Thursday Open Thread

What's on your mind?

Comments

[not guilty]

Here is an interesting article as to who is "grooming" children for sexual activity. https://www.them.us/story/tiktok-child-grooming-data-republicans-pastors?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=syndication&mbid=synd_yahoo_rss It's not transgendered folks or drag queens.

[AmosArch]

Pretty weak. Especially historically drag queens are probably not as common as people involved in church business or in family situations. Trannies aren’t common as some wish, many are not very overt about it, they’re trans in the sense that they check a survey box and they scream on forums about it but its not something to brag to the arresting cops about. And even those that are overt and get caught molesting someone and somehow this status becomes known to authorities this generally isn’t the sort of thing come up in reports unless its such a big factor it can’t be ignored.

You might as well say because we don’t see transvestites in full regalia on the battlefield that transgenders are all cowards.

And even if everything the article says is true that doesn't really have anything to do with what is being asked. If children were being molested left and right by priests the solution isn't to expose them to even more sexual content between the rapings.

even by your standards this argument is bordering on delusional.

[Dr. Ed 2]

https://commonwealthmagazine.org/arts-and-culture/drag-queen-story-hours-pulling-back-the-sequined-curtain/

[Nige]

On the one hand, the lack of evidence is evidence enough. On the other hand, trans people are uncommon, trans groomers even less common, so let's keep the hysterical focus on them rather than the actual areas where the vast preponderance of grooming is actually occurring. Almost as if it's not really about protecting kids at all.

[AmosArch]

Bengal tigers are uncommon. That doesn't mean you should toss your children into a Bengal tiger pit.

[Nige]

Yes, but that has nothing to do with trans people.

[AmosArch]

I'm refuting your argument that transgender abusers are uncommon therefore abuse by them is not a big deal.

[Nige]

That’s not my argument, though. Transgender abusers are uncommon, therefore the massive scaremongering hate campaign against trans people based on the lie that they are all abuser and are everywhere is fascist, disproportionate and distracts from the real dangers to children, is my argument

[hoppy025]

They belong in concentration camps whether they are abusers or not.

[Nige]

QED

[hoppy025]

Any society has a natural right to remove people that are inherently destructive to its moral fiber from that society.

[Krychek_2]

Then what are you still doing here, hoppy?

[Nige]

Proving my point, apparently.

[iowatwo]

Now you're just making stuff up.
The debate centers on parents loosing legal control of the their children. Schools lying to parents, Doctor's prescribing medications, and providing surgeries to children without parents consent.

[Nige]

No, the debate doesn't centre on that, but you guys lie about those things, too and demonstrate, once again, it's not about child saftey in any conceivabe form.

[Nelson]

"Doctor’s prescribing medications, and providing surgeries to children without parents consent."

What are you talking about? Doctors who prescribe medication and perform surgery on minors without the parents consent end up in jail. Because it's illegal.

[grb]

Nige : ” … massive scaremongering hate campaign …”

Sorry, but it’s pretty useless to tell our Righties their “massive scaremongering hate campaign” against trans folk does near-zero to protect children. They don’t give a shit about protecting children.

However, they dearly love their massive scaremongering hate campaign. They haven’t had this much fun in ages. It’s not like the old days, when they could publicly hate on blacks, Jews, gays and and women without the slightest backlash. The thrill of that release is denied them in these cursed modern times.

But with trans people? There they can celebrate a public orgy of hate! When targeting this miniscule number of folk there’s no restrain on their fun! It’s like the ultimate nostalgic trip back to Jim Crow and the 50s. No schoolmarmish ethics. No namby-pamby limits from (sneer) “decency” or (sneer) “common sense”.

And here’s a safe bet: When some commenters here blast away at the trans (with all the venom of one of those 30s governments attacking their particular Hate Target), I’m sure they’re thinking, “God, I wish I could still have this much fun with black people ….”

[Harvey Mosley]

It's almost as bad as the hoplophobes screaming "think of the children" as they dance in ecstasy on the still warm bodies of victims of evil, murdering scum while clamoring for yet more ineffective gun control laws.

And just in case it needs to be said I think the appropriate penalty for raping a child is death. No matter who the rapist is.

[not guilty]

Imposing the death penalty for child rape would incentivize the rapist to kill the victim.

I can see why someone who is copacetic with sacrificing children on the altar of firearm worship would be all right with that, though. Guns are America's Moloch. https://www.nybooks.com/online/2012/12/15/our-moloch/

[Nige]

Meanwhile, don't throw your kids into Republican pastor pits.

[ThePublius]

How did you get "Republican" pastors. The vast majority of Catholic priests are screaming leftist liberal Democrats!

[Dr. Ed 2]

Remember "Rum, Romanism, & Rebellion?

[Nige]

Catholics don't have pastors, (do they?) But sure, them, too.

[Brett Bellmore]

Yeah, we do, at least in the US. It's just that what we're calling a "pastor" is the same position they call a "priest" in other countries, so your doubts are understandable.

[Nige]

Noted. So, it's ecumenical, and pastors in general are more dangerous to children than trans people or cross-dressers.

[Randal]

Is this really news to anyone? I thought we've all known this since like 1985.

[Brett Bellmore]

I guess it makes a good distraction from the problem actually being somewhere else by now.

[Nige]

Christian pastors are still getting caught abusing children, Brett.

[Sarcastr0]

it makes a good distraction just as planned by the vast networks of pedophiles that control the government, eh Brett?

[not guilty]

I suspect that Brett has quite a blind spot as to RoCaMBLA.

[Frank Drackman]

Nige-bot knows trans peoples

[Nige]

edgebot wishes it could know people

[Zarniwoop]

If you actually want to protect kids, focus on real & common threats to kids. Not social-signalling conservative edge cases that might or might not exist.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving exists – for 10s of thousands of good reasons.

Mothers Against Drunk Unicycling does not.

I suppose it’s possible that drunk unicycling has killed someone, someone, somewhen … but it would be pretty ridiculous to make a huge deal of it and base a presidential campaign on it.

Now replace "drink driving" with "priest/pastor sex abuse", and "drunk unicycling" with "DQSH".

[Nelson]

What is DQSH?

[David Nieporent]

Drag Queen Story Hour.

[Dr. Ed 2]

It was a very, VERY small minority of the Catholic priests who were molesting children -- the vast, OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of them were decent men who would probably have sacrificed their own lives to protect a child from being molested.

A small percentage of a large number does become significant, but it still was a very small minority....

[Nige]

How many of that overwhelming majority of decent men sacrificed all those children to protect the institution of the church by protecting the abusers?

[not guilty]

It may have been a small fraction of priests who were molesting children, but the Roman Catholic hierarchy enabled the perpetrators. Not only in the United States -- it was/is a worldwide phenomenon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_sexual_abuse_cases

The church's acceptance of respondeat superior liability to the tune of billions of dollars speaks volumes. If the diocese as an entity were not culpable, the shot callers would no doubt have cut the offenders loose, leaving victims to pursue relief against individual priests who had taken vows of poverty.

[hobie]

Glad to see you come around to our side, Dr. Ed. That's precisely the argument we've been trying to make about gays and blacks.

[not guilty]

It is peculiar that culture warriors who hate on the transgendered have nothing to say about abuse of children by clergy and other religious figures. Like the blind guides of Jesus's day, they strain at gnats and swallow camels. (Matthew 23:24.)

There is a political agenda here, and it is not motivated by concern for children. Ron DeSantis, John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Sonia Sotomayor, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Bear It and Joe Biden are all members of an organization which has enabled more sex with children than any other entity in the history of the planet, to the tune of paying out billions of dollars in legal settlements, but does any polemicist ever say a word about that?

[Nige]

Also, the US foster care system.

[damikesc]

They're all public school teachers?

[Brett Bellmore]

Shush! They're still pretending that the scandal of decades ago is a going concern, and that the real problem hasn't been elsewhere for a long while.

[Sarcastr0]

The Real Problem is drag brunch and transgender people, I thought.

Maybe also gay adoption.

[Bob from Ohio]

Letting gays in the Catholic priesthood was a mistake, no?

[Sarcastr0]

Pretty sure that's still not allowed.

Also pretty sure you're implying being gay and being a pedophile are the same thing. Which is just more Bob trolling because he's bored and likes attention.

[Bob from Ohio]

"Pretty sure that’s still not allowed."

Celibate does not mean dead. They still have sexual preferences, they are just not supposed to act on their urges.

Very few examples of hetero priests molesting girls. Its gay priests molesting boys.

[Sarcastr0]

Gays are explicitly not allowed to be Catholic priests, celibate or not. Some clearly have gotten in, but they’re not being ‘let in’ from what I know.

I don’t know the stats on who is getting molested, and I don’t think it much matters. If you're trying to make a causation argument, you'll have to contend with Krychek's point below.

[Krychek_2]

And if you're going to require celibacy as part of the job description, whom do you think you're going to get? A whole lot of problems with the Catholic priesthood would go away if priests were permitted to marry and have families. Sexual orientation doesn't even have that much to do with it; requiring celibacy means you're going to get people who are running away from their sexuality, or feel a need to hide their sexuality, or want a convenient excuse to not marry and have children. In other words, the celibacy requirement greatly increases the probability of getting psychologically and emotionally damaged individuals.

[Bob from Ohio]

"you’ll have to contend with Krychek’s point below"

Where are all the molested girls if his point is valid?

Its a gay problem [allowed or not], not a celibacy problem.

[Nige]

It’s estimated 19% of the victims of abuse by priests were female, thanks for thinking of them, and no, it was an institutional problem because they knew it was happening and they protected the perpetrators.

[Krychek_2]

Bob, was Ted Bundy a heterosexual problem? No, he was a sociopath problem. Same with priests who molest children. The Catholic priesthood is disproportionately gay, so it is to be expected that any child molestation that happens will be disproportionately gay as well. That doesn't mean it's reflective of most gay people, any more than Ted Bundy was reflective of most heterosexual males. The problem is that *that particular group* of gay men happen to be sociopaths.

And suppose there are two men who are both pedophiles. One of them likes little boys, the other one likes little girls. I would argue that, as pedophiles, they have far more in common with each other than either of them does with non-pedophile gay people or straight people. I would make the same argument about people into SM, fetishes, and role play. What they like to do is far more significant than the gender of the person with whom they like to do it.

[Randal]

Gay marriage has been the best thing that’s happened to little Catholic boys in decades.

You’re a young gay guy. Your options are to marry a woman (yuck!) and live a lie, or go into the priesthood and try to be celibate, which at least is a sort of no-harm-no-foul life (in theory). So you do priesthood. That’s why there are (or were!) so many gay priests.

Now that there’s such a thing as a respectable gay lifestyle, we can expect this to be much less of a problem. Although we can also expect a Catholic priest shortage.

[Krychek_2]

There's an old joke that the oldest and most prestigious group of gay Christians is the College of Cardinals.

[Nige]

'Letting?'

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

The Catholic Church was and is a mistake.

Widespread, systematic, repetitive facilitation and concealment of the sexual abuse of children -- for hundreds of years -- aimed at protecting the reputation and ornate wealth of the church, its personnel, and its leaders.

Centuries of torture, brutal authoritarianism, depravity, and prosecution and persecution of heretics (people not gullible or dumb enough to be victims of adult-onset superstition) in the service of silly, childish dogma.

Centuries of childhood indoctrination -- in schools that teach nonsense to children who deserve better.

People who continue to be Catholics -- against all reason, information, and decency -- are no better than Penn State fans, Baylor fans, or Republicans. Just lousy people.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

At least one of you superstition-addled wingnuts should try to defend your God and your church.

This blog's fans are as cowardly as its operators.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Those poor kids. Every child deserves a Mommy and a Daddy, and it's always sad for the child when they don't have them.

[Randal]

Nige and NG are right, you just don’t care!

https://apnews.com/article/c105b4e94d7897b765b8d8fc646c7da6

There are many, many more.

[damikesc]

Wish to go over public school molestation scandals? Rather massive list.

[Randal]

As is the Boy Scouts' I'm sure.

But what I'm waiting for is the massive list of trans or drag molestation scandals.

[Nige]

'and that the real problem hasn’t been elsewhere for a long while.'

These people claim to care about child safety.

[Nelson]

"that the real problem hasn’t been elsewhere for a long while."

Show me the organized sexual abuse of children by teachers and/or trans people and/or gay people.

The legths to which the Catholic Church, the Boy Scouts, and various other consevative organizations have gone to shoeld perpetrators from prosecution, hide sexual abuse by their leaders, obstruct prosecution by law enforcement, and generally behave in an encouraging, protective, and cooperative way towards pedophiles is well documented. They are accessories, not protectors.

Teachers, gay, and trans people, on the other hand, are not organized national/international pedophile rings like culturally cpnservative organizations. Unlike cultural conservatives, they aid in the apprehension and prosecution of pedophiles. Cultural conservatives aid in the protection of pedophiles.

"They’re still pretending that the scandal of decades ago is a going concern"

It is still a going concern. There are constantly new revelations about pedophiles and sexual predators in the Catholic Church (and other religious organizations).

These are revelations because the Catholic Church, specifically, refuses to turn over their records on pedophile priests, refuses to return the pedophile priests they removed (often internationally) from the jurisdiction, refuses to allow Church officials to testify against accused pedophiles, and refuse to publicly call.for all victims to go to the police. They are unabashed and flagrant violators of basic decency and have proved that they think they are above the law.

My father was raped as a child by a priest that the Catholic Church knew had already raped other boys and who they moved to other parishes after my dad was raped. That priest raped 12 boys )that we know about) in 8 different parishes. It happeded when he was 9 and it was one of the last things he talked about before he died at 81. So fuck you.

The Catholic Church runs an international pedophile ring. Until they publicly and transparently clean house, actively aid in the prosecution of every single pedophile priest they know about, urge all victims to come forward, condemn pedophile priests as immoral, and pay restitution to every victim they know about, they are still a corrupt organization acting immorally to protect the pedophiles they created.

The fact that you pretend this is old news, but the unfounded accusations of cultural conservatives is real, is disgusting. Stop acting like a terrible person.

[Tom for equal rights]

Pedophiles naturally gravitate to professions that provide access to children. At the height of the catholic pedophile scandal, it was estimated that approx 5% of priests were pedophiles. Yes that was bad and unfortunately the catholic church would move the priests to different parishes to hide the pedophile priests.

At the same time it is estimated that protesent (sp) churches have approx 4% of the ministry that are pedophiles, with similar rates with the YMCA's , elementary schools, etc. Where as less that 1/4 of 1% of the general population are pedophiles. So the catholic church should be condemned for the retention of pedophile priests, You have to keep in mind that pedophiles naturally gravitate to jobs professions and other activities that provide access to children.

[Nige]

Sure, that accounts for the pedophiles. But that's just one aspect of the appalling abuse the church doled out to people. Imprisoning young girls for lifetimes of slave labour. Beating children savagely as routine punishment, sometimes to death, always covered up. In Ireland they used to sell babies to the US for adoption - no question of asking permission from the mothers. They subjected children to medical trials with absolutely no consent whatsoever. An ugly, brutal, greedy institution.

[Nelson]

Nige, I am as ardent a critic of the Catholic Church as you will fond, but I don't think most of what you just said is accurate. It sounds like one of the rants that BCD or another one of the rabid paleocons would write.

Stick to the proven, clear, and obvious examples of the immorality of the Catholic Church (and other cultural conservative institutions like the Boy Scouts). Stick to the proven, clear, and obvious evidence that teachers, gay, and trans people, as a group, aren't pedophiles.

[Dr. Ed 2]

No -- had deeper pockets, and lacked sovereign immunity....

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Religious righters will defend their old-timey superstition and bigotry even if it means children are to be molested.

This is why you are destined for replacement, AmosArch.

[Frank Drackman]

Not kind or gentle, Jerry,
and in the long run, aren't we all destined to be "Replaced"???

Frank

[Krychek_2]

Is there any actual data on children sexually assaulted by drag queens? I went on line and couldn't find any; it seems to me there would be if this were an actual problem. I'm sure it's happened at least once, but I'd really like to see some evidence that drag queens are any riskier than the rest of the population before concluding that drag queen story hour should be a police matter.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Can you say "brainwashing"?

[Sarcastr0]

Drag brunch ain't exactly the Manchurian Candidate.

[bevis the lumberjack]

Lol. Abuse isn’t the issue. Children aren’t abused by porn, but we don’t show it to them in school. Why not?

[Krychek_2]

Well, the significant difference is that porn is inherently sexualizing whereas a man in drag reading Dr. Seuss to children isn’t. But you and Dr. Ed have both identified the issue. You don’t want children to know that a world with drag queens exists, or that drag is mostly harmless fun. It’s about making sure the only world views children are exposed to are yours.

And you're just as guilty of wanting to groom children. Conservative values grooming is just as much grooming as liberal values grooming. You think it's not grooming when your side does it, but it is.

[iowatwo]

You don’t want children to know that a world with drag queens exists,

Because Children cannot process the the purpose for their existence.

[Nige]

If they can process guys in tights and capes flying around and beating each other up, they can process drag queens.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Are you aware of the number of children who have walked out of windows thinking they could fly because Superman does?

It was a real child protective issue back in the 90s.

[Nige]

No I am not aware. How many? Isn't it safer for them to wear clothes not associated with their gender than to walk out of windows?

[David Nieporent]

Are you aware of the number of children who have walked out of windows thinking they could fly because Superman does?

None. Yet another fabricated "fact" from Dr. Ed.

[Krychek_2]

Oh, I don't know; when I was five I processed Bugs Bunny dressing up in drag and trying to seduce Elmer Fudd just fine.

[bevis the lumberjack]

Did bugs waggle his dick at you? If so, it would explain some things.

[Krychek_2]

If he had, I probably would have convulsed into gales of laughter.

[Nige]

Funny how you share the tendency with the right-wing guys who take this threat to childhood oh-so-seriously by spouting increasingly obscene facile crudity when challenged.

[Nelson]

Drag queens aren't waggling their dicks at kids at Drag Queen Story Hour. Why do you insist this is a thing?

[Sarcastr0]

Lots of stuff I can’t process the purpose of its existence now. I don’t think it’s all grooming me.

[bevis the lumberjack]

I hate the word groomed. But you used it, so….

I don’t think the schools should be grooming kids at all. Not in this stuff. Either way. And I’ve posted videos of these things that involve the performers waiving their crotches at the kids. So just drop the not inherently sexualizing stuff. It’s a bald faced lie.

Hell, man, the schools in this age aren’t achieving their primary purpose already. Test scores are awful. Large districts are graduating entire classes where only 15% can do math at 12th grade level. Or only 20% can read at grade level. And they’re always bitching about being underfunded.

So why are they wasting classroom time and resources on crap like this? There is nothing learned here, no benefit at all. I guess stuff like this is just the schools waving the white flag - we can’t educate ‘em so let’s kill some time titillating then instead.

Fucking politics is like Trump - a poison that destroys everything it touches.

[not guilty]

My cat grooms himself. Does that mean he is trying to transition to being a female kitty?

[Krychek_2]

Drag queen story hours don't typically happen in schools, but rather libraries. And the one time I attended a drag queen story hour, nobody waggled anything; if someone does it shouldn't be tolerated. But even if you have some drag queens behaving badly, the solution is to not allow those particular drag queens to conduct DQSH, not to ban it altogether.

The broader issue is that kids are going to learn somebody's world view, maybe hoppy's that drag queens should be sent to concentration camps, or maybe Sister Mary Mary Quite Contrary's that drag is nothing more than good clean fun. Everybody wants to "groom" because everybody wants their world view to be the one kids learn. That's a given. So I think everyone should stop tossing the accusation "you're grooming" because, well, so are they.

[bevis the lumberjack]

The schools should be doing academics. Period. It’s not their place to teach kids values. Parents can do that just fine without their help. The schools seem to be actively picking fights with parents these days by teaching values the parents don’t like. Shame in them.

If you aren’t accomplishing your primary purpose already don’t add more complicated crap that’s none of your damn business anyway.

And quit using the word grooming. My children are all grown now but my wife and I raised them. We did not groom them. It’s another word that the culture warriors have bent and twisted beyond any reasonable definition.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

It is difficult to take clingers seriously when they declare "stick to academics in schools."

Who jammed childish superstition into our Pledge of Allegiance?

Who conducts and approves public prayers at the 50-yard-line?

Who pushed to have pure fucking nonsense -- intelligent design, creationism, the Bible -- taught in public classrooms?

Who insists that the Ten Commandments be displayed in public classrooms?

Who sends their children to nonsense-teaching, superstition-addled schools?

Carry on, clingers. But only so far as better Americans permit you to do anything.

[Frank Drackman]

Well Jerry, your CTE is showing
"The phrase "under God" was incorporated into the Pledge of Allegiance on June 14, 1954, by a Joint Resolution of Congress amending § 4 of the Flag Code enacted in 1942."

Again, Jerry, not kind, not gentle, much more and we'll have to put you in the restraints (I guess you could consider Prison a form of "Restraint")

Frank

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Arranging childhood indoctrination of minors -- elementary school students mouthing "under God" each morning in the classroom -- was the work of low-quality victims of adult-onset superstition.

[Krychek_2]

Bevis, value-free academics is impossible. The mere fact that a school teaches science rather than creationism is based on the value that science is worth teaching and creationism is not. If a child is bullied, and the school intervenes, that intervention is based on the value that children shouldn't be bullied. No high school literature class teaches Mein Kampf, and that's based on values too. The question is how to decide which values, and not whether there will be values.

[bevis the lumberjack]

You’re using commonly held values that will match what the parents believe anyway. That’s all benign stuff on which all agree.

The problem is that the schools and teachers are now substituting their own values to supplant the values of parents. The recent upswing in angry parents - I’m sorry, domestic terrorists - at school board meetings is not caused by parents coming in to thank the board for the values they’re teaching.

The schools are giving parents the metaphorical middle finger in values. That’s not right.

[Krychek_2]

Bevis, in your opinion, what should a school located in the middle of Klan country do; teach kids that blacks are inferior because that's what most parents want, or teach kids that all men are created equal? The issue will come up sooner or later; it won't be able to avoid it forever.

How about in fundie country, where most parents want their children taught young earth creationism? Do the schools teach what the parents want, even if it's wrong, or do they stick with science? Again, the issue will come up at some point; it can only be avoided for so long.

I agree that there are plenty of parents who don't like gays, drag queens, or the transgendered. I think their prejudices are bad for the country for the same reason all irrational prejudice is bad for the country. People have to live in civil society with people they don't like; otherwise society falls completely apart. So, what should a school do when the issue comes up, as it will? And keep in mind that some parents will be unhappy no matter what they do. You can't simultaneously satisfy parents who believe Noah's ark was an actual historical event and also satisfy parents who believe that it wasn't.

[Bob from Ohio]

"Klan country"

Is this 1960? There is no Klan country in the US.

[Nige]

But the same complaints about schools teaching stuff they don't like are being made.

[Krychek_2]

Bob, if you don’t think there are still lots of areas that still share some or all of the Klan’s values, then you really need to spend some time seeing more of the country.

In 2008, just after Obama got the Democratic Party’s nomination, I was at a courthouse on the Florida panhandle to attend a foreclosure sale, and overheard a conversation between two good ole boys. One of them said that Obama better not visit North Florida or he might get shot. The second responded that someone should kill him with a knife because if he gets shot, they’ll try to take our guns away.

Twenty years ago an immigrant family from India tried opening a convenience store in rural Lake County, Florida. It was torched within 24 hours.

Those attitudes are still out there.

[bevis the lumberjack]

Your premise is in this statement is ridiculous. It’s not 1955. There are no schools located in Klan country because the Klan has shriveled to nothing. And what the fuck is fundie country?

Your knowledge of people who live in certain areas appears to be limited to political caricature. The areas you describe don’t exist. You’re demonstrating a complete lack of sophistication here. There is literally nowhere where parents are demanding that schools teach white supremacy.

I would have the schools do their fucking job and teach academics. Creationism is a part of science, you teach it. Racial equality is the law, you teach the civil rights movement as part of history and make the point.

But those things are not the issue. The gender spectrum is not part of anything and doesn’t need to be in schools. Books about circlejerks do not need to be in schools. The victim hierarchy in CRT is opinion, doesn’t need to be in schools. This isn’t that hard.

Klan and fundie country. My God. I guess you’re a lifelong resident of fruitloop country…….

[Krychek_2]

Bevis, see my response to Bob directly above your comment. Do you dispute that there are sections in which racism and/or fundamentalist religion form the majority belief? Sorry, I assumed you would be smart enough to figure out that I was using Klan Country and Fundie Country as shorthand to describe that phenomenon.

[not guilty]

"Creationism is a part of science, you teach it."

Is that as true as everything else you have said?

[Bob from Ohio]

"latest on the debt ceiling"

And that boy was Albert Einstein.

[bevis the lumberjack]

I knew what you meant. And yes, there are no “sections” where Klan views and religious views dominate anything.

You’re doing the typical political lazy thinking by taking a few loudmouths and extrapolating them to entire populations.

Name me one place where parents have complained to the school board that the schools shouldn’t be teaching racial equality. If the schools are deviating from equality these days they’re teaching white kids that they’re evil oppressors.

Your premise on this is silly.

[Nige]

'Creationism is a part of science, you teach it.'

Your understanding of science is about at the same level as your understanding of education.

[Krychek_2]

Bevis, do you understand the concept of the thought experiment? I have posited a thought experiment in which the facts are that Klan and Fundie country exist. Based on those facts, how do you think the school board should handle it?

Don't know your background, but if you've ever taken a law school exam (or bar exam), there are lots of questions in which the facts would never happen in the real world, but that's not the point. The point is to think about how those facts would play out. It's like Bertrand Russell's famous syllogism:

All square circles are square
All square circles are circular
Therefore some circles are square

Which is indeed the conclusion that follows from the two premises. And if you object that there are no square circles, you'll get an F on the test. Because the question is: *Assuming those facts exist*, what logically follows?

Now, from the top: I have posited a thought experiment in which Klan Country and Fundie Country exist, and the parents are demanding the school board teach white supremacy and young earth creationism. Now, given those facts, what do you think the school board should do?

I suspect you don't want to answer the question but I'll be happy to be proven wrong.

[Nige]

'Name me one place where parents have complained to the school board that the schools shouldn’t be teaching racial equality.'

Anywhere they're complaining about 'wokism.'

[bevis the lumberjack]

They should say no. Easy answer. Both of those are extreme positions that should not be represented in school curriculum.

But your thought exercise reverses the situation that exists in reality. You’re not opposing parents who want extremist ideas taught to their children. You’re opposing parents who are objecting to having extremist things taught to their children. Your extremist villains in the real world are the school authorities and teachers.

[Krychek_2]

Bevis, Nige is right; anyplace they're complaining about woke is a place they're seeking to preempt teaching racial equality.

[bevis the lumberjack]

Bullshit. Teaching 6 year old white kids in 2020 that they are evil oppressors that are themselves responsible for slavery is not teaching racial equality. Teaching Kendi’s anti-racism bullshit is not teaching racial equality. I thought you were better than that.

“Wokeism” or whatever you want to call it is every bit as hateful and bigoted as the thought exercise Klan. They just hate different people they don’t know based on stereotypes they make up.

Your opinions on people you don’t know out in “fundie country” are based on political rhetoric. You ought to get out if your bubble and actually meet some people.

On my board nige is out there with cbd, so I don’t see his posts. Nige is out there with the extreme of the extreme. The fact that you can actually vouch for one of his ridiculous assertions, which this one is, makes me question you.

[Nige]

'“Wokeism” or whatever you want to call it is every bit as hateful and bigoted as the thought exercise Klan.'

Of course it is. Saying slavery was bad is as bad as slavery. Because some modern white people might make it about them and feel bad. Being a slave is as bad as that feeling some modern white people get when schools teach that slavery was bad.

[Sarcastr0]

Teaching 6 year old white kids in 2020 that they are evil oppressors that are themselves responsible for slavery is not teaching racial equality.
No on is doing this.

Teaching Kendi’s anti-racism bullshit is not teaching racial equality. I don't agree with everything in that book, but 1) is it being taught in HS much, and 2) does it say anything like '6 year old white kids are themselves responsible for slavery' or did you put to not-alike things together?

[bevis the lumberjack]

You with your reliable “something that was widely reported in the media didn’t really happen”. You’re a waste of time.

[Sarcastr0]

One thing that is very clear is that you and I do not read the same media.
And that you take single examples and generalize wildly.

Either could be what's going on here.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

"Teaching 6 year old white kids in 2020 that they are evil oppressors that are themselves responsible for slavery is not teaching racial equality."

I'll take "Singular example an idiot is using to try and generalize across the country" for $500.

[Nelson]

"Creationism is a part of science"

Creationism isn't even history, let alone science. The only place that teaching creationism would be appropriate would be in a mythology class.

"Teaching 6 year old white kids in 2020 that they are evil oppressors that are themselves responsible for slavery is not teaching racial equality."

Where is such an extreme thing being taught? I challenge you to find any curricula, anywhere in America, where that is included as part of the lesson.

"Teaching Kendi’s anti-racism bullshit is not teaching racial equality."

Again, where is Kendi part of any curriculum? What school district in what state? Dragging a far-right boogeyman into a completely unrelated discussion is dishonest.

"You’re opposing parents who are objecting to having extremist things taught to their children."

What "extremist things"? CRT isn't being taught anywhere as part of a K-12 curriculum, despite cultural conservative claims. Probably because it isn't intellectually approachable until college. "Racism against white people" isn't part of any curricula, despite claims (extremely vague claims, at that) by cultural conservatives. No school systems are pushing trangenderism, encouraging kids to be gay, secretly working against parents, or any of the dozens of other irrational claims cultural conservatives make.

Ron DeSantis is an excellent barometer for irrational educational extremism. If he is for it, it's probably anti-intellectual, factually unsupported, bigoted, or all three. Florida just approved a curriculum that claims slavery was good for black people, for God's sake. That's Klan-adjacent, at the very least, wouldn't you agree?

[bernard11]

Bevis,

there are no “sections” where Klan views and religious views dominate anything.

As a former long-time Southerner I can assure you that there are places - plenty of them - where fundamentalist religious views dominate the area.

[Bob from Ohio]

Oops, edit function didn't work

Disregard “latest on the debt ceiling”

Comment should have been

"two good ole boys"

And that boy was Albert Einstein.

[Krychek_2]

No, Einstein had been dead for over fifty years at the time. Try again.

[Bob from Ohio]

Its an internet joke. Look it up.

[bernard11]

The schools should be doing academics. Period. It’s not their place to teach kids values.

First, as the Rev points out, schools have been teaching values for a long time and conservatives love it.

Second, values are inherent in some classes. Lots of literature conveys, subtly, values. Do you think American history classes don't convey values? And the honest ones convey unpleasant facts that conservatives want to suppress.

Should we teach kids that racial discrimination is bad? What about discrimination against gays?

[bevis the lumberjack]

Sure.

You’re referring to a time when things were gentler. Values that the schools are teaching today are frequently pretty extreme and contrary to the parent’s values. Is that ok?

[Nelson]

"frequently pretty extreme and contrary to the parent’s values. Is that ok?"

Frequently extreme according to who? When there is a consensus regarding a community's values and it differs from a particular parent's values, why should the many bow down to the one (or the few)?

The problem that cultural conservatives are facing is that their values are no longer the dominant values in American culture. Even worse (for them), those values have shifted over time because traditional values and prejudices are viewed as baseless, quaint and outdated at best, cruel and hateful at worst.

Religion is fading in modern society because, once the taboo against questioning religious texts and teachings was broken, they frequently don't make sense and their most ardent followers tend towards self-righteousness and anger. "Love thy neighbor" loses out to judge-y and condemning most of the time.

Traditional marriage largely isn't considered better than other types of long-term relationships because all of the disastrous predictions cultural conservatives made have proved to be wrong. Almost everyone knows of a successful relationship (including blended families, gay families, and long-term unmarried couples, either with or without kids) that wasn't a heterosexual, death-do-us-part marriage. Probably because they are just as good, fulfilling, and nurturing as traditional marriage.

Exclusionary policies based on narrow (and arbitrary) moral codes are increasingly opposed because they marginalize people who have done nothing wrong. The rhetoric that labels all trans people as criminals is a perfect example.

Legal abortion enjoys widespread support because it is accurately viewed as an individual choice. Demonization and extreme rhetoric for the last 50 years have failed to change that reality. Recent extremist legislation throughout the country has only resulted in an acceleration of the rejection of anti-abortion laws.

American society is continuing to slowly, but inexorably, move away from cultural conservatism. The right is desperately trying to use legislation to stop people from living the way they want. But America values freedom, so their effort will fail.

[Sarcastr0]

Every puritan against sex ed in the 1980s is coming out of the woodwork.

[bevis the lumberjack]

Sex ed in the second grade. Lol. You call me a puritan, I’ll call you a pervert for wanting dicks waggled at 7 year olds.

But wait, I thought there was nothing sexual about drag queens. So, is it sexual or is it not? You’ve confused yourself.

[Sarcastr0]

OK, so it was like fourth grade people were yelling about 40 years ago. Now it's second grade. I don't see much distinction in the arguments.

It is not at all clear to me that knowing about sex is going to warp a second grader.

But wait, I thought there was nothing sexual about drag queens.
Your comment I replied to wasn't talking about drag queens. At all.

[Nige]

The best way to protect kids from abuse is to privide them with the knowledge they need to know when someone is being inappropraite with them. Apparently this is 'sexualising' them.

[Frank Drackman]

Nige-bot surprised nobody wants his demonstration of inappropriate actions.

[Nige]

edgebot loves being edgy about child abuse

[bevis the lumberjack]

This whole thread is about drag queens.

I think we should require sex ed in daycare. Indoctrinate ‘em early, man.

You can tell a difference on this between people that have children and people who don’t.

[Sarcastr0]

You talked about schools. That's not where drag is showing up. You changed the subject, and it's kinda weird you didn't realize it.

You can tell a difference on this between people that have children and people who don’t.
You coming out against stuff people who have children are doing!

[bevis the lumberjack]

No I’m saying that you have no ability to understand how it is to want your children to be protected and taught the right thing.

Parents love their children. You and the school hierarchy do not and are jamming your politics ahead of the children’s welfare.

[Sarcastr0]

You want to appeal to your authority as a parent, I can't gainsay you.

But there are plenty of parents out there absolutely are doing exactly that. They want sex ed in schools. They are down with drag queen story hour.

[bevis the lumberjack]

“Plenty”.

Hardly anyone objects to sex ed in school. I sure don’t. But it needs to be at a point where it’s age appropriate. And we can debate where that age is. But elementary school ain’t it.

You’re not arguing sex ed vs no sex ed. you’re arguing early age sex ed, which is not going to be popular at all.

And the vast majority of parents do not voluntarily take their children to drag shows. Must not be all THAT popular.

[Sarcastr0]

So your current thesis is that any parent who is okay with sex ed in second grade is a bad parent. Similarly for drag brunches.

As I said, puritanism. It's the same shit I heard as a young child about sex ed, slightly rewarmed. I don't need to be a parent to know how that turned out.

[bevis the lumberjack]

As Reagan said in the debate, there you go again.

I did not say that anyone was a bad parent. You just made something up out of thin air so you could call me something I’m not. “If I make something up it definitely proves my point”. Thought you hated personal attacks.

Where is the substance in this response? Go argue with your fantasy person and leave me out if it.

[Sarcastr0]

You said you can tell who is a parent and who is not by whether they agree or disagree with you on sex ed and drag brunch.
I don't see how else to parse this regarding parents that don't agree with you.

[bevis the lumberjack]

I absolutely did not say that. I didn’t say anyone was or wasn’t a good parent. Are you on LSD or something?

I said that most parents would find elementary sex ed and drag shows for children objectionable. I didn’t say anything about the quality of parenting one way or another. Zero. Zippo. Nada.

And you can’t point to a quote where I did.

You are outdoing yourself this time. Jumping the shark. Seriously, you’ve fucking lost your mind.

[bevis the lumberjack]

Or you just decline to concede points.

Speaking of which, tell me where I said anything detrimental about parents who disagree with me on earlier sex ed or drag shows. Or admit you were wrong.

Put up or shut up.

[Sarcastr0]

You can tell a difference on this between people that have children and people who don’t.

You used this to attack my position. Now you claim that's not you saying those who share my position and are parents are bad parents.

Just, I guess, parents who don't seem like parents to you.

And there are so few of them! You declare. Utterly without support.

[bevis the lumberjack]

Weak sauce. You’re drawing a ridiculous inference. I attacked you. You are not a parent who disagrees with me. I would never criticize parents that I don’t know who do not agree with me because I understand the hundreds of thousands of choices you have to make on the fly with no experience. Anyone who is raising their children in good faith is ok with me, even if we choose different choices.

You drew an inference that is 180 degrees from reality, Kreskin.

Where did I attack parents who disagree with me?

Point out the line, not a fucking paragraph drawing inferences from different

[Jason Cavanaugh]

"Hardly anyone objects to sex ed in school. I sure don’t. But it needs to be at a point where it’s age appropriate. And we can debate where that age is. But elementary school ain’t it."

You must have been stewing about this for the last 40+ years then, seeing as how that's where the fundamentals have been taught since at least the '80s.

[David Nieporent]

I went to elementary school in the late 70s, and we were taught very cursory sex ed starting in 5th grade. (As I recall, they separated boys and girls a few times — something one could do in those days without having any loon calling it xphobic — and showed us some anatomy slides, and that was pretty much it.) It wasn't until sixth grade, middle school, that we had a formal "health" class and got "sex ed" that actually talked about sex.

[Nelson]

"no ability to understand how it is to want your children to be protected and taught the right thing"

That is a disturbing combination of paranoia and self-righteousness. Parents who take their kids to Drag Queen Story Hour love tbeir kods and want to raise them right. Their beliefs don't exclude yours. Yours definitely exclude theirs. So who is the one who values liberty and freedom more? Hint: not you.

"Parents love their children."

Yes, most do. Including the ones who support trans people, gay people, and drag queens. They aren't damaging their kids. Love isn't limited to those who share the narrow beliefs that you accept. There are many loving, supportive, protective, and nurturing parents who believe very different things than you.

I know you refuse to accept it, but it's true.

[OtisAH]

I need clarification: You believe that sex education involves waggling penises at students?

[Frank Drackman]

No, it was more like the Football Coach (in Alabama all "Health" teachers were also Football Coaches) with a Huge Black Dildo, and a "Pocket Pussy" and then he would draw a Diaphragm on the board.

Frank

[Krayt]

Can't say for 7 year olds, but kids are old hands at porn viewing nowadays by the time they're out of grade school.

It was this way with mine 20 years ago, thanks to older brothers of their friends. I can't imagine with phones and omnipresent Internet and kids in their own networks of extended friends passing stuff around like wildfire.

Good luck if you can keep a tight reign on that.

[bevis the lumberjack]

So let’s just make it easy and show it at school. Right?

[Nelson]

No one is showing porn at school. WTF, Bevis?

[Nige]

'Children aren’t abused by porn'

Showing children pornography would probably constitute abuse. Most of the drag queen hysteria is based on conflating stuff that might be rude or risque with pornography, then conflating rude or risque adult drag queen performaces with story hours for children.

[hobie]

I'm sure all the indignant hillbillies here have favorable memories of Mrs. Doubtfire. Probably forgetting that the movie ended with a man in drag reading a story to children. Grooming?

[not guilty]

Cross-dressing in cinema goes back much further than Mrs. Doubtfire. Some Like it Hot was released in 1959.

The characters were presumably reading music.

[hobie]

Personally, my favorite gay-curious movie of all time is Zorro the Gay Blade

[jimc5499]

Is anybody even tracking it? I doubt it.

[Ben_]

This is a good example. You have no interest in protecting children. Your interest is purely in attacking the people who are not like you. You're not even doing a good job of pretending to care about protecting children here.

[Mr. Bumble]

Paging Art Bell.

[AmosArch]

Movie: American Beauty
What I always find funny about this movie is its supposedly all about breaking from conformity to nonconformity yet the penultimate act of the protagonist is to conform by not banging the hot cheerleader chick. Guess it finally makes sense once we learned about Spacey's private life all those years later.

Hey what are you are you looking at me for? She was over 18 and older than I am so you can't shame me for thinking she was hot when I watched it!

[Frank Drackman]

" 1970 Pontiac Firebird. The car I've always wanted and now I have it. I rule!"

Frank

[Brett Bellmore]

Personally, I've always wanted a 1968 T-top Stingray. Well, not always, only since 1968... It represents the peak of car design, so far as I'm concerned.

Yeah, the modern Corvettes are, mechanically, entirely superior cars. But the '68 T top had the style.

[Mr. Bumble]

At least neither of you said Mustang.
For my money it would be a 1968 Dodge Coronet R/T.
440, 4bbl, 4 speed, 4.11 rear.
My late brother-in-law had one and the dumbass lost his license the first month he had it so I got to drive it more than he did.
What a kick.

[Brett Bellmore]

My brother inherited a '65 Mustang with about 40 miles on it. Sat in a barn for years before he could take possession, he had to repair a lot of rust. In fact, he'd come home on leave from the Air Force, go over it with naval jelly, use sheet metal and lead to repair the holes, then end up having to leave before he could get it painted. Rinse and repeat.

Finally got it finished, took me and Mom on its first drive, and on a four lane road, virtually no traffic on a Sunday morning, this idiot woman turns across the road and t-bones him. T bones a candy red car on an otherwise empty road!

Lap belts only, he ends up biting the steering wheel, Mom shatters her arm on the dash. Later that evening I needed pliers to take my boots off, all the eyelets were crushed shut. The car was totaled, and he had NOT paid for the classic car insurance, so he got squat for it.

They were stick picking pieces of the steering wheel out of his jaw 6 months later, when the Air Force picked up the cost of repairing his teeth. I had to drop out of college to nurse mom back to health.

But, yeah, was a nice car, if not as nice as the '68 t-top stingray.

[Dr. Ed 2]

So I'm not the only one who has had to drop out to care for mother.

[Commenter_XY]

You were a good son, Brett = I had to drop out of college to nurse mom back to health.

[SRG]

Seppos and their compensating muscle cars... 😉

50s Bentley Continental Fastback or the new Bentley La Sarthe.

[Mr. Bumble]

So, there's nothing like a Bentley?

[SRG]

I hold no brief for the modern Bentleys since the sale to VW, and I was not a fan of the 60s/70s re-badged Rolls/Bentleys. The last Bentley I lusted over was the 90s Continental T (before the La Sarthe). The newest Continental is not a bad looking car, but doesn’t stir me.

IIRC according to Casino Royale, Bond drove a “blower” Bentley in battleship grey. Mulliner built a continuation series, and they’re a steal at $2mm+

[billatcrea]

My brother had a '68 Dodge Coronet R/T. In the summer of '68, we loaded 4 guys, all of our gear, and two canoes on top for a two-week trip down the Gammon and Blood Vein rivers in Manitoba. On the way up there from Minneapolis, we were either doing 80 on the road or stopped at a gas station.

[Mr. Bumble]

...of course gas was about $.30/gallon.

[John F. Carr]

I dream of a late 1950s car with tailfins. More realistically, what I dream of is a restomod, a land yacht with tailfins that drives like a modern car.

My car had its annual state inspection recently. The sign on the door to the shop said they would flunk you if you had anything except car seats on your passenger and back seats. They specifically said a dog blanket would mean rejection. ("Pass" and "reject" are the outcomes.) I put a torn receipt into a door pocket just to be safe.

[Mr. Bumble]

One like Christine?
https://wallpapercave.com/wp/wp2387133.jpg

[Frank Drackman]

Jeezo Beezo, Georgia did away with "Safety" Inspections in the 60's, you do have to smog your car in the Urban counties.

[NOVA Lawyer]

I agree, the 1968-1971 Corvette Stingray was the best styling of the entire line and of any American car.

[Randal]

American Beauty was the first sign of the post-90s cultural apocalypse. Stunningly and shamelessly self-indulgent, as though self-indulgence were itself the pinnacle of American personal and aesthetic development. It identified the looming cultural wasteland by being the first best example of it.

Compare Fight Club, released exactly two weeks later in the final months of 1999. Those two weeks were the full lunar eclipse of American post-modernism.

[Sarcastr0]

I didn't find I liked it myself, but the Unclear and Present Danger podcast goes through the post-Cold War movies of the 1990s to see what America was feeling.

Not good, as it turns out!

[Frank Drackman]

You do not talk about Fight Club!!!! I mean you do NOT talk about Fight Club!

[Drewski]

"Hey what are you are you looking at me for? She was over 18"

Not condemning you for it, but Thora Birch filmed that when she was barely 17. It was a minor controversy at the time, but all done legally with parental consent.

[AmosArch]

Nah not her. I'm talking about the blonde chick.

[hobie]

Amos 'whatabout' Arch. I'm surprised your hate is so deep that it takes you into skewering a great movie like American Beauty. A lot of characters in that movie had epiphanies leading to them being better people...except possibly the one character you relate to

[darkknight9]

With all of the crap that's happening its honestly scary to think this is just the beginning before another election cyclel

Thank God there's only 75 more days until hockey.

[AmosArch]

Yawn. Before Trump GWB was UltraMegaHitlerSatanx100^132413 who had to be stopped or the multiverse as we know it would collapse after Trump some other conservative will be UltraMegaHitlerSatanx100^132413 who has to be stopped at all costs or the multiverse as we know it will collapse. and on and on.

[Nige]

Yawn. Obama is the antichrist, Hilary drinks the blood of children, Joe Biden is some sort of meat puppet for Hilary and Obama, and on and on.

[AmosArch]

True. You get the same type of rhetoric on both sides but the leftwing rhetoric has far more unironic exposure.

[Nige]

Yes, I can't believe 'Hilary drinks the blood of children' doesn't get enough unironic exposure.

[damikesc]

Who ever said she did? Examples.

[Nige]

Pizzagate and Qanon are centred around this sort of thing.

[damikesc]

So, no examples of somebody saying she drinks the blood of children?

[David Nieporent]

Pizzagate and Qanon are centred around this sort of thing.

[Nige]

Literally Pizzagate and Qanon. There's supposed to be a video of Hilary carving up some child's face.

[Sarcastr0]

June 22-26, 2023 CPOST/NORC Nationally
Representative Survey on Understanding Support for Political
Violence in America: One out of six Republicans think the government is run by pedophiles.

[Brett Bellmore]

By, for, it can be hard to tell the difference. I guess we're just passing over the way Epstein went down for running a sex trafficking ring that apparently nobody actually was a customer of. How exactly DID that happen?

[David Nieporent]

Epstein did not go down for "running a sex trafficking ring" in the way you mean. He went down for personally sexually abusing minors.

[Sarcastr0]

I don't think you're well mentally if this is what you actually believe.

[damikesc]

Seems weird that Epstein's client list is so hidden and how the only person punished for that massive pedo sex ring is Maxwell and not a single person who partaked in it.

[Sarcastr0]

Well then, I guess that proves the government is run by pedophiles!

[Nige]

I guess being on a list isn’t sufficent grounds for prosecution. Guilt by association, yes, prosecution, no.

[OtisAH]

So in this one context we *are* allowed to investigate Turnip? Or do you just mean everyone but him should be tried?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10331943/Trump-flew-seven-times-Jeffrey-Epsteins-private-Lolita-Express-jet-flight-logs-reveal.html

[Zarniwoop]

Epstein likes to tell people that he’s a loner, a man who’s never touched alcohol or drugs, and one whose nightlife is far from energetic. And yet if you talk to Donald Trump, a different Epstein emerges. “I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy,” Trump booms from a speakerphone. “He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it — Jeffrey enjoys his social life.”

https://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/n_7912/

So do you think the GOP elected a pedophile-in-chief? How deep does the conspiracy go? Why are you covering up for pedophiles?

[damikesc]

Biden is an incestuous pedo, so tell me more, please.

At least, if his daughter's diary is to be believed.

...and when compared to Joe, it cannot help but be more accurate.

[Magister]

One widespread online rumor held that Anthony Weiner had a secret video on his laptop of a Satanic ritual showing Hillary Clinton mutilating a girl with the aid of Huma Abedin, drinking the girl’s blood while wearing masks made of the skin of her face. In the QAnon imagination, Democrats and celebrities commingle in orgies of bloodlust, while demons of the figurative and literal variety cavort their way to supreme intoxication.

https://newrepublic.com/article/159529/qanon-blood-libel-satanic-panic

In case you need a fact check (spoiler alert: False):
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/democrats-biden-suck-blood-children/

[damikesc]

1) Define "widespread"

2) I would not take Snopes' word on whether water is wet.

[Nige]

Surely the question is: why wasn't this belief, apparently equivalent to the belief that George W Bush was a warmonger and Donald Trump is corrupt and personally repulsive, get the same level of unironic exposure?

[Magister]

1) check a dictionary
2) I guess you only believe things that tell you what you want to hear; the Snopes page gives a number of links and even embeds the video of Biden's town hall on CNN where he says "I mean, QAnon: The idea that the Democrats or that Biden is hiding people and sucking the blood of children".

You can find the July 21, 2021 town hall at cnn.com, with that comment around 31:35 (link below). If CNN faked that, or there were no basis for the comment, don't you think there would have been a complete shitstorm over CNN or Biden making that up? And if I can click on what I'm sure will be right-wing BS in order to judge it, you can do the same, unless you're too fragile to risk leaving your bubble.
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2021/07/22/part-1-entire-joe-biden-town-hall-july-21-vpx.cnn

[Zarniwoop]

2) I would not take Snopes’ word on whether water is wet.

Good thing you don't have to, because Snopes cites actual sources. That you can check for yourself.

If you're not scared.

Which you are.

[Dr. Ed 2]

How much smoke can there be in the Bite Me administration before someone sends is the fire department?

People can say that the judge who refused the plea deals was appointed by Trump (and she was) but remember that this is a District Judge where approval of the State's Senators is required, and Team Brandon owns Delaware.

[gVOR08]

Where there's smoke, there's fire is generally a good rule. But not when the accusers, FOX/GOP, have the world's biggest smoke machine.

[damikesc]

They were behind a judge shooting down an exceptionally sketchy plea deal? How about the gaslighting how progressives were NOT coming for your gas stoves when they, in fact, very much are. And now your water heaters TOO.

Their power is surely beyond measure.

[Harvey Mosley]

Props for the use of "gaslighting" in this context.

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

It would've been even better if his example had actually been gaslighting.

[darkknight9]

No yawning, Just hockey.

Deep breaths people... we can make it through this together.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Mainstream America will be fine . . . and continue to improve against the wishes and efforts of conservatives.

Right-wingery, though, will not be fine. Clingers are the culture war's roadkill.

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

I am very much looking forward to hockey season, although it's probably going to be another unrewarding season for us Flyers fans. I was in elementary school when we won our last cup, now I'm retired.

[Mr. Bumble]

How long before Hunter Biden violates the terms of his release?
https://www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2023/07/Screenshot-2023-07-26-at-5.39.04-PM.png

[Armchair Lawyer]

There's a reason the secret service just can't seem to find who the cocaine came from....

[Dr. Ed 2]

Tenant A has asthma and is allergic to cigarette smoke. Tenants B, C, & D smoke and their smoke is getting into A's apartment. Does A have recourse against B, C, & D independent of recourse against the landlord?

[Mr. Bumble]

Depends on what they're smoking.

[Magister]

Probably depends on the terms of the lease(s). Most likely recourse is to proceed against the landlord to get out of the lease, as it seems unlikely that the other tenants can be stopped from smoking or that the landlord will then evict them for it, even if the lease promised the building would be no smoking.

[John F. Carr]

"What's the law now? You can only smoke in your apartment, under a blanket, with all the lights out?" – Denis Leary

Sorry, no substantive response.

[hobie]

Dr. Ed, if you spent less time here and more time on your client's cases, you wouldn't have to be hitting up the malcontents here for legal advice

[David Nieporent]

Dr. Ed doesn't have clients. He's a janitor at a college in Massachusetts.

[Dr. Ed 2]

It's not just the Soros DAs that are corrupt:
https://commonwealthmagazine.org/politics/for-progressives-boston-city-councilors-becoming-awkward-embarrassment/

[Krayt]

Fundamental Theorem of Government Corruption is not an unfortunate side effect of the wielding of power. It is the purpose for it since day one, when some thugs picked up branches and wandered down to the crosspaths where two farmers were trading, and demanded the farmers pay their fair share.

[Sarcastr0]

Fundamental Theorem of Krayt is he loves this made up philosophical treatise no matter how unglued from the real world, and also loves to signal his antigovernmental virtue and thus will post his it whenever he can.

[Dr. Ed 2]

What's the chance these UFOs are actually generated images?

We can create ghost images on radar, and visible light is just a different wavelength on the same electromagnetic radiation.

[Zarniwoop]

Dr Ed admits "I know sh*t about physics" without actually saying "I know sh*t about physics".

[Michael P]

Bruce Schneier is Very Concerned about rich people jumping over subway gates: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2023/07/new-york-using-ai-to-detect-subway-fare-evasion.html

[Ed Grinberg]

If we spent just one-tenth of the effort we spend prosecuting the poor on prosecuting the rich, it would be a very different world.

It sure sounds like he wants to prosecute "the rich" for being "the rich" (while ignoring crimes committed by "the poor").
compare (source):
"Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honor the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour."

[Nige]

That's obviously not what he's saying, it doesn't even 'sound like' he's saying that, but white collar crime steals immeasurably more money from people than crime perpetrated by poor people.

[Michael P]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/white-house-responds-claims-bidens-son-hunter-received-preferential-tr-rcna90841

The president was never in business with his son, and the White House had not interfered in the DOJ investigation of whether Hunter broke laws. "Nothing has changed" and the answer is the same as before, when the president had no conversations with Hunter about Hunter's business dealings and there was no political influence whatsoever in the investigation.

Hm....

[Nige]

The croakingly sarcastic conversations with confused and self-contradicting straw men will continue until most people continue not to care.

[Armchair Lawyer]

Just because Hunter put his dad on speakerphone when he was discussing business with his "clients..." That doesn't mean Joe was involved, nope, no sir.

[Brett Bellmore]

Democrats don't particularly care about Biden's corruption, but they have enough lingering concern about optics that they're going to continue the pro-forma denials for a while yet.

[Armchair Lawyer]

I mean, if you honestly wanted to get to the core of this, you'd do the following.

1. Subpoena the business records and tax records for Joe's and Jill's S-corps. Figure out where all the income came from.
2. Do the same for their bank accounts.
3. Take a look at Joe's other expenses (electricity, hotel rooms, etc), and see who was paying for them. Whether it was Joe, or if Hunter way paying for them.

Then you could figure out if Joe was benefiting from Hunter's income.

[Brett Bellmore]

Yeah, you could do that, if Joe didn't control the DOJ.

We actually have enough testimony from Hunter's business partners to live very little doubt about the matter, though.

[bernard11]

We actually have enough testimony from Hunter’s business partners to live very little doubt about the matter, though.

Could you link to this testimony, please, because I think that, as usual, you are getting your information from some garbage RW site.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

It's his poor vision. He can't fucking read anymore, so he just inserts whatever words he comes up with on the fly and then comes here to tell everyone what new 'truth' he discovered.

[BrianL.]

If you did that and didn't find evidence that Joe was benefiting from Hunter's income, people would still say that he was, he just figured out how to hide it.

[SimonP]

Speaking more precisely, "Democrats" don't spend as much time as you do in the right-wing outrage-media echo chamber, so can't be expected to be as concerned about the same things you've been whipped up into a froth over.

The only allegations and "evidence" I've seen about Biden's "corruption" are these crumbs of information - a board seat Hunter had, a deal Hunter participated in, a whistleblower who wasn't, a House investigation yielding a nothingburger, etc. How all of that amounts to a claim of political corruption - and one more salient and pressing than what's been plain with the Trump family - is not clear, not from what's penetrated through the media I consume.

And I'm not saying that my sources are more authoritative than yours, Brett, but I am saying that I have little confidence that you'd be able to offer any kind of account or evidence that is neither (i) an overwhelming data-dump that would be impossible to digest, from which you've cherry-picked putatively "incriminating" facts nor (ii) a source that has done that cherry-picking for you, stringing "facts" together with unsourced assertions, non sequiturs, and leading insinuations.

That is the basic problem here. Credible media outlets with every incentive to publish a blockbuster story about the President's corruption have not done so. You no doubt view that as incriminating in itself, but you will not be able to provide any alternative account that can be trusted to have done the diligent reporting work or careful parsing of information that a credible media outlet would treat as essential to their reporting.

You will no doubt bitch about that, too - wah, wah, Democrats don't believe anything not spoonfed to them by the MSM - but the point is just to say that, it's not that "Democrats don't particularly care about Biden's corruption," but that the people who do claim to care about it have an astonishingly poor way of reporting on it, almost as though they don't care to persuade anyone not already convinced.

[damikesc]

Tell me how Russia swapped the election in 2016.

"Credible media outlets" covered that extensively for years.

[SimonP]

Nobody claimed that "Russia swapped the election in 2016."

What they claimed was that Russia sought to interfere in the election, and they did. What they claimed was that Russia sought to coordinate with the Trump campaign, in order to defeat Hillary, and they did.

In your mind, you've chosen to reduce the discourse to some claim that Russia somehow swung the election by trolling Facebook. While some may have claimed that Russia's meddling on social media was more effective in swaying opinion than it actually turned out to be, that was not the dominant narrative.

[David Nieporent]

Speaking more precisely, “Democrats” don’t spend as much time as you do in the right-wing outrage-media echo chamber, so can’t be expected to be as concerned about the same things you’ve been whipped up into a froth over.

You'll note that all of the specific allegations are about the "Biden family" rather than Joe Biden, because they have no evidence of Joe Biden actually doing anything wrong.

The closest they have is a statement by an anonymous person that someone else told him that Joe Biden had been paid $5 million, and this someone else also told him that the money's path was so convoluted that nobody would ever be able to untangle it. Convenient, isn't it?

[bevis the lumberjack]

You’re right. Biden allowed Hunter to sell access and influence - his name - without any expectation of having to provide anything or receiving anything for himself. That sure passes the smell test.

And don’t they actually have the sworn testimony of one of Hunter’s partners that Joe was in in the deal?

[Nige]

'Biden allowed Hunter to sell access and influence'

We're just taking these claims at face value are we? Cool, cool.

[David Nieporent]

"Allowed"? As opposed to what? Telling Hunter that if didn't stop doing that he'd be grounded for a week with no TV?

And yeah, it actually does pass the smell test that Joe would say, "I don't know what you're doing and I don't want to know what you're doing."

And don’t they actually have the sworn testimony of one of Hunter’s partners that Joe was in in the deal?

No.

[bevis the lumberjack]

Biden has change his position this week from “I had no idea about his business” to “I never interfered in his business”. He knew.

It’s your position that Hunter was able to get millions out of foreigners without ever providing a benefit? Are rich people in other countries really that gullible?

https://cbsaustin.com/news/nation-world/after-multiple-delays-hunter-biden-business-partner-set-to-testify-on-capitol-hill-devon-archer-conspiracy-theory-burisma-president-joe-biden-house-republicans-jim-jordan-james-komer-speakerphone-ukraine-viktor-shokin-corruption

[Sarcastr0]

This is a piece about what the GOP promised the NY Post their testimony will show.

That’s not proof of anything other than the GOP is really going hard against Hunter.

[David Nieporent]

Biden has change his position this week from “I had no idea about his business” to “I never interfered in his business”. He knew.

Those are not incompatible with each other, so no, it isn't a changed position.

[bevis the lumberjack]

“I didn’t know they existed” and “I didn’t interfere” are not the same thing.

If there was no change, the second statement wouldn’t have been necessary. Just let the first one ride without even bringing it up.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

You're a fucking idiot, Bevis.

Biden's remarks are not incongruous, and YOU don't get to declare that he's only allowed to give a single answer otherwise "it's all a lie!"

If or when he contradicts himself, then you can come here and cry about it.

[bernard11]

"I went to a movie Friday night" and "I stayed home Saturday night" are also two different statements.

[Voize]

One of the more believable accusations is that Hunter successfully conned companies in countries with a history of corruption into giving him money with the expectation that his connections would pay off for them. Why wouldn't they believe it? That's how business was done in Ukraine and Romania, after all.

But although it might be another stain on Hunter, it isn't evidence of any real involvement by the president. If instead Joe had given Hunter a White House role, or ordered staff to give Hunter a TS security clearance in spite of him failing his FBI background check, those would have been real red flags and deserving of a full investigation.

[David Nieporent]

Yes, but what kind of idiotic president would order that one of his offspring that couldn't pass a background check should get a security clearance?

[Jason Cavanaugh]

It's a trap!

[jb]

Kids and relatives of famous people trade on their name all the time. In fact, you don't even have to be famous for this: kids at school say shit like "my Dad is going to beat up your Dad".

It turns out kids can claim whatever they want about their parents; until you actually have some evidence the parent did something, it's not really representative of anything.

(Also it is completely mind-boggling that anyone who thinks that Hunter trading on his father's name is disqualifying for Joe Biden can turn around and think it's not disqualifying for Donald Trump and the amount of influence peddling he and his family engaged in while he President. I know that's not you, Bevis, but it does characterize most of the people raising these concerns about Hunter.)

[bevis the lumberjack]

Do those kids and relatives get tens of millions of dollars for nothing? If so, I’ve got a post-retirement hobby to look into.

[Zarniwoop]

Jared K got $2 Billion (with a B). Does that count?

[grb]

Speaking of potential conflict of interest, Kushner virtually ran the Trump transition team after Chris Christie’s star burnt out following Bridgegate. There were plenty of other figures like Flynn, Giuliani and Sessions (it was a toxic waste dump from the start), but Jared became the most important.

Now we turn to the simultaneous phenomena of 666. Nope; I’m not talking about the Antichrist, but the address on Madison Avenue instead. After his daddy went to prison. Kushner bought the skyscraper for about two billion, most of which was heavily leveraged debt. For a while he had big dreams – like having the late Zaha Hadid totally reskin the building (for the architecturally illiterate, she was quite the thing then). But by the time of the transition, 666 was a massive anchor whose rope was coiled around Jared’s neck.

Debt was coming due and the headline on business pages across the world said 666 could singlehandedly destroy Kushner’s company. So Jared went on a global tour begging for a white knight. He pleaded for cash from the Qatar government, a prominent UAE emir who had been that country’s Foreign Minister, and Chinese companies directly tied to the rulers in Beijing. Some Qatari officials think the U.S. position on their country’s feud with Saudi Arabia was heavily impacted by their refusal to bail-out 666.

In the end, Kusher found domestic financing to save his corporate skin, which is slightly reassuring. But it’s fascinating to compare this government-private sector swamp of business panic, abject beggary, and hundreds of millions at stake with little Hunter Biden’s piddling fees selling his name in Ukraine.

[David Nieporent]

Speaking of potential conflict of interest, Kushner virtually ran the Trump transition team after Chris Christie’s star burnt out following Bridgegate.

You've got that wrong. It's true that Trump cited Bridgegate as the reason for pushing Christie out, but Bridgegate was known and fully public before Christie was appointed to run the transition team. Trump couldn't care less about political corruption like that. Hell, he probably admired it.

What happened was that Christie was put in charge of the transition team when nobody cared about the transition team because they thought Trump was going to lose bigly. But Kushner hated Christie because Christie had put his dad in jail, so once Trump won and the transition team became an important job, Kushner called his daddy-in-law and forced Christie out.

[bernard11]

And don’t they actually have the sworn testimony of one of Hunter’s partners that Joe was in in the deal?

Brett thinks so, or read it somewhere on the internet. Given that he interprets news in his own special way, I doubt it.

Do you have a link, or are you believing BS?

[bevis the lumberjack]

I posted it two hours ago. C’mon.

[bernard11]

What you posted is anything but sworn testimony. Plus it's not clear that it's happened yet.

The guy is going to speak to GOP lawmakers behind closed doors and will provide details "about meetings he witnessed that were attended by Joe Biden either in person or via speakerphone when Hunter would call his father and introduce him to foreign business partners or prospective investors.

Let's see. Under oath? No. In public? No? Subject to cross-examination? No.

So we (or you, rather) are going to rely on Jordan or Comer's account of what this guy told a group of Republicans in private under these conditions.

And you claim that's "sworn testimony?" It's bullshit.

Further, even the allegations say nothing about Joe being in on the deals. Hunter called him to introduce him to his partners. He arranged a dinner. They are even dragging out the Shokin lies. BFD.

[apedad]

Dear God,

There's a group of guys who wear dresses, drink wine, and have same-gender sex.

And they're causing a huge problem down here.

They're called priests and bishops and they (sometimes) like to rape little boys.

What the hell man!

Can you come down and handle these fuckers? (Is smite the right term?)

Mucho beaucoup,

apedad

ps. There's this thing called Mega Millions and . . . well you read minds so you know where I'm going with this.

a

[John F. Carr]

God just smote Sinéad O'Connor so I think he's taking the other side.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Your God is a paltry thing. An illusory, bigoted, obsolete thing.

Have fun during the rest of the culture war, clinger!

[Frank Drackman]

Not kind or gentle Jerry, but unfortunately, probably true.
What Surpreme Being worth his Divinity would 1: Create a Jerry Sandusky, 2: Let his rain of terror go on for so long.
but I think one day you'll find out the greatest trick the Devil ever pulled.

Frank

[Randal]

And God said: "Reserve and cleanse the little boys and girls, especially those underprivileged, for they shall be the provenance of the clergy, for whatever use shall be made of them."

[Magister]

What did God have against her? That she tore up a picture of the pope over 30 years ago to protest sexual abuse of children in the Catholic Church? God smote that pope eighteen years ago (perhaps because he apologized for sexual abuse in the Catholic Church in 2001?).

[John F. Carr]

I can not speak for God. Personally, I would have let her live.

[Magister]

You said He smote her, so I assumed you had a source (or Source) of information. That you thought it was a smiting in the absence of divine revelation on the matter suggests that you had some reason in mind why she would be smote; what was that reason?

[shawn_dude]

"would be smote" -- something you'd only ever expect to hear said in a Catholic school English class on they day they're teaching tense.

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

Muting her might've been a blessing.

[Nige]

Yeah, God's pro-child rape? Would explain a lot.

[Frank Drackman]

Nige-bot worships John Wayne Gacy

[Nige]

edgebot trying to prosletyse for his creepy church

[hobie]

apedad, are you referring to the Catholics or the enormous Southern Baptist sex scandal that blew open last year? I get confused which denomination is raping more children. Oh wait...drag queens.

[Michael P]

"There is an easily startled, confused creature in the White House prone to fits of anger. There is also a German Shepherd." https://twitter.com/nypost/status/1684153424852447232

In the world of ordinary people, how much liability would a dog owner have when they got rid of one aggressive dog only to raise a second that also bites people?

[Longtobefree]

https://babylonbee.com/news/biden-put-down-after-biting-another-baby

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Mainstream Americans have our better movies, authors, musicians, television shows, comedians, etc.

Clingers are forced to settle for Gutfeld, the Babylon Bee, contemporary Christian music, drawlin' and twangin’ country artists, Jeff Foxworthy, the Left Behind series, televangelists, and Rob Schneider.

It’s almost enough to make one feel sorry for the clingers.

[John F. Carr]

There is a common saying in defense of pit bulls and the like, it's the owner and not the dog. That is not ordinarily the law, although some jurisdictions ban breed discrimination in some contexts. When it comes to liability the common rule is based on the individual dog's past behavior, the "one bite" rule. The owner's poor dog training skills are not important. If your dog bites somebody without just cause you are responsible for keeping the dog out of trouble in the future. If you train your dog to bite members of the deep state, Republicans, or the general public, then it's a different story. Ditto if you try to get the dog to bite somebody.

[bernard11]

The whole “owner not the dog” business has a measure of truth to it. (Disclosure: I had a Shepherd-Husky mix who was quite friendly and non-aggressive, though the one time he was threatened by another dog he quickly prepared to tear the other dog's throat out.)

The problem is one of selection bias. If you want a mean dog you get one of the breeds that has a reputation for being mean. Used to be Shepherds, maybe Dobermans, now pit bulls.

The point is, the reputation, whether it starts out accurate or not, gets reinforced. Everyone thinks pit bulls are mean, so if you want mean you get a pit bull.

A parallel situation happens with cars. Give a brand a reputation for safety – Volvo, say – and drivers who place a high value on safety buy Volvos, and drive them safely. So they seem to get even safer.

[Michael P]

This month's "yanny or laurel" or "white and gold or blue and black dress" is courtesy of Joe Biden: Is he saying "we ended cancer as we know it" or "we'd end cancer as we know it"?

https://www.foxnews.com/media/biden-skewered-claiming-effectively-ended-cancer-know-why-havent-adults-intervened

[Commenter_XY]

Re: Hunter Biden plea deal falling apart

Q: How often does this kind of thing happen in Court? Where the attorneys just look at each other, look at the judge, and say: We have no deal after we thought we had a deal.

And what’s with the lifetime immunity thing.

[Michael P]

It seems obvious to me that they thought the judge would rubber-stamp a corrupt plea agreement, and were caught flat-footed when she bothered to read the details.

[Nige]

I always love it when the fix is supposed to be in, it falls apart, and somehow this continues to prove that the fix is in.

[VinniUSMC]

We already knew that you have trouble with reading comprehension. No need to remind us.

[Nige]

Oh, so the fix isn't in and the deal falling apart is proof that the fix isn't in? Refreshing.

[David Nieporent]

Newsflash: stop believing MAGA silliness. Nothing "fell apart." There was a brief hiccup, and the plea will still go through in short order.

[Nige]

They’re claiming the deal, the sketchiest deal in human history, fell apart like the Hindenberg AND the fix is in so that Hunter can skate on his appalling crimes, the worst crimes in human history. What can you do but point and laugh?

[Commenter_XY]

So David, you ever make a plea deal for a client that fell apart in court front of the judge?

You practice in the Second Circuit. Ever see it happen?

[David Nieporent]

Again, it didn't "fall apart." Read the Popehat link below; he explains it. It was badly drafted, and the judge wants clarification, both for herself and for the benefit of the parties. But it was not a "Hey, wait, this is an overly generous deal and I'm not going to approve it because Corruption MAGA MAGA. Hunter deserves more punishment and this is going to trial."

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

This had been another episode of "The Cruel Bearer of Facts Ruthlessly Shreds Another Partisan Narrative." Brought to you by the producer of "Simple Answers to Stupid Questions."

[Commenter_XY]

Badly drafted? That's it? Like what, a comma got misplaced or somebody dyslexed a noun and an adjective sort of thing? C'mon. 🙂

Ok, let me re-phrase. You object to fall apart. I will sustain your objection (heh). David, have you ever seen a judge in the Second Circuit 'ixnay' a badly drafted plea deal right there in the courtroom? And the two lawyers involved looking like total stunods? I mean, if I am Hunter, I am looking at my million dollar lawyer and saying, "WTF?"

Does this kind of thing happen a lot?

[ThePublius]

I don't get your point. Are you saying that there was nothing unusual, nothing corrupt, about the deal coming from those prosecutors? It's clear that the prosecution and the defendant's lawyers are on the same team here, and they just drew the wrong judge.

[Nige]

The deal may have been cosy, but actual evidence of corruption is, as usual, in short supply.

[damikesc]

A lifetime immunity deal combined with reducing the FELONIES (which is extremely rarely done in plea deals) does not sound the slightest bit dirty to you?

Really?

[Nige]

Sounds like he's got good lawyers, which the wealthy can afford, but also nobody's especially worked up about his specific crimes.

[Frank Drackman]

Nige-bot projecting his interests to others. As long as the Prosecutors are "Worked Up" thats all that matters.

[Nige]

rare agreement with edgebot about what matters. Nobody else really cares.

[damikesc]

Can you name a single example in history where this was offered?

Must be nice to have good lawyers AND be the son of the person in charge of the prosecutors. I guess those other guilty folks should have made sure to be a Biden...

[Nige]

You're claiming no-one in all of history has ever been offered a cosy plea deal?

His Dad is in charge of the independant special prosecuter appointed by Trump?

[TwelveInchPianist]

No, his Dad is in charge of the US Attorney appointed by Trump.

You see, Biden took over the DOJ a little while ago. Maybe you missed it.

[Nige]

And he let them keep up the investigation and charge his son? Sounds proper.

[David Nieporent]

Weiss, though appointed by Trump, is not an independent prosecutor (which doesn't exist anymore) or a special prosecutor. Not formally.

[Nige]

You've corrected me on that brain fart before, too...

[Randal]

All plea deals come with lifetime immunity. That's the whole point.

[damikesc]

From all crimes including ones not known at the time? Including crimes not even connected to the plea deal, like the obvious FARA violations?

No.

They do not include that.

[Sarcastr0]

Blanket immunity as you describe it does not seem to have been part of the deal.

Maybe the pedophiles that control our government put it in there, and only you can see it.

[OtisAH]

Not that it matters to you in the slightest but not only was there no blanket immunity deal, the immunity offered was in fact against Biden’s interests.

[Frank Drackman]

Well duh, he would have to abstain from Alcohol/Drugs, like that's going to happen.

[TwelveInchPianist]

That appears to be what the disagreement was over. The defense thought they'd been offered blanket immunity, the prosecution disagreed.

[jb]

TIP--if that's the case, it's hard to take ThePublius's contention that the prosecution and defense are on the same team very seriously.

[David Nieporent]

A lifetime immunity deal

I always love when people mindlessly repeat talking points they don't understand. There are two ways to interpret the phrase 'lifetime immunity deal.' One does not reflect the Biden case; the other is a tautology.

All immunity deals are "lifetime immunity deals," if the phrase means that someone will never be prosecuted for the things the immunity deal covers. No immunity deals — including this one — are "lifetime immunity deals" if the phrase means that someone will never be prosecuted for anything they do in the rest of their lifetime.

[OtisAH]

Plea deals are not unusual, no. But considering the feds rarely indict anyone under the charges Hunter faces, there is definitely something unusual going on. Like indicting someone under the charges brought, which is rarely done.

If you get in the weeds, which you won’t do or care to understand if you do, you also learn that actions and/or statements made by the whistleblowers left concern in DOJ that the case against Biden might be rather shaky. So some unusual happenings, just not the ones you wish they were.

[Tom for equal rights]

On the flip side - Judge sullivan wanted to enforce a corrupt prosecution of a non crime - even after the prosecutors admitted the prosecution was corrupt.

[David Nieporent]

Yet another “fact” in the MAGA world that bears no resemblance to actual facts. It is true that Flynn's nutjob lawyer Sidney Powell alleged corruption right and left. The DOJ, however, did not "admit" any such thing. Not even a little bit. What they did, in tanking the case after Trump had the prosecutors replaced, was say that Flynn's lies were not material.

Lying to the federal government is, in fact a crime.

[Tom for equal rights]

David - you know better than that -

1) 302 notes show investigators knew flynn told the truth
2) notes show the prosecution blackmailed Flynn into guilty plea on false premises
3) appeals court ordered sullivan to dismiss the case)

In the ruling, two of three judges on a panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ordered the trial judge overseeing the matter, Emmet G. Sullivan, to immediately dismiss the case without further review. The third accused his colleagues of “grievously” overstepping their powers.

[David Nieporent]

1) 302 notes do not show Flynn told the truth. In fact, they knew for a fact that he lied, because they had the transcript of the call. (And Flynn admitted under oath that he lied!) What the notes reflect is the agents' assessment that Flynn didn't look like he was lying. As in, he didn't look shifty or anything like that. All that means is that he's a good liar, not that his undisputedly false statements were true.

2) There was no "blackmail" or "false premises." No such thing was revealed by any "notes."

3) The appeals court ordered Sullivan to dismiss because the DOJ decided it didn't want to proceed with the case. There was no ruling about the merits of the prosecution one way or the other.

[not guilty]

And that panel opinion of the D.C. Circuit was vacated upon the granting of rehearing en banc. The full Court remanded the case to Judge Sullivan for further proceedings, expressly rejecting Flynn's request that it be assigned to a different judge on remand.

[grb]

And Flynn didn’t just lie to FBI agents. Just days after the calls themselves, he was lying about them to other members of the Trump transition. Later he would lie about them to Vice President Pence. How much this was influenced by the tens of thousands he pocketed from the Putin government just a year before, we’ll never know. But Trump himself decided he couldn’t trust Flynn, and that’s saying something. Pathological liars like Trump tend to have lax standards on that sorta thing.

Meanwhile, more charges have just been announced on the Trump document case :

“The new court documents say that De Oliveira and Nauta moved approximately 30 boxes of classified materials from Trump’s residence to the storage room in June of last year. The following day, the filing says, the two loaded several boxes of documents onto an aircraft taking Trump and his family on a summer trip.

But when De Oliveira did a voluntary interview with FBI agents this past January, he repeatedly denied even knowing about the boxes, the indictment says.

Later in June 2022, De Oliveira asked an unidentified Trump employee how long Mar-a-Lago’s server retained surveillance footage, and then told him “the boss” wanted footage deleted, according to the document. The employee allegedly responded that they did not know how to do that, nor did they think they were allowed to. De Oliveira allegedly asked the employee to keep the conversation private”

[David Nieporent]

De Oliveira allegedly asked the employee to keep the conversation private”

When Nauta texted someone to say that he was secretly headed to Mar-a-Lago [the timing is consistent with the time when he was frantically moving boxes to hide them], he put several "Shush" emojis in the text message. Because that's how these things work.

[not guilty]

It is infrequent for a trial judge to disapprove a proposed plea agreement, but it happens occasionally. From what has been reported, I think I understand the judge's concerns about the court being involved in the diversion agreement regarding the gun charge.

Whether the plea agreement would or would not preclude additional charges should have been worked out in advance of submitting the plea to the court.

[Brett Bellmore]

It surely didn't help that Hunter's defense attempted a fraud on the court, and got caught ahead of the hearing.

Judge says member of Hunter Biden’s legal team ‘misrepresented her identity’ on eve of plea deal hearing

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Gee Brett,

You're awfully quick to believe the accusation being universally (and formally) denied by the law firm in question.

What moved the needle for you, exactly? Was it the name "Biden" that made you immediately believe something totally aligned with your natural partisan stupidity?

[Brett Bellmore]

If there's a factual dispute between the judge's clerk and the defendant's law firm, why would you expect the judge to take the law firm's word over their clerk's word? So, of course the judge is going to proceed on the assumption their clerk is telling the truth about what happened. Are you going to claim that the law firm is denying it out of a disinterested concern for the truth, rather than because they could get sanctioned over it?

"What moved the needle for you, exactly?"

Maybe the fact that Hunter's law firm is kind of sketchy?

I'm arguing that the incident probably was the reason the judge took a close look at the deal instead of rubber stamping it.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Someone smoking marijuana is 'sketchy' to you?

Ok, boomer.

Imagine if the dude was drinking a glass of beer. OMG!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_cannabis_by_U.S._jurisdiction

Get with the times, old man.

[Brett Bellmore]

Yeah, the lawyer for a guy with a drug problem smoking pot about the time he meets with his client seems sketchy to me.

[damikesc]

Also giving a client millions in benefits when the client is so "broke" he had child support payments slashed significantly seems exceedingly odd to me.

[Frank Drackman]

That powder Cocaine isn't cheap (so I'm told)

[Sarcastr0]

Smells like reefer madness up on here.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I would have expected a disaffected, autistic, awkward, antisocial, bigoted, delusional, obsolete loser such as Mr. Bellmore to be more sympathetic toward someone with Hunter Biden's problems.

I guess clingers just tend to be comprehensively lousy people.

[David Nieporent]

Brett manages to get every fact wrong, including the fact that this guy is not "Hunter's law firm."

Hunter's law firm is Latham & Watkins, a white shoe law firm that obviously did not do what is claimed.

And, no, that's not "probably" why the judge did anything. Please stop making shit up about topics you don't understand, Brett.

[Armchair Lawyer]

Firm does something vaguely sketchy, denies doing it....

Film at 11.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

People deny things all the time.

The Volokh Conspirators deny they are bigots. So does their racist, homophobic, immigrant-hating, antisemitic, misogynistic, Islamophobic target audience.

[Frank Drackman]

Don't forget Jerry Sandusky, Jerry Sandusky.

[ThePublius]

The law firm that did it didn't even say they didn't do it, they said it was a "miscommunication." Ha, ha. You are so quick to take Biden's side. Look at the evidence, transcripts, etc.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Well aren't you a fucking ignorant clown?

Responding the judge’s threat of sanctions, Hunter Biden’s lawyers argued that they weren’t warranted because “there was no misrepresentation” made to the court, and that the entire incident was “completely unintentional.”

Jessica Bengels, a staffer of the law firm representing Hunter Biden who had reached out to the court earlier on Tuesday, said in an affidavit submitted to the judge that she never told anyone that she was working with attorneys representing the Republican committee chairman.

“I am completely confident that I never indicated that I was calling from Mr. Kittila’s firm or that I worked with him in any way,” Bengels said in the affidavit, referring to Smith lawyer Ted Kittila.

Bengels said she had two phone calls with two court clerks, and said “there may have been some confusion” between the officials that led to a “mistaken understanding” about her identity.

What did you have to say about the facts of the situation again? That's what I thought.

[Mr. Bumble]

Sure Jason, and let me be the first to say that Devon Archer did not kill himself.

[VinniUSMC]

Well aren’t you a fucking ignorant clown?

Quote describing exactly what Publius wrote.

What did you have to say about the facts of the situation again? That’s what I thought.

The facts, the ones that Publius accurately described?

What do you have to say now? Fucking moron.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

What do I have to say? How about: Learn to read.

“Jessica Bengels, a staffer of the law firm representing Hunter Biden who had reached out to the court earlier on Tuesday, said in an affidavit submitted to the judge that she never told anyone that she was working with attorneys representing the Republican committee chairman.”

That sure sounds to me like a straight-up denial. Even for an ex-Marine you’re a fucking idiot.

[VinniUSMC]

Of course, you could just read the next two paragraphs. I won't even bother quoting it, or explaining any further, since you have such great reading comprehension.

Must really sting to be dumber than a fucking idiot Marine.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Reading Rainbow time for the crybaby:

Publius claimed that they "didn't even say they didn't do it." In fact, the staffer alleged to have made the call stated in an affidavit, under penalty of perjury, that she did not do it.

You really should stay in your li'l lane. Big boys don't always have time to explain shit multiple times just so you might understand it once.

[Gandydancer]

No, Bengels wrote, “I am completely confident that I never indicated that I was calling from Mr. Kittila’s firm or that I worked with him in any way.” This is not a denial that when she realized that the clerk had understood her to say that she represented Kittela she didn’t take advantage of the situatiuon to get the amicus brief withdrawn, which is what happened. I’m still waiting for her to deny that she understood that the brief was being withdrawn because, if she did know that, then it’s clear that she knew the clerk was acting on a false impression of her authority.

[Kazinski]

Yeah kind.of weird though someone from an opposing trying to remove a brief filed by an opposing law firm from the docket before the judge is going to make a ruling on accepting a plea.

[Sarcastr0]

If what you think happened occurred, those lawyers would be in big trouble.

Is the judge in on it?

[David Nieporent]

For the record, it was not filed by an "opposing law firm." Nor were they trying to remove a brief. It was an amicus filed by some scumbag GOP congressperson, and he had attached tax records that Latham & Watkins were saying should've been redacted.

[David Nieporent]

How stupid a conspiracy theorist do you have to be to think that someone called and gave their own name — which can be readily found on their firm's website — but claimed to work for the other side?

[Kazinski]

the judge certainly found it believable otherwise she wouldn't have demanded an explanation and threatened sanctions.

[David Nieporent]

And once they provided an explanation, did she issue sanctions? No, because the explanation makes sense and the allegation was absurd.

[Kazinski]

The allegation was from court staff:
https://twitter.com/mirandadevine/status/1683991220463497216/photo/4

[David Nieporent]

I know who the allegation was from. But it was obviously a misunderstanding on the staff's part.

Even if someone were going to do what the clerk alleged — which doesn't make any sense anyway — she obviously wouldn't do using her own name.

[Tom for equal rights]

Jason Cavanaugh 2 hours ago
Flag Comment Mute User
"Gee Brett,
You’re awfully quick to believe the accusation being universally (and formally) denied by the law firm in question."

JC - That was certainly a believable denial -

Not!

[Sarcastr0]

That doesn’t seem to be related to the judge’s issues with the deal at all, actually. Nor should it.

[Brett Bellmore]

No, I'm not saying it was central to his concerns. I think it contributed to him looking closely enough to HAVE concerns.

[Sarcastr0]

I don’t think there is any evidence her issues had anything to do with that.

[David Nieporent]

Brett knows so much about what the judge is thinking, thanks to his careful analysis of the events of the hearing, that he couldn't even figure out that the judge was a woman.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Don't forget the secret Global Immunity deal. That was pretty weird.

[Commenter_XY]

not guilty, has that ever happened to you? You were a criminal defense atty for 28 years, right? Ever have a deal blow up like that in front of a judge?

(I am going to go out on a limb and say: NFW. That would never happen to not guilty. Not in a million years. Not when I consider the throughness and detail of your answers to my questions)

[Sarcastr0]

This is federal, state level experience might not transfer.

[not guilty]

Most of my practice was in state court. I do not recall a judge declining to approve a proffered guilty plea agreement.

[Mr. Bumble]

So go a bit further. Have you ever seen a plea agreement like the one (reportedly) offered to Biden?

[not guilty]

Not that I can recall. I tried only one failure to file income tax returns case, and no offer was made prior to trial. (The defendant had a prior conviction for the same offense.) But here is some interesting commentary: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/07/hunter-biden-sweetheart-deal-irs-investigator-nope.html

[damikesc]

The same guy calling for RICO charges against Trump in 2019?

Yeah, sounds solid....

[David Nieporent]

I can think of one public one that people should've heard of: the kids for cash scandal in Pennsylvania. Quoting from Wikipedia:

Original, negotiated plea agreements called for both judges to serve up to seven years in prison, pay fines and restitution, and accept responsibility for the crimes.[1] However, on July 30, 2009, Judge Edwin M. Kosik of Federal District Court in nearby Scranton rejected the plea agreement, citing "post-guilty plea conduct and expressions from the defendants" that he ruled did not satisfy the terms of the agreement. Kosik wrote that Conahan and Ciavarella continued to deny their crimes even in the face of overwhelming evidence, and therefore did not merit sentences that were well below federal sentencing guidelines.[24][5] Attorneys for the two judges brought a motion requesting reconsideration of the judge's rejection of the plea agreement.[25] The motion was denied on August 24, 2009, and Ciavarella and Conahan subsequently withdrew their guilty pleas, an action which eventually resulted in a jury trial for Ciavarella and additional charges against the former judges.[26]

[Armchair Lawyer]

The plea deal was...unusual. For a few reasons.

1. It was binding on the judge. That's....odd. Usually, what happens in a plea deal is that the prosecution says "we'll recommend this sentence if you plea guilty." But the judge can sentence differently if he or she wants. Having a plea deal that is binding on the judge (and removes their discretion) is pretty unusual.

2. There are also questions about the pre-trial diversion program, and its constitutionality.

3. And of course, there was the open-ended immunity from all crimes clause.

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/holdall-reasons-hunter-bidens-sweetheart-deal-collapsed

[Frank Drackman]

Maybe they can have Hunter's trial during the Primary Season.

[Sarcastr0]

Good lord read a normal source of news.
Those are not the issues the judge had with the deal. And there was no open ended immunity clause - that was one of the main issues!

[Michael P]

Hunter's lawyers sure thought there was such a clause. It looked enough like one for Judge Noreika to ask very pointed questions about it.

[Sarcastr0]

It was at best ambiguous. That seems well established.

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

Apparently, Judge Noreika's concern rested entirely on the fact that the two sides were not in complete agreement as to the terms of the deal. Do you have a good source that there even was an "open-ended immunity from all crimes clause." The written plea agreement has not been made public, so I'd be curious where you and Armchair are even getting that.

[Michael P]

You are 100% wrong. https://twitter.com/willscharf/status/1684331594864025602

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

Ah, that's your good source. A MAGA guy and Republican activist running for Missouri AG. What motive would he possibly have to fuel the corrupt Biden Administration narrative? Do yourself a favor, and read the Popehat summary of the situation. Then you wouldn't appear such a fool.

[jb]

Does anyone actually bother to read any of the documents in question?

Here's the actual agreement docs:

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/07/26/proposed-hunter-biden-plea-agreement-00108426

Importantly, here's the language around "immunity":

The United States agrees not to criminally prosecute Biden, outside the terms of this Agreement, for any federal crimes encompassed by the attached Statement of Facts (Attachment A) and the Statement of Facts attached as Exhibit 1 to the Memorandum of Plea Agreement filed this same day. This Agreement does not provide any protection against prosecution for any future conduct by Biden or by any of his affiliated businesses

(emphasis mine)

So the agreement very clearly limit its scope to specific conduct associated with the Statement of Facts (i.e. it doesn't apply to any other criminal behavior he may have already committed). Biden's lawyers can think it says whatever they want I guess, but it doesn't seem remotely ambiguous to me and the prosecution team has claimed throughout that they're still investigating and leaving the door open for additional charges.

[Armchair Lawyer]

Yes, I read it. It's....pretty broad immunity... Here's more

"Publicly, this pretrial diversion agreement was described as applying just to the unlawful possession of a firearm charge. This was a wild mischaracterization of the agreement. Included in the agreement was a provision that bound the United States to not prosecute Biden “for any federal crimes encompassed by . . . the Statement of Facts” attached to the Plea Agreement.

The referred-to Statement of Facts includes: Hunter’s role with and compensation from Burisma; Hunter’s role with and compensation from Chinese private equity firm Bohai, Harvest, and Rosemont; Hunter’s holding company Owasco; Hunter’s consulting firm Rosemont Seneca; and many other aspects of Hunter’s controversial web of business relationships.

In other words, if Hunter were to complete probation, this pretrial diversion agreement would prevent DOJ from ever bringing charges against Hunter for any crimes relating to the offense conduct discussed in the plea agreement, which was purposely written to include his foreign influence peddling operations in China, Ukraine, and elsewhere.

Hunter and DOJ put the facts in the plea agreement, but put their non-prosecution agreement in the pretrial diversion agreement, effectively hiding the full scope of what DOJ was offering and Hunter was obtaining through these proceedings. Because this allowed them to, in their view, structure the plea agreement as a Rule 11(c)(1)(B) plea, it insulated the agreement from judicial oversight.

They went even further, though. In an apparent effort to shield Hunter from a new administration, which might try to throw out the pretrial diversion agreement by claiming that Hunter had violated his probation terms, they included a provision — which they admitted was entirely novel, with no precedent — stating that the government could not deem Hunter to have violated the agreement without first proving up violations in front of the judge. So the agreement they stated the judge had no role in and therefore no ability to reject, also placed the judge in a position of having to sign off on any future prosecution."

[Armchair Lawyer]

Courtesy of the Federalist

https://thefederalist.com/2023/07/27/how-a-federal-judge-turned-the-tables-on-hunter-bidens-plea-deal/

[Allutz]

Correct. The attempted plea deal was basically an Oliver North situation, except instead of testifying about dozens of crimes, they put references to basically Hunter's entire life history in the SOF, so he would be shielded from prosecution for basically all of his life's doing up to 2023.

[jb]

It's pretty clear why you're just an Armchair Lawyer.

The statements of facts do include all of the things you mention, but that just means that Hunter can't be charged for crimes that relate to that specific set of facts. If it turned out that in addition to being paid to be on the Burisma board (a fact included in the statement), he was also working as an unregistered foreign agent (not addressed in the statement) he could still be charged for that crime.

And you don't even need to trust my analysis on this point: the judge asked whether he could be charged under the Foreign Agents Registration Act and (after some discussion) both sides agreed the agreements wouldn't preclude that.

[Armchair Lawyer]

": the judge asked whether he could be charged under the Foreign Agents Registration Act and (after some discussion) both sides agreed the agreements wouldn’t preclude tha"

Here's what was ACTUALLY said.

"For example, even though foreign companies are listed in the statement of facts, Wise said it would not prevent the government from hypothetically charging Biden under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, which essentially requires those doing business with a foreign "principal" to submit periodic disclosures.

When the judge asked whether there was a "meeting of the minds" on that matter, Biden attorney Chris Clark said: "As stated by the government just now, I don't agree with what the government said."

When Noreika asked what the next steps were, Wise replied: "Then there is no deal."

Again...facts. Quote exactly what is said. Don't make up your interpretations.

[not guilty]

Thank you for the link. There is no substitute for original source materials.

[not guilty]

I haven't been able to locate the plea submission documents. As for any "lifetime immunity" provision, I would be astounded if prosecutors agreed not to prosecute crimes that have not yet occurred.

ABC News reports that defense counsel "acquiesced to the government's position that any immunity of Hunter Biden would only include tax, firearm, and drug-related conduct investigated by the government." https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hunter-bidens-plea-deal-fell-apart-now-dramatic/story?id=101671356

[damikesc]

The lifetime immunity was part of his pretrial diversion, not the actual plea deal itself.

Which ALSO sounds highly sketchy.

[Sarcastr0]

You should really take this up with you from 2 hours ago.

[not guilty]

How can a pretrial diversion -- a conditional agreement not to prosecute a specified offense -- confer "lifetime immunity" as to other offenses? What is your source of information? (A link would be great.)

[VinniUSMC]

This didn't age well.

[jb]

I linked to the original docs above. They clearly do not provide "lifetime immunity" or any sort of immunity to unrelated charges.

[Armchair Lawyer]

Not "lifetime immunity".

Just all crimes Hunter may have committed in regards to any of his foreign dealings with China, Ukraine, Romania, etc, for a period of 5 years, plus any potential drug charges + ...."

It's a pretty good deal for pleading guilty for two misdemeanors.

[John F. Carr]

Federal law explicitly permits agreements that bind the judge on sentencing matters. The judge may refuse to accept such a plea agreement. A case under my state's rule got a lot of publicity. A man hit the gas instead of the brakes, went through a T intersection, and crashed into a restaurant killing two people. The charge was negligent motor vehicle homicide. Proof of ordinary negligence beyond a reasonable doubt is enough to convict. The parties agreed on a two year sentence. The judge rejected the deal as too lenient. The case went to trial and the man got four years. Search keywords (sweet tomatoes crash) will tell you the story.

[John F. Carr]

As I recall, Whitey Bulger claimed he had advance permission to commit crimes and the court determined such a promise was beyond the authority of the prosecutor.

[Darth Buckeye]

I would be interested in a comparison and contrast between the how the Michael Flynn plea deal blew up and how the Hunter Biden plea deal blew up.

[Tom for equal rights]

The comparison is that Judge Sullivan wanted to impose a harsh sentence for a crime that wasnt committed even after he had knowledge of prosecution misconduct while the Biden prosecution has been trying to hide the WH interference / attorney general interference in order to hide the entire family corruption

[not guilty]

Where do you get that a crime wasn’t committed? Flynn admitted the underlying criminal conduct, under oath, multiple times. Did he perjure himself? If so, should he have been prosecuted for perjury?

[Tom for equal rights]

not guilty 42 mins ago (edited)
Flag Comment Mute User
"Where do you get that a crime wasn’t committed? Flynn admitted the underlying criminal conduct, under oath, multiple times. Did he perjure himself? If so, should he have been prosecuted for perjury?"

Not guilty - thought you would be aware of the circumstances of the guilty plea and the DOJ's withdrawal/ attempted withdrawal of the charges after the prosecution misconduct was withdrawn and ( the subsequent madamus issued by the court of appeals - this last part is my recollection ) though Sullivan ignored the instructions from the court of appeals

[David Nieporent]

There. Was. No. Prosecution. Misconduct.

Please stop lying.

[Tom for equal rights]

David Nieporent 26 mins ago
Flag Comment Mute User
"There. Was. No. Prosecution. Misconduct.

Please stop lying."

David your response is pure Bullshit
The 302 notes show the prosecution misconduct

[David Nieporent]

They do not. They show no "misconduct," and the DOJ did not "admit" to any. Read their actual filings.

[not guilty]

You dodged my question. Should Flynn be prosecuted for perjury during his guilty plea submission colloquy?

[Tom for equal rights]

Quite frankly that is a stupid question given the facts in the case
The Answer is No – Flynn should not be prosecuted for perjury given the fact he was blackballed into the guilty plea.

See the court of appeals ruling

[not guilty]

Do you mean the Court of Appeals en banc order that remanded the matter for further proceedings before Judge Sullivan? https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/777940F1C81FD47E852585D5005DADCB/$file/20-5143.pdf

[Harvey Mosley]

Should people be prosecuted for perjury if they plead not guilty when there is conclusive proof that they are guilty? If there were incontrovertible video evidence or some other evidence that provided absolute certainty that the accused committed the crime?

What about people who really didn't commit a crime but plead guilty to something that has a punishment of time served because it isn't worth the inconvenience to fight it? Should they be prosecuted for perjury?

[not guilty]

A plea of not guilty is not a factual assertion, nor is it made under oath. It is instead notification to the prosecution and the court that the accused is invoking his right to trial for a finder of fact to determine guilt or the absence of guilt.

Before a trial court can accept a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, the court must address the defendant personally in open court and inform him and determine that the defendant understands, among other things, of the government’s right, in a prosecution for perjury or false statement, to use against the defendant any statement that the defendant gives under oath. The defendant may be placed under oath. Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(b)(1)(A).

Before accepting a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, the court must address the defendant personally in open court and determine that the plea is voluntary and did not result from force, threats, or promises (other than promises in a plea agreement), and before entering judgment on a guilty plea, the court must determine that there is a factual basis for the plea. Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(b)(2) and (b)(3). In making the latter determination, the court is entitled to rely upon any statement(s) the defendant makes during the colloquy.

The court may also consider the defendant’s statement(s) in determining whether to accept or reject the plea.

A defendant need not admit guilt or participation in the acts constituting the crime in order to plead guilty. "Thus, while most pleas of guilty consist of both a waiver of trial and an express admission of guilt, the latter element is not a constitutional requisite to the imposition of criminal penalty. An individual accused of crime may voluntarily, knowingly, and understandingly consent to the imposition of a prison sentence even if he is unwilling or unable to admit his participation in the acts constituting the crime." North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 37 (1970). A court nevertheless must be satisfied that there is a factual basis for the plea before accepting a plea of guilty. Id., at 38 n.10.

[David Nieporent]

It's virtually unheard of to prosecute someone for perjury for pleading guilty who then later seeks to withdraw his plea — but at the same time, when one allocutes one is put under oath, and what's the point of doing so if perjury doesn't apply?

[Randal]

All plea deals come with lifetime immunity duh. The scope of the immunity was initially ambiguous but they fixed it (by construing it narrowly).

What blew up the deal was the way it involved the judge in the pretrial diversion. Pretrial diversion works by formally dismissing the charges without prejudice, so that they can be refiled if the accused breaks the terms of the deal. This puts the accused in a bit of a bind, since the government has the sole authority to decide whether to refile. Hunter wanted some extra protection against the government behaving badly, so they put in a clause that any disputes about whether he'd in fact broken the terms of the deal would go before the judge before charges could be refiled. But... what jurisdiction does the judge have at that point? Formally, there are no charges and no case. It's trying to enlist the judiciary into helping to make the decision about whether or not to file charges in the first place... pretty sketchy.

My guess is that rather than argue that point out in court (the judge ordered the two sides to brief it), they'll just change that part to go before some sort of neutral mediator other than the judge. Problem solved.

So, it didn't blow up because it was a corrupt deal. I do think it was bad lawyering to structure the deal in such a problematic way.... but I very much doubt it was an intentional land mine put there by the prosecution. I don't see what they'd be getting out of it.

Maybe it'll continue to blow up for new and different reasons in the future, but so far it's just negligent counsel.

[bernard11]

Hunter wanted some extra protection against the government behaving badly,

Thanks, Randal. Given that there is some chance Trump will be President in eighteen months I'd want that too, if I were him.

[Ben_]

"what’s with the lifetime immunity thing."

Democrats are above the law, obviously.

[apedad]

Public Service Announcement

Time running out to file for $725M Facebook settlement: How to claim your payment

“If you were a Facebook user in the United States between May 24, 2007, and December 22, 2022, inclusive, you may be eligible for a cash payment,” the settlement details state.

To file online, you’ll need to click here, answer a few questions about yourself, and then decide how you’d like to be paid (prepaid gift card, direct deposit, PayPal, etc.).

To file by mail, you’ll need to print some forms and send them in to the settlement administrator in Philadelphia.

How much will (you) get?

We asked Scott Dodson, a distinguished professor of law at UC Law San Francisco and the director of the Center for Litigation and Courts, to help us estimate a figure. He broke down all the factors that go into calculating the size of a class action lawsuit payment, and explained all the fees that will be deducted from the pot of money before it’s even distributed.

Based on similar large class action settlements, Dodson estimated the higher end of payments might be in the “triple digits,” with many more receiving less than $100.

https://thehill.com/homenews/nexstar_media_wire/4116626-time-running-out-to-file-for-725m-facebook-settlement-how-to-claim-your-payment/

You lawyers got a pretty good gig if you don't screw up like Rudy Giuliani who recently, " . . . conceded that his statements meet the 'factual elements of liability' for Moss and Freeman’s claims that his attacks amounted to “intentional infliction of emotional distress.”

[BravoCharlieDelta]

What is "loxism"?

[Brett Bellmore]

Does it have anything to do with preserved fish?

Huh, I guess indirectly. It's apparently a satirical flipped antisemitism.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Satirical?

[Brett Bellmore]

That's what Urban Dictionary says, anyway.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

I wonder what Wiki or the ADL says it is or other approved and trustworthy sources says about it.

[Brett Bellmore]

Geeze, just from the name you'd figure out it was satire.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

There’s simply too much evidence of the phenomenon for me to instinctively go “that’s satire!”

I mean, look around, there's clear evidence of systemic loxism.

[Brett Bellmore]

As long as it's accompanied by bagelism, I'm OK with it.

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

I'm not, bagelism has a lot of holes in it.

[Bwaaah]

What? No schmearism? That's just not right. (This is a case where two isms don't make a right, but three do.)

Bagel baking facts: Two bagels that are baked while touching each other are called "kissing" bagels. After kissing bagels are baked, they are pulled apart, leaving each one with an "earring."

[Armchair Lawyer]

What's going on with food trucks?

Used to be that food trucks used to be a place to get cheap food, of moderate quality, in smaller-moderate amounts. You could get a burrito or plate of Chinese food for $5-6, where the equivalent from a fast service restaurant would be like $7.

These days, it seems like food trucks are more expensive than their fast service restaurant counterparts. I walk buy and see "cheesesteak, $12" or "BBQ sandwich, $14" and think...I could go to a fast service restaurant and get the same thing, in slightly better sizes, for cheaper prices.

[Brett Bellmore]

I suppose it's some combination of becoming trendy, and gas being so expensive?

I'm still in shock about the day some months ago when the Burger King was out of french fries, and the A&W next door couldn't make a root beer float because they were out of root beer. It's become a regular thing here to try to place an order in the drive thru and be told, "I'm sorry, we don't have that."

[ThePublius]

There was a Wendy's we'd frequent where the chances of being able to get chili and a shake at the same time were nearly zero.

[darkknight9]

Ditto.

[SimonP]

Imagine having the kind of dietary habits where you can confidently say something like "it's become a regular thing here to try to place an order in the drive thru...", or can speak of a day where you went to two fast-food restaurants (I'm guessing because you wanted the burger/fries from Burger King but the root beer float from A&W).

As a New Yorker, I would be ashamed to say something even remotely like that. I haven't been through an actual drive-thru in... decades, maybe?... and I shifted to making healthy meals (rather than relying on delivery or junk food) for myself long ago. And I must be at least twenty years younger than you. Are you trying to gift your son an early inheritance? Or are you just modeling your lifestyle after Trump?

[Mr. Bumble]

Not withstanding his dietary habits, Trump seems pretty vital for a man of his age.

[SimonP]

Trump's apparent longevity despite his bad eating habits is why I made the reference. But then it's clear he doesn't do anything that physically or mentally taxing, so perhaps he doesn't need to worry as much about how he fuels himself. Maybe that's why Brett thinks he can get away with it, too.

[ThePublius]

A lot of so-called "healthy eating" is simply bullshit. Like red meat is bad for you, and will inhabit your intestines for decades, that fat is bad for you, egg yolks are bad, and so forth and so on. The real killers are refined white flour and sugar. Sure, there's a lot of sugar in McDonalds' hamburger. buns, so not good. But the other stuff, the beef, onions, lettuce, tomato, pickles, mustard, ketchup (except for the sugar it contains) are fine.

[Nige]

TOO MUCH red meat, fat and egg whites are bad for you. In the right proportions, they're great. Rest of your point, spot on.

[ThePublius]

Define "too much."

Not the Masai men eat nothing but beef and milk, and have ZERO cardiovascular disease, or any of the other "disease of civilization," like diabetes, gout, etc.

[Nige]

Ask a nutritionist for exact quantities.

[SimonP]

I'm not insinuating that Burger King hamburgers are unhealthy because they have meat. They may, however, be unhealthy because they have poor nutritional content, carry too many calories, lack dietary fiber, etc.

I'm not too invested in the mumbo-jumbo of MSM nutrition reporting, either - like you, I've been around for long enough to see everything go back and forth between the "good" and "bad" columns, multiple times. I mostly eat food I prepare for myself from whole ingredients and minimize the white flour/sugar stuff that you mention.

[ThePublius]

"They may, however, be unhealthy because they have poor nutritional content, carry too many calories, lack dietary fiber, etc."

Calorie counting, a concept from over 100 years ago, has been debunked. Dietary fiber, a concept from the 1970's, I think, has also been thoroughly debunked.

In what way does this food have poor nutritional content, and how do you know?

[SimonP]

Ah, I'm sorry. I didn't realize I was speaking with a crazy person.

[bernard11]

Dietary fiber, a concept from the 1970’s, I think, has also been thoroughly debunked.

Yeah. What does the Mayo Clinic know?

A high-fiber diet:

Normalizes bowel movements. Dietary fiber increases the weight and size of your stool and softens it. A bulky stool is easier to pass, decreasing your chance of constipation. If you have loose, watery stools, fiber may help to solidify the stool because it absorbs water and adds bulk to stool.

Helps maintain bowel health. A high-fiber diet may lower your risk of developing hemorrhoids and small pouches in your colon (diverticular disease). Studies have also found that a high-fiber diet likely lowers the risk of colorectal cancer. Some fiber is fermented in the colon. Researchers are looking at how this may play a role in preventing diseases of the colon.

Lowers cholesterol levels. Soluble fiber found in beans, oats, flaxseed and oat bran may help lower total blood cholesterol levels by lowering low-density lipoprotein, or "bad," cholesterol levels. Studies also have shown that high-fiber foods may have other heart-health benefits, such as reducing blood pressure and inflammation.

Helps control blood sugar levels. In people with diabetes, fiber — particularly soluble fiber — can slow the absorption of sugar and help improve blood sugar levels. A healthy diet that includes insoluble fiber may also reduce the risk of developing type 2 diabetes.

Aids in achieving healthy weight. High-fiber foods tend to be more filling than low-fiber foods, so you're likely to eat less and stay satisfied longer. And high-fiber foods tend to take longer to eat and to be less "energy dense," which means they have fewer calories for the same volume of food.

Helps you live longer. Studies suggest that increasing your dietary fiber intake — especially cereal fiber — is associated with a reduced risk of dying from cardiovascular disease and all cancers.

[ThePublius]

Yes, and you get all the fiber you need just eating ordinary food, no need for supplements or foods with added fiber.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Idiot pretends that "constipation" isn't a real thing that happens.

It's remarkable how wrong you frequently are.

[ThePublius]

"Whole foods rather than fiber supplements are generally better. Fiber supplements — such as Metamucil, Citrucel and FiberCon — don't provide the variety of fibers, vitamins, minerals and other beneficial nutrients that foods do."

May Clinic

https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/in-depth/fiber/art-20043983#:~:text=Whole%20foods%20rather%20than%20fiber,beneficial%20nutrients%20that%20foods%20do.

[bernard11]

So it does matter after all, despite you saying,

Dietary fiber, a concept from the 1970’s, I think, has also been thoroughly debunked.

Note that you claimed even the need for dietary fiber, the kind you get from food, has been debunked. Not quite what you're saying now.

And of course not everyone needs supplements. No says they do - well, maybe Ben Shapiro and a few other RW grifters - but some do, depnding on diet, physical conditions, etc.

[TwelveInchPianist]

(I’m guessing because you wanted the burger/fries from Burger King but the root beer float from A&W).

As a New Yorker, I would be ashamed to say something even remotely like that.

The man wanted a burger, fries, and a root beer float, and he's not even ashamed to admit it! Someone bring me my feinting couch!

Where do people get the idea that coastal lefties are elitist, anyway?

[SimonP]

Yes, I suppose it's true - most of the country eats absolute trash, because it's affordable, they don't get paid enough, and no one has the time to prepare well-rounded meals all the time (especially if they have kids).

Is it "elitist" to call it trash? I dunno. Seems like conservatives have an awful lot to say about people buying junk food with food stamps. It's the same kind of judgment.

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

Try THAT in a small town!

[Brett Bellmore]

"(I’m guessing because you wanted the burger/fries from Burger King but the root beer float from A&W)."

No, I actually wanted wings and fries. Popeyes shares a parking lot with a BK, and the wife likes BK fries better anyway, so I drove a whole extra 75 feet, only to find BK was out of fries, and like heck I was going through the line at Popeyes a second time.

The A&W was across the street, on my way home, I hit it for fries, rather than come home empty handed. But if you're stopping at A&W, who wouldn't get a root beer float?

So it was three fast food places. Four if you count the fact that it was one of those combo A&W/Long John Silvers outfits.

[SimonP]

Does it occur to you that a "root beer float" is the sort of thing you could easily make at home, with ingredients you've hand-selected?

Going through three different drive-thrus in close proximity exemplifies precisely the kind of thing I fled when I moved out of the small-town midwest. What a waste of space and time. How long did it take for you to drive around this little food motor-court and get all of the things you wanted? You probably spent half an hour doing all of that.

[Commenter_XY]

Yeah, I have to say, making the rootbeer float at home with freshly made ice cream and brewed root beer from PA Dutch is about as good as it gets.

PSA: Chill the brewed root beer before opening. Trust me on this.

[David Nieporent]

Does it occur to you that a “root beer float” is the sort of thing you could easily make at home, with ingredients you’ve hand-selected?

Does it occur to you that if I wanted to be in food service, I wouldn't have gone to law school?

[Mr. Bumble]

Do you also pay someone to wipe your ass?

[hoppy025]

Brett has it right. They've become a trendy place for young Millennials and Gen Zers to eat. Their costs are substantially less than a full restaurant, but they charge more because they can.

[ThePublius]

I have to agree with Brett, that it seems to me it's that food trucks are a "thing," something trendy. Thank the hipsters. Also, as Brett points out, the price of gasoline to run the trucks and also the generators they use has gone way up. I don't know about the price of propane, but probably that, too.

Then, I don't know how the fuel prices would cause a difference between truck and brick and mortar establishments. Note that the days of the "five dollar foot long" as Subway are long gone. And, a Big Mac is over $7 these days, for just the sandwich. I paid $11 and change for a Big Mac meal not long ago.

My current "fast food" favorite is Jersey Mike's. Super high quality submarine sandwiches, and super convenient. I always order and pay online, via the web or phone app, and collect loyalty points that turn into a free sub after enough are accumulated.

[Armchair Lawyer]

I mean, gas isn't THAT much. It can't be more than rent and electricity on a restaurant.

I mean, I can get a decent cheesesteak at Jersey Mike's for like $10. Walking by the food truck, it was at least $12.

I've read the articles, and still, somehow, the math doesn't quite add up.

[Brett Bellmore]

I can get a semi-decent cheesesteak at the vending machine in the lunch room for $2.75, and I don't have to spend the gas to drive over to Jersey Mike's during my lunch. No, really, it actually IS a pretty decent sandwich.

[Armchair Lawyer]

Let's agree to disagree on decent cheesesteaks from a vending machine.

[SimonP]

Agreed, there's no such thing as a "decent cheesesteak."

[ThePublius]

I suppose you mean from a "healthy eating" perspective? Bunk!

[SimonP]

No. Even the "best" cheesesteaks are flavorless grease-piles.

[ThePublius]

Well, there's no accounting for taste. I love a good cheese steak, with real beef, provolone, peppers, onions....mmmmm!

[Mr. Bumble]

Simon will live longer than you but spend the last years of his life having his oatmeal fed to him by one of Kirkland's replacements and shitting his pants.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Many cheesesteaks are sad -- I was at Pat's and Geno's this week, disappointed again -- but some are excellent.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I can get a semi-decent cheesesteak at the vending machine in the lunch room for $2.75

That's the level of judgment that might enable someone to think the Volokh Conspiracy is a mainstream publication whose operators and fans have a future involving relevance in modern America.

The $2.75 vending machine cheesesteak.

Makes the pursuit of Obama's socialist Muslim communist Kenyan birth certificate seem almost . . . nah, still pathetic bullshit in the misfit mind of a worthless clinger.

[Commenter_XY]

So Arthur, do you eat cheesesteaks? If so, where do you get a good cheesesteak (outside of Philly, of course).

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I have a few clients who make a decent cheesesteak, but mostly I stick to homemade: Beef tenderloin trimmings grilled in olive oil with Flavacol and fresh pepper, sharp provolone, mushrooms, maybe some roasted red peppers or olive salad (muffuletta style) or even broccoli rabe (sometimes difficult to find; worth the search).

I was at Pat's and Geno's the other day, and introduced a grandchild to their cheesesteaks, which are more tradition than quality. After a bite or two of a Pat's cheesesteak, the child ordered (and enjoyed) a Pat's hot dog.

[Commenter_XY]

Mmmmmm....that home recipe combo sounds good. I will try it.

🙂 = Geno's

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I was a cheesesteaker for about 10 years, and visited Geno’s many times, but an introduction to roast pork (sharp provolone, broccoli rabe) at — of all places — Borgata (a Willie Nelson-John Fogerty concert, as I recall) put Philadelphia cheesesteaks in my rear view mirror, except when introducing Pat’s and Geno’s to newbies.

The line for Tony Luke’s at the Phillies game the other day seemed at least three innings long.

On the home cooking front, try a box of Flavacol -- it's the butter-flavored salt used by movie theaters for popcorn. It can be tough to find, because many restaurant supply houses no longer seem to carry it, but I got a box at Home Depot a year or so ago (no idea why Home Depot had it) and one box should last for a few years. It's a few bucks and well worth it. Flavacol is one of the best tips I received from my hospitality clients over the years.

[Commenter_XY]

I am all over that = Flavacol. I'll find it.

Arthur, thx for the tip. I really do appreciate that.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

This is the product I purchase. I believe it was about six or dollars for four or five pounds at Home Depot; still can't understand what it was doing at Home Depot.

Someone told me it could be purchased at some Walmarts for a few dollars. Or if you have a friend at a movie theatre perhaps you could buy one that way.

For years, I used it solely for popcorn. Today, I probably use it once or twice a week.

[Michael P]

I think it's that trendiness means a lot of novices are getting into the business, and either don't understand typical margins (and so set prices too high) or don't bother (maybe don't know how) to develop an efficient supply chain. Depending on their target market, they may or may not be able to survive with economic inefficiencies like that.

[hoppy025]

Ehh, Jersey Mike's is only okay. The meats taste like fast food meats. I find most local grocery stores make much better sandwiches with real Boar's Head meats.

[ThePublius]

My experience has been very good with Jersey Mike's, and I think it's just as good, or better than supermarket subs. But it could be a regional thing, or even a particular location thing. I have only been delighted, my only complaint is once they mistakenly added mayo to my sub, and they put too much oil on the Italian, which was fixed by just specifying "light on the oil" when I order.

I would certainly try a supermarket sub - maybe I will next week. But it won't be nearly as convenient as JM's, as with the latter I can order in advance for a particular pick-up time, exactly as I want it, and grab it on the way to the boat. Takes a 5 or 7 minute detour.

[hoppy025]

I'm in Georgia, and we have Kroger and Publix here. Both make good sandwiches too.

I agree Jersey Mike's is convenient, but the subs seem a little expensive for what they are ($16 for a large, as an example).

[Frank Drackman]

and in Duluth Georgia you can get more authentic Korean food than in Korea.

[Randal]

And if you want good Indian, go to London. Oh god so good.

[ThePublius]

Example from Dartmouth, MA:
Classica Italian
Mini - $7.65
Regular - $10.41
Giant - $17.73

In my opinion, the regular is equivalent to the large at other places. The giant is really pretty big! Maybe when you said large you meant giant?

p.s. I usually order a mini.

[Brett Bellmore]

Lately, I've introduced my family to the joys of home made grilled Rubens. My son was dubious at first, but had to admit that sauerkraut actually does work in a sandwich.

We've been exploring the design space; Seeded vs swirl Rye, honey mustard/mustard bbq sauce/Caesar dressing, different cheeses, corned beef vs pastrami. Gotta be Bavarian sauerkraut, though. Regular just doesn't cut it. (I should probably make some and can it, we're going through enough.)

In fact, we're going for a picnic on the water this weekend, renting a canoe on Lake Jocasee to paddle over to our favorite swimming spot. I think I've just decided what we'll pack for the picnic.

[Commenter_XY]

What's a good brand of Bavarian sauerkraut?

[Brett Bellmore]

Silver Floss is what I usually buy.

[Mr. Bumble]

Try Deutsche Kuche from Aldi's.
Cabbage, water, salt.

[Frank Drackman]

Ich liebe Deutsche Kuche

[Brett Bellmore]

If that's all that's in it, it isn't Bavarian sauerkraut. The Caraway seeds make all the difference.

[Mr. Bumble]

To each his own.

[ThePublius]

I have been making Reubens at home all my life. My mother made them. Also, Rachels - pastrami instead of corned beef. Heck, I've made Rachels from pastrami I made myself, having brined and then smoked a brisket.

I like Kosciusko mustard, and Silver Floss sauerkraut, and Pepperidge Farm rye with seeds. I grill with unsalted butter. Generic "Russian" or Thousand Island dressing.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

A Rachel involves turkey, not pastrami.

[ThePublius]

"The Rachel sandwich is one of several variations on the famous sandwich. Instead of the classic corned beef and sauerkraut, the Rachel is usually made with turkey or pastrami and coleslaw. Both sandwiches are made with Swiss cheese and rye bread."

https://www.thespruceeats.com/reuben-or-rachel-sandwich-3060487#:~:text=The%20Rachel%20sandwich%20is%20one,Swiss%20cheese%20and%20rye%20bread.

[bernard11]

Honey mustard? On a reuben? Why not make it with boiled chicken breast and white bread while you’re at it?

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

Batampte mustard is the best for any deli sandwich, if you can get your hands on it.

[bernard11]

Here you go.

[Commenter_XY]

It is true, they are a 'trendy' thing. My town has a 'Food Truck Thursday evening' where a bunch of food trucks park in the town hall lot, a couple of local brewpubs bring/sell product. Ain't cheap.

Jersey Mikes is good (for a chain).

[ducksalad]

I see why you put "fast food" in scare quotes for Jersey Mike's. Good quality for a chain and the sandwiches look beautiful, but they take 15-20 minutes to get the order out. Slower than some waiters-and-tablecloths places.

[ThePublius]

I wouldn't know, I order in advance and specify the pickup time, and it's always ready for me when I get there.

[David Nieporent]

A Big Mac is not, in fact, over $7 these days, for just the sandwich. Not even in Manhattan.

[ThePublius]

Oh, I assure you it is! I don't know why you'd call me a liar on this. Last one I bought was at a Mass Pike rest area, $7.46. True, cheaper at a neighborhood location - $5.79 plus tax (yes, they tax meals in Massachusetts at 6.75%, with a local option to add 0.25%. So, $6.20. Yes, you're technically correct for some locations, but not absolutely. 🙂

[Armchair Lawyer]

Sigh...

Here's a handy site. It lists the price of a Big Mac, in the US, by location.

While most areas have a Big Max under $7, you'll note a few do not.

You need to stop calling people liars when you have poor information.

https://pantryandlarder.com/mccheapest

[Sarcastr0]

Food trucks have been a $12 meal since 2012 at least. I used to go to them for lunch in downtown DC.

[Krayt]

You haven't been into a fast food in a while, have you?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Get a real job and quit whining about a few dollars.

Or move to West Virginia, where the cost of living is low and you could enjoy life among the uneducated, bigoted, shamblingTrump fans.

[hoppy025]

You'd have a hard time if the taxpayer wasn't paying for your PrEP drugs

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I don't know what a PrEP drug is, but I would wager I pay more in taxes each year than you earn.

Being elite has its perks, which is likely an important reason backwater culture war losers resent their betters.

[TwelveInchPianist]

You and SimonP seem like you'd get along.

[hobie]

If you've got it, flaunt it. Go Rev!

[Ridgeway]

Not if he doesn't know what a PrEP drug is 😉

[Armchair Lawyer]

All Hunter, all the time....

Part One: Hunters sketchy art deals.
-We always knew that having Hunter "sell" his artwork "anonymously" was a bit of a scam. No real art collector was going to purchase Hunter's art...it was a way to buy influence with Hunter's dad.
-Turns out, some of those buyers names have leaked. They were real, serious art collectors, right. Oh, Hunter knew who they were? His donor “friend” Elizabeth Hirsh Naftali reportedly purchased one of his pieces of art? Oh, and she just happened to be appointed by President Biden to the Commission for the Preservation of America’s Heritage Abroad in July 2022. Coincidence, I'm sure.

Part two: Hunter's sketchy lawyers.
I'm sure all lawyers call the court to get an amicus brief supporting the opposition removed....and pretend to be from the organization who wrote the amicus brief. Oh, it was just a "mistake"? Sure....

Part three: Hunter's broken plea deal.
-As we all know, the Judge decided to ask some questions about Hunter's plea deal. Among many of the other sketchy items in it was a clause that could potentially be interpreted as barring any prosecution of Hunter for any crimes during the years 2014 - 2019. Gosh, that would be nice to have.

Once the lawyers learned that was off the table, Hunter's lawyers ripped up the deal.

"Clark called the deal "null and void" after a prosecutor told the judge that Hunter Biden isn't immune from future charges in the investigation, including potential counts under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. "

[Nige]

This is going to be such a winner at the general election. The voting public will be riveted.

[Frank Drackman]

Nige-bot still crying over Hillary Rodman's D-feet

[Nige]

edgebot still coasting on it

[Sarcastr0]

Remember a few weeks ago when the whistleblowers were gonna make Biden toast?

All Hunter all the time is not a great sign the 2024 GOP muckrakers are finding much.

Maybe like impeach him over the border.

[damikesc]

Only corrupt deals made by DoJ to protect the President's son. Should lead to, bare minimum, Garland's impeachment.

Remember when a phone call to find out about BIDEN'S corruption in Ukraine was enough to justify an impeachment? Good times.

[Nige]

Exactly. Trump's come up a cropper trying to smear Biden already, the laptop thing was a bust, so doubling down seems like a great strategy.

[SimonP]

We're talking with the too-online MAGA contingent. This stuff is all bread-and-butter, chapter-verse fare for them; they don't have the slightest clue how it plays in the real world. They seriously believe that having Trump's trials dominate headlines throughout 2024 will benefit him, by riling up the base.

Good luck GOTV for Trump with suburban white women, with that campaign message.

That's part of the problem with DeSantis's go-nowhere campaign, too. It's been such a bizarre play to watch. The establishment wanted "Trump without the baggage," so they lined up all of this donor cash. But now he and his PAC aren't getting along, and everything that DeSantis's campaign puts out is deeply steeped in MAGA online lore. He announced on Twitter with a crypto grifter, for crying out loud! It's an online-only campaign.

To his credit, Trump understands why voters don't give a shit about any of that. And his responses to the online-only element are well-tuned: DeSantis as "Meatball Ron" and "Pudding Fingers." That's all he needs. Make the man seem small and pathetic, and let his whiny kvetching about WOKE WOKE WOKE take himself down.

[damikesc]

All the GOP has to do is:

1) Shoot ads with plumbers, electricians, et al thanking Biden for letting them pay for the education of gender studies majors. Include footage of the absurd protests on campuses. Regressive benefits do not tend to poll well.

2) Shoot ads with the stereotypical rich punk whose daddy gets him off of all problems. Then mention if that sounds like any family you know. People tend to dislike those people.

[SimonP]

Right. You're too online to realize that no one gives a shit about your talking points; they wouldn't even be able to grasp what you're talking about, the way you've presented it here. They're just as likely to think of Trump's crime family, on the second point.

People care about inflation, the economy, public safety, their kids staying in the communities where they were raised, to raise their own families, etc.

[Nige]

Sure, remind everyone how Biden helped relieve student debt, can't go wrong.

[damikesc]

Again, run on that. College students are morons as is, but the people who will be stuck paying for it might find it a bit annoying.

As well as people, like me, who paid their loans back.

It is time to get loans out of the feds' control and let the schools bankroll them. See how easily loans get discharged.

[Nige]

Or the people will apreciate young people saddled with debt getting a bit of relief because they're not selfish monsters and know that much more of their tax-money is being spent on much worse and far stupider things.

[David Nieporent]

Only corrupt deals made by DoJ to protect the President’s son. Should lead to, bare minimum, Garland’s impeachment.

If Garland made any such deal, I agree that he should be impeached, since he promised not to interfere with the work of the Delaware USAO wrt Biden.

But since here in the real world it was a deal made by Weiss to get the president's son, and Garland had nothing to do with it, your post is silly.

[Commenter_XY]

I expect that POTUS Biden will be impeached for bribery. The wheels are already in motion. To me, it is a matter of Team R figuring out when an impeachment trial would do the maximum political damage to POTUS Biden and then hold the vote at that time and impeach him.

I see months of steady 'drip, drip' of revelations from now to Labor Day.

[not guilty]

Then-Rep. Gerald Ford had it right in 1970 when he said “An impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history.” So I don't completely discount your prediction that President Biden will be impeached for bribery.

But if you were drafting articles of impeachment, what facts would you allege?

[hobie]

When all they run on is ancient hatreds and fear...facts, policy? Not so much anymore

[Commenter_XY]

not guilty, when you ask But if you were drafting articles of impeachment, what facts would you allege?

My answer: No need to rush, let's hear the steady 'drip, drip'. The relevant congressional committees are investigating. The Judiciary committee is compiling what they believe they need. Impeachment is a political process; as you paraphrased Ford, the House will impeach for whatever they want. They have in the past, I believe they will in this case also.

It is only a matter if time, I think.

[Randal]

It was the best thing that ever happened to Clinton. I doubt the GOP will be helped by a case that falls apart in the Senate.

[Sarcastr0]

This has no facts. You are sure Biden is guilty of bribery, but not anything about the bribery.

[Commenter_XY]

No, I am listening to the steady 'drip, drip'. I believe that steady dripping will lead to an impeachment of POTUS Biden.

[not guilty]

Bribery involves an abuse of office: a public official soliciting or receiving an undue personal benefit in exchange for the exercise of official power. For impeachment purposes, it may not be coextensive with a statutory definition of bribery as a crime.

But what facts know at this time, if any, suggest that Joe Biden is impeachable for bribery?

[Commenter_XY]

Impeachment is political, not legal: the House Team R will call it whatever they want, not guilty. That happened to POTUS Trump. Like I said, I'll be listening to the steady 'drip, drip' this summer. Recent press reporting indicates quite an extensive collection of LLCs. Speaker McCarthy deliberately and explicitly opened the door to impeachment, that is why I now believe it is going to happen.

WRT impeachment: Now the shoe will be on the other foot.

[Nige]

No better way to signal that Republicans have absolutely no interest whatsoever in the lives and problems of ordinary Americans, except for the ones they can actively terrorise.

[Ben_]

The White House expressed surprise about Devon Archer's abrupt suicide tomorrow.

[shawn_dude]

"All Hunter, all the time…."
If that's the best argument the GOP has for electing their members to the government, that's pretty sad.

[Armchair Lawyer]

The for the Hunter Biden Gambling Odds portion...

1. If Joe Biden loses the election, what are the odds he pardons Hunter for all crimes before leaving office?
-House puts the odds at 95%. Buy or sell?

2. Does Joe Biden already have a pardon for Hunter written up and signed, just in case something happens to Joe? Then posthumously, the pardon comes out.
House puts the odds at 30%. Buy or sell?

3. Do Hunter's charges actually go to trial? Or is another "deal" cooked up.
-Odds: Probably at least 50% another deal is cooked up.

4. If Hunters charges go to trial, Hunter removes the tax charges from DE to DC.
-Odds: 98%. DC is a much better jury pool for Hunter. Plus a better judge may be able to be obtained.
(Note here, tax charges may need to be done in CA instead. Depends on the year).

[Brett Bellmore]

1. I'd say that sounds about right, especially since if his son goes down, he might go down with him. I think the only scenario under which Hunter doesn't get a pardon is dad stroking out before he gets around to it.

2. Probably, if he has managed to remember long enough to actually do it after Hunter asked.

3. No, they don't go to trial, the fallback position is prosecutorial discretion and a pardon.

4. Got no idea.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Can there be a posthumus pardon?

[Armchair Lawyer]

Legally, it's an interesting question.

The way to do it would be for the pardon to be written and signed by Biden, but simply not revealed or published. Witnesses would also be good, perhaps even a judge in there.

Then if Joe passed, the pardon could be revealed.

[Voize]

Why would he have to write anything down?
Can't he do it by telepathy, the same way he can declassify documents?

[Armchair Lawyer]

Telepathy while dead is quite the skillset.

[Michael P]

Yes, although usually the purpose of a posthumous pardon is to recognize that the state committed serious injustice against the person being pardoned.

[Armchair Lawyer]

Other way around.

Could the president "issue" a pardon if the president was dead. (i.e., have it signed and ready to go, but not revealed till he passed).

[Michael P]

I think it would be straightforward, but perhaps scandalous, to have a secret or unpublished pardon.

Is there any precedent or basis for a conditional or delayed pardon? That seems more analogous to a pardon that only takes effect after the pardoner dies.

[OtisAH]

What good is a “secret pardon” dummy?

[Krayt]

The pardon would have to be activated. Kept secret is ok? That's fer u lawyers. As the Con doesn't seem to mention that, prolly ok?

But "In the event of my death, this pardon is activated." would not wash, old man. Yer dead. Nor would, "...and considered as active before my last heart beat."

[Randal]

It would of course be activated. It would be, "wow, he's been pardoned all this time, we just didn't know."

[Brett Bellmore]

I suppose the next administration's position might be, "No, he wasn't, you whipped this up after Joe left office. Now, prove us wrong."

Hunter would end up in jail within a few years regardless, because he'd have a target on his back, and he demonstrably does NOT have the self restraint necessary to clean up his act.

[Sarcastr0]

he demonstrably does NOT have the self restraint necessary to clean up his act. How old are all these photos the right is bandying about, eh? I don’t know that he has cleaned up his act, but I also don’t know that he hasn’t.

Neither do you. But it’s Hate Hunter Time on the right, so here you are, making adverse assumptions about addict's like a dick.

[Frank Drackman]

Jeezo Dr. Ed, you spell like old people (redacted) it's "Posthum-ous"
and everything Senescent Joe does is Posthumous

Frank

[Moderation4ever]

The fact is that Hunter Biden plea bargain will happen, it was just delayed. Neither side here want to take this to trial. As for a pardon, why? A pardon is forgiveness not acquittal, so giving Hunter a pardon does little more than a plea deal. It is important to remember this, because all the Republican candidates saying they will pardon Trump are also saying that Trump is guilty and they will forgive that guilt, not take it away.

[Brett Bellmore]

The primary difference between a pardon and a plea deal here is that it doesn't require buy in from anybody outside the executive branch, Joe can do it unilaterally no matter how bad things get to looking for Hunter, and then nobody can undo it.

It's not entirely clear that a plea deal couldn't later be undone if the new prosecutor could establish that it was corruptly entered into. Pardons are categorically irreversible.

[John F. Carr]

A pardon would make the impeachment talk louder.

[Krayt]

To which I would say it's a plenary power of the president, so how could yoy use it against him, to which my Trump hating buds, wait, that includes me. My Trump hating and Constitution shitting-upon-for-cheap-attacks-buds would say, "Impeachment is political and they can do whatever they want!"

I jus didn't think the shoe would be on the other foot so quikly.

[Bob from Ohio]

"A pardon would make the impeachment talk louder"

Big deal. No democrat will vote for conviction.

[John F. Carr]

I agree. I also think Biden wants less talk about even a doomed atttempt at impeachment.

[David Nieporent]

It’s not entirely clear that a plea deal couldn’t later be undone if the new prosecutor could establish that it was corruptly entered into.

I mean, these are just random words strung together (how is a deal "corruptly entered into")? Given that your words are nonsensical, nothing can be "entirely clear" about them, but it's entirely clear that once the court approves the deal, it is not being "undone."

[Moderation4ever]

There will be no new prosecutor until after President Biden leaves office and when that happen no one cares about Hunter Biden.

[Armchair Lawyer]

"As for a pardon, why? "

A pardon gets Hunter off of all past crimes, no takebacks, foolproof. Joe doesn't want his son to go to prison.

[bevis the lumberjack]

Hey, I have an idea. Let’s load Hunter Biden and Donald Trump into a rocket and shoot it into deep space. That way I wouldn’t have to hear about them anymore ever again. Humanity will be better off without all their predatory criminal bullshit anyway.

Joe Biden should probably be on it as well, but I’ll let him stay off by paying all the money he made off of Hunter’s schemes into the treasury and saying a couple of Hail Marys. Keeps the rockets payload balanced politically.

[apedad]

Sorry but they would (and will) be quickly replaced by new quacks (both left and right).

It's the world we live in.

It's the world humans have always lived in.

[bevis the lumberjack]

Sure. At least the new quacks might be interesting for a little while. Our current ones have become tiresome.

[ducksalad]

No, Bevis. The US is party to the Outer Space Treaty, which includes this clause:

States shall avoid harmful contamination of space and celestial bodies.

[Commenter_XY]

sigh.

That was funny.

[grb]

bevis the lumberjack : “Let’s load Hunter Biden and Donald Trump into a rocket and shoot it into deep space”

Not to mar the purity of your design, but can we include DeSantis? In the last two weeks he has:

1. Proposed using state power in his snit against Anheuser-Busch. Wasn’t Holy War against Mickey Mouse rancid joke enough?

2. Proposed appointing anti-vaxx loon RFK Jr to head the CDC or FDA. Every day DeSantis looks more the clown. Why should he be the Earth’s problem? Let’s blast him away! (I confess the thought of DeSantis tightly confined in a spaceship with Trump thru a long interstellar voyage raises a smile)

Also : Since we’re using rockets, let’s throw in Musk. Deep space needs its brat trolls too….

[bevis the lumberjack]

If it keeps me from ever hearing about Trump again, put anyone you want in there.

I’ll agree to Musk because it makes room to take Biden senior as well. And you’ve got to give Biden’s dirty money to the granddaughter that he’s neglecting.

A nice balanced payload that will require the media to start covering something useful.

[OtisAH]

Mmmm, so much non-partisan goodness…

[Bob from Ohio]

He's getting pardoned in December, 2024 regardless of the result of the election.

[OtisAH]

The percent chance Biden will pardon his son is >1%.

[NOVA Lawyer]

1. Sell

2. Sell

3. The current deal will go through. Nothing is being "cooked up." 98% chance no trial on the tax and gun charges.

4. Sell and sell hard. Chances are actually <1%

[David Nieporent]

1. O% chance.
2. 0% chance.
3. They have a deal. Nothing is going to trial.
4. 0% chance.

[Armchair Lawyer]

Always good to know those people who believe they can predict the future with 100% certainty. Especially about events over which they have no control.

Makes it clear what type of people they are.

[David Nieporent]

Foresighted?

[Armchair Lawyer]

Overly conceited fools.

Wise individuals understand there is always a chance they could be incorrect. Only those who are overly full of themselves think they will 100% be correct about the future.

[Sarcastr0]

There are some things, it's easy to predict won't happen.

You making a good comment, for instance.

[David Nieporent]

Look, I understand you're embarrassed about having asked such a patently silly set of questions, but don't lash out at me. Try some introspection.

[bernard11]

If you are going to talk odds, talk odds, not probabilities.

95% = 19:1, etc.

[Harvey Mosley]

If I were POTUS (God forbid!) and one of my children was likely to go to prison for a process crime I wouldn't hesitate to pardon them. If Biden ends up doing the same I would respect him for that.

I would also resign as soon as I was sure the pardon was complete.

If the crime involved an actual person as a victim I would not intervene.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

We're all quite aware that you don't have any morals.

[hoppy025]

I’m reading about the Ammon Bundy verdict in Idaho. This new trend of the left to use civil juries to punish conservatives for going against the grain has got to stop.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Agreed!

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Open wider, clingers.

[Frank Drackman]

Not gentle or kind, Senator Stuttering John Fetterman still not signed your Commutation?? I think he's just trying to be kind (and gentle)

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I know John Fetterman. He's a good man.

You're a bigoted, worthless, illiterate, obsolete right-wing hick whose next service to society will involve being replaced by a better American.

You also are the Volokh Conspiracy's target audience.

[apedad]

You really think a hospital in Idaho named St. Luke’s Health System is some sort of leftist agency?!?

And you can't call it an unfair process when, "Bundy and (associate Diego) Rodriguez . . . sought to avoid the proceedings by dodging several attempts to be served with legal notices and arrest warrants, and they did not appear or direct attorneys to represent them in the two-week long jury trial."

Losers gotta lose.

Bundy, Rodriguez ordered to pay $52.5M for Idaho hospital harassment, jury rules

https://idahocapitalsun.com/2023/07/24/bundy-rodriguez-and-groups-ordered-to-pay-52-5m-in-damages-for-idaho-hospital-harassment-jury-rules/

[Randal]

Wait, I thought you were concerned for the children, but your sympathies lie with these child abusers? What the fuck is wrong with you?

[not guilty]

The Guardian is reporting on what charges prosecutors in Fulton County, Georgia are considering against Donald Trump, including criminal solicitation to commit election fraud and conspiracy to commit election fraud, as well as solicitation of a public or political officer to fail to perform their duties and solicitation to destroy, deface or remove ballots. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jul/25/trump-georgia-investigation-fulton-county-prosecutors#:~:text=The%20Fulton%20county%20district%20attorney,according%20to%20two%20people%20briefed We should know in a few weeks.

One noteworthy aspect of the expected prosecution in Georgia is that the Republican governor there does not have authority to issue a pardon.

[Frank Drackman]

"45"'s mouthpieces certainly will ask for a change of venue, seeing as how "45" referred to John Lewis's Fulton County District as a (Redacted) Hole. Rome Georgia would be a good choice.

Frank

[hoppy025]

Is there any district capable of electing a black that isn't a REDACTED hole?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Maybe when Trump is in prison you can visit him to provide solace.

If John Eastman is incarcerated in the same facility, you might be able to carpool with Prof. Volokh on visitation days.

[Moderation4ever]

In my memory changes of venue are rare, and I don't see why a defendant's statement would require a change. Nothing compelled the former President to make the remarks he did. If he poisoned the jury pool it on him.

[Frank Drackman]

"it on him" ??? hey, I speak Jive too!!!!!

[hoppy025]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/27/politics/michigan-conversion-therapy-ban-minors-whitmer/index.html

So conversion therapy, and trying to convert homosexuals into heterosexuals is "discredited" and "evil," but cutting a boy's schlong off and giving him estrogen is "empowering."

Fuck these evil pieces of shit.

[Tom for equal rights]

Dont tell Nige - An activist who believes medical science can cure a mental illness with mutilation surgery and drugs to enhance the mentally ill's illusions.

[Nige]

Torturing people 'straight' is abuse. Surgery is not mutilation.

[Frank Drackman]

Nige-bot now a Robotic Surgeon

[Nige]

edgebot wishes it was a robo-surgeon

[Tom for equal rights]

Nige 20 mins ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Torturing people ‘straight’ is abuse. Surgery is not mutilation."

nige - Removing functioning body parts is mutilation. It evil Mutilation. Frontline endocrinologists who treat transgender patients report permanent damage - contrary to the activist such as yourself that deny the harm - or even enjoy the harm that is inflicted on the mentally ill in the name of compassionate gender affirming care.

[Randal]

Removing functioning body parts is mutilation. It evil Mutilation.

No, it's quite common actually, especially for children. Take https://www.childrenshospital.org/conditions/polydactyly for instance.

[Tom for equal rights]

Randal – Removing childrens body parts in the name of gender affirming care remains evil mutilation – doesnt matter how often or how common – it remains evil mutilation.

Your link is for surgical repair of deformities. Considerably different from removing functioning body parts for a delusional treatment for a mental illness.

[Randal]

I like watching you scramble to find a plausibly non-bigoted line here. (You failed by the way.)

[Tom for equal rights]

Randal it is truely sickening that you would equate surgery to correct for deformities with mutilation in order to justify the mutilation.
If that what take for you to sleep at night to justify your hate for those suffering from a mental illness.
It remains Pure evil.

[Randal]

Your semantic games aren't fooling anyone but yourself. All surgeries are mutilations.

[Tom for equal rights]

the only ones sematic games are those trying to justify mutilation in the false belief of "gender affirming care"

[Nige]

They're not functioning properly if they're causing so much distress to the person that they need them to be removed.

[Tom for equal rights]

Those body parts are functioning normally. The distress is due to a mental illness. At least you admitted (perhaps unintentionally) that it is a mental illness. At some point you might grasp an understanding of basic human biology.

[Nige]

A body part that doesn't feel like it beongs to the body is not functioning properly. The only treatment that matters is the one that has been shown to work, not non-existent non-treatments prescribed by laypeople who hate the people they're prescribing for.

[Tom for equal rights]

Nige 12 mins ago
Flag Comment Mute User
A body part that doesn’t feel like it beongs to the body is not functioning properly. The only treatment that matters is the one that has been shown to work,

The surgery doesnt work - ask any endocrinologist that has to provide care post surgery. There is a lifelong pain and discomfort along with body parts that cant function. Ask the doctors that have to treat the damaged patient.

You are part of the problem - An advocate that ignores basic biology and medical science

[Nige]

Why ask endocrinologists and not post-op trans people? Medical science says this is the right treatment.

[Josh R]

We have people who experience extreme distress because their gender identity doesn't match their sex. Where is the basic biology and medical science that shows affirming one's gender identity is the wrong treatment?

[Tom for equal rights]

Josh R 1 day ago
Flag Comment Mute User
We have people who experience extreme distress because their gender identity doesn’t match their sex. Where is the basic biology and medical science that shows affirming one’s gender identity is the wrong treatment?

Josh - dont play stupid , nige is already doing that -
Look at your high school biology book,
As any endocrinologist
different glands
different internal plumbing.
swapping out external faucet parts doesnt change the internal plumbing.
The new fake external plumbing will never functionally work like they are supposed to.

[SimonP]

The problem with "conversion therapy" is not necessarily what it aims to do, but the fact that we have no medically-proven method for doing it and just a lot of junk science supporting a smattering of practices. "Conversion therapists" usually try to turn people "straight" by associating trauma and pain with gay thoughts, actions, and relationships.

By the same token, gender affirming care should be standardized, adequately supported by medical research, and practiced only by experts who are truly dedicated to their patients' well-being. And it may be the case that we have more work to do, in that respect; "best practices" certainly exist, but it's not always clear that practitioners are following them.

Personally, I see no conceptual reason to ban conversion therapy but permit gender affirming care, provided that they are each standardized and supported by competent medical research. The problem is that the supporters of conversion therapy are just not interested in building that case or being transparent about their practices.

[Tom for equal rights]

I am no fan of conversion therapy for a variety of reasons, one of which is that it doesnt work. Fortunately there is no permanent damage.

On the flip side – gender affirming care inflicts permanent damage, provides temporary alleviation / surpression of the mental illness, but can not cure it. Gender affirming care requires lifelong mental health treatment, drugs , hormone treatment in order for the patient to continue in the delustion of being the opposite sex. Frontline endocrinologists are reporting permanent pain and non functioning / partially functioning bodily functions.

Studies are showing long term negative health effects of puberty blockers.

All of which is downplayed by activists posing as experts.

[Randal]

All of which is downplayed by activists posing as experts.

Nobody cares about them. We care about the actual patients. If you’ve ever known a trans person you’d know how totally worth it they find the lifelong treatment and negative health effects to be.

We treat people (including children) for chronic pain even though that too can be lifelong and have negative health effects. Do you think we should stop doing that?

[hoppy025]

They're mentally ill. They need treatment, not mutilation.

[Nige]

Pity you oppose people getting access to health care, whether it's surgery or mental health services.

[Tom for equal rights]

mutilation is not health care - Nige you need to quit being a bigoted activist.

[Nige]

Your ideological and bigoted need to class surgery as mutilaton is irrelevant to anyone else's health care requirements.

[Tom for equal rights]

Nige - my ideology is based an actual understanding of human biology, basic science, and discussions with actual frontline endocrinologists that treat the damages caused the mutilations.

Your expertise is based on woke agenda driven activism, not on actual medical science.

[Nige]

No, you are rejecting modern science and biology in favour of an invented ideologically-driven pseudoscience that is part of a targeted hate campaign.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

mutilation is not health care

What is your position on circumcision, whether motivated by superstition or by stupidity?

[SimonP]

Fortunately there is no permanent damage.

You may not be familiar with people who suffer from PTSD or similar psychological traumatic conditions. These people can be pretty permanently damaged by the sorts of things conversion therapists do, to say nothing of suicides that result.

On the flip side – gender affirming care inflicts permanent damage, provides temporary alleviation / surpression of the mental illness, but can not cure it.

Is there a "cure" for transgenderism that you're aware of?

Gender affirming care may require ongoing treatment, but the vast majority of people who undergo it - and continue to undergo it - evidently find that the benefits it provides are better than forgoing it entirely or trying to "cure" their transgenderism. You cannot say the same for many people who undergo "conversion therapy." In this way, gender affirming care would be akin to treating a congenital or chronic condition.

If there were a medically-proven way to "cure" transgenderism - then, by all means, it should be available for people who would prefer to undergo that cure and live as their birth gender, rather than transition. But as far as I know, no such "cure" exists, so transgendered persons have to face either living a miserable life as the "wrong" gender, or transitioning to live in a way that feels more "right" to them.

[M L]

The "cure" is just facing the fact that you're a boy, not a girl. Plenty of people have done that, including many "detransitioners."

[SimonP]

You're good at therapy!

"Why are you upset? Just don't be upset. Easy."

[M L]

Now you're talking about being upset, not being transgender. That's a different issue.

What makes you upset? How do you feel about that? See, I'm a good therapist.

[SimonP]

Anyone who has come to the place where they're thinking they might be transgendered has spent their lifetime already re-affirming to themselves that they are the same gender they were assigned at birth. They've been saying (if born a boy), "I'm a boy, I do boy things, why don't I feel like a boy? What's wrong with me?" etc.

So telling them that the "cure" to how they feel is just to accept that they're a boy is... not going to be very helpful.

[Nige]

Only in the sense that it's a 'cure' the medical establishment have dispensed with because it only caused more suffering in the patient, and the patient is the focal point of treatment not your delicate sense of gender equilibrium which threatens your entire grip on reality if disturbed.

[Brett Bellmore]

Just waiting for puberty has a better record as a cure for gender dysmorphism than any treatment; Most people who are dysmorphic prior to puberty resolve during it.

Which I guess explains the urgency of the puberty suppressing drugs.

[Nige]

You used to post a link when you made this assertion, and what the link showed was that most kids that present at gender clinics do not get diagnosed as trans. Not sure why you keep lying about it. Maybe it's so you can say stuff like 'Which I guess explains the urgency of the puberty suppressing drugs.' Why you'd want to make such a malicious statement is a problem for yourself.

[SimonP]

It really makes me wonder about Brett’s capacity for empathy. Like, he’s constructed this worldview where parents and therapists are in cahoots to try to “turn” their children into these mutilated, transgendered freaks, like it’s some kind of “woke” competition.

What do you have to believe about human nature, to believe that’s even remotely plausible? He ought to know how he feels about his own kids. That’s what other parents feel, too. People just want their kids to be happy. When they find themselves at the point that they’re asking, “is my kid actually transgender?” it’s not without a lot of anguish and doubt over the issue.

Or maybe that’s the problem. Brett’s statements about his son clearly convey the sense that he is trying to shape his son to share his beliefs and worldview, etc. Maybe it’s hard for him to understand what it means to love someone as they are.

[Tom for equal rights]

Brett's empathy and my empathy is based on actual medical science, and preventing the permanent irreversable harm done in the name of compassion

[SimonP]

"We know what's better for those kids than their own parents do, who are apparently indifferent to, if not actually hostile towards, medical facts and the well-being of their own children."

The question is - why does that seem plausible to you?

[Tom for equal rights]

SimonP 32 mins ago
Flag Comment Mute User
“We know what’s better for those kids than their own parents do, who are apparently indifferent to, if not actually hostile towards, medical facts and the well-being of their own children.”

Simon - I dont know from what side you are arguing from. That being said - nothing in the statement you cited is plausible.

[SimonP]

Tom: You are saying that your "empathy" is based on "actual medical science" and "preventing irreversable harm done in the name of compassion."

You are asserting, then, that you know something about gender-affirming care and its appropriateness for [someone, presumably kids, presumably boys, since all you people can seem to think about is chopping off prepubescent boys' penises], which means you are implying something also about those parents who don't share your views on the topic. Specifically - that they don't know the "medical science," or don't care, or are indifferent to the possibility of doing "permanent irreversable harm" to their kids, etc.

And so the question that this raises, for me, is why you would think that. You claim to know something about gender-affirming care. But parents actually struggling with the question, for their children, somehow don't? Why would you know better than they do? Why would you care more about their kids' long-term health than they do?

[Nige]

Medical science prescribes the treatments you find so ideologically repellant.

[Tom for equal rights]

Nige 20 hours ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Medical science prescribes the treatments you find so ideologically repellant.

Nige - you are consumed with alleging ideology is the reason for my objections.
ideological Medical science prescribes treatments that are biologically repellant.

You fail to grasp that distinction.

[Nige]

Medical treatments for people you hate is 'ideological.' What a handy tautology.

[Bob from Ohio]

"Is there a “cure” for transgenderism that you’re aware of? "

Is there a cure for other mental delusions? Try that.

[Tom for equal rights]

There is a cure - or strong potential for a cure, same with bi polar or any of the other, discover what is causing the mental illness, adjust the hormone balance, chemical imbalance to bring the person back to or closer to normal. The transgender activists want to stop puberty development - always with bad results, perform permanent mutilation to enhance the mentally ills delusions.

Basic human decency calls for medical and mental health treatments that brings the individual back to normal vs expanding and embracing the delusions.

[Nige]

Basic human decency involves using the treatments that have had the best outcomes, not inflicting random, poorly understood suggestions by unqualified randomers who hate the person being treated.

[Tom for equal rights]

Nige

correct - Basic human decency involves using treatments that produce the best outcomes - mutilation is never the best outcome - defending the mutilation is delusionally evil.

You resort to falsehoods to label anyone who opposes mutilation as hating the individuals inflicted with a mental illness. It shows both your inability to be honest and you use it so that you can justify the evil you wish to inflict.

[Nige]

What you call mutilation is a medically recognised proedure for a medically recognised condition. No amount of spluttering and spraying will change that. Wanting to deprive people of medcal treatments for their condition, the reality of which you also deny, is only one sign of hatred for them, but a signficant one.

[hoppy025]

I see both types of "therapy" and "care" to be flip sides of the same evil coin.

[M L]

“any practice or treatment by a mental health professional that seeks to change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity, including, but not limited to, efforts to change behavior or gender expression or to reduce or eliminate sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward an individual of the same gender.”

So, literally, saying "uh you're a boy, not a girl FYI" is illegal.

Do the "liberals" here support this?

[Nige]

In the sense that dangerous quackery and child abuse is illegal, yes.

[VinniUSMC]

You seem confused. Dangerous quackery and child abuse are what you are advocating.

Kindergarten teachers should start teaching children that if you like Barbies, you're a girl, and if you like cars, you're a boy. If that doesn't match your private parts, then go tell mommy and daddy birthing unit 1 and 2, that you are transgender. Right? Right?!

That is what the groomers want. Get in early while the kids are more malleable and don't understand the consequences. If you indoctrinate them by the time they are 5 or 6 that they're the "wrong sex" then they'll be more likely to grow up believing that. Fuck all of you child abusers. Where's the wood chipper?

[Nige]

Well, no, that's just a whole bunch of stupid shit you've completely made up because the reality doesn't match your sensationalising hatemongering needs. And you claim to want to decide what treatments people can access? People you hate? Who you'll tell any lie about while throwing actual victims of child abuse and grooming under the bus?

[Tom for equal rights]

Nige - its a bunch of stupid sh.. made up by activists to justify mutilating individual to enhance their delusions. Its not a cure - what you are defending is pure evil.

It takes pure evil on your part to continue to defend the abuse you wish to inflict on the mentally ill

[Nige]

Yes, it's made-up shit that doesn't happen, well done.

You're taking down the mentally ill in your crusade against trans people, the same way you're taking down victims of abuse in your crusade to label trans people 'groomers.'

[Tom for equal rights]

nige - Its despicable on your part to accuse someone else of something they have never stated or implied to justify you willingness to promote the evil harm you embrace for the mentally ill.

There is absolutely zero evidence that transition surgery provides the benefits the advocates claim.

[Nige]

Only if you completely discount the testimonies of the people who receive it and any medical experts who say otherwise. Zero.

[Sarcastr0]

McConnell.

[Mr. Bumble]

TIA.

[Moderation4ever]

My thought also. It is terrible to see this happen to a person who has had such an important and full life.

[hoppy025]

Does he shit his diapers like Pedo Joe?

[Darth Buckeye]

McConnell looked terrible. He should retire. However, he won't because if he resigns or dies, the Dem gov of Kentucky gets to pick McConnell’s replacement. With a 52/48 majority, would Dems finally be able to abolish the filibuster?

GOP has supermajorities in both chambers of the KY legislature. I wonder if they will pull a Massachusetts and quickly pass a law stripping the governor of the power to fill a US Senate vacancy.

[damikesc]

They should.

But McConnell should have also retired YEARS ago.

Grassley the same. And I LIKE Grassley.

[Darth Buckeye]

Agreed. Why do these guys hang on long after they can do the job? Look at what happened when Ted Kennedy ran for reelection for the last time. It was 2008. If he had announced his retirement, a Dem would easily been elected in the year that President Obama was elected. Instead, Kennedy was reelected and died. There was great outrage over how the Senate cobbled together the ACA; so much so that a Republican won the special election to fill Kennedy's seat. That broke the Dem's super majority in the Senate and made it impossible for them to get around future filibusters; hence they had to accept the Senate version of the ACA as-is. What a cluster mess. These fools should retire so that the public has a chance to fill the vacant seats at a normal election time.

[Sarcastr0]

It seems like the drive for public office is somewhat different from that of folks in a lot of other jobs.

[Krychek_2]

In Canada senators are required to retire at 70. Of course the Canadian Senate has far less power than the US Senate.

[Voize]

Senate appointments in Canada are pure patronage, like an ambassadorship but with no real duties except to show up occasionally and keep breathing. Forcing retirement gives the prime minister a more reliable supply of benefices to hand out.

[Brett Bellmore]

Look at Denny Hastert, and what happened to him after he retired.

These people are all used to having significant immunity from enforcement of laws other people are subject to. And they know that immunity may vanish if they retire. Just the loss of immunity to insider trading charges would be a big hit.

That, and I think they're stuck in a rut. They don't know how to do anything else, and they're old enough they're not flexible anymore.

[Sarcastr0]

Look at all the other politicians who have retired and been fine.

Congress is not packed with people fearing prosecution. Whatever kept McConnell in office, it wasn't that.

[Brett Bellmore]

Well, the ones who voluntarily retired obviously weren't fearing it, but we were discussing the ones who keep going long after they should have retired to a senior home someplace. They're outliers, why is it unreasonable to think they have outlier motivations?

[Sarcastr0]

They’re outliers, why is it unreasonable to think they have outlier motivations?
There are a ton of potential motives to stay other than avoiding prosecution.
We don't live in a political thriller.

[David Nieporent]

Nothing "happened to" Hastert.

[Krychek_2]

Actually, anticipating just such an event, the Kentucky legislature passed a law requiring the governor to appoint a replacement senator of the same party as the senator who didn't complete his term, meaning if McConnell retires or dies, the governor would have to appoint another Republican.

Now, if I were the governor of Kentucky, I would seriously consider just not appointing anyone; it wouldn't add another Democrat but at least there would be one less Republican.

[apedad]

Good discussion here about the Kentucky process and whether the Kentucky law requiring the governor to appoint a replacement senator of the same party is even constitutional.

https://verdict.justia.com/2021/03/26/constitutional-problems-with-the-kentucky-proposal-supported-by-mitch-mcconnell-to-change-the-way-u-s-senate-vacancies-are-filled

[John F. Carr]

The law requires the governor to pick one of three names provided by the party's executive committee within 21 days of receiving the list. Presumably a writ of mandamus could be sought. If a vacancy occurred this year an election would be held 90 to 120 days after the office became vacant.

KRS 63.200 https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=51338

[Krychek_2]

Who would have standing to seek the writ? Standing requires that the plaintiff suffer an injury specific to the plaintiff, and not just the same general injury suffered by the public. And if such a writ were sought, the governor could defend on the ground that the law is unconstitutional; even if the governor lost on that point, it wouldn't happen until well after there had been another election and the case was moot.

[Magister]

It would seem that the party who submitted the list the governor was supposed to pick from could claim an injury (not having a Senator of their party), or perhaps the candidates on the list (as one of them would get the job).

If the legislature had specified that the list have only one name on it, and require the governor to appoint that person, then the legislature would be making the appointment, which seems to violate the 17th amendment.

[John F. Carr]

I don't know Kentucky's rules on standing. With an elected Supreme Court, do they even matter in such a partisan (hypothetical) case?

If I were a judge I would allow the three people on the list to sue collectively.

[Voize]

There is a second issue, that the 17th Amendment allows a state legislature to "empower the executive thereof" to make a temporary appointment, but the Kentucky law purports to require him to do so, with a 21 day deadline no less.
Maybe we will see the invention of the Independent Governor Theory before too long.

[shawn_dude]

Not appointing anyone would be a fitting response to McConnel's successful attempt to prevent Obama from selecting a Supreme Court justice.

However, it would be bad for the citizens of Kentucky who deserve representation.

[damikesc]

We should be GRATEFUL that McConnell left hack Garland off the SCOTUS.

[hoppy025]

Merrick Garfinkel has demonstrated as AG why he had no business being on the Supreme Court.

[shawn_dude]

Tell that to the millions of women having difficulty finding healthcare and for the women who are forced to carry a dying baby until their lives are in immediate jeopardy before doctors can legally assist.

[bevis the lumberjack]

But our president, who greets dead people that he recognizes in an audience and sometimes reads the instructions on his teleprompter as part of his speech is just fine, right?

And let’s not even talk about McConnell’s mental acuity compared to Fetterman’s.

[Frank Drackman]

Fetterman has Transient Lucid Intervals

[Sarcastr0]

Biden keeps waxing the floor with the GOP, latest on the debt ceiling. I dunno if I'd go strong for diagnosing him from afar.

[Frank Drackman]

Well that explains why he's falling all the time, all that "Wax"
Too bad he didn't "Cure Cancer" back when Bo had it.

Frank

[bevis the lumberjack]

Wiping the floor.

Your boy is a crooked child abuser. But you love him anyway. Maybe you’d have better values if your teachers had invited some drag queens to your school.

[Sarcastr0]

Your boy is a crooked child abuser
OK, dude. You enjoy your right wing fever swamps. Whatever it takes to make both sides equally bad, eh?

Holy shit.

[bevis the lumberjack]

Right wing fever swamps. Persuasive arguing from the champion of never saying anything of substance.

And are you actually denying that Biden is aggressively neglecting his granddaughter?

[Nige]

Generally care and welfare of children is something the parents are responsible for, not grandparents. Joining in the hijacking of the issue of child abuse in order to attack political enemies, are we?

[Sarcastr0]

I don't know what aggressively neglecting is, exactly, versus normal neglecting.
But child abuse is a fucked up thing to say.

[bevis the lumberjack]

Neglecting is not having anything to do with her. Aggressively neglecting is denying her existence publicly when everyone knows she exists.

And yeah. Psychological abuse. You think having your existence denied by your father and your grandfather is healthy for a child? It’s cruel beyond description.

Anybody that can do that to a four year old has no humanity. Biden has no soul.

But I forget. Politics is more important to you than the interests of children. At least you’re consistent. I’ll give you that.

[Sarcastr0]

Yeah fuck you.

Don't call Biden a child abuser over this.

You should be ashamed to devalue child abuse for this bullshit. MAGA behavior.

Politics is more important to you than the interests of children
Yeah, exactly like MAGA. Go have fun with BCD you asshole.

[Sarcastr0]

Note how I criticized your comment based on what you said, and you by contrast went after me personally?

Don't do that.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Oh my you are so indignant at his unapproved opinions! How dare he publicly say anything bad about Mr. Biden!! Doesn't he know the President of these United States?!?@?

I'd report him to Homeland if I were you, I'm sure you have their reporting like on speeddial!

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Hey Sarcastr0, can he say anything about Joe's child sniffing or inappropriate touching and licking?

[bevis the lumberjack]

Oh no, I’m MAGA again.

Don’t you know they took away my MAGA decoder ring yesterday when I attacked Dan Patrick? I’m out of the club.

And if you can dismiss openly and proudly neglecting a four year old for the sake of politics, you’ve got no humanity either. So fuck you for defending this.

One of the many reasons I detest trump is how he treated his sick nephew related to his father’s estate.

Look up the words principle and consistency in the dictionary and learn about concepts you don’t understand.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Bevis, that would mean he would have to open a book.

That might be asking too much from that hen.

[damikesc]

"Don’t call Biden a child abuser over this."

How about showering with Ashley well beyond her toddler years? Can we call him a child abuser over that?

He's just a thoughtless evil shit when it comes to Navy, who will, sadly, never get to know the white trash part of her family.

Joe has never been a good or decent man.

[Nige]

So now family estrangement is abuse, and washing your child is abuse. Pretty sure changing nappies is going to be next.

[Nige]

bevis got red-pilled

[Bob from Ohio]

"latest on the debt ceiling"

What was the GOP's leverage?

[Magister]

Trump misreading the teleprompter was often funny. Or the time he couldn't find Rudy who was right in front of him? All the people he can't remember or mistakes for someone else? And remember when he made the military create a hydrosonic missile rather than get the name right?

Biden was reading his speech, not the directions.
https://www.factcheck.org/2022/07/social-media-posts-misleadingly-edit-and-misrepresent-biden-remarks-from-teleprompter/

That Biden did not connect a Congresswoman recently killed in a car accident as the sponsor of a bill being celebrated is unfortunate, but in light of his effectiveness in getting his agenda through a closely divided Congress it's clearly not something you can diagnose off of.

[David Nieporent]

However, he won’t because if he resigns or dies, the Dem gov of Kentucky gets to pick McConnell’s replacement.

Kentucky law requires the governor to pick another Republican.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

It's so funny how you people can latch onto one McConnell "senior moment" and pretend you haven't seen the past 100 of virtually the same episodes by Biden.

Either way, I hope for the worst for McConnell. What a piece shit that guy is.

[ducksalad]

I don't care about whatever disappointments he inflicted on you.

He is a National Hero for keeping Garland off the Supreme Court.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Well, you are absolutely right about that.

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

Hero, another word and concept we can now throw into the shitter.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Bill Redpath, editor of Ballot Access News, defends Ranked Choice Voting against the Wall Street Journal:

https://ballot-access.org/2023/07/26/online-comment-re-wsj-editorial-position-on-rcv/

(I, myself, are more into good old-fashioned runoffs)

[damikesc]

Yeah, the weeks long count does not remotely lead to MORE confidence in the result.

[jb]

Assuming you're using this as an argument against RCV, the long counting process is generally completely unrelated. Once you enter all of the votes into a computer, it usually just takes a few seconds to figure out who the winner is.

The slow part of a lot of recent elections is usually making sure you have all of the ballots and doing the data entry.

[Mr. Bumble]

Does ranked choice voting violate one man one vote?

[Longtobefree]

This is a complex and difficult question.
If a man goes into a voting booth and votes for more than one candidate for an office - - - - - - - - -

[SRG]

Yes, but "one man one vote" is not a constitutional principle, nor does RCV produce unconstitutional outcomes.

[David Nieporent]

No.

[John F. Carr]

I do not make fine distinctions between ranked choice, instant runoff, Australian rules voting, and the rest. They all make it much easier to vote for what one truly believes in. They all can provide election results in a not-too-long period. We can look into the details when we have a large number of nearly-equal parties.

[Magister]

They all make it much easier to vote for what one truly believes in.

And that might lead to smaller parties gaining popularity, which they've been unable to do otherwise.

We can look into the details when we have a large number of nearly-equal parties.

Oh, so that would be never, then.

[ducksalad]

Approval voting (vote for as many candidates as you like, unranked, and whoever gets the most votes wins) seems to have a lot of advantages.

Single easy round of counting, and doesn't erode confidence by being suspiciously complicated.

[ducksalad]

I’m OK with straight RCV where your vote goes to your next highest choice if your higher ranks are eliminated.

But that step in the Arlington process where they redistribute “extra” votes for candidates that meet the threshold seems very fishy. (See the animation at Stage 6 in the link within your link.) It makes a difference which ballots you count as the extra ones, since different ballots will have different 2nd and 3rd choices. How do they do that?

[bernard11]

It makes a difference which ballots you count as the extra ones, since different ballots will have different 2nd and 3rd choices.

Yeah, that's dubious. It could be solved by just awarding them proportionately, and not picking particular ballots.

You need 1000 votes to be elected, and get 1100. Then if half the 1100 named Foghorn second he gets 50 of the extras, etc.

You could just not redistribute the extras. It's not clear to me how that would work out.

[not guilty]

Donald Trump reportedly has suggested that he intends to push false claims about voter fraud during his trial if he’s indicted by the Justice Department for trying to overturn the 2020 election. https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2023/07/26/trump-may-push-voter-fraud-claims-during-a-trial-but-even-his-own-lawyers-wont/?sh=5364de4b53bd

Trump is free to make that claim, although it may be exceedingly difficult for him to do so without testifying and subjecting himself to wide open cross-examination. In any criminal trial the accused has the ultimate authority to decide for himself whether or not to testify in his or her own behalf. Jones v. Barnes, 463 U.S. 745, 751 (1983). I would expect Trump's lawyers to strongly advise him against testifying, though.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

indicted by the Justice Department for trying to overturn the 2020 election.

Can you support that specific claim of yours?

[not guilty]

Did you miss the word "if"?

[BravoCharlieDelta]

I was thinking more along the lines of the "Illegal to Challenge Election" statutes you seemed to be referring to that you believe he will be indicted for.

[Magister]

That quote was preceded by the word "if", but even Trump expects he'll be indicted for that.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-66236837

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Not guilty's choice of words was suggesting the act of challenging an election was illegal.

The Democrats have been using this intentionally broad phrasing to color anyone even suggesting a challenge to a Democrat-claimed election as some sort of treasonous How Dare You criminal.

[Magister]

I'm pretty sure nobody is indicting him for requesting recounts or pursuing election challenges in the courts, even though he lost almost all of those. Falsely claiming election fraud can get you into trouble (e.g., Rudy admitting to defamation). The act of inciting an insurrection is illegal, and most likely what Trump would be indicted for.

But the words are pretty much from the Forbes article.
"Former President Donald Trump suggested Wednesday he intends to push false claims about voter fraud during his trial if he’s indicted by the Justice Department for trying to overturn the 2020 election"

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Back to my point:

The Democrats have been using this intentionally broad phrasing to color anyone even suggesting a challenge to a Democrat-claimed election as some sort of treasonous How Dare You criminal.

[Nige]

Really? Because it's you guys who, since Trump tried to fraudulently overturn an election, decided to label any effort to challenge an election result as trying to fraudulently overturn an election.

[Ben_]

The defense is not caring about anything Democrats say. Democrats don’t value being truthful.

And they’ll happily commit more-or-less any act they’ve ever pretended to be against.

[Nige]

They'll happily commit any action you'll claim is the same as something they're supposedly against, even though it isn't, which disposes of your concern for the truth, also.

[SimonP]

And you’re intentionally referring to the criminal conspiracy to overturn the election as merely “challenging an election.”

Trump’s team went to multiple swing states to try to get Trump elector slates together. These slates signed statements claiming to be the duly elected electors for their states, in some cases without conditionality – i.e., not “we’re the Trump electors if he is declared the winner,” which some of them did, but rather, “we’re definitely the duly elected electors.” The purpose of these dueling electoral slates was to kick the matter to state legislatures and/or Congress; either the state legislatures would pick the Trump slate despite how the voting came out, or there would be enough to dispute the slates in Congress. Then Congress would either choose to accept the Trump slates or reject both Trump/Biden slates, the latter of which would make getting to 270 more difficult (and a House vote to choose the president more likely). In order to facilitate this whole process, it was intended that Pence would be whisked away from the capitol, allowing Grassley (who was in on the scheme) to preside.

That is what Trump is alleged, and has so far been shown, to have done. There’s no world in which that constitutes an “election challenge.”

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

The phony electors who signed conditional documents should be treated with extreme leniency.

The phony electors who signed falsified documents -- and the people who arranged those documents -- should be incarcerated for years.

[Brett Bellmore]

You're intentionally referring to the effort to challenge the election as a criminal conspiracy.

[Nige]

You're right, it was a criminal conspiracy to overthrow the election result not 'challenge the election.'

[John F. Carr]

Science has discovered binding arbitration.

https://www.science.org/content/article/costly-invite-scientists-hit-with-massive-bills-after-speaking-at-covid-19-conferences

"Researchers are fighting back against a mysterious conference organizer and an arbitration court that may not exist"

Scientists were induced to participate in a conference with an oral promise that it was free. Buried in the fine print of a written contract was a fee demand and an arbitration clause. They are being sued in their home countries to enforce alleged arbitration awards of tens of thousands of euros from a Polish tribunal that might not even exist.

[Don Nico]

I was invited to speak at such a webinar about COVID epidemiology. Afterwards, the organizers asked for a donation, but they didn't pursue the matter when I declined

[Estragon]

Rudy agrees he made defamatory statements about Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss. I wonder what the damages will be? Does this mean Rudy has no assets to attach?

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.238720/gov.uscourts.dcd.238720.84.2.pdf

[Magister]

Well, it's likely that Trump never paid him.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Why was US Attorney Weiss giving Hunter such a great deal?

Any ideas? Didn't the judge ask about it, and the USG responded that the sort of deal was unprecedented?

[damikesc]

That should definitely be asked of him.

Under oath, of course.

[Sam Bankman-Fried]

Because Hunter will be pardoned on 12/23/2024.

[Brett Bellmore]

Why would Joe wait that long, (The election is in November, after all.) and then not wait until 1/19/2025?

[Ben_]

Because anything goes.

[apedad]

Anybody remember the book from the 70s: Rape of Ape?

It had the world's shortest chapter (one word); "Fuck*", and then the world's longest footnote.

[ducksalad]

No.

Other than what you mentioned, is it worth reading?

[OtisAH]

For the few thoughtful, intelligent people here this is a lengthy Popehat piece working through all what happened yesterday in the Hunter thing. It includes his original post and two subsequent additions that flesh things out a bit more. Tl;dr: a bit of bad lawyering on both sides of the case.

https://popehat.substack.com/p/hunter-biden-and-the-fog-of-war?utm_source=substack&publication_id=86716&post_id=135478208&utm_medium=email&utm_content=share&triggerShare=true&isFreemail=true

For the rest of you just keep picking your toes and making up stupid shit.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

For the rest of you just keep picking your toes and making up stupid shit.

Nobody looking for worthwhile legal analysis visits the Volokh Conspiracy . . . especially not the comments.

[Sam Bankman-Fried]

They used to…Supreme Court justices’ clerks used to visit to get ideas for opinions.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

I’m pretty sure one of my theories has been tested before the court as well.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

When did Crystal Clanton clerk at the Supreme Court?

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Popehat seems to believe that the the issues with the deal stem from DOJ incompetence.

While part of me says, yes of course, virtually every civil servant is an incompetent buffoon,the other part sees how viscious the DOJ goes after Democrat enemies amd how far they go to cover Democrat crimes and wonders how Popehats analysis would look if he wasn't so Biden-adjacent.

[Commenter_XY]

Tl;dr: a bit of bad lawyering on both sides of the case.

You have a future in comedy. A bit? LOL. An unbelievable amount of bad lawyering, according to Popehat.

Sorry, I just don't see that.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Looks like the elites are giving Sam Bankman-Fried the good ol’ fashioned Hunter Biden treatment.

Must be nice to be a US Elite these days. You can defraud people of billions and walk away and you can sell out your country to China and get away with it, you'll even get an outsider President impeached if he dares look into any of your criminal wrongdoings.

[damikesc]

Not US Elite.

US Pro-DNC Elite.

World of difference.

[M L]

Of course. You can steal billions from US citizens, not pay taxes, smoke crack, accept hundreds of millions from foreign interests influence peddling as a US politician or family member thereof. All good, as long as you’re a Democrat (or probably establishment Republican).

If you’re a conservative? Solitary confinement and beat within an inch of your life for peacefully protesting.

[shawn_dude]

HUH... and here I thought it was the Capital Police beat within an inch of their life by the "peaceful protesters."

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Well, being Federals, you should've assumed they were lying.

Capitol Police officer Aquilino Gonell has repeatedly testified under oath and in federal court that he suffered near-death injuries on January 6. New security video contradicts his claims.

https://www.declassified.live/p/j6-celebrity-cop-appears-uninjured

[damikesc]

Feel free to name one who was.

[Brett Bellmore]

He shared the loot with the right people, obviously.

[jb]

I'm so confused. Since I don't read whatever Trumpworld news source you're ingesting, I had to do a news search for "Sam Bankman-Fried prosecution" and this is the general tenor of the recent news:

https://www.npr.org/2023/07/26/1190364957/bankman-fried-crypto-ftx-jail-bail

So maybe for us "low information" people you can elaborate on WTF you're talking about?

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Gd dude, why do you keep embarrassing yourself?

DOJ Drops Campaign Finance Charge Against Dem Megadonor, Alleged Fraudster

https://dailycaller.com/2023/07/27/doj-campaign-finance-charge-dem-megadonor-alleged-fraudster/

What are you using for your search index that you couldn’t find this? https://www.sarcastr0.com/government-approved-search/ ?

[Ben_]

"What are you using for your search index that you couldn’t find this?"

Probably Google. It’s a black hole for a lot of information that leftists don’t like.

[jb]

Ah, those damn Democrat Bahamians!

Fortunately it sounds like the US prosecutors want him to go to jail starting now.

By the way, since I know you guys think Google is in the tank for the libruls you can try the search yourself on another search engine:

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=sam+bankman+fried+prosecutor&va=r&t=hb&iar=news&ia=news

... which you'll see has several references to the jail thing and none to the campaign finance thing.

[M L]

Throwback

Paddleboarder Arrested In Malibu For Refusing To Exit Water

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcZs9wlnFHY&ab_channel=KCALNews

Liberals, your thoughts?

[Ben_]

No totalitarian measure is so severe that "liberals" won’t embrace it.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

They'd probably be holding his head underwater like they did that one a few days ago for deadnaming Michael.

[jb]

You guys don't have any this week LiBeRaL oUtRaGe so you gotta troll something up to be mad about from three years ago?

[Ben_]

Don’t imagine people will ever forget.

Here’s one of the results the Covid totalitarianism: https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/07/the-daily-chart-falling-institutional-trust.php

[Nige]

Here's the result of one side of a political divide essentially taking the side of the disease in a pandemic. It's the new laissez faire.

[dwb68]

Scientists declare {COVID was not leaked from a lab!!, warmest three weeks yet recorded worldwide!!}

Neither of which are true.

Why destroy your scientific credibility with absolutist statements?

[Nige]

Ask everyone who definitively claims covid leaked from a lab and that climate change isn't real. Mostly the answer is they never had the credibility to destroy.

[Frank Drackman]

It did leak from a lab (Jon Stewart said so) and Climate Change isn't real, other than the seasonal changes caused by the tilt of the Earth's Axis. Nobody knows what the temperature was in Chicago in 1123, 823, 23, 2023 BC, because even if temperature records went back that far, there was nobody keeping them in Chicago.

[Nige]

edgebot's not the finest mind on the right, but its up there

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Why pretend that you have any credibility at all?

[SRG]

Propublica on people in Mississippi being jailed for being mentally ill:

https://www.propublica.org/article/they-needed-mental-health-treatment-mississippi-threw-them-in-jail

I can understand pragmatically why Mississippi does such things. What I don't get is how it can be constitutional.

[Nige]

It would be pragmatic to provide them with the health care they need, this is just lazy, ideological and cruel, and will end up costing way more.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

STATES RANKED BY EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
(includes territories; 52 jurisdictions ranked)

HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA
Mississippi 49

UNDERGRADUATE DEGREE
Mississippi 51

ADVANCED DEGREE
Mississippi 51

HALF-EDUCATED CLINGERS
Mississippi 3

STATES RANKED BY REPUBLICAN ADVANTAGE

Mississippi 14

STATES RANKED BY PARASITISM
(dependency on federal assistance)

Mississippi 3

Mississippi is one of the states that should have been designated an unincorporated territory at the conclusion of the Civil War. Imagine an America with no senator from Mississippi or Tennessee, no House member from South Carolina or Arkansas, no electoral vote from Texas or Alabama.

[Randal]

Parrassitte

[Frank Drackman]

Jerry Sandusky being particularly Un-kind and Un-gentle today, ironic that his freedom has been paid for by thousands of Veterans from Mississippi.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Puerto Ricans have served in the American military. Residents of the unincorporated territory of Mississippi could have served, too.

It was a grave mistake to enable Mississippi and the other traitors, bigots, and losers to resume statehood, but I can't fault those who were unwisely lenient in the immediate wake of the Civil War too much.

They beat the bigots when it counted.

[Frank Drackman]

You really are a Foo-Bawl Coach Jerry, so after a whole war over States leaving the Onion, you'd not let them back in. Good thing you like little boys and didn't reproduce, talk about extra Chromosomes...

Frank

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Dear Diary,

How great would the world be if the US never incorporated the Black Belt. All those stupid niggers now have representation in our Congress!!!

Perplexed,

Arthur the Tolerant

[SRG]

One good reason for free speech is that it lets racists like you out themselves.

[Frank Drackman]

Barry Hussein Osama said the same word in his auto-erotic-biography, so he's a race-ist too (bad example, he is)

Frank

[mydisplayname]

I'm not certain the phrase "pay your fair share" is one that the current Federal administration should use.

[Ben_]

More illegal racial discrimination from a giant multinational company:

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/food-service-giant-sued-over-white-men-need-not-apply-program-5423007

High level people at the company reportedly said: “This is the direction the world is going, jump on the train or get run over,” and “We are not here to appease the old white man.”

Are people like that due any goodwill or humanity? Are their supporters due any? Are they not hostile enemies and racists?

[David Nieporent]

I can believe a company had an illegal program. The notion that people said those things in defense of the program is patently absurd. (I like the misuse of the word "reportedly." A former employee suing the company alleged it.)

[Ben_]

Democrats very commonly say similar things and seek to illegally discriminate in similar ways.

[Sarcastr0]

The Democrats in your head being all into white replacement is not surprising.

Those imaginary Dems are the *worst*

[BravoCharlieDelta]

This is where you pretend there aren’t countless videos of prominent/influention Democrats, headlines or magazine covers relishing, encouraging, and promoting White Replacement.

[Randal]

I don't deny they exist in your head.

[Ben_]

Here’s another story from today:

https://freebeacon.com/democrats/starbucks-hired-eric-holder-to-conduct-a-civil-rights-audit-the-policies-he-blessed-got-the-coffee-maker-sued/

"[Democrat Eric] Holder … outlined the steps Starbucks had taken to promote "equity." They included tying executive pay to diversity targets, setting spending goals for "diverse suppliers," and launching a mentorship program for "BIPOC" employees, which Holder pressed the company to expand. "

"But one year later, Starbucks was fending off a civil rights lawsuit over precisely the programs Holder had blessed. "

"At no point did Holder’s report address the legality of the policies at issue."

[Randal]

Oh no they "face a lawsuit!" What country have you been living in your whole life? Everybody sues everybody over everything. Tell me when they actually lose a case. Nothing described in the article is illegal.

[Ben_]

You can change the goalposts from Democrats don’t do such things to lawsuits are no big deal if you want.

Democrats illegally discriminate whenever they think they can get away with it. And they casually express their racism and intent to harm particular racial groups. That’s true regardless of whether a lawsuit is a big deal or not.

[Randal]

Don't try to use Sarcastr0isms that you don't understand. I didn't move the goalposts. I pointed out that your theory is stupid. Just because someone files a lawsuit doesn't mean the defendant did anything illegal. Na'doi.

[Ben_]

An observation is not a theory. I'd say Democrats' behavior is bad, not necessarily literally stupid.

[OtisAH]

Oh yeah? Since the practice is done so very commonly it should be real easy to provide some examples.

[NOVA Lawyer]

Not that you have much credibility, but all that we know so far is a person seeking large monetary damages has made allegations. I'm assuming you didn't make the same assumptions of truth about, say, E. Jean Carroll's allegations.

So, another multinational corporation is being sued by someone who was fired and claims that their termination was the result of discrimination (although, in this case, somewhat weirdly not against the plaintiff, except to the extent she had "religious objections" to the company's implementation of a "diversity" program). Shorter, it's another day in America and some of these plaintiffs win, some lose, some deserve to win, some deserve to lose.

There's no way to tell from this article whether this plaintiff has a legit complaint or is utterly and totally full of BS.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

THE VOLOKH CONSPIRACY

This white, male,
conservative blog
has operated for

ONE (1)

day without publishing a vile racial slur;
it has published racial slurs on at least

TWENTY-ONE (21)

different occasions (so far) during 2023
(that’s 21 different discussions, not 21
racial slurs; many of those discussions
featured multiple vile racial slurs).

This assessment does not address
the incessant, disgusting stream
of gay-bashing, misogynist, antisemitic,
Islamophobic, and immigrant-hating slurs
and other bigoted content presented
daily at this conservative blog, which
is presented by members of
the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies.

Amid this ugly right-wing intolerance and stale conservative ignorance, here is something worthwhile.

(This one is just as good.)

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Nope. Back to zero days. At the Volokh Conspiracy, the vile racial slurs never stop.

If this -- a bigot-hugging blog specializing in racial slurs -- is how a bunch of disaffected Federalist Society members want to spend the time they have remaining while awaiting replacement, let them have their fun.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

re: Alien Whistleblower, Democrats : oooohh awwwww Aliens must be real!

re: Biden Whistleblower, Democrats: That’s not real evidence!! That Whistleblower is lying! You can’t trust whistleblowers!

[SRG]

Alien credulity is a bipartisan meshugaas.

[SRG]

Note: the use of Yiddish is not loxist 🙂

[Nige]

So the alien guy is more credible than the Biden guys? Oooh, cellphone.

[Sam Bankman-Fried]

I think it’s cool Hunter conned a billion dollars out of China…I wish Trump would have done it.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Conned?

They're getting their money's worth, that's for sure.

[Sam Bankman-Fried]

Trump is the big flappy pussy that allowed China to unleash a bioweapon into America and did nothing about it!?!

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Well it's a good thing too he didn't, Gen. Miley confessed he told the Chinese he would give them advance warning if Trump retaliated.

Trumps inaction saved countless homo, trannies, and illegals from falling into a Chicom ambush.

[SRG]

Here you go: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/homophobes-might-be-hidden-homosexuals/

[BravoCharlieDelta]

And that makes sense to you?

Can you think of other human domains where the same principle might apply?

E.g., I despise most Jews for what they do to Western Society. Does that mean I’m secretly a Jew? I hate Chimp-outs, does that mean I’m secretly a BIPOC? I despise the Federal Government, does that mean I’m secretly the Federal Government? If I hate faggots, wouldn't that mean I'm secretly the FBI?

I mean, have you ever really thought about what their claiming? At all? Or just gulped it in like it was a big dong?

[Estragon]

Hey, Mark Foley was head of the exploited children’s caucus

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

E.g., I despise most Jews for what they do to Western Society.

Don't worry. Prof. Bernstein is surely familiar with your right-wing street cred and consequently will issue a pass on this one.

Carry on, clingers.

[SRG]

Sexual preference is different from political or racial preference. And if you can find research to support analogous findings, provide them.

It’s not difficult to imagine how given that being gay still has a stigma attached to it in certain groups, someone who’s a member of that group who either is gay or is afraid that they might be, might not wish to reveal the fact nor accept it of themselves, and might be aggressively anti-gay either to show to the group that they’re definitely not gay or to try to persuade themselves that they’re not.

And you fit the bill, being the most obvious closet case on this forum.

[Ed Grinberg]

I despise most Jews for what they do to Western Society.

I don't believe I've done anything "to Western Society." I'm pretty sure neither did my parents. I'm 100% sure my kids didn't. I think you're full of shit.
It's one thing to despise Person X for something he does. Despising people because of who they are -- because of their immutable characteristics -- is stupid & evil. Congratulations, BCD.

[Randal]

HA hahaha. Ha. Ha.

Those participants who reported their heterosexuality despite having hidden same-sex desires were also the most likely to show hostility toward gay individuals, including self-reported anti-gay attitudes, endorsement of anti-gay policies and discrimination such as supporting harsher punishments for homosexuals.

That's you, hoppy!

[BravoCharlieDelta]

This can’t be the first time you’ve heard about this stupid shit can it?

How can you Leftists be so ignorant all the time? Day after day one of you dummies out dummies each other. Like it's s o me kind of idiot competition.

[SRG]

And yet you've provided no real argument against the findings referred to in the SciAm article.

You'd be much happier if you came out, you know. You're a miserable prick atm.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

BCD really needs to stop the self-loathing and just find a decent dick to suck.

Go taste the rainbow, BCD. You'll be happier about life, and by extension, people here won't hate you as much.

[Randal]

It’s the first time I’ve seen it in Scientific American! Now we’ve got scientific proof!

[David Nieporent]

Gen. Miley confessed he told the Chinese he would give them advance warning if Trump retaliated.

One rhetorical trick is to use the word "admitted" or "confessed" rather than "said." That insinuates that the person didn't want to say it but was forced to, and that the thing said is true.

Of course, a second level of the trick is to use the word "admitted" or "confessed" for something the person never said at all. Milley did not admit, confess, or say that he told the Chinese he would give them advance warning if Trump "retaliated."

[Estragon]

I watched some of that hearing and my distinct impression was that the Republican members were more… ahem… credulous than their Democratic counterparts

[Mr. Bumble]

,,,and in Supreme Court news;
Court vacates two stays from 4th Circuit which had halted construction of the Mountain Valley Pipeline. Construction may now move forward.

[David Nieporent]

Without dissent.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

A headline that shouldn't surprise anyone:

ABC News Reporter, Who "Debunked" Pizzagate, Pleads Guilty to Child Rape

There are so many levels of "Of Course" there I lost count.

[Nige]

So you're claiming pizzagate was real, and Hilary and her staff were ordering children to abuse from a pizzeria?

[David Nieporent]

Don't be stupid. From the basement of a pizzeria. (That doesn't in fact have a basement.)

[Nige]

Oh, was that "Debunked?"

[shawn_dude]

It was "de-based."

[Estragon]

Comet pizza material from the guy who puts holocaust in scare quotes!

It’s a little too on the nose, isn’t it??

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Hey did you ever notice how the "bad guys" have never won a major war? Statistically speaking, wouldn't they have one at least once?

[Frank Drackman]

Roosha won in WW2, of course they were a "Good Guy" then, North Vietnam won, which is why the capital of what used to be called "South Vietnam" is now Ho Chi Minh City, the Tolly-bon won in Afghanistan, wow, you almost sound like an idiot with absolutely no military experience (I know you were Homo, much better now though)

Frank

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Like I said, Frank.

[Ben_]

That sort of thing keeps happening.

https://hotair.com/david-strom/2023/07/20/update-on-trans-lawmaker-arrested-for-kiddie-porn-it-gets-worse-n565986

"Stacie Marie Laughton, a Democrat who previously resigned twice from the New Hampshire state house, is now facing four counts of distributing sexually explicit images of children. Laughton was born Barry Charles Laughton, Jr."

Democrats chose this person. Not in spite of the obvious, on the record, crimes and deviance but because they preferred and valued it.

[Nige]

Ooh, can we say the exact same thing every time a Republican offical and Christian pastor or Qanon influencer gets arrested for similar? Because that happens a LOT more often, so perhaps people just take it for granted at this point.

[Krayt]

"These people are coming over the border. What would Jesus do?"

"Not welcome them escaping from corruption and dictatorship. Not comfort them and give them food and water. Put stuff in their way so they couldn't stumble into His welcoming, open arms."

Jesus will send you to Hell.

[Krayt]

"I have several meme responses to that!"

(Some time later...)

Jesus: "Yeah, that sounds about right. Get the hell out, Mexicans!"

[bevis the lumberjack]

He would say to treat them with humanity and love, then render unto Caesar and send them home.

[SimonP]

Same deal, when it comes to abortion rights, gender affirming care, CRT in the schools, etc.? "Render unto Caesar" and butt out of it?

[BravoCharlieDelta]

He would say if you send your children to Roman schools why are you surprised they came back as Romans?

[Nige]

If they were going to Roman schools they were probably already Roman. Duh.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Here is where Nige demonstrates he doesn't know that the Romans were conquerors and occupiers.

[Nige]

The Roman Empire extends mostly to the suburbs of Rome these days.

[Frank Drackman]

Nige-bot learned history in Pubic Screw-els

[Nige]

edgebot learned its history where it learned everything: 4chan

[bevis the lumberjack]

He was pretty clear on how to act toward the poor and the sick and those in prison.

I don’t recall seeing any teachings on CRT or abortion or trans stuff, so I’ll let you interpret that for yourself

[SimonP]

But you're the one applying Christian teachings in support of "Return to Mexico," expansive use of safe third country agreements, and deportations - under the rubric of "render unto Caesar." You're saying that specific Christian teachings about how to treat people, on an individual level, does not point in any particular direction when it comes to public policy. Aren't you?

If that's what you're saying, then what I'm saying is that the same principle would seem to apply to other public policies. Are Christians entitled to ignore Jesus's teaching, when it comes to what policies they vote for, or not?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

This Jesus sounds like a real loser whose followers are mostly just selfish assholes.

[Krayt]

So Netflix has an open $900k AI job. Striking actors are bent out of shape over it, how dare they?

How dare they what? Offer a massive salary for someone of their own “unique” brand they can charge an arm and a leg for?

Someone besides you, that is.

Good luck browbeating all the actor superstars to reduce their salary to $98k (still not bad) so you can have more. AI genius consuming Netflix money, leaving less fer yu: 0.01% of problem for you. Actor superstars consuming Neflix money, leaving less for you: 99% of your problem.

[Nige]

Did a drunk AI write this?

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Wealth inequality increased dramatically since the COVID years.

The government injected trillions into the economy over the same time period.

Did the governments policies cause this expansion in equality? Or did this acceleration happen in spite of government policies?

If the government policies cause this expansion during COVID, could government policies have contributed to the wealth inequalities before COVID?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I did not take a dime of government assistance related to COVID but figure the pandemic was worth a few hundred thousand dollars to me.

Plenty of people needed help during the pandemic and there wasn't much else to do, so I worked much more during that period than I otherwise would have and didn't spend as much.

This probably intensified wealth inequality but I billed and collected that money without government involvement.

[Ben_]

Now that the official deadline for doing anything about climate has passed, and the Earth is therefore DOOOMED, we can all forget about it entirely.

Yay!

[John F. Carr]

I remember when 2010 was the deadline.

[Nige]

If you'd read or listened carefully you'd know what they were and are the deadlines for.

[Ben_]

Almost like the climate change is 90+% hype and the reality is that it's basically a minor problem for distant future people.

[John F. Carr]

A superseding indictment has been filed against Donald Trump. It adds a 32nd count of willful retention of national defense information related to a "presentation concerning military activity in a foreign country" and a second co-conspirator, Trump's property manager Carlos De Oliveira.

[NOVA Lawyer]

And, don't forget, charges related to attempting to delete surveillance footage. Apparently, they have testimony and evidence which they believe proves Trump ordered the coverup.

I'm sure the new line will be, well, Hillary did it too, though we can't prove it. And that's the rub. There is direct evidence of Trump committing the crime MAGA nuts were outraged about when they thought, without evidence, that Hillary did it. Too bad for them, their beliefs aren't the same as evidence, and we are a nation of laws which require evidence beyond a reasonable doubt of guilt which, helpfully, Trump appears to have provided.

Definitely, he is the biggest loser.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

"without evidence"

lol

[Don Nico]

Whether Hilary did "it" is irrelevant. In fact, what anyone else did is irrelevant.
The Orange Clown skillfully painted himself into this corner. It is all his doing. Now comes the time to pay up.

[grb]

Don Nico : “The Orange Clown skillfully painted himself into this corner”

I recently read the New Yorker account of Stockton Rush and the Titan submersible. He ignored the advice of every major expert on designing for that depth, stiffed the recommendations of the man he hired to lead the sub’s development, drove him out of the company and threatened lawsuits when he tried to go public, bought cheap dated materials and the services of engineers just out of school, incorporated his business to escape rigorous certification, and ignored repeated problems in the few trials he ran.

By article’s end, it almost seemed like Rush had committed slow purposeful suicide. Then it hit me : That’s so like Trump at Mar-a-Lago with all his boxes of stolen documents. It’s as if Trump committed slow purposeful suicide too. He had dozens of chances to defuse the issue. He stiffed every one.

[Don Nico]

On this one, I completely agree with you.

[John F. Carr]

If the grand jury's summary is fair Trump looks guiltier than he did a week ago. But under federal sentencing rules, being convicted on any of the obstruction and coverup charges is hardly different from being convicted on all of them. And concealing 32 classified documents is the same as concealing 31. (Or willfully retaining 32 items containing national defense information, said items possessed without authorization, if you want to be pointlessly pedantic.)

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

One bonus is that at least a couple of Trump's co-criminals seem likely to be convicted, too, especially if they decline to cooperate with law enforcement officials. Dumbasses who try to conceal or destroy evidence and then lie to federal investigators in this context deserve to spend years in prison.

[NOVA Lawyer]

And there's the fact that they appear to have the goods on his attempt to destroy evidence (surveillance video) of his crimes, which won't add time to his sentence, but does make it a pretty hard sell to a jury. If there was no evidence of wrongdoing on the tapes, why were you so hell bent on erasing them before the feds could get them?

If this makes it to trial, it's not looking at all good for Trump. But it is looking good for decent, law-abiding, America-loving citizens.

[John F. Carr]

If they "have the goods" on Trump it's because he is liable for the actions of his co-conspirators. The evidence that Trump gave the order is shaky. Employee #4 says De Oliveira told him "the boss" wanted data erased. For a jury to conclude that Trump asked for the erasure the jurors would have to agree (1) employee #4 is telling the truth, (2) De Oliveira was telling the truth, (3) "the boss" was Trump, and (4) Trump's wishes were expressed with sufficient clarity to justify holding him responsible. To blame Trump for overzealous co-conspirators the jury only needs to believe (1), and that the request to erase video was within the scope of the conspiracy charged in count 33.

[not guilty]

"If they 'have the goods' on Trump it’s because he is liable for the actions of his co-conspirators."

Keen grasp of the obvious there.

Employee #4's testimony as to what De Oliveira said would be admissible against all conspirators pursuant to Fed.R.Evid. 801(d)(2)(E) if the prosecution can lay a proper foundation -- that is, that by a preponderance of evidence De Oliveira had conspired with others including Trump and that De Oliveira's statement was made in furtherance of the conspiracy. Bourjaily v. United States, 483 U.S. 171, 175-76 (1987). The court must consider the content of De Oliveira's statement in making the preliminary determination, but such statement does not by itself establish the existence of the conspiracy or De Oliveira's participation in it.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

The evidence that Trump gave the order is shaky.

I find it difficult to believe that any competent lawyer would underestimate the evidence the prosecution possesses in this context.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Woah, that sounds super serious! They got him this time guys!

[David Nieporent]

It adds a 32nd count of willful retention of national defense information related to a “presentation concerning military activity in a foreign country”

That sounds so innocuous, doesn't it? Except what it actually sounds like is that they found the Iran document that Trump was waving around and telling people was classified. If that’s what it refers to, it takes this case from home run to grand slam.

Also, a bunch of the MAGA idiots were talking about how prosecutors had supposedly concealed that Trump had cooperated with the subpoenas. Whoops! Once again, false.

[Kazinski]

I went out on what was planned as a 3 day backpacking trip with two of my kids yesterday, but climate changed happened, and we had to come back the way we came after one night. We started hitting large snow fields over 7200 feet on the Pacific Crest trail, and since 16 miles of our route would meander between 6800 and 7400 feet, we decided to head back down the way we came.

[Estragon]

“ but climate changed happened”

Cute but asinine. 16 miles where?

[bevis the lumberjack]

“Cute but asinine”

My wife bought me a t-shirt that says that for my birthday.

[Kazinski]

From Johnsville to Sierra City, the entire trip was going to be 24 miles, but the 16 in the middle was at about 7000 feet.

[Estragon]

The only thing I really remember about sierra city was that I stayed at a motel with a trout pond out front

[Ben_]

"…climate changed…"

It’s because Americans haven’t been forced by leftists to eat enough bugs.

[Estragon]

Tucker is that you?

[grb]

Kazinski : “We started hitting large snow fields over 7200 feet on the Pacific Crest trail”

When I did the AT back in 2010-2011, I was a painfully slow hiker. Most people do the two thousand-plus miles in 5-6 months; I took eight. Subsequently, I was wading thru snow barely more than halfway into Virginia, even though I had started late-June in Maine.

From late-November through early-February, I was continuously in snow. Navigation is a problem with everything blanketed in white; brief (and sometimes long) periods of getting lost became commonplace. I needed every stitch of clothing on when going into the bag at night (along with boots & water), but almost never hiked in thermals. Therefore I had to strip to skin every morn with temperatures down in the teens. Sometimes I could go a week without seeing another soul. There was almost no one left on the Trail and those few were ahead of me. I persisted thru brainless f***king stubbornness.

On 08 February, I descended three thousand vertical feet out of the Great Smokey Mountains to Fontana Dam – and walked on ground bare of snow. I can still recall the feeling of dizzying giddiness….

(The highest elevation I ever faced was 6,643 feet)

[Kazinski]

I like the outdoors, but camping in the teens takes all the enjoyment out of it for me. Waking up with hard ice on your sleeping bag from freezing condensation isn't fun.

I'm 68, and I was fine going 5 miles with a 2000' elevation gain yesterday in nice weather (we planned 8, before we turned back), but I'm not doing even 2 weeks anymore let alone months.

[grb]

I was then just into my 50s and therefore a spring lamb. Plus incentivized: The Great Recession had me long-term unemployed (not the best time to be an architect) and that was followed by divorce. The woods just seemed the place to be, misery & suffering notwithstanding.

Last August, I geared-up for 160miles in Sweden, hiking the Kungsleden above the Arctic Circle. It was a bit harder climbing in & out of the tent (the body's own mileage taking its toll), but I still managed. Now I'm considering the PCT in a few years.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

but climate changed happened,

The more I read from Kazinski, the more I am convinced that having him off the grid, in a shitty backwater shack separated from other people, is probably best for all concerned.

[Frank Drackman]

Like your "Off the Grid" home, Jerry at
https://www.cor.pa.gov/Facilities/StatePrisons/Pages/Greene.aspx

[Ben_]

Here’s some info from Twitter. Hunter’s judge incredulous about Hunter’s sweetheart deal with US Attorney Weiss:

https://twitchy.com/brettt/2023/07/27/man-who-didnt-get-sweetheart-plea-deal-examines-the-two-tiers-of-justice-n2385787

JUDGE: "Do you have any precedent for agreeing not to prosecute crimes that have nothing to do with the case or the charges being diverted?"

U.S. ATTY: " I am not aware of any, Your Honor."
—
Corrupt Democrats are barely even trying to pretend anymore.

[jb]

Good thing that they weren't proposing to do the thing there wasn't any precedent for, then.

Seems extra dumb to very obviously have read twitchy.com but none of the discussion on this exact same topic that's available by scrolling up a bit.

[Kazinski]

Seems your quarrel is with the judge not Ben, the Judge asked the prosecutor five times.

[Randal]

Asking questions is fine. She was trying to understand the sides' positions on an ambiguity, terrorist-boy.

Misrepresenting quotes out of context is lame and dorky.

[Kazinski]

Now just what was misrepresented?

[Randal]

The words “incredulous,” “sweetheart,” “corrupt,” and “pretend,” along with their surroundings.

Oh yeah and as DN pointed out, “Democrats.”

[David Nieporent]

What exactly is your basis for claiming that Leo Wise is a Democrat?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Corrupt Democrats are barely even trying to pretend anymore.

Which of the Democrats responsible for this prosecution do you have in mind, you bigoted, uneducated rube?

[not guilty]

A superseding indictment has been filed in Florida regarding the Mar-a-Lago documents. It adds an additional defendant and additional counts. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67490070/united-states-v-trump/ ECF No. 85.

[not guilty]

Here is a description of the additional content. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653.86.0.pdf

I wonder if the additional defendant has a cooperation agreement.

[Estragon]

I think the person cooperating is “employee 5”

[Don Nico]

It is time for ALL the oldsters to retire from politics.
The US neither needs nor deserves its present gerontocracy.

[Kazinski]

Totally agree there.

Probably need to weed out the senate too.

The Senate and the Presidency are making the Supreme Court look youthful.

But on the positive side Biden's re-election campaign is beginning to look like one last grift. He's raising funds as fast as he can but he has an absolute bare bones campaign staff spending almost no money.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Disagree. I don't see how the oldsters are any worse than the youngsters champing at the bit to replace them.

If these guys were a bunch of Nestors, I wouldn't object to them on account of age.

But the old people we have seem to have grown old before they grew wise, like King Lear (but without the abdication part).

[Kazinski]

Well to be clear, I think the voters should do the weeding out, I don't want to change the laws.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

OK, but my point was that voters should do their weeding based on whether the people are any good, not if they're over a certain age.

Biden and Trump, in middle age, weren't any better than they are now.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Like all politicians in middle age, Biden and Trump were better attuned generationally to the needs and future concerns of typical constituents. As they age, politicians become less and less attuned to the challenges which impinge on younger constituents, who in turn become a greater and greater fraction of everyone. It is human nature to stay attuned to the views of elders, while paying relatively less attention to the views of juniors. In advanced age, that leaves elderly leaders out of touch with nearly everyone.

[Intelligent Mr Toad]

On my mind: this has nothing to do with politics but it sure is interesting. From the current issue of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences:

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2301856120

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Benjamin Franklin would have been pleased to have his work analyzed for a scientific journal called PNAS, huh-huh.

[santamonica811]

Man, you're on a roll today. Two really good ones!

[Kazinski]

I was reading a paper last night, on my phone because I was out in the woods, about Axion Quark Nuggets.
https://link.aps.org/doi/1n0.1103/PhysRevD.99.023517

The theory seems to explain a few mysteries like the difference in matter anti-matter prevalence, and why the Suns Corona is 100x hotter than the Suns surface.

The theory is anti-matter Quark Nuggets are being anialated at the corona providing the extra energy needed to fully explain the difference.

[Brett Bellmore]

Interesting. Here's a working link.

Such nuggets, if they could be harvested from free space, would be a wonderful fuel for interstellar spacecraft.

The energy flux proposed is 10^20 watts, distributed over the entire surface of the Sun. The surface area of the Sun is 'only' 6*10^18 square meters, so we're talking an energy flux of about 17 watts per square meter.

Not much compared to the Sun's luminosity, but still pretty significant. The obvious question is, wouldn't you notice this sort of flux elsewhere in the solar system? It's not like the nuggets would only be hitting the Sun, they'd hit every body in the Solar system. I really don't think we could escape noticing 17 watts per square meter of incoming antimatter landing on, say, the dark side of the Moon.

Now, granted, the sectional density of these things is pretty darned high, so it's possible the reason we don't see any outward sign is that they hardly interact with the atmosphere, and bury themselves quite deeply before exploding.

Here's the thing: The geothermal heat flux, the rate at which heat escapes from the core of the earth to the surface, is about a tenth of a watt per square meter. If you had 17 watts per square meter incoming, being deposited in the crust, the crust would be continually getting hotter until it reached an equilibrium where that heat flux was equal to 17 watts per square meter!

So, I have my doubts about the theory here...

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Penn State, a deplorable backwater institution for at least a half-century, has announced plans to stop funding for The Daily Collegian, the student newspaper.

The Daily Collegian was not the best student newspaper -- its bloated professional staff did much of the newsroom and business office work for decades, providing a crutch that stunted the education and training of many student journalists -- but it was a worthy publication staffed by many good journalists over the years.

Penn State -- already disgraced by Joe Paterno, Jerry Sandusky, Todd Hodne, and others, a revolting example of what happens when the financial, administrative, academic, political, prosecutorial, and police power in a rural region is located on the front porch of a football coach who is an ethically bankrupt and criminally corrupt hypocrite -- keeps getting worse.

[Frank Drackman]

So you're saying you're NOT Jerry Sandusky??
that's just what Jerry Sandusky would say,
Carry on, Klinger
back to kinder/gentler Frank

Frank

[BravoCharlieDelta]

So a black man in SF pulls a gun on the cops and gets shot.

What do you think the natives do? If you answered Chimp Out you'd be correc5.

I'm guessing soon it will be a crime for a cop to stop a black man from shooting them.

[BrotherMovesOn]

Are you gainfully employed by a going concern?
Apologies in advance if you are mentally or physically disabled/unable to contribute, of course.

[apedad]

Trump charged with trying to delete Mar-a-Lago surveillance footage in new indictment

The indictment notes efforts from de Oliveira, 56, to determine how long security footage was stored on the Mar-a-Lago system. It says he later told another Mar-a-Lago employee that “‘the boss’ wanted the server deleted.”

The indictment also described de Oliveira and Nauta organizing their plans secretly, apparently walking among the bushes around the IT office where the security footage was managed.

At another point de Oliveira and Nauta “walked with a flashlight through the tunnel where the storage room was located, and observed and pointed out security cameras.”

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4123941-trump-charged-with-trying-to-delete-mar-a-lago-surveillance-footage-in-new-indictment/

Whatever your opinion of Trump is, if you work for him then you are committing career suicide.

[NOVA Lawyer]

It fascinating that everyone thinks they can get more out of Trump than they are going to lose especially including evangelical voters who thought they could "use" Trump to get what they wanted. Trump more consistently destroys the careers of his supporters than of his supposed enemies. And yet, people keep tying their hopes, dreams, and careers to this black hole of a human being.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

And yet, people keep tying their hopes, dreams, and careers to this black hole of a human being.

Not many good or smart people.

[NOVA Lawyer]

This is true. And often they are neither smart nor good, but very seldom both.

[shawn_dude]

Evangelical voters got a repeal of Roe V Wade and are likely to get additional benefits valued by white nationalists as time goes on.

Some voters don't believe democracy is working for them any more and Trump was a good candidate for causing chaos in the system. He delivered to some degree, though failed at overturning democracy itself. Perhaps he's set things in motion that will facilitate the GOP enacting a single-party system in the US similar to Russia or Hungary in the near future.

[Brett Bellmore]

We didn't want democracy overturned. We wanted it rendered functional again, instead of having a system where you got the same thing regardless of who you voted for. (Maybe just on a slightly less aggressive schedule if you elected Republicans.)

Notice that overturning Roe v Wade didn't abolish democracy, instead it allowed abortion policy to be made democratically, instead of by judicial fiat.

[Nige]

'We didn’t want democracy overturned'

That's just what someone who wants to overturn democracy would say.

[grb]

Brett Bellmore : “We wanted it rendered functional again, instead of having a system where you got the same thing regardless of who you voted for”

As one of Trump’s most abject lickspittles, what do you think that sentence means?

1. Do you think Trump “rendered” government functional again with his clownshow chaos?

2. Take away all the huckster fireworks, and how was Trump different from the “same thing” of any other GOP president?

3. For that matter, how did somehow so corrupt as Trump (who didn’t even pretend to follow ethics rules) and an administration that racked-up more criminal and ethics transgression than any since Nixon, “drain the swamp”?

Since I doubt your capacity to respond honestly, I’ll provide your answer : You didn’t care about “functionality”. You didn’t care about substantive new policy. And you damn sure didn’t care about the “swamp” or clean government given the man you support.

All you cared about was watching Trump wipe his lard ass on every political and civic institution within reach. All you cared about was Trump’s brat show of contempt for all the rules. All you cared about was Trump’s cartoon scorn towards the uppity types you hate.

That was “functionality” to you. That was something different than the “same thing” to you. That was “draining the swamp” to you: A two-bit obviously fake act. Pure reality TV entertainment, nothing more.

[NOVA Lawyer]

Precisely this.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Mr. Bellmore has demonstrated he is delusional, bigoted, disaffected, and antisocial, and admitted he is autistic.

[Stephen Lathrop]

What's wrong with being autistic? Adam Smith, Thomas Jefferson, Bill Gates....

[David Nieporent]

I am quite certain that none of those people were ever diagnosed as autistic.

[Randal]

We didn’t want democracy overturned. We wanted it rendered functional again...

Republicans think that any election won by a Democrat is invalid.

How exactly is that different from wanting democracy overturned in favor of a one-party system?

[NOVA Lawyer]

"Evangelical voters got a repeal of Roe V Wade"

Yes, but, though souls aren't a thing, they lost them. They are seen widely by young people for the anti-Jesus people they are, willing to throw in with Trump as well as demonizing all the sorts of people the Jesus of the Bible commanded they show compassion. They've exposed themselves as the Sadducees and Pharisees they are and that doesn't win converts.

In addition, the repeal of Roe v. Wade isn't popular, so that's likely going to be a pyrrhic victory for them, both in terms of losing members/converts because they will continue to try to eliminate all abortions (which is very unpopular) and it will make it less likely they'll achieve other electoral successes.

[David Nieporent]

They’ve exposed themselves as the Sadducees and Pharisees they are and that doesn’t win converts.

Do we really feel the need to use antisemitic slurs in order to attack Christians?

[NOVA Lawyer]

Educate me. As the Bible tells it, Jesus literally preached against the Sadducees and Pharisees based on, as told in the Bible, their hypocrisy and arrogance and lust for power over compassion for the poor. Clearly, I was referring to this Bible story, not present day Jews, assuming Pharisees and Sadducees are still a titles people have (I guess, probably they are, but actually hadn’t considered it).

If referring to that story is antisemitic, then I can’t see how any reference to Bible stories isn’t antisemitic because the whole story is of Jesus repudiating the then ascendant Jewish leaders.

And it seems fair game to use the Bible that many, if not most, Christians view as the inerrant “word of God” to criticize Christians for exemplifying the characteristics of those Jesus explicitly and brutally criticized.

But if I offended you or anyone else for unintentionally and collaterally insulting Jews (or a subgroup of them), I apologize. It was not my intent.

Feel free to educate me as to how to reference that story without “antisemitic slurs.” Because it is a useful story to reference when talking to today’s powerful Christians (or their apologists) because they exhibit the character and behavior that Jesus criticized in this story and Christians are familiar with this story.