Comments by "William Cox" (@WildBillCox13) on "LegalEagle" channel.

  1. "Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!" (Sir Walter Scott, 1808)
    23
  2. 1) The courtroom is sublimed from period piece British cinema. So is the "frilly" look of the Prosecutor- artistic license used to promote a setting, a mood. It almost shouts: "this is a high class place, dattebayo!" 2) Channeling the spirits of the deceased in court is a holdover from ancient times when it was done by priests or onmyoji. This custom is given a nod in Kurosawa's immortal Roshomon- a movie about a Sengoku Jidai high profile murder trial. If you haven't seen it, I highly recommend it.
    12
  3. Ouch! I l keep falling off my high horse! Effing ground hurts!
    3
  4. Informative and wonderfully entertaining. Thanks for posting. Liked and shared.
    2
  5. 18:33 I remember channels 2, 4, and 11. CBS, ABC, and NBC. The television broadcasters signed off at (usually) midnight and that was it until the next morning's programming schedule began. The big improvement since then has been in presentation clarity; as in 1080p vs 180p. And personal comment: the writing never improved. That's what comes of a "lowest bidder" economy. Now, writers are imprinted with bad writing from an early age and will never break free of the "talent is cheap for a reason" mentality enforced from above.
    2
  6. This is why my art is free to viewers and will never be sold to producers. I create art and disseminate it freely. I am not interested in being corrupted by greed. But everyone else sure is. 😇
    2
  7. Although I am as gullible to echo chambering as anyone, I surf applicable content hoping to assemble a reasonably coherent world view. I don't mind admitting I find your content interesting and well presented.
    2
  8. Well researched and well presented. Liked and shared.
    1
  9. "Daylight come and me want you go home."
    1
  10. Sometimes I wonder if this is the public demonstration of how high up the financial ladder you need to be to utterly escape retributory justice. A man free of guilt for his actions (refer to your previous video on his divorce), unbound by conviction that truth trumps profit, might simply be willing to make himself the target for public ire to profit over the increase in visibility of his product. If that were the case, mightn't he been a lure in the water so other extremely wealthy, morally and ethically corrupt, captains of finance and industry can see what kind of predators lurk outside their purview? My suspicion is that all change comes from above, that trickle down is a myth, and that government is a mitigating agency used to put worker asses in owner seats for the lowest possible wages. I know-old guys get paranoid.
    1
  11. This is so shared.
    1
  12. Shared.
    1
  13. Shared with a lawyer friend. This is interesting stuff, because it's part of a process to append the same laws and restrictions to the rich and powerful that have since day one lain upon the shoulders of the poor and defenseless. It's also providing important precedents for the upcoming world stage drama involving the legitimacy of presidents both new and old. Who can protect himself from the courts despite demonstrable culpability, thus absolutely perverting the intent of the law? That's what we're discussing here. I'm interested to see where the line is drawn between our sophomoric belief in egalitarianism in the justice system and the tawdry truth that those atop our economic pyramid can safely ignore the affairs of those less important. If the line is pushed high enough there is hope for the system to work as intended*, rather than remain in the sad reality of cronyism and influence peddling. *As an egalitarian meritocracy
    1
  14. Data is collected for sale. Russia buys that data. Just sayin' . . .
    1
  15. Jarts. Surprised you didn't mention the game of horseshoes. It's ages old and has injured tens of thousands.
    1
  16. I had a Johnny 7 OMA. Every moving part soon broke.
    1
  17. Taylor Swift. Dated ideas struggling tooth and claw to retain relevance, no matter the damage to others. She can be safely ignored. All her best ideas belong to others. And no offense meant. Just truthing, It's still a thing. For contrast, look into Elton John's troubles with fans and interviewers*. Taylor's handled with kid gloves by comparison. *See Rowan Atkinson interviews Elton John. They did the whole thing in one shot. Ha ha haha.
    1
  18. Almost a million views in 2 months. Sweet.
    1
  19. Clackers are a murder weapon waiting to happen . . . to yourself.
    1
  20. OMG! Hank Green! Now THAT was unexpected! Sweet, Liked and shared.
    1
  21. 3:41-5 Ouch! Right to the forehead! Good use of the language to make a deep point.
    1
  22. "Whenever two or more of you are gathered in its name . . ." -Anonymous
    1
  23. Great segue into the Skillshare ad. Props.
    1
  24. Useful. Thanks. Liked and shared with a bunch of young artists.
    1
  25. Similarly, I call myself Wild Bill. If you know me, there is no other Wild Bill. If someone tries to steal my shtick they'll be tested . . . and fail. Wild isn't a simple word-it's a lifestyle. My great benefit is that I rock the "Wild Bill" appellation without firearms. Don't need them to get folks' attention. A few words, a topical joke, a short poem, or three minutes at the piano is plenty of time to separate the Wild man . . . from the wild bois. The Japanese have a concept-regionalization. They change meanings to avoid insulting or too much titillation of unfamiliar market demographic. The easiest way to impose regionalization is to ban the dumb ads in the first place; but what station will turn down money unless forced to do so? So I suggest we simply stop watching the boob toob. That way the Cheboygan Hammer is always the only "real" hammer, just like I'm the only legitimate "wild Bill".
    1
  26. Liked and shared.
    1
  27. Serious musical entertainer here. To my experienced ear (45 years in the biz) those two songs do not sound alike in the clip offered. However, Katy's song intro is almost identical to that of "Gangster Paradise". Give it a listen and see what you think.
    1
  28. I'd give it a thumbs up just for the segue into the ad.
    1
  29. Shared.
    1
  30. The "must stand behind perspex" has got me wondering.
    1
  31.  @jeffreypierson2064  Thanks for your question. Certainly, that sort of thing happens all the time and corporate lawyers exist to that specific purpose at the highest levels. But it might be a bit off topic. As far as my intellectual property is concerned, it is mine and mine alone. I let anyone who wants to hear or see or read it do so for free. I don't extend anyone else the right to profit on it without my approval or involvement. My point is I am not creating art for profit. I do the art for its own sake. I don't mind that others go for the gold. But, going for the gold takes the artist away from creating art. It also subjects that artist to outside control-which kills originality. I urge other artists to embrace what makes them unique, not take direction from anything else. That's where an artist finds completion. And that's how the artist stands out from the pack. Which is how an artist gets noticed, if that's what he or she wants.
    1
  32. Liked and shared. The seamless segue into shameless self-promotion was particularly attractive.
    1
  33. So-we empower her to call herself a lord . . . and she allows us to "farm" (for reputation) a parcel of that land. Feudalism works!
    1
  34. Bright as you are, you are already aware of how wonderfully entertaining this post is. Thanks.
    1
  35. So, if I understand it, Disney is protecting alternate lifestyles by violating democracy? It seems like a bit of a grudge match; Jean Henry versus La Machine. Or is it consuming sound bytes for profit . . . on both sides? Name recognition isn't a thing- in fact it's the only thing- in entertainment. Your 2.8 million subscribers are clear evidence of that. I don't doubt that a look inside the various souls involved and concerned would tell us a lot more than media coverage ever can. What a time to be a telepath!
    1
  36. Wait-what about convictions later overturned? Both prosecutors and defenders have been known at times to present a series or chain of causal or pertinent events which, in the light of new evidence, proved false.
    1
  37. Liked and shared. D&D/AD&D provides a great point of departure for crafting unique experiences for any gaming group whose GM is the creative type. Its basic concept-the reason Gygax & Co developed it- is to provide a set of rules for small unit (down to single man) tactical simulations. That was a major step in tabletop wargaming. Before that, all markers and counters on a game map represented larger units; i.e.: corps, divisions, brigades regiments, battalions, companies. If you're not a wargamer you might not sense the significance of this concept. Here's a personal anecdote apropos to topic: A buddy came back from college with the three book "Chainmail" rules from Gygax (et al) in early '79. We bought another nerdy buddy the boxed D&D set for his birthday in mid 1979. Three months later we bought the 1st edition handbooks. Now for context. By the time I first heard of D&D I had already exhausted the existing catalogues of fantasy writings of Burroughs, Kipling, Lovecraft, Heinlein, and many others, was illustrating my own short stories and comics, and executing full size color posters of fantastic art. D&D is therefore not part or parcel of my many fantasy novels, but it was a favorite mode of entertainment/socialization for a decade. The words and ideas such as "Elf", "Orc/Ork", "Dragon", "Epic Hero", "Warlock", "Wizard", "Priest/Healer", "Witch", and "Quest" were already in the lexicon of fantasy writers everywhere. Gygax's revolution lay in an ongoing process of refining tactical simulations in terms of provision of smaller, or discrete, units. in effect, he reduced the minimum unit size to a single person or monster. Before this, single unit counters and figures were only useful in tabletop naval combat simulations*. I am happy to pay it an homage. * "Jutland" was a very popular game played on the floor with each cardboard counter representing either a single large ship or a flotilla of destroyers or torpedo boats.
    1
  38. I enjoyed this so much I sat through the ad and recommendations. You're welcome.
    1
  39. This is so shared.
    1
  40. "The great Prince founds fiefs, vests families . . . inferior people shouldn't be allowed to compete!" -Firesign Theater (explaining medieval power structures in search of a punchline).
    1
  41. A powerful argument, indeed. I have shared your thoughts with a canny associate and am eager for her impressions. I very much enjoyed this presentation, in any case. Informative, and entertaining.
    1
  42. Expert Bullsh*tter here. I have a thousand videos to prove it. Interesting. Bullsh*t is nuanced. In entertainment it's perfectly acceptable. In business, the agent sells, the owner signs. In politics it's (bullsh*t) expected-and the cause of much ribaldry-but not particularly legal. But, if a person's whole reason for existence is the selling of shaky prospects to credulous donors, at what point does it cross the line? "Peace in our time" gets no one indicted. "No new taxes" merely incites the snide to deride. At some level we-the peoples-are marks and the electees are the cons. Or so they think. I think it's layers of the onion. What is the ultimate germ at its core?
    1
  43. Personal view here. Not adhering to any real or illusory philosophical debate between the billionaires who formulate policy on both sides. I imagine Dominion gets a huge boost in visibility-a key to profit and perpetuity of its high profile employees and management within the system. Fox gets an enormous boost in notoriety and, if you understand the value of name recognition*, you might think as I do that Fox benefitted mightily from its high visibility and the slap on the economic wrist was merely the contractual payment for said advertisement. *Folks flock to countercultural events. That's why other folks sell tickets to them. For instance, I suggest that no one believed- then or now- in "tune in, turn on, drop out", but millions of us loved the music. Billionaires were made thereby; exploiting the rapid rise and quick demise of the top pop stars. Millions still wear Janis, Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison, and MJ merch, even though they died of recreational drug overdoses. So-yeah; Fox makes out like bandits.
    1
  44. Liked and shared to my FB, with tags for my lawyer friends.
    1
  45. The growing complexity of human artifice has changed the meaning of evolution from a genetic predilection in certain lucky individuals into the acquired ability to take part in the creation of a race horse by committee. And, speaking of equine prodigies, Francis could talk. Mister Ed could talk. The problem was they could only talk to straight men. There's a joke in that somewhere.
    1
  46. Fascinating content and thanks for posting. It seems to me that, if no disclaimer is given beforehand, or, should the speaker not be on a comedy or satirical platform, then that speaker is purposefully making an attempt to deceive and/or obfuscate understanding of an issue, not clarify. I suggest it sets a bad precedent for those who hope/pray to be considered "reasonable" or "rational" of thought in future. And my opinion is that: the biggest failure of our legal system is honoring debate over truth. Facility over veracity. I suggest that Truth can be quantified and tested. Debate cannot. It-debate- is specifically mental exercise; there is no mandate that debaters must ascribe to truth or veracity. Just like News programming. I cite the context of the 1939 radio play: War of the Worlds. Clear disclaimers were given beforehand and during the transmission. No attempt to deceive or obfuscate was apparent.
    1