No, I like to see that when the rules of justice are bent beyond all recognition to go after someone that someone stops to say, "Hey, is this even legal?"

Free Site, doesn't need a password

In an interesting brief filed recently, people that know the law a lot better than Merrick Garland think Jack Smith's appointment is illegitimate and therefore his charges against Trump must be dropped. Jack Smith was not properly appointed.


https://reason.com/volokh/2023/12/20/special-counsel-jack-smmiths-appointment-is-unconstitutional/

The brief outlines four reasons Jack Smith's appointment is unconstitutional. If Smith continues to go after Trump, any result in an inferior court could be fought simply on constitutional grounds at the Supreme court.

First, all federal offices must be "established by Law," and there is no statute authorizing such an office in the DOJ now that the Ethics in Government Act has sunsetted out of existence in 1999.

Second, even if one chooses to overlook the absence of statutory authority for the office, which Jack Smith currently holds, there is also no statute specifically vesting in the Attorney General the power to appoint an inferior officer Special Counsel with the powers that Jack Smith currently has of a Senate-confirmed officer.

Third, the Supreme Court has defined an inferior officer as being one who is directed, supervised, and controlled by a superior officer in Edmond v. United States, 520 U.S. 651 (1997) and in Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, 561 U.S. 477 (2010). Attorney General Merrick Garland is not, and cannot under the DOJ regulation under which Smith was appointed, direct and control Jack Smith's activities in a way that satisfies the Edmond test.

Fourth, the Special Counsel is, in all events, a superior, like a U.S. Attorney, rather than an inferior officer, like an Assistant U.S. Attorney, and thus cannot be appointed by any means other than p**********l appointment and senatorial confirmation regardless of what any statutes purport to say.

Excellent series of a wonderful model.

People need to realize that decisions like this play both ways. There is no proof that the commander in chief conspired to get a group of unarmed citizens to seize power on his behalf. To believe otherwise, especially without evidence and adjudication, is ludicrous.

There is plenty of evidence that Biden took bribes from foreign governments. What if the Texas and Florida supreme courts throw him off the b****t? Where does it end? Colorado has 10 e*******l v**es in 2024. Florida and Texas combine for 70. Does the moronic Democratic party really want to start down this road?

A few months ago, one of the photographers we've shot with sent some semi-nude AI images of my wife to me, set in Roman ruin theme. It was easy to see that they were AI generated because they had a cartoonish nature to them. That said, they were made up out of whole cloth, only based on my wife's body type and her face.

Last night I did a search and found out there are at least a half-dozen programs, mostly available for phone, that specialize in generating nude or risqué AI images. The interface seems to break down into three categories. AI images generated from keywords, image generators that take an existing image and re-render it removing clothes and leaving the subject nude or clothed in lingerie, and generators that use seed images and text prompts to create new images that look like a certain individual. As this technology progresses, I feel many public people are going to be fighting a host of deep fakes. The latter two technologies can create believable images using images harvested from someone's social media account.

This leads me to two conclusions: 1. It's going to get crazy out there. 2. Models are going to have trouble finding work.

A submission to this section of the forum, at a bare minimum, should start with a photo of a human. If you accept this as a valid post, we should all just sell our camera equipment and fire our models.

I tend to agree with all of your statement. UHH, as I've found out personally, is not the venue for images like this. That said, no matter what the content, images can be appreciated for how well they are executed. For the posters of UHH I think there is a sliding scale based on the intent and composition. If a user here tries to do a traditional figure study and blows the execution they're going to get more support than a photographer that delivers a poorly composed and posed crotch shot.

Hello everyone. One problem with getting old and posting infrequently is not remembering if you've shared a set of images before. If these photos that we took in 2017 are repeats, I apologize. Just a little holiday fun from both of us. Everyone in the family is fine and we're looking forward to the holidays. Perhaps we'll even break out the lights and camera.

PS. I'm a fan of pin-up photography. My model smiles, makes me smile, and tends to look at the camera. Sorry in advance to all the serious boudoir types.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

very nice series

Yes, but kids schooling at home don't decrease the amount spent per student and their parents contribute to those students still in the traditional classroom.

That's what are primary process is all about. If you're truly a conservative, pick someone and v**e, Denny

I shudder to think this is our commander in chief.

How in the hell does home schooling deprive the public education system of taxes? You're a moron. Homeschoolers still pay property taxes so they pay for their own educational materials and pay for public schools as well.

Absolutely not. We need to shore up the K-12 education so getting a high school diploma means something and for most jobs more education is not necessary.