I just discovered this person on YouTube, member name is LegalEagle (real first name is Devin) who is a real life lawyer, and has been doing videos discussing the accuracies (or mistakes) TV shows or movies make when featuring real legal matters.
He already has many videos up, but this video
is a good starting point, where he discusses the infamous series finale to Seinfeld.
Mod Note
There is a forum-wide ban on discussing US politics, which remains in place as long at the dedicated US Politics thread
is locked.
If a new episode goes back onto that subject (or any of the other banned topics
) then you are not allowed to discuss it. You can discuss any video about anything else, just not related to US politics.
If this becomes a problem, posts will be thumped and there may be further consequences.
We've already had to lock this thread once. If we have to lock it again, it's likely to remain locked for a very long time — and may not get unlocked at all. We'd really like to avoid that.
Edited by kory on Sep 22nd 2024 at 9:15:19 AM
Deadly Vu!
I had a similar experience with my GP, they felt that because I knew I was autistic and already had coping strategies there wasn’t a real need for me to get a formal diagnosis. I ended up pushing for one further down the line anyway and it has been useful.
It comes down to the fact that a formal diagnosis will often unlock a chunk of support both in the form of direct services and in the form of legal protections, but you have to be able and willing to utilise said support for it to be worthwhile, as a formal dissngosid can also put a target on your back.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranAn adult? Most official autism screenings are targeted at young children. There's no formal criteria for adult screenings, it's either done through observations from a specialist or unofficial modifications of the DSM criteria. There's kind of a stigma that if you made it to adulthood without a diagnosis then your brand of the spectrum "is not so bad."
It comes down to the fact that a formal diagnosis will often unlock a chunk of support both in the form of direct services and in the form of legal protections, but you have to be able and willing to utilise said support for it to be worthwhile, as a formal dissngosid can also put a target on your back.
Yep, very similar to my experiences.
So, just to check, Stormy Daniels was having an affair with Trump voluntarily, right? She wasn't paid for it or anything? Because the way she keeps talking about it makes it sound like she didn't want to be there, when the whole extramarital affair thing seems to suggest otherwise.
Hope shines brightest in the darkest timesReading up on it, I'm surprised it was just a one night stand, basically. The way everyone was talking about it, I thought it was a full blown extramarital affair. Daniels sure sounds like a jilted lover the way she talks about it in her book.
Does anyone believe this affair would have cost him the election? I find it hard to believe. I mean, if "grab them by the pussy" didn't do it...
I also find the part about the blackout and not remembering how she ended up on the bed a bit odd.
Edited by Redmess on Jun 3rd 2024 at 1:04:30 PM
Hope shines brightest in the darkest timesProbably not since his fan base's mentality is "If Trump did it, it's okay." Or as members of my family say "He must have had a very good reason to do it."
Like creepy stories? Check out my book!Bill Clinton was a notorious philanderer from way back in his days as an Arkansas politician. It wasn't new information. But yes, he got in trouble for lying about it, not for the act itself. Being unfaithful to one's spouse is not a crime (in the US, anyway). Newt Gingrich, who was the voice of the GOP in going after him at the time, was a serial adulterer, at one point cheating on his wife while she was dying of cancer.
While I would normally call out a "both sides" argument, this isn't that. It's more of a "glass houses" one. The GOP's protestations of "family values" have always been intensely hypocritical.
As for Trump, if he hadn't tried to cover up the affair with Daniels, none of this would have happened. He did everything out of fear that he'd lose the election if it came out, but the irony is that his base probably wouldn't have cared. The Access Hollywood tape didn't defeat him, so why would this?
Edited by Fighteer on Jun 4th 2024 at 11:29:39 AM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Yeah, the Clintons had the famous 60 Minutes interview about their marriage before the election. And there were certainly more cheating presidents, Jefferson for example.
Although lying about it was the legal hook, the impeachment made a big deal about how this proved he was morally unsuitable to be president.
At the time of the Access Hollywood tape, Trump was still seen as having some vulnerabilities. A bunch of republicans called for him to drop out at the time. Now? Nothing but enthusiastic support for him is acceptable.
Only Nixon could go to China, only Reagan could be divorced, only Trump could cheat on his wife. And maybe only Trump could be a convicted felon.
Edited by alanh on Jun 4th 2024 at 9:05:49 AM
