Riobard

Gupta means well and I liked his personal account of evaluation, but slow your roll, Dr Ben Casey. To my way of thinking it would be imperative to establish a priori score and other results cut-off points for determining acceptable President role capacity if such testing is to be used in credential terms. Such an endeavour would be a monumental task hardly attainable over a short time. The battery of tests could have utilitarian merit, however, as the subject and inner circle would be provided with a breadth and depth of potentially more objective data to consider in his appraisal of his own fitness. As I suggested earlier, practice / rehearsal on many cognitive tests introduces recall bias influencing results favourably. In contrast, being an impromptu evaluative curve thrown at the Jessica Lange character in The Great Lillian Hall (Broadway production insurance the context) yielded a more damning result. Interestingly, standardized scores on the widely used assessment tool employed in the film reflect cognitive impairment for the majority of adults of any age with less than Grade 12 education. No age group scores within that variable match those of folks age 70-80 with post-secondary education. Age and education just examples of several demographic variables associated with score variance above and below normative cut-off values. Try to establish an arbitrary binary cut-off of fitness when several extenuating factors that highlight flaws within tried and true tests will inevitably enter the mix. (Parenthetically, speaks to voter legitimacy.) There is a huge array of factors to consider over a limited period of time in integrating formal assessment with the already existing demands for meta-synthesis of information over which there already exists discord about what credentials are arbitrarily essential and what salutary qualities and context merit consideration in spite of isolated deficiencies. Gupta is certainly on to something. It needs to be realistically planned, not on the crash-cart. He executed his own pursuit of testing for a special. Repurposing it precipitously in the way now proposed? Not so sure.

But these are merely cherry-picked observations in what was evidently a rousing speech. Full disclosure: I just plagiarized a bit from Sanjay Gupta’s earlier post regarding the debate …

Apparently today on campaign trail: “I will beat Donald Trump. I will beat him again in 2020. By the way we’re going to do it again in 2024.” ”When you get knocked down you get back up.” First order of business: orientation to time …

Furst tho, wot and wear is Phillipines?

Some would say CSAM or CSEM are better terms than CP (here presented as acronyms); others (like me) would say legitimately interchangeable. If one doesn’t understand that sexual, abuse, exploitation, and material are all implicit in Child Pornography one is living under a rock. What it means is tried and true, irrespective of somebody’s contrarian Linguistics/SocialConstructionism PhD thesis. “Material” has multiple noun and adjective definitions, hence possessing inexplicitness requiring an additional level of interpretative implicitness. The trouble with splitting hairs on nomenclature is that it can end up in circles, obscure the essential point, and is impactless on the unfortunate phenomenon it attempts to label anyway. Of course, one never knows whether the subject’s prosecution or defense will get caught up in this type of definitional material, or that both sides are in possession of Child Pornography for different purposes, and so on ad infinitum.

A tragedy, though? Yes and no.

The military ones are bonny.

In any case, one is a musical fruit that makes you toot, the other a tout in a musical for fruit.

If you presented Grand Rounds at a similar level of performance you’d be escorted off the podium, sympathetically of course, and subject to evaluation of professional capacity. For the sake of beneficence. In contrast, the imperative of non-maleficence applies to the other one.

I think what was meant up-thread is “congestive heart failure”. But one of the candidates arguably has cognitive heart failure. —- Doesn’t the ill-advised Supreme Court ruling inadvertently support refusal to capitulate to cognitive function testing? Otherwise, submitting to such evaluation is a fiduciary, legal one might assert, responsibility. Not a bad strategy given the forecasted election outcome. — Having done clinical rotation in Geriatric Psychiatry I would suggest that standardized rigorous cognitive testing formats exist in the public domain and any candidate can work at finesse with coached practice. Advantage DJT because they transcend other pathology and mendacity. Comparatively off-cuff contexts, eg, May JB interview with Burnett, recent CNN debate, tomorrow’s ABC interview, etc, are reasonable surrogate markers of capacity. The problem with the debate opponent challenge is how to evaluate any senior person’s ability to respond to a Roseanne Roseannadanna gone sociopathic. —— I vote for the next dragon hatchling to be named Suckrates. The wording itself tracks.

There must be a root cause.

True, with 1 or 2 varieties, hardly near 57.

Sigh. “Child Pornography” is an easier sell in language and legal terms and is appropriate terminology because what is distinctive about pornography is that it is oriented to inciting sexual excitement, whether acceptable or not. It is implicit that the imagery constitutes abuse.

Hindsight is too clear. Judging by the popularity of such a comment, clairvoyance is rampant within the population viewing erotica. It’s too easy to conflate legal yet objectionable (to some) pornography content with the background existence of unequivocally illegal conduct. One is not automatically a corollary of the other. It is, and will be, given evidentiary value but that should be restricted to the court of public opinion. That said, I wholeheartedly reject the nomenclature of “boy”, for example, within any sexualized context other than related legislation, the reason as much to do with the inability of the general population to grasp nuance as with the idea it is creepy particularly when paired with imagery suggestive of youth. The reason I’m not surprised is that the charges and convictions are so ubiquitous judging by USA sentencing data. Similarly reflecting such vast community interest in thematically edgy porn. That, and naïveté among users. Known players will inevitably emerge and folks will assert they look the part as if it’s a meaningful contribution. If those judgements are accurate then there is no end to the quantity of porn creators that should be under suspicion. The subject of discussion was only under surveillance once named by another arrested person (ahem, canary) snagged in the FBI investigative net and given incentivizing informant status months previously. That person’s arrest was unrelated to the subject of discussion.

Couldn’t it be due to Edge-y material including the embedded ‘Boytoyflirt’ redirect, tasteful STI discussions, etc?

Yes, certainly very incriminating, and the alleged file name itself related to the 10-yr old, albeit in Spanish, clearly stated the content as above, so it cannot be easily argued as having been embedded in a video that contained innocuous material, with the person in possession claiming to be unaware or polyglottally challenged, even if large 3-figure caches contain elements of simulated content with colloquial terms (eg, “boy”) in keeping with the technically legal but gateway performative material that is so prolific and monetized for ‘fan’ consumption. SouthernDistrictNY sentencing length appears to be an anomaly, for the year referenced anyway, a 1% microcosm of cumulative federal cases. Recent NY state Child Pornography federal sentence lengths are much greater and consistent with overall national trends. Only the more serious cases are publicized, so it’s difficult to get a sense of what mitigating factors yield a mere probation sentence.

Inquiring minds want to know: how did you breach the firewall to enter your above post, then?

Yeah but what’s Nippon’s follow thru rate for that clamping?

For SDNY fiscal 2023, some 14 Child Pornography cases. Trends: all guilty plea; majority imprisoned, 1 ‘prison + alternatives’ [sic], 2 ‘probation + alternatives’ [sic]; sentence Mean 36 months, Median 24 months. These metrics are not predictive; there have been lengthy prison sentences elevating the Mean.

The usual typical info wars on other platforms regarding this. Obviously the presumption of innocence holds legally, but here are what seem to be unambiguous historical sentencing data updated June 2023; fiscal 2023 data forthcoming but it has been consistent year to year. Judging from some of the child sexual abuse erotica media trail going back to 2023 the current news release reflects both upstream and downstream FBI investigating with the possibility of downward sentencing variance based on substantial informant role assistance and upward variance based on nature of abuse content. https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/quick-facts/Child_Pornography_FY22.pdf

Interesting ‘art imitates life’ parallel: Yesterday prior to debate I tuned into HBO movie apparently squeezed in last minute for Emmy Awards nominations qualifications. The Great Lillian Hall. Jessica Lange plays aging national theatre treasure headlining The Cherry Orchard but is deteriorating cognitively in rehearsals while producers etc struggle with deciding to replace her or prop her up, missed cues notwithstanding, and whether or not to count on her star power to compensate for the audience’s perceptions of obvious impairment. In this case, however, no conniving ‘Eve Harrington’ understudy. And the play’s run is likely her last rodeo, not stretched out to an additional 54 months.

However, it’s indicating a location (and new name?) at what is or was Babilonia Nightclub, Av Santa Cruz 9, Reangelo. While the current location is a revised club as noted above. Unclear whether trade at both venues.

-