G&T

No concussion they say.

The first thing you need to do is talk to her about the changes and that she needs to go back to get help. That's a hard conversation but she needs to hear it. Speaking personally, I was just recently diagnosed with anxiety and panic disorder. I've had depression in the past, and the two are linked. It sucks, but I wasted no time getting on meds (which are pretty awesome) and I'm looking for a therapist. These things happen and shouldn't be a big deal to anyone. Getting help is important and should be treated like a broken bone. For whatever reason, depression always felt like a thing I should just fight on my own. But the panic disorder became impossible to ignore or fight. Being honest with myself has been liberating in a sense and I know that it will make me a better husband and father. If you also suffer from anxiety, it might help to see a relationship counselor. I never would have done this when I was younger, but experience has a way of changing perspectives.

I use State Farm. Had a claim for hail damage and got all new siding and gutters. No hassle.

I don't even know what you are arguing. You claimed that Foxx broke the law by recusing herself but not having a special prosecutor appointed, and I said that wasn't likely true. Nothing in this statement contradicts my position. She didn't recuse herself before the court, so the statute doesn't apply. I'm not debating that she appears to have breached ethical rules and best practices, but I don't see where she broke the law. Funny thing, that statement was written by a guy I went to high school with.

First, I'm speaking in likelihoods, not definitives because I doubt the issue has ever been decided. Second, I have tried to explain that in the event the office is entirely conflicted, then a special prosecutor is appointed. For example, if an employee of the State's Attorney Office is a defendant, or a family member thereof, the whole office is probably conflicted and a special prosecutor is appointed. There is nothing wrong with Foxx having a conflict and invoking a firewall to remove herself from the investigation, which is covered in the ethical rules. The unethical part is violating the firewall, which may have resulted in this outcome. That's a serious problem.

Not likely. State laws don't normally account for an office full of employees so, unless the whole office is somehow conflicted, Foxx could assign a case to a deputy. However, she can't then be interacting with the assigned attorney, or the defense team about the case. It's not illegal, but unethical. I don't see how she "has a conflict" but then doesn't have a conflict. And the argument that the whole office is automatically conflicted is nonsense. Law offices have conflicts all the time and ethical rules guide how it's handled. There are cases where a smaller State's Attorney office will not be able to take a case due to conflict, in which case a court appoints a special prosecutor.

Politicians don’t “enforce” or “hand out” anything and I’m not sure what “bylaws” you’re talking about. They make approvals on land use applications which are driven by ordinances, design standards, and community input. There are committees made up of political and non-political members that make design recommendations for city council approval. Generally, unless the City wants to risk a lawsuit, council doesn’t make arbitrary decisions on land use approvals. Permits are approved by city staff based on the land use approvals.

57% of NYers approved of the deal. So I don’t know what you’re talking about.

Oh right.

Eh. Look at the Hawks.

This is the KW motto from forever ago. We aren't cheap, we are poor. What's totally odd is that every other team points to player valuation for why they didn't pay for a guy, but the Sox have never said that. Their excuses about signing a new core is so lame. Not one guy right now can be seen as a future core player. Eloy hasn't played in the MLB. Kopech is out for the year. Everyone else has been underwhelming or hurt.

He lives in Miami. He isn't moving.

Hahn claims he told JR their chances were less than 50/50, so I doubt he didn't want to give more money. I really think JR just wouldn't pull the trigger on $300M. Logic need not apply.

The Sox are literally on a media tour explaining the failed Machado negotiations to fans. A better apology to fans would be landing Harper.

Maybe, but the current deal has a lower AAV, so failing to counter is stupid. Restructure the deal over 10 years at $300M and see if he takes it. Front load money. If the Padres go up another $10M, and the AAV exceeds $31M (which is where the sox were), then maybe you drop out. I'm not mad that they lost, I'm mad that they lost to that deal, and can't explain why.