7
JLoonacy 7 points ago +7 / -0

This actually is a planned outage, for maintenance purposes. They are just issuing a notice that they need to delay a planned outage because they don't have enough reserve resources stocked up elsewhere in the power grid to support the usual demand during the planned maintenance outage. Here's the official Advance Action Notice that they issued: https://www.ercot.com/files/docs/2024/04/26/ERCOT_Trending_Topic_AAN.pdf

https://www.ercot.com/news/trendingtopics?utm_source=twitter-x&utm_medium=post&utm_campaign=trending-topics&utm_term=AAN&utm_content=April-2024

1
JLoonacy 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yep, the more she unseals, the more she can point to as justification for throwing it out, especially since the government will likely appeal and the appellate and higher courts need to know her reasoning in throwing out the case.

5
JLoonacy 5 points ago +5 / -0

This is the ALARACT in question. Looks like they are claiming in the attached PDF that they are calling retirees back due to a shortage of army personnel. Best case scenario is that it's just proof that they are having trouble recruiting and no one wants to serve for this corrupt administration. Worst case is WWII, as others have already alluded to. https://armypubs.army.mil/ProductMaps/PubForm/Details_Printer.aspx?PUB_ID=1028611

2
JLoonacy 2 points ago +5 / -3

It's only real insofar as the bills can be folded that way, but it doesn't prove anything about the planning of 9/11.

1
JLoonacy 1 point ago +1 / -0

I would like to see Texas enforce the law despite the recent SCOTUS injunction. That's how the leftists operate - better to ask forgiveness than permission - and they get away with all sorts of shit the effects of which are irreversible. Then they just say, "Whoops! Too late now. Oh well."

11
JLoonacy 11 points ago +11 / -0

It's an excellent question, and I hope you and your family remain well. I have also observed the cost of homeowner's insurance more than doubling recently, on top of all the other cost of living spikes for food, goods, vehicles, interest rates, etc. It is clear to me that there is an agenda by the large, corporate firms, e.g. Vanguard, Blackrock, and other corporate landlord companies to squeeze everyone out of their homes, even if they have previously locked in a fixed mortgage with a favorable interest rate.

I, for one, am hoping that the crash in commercial real estate hits before any such crash in residential real estate, so that these corporations will feel the pain primarily, rather than the common man. Of course, these corporations employ people and there will be a ripple effect to any crash in commercial real estate, but the best I can hope for is that the crash in commercial real estate happens soon, affects only the companies (as much as possible) and a reset and recovery for the common man resolves itself as quickly as possible.

In the meantime, the people you are seeing with fast cars, extravagant vacations, and trips to dine out for every meal are almost certainly living beyond their means but want to keep up appearances. The bubble crash should affect them more than it will affect economically conservative people, such as yourself, hopefully.

2
JLoonacy 2 points ago +2 / -0

Not sure which particular locations this is limited to, but I found this tweet from a U.K. Twitter account. Let's hope this isn't infecting the U.S. and other countries, too.

https://nitter.net/POLITlCSUK/status/1564336784028442625#m

6
JLoonacy 6 points ago +6 / -0

I am not a lawyer, but I would imagine that this does not negate the need for a special master. The DOJ may very well have reviewed the documents already to determine what they consider to be attorney-client-privileged information, but since the DOJ is a party to this case and part of the Executive branch, I would think Trump has the right to petition the Court and the Court has the right to give a special master, due to separation of powers and conflict of interest for the DOJ.

-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
3
JLoonacy 3 points ago +4 / -1

Exactly. This is an argument against cryptocurrency, but whether or not OP of the post on this site understands that is unclear.

2
JLoonacy 2 points ago +2 / -0

It will have to be provided if the case goes to court, but that's exactly the dragged-out timeframe that the DOJ wants, unfortunately. Enough time to try and bar Trump's 2024 candidacy.