|
Post by aquaduct on Jun 10, 2022 21:48:00 GMT -5
How can we know the court is even real? What if other dimensions interfere with our court system? How can we know anything? Am I the only one here and this is a dream? What if a camel ate my tent in the desert, who would I argue with? what? They think we're stupid as always. He's making fun of both of us. Stop caring and it's easy to ignore.
|
|
|
Post by epaul on Jun 10, 2022 21:52:20 GMT -5
I tried explain to a closed mind why oil prices were rising. The dropping soon part is something you imagined (go figure).
Oil prices aren't dropping soon (maybe never?). The world's oil delivery system and trading arrangements are in turmoil due the Russian/Ukrainian war. That won't get fixed soon.
Plus the Saudis are very happy with the current price... and more than any other non-war factor, their spigot has control over prices. $60 (and less) oil gave them a serious scare. They are very happy now.
PLus, the major U.S. producers are very happy with current prices and you better believe it. The big oil guys are back in charge here. North Dakota lost about half of its oil producers during the three-year market plunge, they went belly up to the bank. And guess who bought them up? Same happened elsewhere, startups and new guys got whacked good and hard. Our domestic producers are now a much smaller and more amenable group than they were during the wide open wildcat days.
These are good days for oil, the remaining oil producers, and the oil states that depend on them for jobs and revenue. Good days. Trust me, ok don't trust me, but everyone connected oil and cognizant of the importance of a healthy oil economy is happy with these prices. Don't pay any attention to what some press release claims, oil is happy as a pig in a cornfield right now. And oil will do whatever it can to make sure $60 (and less) a barrel never comes back again.
Never say never, but oil may never go down to where it was three years ago. The Saudis spent a couple years trying to wipe out the fracker start ups in the U.S. by opening their spigot. And then about the time they gave up on that ploy, Covid threw a wrench in the global economy. Bottom line, the low prices of three years ago were the result of unusual events. A more "in control" industry will do what they can to make sure $60 (and less) a barrel never happens again.
The end of the Russian/Ukraine war and a recession will help. Some.
|
|
|
Post by epaul on Jun 10, 2022 21:56:14 GMT -5
Now, if you had read me with any care, what I did say was that the U.S. has a good supply of oil and will continue to have a good supply of oil. We have all the oil we need. You will pay through the nose for it because it is a world market and world is unstable right now. But, there will be no shortages of oil here, in this country.
(refinery issues and train wrecks can mess up the delivery of oil, but the base supply of it is golden.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Jun 10, 2022 21:58:02 GMT -5
We're all repeating ourselves. Why shouldn't I? I've handled a couple of dozen election cases over the years. A lot of lawyers avoid them. First of all, you have to know what you're doing. Also, there's little time to prepare and you have to be willing to fly by the seat of your pants. That increases the risk of humiliation. Me, I liked having an evidentiary hearing on two days' notice and then, sometimes, arguing the case in the Arizona Supreme Court two or three days later. Life on the edge can be fun. The first thing to know about election challenges is that if you bring one, you have a hard row to hoe. Our case law is replete with statements that there is a strong presumption that elections are valid and that there's a strong interest in the finality of elections. So when you file one, you have to have your evidence ready. You can expect to be asked by the judge what kind of evidence you have. The judges here have hundreds of cases. They want to know whether they should interrupt their busy schedules to handle yours. When you're asked what evidence you have, you'd better answer honestly. Otherwise, you can be the subject of financial sanctions and be reported to the State Bar. And the evidence had better be good. If we can put aside our partisan leanings, all this makes sense. Do we really want every election to be contested in court for years? Election challenges don't succeed very often. When they do, it's usually something cut and dried. Our courts overturned the election of one guy who clearly didn't meet the legal requirements for holding the office he had won. I don't think many, if any, of the challenges by the Trump loyalists here were grounded on fraud in the legal sense. To prove common-law fraud, you have to have clear and convincing evidence of all the following elements: (1) a representation of fact; (2) its falsity; (3) its materiality; (4) the representer’s knowledge of its falsity or ignorance of its truth; (5) the representer’s intent that it should be acted upon by the person in the manner reasonably contemplated; (6) the injured party’s ignorance of its falsity; (7) the injured party’s reliance on its truth; (8) the injured party’s right to rely thereon; and (9) the injured party’s consequent and proximate injury. The law doesn't like fraud claims and they're hard to prove. That's the most reasonable thing I've heard so far. If I'm reading it right, the whole enterprise is tough and you can almost count on it being denied based on the presumption that elections are usually pretty fair. The cases from Trump were denied as a typical matter of course but since there wasn't a finding of fraud, they could still be valid. So I guess all us stupid rubes can't really be blamed for not trusting the election outcome. And dismissing us does nothing to change our minds. Sounds perfectly reasonable.
|
|
|
Post by david on Jun 10, 2022 22:02:48 GMT -5
John, Peter, Bruce and Gene: Show me a verified affidavit, sworn under penalty of perjury, from an authorized vote counter or verification officer, who indicates that a substantial number of votes were fraudulently credited in favor of Biden or that a substantial number of votes were not counted in favor or Trump.
No such evidence has been presented, despite a crap full of unsubstantiated claims. It threw the US into a tailspin, all based upon the ego of Trump and his bootlickers.
Otherwise, shut up. Your conspiracy theories are absolutely tiresome and denigrating to my American life. Give me proof of your fantastic claims or go home and lick your wounds. Trump is an ass. He has set the Republican party back 50 years. Get over it and try to help build some credibility back into the Republican party. Maybe I will then rejoin. As it is, the party is not worthy of my involvement.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Jun 10, 2022 22:06:04 GMT -5
John, Peter, Bruce and Gene: Show me a verified affidavit, sworn under penalty of perjury, from an authorized vote counter or verification officer, who indicates that a substantial number of votes were fraudulently credited in favor of Biden or that a substantial number of votes were not counted in favor or Trump. No such evidence has been presented, despite a crap full of unsubstantiated claims. It threw the US into a tailspin, all based upon the ego of Trump and his bootlickers. Otherwise, shut up. Your conspiracy theories are absolutely tiresome and denigrating to my American life. Give me proof of your fantastic claims or go home and lick your wounds. Trump is an ass. He has set the Republican party back 50 years. Get over it and try to help build some credibility back into the Republican party. Maybe I will then rejoin. As it is, the party is not worthy of my involvement. You're assuming we want you back.
|
|
|
Post by david on Jun 10, 2022 22:15:43 GMT -5
John, Peter, Bruce and Gene: Show me a verified affidavit, sworn under penalty of perjury, from an authorized vote counter or verification officer, who indicates that a substantial number of votes were fraudulently credited in favor of Biden or that a substantial number of votes were not counted in favor or Trump. No such evidence has been presented, despite a crap full of unsubstantiated claims. It threw the US into a tailspin, all based upon the ego of Trump and his bootlickers. Otherwise, shut up. Your conspiracy theories are absolutely tiresome and denigrating to my American life. Give me proof of your fantastic claims or go home and lick your wounds. Trump is an ass. He has set the Republican party back 50 years. Get over it and try to help build some credibility back into the Republican party. Maybe I will then rejoin. As it is, the party is not worthy of my involvement. You're assuming we want you back. Peter, Maybe you are not the best ambassador for the party. Other than Trump sycophants, I have generally received well wishes. Perhaps you are not welcome to the party.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Jun 10, 2022 22:27:32 GMT -5
You're assuming we want you back. Peter, Maybe you are not the best ambassador for the party. Other than Trump sycophants, I have generally received well wishes. Perhaps you are not welcome to the party. I've never bothered to join a party, I just vote for them. And I really couldn't give less of a shit about your opinion of Trump and your rude name calling.
|
|
|
Post by epaul on Jun 10, 2022 22:31:08 GMT -5
Our economy is made up of conflicting parts. Very loosely, there is a production economy and a service economy. And those two are split up into many parts. But, bottom line, sometimes one part of the economy is unhappy while another is quite pleased.
And staying very loose and general, natural resources generally are suffering when the service economy is happy, and conversely, when natural resources are happy, the service economy is unhappy. And the happiness ratio is 60/40, make that 70/30, in favor of the service economy.
But, right now, oil, forestry/lumber, agriculture, mining, and construction/building materials are happy, very happy. It won't last, it never does.
(and inflation isn't necessarily a bad word for many on the production/natural resources end, like agriculture, lumber, mining... when everything is nice and stable with an economy, natural resources get the short stick).
|
|
|
Post by david on Jun 10, 2022 22:39:30 GMT -5
Peter,
Name calling is wrong. I am sorry for suggesting that you are a Trump sycophant. Please continue to consider me a friend. I am getting older, perhaps less diplomatic, and do not have as many friends as I used to. I need all I can get! Please forgive me and let us just disagree on the issues.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Jun 10, 2022 22:44:35 GMT -5
Peter, Name calling is wrong. I am sorry for suggesting that you are a Trump sycophant. Please continue to consider me a friend. I am getting older, perhaps less diplomatic, and do not have as many friends as I used to. I need all I can get! Please forgive me and let us just disagree on the issues. No problem. You're still welcome out here with your bikes.
|
|
|
Post by epaul on Jun 10, 2022 22:45:54 GMT -5
And that diversity is a huge advantage for this country. If a country is spending through the nose for oil and all that money is going to Saudi Arabia, that is a double screw. But, if a country is spending through the nose for oil but all that money is circulating "in house" as it were, that's not such a bad deal.
The "Carter" inflation/oil crisis (that lasted for three presidents, but Carter gets the credit, regardless) was an economic bitch because up to 60% of the money we spent on oil went to the Middle East and right down the toilet (at least they bought some jets, so we got a dribble back).
It's different this go-round. The money spent on oil (gas) is staying in this for county, and it will get spent here... and in China. Ok, the China part isn't good. We have to fix that somehow. But, regardless, it is a different deal now, and a better deal now. And it is a deal many other countries, such as Germany and China, don't have. For all that is wrong here, if I had to pick one economy to bank on, (and invest in), it is the U.S. economy.
(and Canada is my second choice. They are positioned well for the future as I see it.) ((actually, I tend to regard the U.S. economy and the Canadian economy as the same economy, so they represent one pick and I don't know who I have second.))
|
|
|
Post by jdd2 on Jun 10, 2022 23:37:48 GMT -5
... The "Carter" inflation/oil crisis (that lasted for three presidents, but Carter gets the credit, regardless) was an economic bitch because up to 60% of the money we spent on oil went to the Middle East and right down the toilet (at least they bought some jets, so we got a dribble back). ... In '71, even before the oil shocks, inflation was seen to be serious enough that nixon tried wage and price controls. I wonder how that would go over today? And he further decoupled from gold (at $35), which led to the end of bretton woods. And then with inflation already a problem, the first oil shock came right on the tail end of vietnam (which, as wars generally go, hadn't been paid for up front), with inflation already a problem. The first one of those oil shocks tripled the price of oil--a parallel of that today would be oil at $180 or better. And then the second
|
|
|
Post by gbacklin on Jun 10, 2022 23:56:59 GMT -5
John, Peter, Bruce and Gene: Show me a verified affidavit, sworn under penalty of perjury, from an authorized vote counter or verification officer, who indicates that a substantial number of votes were fraudulently credited in favor of Biden or that a substantial number of votes were not counted in favor or Trump. No such evidence has been presented, despite a crap full of unsubstantiated claims. It threw the US into a tailspin, all based upon the ego of Trump and his bootlickers. Otherwise, shut up. Your conspiracy theories are absolutely tiresome and denigrating to my American life. Give me proof of your fantastic claims or go home and lick your wounds. Trump is an ass. He has set the Republican party back 50 years. Get over it and try to help build some credibility back into the Republican party. Maybe I will then rejoin. As it is, the party is not worthy of my involvement. Hey dude, show me where in this thread where I said anything about the election. My post was in the incoming digital currency and that was it. That is not a conspiracy theory. So before you tell me to shut up (which is a direct attack and personal - moderators ) I suggest you be a little more prudent on who you go after.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Jun 11, 2022 4:03:04 GMT -5
We're all repeating ourselves. Why shouldn't I? I've handled a couple of dozen election cases over the years. A lot of lawyers avoid them. First of all, you have to know what you're doing. Also, there's little time to prepare and you have to be willing to fly by the seat of your pants. That increases the risk of humiliation. Me, I liked having an evidentiary hearing on two days' notice and then, sometimes, arguing the case in the Arizona Supreme Court two or three days later. Life on the edge can be fun. The first thing to know about election challenges is that if you bring one, you have a hard row to hoe. Our case law is replete with statements that there is a strong presumption that elections are valid and that there's a strong interest in the finality of elections. So when you file one, you have to have your evidence ready. You can expect to be asked by the judge what kind of evidence you have. The judges here have hundreds of cases. They want to know whether they should interrupt their busy schedules to handle yours. When you're asked what evidence you have, you'd better answer honestly. Otherwise, you can be the subject of financial sanctions and be reported to the State Bar. And the evidence had better be good. If we can put aside our partisan leanings, all this makes sense. Do we really want every election to be contested in court for years? Election challenges don't succeed very often. When they do, it's usually something cut and dried. Our courts overturned the election of one guy who clearly didn't meet the legal requirements for holding the office he had won. I don't think many, if any, of the challenges by the Trump loyalists here were grounded on fraud in the legal sense. To prove common-law fraud, you have to have clear and convincing evidence of all the following elements: (1) a representation of fact; (2) its falsity; (3) its materiality; (4) the representer’s knowledge of its falsity or ignorance of its truth; (5) the representer’s intent that it should be acted upon by the person in the manner reasonably contemplated; (6) the injured party’s ignorance of its falsity; (7) the injured party’s reliance on its truth; (8) the injured party’s right to rely thereon; and (9) the injured party’s consequent and proximate injury. The law doesn't like fraud claims and they're hard to prove. Exactly.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Jun 11, 2022 4:07:32 GMT -5
John, Peter, Bruce and Gene: Show me a verified affidavit, sworn under penalty of perjury, from an authorized vote counter or verification officer, who indicates that a substantial number of votes were fraudulently credited in favor of Biden or that a substantial number of votes were not counted in favor or Trump. No such evidence has been presented, despite a crap full of unsubstantiated claims. It threw the US into a tailspin, all based upon the ego of Trump and his bootlickers. Otherwise, shut up. Your conspiracy theories are absolutely tiresome and denigrating to my American life. Give me proof of your fantastic claims or go home and lick your wounds. Trump is an ass. He has set the Republican party back 50 years. Get over it and try to help build some credibility back into the Republican party. Maybe I will then rejoin. As it is, the party is not worthy of my involvement. That's not how I see it at all. I never liked Trump from day one. That, more than party affinity informs my observations.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Jun 11, 2022 8:16:56 GMT -5
And to remind everyone, I started this little shit storm by simply saying that I thought Thursday's hearing was, in my view, bullshit and a waste of time. As usual that earned 5 pages of derision in 12 hours. And somehow my friends Gene and John got dragged in the mire of this place.
And to be clear, I might be the only actual Trump supporter here (with the possible exception of Bruce, but he's perfectly capable of handling himself).
And I'm unapologetic. In my view Trump deserves a spot on Mt. Rushmore simply for getting 3 Supreme Court justices through. Doubt me? Watch the remaining decisions roll out over the rest of the month.
And now Ruth Sent Us has doxxed Amy Coney Barrett's kids.
I hope some of you might seriously consider what your side has created.
|
|
|
Post by james on Jun 11, 2022 8:21:16 GMT -5
The Just Security people have produced a useful thing. An "evidence tracker" It will be updated as any new evidence is revealed during the course of the hearings. "A public resource that tracks evidence produced by the House Select Committee investigating January 6th, and whether the evidence meets elements of three federal and state crimes." www.justsecurity.org/81875/the-january-6th-hearings-a-criminal-evidence-tracker/
|
|
|
Post by factorychef on Jun 11, 2022 8:35:03 GMT -5
I started this thread, not Aqua. Again he spins BS. Name calls people who disagree with him just like a little bully that we all knew in school.he doesn't have all his facts straight.Fuel prices and inflation are up in most of the world as he has been told but will try to twist it.Gas prices are never coming down and his buddy Trump is going to go to jail.Trump is the one who has mental problems. Everyone is an asshole or a dumb idiot but him. Look in the mirror.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Hanesworth on Jun 11, 2022 11:19:14 GMT -5
Apparently no one on Trump's team knows the answer to that question. Do you? No, not being a trained lawyer, I recognize that I probably don't. Unlike some here, while I think I am smart, I claim real expertise in very little, and certainly not everything. I have not had, and apparently lost, jobs everywhere affording me limitlessness expertise. However, Trump's team of trained lawyers should know what actual evidence looks like.
|
|