay just because is extraordinary. He'd use excuses that a) it doesn't look/feel like the job should have cost (fill in the blank), b) I'm not going to pay you the full amount but you'll be able to put on your resume that you did work for Trump c) you know that I can keep you in court forever and that you'd be better off settling for X, etc. The Reise (sp?) brothers were notorious for doing the same thing.

This is part of the reason there are so many suits against him. I'm sure that in some cases, the contractor might have screwed up. It happens. Yet somehow in the hundreds of jobs that I've done as a Landlord, GC, carpentry contractor and construction manager, I've had only 5 lawsuits, 3 of which where I sued for non-payment where the developer went belly up. The fourth was a Trump clone (only a 9 figure bank account) who used excuses a & c above. (As a Landlord, I had to sue a GC once(!) for taking a year to do 3 month job. I was new at this and learned my lesson the hard way.)

He's a serial litigator and bully and his base looks a lot like his "victims."
   1747. dejarouehg Posted: February 18, 2018 at 01:20 PM (#5626604)
I mean very little downside, other than the billions of dollars a year? But even then, I would strongly disagree. I am about 95% certain, that having armed police in schools would end up killing more kids than it saves.


In all of these school shootings, when the cops arrived fully armed, how many kids have they killed "mistakenly"?

I'm not a huge fan of police based on my personal dealings but I don't agree with your assessment that they will try to justify their existence. If cops have an adjunct-precinct in a school, or let's even say in a school lot - an office trailer - why are you jumping to the conclusion that they'd be involved with ordinary school business or that they'd even want to be? You think school administrators are looking to do give up their authority?

And if you think the police will just sit in their office all day long, and do paperwork, well then I have a bridge to sell you.
Well then you have absolutely ZERO ***ing idea of the current work habits of thousands of police officers in NYC, Nassau or Suffolk counties. I can't speak for any others.
   1748. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 18, 2018 at 01:25 PM (#5626605)
True for Trump himself, but here the irony is that Trump's most fervent followers...

I think the true irony is that Trump has reveled in screwing over the type of people who make up his base. The number of contractors who did work for him that he didn't pay just because is extraordinary. He'd use excuses that a) it doesn't look/feel like the job should have cost (fill in the blank), b) I'm not going to pay you the full amount but you'll be able to put on your resume that you did work for Trump c) you know that I can keep you in court forever and that you'd be better off settling for X, etc. The Reise (sp?) brothers were notorious for doing the same thing.

This is part of the reason there are so many suits against him. I'm sure that in some cases, the contractor might have screwed up. It happens. Yet somehow in the hundreds of jobs that I've done as a Landlord, GC, carpentry contractor and construction manager, I've had only 5 lawsuits, 3 of which where I sued for non-payment where the developer went belly up. The fourth was a Trump clone (only a 9 figure bank account) who used excuses a & c above. (As a Landlord, I had to sue a GC once(!) for taking a year to do 3 month job. I was new at this and learned my lesson the hard way.)

He's a serial litigator and bully and his base looks a lot like his "victims."


I guess I'll double down on the irony by noting that everything you mention above was well known about Trump well before election day. Or at least it was well known to anyone who was paying attention.
   1749. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 01:31 PM (#5626606)
I don't know your level of gun skills, David, but I suspect that if you were teaching in a campus-carry state, you'd leave your weapon at home. As we've both noted, the chances of getting into a gunfight with an active shooter are extremely infinitesimal. So the liability risks if you somehow mess up and your gun is stolen, grabbed, accidentally discharged, etc. are significantly greater than those of being able to re-enact Die Hard during the next crisis.

You may answer that you don't read much about problems with professors having problems with their guns, either, and that's true (though one reason might be that so few are armed). But the issue is not one of abstract statistics at that point: it's whether you yourself want to introduce a level of continual real risk into your life, in exchange for the unlikely, uncertain, or purely theoretical good it might bring.
The most recent data I see in a quick google is 2016; as of that date there were more than a million active carry licenses in Texas. While we can reasonably assume that not all million license holders actually carry on a daily basis, we can reasonably assume that at a minimum hundreds of thousands do. How frequently do you hear about such people having their guns taken away from them and used against them?
   1750. BDC Posted: February 18, 2018 at 01:32 PM (#5626607)
Black Panther: a very well-written movie. The plot has considerable forward movement and hangs together, with loose ends folded neatly in as you go along. I admit to wondering for the first few reels what the #### the opening scene in Oakland, California in 1992 had to do with anything else, but it is all made perfectly clear.

Political message: The oppressed people of color of the Earth must rise up against the colonizers – but with scientific and cultural exchange! not by kicking their ###es.

I paid more attention to the score than I might have otherwise, because Lassus liked it. It's eclectic and energetic – I liked both the car-chase music and the battle music (though Lassus may have liked totally different things).
   1751. BDC Posted: February 18, 2018 at 01:51 PM (#5626610)
How frequently do you hear about such people having their guns taken away from them and used against them?

I don't think you're quite getting my point, which is about balancing risks. The odds of any bad incident with a concealed weapon are small, which is precisely why I haven't freaked out about campus carry. The odds of an active shooter are immensely less, and the odds of my having any positive impact on an active shooter situation are immensely less than that. So why would I personally carry a weapon? It is not going to do anybody any good. They're not going to say at my funeral "and he kept us all safer by packing that revolver that none of the potential shooters who never materialized ever knew about."

When you get to armed teachers in elementary or secondary schools, you get into just-plain-stupid territory. You do hear regularly about kids finding guns and discharging them. Do you want to turn elementary classrooms into the context for that kind of story?

   1752. dejarouehg Posted: February 18, 2018 at 02:16 PM (#5626613)
Or at least it was well known to anyone who was paying attention.
.......and that was the key point. Plenty of the Trump-ists I've spoken to didn't know, didn't care or were in denial, "how do I know that's accurate?

Met with some real estate developers in WI after the election who were real successful folks. Clearly winners in the Living the American Dream contest. They used the phrase "fake news," and we just sat there stone-faced. As I wrote earlier, when the people who are educated buy into his b.s., I just don't know where you go.
   1753. Joe Bivens will never admit, will make some excuse Posted: February 18, 2018 at 02:25 PM (#5626614)
As I wrote earlier, when the people who are educated buy into his b.s., I just don't know where you go.


Yeah. I've run into many dumb Trump supporters who use "Fake News" as an excuse to ignore evidence. They want things boiled down to simplest terms. Buying into "Fake News" saves them from having to admit they don't understand what the Trump team has done. I don't despise these people. They're stupid. Oh well.

It's the Dancing Monkey types that deserve all the ridicule.
   1754. tshipman Posted: February 18, 2018 at 02:25 PM (#5626615)
The most recent data I see in a quick google is 2016; as of that date there were more than a million active carry licenses in Texas. While we can reasonably assume that not all million license holders actually carry on a daily basis, we can reasonably assume that at a minimum hundreds of thousands do. How frequently do you hear about such people having their guns taken away from them and used against them?


Per this source, which cites the CDC, there were 1994 suicides and 609 accidental gun deaths for minors in Texas in 2015.

Those are by far the biggest risks of having a gun in your house. (35.9% of Texans owned a gun).
Wiki adds that there are about 5400 non-fatal gun accidents/year.

Comparatively, there were 121,000 violent crimes committed in the state of Texas (presumably what you want a gun to protect yourself from).

Violent crime rate was 434/100K in Texas. "Bad gun stuff" at about 80/100K.
   1755. dejarouehg Posted: February 18, 2018 at 02:27 PM (#5626617)
They are laughing their asses off in Moscow.
Well, this is one thing I think he got right. They must be enjoying this reality show.
   1756. dejarouehg Posted: February 18, 2018 at 02:32 PM (#5626618)
I only mentioned Washington because that was the one I was most familiar with, but a general admission ticket in Yankee Stadium in 1961 got you an upper deck seat behind the plate for only $1.30. I went to 9 games in 7 days there that Summer for a total ticket cost of $9.10.


Hate to infuse baseball into this, but any recollections of the 9 games?

Don't like the Yankees but wish I'd gotten to see Mantle play. Saw Aaron and Clemente at the end. Saw Mays and Mantle (and Joe D) at Old Timers Games, but to get to see Mantle (and Banks and Mays and Koufax) play live..............
   1757. dejarouehg Posted: February 18, 2018 at 02:41 PM (#5626619)
Those are by far the biggest risks of having a gun in your house. (35.9% of Texans owned a gun).


Surprised the number is this low. All of my TX friends own guns........and yes, they completely disagree with my opposition to guns. They're just very civil about it.

Was stunned to learn a few months ago that on my block, which is stereotypically pseudo-North Shore LI, (as in North Shore wannabees) i.e., 30% Jewish, 50% Italian, 20% other, we have about 50% gun ownership. (Includes a retired cop and federal officer.)

   1758. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: February 18, 2018 at 03:15 PM (#5626622)
Wow, if you irrational, obsessive people had a little more self-confidence in your lives, and could control your own outcomes and happiness, you wouldn't be so crazed about Trump in the White House. I can't imagine being married to any of you. That's right; none of you will ever have me. My heart's pitter-patter belongs to Trump.
   1759. I Am Merely a Fake Lawyer Posted: February 18, 2018 at 03:40 PM (#5626628)
If they shot all the horses at Belmont -- including Secretariat -- Trump Derangement Syndrome would still abide.
   1760. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 03:57 PM (#5626632)
Five states allow guns to be seized before someone can commit violence

In the wake of massacres similar to Wednesday’s school shooting in Parkland, Fla., a small number of states have passed “red flag laws” that allow the seizure of guns before people can commit acts of violence.

California, Washington, Oregon, Indiana and Connecticut have statutes that can be used to temporarily take guns away from people a judge deems a threat to themselves or others. Lawmakers in 18 other states — including Florida — plus the District of Columbia have proposed similar measures.

At the federal level, Rep. Salud Carbajal (D-Calif.) and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) introduced legislation last May that would encourage states to adopt the approach.

Mental illness, escalating threats, substance abuse and domestic violence are among the circumstances in which a judge can order weapon restrictions under the statutes.

“This morning I heard the sheriff [in Parkland] lament the fact that he did not have the tools to remove the firearms from the shooter,” Joshua Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, said Thursday. “Had he lived in one of those states where this law is in place, he would have had the tools, and this shooting may have been averted.”

The nation’s patchwork of federal and state gun laws mainly involves background checks and actions to prevent people who pose a threat from buying firearms. The approach of the red flag laws is to seize guns from people who have them and to restrict their access until they are no longer deemed dangerous....

The laws allow family members or law enforcement officers to ask a judge for a “gun violence restraining order” or an “extreme risk protection order” against someone who behaves the way 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz, the alleged Florida gunman, did in recent years.

According to news reports, Cruz killed squirrels with a pellet gun, trained his dogs to attack a neighbor’s piglets, posted on Insta­gram about guns and killing animals and eventually threatened at least one teen. He showed signs of depression and had been treated at a mental health clinic....


Note that this doesn't require armed teachers, or a squad of policemen to be stationed in every school. It just allows the common sense remedies that law enforcement officials should have at their disposal when someone like Cruz appears on their radar screen.

It won't prevent all mass shootings, because (duh) not all mass shooters give off early warning signals the way that Cruz did. But if such a law had been in effect in Florida, there's a good chance that this particular tragedy might have been averted.

And what's the downside to that?


1. Every law enacted is a law that will be abused. You understand this quite well when it comes to laws restricting, say, abortion rights, so why don't you understand it here?

2. "Taking away" someone's guns doesn't take away the person's ability to get another gun.

3. At that, they only "take away" the person's guns temporarily; the person eventually gets the guns back.

4. Guns aren't the only way to kill people.

5. You and SBB are still not understanding that there's a denominator here. Only a tiny percentage of even those who are "red flagged" go on to shoot up a school or the like. You have to be a mind reader to predict who of the set it will be. This is quite easy in hindsight; quite difficult beforehand.
   1761. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 04:05 PM (#5626634)
Black Panther: a very well-written movie. The plot has considerable forward movement and hangs together, with loose ends folded neatly in as you go along. I admit to wondering for the first few reels what the #### the opening scene in Oakland, California in 1992 had to do with anything else, but it is all made perfectly clear.


I won't see it because it's a Marvel / Comic Book / SuperHero movie and I don't see those, but my weird friends who are into these movies loved it.

I did (belatedly) see Deepwater Horizon this weekend and enjoyed it. Fairly well made.
   1762. Lassus Posted: February 18, 2018 at 04:12 PM (#5626637)
I'm packing my house and hate Twitter, but I hear Rubio's having a public meltdown. Hyperbole, or another good show?
   1763. Barnaby Jones Posted: February 18, 2018 at 04:14 PM (#5626638)
I also want to say that the idea of arming teachers scares me. Recent events have shown that it is difficult for police officers to know when to use deadly force appropriately. Asking teachers to do the same is a lot to ask, and that says nothing about the risk of the weapons being lost, stolen, etc.


I know the "arm the teachers" plan was already dismissed by most, but I just wanted to agree strongly with this.
   1764. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 04:28 PM (#5626642)
Count David Frum among those who think Trump fired Comey to stop the investigations -- not "impede" but literally "shut down." There was some revisionist history on this point here last week, with a lot of pretending going on that people haven't been saying "stop" (even though the difference between "stop" and "impede" doesn't matter from an obstruction of justice standpoint):

The new question is this: What has been—what will be done—to protect American democracy from such attacks in the future? The Russian attack in 2016 worked, yielding dividends beyond Vladimir Putin’s wildest hopes. The Russians hoped to cast a shadow over the Clinton presidency. Instead, they outright elected their preferred candidate. Americans once thought it was a big deal that Alger Hiss rose to serve as acting temporary secretary general of the United Nations. This time, a Russian-backed individual was installed in the Oval Office.

From that position of power, Trump has systematically attempted to shut down investigations of the foreign-espionage operation that operated on his behalf. He fired the director of the FBI to shut it down. His White House coordinated with the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee to misdirect the investigation. He mobilized the speaker of the House to thwart bipartisan investigations under broadly respected leadership. He has inspired, supported, and joined a national propaganda campaign against the Mueller investigation.
   1765. zenbitz Posted: February 18, 2018 at 04:35 PM (#5626645)
My high school in SF had about 2900. Currently around 2600. It's one of the bigger ones. In toto Sfusd has 16k high schoolers and 14 high schools.
   1766. tshipman Posted: February 18, 2018 at 04:42 PM (#5626648)
Manafort is mega-screwed.

I know that we've known about this being possible for a while, but it seems likely that Mueller's strategy has two directions:

Money Laundering
1. Flip Gates
2. Pressure Manafort
3. Flip Manafort--may not be necessary if the forensic evidence is strong)
4. Indict the biggest fish (possible also that Manafort is the biggest fish!)

Computer Hacking
1. Flip low level guys (Papadopolous)
2. Establish the network
3. Pressure the families
4. Flip the mid-level
5. Indict the top level guys

Obstruction
1. Just record Donald Trump's verbatim comments.
   1767. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 05:03 PM (#5626654)
I also want to say that the idea of arming teachers scares me. Recent events have shown that it is difficult for police officers to know when to use deadly force appropriately. Asking teachers to do the same is a lot to ask, and that says nothing about the risk of the weapons being lost, stolen, etc.
Let me concur with the objection to this as phrased; I don't think "arm the teachers" is a good idea at all. Rather, I think teachers (and other school employees) should be allowed to possess firearms on campuses, not that the schools should be giving out weapons.

But setting that aside, I think this objection is misplaced. Cops do not suffer from an inability to know when to use deadly force; they simply disagree (as, unfortunately, do prosecutors and juries) with some of us as to when it's appropriate. Teachers, however, would be in the same boat as the rest of us: they could use deadly force only in immediate self-defense. They don't face the same putatively ambiguous situations that cops do, because they would not be asked to do anything except to defend against an actual active shooter on campus.
   1768. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 18, 2018 at 05:05 PM (#5626655)
I only mentioned Washington because that was the one I was most familiar with, but a general admission ticket in Yankee Stadium in 1961 got you an upper deck seat behind the plate for only $1.30. I went to 9 games in 7 days there that Summer for a total ticket cost of $9.10.

Hate to infuse baseball into this, but any recollections of the 9 games?


Many recollections. The week ran from a Mayor's Cup game with the Giants on Monday night, July 24th, through a twi-nighter and two night games with the White Sox, and it ended with a night game, an Old Timers' Day game, and a doubleheader against the Orioles over the weekend of July 28-30. The Yanks lost the Mayor's Cup game, swept the White Sox, and won only the Old Timers' game against the Birds.

Highlights: Maris hit 4 homers in the White Sox twi-nighter, 2 in each game, and Mantle added one in the first game, a liner off the LF foul pole. And in the final White Sox game, when the Sox rallied in the 9th and had the tying and go-ahead runs on base, Richardson-Kubek-Skowron turned a DP that took about a tenth of a second to complete.

Lowlights: After that it went all downhill. Nightcap of the Sunday doubleheader, the Yanks were losing 2-1 going into the bottom of the 9th, but loaded the bases with nobody out. Clete Boyer worked the count to 3 and 0, then took 3 straight strikes down the middle. Then Hector Lopez swung at the first pitch and hit a hard one-hopper to short for a game ending DP. And just to make sure, he slipped and fell while leaving the batter's box. And poor 17 year old me had to take a train back to DC with all that festering in my tormented mind.

Don't like the Yankees but wish I'd gotten to see Mantle play. Saw Aaron and Clemente at the end. Saw Mays and Mantle (and Joe D) at Old Timers Games, but to get to see Mantle (and Banks and Mays and Koufax) play live......

Saw Mantle a million times in NY, DC, Detroit and Baltimore, Mays and Aaron in the '56 and '62 All-Star games in Washington, and later in Wrigley (Mays, as a Met), San Francisco (Mays, several times) and LA (Aaron), Clemente only in that 1962 A-S game, Banks in the '62 A-S game and later in Wrigley (where he hit a walkoff homer in this game) and Candlestick. And I also saw Ted Williams hit a home run in Washington right after he got out of Korea.

But I never saw Koufax (other than on a bench in DC and Connie Mack) or Dimaggio. Joe D retired just 5 months before I went to my first game. Biggest regret of my life as a Fearless Spectator.

   1769. greenback took the 110 until the 105 Posted: February 18, 2018 at 05:13 PM (#5626659)
I know that we've known about this being possible for a while, but it seems likely that Mueller's strategy has two directions:

The troll farm indictments announced on Friday were in a completely different direction. Lots of "conspiracy to commit..." charges against Russians raise the obvious question of whether some Americans could be party to these conspiracy. The potential American conspirators would include Trump's data guys and Cambridge Analytica (in spite of the English name, Mercer is a part-owner of CA and Bannon was a a VP at CA), who have little or nothing to do with hacking, as their expertise is manipulating Facebook users and not computer security. Aside from the Manafortian Candidate path, this is the one obvious link for collusion between the campaign and the Russians.
   1770. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 05:15 PM (#5626661)
1. Every law enacted is a law that will be abused. You understand this quite well when it comes to laws restricting, say, abortion rights, so why don't you understand it here?
As Wally Olson noted, if Randy Barnett is willing to consider this, so am I. But Randy goes on to explain that he's talking precisely: he's willing to consider it, not endorsing it. But California's implementation is pretty terrible, as one would expect from California. It allows anyone at all to report, anonymously, and it allows for extended periods of denial. David French outlines the features a legitimate process should have:
1. It should limit those who have standing to seek the order to a narrowly defined class of people (close relatives, those living with the respondent);
2. It should require petitioners to come forward with clear, convincing, admissible evidence that the respondent is a significant danger to himself or others;
3. It should grant the respondent an opportunity to contest the claims against him;
4. In the event of an emergency, ex parte order (an order granted before the respondent can contest the claims), a full hearing should be scheduled quickly — preferably within 72 hours; and
5. The order should lapse after a defined period of time unless petitioners can come forward with clear and convincing evidence that it should remain in place.

The concept of the GVRO is simple, not substantially different from the restraining orders that are common in family law, and far easier to explain to the public than our nation’s mental-health adjudications. Moreover, the requirement that the order come from people close to the respondent and that they come forward with real evidence (e.g. sworn statements, screenshots of social-media posts, copies of journal entries) minimizes the chance of bad-faith claims.
   1771. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 18, 2018 at 05:27 PM (#5626664)
Can we all agree on just these two things?

1. Trump is too stupid ever to directly conspire with the Russians about influencing the election without bragging about it in response to a comment that he's too stupid to do it. If he was willing to go on record encouraging them to release all of Hillary's pilfered emails, it's hard to imagine he wouldn't be equally (and spontaneously) self-incriminating about more serious matters.

2. OTOH his lack of brainpower is probably the only reason he wasn't involved in any direct conspiring. It certainly wasn't an excess of patriotism or any other positive principle. His idea of patriotism is staging a Soviet-style military parade in his honor.

Our saving grace will probably turn out to be that none of these clowns are all that bright, none of them have one iota of character, and few if any of them will have any qualms about selling out their superiors in return for leniency.

Pass the popcorn.
   1772. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: February 18, 2018 at 05:33 PM (#5626666)
Trump supporters like to equate Trump's stated motive-- I fired Comey to make the investigation pressure go away-- with its poor chance of success. Because there's no credible way for them to get around the former.

Everyone saying that Trump fired Comey to stop the investigation is taking the President literally (and accurately) but not seriously.
   1773. Hysterical & Useless Posted: February 18, 2018 at 05:34 PM (#5626667)
Ray, I am not privy to David Frum's thoughts; he may well believe that Trump firing Comey could have "stopped" the Russia investigation. However, my impression of what people have been saying here in OTP is that Trump's intent in firing Comey was to attempt to stop or impede the investigation, and that interpretation is based on Trump's words after the firing. I certainly don't think firing the FBI director would do much to derail the investigation, but then I'm not the President, and DJT has certainly made no secret of his desire that the whole thing would just be shut down and forgotten (or directed completely toward HRC and the Democrats).

Maybe this is revisionist history on my part, but that's my read on the comments.

ETA: I am a much slower thinker & typist than Gonfalon. Drink up, lad.
   1774. dejarouehg Posted: February 18, 2018 at 05:44 PM (#5626669)
Highlights: Maris hit 4 homers in the White Sox twi-nighter, 2 in each game, and Mantle added one in the first game, a liner off the LF foul pole. And in the final White Sox game, when the Sox rallied in the 9th and had the tying and go-ahead runs on base, Richardson-Kubek-Skowron turned a DP that took about a tenth of a second to complete.

Lowlights: After that it went all downhill. Nightcap of the Sunday doubleheader, the Yanks were losing 2-1 going into the bottom of the 9th, but loaded the bases with nobody out. Clete Boyer worked the count to 3 and 0, then took 3 straight strikes down the middle. Then Hector Lopez swung at the first pitch and hit a hard one-hopper to short for a game ending DP. And just to make sure, he slipped and fell while leaving the batter's box. And poor 17 year old me had to take a train back to DC with all that festering in my tormented mind.

Don't like the Yankees but wish I'd gotten to see Mantle play. Saw Aaron and Clemente at the end. Saw Mays and Mantle (and Joe D) at Old Timers Games, but to get to see Mantle (and Banks and Mays and Koufax) play live......

Saw Mantle a million times in NY, DC, Detroit and Baltimore, Mays and Aaron in the '56 and '62 All-Star games in Washington, and later in Wrigley (Mays, as a Met), San Francisco (Mays, several times) and LA (Aaron), Clemente only in that 1962 A-S game, Banks in the '62 A-S game and later in Wrigley (where he hit a walkoff homer in this game) and Candlestick. And I also saw Ted Williams hit a home run in Washington right after he got out of Korea.


That's tremendous! I was fortunate enough to see Seaver, and as noted above, Aaron and Clemente. Also saw the Big Red Machine and the Yankees of the 70's/80's but most of that time was watching the Frank Taveras, Ed Kranepool, Tom Hausman, and an abandoned-by-ownership Jerry Koosman. Of course, have seen all the great players since but I guess you never think it's as good as seeing the great players that you just missed out on. The closest I've really come is Michael Jordan and getting to see him many times and fortunately from about 10' from the bench.
   1775. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 05:45 PM (#5626671)
Can we all agree on just these two things?

1. Trump is too stupid ever to directly conspire with the Russians about influencing the election without bragging about it in response to a comment that he's too stupid to do it. If he was willing to go on record encouraging them to release all of Hillary's pilfered emails, it's hard to imagine he wouldn't be equally (and spontaneously) self-incriminating about more serious matters.

2. OTOH his lack of brainpower is probably the only reason he wasn't involved in any direct conspiring. It certainly wasn't an excess of patriotism or any other positive principle. His idea of patriotism is staging a Soviet-style military parade in his honor.

Our saving grace will probably turn out to be that none of these clowns are all that bright, none of them have one iota of character, and few if any of them will have any qualms about selling out their superiors in return for leniency.

Pass the popcorn.


The retreat continues.
   1776. tshipman Posted: February 18, 2018 at 05:47 PM (#5626672)
1. Trump is too stupid ever to directly conspire with the Russians about influencing the election without bragging about it in response to a comment that he's too stupid to do it. If he was willing to go on record encouraging them to release all of Hillary's pilfered emails, it's hard to imagine he wouldn't be equally (and spontaneously) self-incriminating about more serious matters.


No. Trump has kept quiet about scams he's run in the past.
   1777. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 05:52 PM (#5626673)
Is the theory that the stupid know-nothing Trump was intelligent enough to collude with Russia to win the election (itself a ridiculous proposition) while hiding it from an investigation of the type run by Mueller?

To say nothing of hiding it from the rest of the investigations.
   1778. Lassus Posted: February 18, 2018 at 05:56 PM (#5626674)
I know we kid Ray, but David's #1767 makes it sound like he's never interacted with human beings.
   1779. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 06:00 PM (#5626675)
.

   1780. tshipman Posted: February 18, 2018 at 06:02 PM (#5626676)
Is the theory that the stupid know-nothing Trump was intelligent enough to collude with Russia to win the election (itself a ridiculous proposition) while hiding it from an investigation of the type run by Mueller?


1. Sometimes "Trump" is used to refer to an individual, and sometimes it's used as a synecdoche to refer to the Trump campaign. This makes people speak past each other.
2. Who said anything about Trump being smart enough to hide anything from Mueller? If Mueller finishes his investigation and says there was no collusion by the campaign, I will believe him, and would encourage others to do the same.
3. I think you are misunderstanding what people think led to collusion.

When people talk about collusion, it's always about Trump trying to get Russia to release Hillary/DNC emails. Trump and his campaign seemed to sincerely believe that there was some big deal about the emails and that it needed to be exposed. "People who go along a treasonous path do not know they are on a treasonous path until it is too late." Trump/Campaign did not think of it as "colluding with Russia" so much as getting the truth out. However, in their zeal to sling dirt at their opponent, they didn't think about the consequences of their actions if they won the election.
   1781. The Yankee Clapper Posted: February 18, 2018 at 06:20 PM (#5626678)
Lots of "conspiracy to commit..." charges against Russians raise the obvious question of whether some Americans could be party to these conspiracy.

No Americans were indicted for "collusion" on those ham-handed Russian efforts to sow discord, and the belief that something will come out of investigating the hacking seems to rest on blind faith. The DNC has never allowed the FBI to even look at its servers, and it's just hard to see anything coming out of that. The FBI is more than a year into its investigation, and the only significant charges involve Manafort's financial activities that are unrelated to the campaign. Folks may want to begin to consider there is nothing here. Seems likely there would be some backlash if that's how it plays out.
   1782. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 06:28 PM (#5626679)
2. Who said anything about Trump being smart enough to hide anything from Mueller? If Mueller finishes his investigation and says there was no collusion by the campaign, I will believe him, and would encourage others to do the same.


David in a major retreat a few weeks ago conceded that Mueller may well not find anything -- but that that wouldn't convince David that there was nothing to find.

People are having it all ways to avoid ever having to admit that they were wrong.

3. I think you are misunderstanding what people think led to collusion.

When people talk about collusion, it's always about Trump trying to get Russia to release Hillary/DNC emails. Trump and his campaign seemed to sincerely believe that there was some big deal about the emails and that it needed to be exposed. "People who go along a treasonous path do not know they are on a treasonous path until it is too late." Trump/Campaign did not think of it as "colluding with Russia" so much as getting the truth out. However, in their zeal to sling dirt at their opponent, they didn't think about the consequences of their actions if they won the election.


The emails are part of it. And yet there's not a scintilla of evidence for that.

The other allegations in the dossier are part of it.

The longer this goes bearing no fruit the more ridiculous people look for pimping this already-ridiculous conspiracy/collusion theory.

(The theory is ridiculous even on its face. "Let's try to win this election by... colluding with Russia!" It's really nutty.)
   1783. greenback took the 110 until the 105 Posted: February 18, 2018 at 06:34 PM (#5626680)
No Americans were indicted for "collusion" on those ham-handed Russian efforts to sow discord, and the belief that something will come out of investigating the hacking seems to rest on blind faith. The DNC has never allowed the FBI to even look at its servers, and it's just hard to see anything coming out of that.

I quite explicitly stated this has nothing to do with hacking. My question is whether somebody like Cambridge Analytica might have worked directly with the Russians in the targeting of their troll campaigns.

Folks may want to begin to consider there is nothing here. Seems likely there would be some backlash if that's how it plays out.

I have repeatedly stated that I think there's nothing here. Ironically the backlash, as you might call it, from Trump and his sycophants (such as yourself) is the main thing that makes me question that thesis. It's so odious, for example, to weaponize the recent Parkland tragedy against the Mueller investigation that I'm forced to re-evaluate my views of Trump.

My specific comment about Cambridge Analytica's role can be traced to Trey Gowdy's remark that a Cambridge Analytica email needed to be investigated.
   1784. Ray (CTL) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 06:36 PM (#5626681)
Lots of "conspiracy to commit..." charges against Russians raise the obvious question of whether some Americans could be party to these conspiracy.

No Americans were indicted for "collusion" on those ham-handed Russian efforts to sow discord, and the belief that something will come out of investigating the hacking seems to rest on blind faith.


Again this is the same type of thinking that led Trump supporters to believe that Podesta and Hillary were running a child sex ring out of a pizza place. You see some dots and "connect" them in your mind and -- voila.
   1785. The Yankee Clapper Posted: February 18, 2018 at 06:42 PM (#5626682)
I quite explicitly stated this has nothing to do with hacking. My question is whether somebody like Cambridge Analytica might have worked directly with the Russians in the targeting of their troll campaigns.

What part of "no Americans were involved" don't you understand? Rosenstein was pretty specific.
   1786. tshipman Posted: February 18, 2018 at 06:43 PM (#5626683)
(The theory is ridiculous even on its face. "Let's try to win this election by... colluding with Russia!" It's really nutty.)


Again, you're missing the point.

They didn't think that they could win. They weren't trying to win the election, they were trying to make the winner look illegitimate so they could make money off grievance politics.
   1787. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 06:55 PM (#5626685)
Again this is the same type of thinking that led Trump supporters to believe that Podesta and Hillary were running a child sex ring out of a pizza place


I wonder how long you’d need an investigation to determine the pizza shop had no basement.
   1788. greenback took the 110 until the 105 Posted: February 18, 2018 at 06:57 PM (#5626686)
What part of "no Americans were involved" don't you understand? Rosenstein was pretty specific.

Yes, Rosenstein was specific. Unfortunately he was more specific than what you're claiming:

There is no allegation in the indictment that any American was a knowing participant in the alleged unlawful activity. There is no allegation in the indictment that the charged conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election.


Emphasis mine. This seems to have been Rosenstein's way of placating his boss.

ETA: Actually Rosenstein's comment, as you interpreted it, has already been contradicted. One American, Richard Pinedo, was most definitely involved with Russian trolling activities.
   1789. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: February 18, 2018 at 06:58 PM (#5626687)
this is the same type of thinking that led Trump supporters to believe that Podesta and Hillary were running a child sex ring out of a pizza place.


Anyone selling that stupid, asinine analogy isn't in the thinking business at all.
   1790. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 18, 2018 at 07:03 PM (#5626688)
That's tremendous! I was fortunate enough to see Seaver, and as noted above, Aaron and Clemente. Also saw the Big Red Machine and the Yankees of the 70's/80's but most of that time was watching the Frank Taveras, Ed Kranepool, Tom Hausman, and an abandoned-by-ownership Jerry Koosman. Of course, have seen all the great players since but I guess you never think it's as good as seeing the great players that you just missed out on. The closest I've really come is Michael Jordan and getting to see him many times and fortunately from about 10' from the bench.

I saw Seaver exactly twice. The first time was in 1973, in Wrigley, in the makeup game that clinched the NL East for the Mets. The real significance of that game for me was that I was hoping to see Mays play his last regular season game, but Yogi kept him on the bench, as he'd also done in the doubleheader the day before. I'd driven all the way up from Champaign-Urbana to see that twin bill, and by the end of the Seaver game I was 0 for 3.

The second and last time I saw Seaver was in 1975, on a cold April day in Shea, where I'd been lured by the prospect of a Seaver-Gibson duel. Turned out to be a Terrific day for Tom, but a ghastly day for Gibby, who got knocked all around by the Mets and departed after 6 innings in a 7 to 1 loss.

Don't remember seeing Kranepool one way or the other, but I do remember feeling jealous of him when a teammate on the Duke freshman team told me that he played with him in high school in the Bronx just before he was signed, and since Kranepool was four months younger than me, I could already feel the quicksand under my feet.

About the only great basketball players I've seen in person were from the 70's and early 80's, when the Bullets were perennial contenders and good midcourt tickets were but 5 bucks, and courtside tickets only $7.00. So I got to see Kareem, Walton, Hayes, Unseld, Barry, Doc, Bird, etc., but not Russ or Wilt or Jordan. My biggest regret about Jordan was not scouting books in Chapel Hill until the year after he left school, since I'd been hearing rumors about what a score he was in pool. Oh, the missed opportunities.....

EDIT: But I did see two future NBA journeyman at a very young age. The first was the former Warrior Fred Hetzel. He was a superstar Jr. High School player at my JHS in DC, and I'd heard all about him when I got there in his final year. And after all the buildup, in the season opener he scored but 3 points in a 1 point loss. What made it even worse was that 2 of those 3 points came from a brain fart tip-in---in the wrong basket. He scored more points for the other team than he did for our own.

And then 3 years later, for a very brief period (maybe a month) I made my high school basketball varsity team before getting cut before the first game. It was a lousy team, but it did have one future NBA benchwarmer whose main claim to fame was being featured in an AT&T long distance telephone commercial with Bill Russell. His name is Ronnie Watts, and if you click on the link, you'll see he averaged all of 1.4 PPG and lasted all of two seasons. (But then CountDaRingz----he was 2 for 2.)
   1791. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 07:04 PM (#5626689)

Ray, I am not privy to David Frum's thoughts; he may well believe that Trump firing Comey could have "stopped" the Russia investigation.
From didn't say that. He attributed that motive to Trump. The issue is whether Trump believed he could stop the Russia investigation, not whether anyone else thinks it could have done that.
   1792. The Yankee Clapper Posted: February 18, 2018 at 07:05 PM (#5626690)
When people talk about collusion, it's always about Trump trying to get Russia to release Hillary/DNC emails. Trump and his campaign seemed to sincerely believe that there was some big deal about the emails and that it needed to be exposed. "People who go along a treasonous path do not know they are on a treasonous path until it is too late." Trump/Campaign did not think of it as "colluding with Russia" so much as getting the truth out. However, in their zeal to sling dirt at their opponent, they didn't think about the consequences of their actions if they won the election.

The far more obvious explanation is Trump & his campaign were simply trying to gain political advantage from Hillary's use of a rogue non-governmental e-mail operation. Once that came out, the obvious lines of attack were that Hillary had illegally dodged the record-keeping/FOIA requirements and jeopardized national security by using such a vulnerable system, so it's not surprising that those claims were raised, while also suggesting that Hillary unilaterally deleting half of those e-mails was highly suspicious. Any political campaign would have made similar use of its opponent's behavior.

While, IMHO, it's highly unlikely there was any collusion on the hacking of the DNC e-mails, I also don't see how the government could bring charges when the DNC has denied them access to its servers. I'm no cybercrime expert, but it strikes me as like trying to prosecute a burglary where the victimized homeowner won't let the cops on his property.
   1793. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 07:07 PM (#5626691)

David in a major retreat a few weeks ago conceded that Mueller may well not find anything -- but that that wouldn't convince David that there was nothing to find.
There have been no major retreats for me at any point in this interminable discussion. I have consistently said the same thing. If you think otherwise, you misunderstood me one or both times.
   1794. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 18, 2018 at 07:08 PM (#5626692)
What part of "no Americans were involved" don't you understand? Rosenstein was pretty specific.


Yes, Rosenstein was specific. Unfortunately he was more specific than what you're claiming:

There is no allegation in the indictment that any American was a knowing participant in the alleged unlawful activity. There is no allegation in the indictment that the charged conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election.

Clapper had this pointed out to him not once, but twice yesterday, and I see he thinks that the third time will be a charm. Nice try, poor results.

   1795. greenback took the 110 until the 105 Posted: February 18, 2018 at 07:09 PM (#5626693)
Nice try, poor results.

Sad!
   1796. tshipman Posted: February 18, 2018 at 07:10 PM (#5626694)
The far more obvious explanation is Trump & his campaign were simply trying to gain political advantage from Hillary's use of a rogue non-governmental e-mail operation. Once that came out, the obvious lines of attack were that Hillary had illegally dodged the record-keeping/FOIA requirements and jeopardized national security by using such a vulnerable system, so it's not surprising that those claims were raised, while also suggesting that Hillary unilaterally deleting half of those e-mails was highly suspicious. Any political campaign would have made similar use of its opponent's behavior.


Really? Any political campaign would have taken meetings with representatives of the "crown prosecutor of Russia"?

Keep lying to yourself, it will make the schadenfreude sweeter.
   1797. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: February 18, 2018 at 07:11 PM (#5626695)
Can we all agree on just these two things?

1. Trump is too stupid ever to directly conspire with the Russians about influencing the election without bragging about it in response to a comment that he's too stupid to do it. If he was willing to go on record encouraging them to release all of Hillary's pilfered emails, it's hard to imagine he wouldn't be equally (and spontaneously) self-incriminating about more serious matters.

2. OTOH his lack of brainpower is probably the only reason he wasn't involved in any direct conspiring. It certainly wasn't an excess of patriotism or any other positive principle. His idea of patriotism is staging a Soviet-style military parade in his honor.

Our saving grace will probably turn out to be that none of these clowns are all that bright, none of them have one iota of character, and few if any of them will have any qualms about selling out their superiors in return for leniency.

Pass the popcorn.


The retreat continues.


WTF are you talking about? When have I ever said that Trump was actively conspiring with the Russians to influence the election?

EDIT: I see that David has the same question about your fuzzy memory. Not exactly a surprise.
   1798. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 07:15 PM (#5626696)


I will just point out once again that one of the few pieces of irrefutable evidence we have is that the Russian government told Trump's son that they supported Trump and were working to help him win, and asked for a meeting to further that. Trump's son responded enthusiastically; not only did he not report it, but he brought along his brother-in-law and his dad's campaign manager to said meeting. Trumpistas want everyone to forget about that, but it is actually proof of attempted collusion at the least by Trump's inner-inner circle.
   1799. The Yankee Clapper Posted: February 18, 2018 at 07:17 PM (#5626697)
What part of "no Americans were involved" don't you understand? Rosenstein was pretty specific.
Yes, Rosenstein was specific. Unfortunately he was more specific than what you're claiming:

There is no allegation in the indictment that any American was a knowing participant in the alleged unlawful activity. There is no allegation in the indictment that the charged conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election.

Exactly, and your belief that that means there is something "outside of the indictment" is profoundly misplaced. Perhaps you're blinded by the TDS aspect, let's try it with just plain old criminal activity:

Prosecutor: Today, we have indicted John Jones for murder.

Q: What about Sam Smith?

Prosecutor: There is no allegation in the indictment that anyone else was a participant.

Greenback: Sam Smith is in big trouble.

Everyone Else: WTF????
   1800. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 18, 2018 at 07:19 PM (#5626698)
Of course, YC has it backwards:

Prosecutor: Today, we have indicted John Jones for murder.

Q: What about Sam Smith?

Prosecutor: There is no allegation in the indictment that anyone else was a participant.

Sam Smith: I'm not in the indictment! I've been exonerated!!!!!

Everyone Else: WTF????
Page 18 of 21 pages ‹ First  < 16 17 18 19 20 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Infinite Yost (Voxter)
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogSoccer? OMNICHATTER hardly knows'er! for June 19, 2018.
(22 - 2:27pm, Jun 19)
Last: Jess Franco

NewsblogOT - 2018 NBA Summer Potpourri (finals, draft, free agency, Colangelo dragging)
(1231 - 2:26pm, Jun 19)
Last: jmurph

NewsblogFormer MLB pitcher Kevin Brown reportedly held two mail thieves at gunpoint until police arrived
(175 - 2:26pm, Jun 19)
Last: Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant

NewsblogOTP 2018 June 18: How Life Imitates the Congressional Baseball Game
(452 - 2:25pm, Jun 19)
Last: Random Transaction Generator

NewsblogKelvin Herrera Trade Start of Something Big for Nationals
(4 - 2:21pm, Jun 19)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 6-19-2018
(43 - 2:05pm, Jun 19)
Last: SoSH U at work

NewsblogDodgers' surprise ace makes All-Star case in win over Giants
(97 - 1:49pm, Jun 19)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (April - June 2018)
(3755 - 1:37pm, Jun 19)
Last: Panik on the streets of London (Trout! Trout!)

NewsblogOT: Soccer Thread (World Cup)
(569 - 1:19pm, Jun 19)
Last: J. Sosa

NewsblogIt's not a crime when OMNICHATTER does it! for June 18, 2018
(80 - 1:14pm, Jun 19)
Last: Moses Taylor, aka Hambone Fakenameington

Sox TherapyA Pleasant Trip So Far
(9 - 1:07pm, Jun 19)
Last: Jose is an Absurd Doubles Machine

NewsblogGrumpy Gossage Napalms His Bridges:BWitz:NYT (reg req.)
(74 - 12:27pm, Jun 19)
Last: Panik on the streets of London (Trout! Trout!)

NewsblogJuan Soto Makes His Second MLB Debut Tonight
(18 - 12:20pm, Jun 19)
Last: Mike Emeigh

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1944 Discussion
(10 - 12:16pm, Jun 19)
Last: MrC.

Gonfalon CubsClicking
(52 - 12:16pm, Jun 19)
Last: Moses Taylor, aka Hambone Fakenameington

Page rendered in 0.8966 seconds
46 querie(s) executed