I just like how happy he is when he says it. I also like when he objectsaka The Hillary Defense
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I just like how happy he is when he says it. I also like when he objectsaka The Hillary Defense
Dammit, you're going to continue to encourage me to watch that until I do, aren't you?I just like how happy he is when he says it. I also like when he objects
LOL definitely watch it. it's stupid but funnyDammit, you're going to continue to encourage me to watch that until I do, aren't you?
little turdI just like how happy he is when he says it. I also like when he objects
Lotta glass houses on that block man.aka The Hillary Defense
I heard a story about him racing a McLaren or something up and down his well off residential street at all hours of the day. Neighbors hated him.little turd
OK, Lois Lerner.Lotta glass houses on that block man.
I think he is a lot more likable todayI heard a story about him racing a McLaren or something up and down his well off residential street at all hours of the day. Neighbors hated him.
But I hated him b/c if you own a high powered vehicle, you take it to the track or the middle of nowhere to have fun so you don't kill anybody but yourself.
It's these kinds of people that ruin it for the rest of us.
Age does that to you usually. And marriage. Which, isn't he married to a Baldwin?I think he is a lot more likable today
With that outfit and haircut, I would have asked him "How long have you been a lesbian and did you come here straight from the Indigo Girls concert?"He could also simply answer: Guess what. Guess what. I don't recall
Justin Bieber -- VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION -- Like You've Never Seen Him ... And It's Bad
Justin Bieber can be insulting, arrogant, snotty, ignorant and disrespectful ... and all in one sitting -- because that's exactly what he was like during his deposition last week in the lawsuit where his bodyguard allegedly beat up a photog.www.tmz.com
Correct. We’re lucky to have BiebsAge does that to you usually. And marriage. Which, isn't he married to a Baldwin?
When is he ever going to fight Tom Cruise?Correct. We’re lucky to have Biebs
Dying laughing. All that fighting wears on ya. My first boss used to go to med mal depos and he wouldn't say hi to anyone. wouldn't say hi to the other lawyers. no one. would never take an adjuster's call. just file. and he'd sit down at the depo for a doctor like this.With that outfit and haircut, I would have asked him "How long have you been a lesbian and did you come here straight from the Indigo Girls concert?"
it would eclipse all ppv recordsWhen is he ever going to fight Tom Cruise?
Biebs is in a weird section of his life. Probably too old to be a 15 y/o's hearthrob. Not yet at Neil Diamond's age when the 30-50 year olds are throwing lingerie at you. Just 30 something.Correct. We’re lucky to have Biebs
Until Jake Paul (or is it Logan, who cares) fights a real boxer and gets absolutely destroyed. I'd pay $100 for that if anybody's listening.it would eclipse all ppv records
One of them signed up for mma. That’ll be uglyUntil Jake Paul (or is it Logan, who cares) fights a real boxer and gets absolutely destroyed. I'd pay $100 for that if anybody's listening.
I think one of his neighbor was Keyshawn Johnson and he was ready to whoop his tail.I heard a story about him racing a McLaren or something up and down his well off residential street at all hours of the day. Neighbors hated him.
But I hated him b/c if you own a high powered vehicle, you take it to the track or the middle of nowhere to have fun so you don't kill anybody but yourself.
It's these kinds of people that ruin it for the rest of us.
Very surprised they did NOT convene a grand jury for a case like this. Leaves a scent of a prosecutor trying to make a name for her/himself.Agreed. That said i don't have the benefit of whatever info the prosecutor's office has. presumably they found enough to charge him so.... and presumably, not to be a dick, they have enough self-awareness to recognize that they probably aren't the A team and will be out of their league with whoever is the top lawyer in town that baldwin will retain. ah shit maybe they want a televised trial. parlay it into a tv show or court host or something
I don’t really know how all that worksVery surprised they did NOT convene a grand jury for a case like this. Leaves a scent of a prosecutor trying to make a name for her/himself.
I like him as an actor. I think he’s a jerk, in large part because he’s been an actor. And my guess is he will fight this with all of the liberal, social justice warrior, virtue-signaling gusto he can still drum up. And I would aid his defense. He is a freaking actor. It is not his job to make sure that the fantasy world created in the fantasy place so they can film it and make people pay to watch the fantasy doesn’t include real bullets in the gun they tell him to pick up, point around, and pull the trigger. This is like suing a stewardess because the pilot crashed the plane.
Does anyone read Tom Clancy anymore? I remember reading them in the early 1990s, and even then they seemed dated. I remember them as riveting, wonder if they hold up.He's a douchebag, but I agree with you. Not sure if any of your points hold up legally, but eff that. Common sense says that Baldwin should have some expectation that he was not handed a weapon with live rounds on a movie set.
Besides, he was great in The Hunt for Red October. Every Ryan since then has sucked.
My Dad is a huge Clive Cussler fan. Read everything. You'd think there would be a ton more movies but really there's so few. Sahara and Raise the Titanic are the only ones I can think of (probably more). I never liked Cussler (b/c of my erudite sensibilities /s) but Sahara was really well done. I heard he doens't let go of material and wanted to have a hand in writing the screenplays. Probably isn't easy to deal with.Does anyone read Tom Clancy anymore? I remember reading them in the early 1990s, and even then they seemed dated. I remember them as riveting, wonder if they hold up.
Does anyone read Tom Clancy anymore? I remember reading them in the early 1990s, and even then they seemed dated. I remember them as riveting, wonder if they hold up.
Well before he died, Clancy was using his name for others to write under. So I am not sure how much of his last books were written by himDoes anyone read Tom Clancy anymore? I remember reading them in the early 1990s, and even then they seemed dated. I remember them as riveting, wonder if they hold up.
That might have been my last one too. I don't think I read the ones where he becomes VP or the Pres.Well before he died, Clancy was using his name for others to write under. So I am not sure how much of his last books were written by him
I gave up on Clancy after Sum, it became too painfully obvious to that Ryan was a Mary Sue the author was too in love with.
Only dumb ass boomers read Clancy, so they can fantasize about saving the world like their parents ACTUALLY did. It’s pathetic.Does anyone read Tom Clancy anymore? I remember reading them in the early 1990s, and even then they seemed dated. I remember them as riveting, wonder if they hold up.
How do we know he didn’t point the gun at her and pull the trigger when he wasn't supposed to? One of the main theories I heard when this first happened is that he was probably pissed off at her for making stay to shoot another scene. Being the psycho that he is thought "I'll show her" and pointed it at her and shot when he wasn't supposed to assuming it was a blank inside and would just make a loud bang and scare the shit out of her.If I'm Baldwin, I go to trial. I think he'd have a decent chance on appeal even if convincted, unless they have some damning proof that as the producer, he OK'd a bunch of outrageous cost-cutting measures including safety ones. Like someone testifies "I told him if we don't have this person on set, someone could get shot. And he responded, 'I don't care.'"
They charged the armorer, too. That suggests to me that they have a theory of the case based on reckless implementation of safety procedures, which hooks Baldwin as the producer. Although, the DA also suggested a theory floated by some here, that Baldwin as the actor was negligent in not checking the gun himself when it was handed to him. I'm still skeptical of that theory. I think the strongest attack will be re: the safety procedures. The got the assistant director who handed him the gun to turn state's evidence, and I'd guess he's going to testify to more than, "Yes, I handed him the gun."If I'm Baldwin, I go to trial. I think he'd have a decent chance on appeal even if convincted, unless they have some damning proof that as the producer, he OK'd a bunch of outrageous cost-cutting measures including safety ones. Like someone testifies "I told him if we don't have this person on set, someone could get shot. And he responded, 'I don't care.'"
If they had evidence of that, there would probably be additional charges, like some form of menacing or something.How do we know he didn’t point the gun at her and pull the trigger when he wasn't supposed to? One of the main theories I heard when this first happened is that he was probably pissed off at her for making stay to shoot another scene. Being the psycho that he is thought "I'll show her" and pointed it at her and shot when he wasn't supposed to assuming it was a blank inside and would just make a loud bang and scare the shit out of her.
If they are hinging their case on the testimony of the AD who handed him the gun and cut a deal, I don't think this is a very strong case.They charged the armorer, too. That suggests to me that they have a theory of the case based on reckless implementation of safety procedures, which hooks Baldwin as the producer. Although, the DA also suggested a theory floated by some here, that Baldwin as the actor was negligent in not checking the gun himself when it was handed to him. I'm still skeptical of that theory. I think the strongest attack will be re: the safety procedures. The got the assistant director who handed him the gun to turn state's evidence, and I'd guess he's going to testify to more than, "Yes, I handed him the gun."
If the safety on set was really as bad as they are hinting, I'm guessing they'll have other witnesses who can corroborate the claims.If they are hinging their case on the testimony of the AD who handed him the gun and cut a deal, I don't think this is a very strong case.
Frank Galvin would easily win.
They charged the armorer, too. That suggests to me that they have a theory of the case based on reckless implementation of safety procedures, which hooks Baldwin as the producer. Although, the DA also suggested a theory floated by some here, that Baldwin as the actor was negligent in not checking the gun himself when it was handed to him. I'm still skeptical of that theory. I think the strongest attack will be re: the safety procedures. The got the assistant director who handed him the gun to turn state's evidence, and I'd guess he's going to testify to more than, "Yes, I handed him the gun."
I bet they find it a lot harder to find armorers who will testify that it was perfectly okay to knowingly have both blank and live ammunition lying around on set, which is what the DA is suggesting happened.I heard a debate on CNN, one person saying the "you should always check your gun". Which I think we all agree. But another who is a Hollywood armorer say he absolutely does not want his actors doing that. He said they know nothing about the gun, he has it prepared exactly as he wants it. He will open it and show it if they ask, but he doesn't trust them to return it the way he wants it.
If there are a couple armorers saying that in court, it may be be tough to get a conviction.
Civil case though, pretty easy.
Yes, the armorer did say that was horrible.I bet they find it a lot harder to find armorers who will testify that it was perfectly okay to knowingly have both blank and live ammunition lying around on set, which is what the DA is suggesting happened.
That's the story that came out awhile ago.I bet they find it a lot harder to find armorers who will testify that it was perfectly okay to knowingly have both blank and live ammunition lying around on set, which is what the DA is suggesting happened.
I bet they find it a lot harder to find armorers who will testify that it was perfectly okay to knowingly have both blank and live ammunition lying around on set, which is what the DA is suggesting happened.
Yes, the armorer did say that was horrible.
One problem to that, what is Baldwin's role in that. He said stars are often given a producer title for royalties but have no authority beyond that. IF that is this case, and he did not know, Baldwin may not have any more responsibility for that than anyone else on set.
Mind you, personally, I think manslaughter fits. Just pointing out that this may not be open and shut.
I have no idea how accurate it is, but IIRC, some of the early reporting was that people brought live ammo so they could go out and do target shooting as recreation. If that's true, and it was generally well-known on set, then that might weaken Baldwin's claim that he had no reason to check the gun because he's just an actor.I know this is backwards to how most legal liability works, but I have to believe the primary responsibility in this case is upstream, as in "how in the fvck did live rounds ever get within a mile of the premises" upstream. Whoever they used as a "ammo" supplier should be providing some good answers.
As far as Baldwin not checking the gun (that everyone seems to be concentrating on), does a dummy round look unmistakably different than a live round? Would a dumbass Hollywood douchebag be able to tell the difference? (I truly have no idea.)