CBDCs Banned

Plus: Crime prevention, JFK assassination files, and more...

Strong repudiation of CBDCs: In an executive order released yesterday (called "Strengthening American Leadership in Digital Financial Technology"), Trump gave those who care about financial privacy a very clear win.

The Trump administration, through this executive order, commits to "providing regulatory clarity and certainty built on technology-neutral regulations, frameworks that account for emerging technologies, transparent decision making, and well-defined jurisdictional regulatory boundaries, all of which are essential to supporting a vibrant and inclusive digital economy and innovation in digital assets, permissionless blockchains, and distributed ledger technologies." No more constant persecution of the industry by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

Crucially, it also says it will "protect Americans from the risks of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), which threaten the stability of the financial system, individual privacy, and the sovereignty of the United States, including by prohibiting the establishment, issuance, circulation, and use of a CBDC within the jurisdiction of the United States." Yep, you heard him right: CBDCs are banned now.

Governments around the world—China, Russia, India, Sweden, and the United Arab Emirates—have either introduced CBDCs or recently toyed with doing so. In the U.S., too, central bankers have perennially signaled interest: "'The Federal Reserve's initial analysis,' the central bank insisted in a January 2022 report, 'suggests that a potential U.S. CBDC, if one were created, would best serve the needs of the United States by being privacy-protected, intermediated, widely transferable, and identity-verified,'" wrote Reason's Brian Doherty in a January 2023 feature. "That last point is the danger zone. To use cash, you merely have to convince your counterparty that the cash is cash; you do not have to convince them you are you. In a digital system whose capacities to surveil and control are nearly unlimited, identity verification looks frightening indeed."

Consider in which ways central planners might try to control your behavior if a CBDC were widely adopted. "Authorities could bake in faddish, top-down social goals that you—the sucker who merely wants to spend your money to meet your needs and desires—want nothing to do with," continues Doherty. "These could concern the environment (do you really need to buy that much carbon-generating stuff in a month?), safety (guns and gun accessories not FedCoin-compatible at this time) or 'equity' (let's make sure the right percentage of your spending goes to counterparties with the approved racial or gender mix)."

Meanwhile in the Senate: A new first-of-its-kind Senate Banking subcommittee has been created, focusing specifically on digital assets and chaired by longtime crypto advocate Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R–Wyo.).

"Digital assets are the future, and if the United States wants to remain a global leader in financial innovation, Congress needs to urgently pass bipartisan legislation establishing a comprehensive legal framework for digital assets and that strengthens the U.S. dollar with a strategic bitcoin reserve," said Lummis in a statement following her appointment.

The Senate Banking digital asset subcommittee will:
✔️ Pass legislation promoting responsible innovation and consumer protection
✔️ Eradicate Operation Chokepoint 2.0
✔️ Make America the bitcoin and digital asset capital of the world

— Senator Cynthia Lummis (@SenLummis) January 23, 2025

Though Lummis' new role—and the creation of this subcommittee—is a welcome development, the establishment of a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve (or SBR) is a bit controversial. "A Bitcoin reserve would not bolster the dollar. Unlike other countries, the US issues the global reserve currency," writes investor (and Just Asking Questions guest) Nic Carter. "It might make sense, if you are Russia or Iran, to consider an un-seizable asset in your FX reserves, especially after the US confiscated Russia's treasuries in 2022. But the US does not need to hedge its exposure to the dollar, because it itself issues the dollar. Acquiring Bitcoins and assigning them a monetary role—whether as FX reserves or something more significant—would imply the US is losing confidence in the current dollar-based system." This, notes Carter, would "throw the system into chaos" and markets would react in such a way that the cons would surely outweigh the pros. (More here.)

---

Scenes from New York: "The key to effective crime prevention is to effectively delink society's problems from criminal activity," writes former Baltimore cop and current criminal justice professor Peter Moskos at Vital City. "Focus not on so-called 'root causes' but on proximate causes. We can't wait to fix society's intractable problems, given our seeming inability to accomplish that."

"Murders on the subway remain rare—10 in 2024—but if you ride the subway and think things used to be safer, you are correct," he continues. "There were zero subway murders in 2017, and two or fewer every year from 2008 to 2018. Then police in the subway stopped enforcing many of the rules. In the name of social and racial justice, New York City, in essence, gave up its commitment to public safety."

---

QUICK HITS

• "President Trump announced that he'll declassify any remaining files from the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, his brother Robert F. Kennedy and civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.," reports CBS News. "He signed an executive order at the White House Thursday." Both the attorney general and the director of national intelligence will spend quite a few weeks coming up with a plan for the release of the documents, so expect a bit of a lag in terms of when people can actually dig in.
• "US District Judge John Coughenour in Seattle called Trump's executive order 'blatantly unconstitutional' and questioned the quality of lawyering within the administration," reports Bloomberg. "The order, which Trump signed on his first day in office, denies automatic citizenship to US-born children of immigrants who entered the country illegally or have a temporary legal status."
• No, actually. We don't do this in these parts (America). This is clearly showboating—there's no reason to believe such sycophantic nonsense will pass—but it's corrosive, bad showboating that shows blatant disregard for crucial constitutional limits on executive power.

I just introduced a resolution to amend the 22nd Amendment to allow President Trump to seek a third term. Read the details.????https://t.co/OTacpt3ggE

— Rep. Andy Ogles (@RepOgles) January 23, 2025

Comments

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

Scenes from New york:

https://nypost.com/2025/01/23/us-news/ny-has-670k-residents-who-are-illegal-migrants-including-42300-undocumented-restaurant-workers/

[Rev Arthur L kuckland (5-30-24 banana republic day)]

Oh know the proggies might have to learn their insane labor laws and regs make it impossible to do business

[Medulla Oblongata]

But that has zero impact on housing costs there, right?

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

But it does keep the cost of nannies and busboys down!

[With Trump in, "now Lord you can let your servant go in peace"]

"“NAHB survey data of builders has demonstrated that, on average, regulation imposed during development accounts for 16.4 percent of the price of a home built for sale; regulation imposed during construction accounts for 8.6 percent of the price,” said Granger MacDonald, speaking last year on behalf of the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) before the House Financial Services Committee Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance.

“Thus, in total,” continued MacDonald, “25 percent of the price of an average single-family home built for sale is attributable to regulation imposed by all units of government at various points along the development/construction process. The regulatory burden includes costs associated with permitting, land development, construction codes and other financial burdens imposed on the construction process.”"

[Minadin]

How will they get their avocado toast if the restaurant workers are sent away?

[middlefinger]

This is normal on the east coast. The difference is that the restaurants used to house, feed and pay for medical care for illegals.

I would bet some money laundering 4-5 star restaurant front operation decided to get the DNC to pursue the state, city and U.S. taxpayer to pay for the lifetime labor expenses- cutting in on their operations.

[Fist of Etiquette]

A new first-of-its-kind Senate Banking subcommittee has been created, focusing specifically on digital assets...

Crypto had a nice run, I guess.

[Bubba Jones]

Thankfully $TRUMP isn't a financial asset, it's an "expression of support."

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

A "gift of love."

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

Don't deport then! - jeffsarc

Bill Melugin
@BillMelugin_
SNEAK PEEK: We embedded exclusively w/ ICE Boston today as they targeted egregious criminal aliens. We witnessed 8 arrests, including multiple MS-13, Interpol Red Notices, murder & rape suspects, & a volatile Haitian gang member w/ 18 convictions in recent years who told our cameras he “ain’t going back to Haiti” and “f**k Trump, Biden forever!”.

We also witnessed a “collateral” arrest, where ICE arrested an illegal alien who wasn’t their initial target - but was with a MS-13 gang member who had been released by a sanctuary jurisdiction yesterday with an ICE detainer not honored. These collateral arrests are something that border czar Tom Homan has warned would happen in sanctuary jurisdictions. At one point, a woman yelled out “thank you” to ICE as a violent illegal alien was being arrested in her neighborhood.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

a volatile Haitian gang member w/ 18 convictions in recent years who told our cameras he “ain’t going back to Haiti” and “f**k Trump, Biden forever!”.

Perhaps a soothing sleeper hold (we can rename it the "Penny Hug") will calm him down.

[Idaho-Bob]

Okay, I legit LOL'd at both "soothing sleeper hold" and "Penny Hug".

Thanks!

[Mickey Rat]

You do not have to go home, but you cannot stay here.

[Sometimes a Great Notion]

My vote is, giving them "Biden Brain". They'll going to want to name something aftee him and being rendered unconscious is apropos.

[Fire up the Woodchippers! (Trump Ascendant!! )]

Sometimes violent thugs need a little extra help getting down for their naps.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

Let's compromise and send that gang member halfway back to Haiti.

[Chipper Chunked Chile Con Congress (ex NCW)]

Seems like a fair solution.

[Weigel's Cock Ring]

"Hit the road Jack, and don't you come back no more no more no more no more, hit the road Jack, and don't you come back no more."
-Ray Charles

[EISTAU Gree-Vance]

“……a “collateral” arrest….”

Just think of all the rapists and murderers that had to be released to make room for this low priority MS-13 gang member!

They only have so much room, ya know? Stop the madness! Lol.

[Fist of Etiquette]

No more constant persecution of the industry by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

Well, how are they supposed to pad their resumes now?

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

Have you never heard of crony capitalism?

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

Posted yesterday, but for readers of the roundup.

Tom Woods take on birthright citizenship.

https://mailchi.mp/tomwoods/birthright?e=503752da56

[Quicktown Brix]

I have been convinced that what Tom Woods says about the intention of Senator Jacob Howard when he drafted the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was to exclude immigrants' birthright citizenship.

If we only had to determine the intent of the author, this would be easy. But what we really need to know is the intent of those that approved the amendment. For that we must rely on the meaning of the words at the time it was approved.

Where Woods makes a logical fallacy is here:

"The key phrase to consider there when considering who is a "natural-born citizen" is "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." The argument of Trump's legal supporters is that illegal immigrants are subject to a foreign sovereignty, are therefore not subject to U.S. jurisdiction, and thus the citizenship clause above does not apply...What was meant by the clause was that you had to be subject to no other sovereign."

No. Sorry, but "subject to US jurisdiction" is not mutually exclusive with "subject to a foreign sovereignty". You can be both. Senator Howard failed to clearly articulate his desire. We live by the words that were ratified, not by what it's author intended.

So can anyone make a case that the shared understanding of "subject to US jurisdiction" at the time of the amendment's ratification, would exclude aliens?

[Fire up the Woodchippers! (Trump Ascendant!! )]

Nope. We’re not stuck with it because you say so.

[Quicktown Brix]

I know. You're stuck with it because the court says so.

My only argument is the words of the law should match the rule of law.

If I said "I have a blue car," would you assume that means my car is 100% blue; the interior, the engine, the rims and tires; and also that I have no other car? Because that's the logical leap being made by this "under US jurisdiction" argument.

[EISTAU Gree-Vance]

Is there a bear in the trunk?

[Quicktown Brix]

With this inflation? I had to downsize to a hamster.

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

Go read a few SCOTUS decisions about Constitutional issues. I waded through quite a bit of Dred Scott this week and Justice Taney writes extensively about the arguments used during ratification. The arguments from the floor of Congress in the Congressional record are without question required to be reviewed to determine intent. In the case of 14th, like in the case of the 2A, it is every bit as important as the language in the amendment.

Proggies are going to prog. They are going to misinterpret the intention of the Congress which was to grant slaves the citizenship that had been denied them in the Constitution and by decisions like Dred Scott.

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

It is why the left is so obsessed with changing language when they can't change laws or the constitution.

Believing legislative intent doesn't matter is quite frankly retarded. But we expect that from the left.

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

It is why the left is so obsessed with changing language

Something else that Zeb is in denial about.

They changed the definition of vaccine right in front of our eyes in the middle of a pandemic. FFS, common misuse should not change what words mean. Literal cannot mean figurative in a sane society. It is the proof that academia is completely compromised by Marxist agitators.

[Zeb]

No, I am fully aware of the left's project of changing language to suit their projects. The 14th should have been written more clearly. I really don't buy that the definition of "jurisdiction" has changed so much since the 19th century that it is incomprehensible without reading the arguments of the time. If they wanted it to say that children of people who still have allegiance to another country aren't citizens, then they should have said that. My position is that the real meaning is ambiguous and debatable. The law is the text that was actually ratified, not what people were arguing when it was being debated. And there are always compromises. I doubt everyone agreed on the one true meaning of the 14th when it was ratified either.

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

What would convince you given we've provided the words and statements from those who drafted the amendment?

[Social Justice is neither]

By any means necessary means exactly that. It they must destroy every facet of civilization for their Marxist utopia, they will or kill you trying.

[Quicktown Brix]

Hi Chuck,

I tend to place little value on what the court says given decisions like Wickard and Raich. But in this case, I'm not arguing what I think should be, but what is. As I told you the other day, you convinced me the intent of the author was to exclude alien babies. However his wording was poor to the point that USSC interpreted that the ratifiers and common law must have believed otherwise

The US v. Wong case is the most relevant. The opinion states:

"By the Civil Rights Act of 1866, “all persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed,” were declared to be citizens of the United States. In the light of the law as previously established, and of the history of the times, it can hardly be doubted that the words of that act, “not subject to any foreign power,” were not intended to exclude any children born in this country from the citizenship which would theretofore have been their birthright, or, for instance, for the first time in our history, to deny the right of citizenship to native-born children of foreign white parents not in the diplomatic service of their own country nor in hostile occupation of part of our territory. But any possible doubt in this regard was removed when the negative words of the Civil Rights Act, “not subject to any foreign power,” gave way, in the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, to the affirmative words, “subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.” . . .The Amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born, within the territory of the United States, of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States. Every citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States.... It can hardly be denied that an alien is completely subject to the political jurisdiction of the country in which he resides

https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/supreme-court-case-library/united-states-v-wong-kim-ark-1898

What this means is either that this decision needs to be overturned, (you may say, set right) or by some distortion of logic "under US jurisdiction" must exclude illegal aliens, but include legal aliens.

[Gaear Grimsrud]

Looked up the legal definition of "domiciled"
Says permanent place of legal residence.

[Quicktown Brix]

No. It says place of residence. I looked it up several places and legal status was never included.

To say an illegal immigrant that's been living in the US for 10 years is domiciled in Mexico or whatever defies all logic.

[With Trump in, "now Lord you can let your servant go in peace"]

But you wouldn't have to say the baby was a US citizen if otherwise it had no citizenship but it does, it is the citizenship of its parents

[Chipper Chunked Chile Con Congress (ex NCW)]

Yeah, I realized that I probably (well, almost certainly) previously misunderstood the "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" bit after reading this: https://americanmind.org/salvo/birthright-citizenship-game-on/

That said, I'd be fine with a solution where we go ahead and grant the kid citizenship... which will entitle them to return in 18 years, after being sent off with their parents as they are deported. With the parents being permanently barred from ever receiving so much as a visitor visa, let along a green card or citizenship. It would still significantly reduce the incentive for the parents to have a kid here.

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

Wish I had googled it when I heard it on a podcast.

But one of the authors during debate clearly said he did not mean partial jurisdiction but complete jurisdiction.

[Zeb]

I could perhaps be convinced that what is described there was the intent when it was written. But if that is the case, why the fuck didn't they clearly and explicitly write it that way? How did they fail to foresee that the way it is written is subject to various interpretations?
Anyone in the US (excepting diplomats, etc) is entirely subject to the jurisdiction of the US while they are in the country, whether or not they "owe allegiance" to another country (whatever that means. I don't think anyone owes allegiance to anyone or anything, but that's another topic I guess). And while in the US, citizens of other countries are not subject to the jurisdiction of those countries. You can only enforce laws in territories you control.
In a lot of ways it's nice that the US constitution is so short and concise. But I really think we could have avoided a lot of bad policy and annoying debates if they had been just a little more explicit and verbose on a few points.

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

How did they fail to foresee that the way it is written is subject to various interpretations?

They didn't. They specifically wrote it that way to exclude Indians, who were born on US soil, but subject to tribal jurisdictions. Again, just like they clearly stated on the floor on Congress before they ratified it.

[Zeb]

Right, so a reasonable interpretation is that it was intended to exclude Indians (which is easily derived from what the actual text says since Indians had their own jurisdictions and was always understood).
I ask again, if they could clearly state it on the floor of congress, why didn't they clearly state it in the text of the amendment (i.e. the part that actually becomes law)?

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

In their minds and using their language they did.

[Zeb]

Except they didn't because they explained it a lot more clearly and explicitly in congress.

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

And the members of Congress were aware, because of the innumerable precedents, that the Courts would be required to review their records.

They understood that the more words that were added, the more language that would be available to be misinterpreted by people with malicious intentions. They pared it down to the essentials.

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

And so did those who wrote the constitution. The Federalist papers were a lot more clear on intent. The discussions around the 2a were a lot more clear. You understand that 2nd point but are demanding a different threshold over the 14th.

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

why didn't they clearly state it in the text of the amendment (i.e. the part that actually becomes law)?

Because some of them could foresee that it would eventually be extended to Indians as well and didn't want to have to pass another amendment to do that?

And, again, the express intent at the time was to define and provide citizenship to people who were neither the subject of nor subject to any other jurisdiction in the wake of the 13A. FFS, Lincoln was convinced that integration was impossible and tried shipping them off to a colony in the Caribbean.

[Zeb]

People do things all the time that either fail to meet their intentions, or go well beyond their intentions in their effects.

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

Hey, Zeb, you are being are stubborn fuckhead.

The 13th amendment did not make freed slaves citizens. The 14th was necessary to prevent a great injustice that could have seen freed slaves put on a boat to Haiti, as indeed, no less than Abraham Lincoln, had already proposed.

during his second annual message to Congress, Lincoln had proposed a constitutional amendment to colonize African Americans outside the United States

The 14th amendment had a clearly defined purpose. It was about freed slaves. The language was sufficient to have the intended effect. The Congressional record reflects that it was not intended to affect foreign nationals. I am not comprehending why you continue to assert there is ambiguity.

https://www.history.com/news/abraham-lincoln-black-resettlement-haiti

[Quicktown Brix]

Hey, Zeb, you are being are stubborn fuckhead

Zeb's like the chillest commenter here.

[EISTAU Gree-Vance]

He’s cool. But not as chill as Dill.

[Chipper Chunked Chile Con Congress (ex NCW)]

These two things are not mutually exclusive.

[With Trump in, "now Lord you can let your servant go in peace"]

Which is why we have epikeia

In constitutional law, "epikeia" refers to a principle derived from ancient Greek philosophy, signifying the idea of applying equity or reasonableness to interpret a law in a specific case where a strict application of the law would result in an unjust outcome, essentially allowing for a flexible interpretation to achieve a more just result when the situation warrants it; it's often considered a form of "fairness beyond the letter of the law.".

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

Language changes over time zeb. It is really as simple as that.

What was common usage at the time may not be common isage now. Which is why we look at their debates and discussions regarding laws and amendments. Just like we look to the Federalist papers regarding the constitution.

[Zeb]

Right. So all the more reason to define your terms and make these things clear in the text of the law. The debates and discussions can help understand the intended meanings of the terms they used. But in the end they decided to include only the language they included and I don't want to read more into it than is actually there. People often intend things that they don't successfully accomplish and laws don't always have their intended effects, or only their intended effects.

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

You're talking in a circular manner.

See how the left goes after the 2a despite clear intent and writing around discussions of 2a.

You know this, but are treating it differently from the 14th.

You can literally see in the recorded discussions for thr constitution where there were debates on clear but long written amendments and what they ended with. They went with conciseness and brevity not thinking people would manipulate or change words. They left their written and recorded discussions for this reason.

[soldiermedic76]

This is actually the argument used by the left in regards to the word regulated in the militia clause of the 2A. That they meant laws could be used to regulate firearms to only militia use. That is why the debates and letters of the authors is so important to protect our rights to bear arms. Language changed, and the militia clause definitely was not meant to limit arms to only militia usage but because regulate has changed its common meaning, they try and argue to the more modern usage.

[Chipper Chunked Chile Con Congress (ex NCW)]

But if that is the case, why the fuck didn't they clearly and explicitly write it that way? How did they fail to foresee that the way it is written is subject to various interpretations?

I mean, I've often wondered the same thing about the Framers and the Second Amendment. There was a perfectly good linguistic construction available from the First Amendment -- "Congress shall make no law" -- that would have truly nailed down what every single one of them wrote at the time that the amendment actually meant and yet we got what is arguably ambiguous language. But they wrote what they did. Apparently they didn't consider the need to bulletproof things against folks who would insist on ignoring their intent hundreds of years later. Yes, likely naively.

That said, I'm still fine with a solution where the child is granted citizenship, which they can exercise at the age of 18 to come back, after having been deported to the home country of their parents, along with their parents.

[With Trump in, "now Lord you can let your servant go in peace"]

But you both must know that about 20 state constitutions preceded that and they are often utterly beyond cavil
PENNSYLVANIA
STATE CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION - Article 1, Section 21. “The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.”

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

They will overlook that Congress did not view Wong Kim Ark as mandating automatic citizenship for everyone born on U.S. soil when, a quarter century later, it extended citizenship to Native Americans pursuant to its power under the Naturalization Clause, an act that would have been superfluous if Wong Kim Ark had already settled the matter that everyone born in the U.S., including Native Americans, were automatically citizens. And they will overlook that when a 1920s guest worker program ended in the wake of the Great Depression and more than a million Mexican workers were repatriated to Mexico, the repatriation included their U.S.-born children. No one at the time claimed that the children were U.S. citizens.

I was not previously aware of the Mexican repatriation in the 1920s. That puts it beyond a shadow of a doubt that the shit that the progs and Democrats are spouting is utter bullshit.

They contend that the EO is "rewriting the Constitution". That is the actual phrase I heard on NPR this morning. They imply the matter was long ago settled and argue from only that position. They moan and wail from the bailey, pretending their motte is not a paper-mache facade. At least the castle in The Wizard of Oz was real.

When the EO gets upheld, they will blame it on the "conservative majority" in the SCOTUS and riot. Their revolution can't start soon enough. I really want to finally be able to shoot them in the face like they deserve.

[Fist of Etiquette]

Then police in the subway stopped enforcing many of the rules. In the name of social and racial justice, New York City, in essence, gave up its commitment to public safety.

Apparently it's broken windows or anarchy. There is no middle ground.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

What about the Russian solution? I hear their subways are a marvel.

[Dillinger]

watch out for Crazy Mikhail Jacksonov

[With Trump in, "now Lord you can let your servant go in peace"]

I don't know about that. You should not have a law on the books that you don't intend to enforce.

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

This is why all the trespassers should have been shot - Jeff

Insurrection Barbie
@DefiyantlyFree
I picked a J6 case at random to review because I wanted to see how bad it was.

And let me tell you the random one I picked did not disappoint. This defendant went into the capital and walked down the corridor. He was not accused of violence. He did not break anything. He did not hurt anybody. He was sentenced by a jury to 19 months in prison he was overcharged by the prosecutor to the point where it should be called malicious prosecution, and a judge rubber stamped every single thing the prosecutor asked for.

The most egregious part of these filings was that the government introduced a 22 minute video montage that spliced together key breaches that occurred that day.

They introduced that video to a jury even when the defendant in question is only shown on that video for less than 60 seconds.

The defendant in question was not violent. He was walking through a hallway in the capital building with the crowd, he looked like it was a walking tour in the picture still shot.

The remaining 21 minutes, shows the most violent portions of the event spliced together.

Luckily, this defendant seems to have had competent attorneys who filed a motion to exclude this video. The defendant’s lawyers argued that this video montage is highly prejudicial because it shows a jury a 22 minute video where all they see are the most extreme parts of the whole day, but the defendant in question is only on that videotape for six seconds and is seen walking around peacefully.

Further, attorneys for the defendant argued that the majority of the jury in Washington DC is made of a federal employees. This video is meant to inflame a jury, it has no probative value, and therefore is a violation of federal rule of evidence 401 (which by the way they teach like on the first day of criminal procedure in law school).

District Court Judge Bates declined the motion and allowed the prosecutor to include the video montage.

I would be willing to bet everything I own that submitting a 22 minute video montage that shows the most egregious acts of violence you can find from that day when the defendant in question is on that video for only six seconds and is seen walking calmly is highly prejudicial and a violation of the defendants due process rights.

This person was found guilty and sentenced to 19 months in prison.

Let me repeat that again, this person got 19 months in prison for walking through the capital for 8 minuets.

It took me two hours to read through all of the documents that were in this case file. Every motion submitted by the defendant was denied, and every motion submitted by the government was granted.

They turned a trespass misdemeanor that would have result in a $50 ticket into a 5 misdemeanors and a felony charge by charging the defendant with a statute that would have required the Secret Service to rope off the section he was in, which they did not, they also charged him with a statute that would have required them to prove Mike Pence was in the building at the time he walked through that corridor, he was not, and finally they used an Enron statue that the Supreme Court struck down.

This defendant had to spend two years and probably hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorneys fees for spending 20 minutes in the building and walking through the corridors.

And this is just the first case I dug into.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

If the facts as you allege them are true - which, given you, is always an iffy assumption - then yes that does sound like a miscarriage of justice.

Why wasn't the case appealed by the defendant's competent lawyer? Inclusion of that video would seem to be a terrific grounds for appeal.

[Medulla Oblongata]

He should should have been shot in the face, would have saved the costs of his prosecution.

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

Jeff. You're a fucking retard. This has been explained to you with multiple fucking examples. We've given you other cases. We've given you judges forcing realty statements for reduced time.

Stop acting like you were ignorant. We gave posted these examples for fucking years. And you've defended the legal abuse for years despite it.

You're such a dishonest fucking shit weasel.

Stop pretending nobody knew.

Years in jail without trial. Over use of solitary. 20 year threats for parading for a few minutes.

This is known. We have linked. You have defended.

Nobody is buying your turn here to pretend you aren't a fucking fascist.

Fuck off shit weasel.

80% of those convicted are in a similar situation, committing no violence or vandalism. You have supported it.

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

Apologies Jeff. Forgot about your medical issue.

Bob of Nazareth, PA 21 hours ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Hey Jeff, I’ve been following your posts for a while now, and while I don’t usually comment, I felt compelled to share a thought. It's clear that you're empathetic and compassionate toward a variety of groups including immigrants, gays, trans, pedo's and rapist, which I respect. However, I've noticed that your perspectives on certain topics might reflect a more empathetic, feminine viewpoint, and I wonder if this could be related to your overall health and well-being.

I’d encourage you to consider having your testosterone levels checked. Low T levels can sometimes lead to shifts in mood, energy, and even political outlook. Some recent studies suggest that when testosterone levels are balanced, some men notice a change in how they approach life and certain issues. Of course, this is a personal journey, but if your T levels are low, you might benefit from natural or medical options to bring them back into balance.

Additionally, raising testosterone levels can help with muscle development and fat loss, which might lead to not just a physical transformation, but also an improvement in mental clarity and focus. Just something worth considering for your overall health and well-being!

[Fire up the Woodchippers! (Trump Ascendant!! )]

And let’s be honest. Jeffy is undoubtedly surging with estrogen too.

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

Jeffy gets pegged every day and comes back for more. His rectum must hang to his knees.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

What the fuck is wrong with you? I'm agreeing with you here.

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

Why wasn't the case appealed by the defendant's competent lawyer? Inclusion of that video would seem to be a terrific grounds for appeal.

Disingenuous shitposters deserve to get reamed. People were being held without bail for walking through the Capitol. Many plead guilty just to get the process further along and appeals are really expensive. Some still have not been tried.

Your rhetorical question is not honest and you were clearly not agreeing.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

Yes, I am agreeing. I don't agree with a sentence of 19 months in jail for the crime of trespassing in the Capitol for 20 minutes. That seems excessively harsh here.

People were being held without bail for walking through the Capitol.

Who was? Give me a name and I will look it up.

[Social Justice is neither]

Fuck off you dishonest Marxist PO. You've spent the last 4 years defending every last abuse of power and only now that the whole thing has unravelled do you deign to recognize, maybe, even the smallest portion of the abuses you cheered for.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

So you can't give me a name either.

I'm not a Marxist, I just don't believe the endless right-wing narrative that is spouted here on a daily basis. One doesn't have to be a Marxist to think that the modern Team Red is mostly full of shit.

[With Trump in, "now Lord you can let your servant go in peace"]

Yeah, your a Marxist.
Lying for the cause.

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

Give me a name and I will look it up.

Liar. I posted a link to the docket before and you didn't bother to look it up then.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

Well, I had you on ignore for the past year or so, up until about an hour ago. So give me a name and I'll look it up. Why is this so hard?

This is proving to be a pattern around here - someone makes an assertion, and when asked for evidence to back it up, instead of providing evidence, just hurl insults and threats. It's an attempt to bully people into accepting a claim without having to provide evidence.

[Stupid Government Tricks]

Are you really so ignorant that you don't know how slow the US judicial system is? 19 months sentence means he'd probably be released before they even hear the appeal.

Playing stupid doesn't make sense. You really are stupid if you think anyone believes you don't know such basic facts.

[A Thinking Mind]

You expect an appeal to get resolved in less than 18 months? And no judge in DC would have granted release while the appeal was pending.

How much more attorney fees should a defendant be forced to rack up for minimal benefit, given their sentence will have already been completed by the time a higher court hears their appeal?

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

Yet he defended through j6 committee and fauci pardons because even an investigation into them would cause them harm.

Jeff is an amazing hypocrite.

[A Thinking Mind]

And I, on the other hand, defended that Biden had the power to issue those pardons which pre-empted any charges, despite the fact that I think Fauci should be prosecuted and that we need answers about missing records from the J6 committee. Maintaining consistent principles actually simplifies one's arguments. You don't have to twist yourself around to justify why you think it's okay for this person but not okay for this other person.

[With Trump in, "now Lord you can let your servant go in peace"]

SO Biden is innocent because as President he says he's innocent.
NOw there's some twisting Chubby CHecker could admire

[Medulla Oblongata]

Well, to be fair, the process is the punishment. Getting those Jan 6-ers actual prison time was gravy.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

Oh fuck you. I never defended the Fauci pardon. Instead I pointed out that you and your team have not put forth much in the way of concrete evidence that Fauci broke the law. To your team he is an Emmanuel Goldstein figure, presumed guilty of something because he is the hated face of the COVID lockdown regime that we all hated. You want him thrown in jail "pour encourageur les autres". That's why.

[A Thinking Mind]

Instead I pointed out that you and your team have not put forth much in the way of concrete evidence that Fauci broke the law

And when you do see evidence, you shift the goalposts and say, "Well that's not against the law. I mean, you're intentionally preventing FOIA requests from properly returning information but that's not a FOIA violation!"

[Jefferson Paul]

Or he says that Fauci lying wasn't a crime, forgetting that Fauci lied under oath, which definitely is a crime.

[Jefferson Paul]

[chemjeff radical individualist]

First, all the evidence that was presented about FOIA evasions were not even involving Fauci. They involved other members of his staff.

Second, I correctly pointed out that the 'strategic misspellings' that you complained about represented a loophole in the law, not a violation of the law. It absolutely violated the spirit of the law but, as far as I can tell anyway, not the letter of the law. And it certainly wasn't an instance of "fraud".

I'm not changing the goalposts, I'm rigidly enforcing the ACTUAL goalposts, which is "did Fauci break the law?" Instead it was you and others who were subtly shifting the goalposts to something like "did Fauci *or his staff* violate the *spirit* of the law?"

[Jefferson Paul]

Lying under oath is breaking the law. Regardless of how you feel about the examples ATM provided (which were good examples), you should admit that Fauci blatantly lying when under oat before Congress was wrong and it was illegal.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

IF Fauci lied under oath, then yes that's a crime and he should be prosecuted for it. Just like anyone else.

But the one statement that I was presented of where Fauci supposedly lied under oath, where he claimed that the NIH did not fund gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, is technically true but extremely misleading, because the NIH didn't *directly* fund the research, they funded EcoHealth, which subsequently funded the research at WIV with a subcontract. You can say "it's a distinction without a difference" but that is not how the government itself views it.

https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/6.14.23_gao_report_to_hpsci.pdf

We previously reported that a federal awarding agency has a direct relationship with an award recipient but has no direct relationship with subrecipients.

That is how the government itself views the financial relationship between the granting agency, the direct recipient, and any subrecipients. So Fauci was wrong to be so misleading and deceptive to Congress. But was it perjury? I think you would have a tough time proving that.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

If the defense really believes there has been that much of a miscarriage of justice then I would expect them to file an appeal.

[A Thinking Mind]

And if it reaches the appeals' court after the sentence has been served, the appellate court will say, "There's no point in hearing this matter as there is no remedy that can be offered by this court."

That sounds like a very intelligent use of time and resources. Someone got fucked over by a very shitty, one-sided process, and there's nothing that can feasibly be done about it. Even if you can get any momentum behind a case for malicious prosecution, it's going to be heard by the same jury pool that is politically biased in favor of the state (because they're largely federal workers and their families). And you can't sue the judge for malicious prosecution; it's nearly impossible to make judges face penalties for abuse of discretion.

That's why a weaponized justice system is so damned dangerous, it screws people over with no remedies.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

I mainly agree with you here. I think we just disagree on what constitutes 'weaponized'.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

Also, one more thing.

In this case, and in cases like these, you are correctly able to discern differences in culpability based on the defendant's role(s) in the commission of crimes. Because this guy wandered around the Capitol for 20 minutes, he should get less of a punishment than a guy who broke windows and beat up a cop. And I agree with you on this fundamental point - justice should be tailored towards the specific actions of a specific defendant.

Now, let's see if you can apply this same principle to other cases - such as, for example, instances of 'felony murder', or say some hypothetical instance where a group of immigrant men gang rape a woman. Not every member of that group are equally culpable and should not be treated exactly the same. Would you agree?

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

"If you just money shot a girl in the face, it's not rape"--Serial kiddie flasher chemtard radical deathfat.

[Ajsloss]

You have to show remorse after. And we need to know if she was drinking or not because, you know, perhaps she was asking for it.

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

Pretend to show remorse*

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

What about skin color (including ethnicity and immigrant status)?

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

They have different cultural values. We have no right to criticize their cultural rapes. Also applies to knife fights.

[Don't look at me!]

Did you see what that girl was wearing?

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

A "blue dress"?

[damikesc]

If it is a gang rape --- yeah, you are ALL guilty.

[NealAppeal]

Right...maybe you aren't the penetrator...maybe you are just pinning her down while other degenerates defile her or jag on her. Not the same thing as a person walking by in the park not participating in the violence at all.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

What about the oppressed ethnic immigrant class defense?

[chemjeff radical individualist]

If they all participated, they are all guilty OF SOMETHING, sure. They are not necessarily all EQUALLY guilty of the SAME thing. See the difference now?

You want me and others to use nuance and specific standards of justice for specific individuals when it comes to the Jan. 6 rioters. Why can't you apply that same standard to EVERYONE, not just the people you are sympathetic to?

[Bertram Guilfoyle]

Don't you just love when sarcjeff pretend to be principled?

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

It is amazing they think they are tricking anybody other than themselves.

[A Thinking Mind]

say some hypothetical instance where a group of immigrant men gang rape a woman.

You just say shit like this sometimes. You don't think there's a rather straightforward distinction between being inside of a crowd of thousands of people, some of whom committed criminal activity, and actively joining in a small group of people actively committing rape?

[InsaneTrollLogic (On The List!)]

It’s a typical Jeffy false equivalency.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

It was a specific reference to a prior conversation that we had around here. The usual morons around here claimed that I "excused gang rape" because I did not treat every perpetrator exactly the same and treat them all as if they were all guilty of the worst possible crime. Instead they wanted to throw all the perpetrators in jail for the same crime and the same sentence. Contrast that to the current situation with the Jan. 6 riots, where many of the same morons demand that we use nuance and judgment to separate out different individual acts by different perpetrators to apply individualized standards of justice.

They really do have no shame. They want collective judgment and collective punishment for the people they don't like, and they want specific, individualized, nuanced standards of justice they do like. THEY are the ones who want a two-tiered justice system.

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

They want collective judgment for the people they don't like, and they want specific, individualized, nuanced standards of justice they do like. THEY are the ones who want a two-tiered justice system.

You are FULL OF SHIT. Nobody ever wrote during the summer of fiery protests that peaceful protestors should be jailed. Despite your continuous demands that they were innocent, I would not object them being arrested, because they were, intentionally or unintentionally providing cover for actual rioters and looters. Then the people who it could be demonstrated did anything wrong were quickly released and were never prosecuted. Neither myself nor anybody else in the comments ever advocated for prosecutions for people who just protested and did not commit violent acts. We are being COMPLETELY consistent.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

I would not object them being arrested, because they were, intentionally or unintentionally providing cover for actual rioters and looters.

So please explain why the guy who wandered through the Capitol for 20 minutes on Jan. 6, wasn't merely "providing cover for actual rioters and looters" and should also therefore be arrested and prosecuted.

[A Thinking Mind]

Because there comes a time when a pattern of activity confers knowledge. The January 6 riot, famously, took place exclusively on January 6. Law abiding people saw what happened and decided there was no point in holding further protests because they didn't want to provide further cover for a riot.

The Summer of love riots took place daily for weeks, and in some cities, months at a time. There comes a time where you can't enter a gambling parlor and be shocked that gambling is taking place there. The first time you might not realize it, and maybe you took a wrong turn the second time, but after the 4th or 5th time, what exactly is your goal?

[chemjeff radical individualist]

But this type of thinking, also, is a type of collective judgment. It is holding people responsible for the actions of someone else.

There comes a time where you can't enter a gambling parlor and be shocked that gambling is taking place there.

By this thinking, if a person goes to a massage parlor for a genuine massage, but then gets arrested in a sting operation because it's really one of those types of "massage" parlors, then it's his own fault for not knowing better about the nature of the establishment, even if he did not come for the purpose of one of those "massages", but instead for the purpose of a real massage.

[A Thinking Mind]

I did not treat every perpetrator exactly the same and treat them all as if they were all guilty of the worst possible crime

And that's where you've messed up. See, any level of complicity in a gang rape is too high, and it makes you complicit in the entire act because it is inherently unlawful.

Whereas the actions of people who attempted a Trump rally were lawful. They were still lawful when they marched down to the Capitol to protest. There became a time when the protest turned into a riot, and it stopped being lawful, but that does not make every person who was involved with the protest equally guilty of the riot.

There was never an action in the gang rape where it inherently lawful. If you participated in it, you participated in something that you either knew was unlawful, or you should have known it was unlawful. There's a victim there who is probably very upset and is clearly not consenting. You had an easy decision to make to not participate in the rape even slightly, and instead you joined in, even if only a tertiary manner. That makes you a full accomplice, your mere presence aided to the commission of the acts of others.

Surely you recognize a moral difference between the two scenarios?

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

Surely you recognize a moral difference between the two scenarios?

Surely you recognize that Jeffy is incapable of an honest answer.

[A Thinking Mind]

I really should stop engaging with him. It's just that he lobs these softballs at me and I'm like Jeff Francouer, I can't HELP but swing at them.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

Literally no one, not even Joe Biden & co., ever claimed that EVERYONE who went to the Jan. 6 protest was guilty of a crime. So that is just a strawman. The discussion has always been about those who committed very minor crimes, such as trespassing or 'parading', and those who committed much more serious crimes such as vandalism or assault.

There was never an action in the gang rape where it inherently lawful. If you participated in it, you participated in something that you either knew was unlawful, or you should have known it was unlawful.

I completely agree. And the exact same thing could be said of everyone who *entered the Capitol* on Jan. 6.

You had an easy decision to make to not participate in the rape even slightly, and instead you joined in, even if only a tertiary manner. That makes you a full accomplice, your mere presence aided to the commission of the acts of others.

An accomplice to a rape, and an actual rapist, are both guilty of crimes, both guilty of serious crimes, and both should be prosecuted for their crimes. But they are not EQUALLY guilty of the SAME crime, JUST LIKE the guy who wandered through the Capitol for 20 minutes is not EQUALLY guilty of the guy who smashed windows and assaulted a cop.

[A Thinking Mind]

Literally no one, not even Joe Biden & co., ever claimed that EVERYONE who went to the Jan. 6 protest was guilty of a crime.

Look at the top of this thread, the post that initiated this discussion. The video shown at this person's trial was of a lengthy compilation of violent acts in which the guilty party took zero part. The only purpose in playing it is to equate the defendant to the most violent actors on the day of, to spread some collective guilt around to this alleged violator.

They should have received a sentence of a fine and some hours of community service. Instead they got 19 months in prison because collective guilt was smeared across them like jam.

I completely agree. And the exact same thing could be said of everyone who *entered the Capitol* on Jan. 6.

Walking through a building that is often open to the public (just not on that day) is not an inherently unlawful act. And it followed from an otherwise lawful protest activity. There are points where rational, law-abiding people probably should have realized they were doing something wrong, especially if they were on the side of the building where police were throwing smoke bombs to try to disperse the crowd, but if your individual guilty action is trespassing, how does showing a video of someone beating a cop with a flag pole assist the jury in determining your level of guilt?

An accomplice to a rape, and an actual rapist, are both guilty of crimes, both guilty of serious crimes, and both should be prosecuted for their crimes. But they are not EQUALLY guilty of the SAME crime, JUST LIKE the guy who wandered through the Capitol for 20 minutes is not EQUALLY guilty of the guy who smashed windows and assaulted a cop.

And here you apparently don't understand what the word "accomplice" means. Maybe that's where you've come to some bizarre conclusion about culpability.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

Look at the top of this thread, the post that initiated this discussion. The video shown at this person's trial was of a lengthy compilation of violent acts in which the guilty party took zero part. The only purpose in playing it is to equate the defendant to the most violent actors on the day of, to spread some collective guilt around to this alleged violator.

Yes, that's right. It was a slimy attempt to try to equate the more serious crimes (vandalism and assault) with the less serious crimes (trespassing). But it is still not the same as claiming that EVERYONE who went to the protest AT ALL, including the ones who didn't enter the Capitol, are guilty as well.

but if your individual guilty action is trespassing, how does showing a video of someone beating a cop with a flag pole assist the jury in determining your level of guilt?

I am agreeing with you and disagreeing with the prosecutor. Showing that video to the jury was wrong.

And here you apparently don't understand what the word "accomplice" means. Maybe that's where you've come to some bizarre conclusion about culpability.

ac·com·plice
/əˈkämpləs/
noun
a person who helps another commit a crime.

That is my definition of the word 'accomplice'. It is a person who assists in the commission of a crime, but is not the same as the person who actually commits the crime. They are both guilty of breaking some law, but not the same law, and they shouldn't have the exact same level of culpability.

[NealAppeal]

Just two days ago you excoriated me saying you never said such a thing...and here you are.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

No I didn't. Post where you think I said that.

[Fire up the Woodchippers! (Trump Ascendant!! )]

So now you’re shilling for illegal alien gang members, like MS-13?

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

Freedom of association or something.

[Gaear Grimsrud]

I hope a lot of these people file malicious prosecution lawsuits and that they can get the cases out of DC. These stories are starting to come out and it's a lot worse than most people thought. Also allegations of criminal abuse on the part of the DC prison system.

[With Trump in, "now Lord you can let your servant go in peace"]

Agree, DC ( i used to live there) is Satan's living room
Dupont Circle for example

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

I wonder what a 22 minute video of the BLM-antifa Summer of Love would look like.

[Chipper Chunked Chile Con Congress (ex NCW)]

I mean, if properly selectively edited, you could probably get 22 minutes of the crowds singing Kumbaya. Well, OK, 5 minutes, at least.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

With warm fires in the background?

[Medulla Oblongata]

Fiery, but mostly peaceful.

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

They are still rewriting what happened on 1/6.

I heard a claim for the first time this week that the police officer who held Ashli Babbitt as she was dying was part of a strike team that had been dispatched to turn back the crowd at the barricaded corridor. The guy that can be seen on his radio in the video calling, "we have an active shooter", I would assume because he can't comprehend why an LEO was shooting into the milling crowd. The guy that was her side of the window and could have just yanked back into the hall. The guy that clearly wasn't giving orders to anyone.

Too many people have seen to much to do anything but reframe the narrative.

[Fist of Etiquette]

President Trump announced that he'll declassify any remaining files from the assassinations...

How about declassifying the information on Trump's own would-be assassin.

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

Thats unfortunately behind releasing the J6 pipe bomber. May take a while.

[Moonrocks]

Those files were conveniently deleted by a mysterious hacker.

[Fist of Etiquette]

Both the attorney general and the director of national intelligence will spend quite a few weeks coming up with a plan for the release of the documents...

Redaction Faction, what's your action? Blacking out words, phrases and clauses.

[Fist of Etiquette]

A belated google search shows that I'm not the first to come up with that.

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

Fist is a thief! Deport him.

[Mike Parsons]

I wont stand for deportation of a national treasure

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

National treasure or Chinese knock off of one?!?

[Mike Parsons]

You are thinking of Hand of Polite Behavior

[Dillinger]

lol that gets me yelled at in my office if you can imagine

[Quicktown Brix]

I just tried translating "Fist of Etiquette" to Mandarin and then that tic tac toe symbol result back to English and got "ceremonial boxing"

Which explains why my bluetooth adapter says, "Device is to connect."

[Fist of Etiquette]

Fortunately the Chinamen can't afford me so I won't be changing my brand to Ceremonial Boxing.

[Quicktown Brix]

What?! Who am I following on TikTok then?

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

Plagiarism? Do you want to run for office or be president of Harvard or something?

[Medulla Oblongata]

Well played. Well played indeed.

[Mike Parsons]

"CBDCs Banned"

Of note:

ECB pitches digital euro as response to Trump's crypto push

https://www.reuters.com/technology/ecb-pitches-digital-euro-response-trumps-crypto-push-2025-01-24/

EU immediately tries to launch a CBDC. Fucking clowns all of them

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

But actual nasty, murderous clowns.

[Zeb]

The principle seems to be: whatever Trump says or does, do the opposite. Then call everyone you don't like a Nazi.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

1D chess.

[mad.casual]

That said, crypto seems to be in a/the precarious position where if either a government endorses and amasses it or rejects it and prints their own or simply refuses to allow taxes to be paid in it the way they wouldn't allow taxes to be paid in wampum or Marlboro bucks or IOUs, it's no longer the fiat-destroying sliver-bullet it was advertised as being.

Almost like the fiat and any trust, or lack thereof, came before the currency and not the other way around.

[Fist of Etiquette]

US District Judge John Coughenour in Seattle called Trump's executive order 'blatantly unconstitutional' and questioned the quality of lawyering within the administration...

Geez, I guess it does hurt to try.

[Rev Arthur L kuckland (5-30-24 banana republic day)]

Trump is a retard for banning cbdc! This facist doesn't know how to facist correctly! It as if he is doing the opposite of fascism at every turn!

[Mike Parsons]

Exactly. He just basically stopped (temporarily) the ability to easily install an authoritarian social credit system. Such a fascist

[middlefinger]

Liz goes rogue? The rest of the staff on this site release a strong social credit score vibe with housing . Why does anyone give a shit how many spare bedrooms someone has or how big a backyard is. who is being paid to collect this information and why does Reason constantly write about it. Is it bags of cash from fucking Xi Bloomberg. The guy who demands federal housing projects- Yes in your backyard

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

5D fascism.

[Spiritus Mundi]

What a nazi!

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

Ask a Democrat. (But don't ask them "What's a woman?")

[Gaear Grimsrud]

Worst dictator ever.

[mad.casual]

Worst Dictator Ever: First Blood Part II

[Fist of Etiquette]

We don't do this in these parts (America). This is clearly showboating...

We showboat in all parts of America.

[Ska]

Yeah, but for far better shit. Give me the love of inebriated halfwits, or give me death!

[Bertram Guilfoyle]

"inebriated halfwits"

But enough about sarc.

[Dillinger]

has he not seen Smokey & the Bandit?

[tracerv]

Fun fact. Brenda Lee lived in my grandparents neighborhood in South Nashville. She is, indeed, a spinner. Nice lady.

[Dillinger]

love it!

[mad.casual]

We literally *just* had a President last week slam dunk a half-deflated amendment on his way out the door.

[Fist of Etiquette]

I just introduced a resolution to amend the 22nd Amendment to allow President Trump to seek a third term.

Right now Melania is getting the name of Hillary's suicide guy.

[InsaneTrollLogic (On The List!)]

The only way I want to see 22A amended is to add term limits for the House and Senate.

[Minadin]

And Deep State Bureaucrats.

[Ajsloss]

^-- This guy gets it.

[Stupid Government Tricks]

That would be awesome.

* No one can work for the government for more than 5 years in their entire lifetime, and there are no government pensions.

ETA: No, make it 6 years. Senators get one shot. Reps get three shots. And no bouncing from Rep to Senator to bureaucrat.

And it probably ought to forbid working on any contract funded by the government, but that's too easy to get around; money is fungible.

[Super Scary]

" In an executive order released yesterday (called "Strengthening American Leadership in Digital Financial Technology")"

SALDFT? This new admin sucks at naming stuff.

[Ska]

They're just working on their new COVFEFE bill drop.

[EISTAU Gree-Vance]

You SEE what happens when Elon fires all the focus groups? Acronyms suffer.

I never thought I’d see this day in America. Sad.

[Medulla Oblongata]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/as-trump-cracks-down-on-dei-in-washington-federal-agencies-caught-secretly-trying-to-keep-it-alive/ar-AA1xKOpD

The ATF changed Chief Diversity Officer Lisa Boykin’s official title to simply “senior executive” under the office of the director as late as Thursday, according to archives of the agency’s official leadership page. Boykin was appointed as the agency’s first chief diversity officer in 2021, previously serving in a human resources capacity for the agency since 2016, according to Leadership Connect.

CBP renamed their “Diversity and Inclusion” webpage to “Special Emphasis Programs” (SEP) at some point between Jan. 21 and the early morning of Jan. 23, according to a web archives. The agency has since taken down this webpage, instead redirecting to a section on equal opportunity employment.

[Note the XO says: "(A) agency or department DEI, DEIA, or “environmental justice” positions, committees, programs, services, activities, budgets, and expenditures in existence on November 4, 2024, and an assessment of whether these positions, committees, programs, services, activities, budgets, and expenditures have been misleadingly relabeled in an attempt to preserve their pre-November 4, 2024 function;]

[Mike Parsons]

Ive heard head of the SEP office is Schmisa Moynkin, and bears a striking resemblance to the former DEI officer

[Ska]

Jews have no place in DEI groups.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

Nor Asians or men or heterosexuals or uppity brown and black people.

[Rev Arthur L kuckland (5-30-24 banana republic day)]

The people will get access to the jfk assassination files as soon as the paper shredding and burning truck leaves langly

[Super Scary]

"CBDCs Banned"

Thank goodness. I see one of those shops on nearly every corner selling their oils, gummies and teas.

[Medulla Oblongata]

Thomas Padilla, who teaches at Dixon High School, wrote in a now-deleted post, “If you were born in 1964 or after, you have never experienced a US president dying in office. I am ready.”

Honestly, I'm ok with this. He's entitled to hope Trump keels over, just like I'm entitled to hope that the giant meteor hits Davos (I would also have accepted the giant meteor hitting the ND vs OSU game...)

[Rev Arthur L kuckland (5-30-24 banana republic day)]

How about a small meteor, as a giant one would kill off most life on earth

[InsaneTrollLogic (On The List!)]

A Tunguska type event right over Davos.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

Why do you hate trees?

[InsaneTrollLogic (On The List!)]

Sacrifice a few trees to totally flatten Davos is a trade off I’m willing to make.

[Sometimes a Great Notion]

Because of Shel Silverstein. That damn tree had it coming.

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

Fuck you. The tree was happy.

[Mother's Lament (Salt farmer)]

Fire from heaven.

[Medulla Oblongata]

Okay, a 'goldilocks meteor'. Just big enough to do the job, but no bigger.

[Gaear Grimsrud]

How about a tiny meteor lands on Mr. Padilla's house?

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

In the universe of unintended consequences, what would happen if Padilla got his wish, especially through assassination (which I will bet is the unspoken part of his desire)? How deeper and longer would that cement MAGA in place, and how much more extreme would Republicans push their policies? Then what would Padilla say?

[Zeb]

An assassination would be a disaster for everyone I think. But he is old enough that he could come down with some terminal illness or just up and die one day (though he does still seem pretty healthy and energetic).

[Medulla Oblongata]

Assassination after 2 years could tend to produce a 10-year Vance presidency.

[Zeb]

Which would probably be pretty OK. A stroke or something would be a lot better for the domestic tranquility, though.

[Super Scary]

"He's entitled to hope Trump keels over"

Since he specified 1964, the year after JFK was shot, I don't think he is hoping Trump just dies of old age. He wants him shot (again).

Hey may as well have said "in minecraft".

[Medulla Oblongata]

To be fair, 1963 was the last time a President died in office, so that's the point he started off with "If you were born...you've never had..."

Another bizarre post listed 1841, 1850, 1865, 1881, 1901, 1923, 1945, and 1963 — the years in which Presidents William Henry Harrison, Zachary Taylor, Abraham Lincoln, James Garfield, William McKinley, Warren Harding, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and John F. Kennedy died or were assassinated. So it was not all about assassination.

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

We've experienced a President wander off to follow a fucking Easter Bunny. That is something I would never like to experience again.

[mad.casual]

I'm pretty sure I witnessed the murder of a sitting President on live TV June 27, 2024.

[Medulla Oblongata]

I thought it was "just a handful of apartments"...

NYT: How Labeling Cartels 'Terrorists' Could Hurt the U.S. Economy

"Even more complicated, these criminal networks have extended their operations far beyond drug trafficking and human smuggling. They are now embedded in a wide swath of the legal economy, from avocado farming to the country’s billion-dollar tourism industry...

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

Look. You can either keep avocado toast or go after large criminal entities.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

Don't forget cheap, compliant nannies.

[Chupacabra]

It makes one wonder how much the cartels were paying the Bidens and other Democrats to keep the border open.

[Don't look at me!]

10%

[Quicktown Brix]

We're bigger than US Nippon Steel.

[Ska]

Your father did business with Hyman Roth, he respected Hyman Roth... but he never trusted Hyman Roth!

[Medulla Oblongata]

Davos kinda wishing they had not invited Milei to the party (didn't they learn their lesson last year?)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3HAuM7nZg4&ab_channel=WorldEconomicForum

And they doubled down by inviting Trump to speak (virtually).

https://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/1882461011048902971

Eric Daugherty
@EricLDaugh
OMG.

Trump just told the globalists at the World Economic Forum right to their faces that he froze foreign aid, is ending climate change policies/"Green New Deal," withdrew from the Paris Climate Accord, ended the EV mandate and is rushing to get more fossil fuels.

You know their blood is boiling.

[Medulla Oblongata]

Transcript of Milei's speech:

https://www.weforum.org/stories/2025/01/davos-2025-special-address-javier-milei-president-argentina/

[some snippets]

Also, we are an example of a new way of doing politics, which is about telling people the truth to their faces and trusting that they will understand.

Nor do I feel alone because over the course of this year, I have found allies in this fight for the ideas of freedom in every corner of the world – from the amazing Elon Musk to that fierce Italian lady, my dear Giorgia Meloni; from Bukele in El Salvador to Viktor Orbán in Hungary; from Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel to Donald Trump in the United States – slowly an international alliance has been forming among all those nations which, like ours, want to be free and believe in the ideas of liberty.

And slowly, what once seemed like the absolute global hegemony of the woke left in politics and educational institutions, in the media, in supranational organizations, or even in forums like Davos, has begun to crumble. And I hope for the ideas of freedom is starting to emerge.

...

A new political class, driven by collectivist ideologies and taking advantage of times of crisis, saw the perfect opportunity to accumulate power. All the wealth created by capitalism until then and into the future would be redistributed through some scheme of centralized planning, setting in motion a process whose disastrous consequences we are suffering today.

By promoting a socialist agenda while insidiously operating within the liberal paradigm, this new political class distorted the values of liberalism, and so they replaced freedom with liberation, using the coercive power of the state to redistribute the wealth created by capitalism.

Their justification was the sinister, unjust and abhorrent idea of social justice, complemented by theoretical Marxist frameworks aimed at liberating individuals from their needs. And at the core of this new value system lies the fundamental premise that equality before the law is not enough, as hidden systemic injustices exist which must be rectified, an idea that serves as a gold mine for bureaucrats who aspire to omnipotence.

And this is fundamentally, fundamentally what wokeism is about, the result of the reversal of Western values. Each of our civilization's pillars has been replaced by a distorted version of itself through various mechanisms of cultural subversion.

Negative rights to life, liberty and property were transformed into an artificially and artificial and endless list of positive rights. First it was education, then housing, and from then on, absurdities like access to the internet, televised football, theatre, cosmetic treatments and an endless number of other desires that were turned into fundamental human rights.

Rights that, of course, someone has to pay for, and which can only be guaranteed through the infinite expansion of the abhorrent state. In other words, we moved from the concept of freedom as the fundamental protection of the individual against the intervention of the tyrant to the concept of liberation through state intervention.

On this foundation, wokeism was built – an ideology of monolithic thinking upheld by various institutions whose purpose is to penalize dissent, feminism, diversity, inclusion, equity, immigration, abortion, environmentalism, gender ideology, among others. These are all various heads of the same beast aimed at justifying the state's expansion through the appropriation and distortion of noble causes.

[Ska]

I don't know shit about her policies, but I'm all for fierce Italian ladies.

[Gaear Grimsrud]

Meloni is classified as "far right" by the press. She's also pretty damn hot.

[tracerv]

Yeah. There's something about her. She like a hot Kelly Coffield.

[tracerv]

Wrong show. I meant Nicole Sullivan.

[Medulla Oblongata]

I can see that.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

You need to get out more. Or learn about The Formula*.

*By ancient tradition, the proper age for your mate is half your age plus 7.

[Stupid Government Tricks]

Ah, the Muslim tradition.

[Mother's Lament (Salt farmer)]

No, that one is simpler to calculate, "the proper age for your mate is 7".
See: Aisha bint Abi Bakr.

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

Shrike multiplies by zero instead of dividing by 2.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

What's absolutely pathetic is that none of these European populists are in any way "far right" except for their support of strict immigration controls. In all other ways they're very much of the left.

Milei's giving a shine to these guys, but he's really a political anomaly in that sphere. The guy literally disappeared whole departments out of Argentina's government within 48 hours of taking office. Not even Trump has done that, although to be fair he has to go through Congress to do so.

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

The EU promised to overturn the election if she wins like they did with Romania.

[InsaneTrollLogic (On The List!)]

The EU has no business overturning any elections within a sovereign country.

[Miss Ann Thrope (She/It)]

Far right meaning one step to the right of me.

[Medulla Oblongata]

Far right meaning they disagree with at least one thing I believe.

[mamabug]

Makes sense, 'hotness' of female politicians and pundits seems to be directly proportional to their rank on the right wing scale.

The left only had Tulsi, and that turned out to be a false positive.

[Spiritus Mundi]

If Trump gave the same speech, word for word, someone at Reason would write a pearl clutching kulture war condemnation of it.

[Medulla Oblongata]

With a title "JD Vance is wrong about...", to be sure.

[Gaear Grimsrud]

Trump called out Obama and Biden to their faces at the inauguration and now he and Milei do the same at Davos. The shit is awesome. Trying not to be too enthusiastic but I'm loving every minute of it.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

"Freedom is fascism!"
- Every global-Marxist-race grifter at Davos

[shadydave]

Milei is the gift that keeps on giving. One of the countries on Earth with the longest streak of pure socialist governance was so enamored of it, they elected a dyed in the wool libertarian to put a stop to it.

We need more of these in more countries.

[InsaneTrollLogic (On The List!)]

I love it. Fuck the WEF and their water carriers.

[Nobartium]

Dear Trump, nuke Davos.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

By "accident".

(And to satisfy the Russia! Russia! Russia! types, Trump could pay Putin to over-shoot Kiev just a bit.)

[Mother's Lament (Salt farmer)]

"Rep. Andy Ogles
I just introduced a resolution to amend the 22nd Amendment to allow President Trump to seek a third term. Read the details."

You can fuck right off, Rep. Andy Ogles. The last thing anyone needs is you handing retarded "he'll be a dictator for life" talking points to Democrats.

[Spiritus Mundi]

Reminder that some in the GOP are controlled opposition.

[tracerv]

He's actually a Trump guy. Just a fucking moron.

[tracerv]

He's my Congressman here in Nashville. A goddamn idiot. Embarrassing.

[Mother's Lament (Salt farmer)]

I imagine he's basically just trying to get Trump's attention as an ally.

[tracerv]

Bingo. He's been in legal trouble. Probably shooting for a possible pardon or something. He's a weasel like that.

[Mickey Rat]

The dumbassery is off the charts with Ogles. Two terms is enough for one man.

[Miss Ann Thrope (She/It)]

Also the last thing we need is a democrat to have the same privilege.

[Mother's Lament (Salt farmer)]

This. Always imagine what is the worst thing that can be done with a power if the Democrats obtain it.

[Chupacabra]

If they did it first, it would be OK. /sarcasmic

[Medulla Oblongata]

Yeah, so many things Dems did that came back to bite them in the ass when R's were in the slots (e.g., nuclear option, governing by XO...).

[shadydave]

Obama would not have left the White House voluntarily. Ever.

[mad.casual]

Meh.

Trump: I won't sign.

Not that I think he would or wouldn't, but if there were any President in the last 50+ yrs. so chaotic neutral as to have his own people tell him "Half of America will hate you for it." and him realize they're right, it would be him.

Clearly Joe was down for as many tours as possible before rigor mortis set in, The Clintons enacted their own dynasty to sidestep it, arguably in a manner that the Bushes had already done...

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

Extra LOLs for today--r/fednews is in total meltdown over having to actually come back in to the office. Whining and crying that they won't be able to focus on their work with all the people walking around and talking, trying to figure out day care options, long work commutes, etc.

What's particularly notable is how many of the complaints are from women. These bitches are basically being paid for an upper-middle class lifestyle to be a glorified housewife instead of actually doing their fucking job.

The scamdemic is over, you gold-bricking whores. If people could figure all this shit out before March of 2020, you can too. You're fucking adults, time to act like it. Or just get the fuck out and save everyone the cost of your salary. We're going to find out real fucking quick how many of these bitches are actually necessary employees and how many are driftwood, and my money is on the latter.

[Ajsloss]

The scamdemic is over, you gold-bricking whores.

Keep your gold-bricking asses out of Malibu too!

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

They are threatening to boycott the local businesses around the workplaces. They don't understand they never visited these places while working from home.

Fed workers are especially dumb. Jeffsarc levels of dumb.

[InsaneTrollLogic (On The List!)]

A number of those local businesses went belly-up due to these federal workers working from home. They’re just not there anymore, and if they are, they don’t have to rely on federal workers anymore.

[mad.casual]

Or the optics of driving to an inconvenient but leisurely lunch right next to your workplace, but not to your workplace.

So you've been dunking on your workplace for years and now that they're asking you to put in a few layups for your paycheck, you're going to dunk on the local businesses instead... you psychopaths?

Gold-bricking, bridge-burning whores.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

"What's particularly notable is how many of the complaints are from women. These bitches are basically being paid for an upper-middle class lifestyle to be a glorified housewife instead of actually doing their fucking job."

But what about whatever-wave feminists who concocted this scheme to deliver on "Women, you can have it all!" promises? And in the perpetual childhood 21st century coddled segment of American society, "all" includes never having to grow up.

[Michael Ejercito]

Counterpoint.

If they work from home, they have to pay for their own coffee, tea, and snacks.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

From food trucks?

[Super Scary]

They come right to the windows like that Asian guy in The 5th Element.

[Medulla Oblongata]

Good philosophy! See good in bad. I like.

[Miss Ann Thrope (She/It)]

... they won't be able to focus on their work with all the people walking around and talking...

I empathize with that point. My whole team did. Of course we actually worked at home.

[Medulla Oblongata]

https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/01/23/the-grooming-gangs-scandal-is-far-worse-than-you-think/

The details of what grooming gangs did to young British girls are literally unbelievable. They are so grotesque that it is truly hard to believe that one human could do such things to another, never mind to young girls.

Thank God, then, for the trial transcripts. We now have the judge’s sentencing remarks in a 2013 case concerning a grooming gang from Oxford. Between 1998 and 2012, a group of 22 mostly Pakistani-origin men sexually abused, trafficked and tortured more than 300 children, predominantly girls. The scale and details of the crimes are so horrific as to almost defy belief. But no one can deny the truth of what went on and was allowed to go on when they see what Judge Peter Rook said as he sentenced the men – some to life imprisonment. He didn’t hold back in his condemnation of their crimes.

...

Then, Rook detailed some of the depravity, which is probably one of the most disturbing things you will read in a long time:

‘You, Mohammed Karrar, prepared [the victim] for gang anal rape by using a pump to expand her anal passage. You subjected her to a gang rape by five or six men. At one point she had four men inside her. A red ball was placed in her mouth to keep her quiet.’

[It seems like he didn't *really* rape her, only helped others do so, so maybe he gets released? Especially since his culture says this is acceptable behavior.]

[Chipper Chunked Chile Con Congress (ex NCW)]

[It seems like he didn't *really* rape her, only helped others do so, so maybe he gets released? Especially since his culture says this is acceptable behavior.]

JeffSarc says it's OK as long as he claimed to feel remorse.

[Mickey Rat]

These gang members do not really see white, nominally christian, girls as actual persons because of the culture of ethnic and religious superiority that they have been brought up in.

It is fascinating to see center left to leftist politicians go to great lengths to protect and deny the existence of an honest to God rape culture.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

Remember when Europeans saw Muslims (or at least Islam) as an existential threat and actual invaders?

[But SkyNet is a Private Company]

The 17th century?

[Medulla Oblongata]

Vlad Dracula did.

[InsaneTrollLogic (On The List!)]

So did Ferdinand and Isabella. See Granada, 1492

[shadydave]

I do wonder if Reform might win the next election. I also wonder if they would be allowed to win even if they had the votes to do so.

Somebody has got to do something. This sort of thing won't be allowed to continue. Either the government does something about it, or a bunch of British Charles Bronsons are gonna start popping up.

[Sometimes a Great Notion]

$1,034,709,285,000 current interest on debt. 122% debt to GDP ratio. Cut Spending!

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

Cut spending? Dude, don't you know that if we even try to reduced the programmed increases in federal agency budgets then the world will end in hell fire, with plagues of frogs and locusts and deplorable trailer trash in MAGA hats and shit?

[Sometimes a Great Notion]

Sounds like an aprovement, I do live outside Baltimore though.

[sarcasmic]

I thought CBGB closed a long time ago.

[InsaneTrollLogic (On The List!)]

You might want to pay attention to what’s written instead of your morning 40.

[Chipper Chunked Chile Con Congress (ex NCW)]

Why would he want that?

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

He doesn't process ideas or information in written format.

[Stupid Government Tricks]

He doesn't process ideas or information in written format.

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

Fair.

[Rev Arthur L kuckland (5-30-24 banana republic day)]

God created all men, colt 45 made them equal

[Spiritus Mundi]

Trump pardons Biden's FACE act political prisoners. Will it be Sullum or ENB who writes the 'Trump is a dictator for releasing violent anti-choice insurrectionists' article?

[JesseAz (mean girl ambassador)]

Another sad day for jeffsarc.

Violent 86 year old grandma's who recieved 2 to 5 years. They caused someone to twist their ankle!!! Just ask Jeff. Or QB, who argued the same defending the charges.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

Hey, were they, like, praying in public, and other extreme violent stuff, like?

[Spiritus Mundi]

Praying in public, even silently is illegal in Britian. I am assuming very loud muslim call to prayer is somehow different though.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

Hmm, what happens when an entire society gets a rape fetish fantasy?

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

'The Federal Reserve's initial analysis,' the central bank insisted in a January 2022 report, 'suggests that a potential U.S. CBDC, if one were created, would best serve the needs of the United States by being privacy-protected, intermediated, widely transferable, and identity-verified'

And super-handy for controlling unruly peasants since the Fed (or their masters) can make "your" money vanish at the push of a button.

[Yuno Hoo]

"Exactly! We *said* it 'would best serve the needs of the United States'!"

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

"The key to effective crime prevention is to effectively delink society's problems from criminal activity," writes former Baltimore cop and current criminal justice professor Peter Moskos at Vital City. "Focus not on so-called 'root causes' but on proximate causes. We can't wait to fix society's intractable problems, given our seeming inability to accomplish that."

Do "society's problems" include not meeting socialist-globalist ideals? How about we write and enforce basic laws against theft and assault, and stop worrying about Marxist whining?

[mamabug]

That's basically the author's argument. 'Delinking' criminal activity from society's problems = enforcing laws equally and not ignore certain activity based on the race/gender/ethnicity/religion of the perpetrator.

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

The law should not be arbitrary. At any level.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

'Both the attorney general and the director of national intelligence will spend quite a few weeks coming up with a plan for the release of the documents, so expect a bit of a lag in terms of when people can actually dig in.'

Crafting new bullshit (and silencing more people) takes time.

[Yuno Hoo]

Both the attorney general and the director of national intelligence will spend quite a few weeks coming up with a plan for the release of the documents, so expect a bit of a lag in terms of when people can actually dig in.

Uh, huh. How about releasing a complete "transcript" of the plan development along with the actual documents?

[Sevo, 5-30-24, embarrassment]

"US District Judge John Coughenour in Seattle"

Jurisdiction shopping.

[Commenter_XY]

In one week, POTUS Trump has arranged for 1 TRILLION in foreign investment (Stargate, KSA). What a blessing for America.

The last guy, Pres Cauliflower, would never do anything like this.

More foreign investment in America is coming, because we have a POTUS who actually 'gets it'.

Uberlibs hardest hit. Though, why would they oppose America doing better? Ask yourself that question.

[Chipper Chunked Chile Con Congress (ex NCW)]

I know the answer to that question. It's not like they're particularly subtle or silent about how they hate America.

[MWAocdoc]

"In the name of social and racial justice, New York City, in essence, gave up its commitment to public safety."

The two are not mutually exclusive. You don't have to violate the equal Constitutional rights of bums by kicking them off the subway to prevent crime on the subways. But you DO have to arrest them for disorderly conduct or for riding a train all night long without paying, which implies patrolling the subways. New York has intractable social problems, but uncontrolled crime waves do not have to be one of them.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

No, these are exclusive as long as people accept the "logic" of equity, and define crime not just by actions but also by intersectional delusions.

[MWAocdoc]

One of these days some of us will realize that what people accept as logical is irrelevant to logic. Peoples' beliefs have no effect in the real world, only their actions count.

[Ska]

Vote for Andy Ogles! I don't grab them by the pussy, I just stare at 'em.

[Gaear Grimsrud]

FUCK YES!
"Settle Now, And STOP This Ridiculous War!": Trump Threatens Tariffs As Russia Sees 'Small' Window For Deal On Ukraine
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/settle-now-and-stop-ridiculous-war-russia-sees-small-window-deal-ukraine-trump

[Gaear Grimsrud]

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/watch-davos-globalists-admit-we-have-lost-trump
“This is a phenomenon we shouldn’t try to understand only in the terms we traditionally accept. We should say something strange, new, and amazing is happening here, and we should study it,” Allison further urged.
Yale University Professor Walter Reed emphasised “I think we need to also factor in not only who has won (Trump) but also who has lost, which is to say us.”
“By ‘us,’ I mean the general intellectual, professional, managerial people who believed history was over, and we were merely administering and managing things according to clear and known rules,” Reed explained.
“Something new, not necessarily better, but new, is moving into the center,” he added.
Ian Bremmer, president of political consulting firm Eurasia Group remarked:
“Anti-establishment forces in the United States are growing, and their momentum is undeniable.”
Trump himself addressed the globalists at Davos today by video link and put them on blast that America is back.
“I’m pleased to report that America is a free nation once again,” Trump announced, adding “On day one, I signed an executive order to stop all government censorship.”
“No longer will our government label the speech of our own citizens as misinformation or disinformation, which are the favorite words of censors and those who wish to stop the free exchange of ideas and, frankly, progress,” Trump asserted, adding “We have saved free speech in America, and we’ve saved it strongly.”

[Michael Ejercito]

Neither the feds nor the States generally have any business in whether or not a social media web site refuses to remove content.

Misinformation®™ is not an exception.

[Sevo, 5-30-24, embarrassment]

“By ‘us,’ I mean the general intellectual, professional, managerial people who believed history was over, and we were merely administering and managing things according to clear and known rules,”

"...clear and known rules..." as defined by those who travel in private jets and presume to tell the rest of us to cook on heating plates.
No, you are a self-appointed royal court and we don't care.

[Dillinger]

>>“Anti-establishment forces in the United States are growing, and their momentum is undeniable.”

terrified the pendulum swing is gonna be all Brave New World lol

[Weigel's Cock Ring]

Seeing that Haitian scumbag getting arrested yesterday as he was yelling "fuck Trump, Biden forever, thank Obama for what he did for me, blah blah blah" made my entire week. I could see that kind of scene repeated every single day for the next four years and not get tired of it.

"Hit the road Jack, and don't you come back no more no more no more no more, hit the road Jack, and don't you come back no more."
-Ray Charles

[Gaear Grimsrud]

Dude has 18 criminal convictions. GTFO.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

"Haiti is that way. Start swimming."

[damikesc]

I liked Tom Homan's response of "Well, he is wrong." when shown his video.

[Nobartium]

that shows blatant disregard for crucial constitutional limits on executive power.

Amending the Constitution isn't trashing limits, Liz, no matter how good or bad any given amendment is.

That's what the goddamn process is for.

[Roberta]

...

No, actually. We don't do this in these parts (America).

Well, only in obscure cases like a recent mayor of New York City, that's all. And only right after they'd enacted the limit by popular vote.

What's the matter, can't get over the fact that this president is so good that people want him this badly?

[Zeb]

Well, one guy from TN does. I'm glad Trump has this term. I think that's enough. And he's getting pretty old. We need more term limits, not less. Best case I think is Trump manages to make some actual good change in the federal government and economic things go well enough that Vance or whoever ends up being the next R candidate can continue the program, hopefully with a bit more consistency and commitment to smaller government.

[Dillinger]

term limits bother me from a 1A perspective. not that it's terminal if term limits exist but they bug me.

[sarcasmic]

If term limits didn't exist we'd have a king instead of a president. Not only do I think term limits are great for the president, I've often thought that all government jobs should have limits. Everyone from bureaucrats to police. Ten year max or something similar, after which they have to get a job where they contribute something of value to society.

[Dillinger]

anyone not elected can be limited I don't care about those guys.

if a majority of Kansans write their governor in for a third term why should they not be heard?

[sarcasmic]

If you want our government run by career politicians who die in office from old age, then good for you. I don't.

[Dillinger]

I prefer free speech be free idk about career politicians

[sarcasmic]

If the system wasn't rigged to give incumbents a huge advantage then I would be singing a different tune. But it is.

[Zeb]

How is requiring certain qualifications for candidates for elected office a restriction on speech? Free speech doesn't mean anyone has to pay attention to what you say.

[Zeb]

I don't really see this as a 1A issue. Seems more like an argument for absolute democracy, which I don't like the sound of at all. And wouldn't the same argument apply any restrictions or qualifications for office? Maybe you are against those restrictions too. If people decided to write in King Charles III for president, should he be the president despite being a foreign monarch?

[I, Woodchipper]

CBDCs Banned

This alone, regardless of everything else, makes him by far the better option and I'm glad he won.

[Dillinger]

yes. also enjoying Gulf of America

[shadydave]

The "isidewith" questions clearly showed that Trump had the 2nd most libertarian policies on the ballot (how libertarian Chase Oliver actually _is_ remains an open question). That many ostensible libertarians were pretending otherwise is concerning.

The Democratic is as much the opposite of libertarian as the Libertarian Party is libertarian. They consistently anti-liberty.

[Dillinger]

CBGB's banned?!?!?

[Gaear Grimsrud]

Talking Heads retired a long time ago.

[Dillinger]

thank you! phish regularly does Crosseyed & Painless and Cities for me

[MK Ultra]

Ramones are dead.

[JFree]

And the BeeGee's CBD has been confiscated.

[Rick James]

"President Trump announced that he'll declassify any remaining files from the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, his brother Robert F. Kennedy and civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.," reports CBS News. "He signed an executive order at the White House Thursday." Both the attorney general and the director of national intelligence will spend quite a few weeks coming up with a plan for the release of the documents, so expect a bit of a lag in terms of when people can actually dig in.

This is pretty earth-shattering news and yet I'm hearing very little of it. I would think liberal newspapers-- and by that I mean 'newspapers' would be crowing about this from the rooftops. Or were all those liberal 60s conspiracy theories I've had to listen to my entire life just nothing more than a tool used as a political wedge? Perhaps I should consult my rulebook... Let's see:

rule 1: The thing is never the thing, the thing is always the revolution.

Hmm, that tracks.

[Dillinger]

lol remember the 1700s when the newspapers weren't the government?

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

No working reporter or editor remembers (or cares) about the 1960s. If anything, JFK (like FDR) is some nebulous figure in the Democratic Pantheon. I bet if we asked Millennials which of those two was assassinated, we would get a 50-50 response.

[JFree]

The reason this isn't really news is because those documents were called on (in 1992 I think) to be declassified in 2017. Trump declassified them then - but went along with the CIA's usual slow-walking. As did Biden. Now Trump is no longer going along with the CIA's usual slow-walking. Or so someone says. Until he gets decided upon to do the same thing again because he is not an actual manager who does follow-up beyond issuing orders and press releases.

It is apparently time for that new sub-department of the CIA (headed by the Assistant Associate Under-Secretary of Government Transparency re the Kennedy and King Assassinations and Area 51 and Roswell) to take a really long lunch break and not respond to a specific request to release documents.

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

Redacting 60 year old documents is a fucking joke.

[JFree]

prohibiting the establishment, issuance, circulation, and use of a CBDC within the jurisdiction of the United States." Yep, you heard him right: CBDCs are banned now.

How does this increase financial privacy or freedom? He's not ordering the US government to prohibit the issuance by the Federal Reserve of a US dollar CBDC. Which I would agree be an appalling way for the US banking system to undermine current public dollar-based stablecoins via its current monopoly on US dollar issuance. And which is NOT the same thing as having the Treasury issue a dollar-based stablecoin - which would certainly compete with both the current stablecoins AND the Federal Reserve (by breaking the latter's monopoly - and thus providing an actual alternative currency in a financial crisis which was exactly the fucking original point of blockchain before they began pimping the existing coins as a new digital monopoly) AND is exactly what the US government should do since the US dollar is the government's currency.

Specifically, he is revoking Biden's EO re crypto and revoking the Treasury's Framework for International Engagement on Digital Assets (which was issued after Biden's EO but was mostly developed during Trump's first term with some Bidenesque hoohaa attached) and creating a whole new committee to achieve what he talks about earlier in the EO as his crypto objectives. Which - fine I guess. The first two are purely bullshit DeRp politics - since the Biden EO and the Treasury Framework both talk about supporting a 'liberal' democratic G-7 supporting blahblahblah. So now that's gone and the DeRp pendulum swings.

The third however - creating a new committee to do the same fucking thing that the old one did - is pure cronyism. No fucking surprise Reason loves that - as do the Bitcoin pimps here. Because looking at those objectives - they are pure protectionism. The Trump administration is going to create whatever is necessary to 'protect and promote the open public blockchain networks' and 'promote the development and growth of legal and legitimate dollar-based stablecoins'.

IOW - the US government is now going to erect barriers to any new blockchain.

[But SkyNet is a Private Company]

You are seriously dense, assuming you know what CBDC means. Freedom = The Govt having the ability to freeze or even disappear your money

[JFree]

Freedom re currency means people being free to use whatever fucking currency they want to use. Not your horseshit of pretending that the dollar is free because USA USA USA

re dollar-based stablecoins in particular, those are the ONLY blockchains that have both a use case and actual usage. It is why Tether has twice the volume of Bitcoin (and infinitely more liquidity). That volume is not being created by crypto day-traders or bitcoin whales in the US. It is being used by traders in Africa selling goods across borders when they don't have access to US-dollar (or any other) banking.

What Trump (or rather the committee he is setting up) is saying now is:
that any US-dollar based crypto will not to subject to any decision by the US government to control its own currency - and -
that any attempt by traders in Africa/elsewhere to use a different currency stablecoin will not be able to transact anything on a US-dollar based financial network.