Shelby’s “Chili in a brown paper bag” was a damn fine product.

We’re all watching the brain of an aging psychopath (and his confederates) operate in slow-motion right before our eyes. For however long, he didn’t have a response to the Roy Moore stuff, to the point he had to pretend not to even hear the questions. It was ... awkward.

It’s a breadstick restaurant. Really no other reason for it to exist. Their daughter will hold this against them forever and she will be right to do so.

What was it they did to “interfere in our election” again? Everyone seems so convinced of this, but apparently it was accomplished through Facebook ads or something?

Yes, this is the right take. The entire point is that toxic points of view don’t always come with pointy hats or boots with red laces. They are in the Cub Scout den, and the copy room at work. They are in church.

You’re not sure what “Seems like a small car to have a lot more battery pack than a Model S” means, but when you rephrase it as

If you’ve seen one episode of Star Trek you’ve seen them all. Technology will save our collective humanity. Got it.

I get acceleration as an index of performance or just pure engineering, but it’s not adding anything to the utility or even the “fun” of a street car after a certain point. No one’s launching their Camrys out of stoplights to pull off 6 seconds or whatever, because what’s the point? We can all get up the onramp quick…

I keep reading hopeful anonymously sourced items saying DeVos is on her way out. I hope they’re true.

What does “trusting the government” mean to you? It’s not monolithic. The Parks Department has been pretty good to us. The FDA has done some things well and others not so much.

What do you think the “entire intellgence community” has “reported on,” exactly? Go ahead. Tell me what they’ve told you happened, beyond a naked assertion Russia did “something.”

Oh my fucking god. You would be a great detective too:

This is the actual thing.

“It’s not vague, it’s concrete and specific - the consensus of the intelligence community is that the Russian government was involved in concerted efforts to influence the election against Hillary Clinton.”

So you agree we haven’t been shown any concrete evidence of anything. “All of the intelligence agencies,” by the way, have not concluded anything either.

Okay — that’s the closest I’ve seen to some meat on this bone. If, for example, the Junior Trumps offered to get rid of the Magnitsky Act for a dump of Clinton emails, and had Trump’s authority to make that offer, a crime was committed.

Good point. It’s hard to argue the remnants of the Clinton coalition aren’t looking hard to blame something or someone, from Comey’s letter to Russian hackers or ... well anything, really, for her loss to possibly the worst human being ever to take the public stage.

“Pretty much consensus?” Yes, there is a vague, politically driven media consensus built on a whole lot of nothing, which is the problem.

First, I think I was pretty clear I have as much for contempt Trump as anyone, so you’re already arguing dishonestly.

And not one of those “dominoes” amount to “Russian election interference,”, do they?