Max Hailperin
@maxhailperin.bsky.social
At any rate, a great movie. Enjoy!
November 29, 2025 at 10:54 PM
At any rate, a great movie. Enjoy!
And yet at the same time as it owes a debt to Hitchcock, so too also to Hawks. (See "Trading Places" by Dennis Drabelle regarding the relationship between these two directors.)
November 29, 2025 at 10:54 PM
And yet at the same time as it owes a debt to Hitchcock, so too also to Hawks. (See "Trading Places" by Dennis Drabelle regarding the relationship between these two directors.)
I'd respectfully suggest waiting for the recency bias to settle out some before comparing the notoriety and deciding whether the prior frontrunner has been overtaken.
November 29, 2025 at 9:15 PM
I'd respectfully suggest waiting for the recency bias to settle out some before comparing the notoriety and deciding whether the prior frontrunner has been overtaken.
I've known him since he joined the Walz team in 2007. (I'd been a Walz supporter since early 2006.) He's the kind to lose sleep over a decision (before and after making it) while continuing to project confidence.
November 29, 2025 at 9:07 PM
I've known him since he joined the Walz team in 2007. (I'd been a Walz supporter since early 2006.) He's the kind to lose sleep over a decision (before and after making it) while continuing to project confidence.
Of course, those conversations were already had.
November 29, 2025 at 8:53 PM
Of course, those conversations were already had.
All but the mayorship of Saint Joe's. But that's irrelevant. He's savvy enough not to try applying public pressure. He'd sit down with Walz for a chat over a couple diet dews. And he isn't Walz's only trusted advisor.
November 29, 2025 at 8:49 PM
All but the mayorship of Saint Joe's. But that's irrelevant. He's savvy enough not to try applying public pressure. He'd sit down with Walz for a chat over a couple diet dews. And he isn't Walz's only trusted advisor.
Incumbents have an advantage until they don't. When they don't, it's easy to point to some "taint" as their undoing, but those taints stick or don't based on a more generalized sense of when someone is past their best-if-used-by date.
November 29, 2025 at 8:37 PM
Incumbents have an advantage until they don't. When they don't, it's easy to point to some "taint" as their undoing, but those taints stick or don't based on a more generalized sense of when someone is past their best-if-used-by date.
You're in good company. Someone with academic credentials wrote "Water: an essential but overlooked nutrient" pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9972188/
Water: an essential but overlooked nutrient - PubMed
Water is an essential nutrient required for life. To be well hydrated, the average sedentary adult man must consume at least 2,900 mL (12 c) fluid per day, and the average sedentary adult woman at least 2,200 mL (9 c) fluid per day, in the form of noncaffeinated, nonalcoholic beverages, soups, and f …
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
November 29, 2025 at 2:59 PM
You're in good company. Someone with academic credentials wrote "Water: an essential but overlooked nutrient" pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9972188/
This opens up so many questions. Is caloric content a requisite for food, or will any nutrient suffice, even those that are non-caloric? Is water a nutrient?
November 29, 2025 at 2:34 PM
This opens up so many questions. Is caloric content a requisite for food, or will any nutrient suffice, even those that are non-caloric? Is water a nutrient?
A tent, unless one is doing surgery.
November 28, 2025 at 11:02 PM
A tent, unless one is doing surgery.
No, if you read the memorandum in which the judge explains her order, the exhibit in question is only relevant in so far as there is no direct evidence of the defendant's involvement in initiating that transfer.
November 28, 2025 at 10:06 PM
No, if you read the memorandum in which the judge explains her order, the exhibit in question is only relevant in so far as there is no direct evidence of the defendant's involvement in initiating that transfer.
My read of his educational background is the same as yours.
November 28, 2025 at 5:27 PM
My read of his educational background is the same as yours.
If the letter were genuinely intended to persuade the judge to unseal the exhibit, this tone certainly wouldn't help. I have to assume the letter is really addressed to the more easily impressed members of Holmstrom's constituency.
November 28, 2025 at 5:07 PM
If the letter were genuinely intended to persuade the judge to unseal the exhibit, this tone certainly wouldn't help. I have to assume the letter is really addressed to the more easily impressed members of Holmstrom's constituency.
Leading off from that dubious premise, Homstrom then goes on to lecture the judge regarding what "the First Amendment and common law have long protected." And he closes with what can only be read as a demand, despite his inclusion of the word "please."
November 28, 2025 at 5:07 PM
Leading off from that dubious premise, Homstrom then goes on to lecture the judge regarding what "the First Amendment and common law have long protected." And he closes with what can only be read as a demand, despite his inclusion of the word "please."
Holmstrom "cannot imagine a situation where a document presented in open court could later be sealed," but did that happen? The motion for a restrictive order, including on exhibits with account information, was submitted July 29th and would have been acted on prior to trial.
November 28, 2025 at 5:07 PM
Holmstrom "cannot imagine a situation where a document presented in open court could later be sealed," but did that happen? The motion for a restrictive order, including on exhibits with account information, was submitted July 29th and would have been acted on prior to trial.