You playing this on the Deck? I tried, it runs reasonably well to take on the go if needs be, but how do you use the touchpad functionality?

I can‘t play as I need to be able to sheathe my sword, use the flute, bow, and call the wind up. The trackpads aren’t defaulted to this functionality.

So I’m currently on a trip and took my deck with me, putting it into offline in my room so it can verify connection before going offline. Get on the plane, attempt to boot up a game and this comes up:

So, I cannot launch games because downloads disabled? Well….yeah, I’m in offline mode, the whole point is I have no internet?

I‘ve played in offline mode before and have never encountered this issue, anyone know what the problem is?

On my back or right side.

Can't on my left side because I have a tumor in my left chest that pushes into my lung/heart cavity, and is also on the nerve so it gives me discomfort.

I would hate to see him governing at all, much less in charge of any crisis. I thank my lucky stars nothing like 9-11 happened on his watch.

@sargentd: What do you think "weaponization of the DoJ against political opposition" means? Are they hanging Trump in the middle of times square with pitchforks out" No. It's a weaponization of the legal system. It's not a mob. That still doesn't make it ethical or "justice".

Generally, when one breaks the law, the Department of Justice is "weaponized" against them, yes. That's how it works.

How do you take the term to mean? That the DoJ is corruptly harnessed by one individual, party, or a government? In the end, claiming weaponization is a moot criticism to defend Trump, because it's not so simple as garbage in-garbage out as you are framing it. These cases are going to work their way through, and be filtered by, our institutions. They will be held to procedure, facts, evidence. They will be viewed and ascertained equally by a mix of ideologies and partisan leanings. Juries are composed of citizenry.

The DoJ and our justice system isn't some cohesive, nefarious evil eye entity where everyone is in on some grand scheme to disenfranchise someone else. Yes, there are bad faith actors and faults occasionally, as any human endeavor entails, but the way you're presenting it tends towards conspiratorial thinking, and it is nonsense. It's simply not the way our justice system functions, or even could function, given how it is structured. Bad motives won't stand a chance surviving the legal rigor these cases will be held to.

You have to be very naive to think all these different cases.. all needed the same the same amount of time to proceed.. and they all just happen to move forward during the election year... Come on.. if the cases were clear cut cases with evidence that couldn't be refuted these would have proceeded immediately.

I do not believe (as you do) that these cases wouldn't have been brought against Trump had he decided not to run for office again. They were coming regardless, which is exactly why he made such an early announcement that he was running. He did so because he's shrewd to the understanding that the optics would favor him if he announced and was then indicted. Then he could paint and push the narrative that he's being politically persecuted for running, and not the crimes he's committed, which is exactly what he's doing. Had he been indicted and then announced his candidacy, it would've had the optics that he was seeking office to evade the charges, and the shifting of attention from the charges to his supposed persecution would have been FAR harder to sell and far more impotent in its effectiveness to take anchor.

It, again, is all a PR game to Trump. He calculates and makes moves so he can frame the optics favorably to him, to then incessantly hammer them home with rhetoric, demagoguery, and toxic partisan appeals and division, leveraging that partisan potency he's been nurturing in the masses for years to be able to sell them favorably (and much more easily) to those who are prone to his manipulations.

Trump is a con man, and this is what he does. Unfortunately, many are so wrapped up in their partisan hatreds and look no deeper than the superficial, and admittedly, the optics, on surface examination, help Trump. I completely can see how it's a persuasive sell.....but when you look deeper, it's a con job to turn people to his side.

Ever heard the phrase "throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks".

This just reeks of desperation to try and bog down Trump.

Which, as I just explained, is due to the optics that Trump put into play so he could grab the narrative before circumstances became unfavorable to his ability to sell them to his benefit. He's been very successful in the way he's played the PR deck with these cases.

.....and yes, Trump throws shit at the wall all the time to see what sticks. I'm very familiar with it, as you should be also.

And you yourself are conceding in saying "yes, they are definitely doing this to try and stop Trump from winning re-election" "which I'm OK with because I think he's a danger to the country"

That is a huge concession man... I don't think you are comprehending what that really means.

I'm fully aware of what it means, and am 100% ok with stopping Trump on the merits of the legal consequences he's wrought that would, and should, preclude him from attaining the presidency again as they are directly relevant to his duties that he's shown he's 100% unfit for. The determination of Trump's guilt regarding the classified information, for just one example, is imperative for the American people to know before the election. Who in their right mind wouldn't want to stop him from regaining office with his guilt on this matter undetermined? Do you care about this country and our classified information? Don't you believe that is a wise thing to do?

It completely throws away the legitimacy of all these cases..if that's the motive of the cases being brought forth.. it pretty much tells you everything you need to know.

No, it doesn't delegitimize them.

The legal merits of the cases against him and law's process is entirely separate from what is motivating them. Either he broke the law, or he did not. The impetus for the cases does not negate the merit of their legal foundation, and I trust that if these cases truly are predicated upon faulty premise as any borne of weaponizing the DoJ would be, that will be revealed, and nullified, in their adjudication through jurisprudence's process.

I've already conceded that I do? I said I agree (to a degree) that there is a driving motivation to keep Trump out of office, and I wholeheartedly and unashamedly agree with it because I consider him a danger to our country. Where I would disagree is if illegal means were being taken to preclude him from office, and again, I see nothing that is happening outside the scope of legal venue, and I see nothing that is fabricated out of thin air. All that Trump is facing, he could have prevented. Not one ounce of sympathy for that piece of garbage.

But I also accord some accommodation to the time the process of investigation and substantiation necessitates, alongside the fact that we are in unprecedented territory: the prosecution of a former president. That takes time. They are going to be crossing their t's and dotting their i's.

Yes, having watched these proceedings, you can almost hear Trump’s attorneys advising him.

‘If you challenge these in court on the merits of the evidence, you are going to lose. Our best option is to delay by filing continual frivolous motions, obfuscate, appeal everything, tie things up in judicial bureaucracy until November, and get you back into office where you can dismiss the federal and be protected by executive privilege. Then our job is done and you‘re on your own‘.

That’s the real clown show going on. Trump’s attorney’s approach scream not of confidence and knowing these are flimsy cases, but of fear for them to be brought before the courts. You know your client is beyond hope when the strategy is, ‘Get him back into power and overseeing the justice department that is trying to hold him accountable’.

How some see that as an indication of weak cases is beyond me, it’s a strategy that speaks exactly the opposite.

Procedural pre-rulings make no statement on the facts or evidence and aren't indicative that the cases themselves are weak, they have yet to even be adjudicated. Hard to claim they are flimsy when they haven't even been held to jurisprudence yet.

I'm willing to concede that they're trying to stop him from gaining office again, sure, and for good reason.....he's literally on tape bragging about showing off classified information and (despite your belief that he was legitimately questioning the election in good faith), he made a concerted, bad faith effort to corruptly steal it on multiple fronts, in the process causing a storming of our Capitol and a dragging of our country's good name through the mud, framing it as third world dogshit simply to satiate his lust for power.

So yeah....you'd best believe that there are people in our highest institutions who took great exception to Jan 6th and want to protect and defend our country from such an irresponsible person who's demonstrated utter contempt and disregard for our democracy by the actions he's being legally held to account for. Any real American would desire the same. But they're taking this initiative through legitimate venue, within the boundaries of our country's judicial process.

It's amusing how such a "weaponized" DOJ is being so effective at getting Trump, isn't it? Trump supporters scream persecution and corruption of our justice system while completely ignoring the fact that Trump has received, and continues to receive, deference and curiously favorable rulings in the courts they view in contempt. Rulings that align with his attempts to delay so he can dismiss them if he retains power.

Then they'll sit there claiming to be the party of law and order while they at the same time cheer on Trump ordering the DOJ to drop the charges against him.

Party of personal responsibility and law and order for sure. 🙄