header 1
header 2
header 3

Message Forum - GENERAL

Welcome to the Bethesda Chevy Chase High School Message Forum.

The message forum is an ongoing dialogue between classmates. There are no items, topics, subtopics, etc.

Forums work when people participate - so don't be bashful! Click the "Post Message" button to add your entry to the forum.


 
go to bottom 
  Post Message
  
    Prior Page
 Page  

01/06/26 08:10 AM #18768    

 

Joanie Bender (Grosfeld)

Jack, thanks for the NPR link, etc....yes, this was a horrific day when a coup was attempted and Trump stood by and watched it all on tv. To think he pardoned all of them...Love, Joanie


01/07/26 07:09 AM #18769    

 

Jack Mallory

And again. Never forget:

"A day of love." DJT

He's not only a lying sack of shit, he's a lying sack of shit that thinks we're stupid. I guess it's easy to think that way when you're surrounded by MAGATs. 


01/08/26 08:58 AM #18770    

 

Joanie Bender (Grosfeld)

Renee Nicole Good was murdered yesterday in Minneapolis by an ICE agent. Her car had blocked ICE agents but she committed no violence. When an ICE agent approached her car and tried to open her front door, she backed up and attempted to drive away...Instead another ICE agent ran up to her car and shot her face three times at close range. She had her foot on the pedal and the car pushed forward. A woman nearby took a video and you could see Nicole's blood all over the airbag that deflated. It was a horrific thing. There were stuffed animals, like teddy bears in the car. She had a six yaer old child. This child has no parents now. She was a poet and people spoke of how she was warm and caring and a do gooder. Trump and Noem lied about it all making up a story that she was a terrorist and ran over an ICE agent...the video you can see shows that she didn't run over anyone but was killed in cold blood. It is truly heartbreaking..George Floyd was murdered nearby five years ago.  The second link is a video of what really happened...Its so very sad.  Love, Joanie

https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/2026/01/08/renee-good-ice-who-is/

https://www.startribune.com/video-ice-shooting-minneapolis/601559951

I might add that Noem not only is a liar like Trump but killed a puppy in cold blood so anything she says is worthless. 


01/08/26 07:33 PM #18771    

 

Jack Mallory

At the memorial for her this morning. 


 

Deb laying our flowers own. 
 


 


01/09/26 08:38 AM #18772    

 

Joanie Bender (Grosfeld)

Thank you for posting those pictures Jack...

Now I'm worried thatTrump might try to take over Greenland. In addition to that being awful in and of itself he will ruin NATO...He cares nothing about anything but himself and getting more money. To think he dreams of more conquests of countries while people are starving in this country and Trump cuts programs for hungry children that are in BLUE states. Love, Joanie

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/06/trump-cut-child-care-funds-00712875


01/09/26 02:44 PM #18773    

 

Nora Skinker (Morton)

Ahoy, friends. Indeed. these are trying times.  It is sorrowful whenever anyone's life is taken.  As for public opinions, I am hopeful that the local MN government will work with the Feds to investigate the death of Renee Goode, and that we may actually find out the whole truth of what happened there.  Usually the Federal Government has priority over the States with investigative privileges, as the Constitution dictates.  Until the details are known, it adds fuel to a growing fire to assume we know them.  A friend, who was a Juvenile Court Judge in Rockville, MD at the time, long ago shared that he maintained it was law enforcement which was the main thing instilling fear into a criminal mind.  I was raised to fear cops.  All cops.  It kept a lot of us out of trouble.  I believe there is no fear anymore. Am not saying this necessarity happened, but I cannot help but think that perhaps Goode felt emboldened as she watched and heard those around her screaming obscenities, throwing things and urging violence against law enforcement. I understand from the news, that the officer in question had had a prior incident with outraged protestors who dragged him many feet by car and resulted in his receiving stitches and a long healing process. Just adding a couple of unhappy observations.  Meanwhile, does the taunting and verbal abuse of ICE officers, doing their jobs, enrage anybody?  Or is it that I remember so well the days when we actually knew our local police officers from our communities (even from school) and understood at a young age the respect they so deserved?

As for Greenland; knowing how important it is to secure the US against our enemies, Russia and China, I back the importance of securing Greenland, and wish we had bought it, ala Alaska and Louisiana purchases.. I am not for using military might to gain access.  As a lonely voice on this forum, I furvently hope Trump will not willfully act against our NATO ally of Denmark, but through negotiation and bargaining we can seal a deal.  

On a happier note, I rejoice with all of you, whom I know are applauding Steve Witkoff and others who instrumentally have been working hard for the release of Venezuelan prisoners.  So, maybe it's not only "all about oil', after all.  


01/09/26 04:07 PM #18774    

 

Joanie Bender (Grosfeld)

The Video of the murder of Renee Nicole Good says it all and no amount of angles will change what is clearly seen. A mother of 3 was murdered in cold blood...the little stuffed animals were in her car for her children that now have no mother.  Love, Joanie

https://minnesotareformer.com/2026/01/07/ice-officer-fatally-shoots-driver-through-car-window-in-minneapolis/


01/09/26 08:46 PM #18775    

 

Jack Mallory

I'm not a Constitutional lawyer. None of the lawyers in the family is a Constitutional lawyer. But if somebody walks up to me and starts telling me what the Constitution says, I'd certainly ask them if they were a Constitutional lawyer. If the answer was no, and they wouldn't tell me what the Constitution actually said, I'd look elsewhere for legal advice.

This being the 21st Century, try AI. Can't take it as god's truth, don't try and take it to court, but a good way to get an intro to a topic. For example:

I asked ChatGPT-- Is it true that the Constitution gives the Federal Government priority over the States concerning investigative privileges? 

It responded (5 seconds later?):

Short answer: No, the Constitution does not give the federal government a general, across-the-board “priority” over the states when it comes to investigative privileges. What it does create is a system of divided sovereignty, where priority depends on the source of authority, the subject matter, and whether federal law is supreme in that are

Here’s how this actually works.

1. What the Constitution does say

Supremacy Clause (Article VI)

Federal law is the “supreme Law of the Land” when it is validly enacted under the Constitution. That means:

  • Federal law can override conflicting state law
  • But only within areas of federal constitutional authority

It does not mean federal power automatically outranks state power in every context.

2. Investigative power is not explicitly assigned

The Constitution:

  • Does not explicitly grant investigative power to either the federal or state governments
  • Investigative authority is understood as incidental to other powers (e.g., law enforcement, legislation, adjudication)

This matters because:

  • Federal investigative authority exists only insofar as it supports an enumerated federal power
  • State investigative authority exists under the states’ general police powers, which are broad

3. Federal vs. state investigations: who has priority?

A. When federal law governs the subject

Federal priority often exists in practice, but not because of a blanket constitutional rule.

Examples:

  • Federal crimes (e.g., securities fraud, immigration violations)
  • Congressional investigations tied to federal legislation
  • Federal regulatory enforcement (IRS, SEC, EPA)

Here, federal investigative authority is supreme because federal law governs the underlying matter, not because investigations themselves are superior.

B. When both have jurisdiction (concurrent jurisdiction)

This is common.

Examples:

  • Drug offenses
  • Financial crimes
  • Civil rights violations

Key points:

  • Both sovereigns may investigate simultaneously
  • Neither automatically outranks the other
  • Cooperation or deference is often political or practical, not constitutional

The “dual sovereignty” doctrine recognizes that both governments may act independently.

C. State investigations into federal matters

States cannot:

  • Compel federal officials acting in their official capacity
  • Interfere with federal functions (intergovernmental immunity)

But states can:

  • Investigate conduct that violates state law, even if federal interests are implicated
  • Investigate private actors regulated by federal law, unless Congress has expressly preempted the field

4. Investigative “privileges” specifically

If by investigative privileges you mean things like subpoenas, immunity, or access to information:

Federal privileges

  • Executive privilege
  • Federal law enforcement privileges
  • Classified information protections

These can override state processes when they conflict, but again, only because of supremacy in that domain.

State privileges

  • States have their own subpoena powers, grand juries, and immunities
  • Federal courts generally respect them unless they obstruct federal law

There is no constitutional rule that says federal investigative privileges always trump state ones.

5. Bottom line

  • ❌ The Constitution does not grant the federal government blanket priority over states in investigations
  • ✅ Federal authority prevails only where federal law validly governs
  • ⚖️ Investigative power follows substantive jurisdiction, not the other way around
  • 🏛️ States retain broad investigative authority under their police powers

If you’d like, I can:

  • Apply this framework to a specific scenario (e.g., congressional subpoenas vs. state AGs)
  • Walk through key Supreme Court cases that define these boundaries
  • Clarify how this works in criminal vs. civil investigations


********

Why take advice from someone who won't make any attempt to provide concrete, verifiable information?

 

 


01/09/26 09:49 PM #18776    

 

Jack Mallory

Posted this to Face Book five years ago--maybe here as well. True then, truer now. 

************

I have finally resolved the question that has been plaguing me for four years, as I've mentioned before. Or, I suppose, Trump has answered it for me:

The worst President in my lifetime, the greatest betrayer of the Constitution, the most dangerous threat to democracy--Dick Nixon, or Donald Trump? Sorry, Dick; you were my top pick throughout my adult lifetime. A strong contender, I'll admit. A bigot, a liar, a President for whom the Constitution meant nothing, a scumbag in every sense of the word--absolutely.

BUT . . . You've been outclassed. Maybe it's just presentation, maybe your lies weren't blatant enough. Maybe your bigotry was less open, hidden within the White House tapes. Sure, you conspired to spy on other Presidential contenders, you used the FBI and the IRS against Americans who disagreed with you, you worked to subvert justice with  bribery and threats. 

But you're up against a far greater liar (yeah, I know, Trump had Twitter, you didn't. Tough noogies.). You never, as far as we know, used foreign governments in your elections. Well, excepting the interference in the Vietnamese peace talks to try and win votes. You didn't create and/or spread massive lies undermining our electoral process. Your evils would have worked primarily to your own advantage, not in widespread damage to the Constitution and democracy more generally--not that you would have given a shit. 

In the final accounting, you lost the competition for #1 Presidential scumbag by failing to try and take down the other branches of government, as Trump has done. Your damage was pretty much limited to the Presidency itself. No attacks on our judicial system, labeling it as unjust and incompetent. No dispatching riotous mobs to invade Congress and obstruct its Constitutional duties.

Basically, Trump takes first place not only for his own malfeasance, but for working to create an entire movement of racist, white nationalist, anti-democratic and violence-prone supporters. I think Orwell and Arendt would note that what Trump has done is what many fascist leaders have done, in the same way. Trump is the biggest scumbag, the most dangerous President, because he has been the most identifiably fascist of our chief executives. Nixon worked to accrue personal power and advantage; Trump has worked to change our nation and its politics into something resembling Spain under Franco, Italy under Mussolini, and Germany under Hitler. A man who would wipe his ass with our Constitution. 

You lose, Dick, but may you rot in hell anyway. You win, Trump, but I like to think that in the hell I don't believe in there's a very special  place for you

********

Those Americans who voted for both Nixon and Trump--maybe twice each . . . Do you think any of them have thought to themselves, "Maybe I should never vote again?"


01/10/26 07:09 AM #18777    

 

Jack Mallory

Heather Cox Richardson shows us how our government explained fascism to our military during WWII. Now, every day, our government provides examples. (https://open.substack.com/pub/heathercoxrichardson/p/january-9-2026?r=asnwm&utm_medium=ios&shareImageVariant=overlay)
 


 

Beginning in 1943, the War Department published a series of pamphlets for U.S. Army personnel in the European theater of World War II. Titled Army Talks, the series was designed “to help [the personnel] become better-informed men and women and therefore better soldiers.”

On March 24, 1945, the topic for the week was “FASCISM!”
“You are away from home, separated from your families, no longer at a civilian job or at school and many of you are risking your very lives,” the pamphlet explained, “because of a thing called fascism.” But, the publication asked, what is fascism? “Fascism is not the easiest thing to identify and analyze,” it said, “nor, once in power, is it easy to destroy. It is important for our future and that of the world that as many of us as possible understand the causes and practices of fascism, in order to combat it.”

Fascism, the U.S. government document explained, “is government by the few and for the few. The objective is seizure and control of the economic, political, social, and cultural life of the state.” “The people run democratic governments, but fascist governments run the people.”

“The basic principles of democracy stand in the way of their desires; hence—democracy must go! Anyone who is not a member of their inner gang has to do what he’s told. They permit no civil liberties, no equality before the law.” “Fascism treats women as mere breeders. ‘Children, kitchen, and the church,’ was the Nazi slogan for women,” the pamphlet said.

Fascists “make their own rules and change them when they choose…. They maintain themselves in power by use of force combined with propaganda based on primitive ideas of ‘blood’ and ‘race,’ by skillful manipulation of fear and hate, and by false promise of security. The propaganda glorifies war and insists it is smart and ‘realistic’ to be pitiless and violent.”

Fascists understood that “the fundamental principle of democracy—faith in the common sense of the common people—was the direct opposite of the fascist principle of rule by the elite few,” it explained, “[s]o they fought democracy…. They played political, religious, social, and economic groups against each other and seized power while these groups struggled.”

Americans should not be fooled into thinking that fascism could not come to America, the pamphlet warned; after all, “[w]e once laughed Hitler off as a harmless little clown with a funny mustache.” And indeed, the U.S. had experienced “sorry instances of mob sadism, lynchings, vigilantism, terror, and suppression of civil liberties. We have had our hooded gangs, Black Legions, Silver Shirts, and racial and religious bigots. All of them, in the name of Americanism, have used undemocratic methods and doctrines which…can be properly identified as ‘fascist.’”

The War Department thought it was important for Americans to understand the tactics fascists would use to take power in the United States. They would try to gain power “under the guise of ‘super-patriotism’ and ‘super-Americanism.’” And they would use three techniques:

First, they would pit religious, racial, and economic groups against one another to break down national unity. Part of that effort to divide and conquer would be a “well-planned ‘hate campaign’ against minority races, religions, and other groups.”

Second, they would deny any need for international cooperation, because that would fly in the face of their insistence that their supporters were better than everyone else. “In place of international cooperation, the fascists seek to substitute a perverted sort of ultra-nationalism which tells their people that they are the only people in the world who count. With this goes hatred and suspicion toward the people of all other nations.”

Third, fascists would insist that “the world has but two choices—either fascism or communism, and they label as ‘communists’ everyone who refuses to support them.”

It is “vitally important” to learn to spot native fascists, the government said, “even though they adopt names and slogans with popular appeal, drape themselves with the American flag, and attempt to carry out their program in the name of the democracy they are trying to destroy.”

The only way to stop the rise of fascism in the United States, the document said, “is by making our democracy work and by actively cooperating to preserve world peace and security.” 

In the midst of the insecurity of the modern world, the hatred at the root of fascism “fulfills a triple mission.” By dividing people, it weakens democracy. “By getting men to hate rather than to think,” it prevents them “from seeking the real cause and a democratic solution to the problem.” By falsely promising prosperity, it lures people to embrace its security.

 “Fascism thrives on indifference and ignorance,” it warned. Freedom requires “being alert and on guard against the infringement not only of our own freedom but the freedom of every American. If we permit discrimination, prejudice, or hate to rob anyone of his democratic rights, our own freedom and all democracy is threatened.”

Notes:
https://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/serial?id=armytalks

War Department, “Army Talk 64: FASCISM!” March 24, 1945, at https://archive.org/details/ArmyTalkOrientationFactSheet64-Fascism/mode/2up


01/10/26 01:31 PM #18778    

 

Joanie Bender (Grosfeld)

Thanks Jack for those terrific posts. Yes Trump who always wanted to be first at something is the number one fascist and liar. I heard Timothy Snyder, an expert on tyranny on tv today and he said the lies depend on creating fear and intimidation but if we the people resist, then there is hope. I hope to be at a No ICE rally tomorrow.  I keep thinking of Renee Nicole Good being murdered in cold blood and so many others. Her last words were something like, hey dude, I'm not mad at you.  Then the shots rang out by Jonathan Ross who killed a defenseless woman trying to drive away in her car.  As the video clearly shows, she backed up and turned to the right attempting to leave. She never pointed her car towards the ICE agent.  Trump, Vance and Noem will continue to lie and malign her. Their cruelty knows no bounds. Love, Joanie


01/10/26 07:33 PM #18779    

 

Nora Skinker (Morton)

     Indulge me the following scenario & feel free to comment: do you wonder why that officer might WANT to murder anyone? Do you wonder why Renee Goode would WANT to run an officer over? For me, I believe there's a possibility that Ms. Goode was turning the car to the right to AVOID hitting him AND to stop trying to impede by blocking the road (she had been perpendicular to the road for 4 minutes) AND to pick up her wife & then leave the scene. At the moment she began turning her car right, she was verbally & jokingly addressing the other officer who had just told her to get out of the car. At the same moment she began moving her car to the right, the shooter THOUGHT she was going to hit him, dodged out of the way, & fired a shot that killed her. As her car continued, he shot two more rounds because he thought she was endangering others by possibly ramming her car into fellow officers or other people. Historically, protestors have used vehicles as weapons. Matter of fact, just last summer the shooter was dragged thirty yards by a vehicle being driven by an enraged protestor, & received multiple stitches. For me, this tragic incident was a perfect storm of misunderstood circumstances involving misunderstood behaviors. Though we will never know Renee Goode's intention definitively, the shooter's intention might very well have been to shoot in self-defense & in defense of others. 

     Yes, Jack, TMI notwithstanding, Federal Law usually supercedes State Law but not always. 

     And yes, politicians of both parties are WRONG to publically declare misleading  "facts" & erroneous "details" in this or any pending case which should be investigated, with evidence presented to & decided by a jury. JMO

 


01/10/26 11:10 PM #18780    

 

Joanie Bender (Grosfeld)

Nori there is no way to change what happened. This was a cold blooded murder...the ICE agent was a cruel horrible person and he wasn't in danger at all as he was not close to her car...the video shows that. After he killed her, either he or his buddy yelled f ing Bitch...

https://www.irishtimes.com/world/us/2026/01/08/video-shows-shooting-of-renee-nicole-good-by-ice-agent-in-minnesota/

The protocol is not to shoot into a moving vehicle but to deescalate a situation. Those agents had no intention of that. Too bad this agent probably will never be held accountable. Love, Joanie


01/11/26 07:21 AM #18781    

 

Joanie Bender (Grosfeld)

Hi again....this is for  folks who want to believe that there is justification for the cold blooded killing of Renee Nicole Good..

This former safety commisioner explains that this Officer behaved in a disregard for life and not at all according to protocol...Love, Joanie

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzRpkiucTZ0


01/11/26 07:55 AM #18782    

 

Jack Mallory

No one offers any contradiction to the brief and quite nuanced AI interpretation of federal vs. state investigative rights--other than to complain that it provides too much information. TMI=information someone is unable to rebut. 

********

At the risk of again providing too much information: The video footage filmed by the shooter clearly shows Renee Good’s last words to her killer were "That's fine, I'm not mad at you." The killer's last words to her, after shooting her in the face, were, "Fucking bitch." 

The shooter was an employee of OURS. Paid by US, given a badge by US, given a pistol by US, given the mission by OUR LAWS "to protect the United States from national security and public-safety threats by enforcing immigration and customs laws," as the U.S. Custioms and Immigration Act puts it.

Her death is our responsibility. Her last words to him before he killed her, her visible actions at the wheel, and his last words to her, suggest that the killing was something other than self defense or simple law enforcement. 

Justice requires an investigation, or investigations. The many judgements already passed and evident in the words of the most senior administration officials cast major doubt on the ability and willingness of federal authorities to self-investigate. The state of Minnesota must be given equal access to all pertinent information in order to produce a credible conclusion about Renee Good's death.

 

01/11/26 07:35 PM #18783    

 

Nora Skinker (Morton)

From the footage and angles  I saw, it is possible Ms. Goode was speaking to the other officer and not the one that shot her.  Moreover, the officer's shouted words did not necessarily come from the officer who fired the fatal round.  Events leading up to the shot and after the shot(s) might be crucially important to a jury, as well.  IOW, there are many questions/possibilities/scenarios outstanding that can only emerge from a thorough investigation. "Cold blooded" connotes premeditation.  Do you really think so, Joanie? If so, why? I do believe there exists "rogue" law enforcement officers in our country, but I don't believe this one fits the profile, unless further investigation reveals otherwise. To "suggest" that anything is pertiment to guilt or innocence before a case of this magnitude is tried, is insufficient. JMO

 

 

 

 


01/11/26 08:54 PM #18784    

 

Joanie Bender (Grosfeld)

I saw the video with my own eyes....the officer had no business shooting multiple shots at close range at Renee Nicole Good. She was not driving her car into him. He endangered others too by doing that as then her car zoomed out of countrol into other cars. She did not run him over as Trump and Vance said. He walked in front of her car but then moved away to the side... She backed her car up and turned the wheel to the right to pull away. She said just before that, I am not mad at you...these are not the words of someone trying to run someone over and that officer was not in danger of her car. You can see from the video
CLEARLY that he was not in any danger of her car. He was a cold blooded killer of Renee Nicole Good. Blood from her fatally shot body was all over her and the teddy bears she had stuffed inthe glove compartment for her six year old son...where is the compassion for her?  I have heard many experts say they saw the video and nothing merited what this officer did...afterwards he or his buddy yelled fucking bitch... Even if you don't believe my take Nori, Kristi Noam and Trump and Vance all said a bunch of lies about her before they even knew what was going on like she ran over the officer..and he was taken to the hospital. .NO he wasbnot...or she was a domestic terrorist...Everyone who knew her said she had no ties to terrorism....they can't say where they came up with that. So even if you think that officer thought he was in danger which I 100% don't think he felt, you must see that the people you are defending are lying all the time. Love, Joanie  Also since they lie and don't want the State involved in an investigation, there is not way to find anything out Nori that is fair and resembling the truth. 


01/12/26 07:30 AM #18785    

 

Robert Hall

Competence pushing back against incompetence


01/12/26 07:40 AM #18786    

 

Jack Mallory

Speaking of foul and disgusting lies, look to the filth that‘s being spread about Renee Good by those who are trying to counter the images of apparent murder. 

I can't bring myself to copy or quote them. But all over social media is the evidence-free lie that Good was a child abuser of her own children, even claiming that she burned them with cigarettes. NONE OF THIS BULLSHIT LINKS TO SOURCES VERIFYING THEM. There is no more evidence of this than there is evidence of any of you or I abusing children. 

Not too much information, NO INFORMATION. They are spread by those who realize the evidence that is available requires lies to distract attention from the truth, lies to denigrate a much-loved mother killed on camera by a man who then calls her a "fucking bitch."

Why might an American murder another American under such circumstances? Indulge me this scenario, provided by our government in 1945:

Once again we are seeing "sorry instances of mob sadism, lynchings, vigilantism, terror, and suppression of civil liberties. We have had our hooded gangs, Black Legions, Silver Shirts, and racial and religious bigots. All of them, in the name of Americanism, have used undemocratic methods and doctrines which…can be properly identified as ‘fascist.’”

"they would pit religious, racial, and economic groups against one another to break down national unity. Part of that effort to divide and conquer would be a “well-planned ‘hate campaign’ against minority races, religions, and other groups.” As an American who was not only working against ICE abuses but part of the LGBTQ+ community, Good may have drawn the hatred of a bigoted ICE agent--"Fucking bitch." Not simply bigoted, but sympathetic to the increasingly fascist tendencies of our federal government. And expecting to get away with the killing because he was, supposedly, law enforcement. Just a scenario . . . 
 


01/12/26 07:51 AM #18787    

 

Robert Hall

As American as apple pie Jack. With, I think, also a lot of foreign internet input to pander to our baser instincts. Just as our current leadership does.

Got to go back to cleaning out the basement......

01/12/26 08:23 AM #18788    

 

Joanie Bender (Grosfeld)

Robert, thanks for that post of Jerome Powell speaking about the bogus criminal probe. It really was good to see him and good to see him standing up

to pressure to do the President's bidding. He wants to do what he feels is right in his independent judgement...

Jack, thanks for your post. The lies keep mounting. There is no end to the cruelty of some and willingness to malign an innocent person who just lost her life. Her little six year old is asking where she is? He will never see her again.  Love, Joanie


01/12/26 10:31 AM #18789    

 

Jack Mallory

I'm afraid it's not foreign input, Robert, I think it's our very own. Americans pandering to other Americans, reveling in their own sick imaginations. When you can't turn to facts and reason, head for filthy slander. We see it all around us. 


01/12/26 03:12 PM #18790    

 

Joan Ruggles (Young)

Maybe I'm naive, it wouldn't be the first time, but if Minneapolis can get itself together and bring charges against the ICE officer, it should provide some clarity. If a jury can see frame by frame what happened, they will certainly come to the same conclusions that those of us have seen with our own eyes. Presumably, they would shoot down the slurs against her, and the truth will be told. But of course, this will only happen if the investigation is allowed to proceed and charges are allowed to be brought - something that is not at all certain with this administration.

Hey felon! Another nice distraction from Venezuela and Epstein! You've got all the luck!


01/12/26 03:55 PM #18791    

 

Jack Mallory

The last few days--and weeks and months and years--of politics especially and hatred more generally on social media drive my near-neurotic demands for links to the origins of assertions. Especially assertions of things that might be expected to produce documentary evidence, like charges of illegal acts.

With the advent and rapid rise of AI, I fear that it will be put to bad use as well. Clearly capable of producing facts and credible information, and the links to its origin, AI can be used, already is being used, to produce things like phony photos and video. I suppose it can also be used to produce phony, print media-like articles as well. 
 

SOooooo . . . Believe nothing you see on social media without links to origin. And stick to sources known to be reliable. And even then doubletriplequadruple check information against a variety of sources. And pass nothing on unless you've followed this process. Be ready, eager, and willing to provide evidence when asked for it. Provide TOO MUCH INFORMATION rather than nothing at all!
 

Sorry to be repetitive, I know I've said all this before, and most of you already think this way. In the modern world, folks who fail to follow these precepts run the risk of appearing foolish at best and or dishonest at worst. 
 


01/12/26 03:56 PM #18792    

 

Jack Mallory

The last few days--and weeks and months and years--of politics especially and hatred more generally on social media drive my near-neurotic demands for links to the origins of assertions. Especially assertions of things that might be expected to produce documentary evidence, like charges of illegal acts.

With the advent and rapid rise of AI, I fear that it will be put to bad use as well. Clearly capable of producing facts and credible information, and the links to its origin, AI can be used, already is being used, to produce things like phony photos and video. I suppose it can also be used to produce phony, print media-like articles as well. 
 

SOooooo . . . Believe nothing you see on social media without links to origin. And stick to sources known to be reliable. And even then doubletriplequadruple check information against a variety of sources. And pass nothing on unless you've followed this process. Be ready, eager, and willing to provide evidence when asked for it. Provide TOO MUCH INFORMATION rather than nothing at all!
 

Sorry to be repetitive, I know I've said all this before, and most of you already think this way. In the modern world, folks who won't follow these epistomological precepts run the risk of appearing foolish at best and dishonest at worst. 
 


go to top 
  Post Message
  
    Prior Page
 Page  

agape