Category: Legal Stuff

Pass It Around

Legal Stuff, Politics

Whatever Lindsey Graham’s been drinking these past few months, can we set up an IV line of the stuff for Senate RINOs like Susan Collins?  This is excellent:

A day after the attorney general said the report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller found Trump’s campaign did not conspire with Russia, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham said: “We will begin to unpack the other side of the story.”
He said it was time to look at the origins of a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant for former Trump adviser Carter Page, which was based in part on information in a dossier compiled by Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer who co-founded a private intelligence firm.
Graham told reporters he planned to ask Barr to appoint a special counsel to investigate the FISA matter, which is already being probed by the Justice Department’s internal watchdog, Inspector General Michael Horowitz.

Give ’em a fair trial, then hang ’em.  After we’ve taken down the rotting corpses of the various mainstream media reptiles, that is.

Ye Olde Hanging Tree is going to get a workout over the next couple years… well, it should, anyway.

Bed-Breaking Antics

Legal Stuff

Apparently this couple were engaged in sex when the bed broke, violently catapulting the woman onto the floor and causing her to break her back.

This being the Modern Era, she sued the manufacturer of said bed for lots of money.  Result:

[Woman] LOSES bid for £1 million damages after judge rules ‘tragic accident’ was down to ‘unusual positioning and movement’

Personally, I blame the Daily Mail newspaper for her injury.  Is it not the Mail which publishes articles such as this?

Couples stuck in a sexual rut need look no further, as a new guide breaks down the most satisfying – yet challenging – new positions to try in the bedroom.
Unveiled by the British lingerie giant Ann Summers, the top five most difficult to master moves will require dexterity on the part of both you and your partner.
According to Ann Summers its top five are the ‘most pleasurable’ positions, but it concedes they’ll take some practice.
The retailer’s resident ‘flexpert’, Charlotte, said: ‘It is important to train your body to be able to contort properly, but it will be worth it for both you and your other half.
‘However you will need to practice regularly if you want to attempt the most difficult sex positions with your perfect partner.’

They even have pictures to illustrate them — just not of actual couples, the cowards, but marionettes:

(Note that the female figure is bent over backwards in this one.  I dunno;  maybe US gymnast Nastia Liukin could do it, but not many others.)

Anyway, I think the Mail  should shoulder at least a little responsibility here;  although that said, I think that if the abovementioned judge is to believed, older women need to be a little more cautious before launching into “unusual positioning and movement”.

And under no circumstances should anyone attempt the notorious “aircraft-carrier-landing position”, which carries a severe risk of injury to those attempting it.  Don’t make me post the picture…

Action – Reaction

Gummint, Legal Stuff

In response to situations such as this:

Two teenagers have been stabbed to death within days of each other as Britain’s knife crime bloodshed continues.

…a judge in Britishland has come up with a solution:

A judge has called for a drastic rethink on the way we use knives in kitchens in a bid to reduce the number of young men dying on our streets because of knife crime.
And he has come up with an idea for a scheme that could be rolled out across the UK where members of the public could take their kitchen knives to be ‘modified’ and the points ground down into rounded ends.

After all, nobody except a professional chef (trained in its use) has any need for a pointed knife, anyway.

I report, you wet your pants laughing.

The Other Side

Legal Stuff

I’ve never served on a jury. The whole story is that I’ve been called on twice to do so, but in both cases I showed up, waited a while and then was told I wasn’t needed and sent home, with thanks.

So I wonder how I’d react to this situation if it ever came to court and I was on the jury:

A primary school teacher accused of putting a sock in a pupil’s mouth in a bid to quieten him down has been banned from the classroom.

Of course, I’d have the man’s pee-pee whacked by a bailiff simply because “Put a sock in it!” is just a figure of speech, not a recommended action. But I have to say that I’d want to hear his side of the story first before determining on the number of whacks, so to speak, e.g.:

“How many times has the little shit done this before?”
“Has he given you lip on previous occasions, when you told him to shut up?”
“Is this the only thing he does: talking when he’s not supposed to, or does he get up to other kinds of mischief as well?” (no odds on that one)

…and so on.

If the recipient of the teacher’s sock was in fact an incorrigible little bastard who was wrecking the discipline of the entire class, then yes, I’d call for the teacher to be reprimanded. But not as massively as if he’d just picked on a first offender for some oral sock insertion.

Because I’ve been a parent of small kids myself, and let me tell you, there are times…

But of course, we can’t do that anymore because Crool & Unusual, or some such rubbish. [10,000 word rant deleted]