Reed Esau 😺

😂

Congrats #Colorado, I guess. It's official. You've finally dethroned California for the title of "Craziest State in the Country," with Oregon and Washington State now trailing far behind. Now prepare to suffer the Cali-like consequences. You can anticipate hunting bans, capital and corporate flight, energy shortages and grid instability, skyrocketing utility bills, a war on natural gas users, negative population growth, even poorer public schools, decaying roadways, the total demise of TABOR budget restraints, increased crime rates, and death (and impoverishment) by a thousand new "fees" and "assessments." The few common sense ballot measures that eeked out a win on Tuesday will be neutered, nullified and negated by Jared the Second (AKA @pweiser) and our one party rulers under the Golden Dome, with no recourse because the courts are also stacked with party hacks. It's over, Colorado. We just put California in the rear view mirror in the race off the crazy cliff. Better brace for impact. #copolitics #coleg @GovofCO

MIT is insane to continue to call its metoo investigation of Sabatini independent and expect blind faith in return. The court record contains smoking-gun evidence confirming bias surrounding the investigation, yet MIT continues to stand by Ruth Lehmann—the director who removed Sabatini in the name of metoo and workplace culture. MIT’s response accuses social-media coverage of being inaccurate without identifying a single specific inaccurate statement. Thousands of people have commented on this nationally reported story, so the accusation could refer to anything or anyone. If MIT means Bill Ackman, it should address him directly. If it means the Colonel, it should say so to her face. I certainly have not heard anything from MIT. If something I have posted is untrue, MIT should identify it specifically. Instead, it issued a statement deliberately designed to project confidence in the administration while admitting, explaining, and answering nothing. MIT repeatedly invokes an “independent law firm” while omitting the most important fact: MIT hired and paid that firm. The public has not been told how much that law firm was paid, what information it received, what instructions it was given, and how the investigation was framed. Discovery may reveal fees well into six figures or even approaching seven. A law firm running a business has every incentive to satisfy the client paying its bills, which is precisely why genuine transparency about the arrangement is essential. The report was leaked years ago, and its account ran counter to firsthand witness descriptions of Sabatini’s work environment. That conflict warranted scrutiny then and demands it now. The consequences extend far beyond Sabatini. MIT disrupted NIH-supported research, squandered scientific work, and sent a warning to every serious scientist considering a career there: administrators can destroy your laboratory and reputation, and hide behind a law firm they selected and paid. Changing course would cost MIT little and begin the process of restoring public trust. Refusing to do so risks the future of the Institute itself.

Before purchase I’d taken precaution of ensuring house is not located in severe flood zone. That may have helped, as water got close but still several inches below interior floor surface, so no intrusion. Many houses in other developments did get flooded!