chasfh

Oh ****ing A, it's gonna get overturned on appeal for sure, isn't it? Damn it. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/02/nyregion/trump-sentencing-hush-money-trial.html?emc=edit_na_20240702&ref=cta&nl=breaking-news

But he doesn't look like he is, and that's the whole ball of wax, isn't it? You can rant and rave at voters on this point all you want, but they're still gonna vote based on it, so rather than shaming them for feeling it, the age/health thing has to be positioned in some way as being a non-issue, which most would agree is a tall, tall order.

I wouldn't say no one, in the absolutist sense, but I would say those who are committed are amping up the commitment, and that's a positive.

Considering who authored the op-ed is the most important thing a reader can do to properly frame what's been written—even more important than where it's published.

As I think about it, it makes total sense that donations would spike, and not fall. Biden's objectively horrific performance exposed huge fault lines in our democratic republic, the kind that could end the whole thing in the wrong hands. It scared people straight about how this election could slip away, and be perhaps the last free and fair election we ever see. Backs are against the wall, and when an animal gets cornered, thats' when they become the most dangerous. And make no mistake: between this, the Congress, and the courts, we are cornered. IOW, as someone once said ...

It's still ironic and funny.

Speak for yourself, asshole ...

TFW they cite articles by Baseball Crank

Now that the Court has expanded presidential powers so dramatically, Trump can eventually jusy get to the point where he kneecaps the Court along with Congress and retains all legislative and judicial powers until himself. 😉

Of course the ruling was about this specific case, but the ruling has broader implications than just this specific case, which is what I was (clearly insufficiently) alluding to. This ruling was also about more than defending this specific defendant's individual rights in this specific case. This was a ruling that opened the door for how any president going forward can use the power of the office to commit crimes for personal gain (and I know I'm inviting some Biden example from you, so have at it) and be confident that it will get all tied up in knots while whatever court they arranged to hear the case labors over whether the acts were "official" or "unofficial", and bonus, perhaps even what the meaning of the word "is" is.

Wouldn’t the opposite be that the Supreme Court defined exactly what constitutes “official” and “unofficial” acts so that lower courts could follow such guidance? Did they do that and I missed it?

All the Court did yesterday was to create the opportunity for lower courts to litigate every single thing that’s done as to whether it’s “official” or “unofficial”, with the requisite shifting interpretations attended thereto, and completely dependent on who happens to be sitting on what bench at the time.

Yeah, the season isn’t lost yet, so it’s not time for them to win yet. 😉

The Tigers have taken an official stance on this so I don’t think access is the issue here. The story doesn’t belong to the beat guys, anyway. It belongs to the newsroom.

The Orioles.

More to the point, ten games in July will be against Cleveland and six will be against Minnesota. That's two-third of all games coming against division rivals above us in the standings. This stretch will determine whether we are buying or selling this deadline.

I don't know if I agree it makes sense. I would opt for a stricter view of what a president is immune from, basically, just about nothing, under the idea that a president is a 24/7/365 job and that no action he takes in public that has any consequence can be divorced from that. I don't think he can be prosecuted for governmental actions he enacts that are strictly within the realm of service to the public, but I do think he should be held liable for governmental actions he enacts that can be shown to have enriched him personally.

I don't think of it as a bunch of bad choices as much as it's been a decent bullpen that's gotten roughed up as of late, and also in which everyone in it has had bad stretches. We are disappointed in the Tigers this year, so the bad times really stand out to us.

I have never not been in on AOC. I always thought she is cut from a different cloth from the rest of the so-called The Squad.

This is a really good article, and highlights the unintended consequences of all these changes Baseball undertook all at once: reducing number of minor league levels, reducing roster limits within the remaining levels, pitch timer, schedule changes to six-game series, ABS, am I missing anything? Perhaps especially ABS, which is really juicing walk rates. In the majors the walk rate is about 8%. In AAA, it's 11.3%. And in AA, with supposedly worse pitchers, it's 9.8%. I would imagine we will see jacked-up walk rates when ABS comes to the bigs as well.

I pulled up a bunch of 2019 mock draft articles, and while to your point it wasn't unanimous, Riley showed up on most of them: Baseball America: Riley Bleacher Report: Riley CBS Sports: Andrew Vaughn ("For weeks the Tigers have been strongly tied to outfielder Riley Greene, the best high school hitter in this draft, but Vaughn slipping would make them shift gears.") The White Sox took Vaughn at #3. Perfect Game: Riley Fangraphs: Vaughn ("Vaughn or Florida high school OF Riley Greene.") The Athletic: Riley Callis, MLB Pipeline: Riley Mayo, MLB Pipeline: Riley

Shelby did have a solid eight-game stretch from May 11 to June 25, giving up only two earned in 8-2/3 with eight strikeouts and no walks and a .115/.138/.308 slash against. Of course that was also buoyed by a .105 BABIP, but he did have a FIP 3.16 and xFIP of 3.32, so, not chopped liver. In the two game since he has collapsed, and to G's point, I'm wondering how much clocking a guy in the side of his helmet and putting him out of the game got into Shelby's head in yesterday's outing. I think I'd be surprised to see him DFA'ed today, although his Savant card is pretty blue, meaning he doesn't have much underlying strength in his pitching, so I guess it wouldn't floor me.

Avila gets positive credit for not screwing up the Riley Greene pick, the same way he doesn't get the blame for picking Tork 1-1. He took the pick everyone would have taken. Late round guys are basically dartboard picks for everybody. I don't see how anyone can claim someone is a genius because they laid in wait for a guy they knew was going to rake in the major leagues but who wouldn't get picked until the 19th round. That just doesn't pass the smell test. The Fetter thing comes out of nowhere, but now that you mention it, it was a good hire by Avila, especially since Fetter coached in the Padres system while the guy who'd just been hired a week earlier as Tigers manager was a scouting VP there.