Thursday Open Thread

What's on your mind?

Comments

[not guilty]

The Washington Post has reported some content of the proffers made to Georgia authorities by defendants who have pleaded guilty in the Fulton County prosecution of Donald Trump and others. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/11/13/trump-georgia-case-videos-overturn-2020-election/

Kenneth Chesebro disclosed that at a previously unreported White House meeting on December 16, 2020 he briefed Trump on election challenges in Arizona and summarized a memo in which he offered advice on assembling alternate slates of electors in key battlegrounds to cast ballots for Trump despite Biden’s victories in those states. Chesebro told prosecutors that Trump asked “four or five questions” and that he summarized for Trump his Nov. 18, 2020, memo to the campaign in which he called Jan. 6, 2021, “the real deadline” for settling the state’s electoral votes.

This should rebut any suggestion that Trump was unaware of or not complicit in the fake elector scheme which was the linchpin of his efforts to unlawfully remain in office after his term expired.

Jenna Ellis told prosecutors that Dan Scavino, Trump's Deputy Chief of Staff, said to her in December 2020 that “the boss” did not plan to leave the White House “under any circumstances.” When Scavino said Trump planned to stay in the White House anyway, she said, “Well, it doesn’t quite work that way, you realize,” according to her statement. “We don’t care,” Scavino replied, she said.

“We, I believed to mean President Trump, as the boss, and anyone who — including Mr. Scavino — who would have aided him in that effort, which my understanding at the time would have been some of his staff including Mr. Meadows,” Ellis said.

Scavino's statements may be admissible at trial against Trump as nonhearsay under Georgia Code § 24-8-801(d)(2)(D) as statements by Trump's agent or employee concerning a matter within the scope of the agency or employment, made during the existence of the relationship. If the trial court finds that Scavino was a coconspirator of Trump and made his statements during the course and in furtherance of the conspiracy, they are nonhearsay according to § 24-8-801(d)(2)(E).

[VinniUSMC]

Smells like... desperation.

[Sarcastr0]

All lies and jest, till the man hears what he wants to hear.

[David Nieporent]

I think you meant "smells what he wants to smell."

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Trump, Scavino, and their co-conspirators still reek of desperation.

[VinniUSMC]

Awesome, 2 gray boxes. Thanks for your input.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Half-educated, bigoted Trump supporters who hate modern America are among my favorite culture war casualties . . . and the target audience of a white, male, bigot-hugging blog operated by fringe law professors

[Zarniwoop]

In response to the leak by a defendant, the Court has now issued protective order (document here):

https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/a66b98de-59dd-472b-9f3b-83eed8f063ad.pdf

What’s the over/under on Trump squawking about how this, too, infringes his 1st Amd right to taint the jury pool er bloviate to his supporters er fundraise off of specious persecution claims er make “perfect speeches” on the campaign trail?

[Kazinski]

I really always try to understand the science which underlies AGW theory but there seems to be one major disconnect that I can’t reconcile. I saw recently saw a outgoing infrared energy data set showing a NASA dataset of radiative fluxes I hadn’t heard about before. It measures downwelling LW IR radiation, and interestingly enough it shows no trend, or actually a slight negative trend in the data since 1983, despite the fact that there has been a rather significant increase in CO2 since 1983.

https://isccp.giss.nasa.gov/zFD/an9090_LWdw_srf.gif

According to Global Warming theory downwelling LWIR is the physical effect of CO2 that causes the planet to warm. Here is a typical explanation of the expected effect:

Photon gobblers: All forms of light, including infrared, consist of tiny packets of energy called ‘photons.’ When an infrared photon radiating away from the earth happens to hit a GHG molecule, that molecule gobbles it up and goes into what’s called an ‘excited’ vibrational state. But that only lasts for an instant, after which the molecule spits out an identical photon in a random direction. That’s the key: since that new photon could go in any direction, it may continue out to space like the original one, but there’s an even chance it will go back down toward the earth, returning that energy back to where we all live. So, the more GHG molecules there are in the air, the more of the outgoing infrared energy effectively gets bounced back to the Earth’s surface. The equilibrium between ingoing and outgoing energy changes, and that’s what gradually raises the average global temperature."

https://citizensclimatelobby.org/blog/policy/the-science-behind-climate-change/

Don't take my word for it, there are hundreds of sites with the same explanation.

But of course the data shows no such increase in the “outgoing infrared energy [that] effectively gets bounced back to the Earth’s surface.”

The reason is likely because of a big missing component of that picture: the Kinetic Theory of Gases. While its true a CO2 molecule will be bumped into a higher energy state when it absorbs an LWIR photon, and left undisturbed will emit an identical such photon in less than a second after its absorbed, gas molecules are not left undisturbed, and a typical CO2 molecule will collide with literally millions of other molecules and transfer that excess vibrational energy to them long before it can release that energy via a photon. And like most latent heat in the atmosphere it will rise and dissipate as it reaches higher altitude.

Since 99.9 of the atmosphere is nitrogen and oxygen then 99.9% of the formerly LWIR energy is transferred to N2 and O2 as kinetic energy and is not re-emitted back towards the surface as LWIR it is absolutely inconsistent with standard AGW theory.

If I have to choose between AGW theory and the standard kinetic theory of gases, well Its not a hard choice.

And please don’t tempt me to explain the standard atmospheric and physical data which is pretty conclusive that CO2 is already saturated and additional CO2 will have virtually no effect.

[Nige]

'If I have to choose between AGW theory and the standard kinetic theory of gases, well Its not a hard choice'

It's a good thing the natural world works in such a way that if you persuade yourself you've found a loophole, it has to stop doing the things you don't want to believe it's doing. This is a legal blog, I suppose.

[Mr. Bumble]

I’LL BELIEVE IT’S A CRISIS WHEN THE PEOPLE WHO KEEP TELLING ME IT’S A CRISIS START ACTING LIKE IT’S A CRISIS: Climate Change Is ‘Ultimate Threat to Humanity,’ Biden Says Before Boarding Private Jet To Meet World’s Largest Carbon Emitter: Biden’s flight to San Francisco to meet Chinese president Xi emitted more carbon than the average American produces in four years. Posted at 8:00 am by Glenn Reynolds From Instapundit. Link to article below:

https://freebeacon.com/biden-administration/climate-change-is-ultimate-threat-to-humanity-biden-says-before-boarding-private-jet-to-meet-worlds-largest-carbon-emitter/

[Nige]

I too base my understanding of physics on the behaviour of politicians who, as we all know, and as you repeatedly tell us, fail to act with sufficent urgency on things you claim are crises all the time.

[ThePublius]

Not a loophole. It has long been know that there is no downwelling of LWIR. One need only look at a couple of statistical facts about CO2 molecules. The mean time for a CO2 molecule to transfer its excess energy to an adjacent molecule in the atmosphere is about a million times less than the mean time for an excited CO2 molecule to emit a photon. So the latter never happens.

[Nige]

Explanations for why a thing that is happening cannot possibly be happening are entertaining, especially from you lot.

[ThePublius]

What a bullshit comment. You are just being contrary.

[Nige]

The only point of taking a narrow scientific principle and using it to declare a massive complex inter-related system like the climate is therefore not doing what it's clearly doing is to prevent any policy responses to what the climate is clearly doing.

[Armchair]

Brief point.

"99.9%" of the atmosphere is not oxygen and nitrogen. Argon makes up 0.9% of the atmosphere.

[Kazinski]

“What’s in the Air? By volume, the dry air in Earth’s atmosphere is about 78.08 percent nitrogen, 20.95 percent oxygen, and 0.93 percent argon. A brew of trace gases accounts for the other approximately 0.04 percent, including the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and ozone.”

Yes, you got me there, so nitrogen and oxygen are together 99.03% of the atmosphere, and Argon another NON greenhouse gas which is another .93, which gives us a total of 99.96 inert non greenhouse gasses before we get to CO2.

For the record its not 99.9 O2, N2, its ~99.96% with Argon.

Thanks for the clarification. One interesting tidbit as far as I can tel Argon is the only significant free floating atom in the atmosphere among N2(78%), O2(20.95),H2O(0-4%), AR(0.93), CO2 (.04%)_ is pretty distinctive. The math doesn’t quite add up because everything except the H2O percent is dry air percentage and that is very variable.

[Armchair]

It should also be remarked on that water is a greenhouse gas. In fact, it's responsible for ~50% of Earth's greenhouse effect.

The little details like this get important.

[Brett Bellmore]

In fact, most of the claimed global warming threat is supposed to come from a very minor increase in temperature due to the CO2 driving up humidity, in a positive feedback which is suggested to be just barely short of running away and causing a Venus scenario. Without the water amplification, the models show trivial levels of warming from increased CO2.

[Joe_dallas]

Brett - the water vapor feedback (positive or negative ) is one of the most poorly understand factors in the climate science realm. As you mention, water vapor is a positive feedback under the current theory of climate science. Yet there are far too many contradictions from the past to reach a conclusion as to whether water vapor is a positive or negative feedback or both. I personally think climate science is extremely complex with vastly too many dynamics (too many unknown/ poorly understood factors ) at this point in time.

I will also state that I agree that the earth has been on a warming cycle since the mid to late 1800's which is not in dispute and the increases in CO2 have had some contribution to that warming. Though simply that the amount of warming due to co2 is unknown, but probably significantly less than promoted by the activists.

I will say, the climate scientists lose a lot of credibility when they get so many easy to understand facts wrong on the peripherial subjects, such as renewables, paleo reconstructions, subsidies ,etc. IE if they get so much of the easy stuff wrong - how can they possibly get the complex issues correct.

[David Nieporent]

I will say, the climate scientists lose a lot of credibility when they get so many easy to understand facts wrong on the peripherial subjects, such as renewables, paleo reconstructions, subsidies ,etc. IE if they get so much of the easy stuff wrong – how can they possibly get the complex issues correct.

I think that all of humanity appreciates that you took time away from your busy schedule doing microbiology to also educate the world on climatology.

[grb]

Speaking of our microbiology expert Joe_dallas, I saw in the news that the overall childhood vaccination rate has fallen from 95% to 93%. That drop will have real consequences and represents a distrubing trend, public health-wise.

And to think it's all so people like Joe_dallas can have another Culture War playtoy...

[Joe_dallas]

The drop in vaccination rates for the hugely beneficial vaccines (MMR, polio, etc) is due largely from the push of an ineffective covid vaccine on a sub-population (children) that are not at risk. Thus creating an atmosphere whereby parents are questioning the benefits of all vaccines. The CDC etal basically tainted the benefits of all vaccines with the push for a vaccine with very little benefit, if any, for children. ie if the covid vaccine is not worth it, then are the other vaccines worth it. Call it unintended consequences of trying to force a single ineffective vaccine.

[Nige]

Yeah all the anti-vaxx bullshit - of which this is a sample - can't possibly be held responsible for anything.

[Joe_dallas]

Nige 22 mins ago
Flag Comment Mute User
"Yeah all the anti-vaxx bullshit – of which this is a sample – can’t possibly be held responsible for anything."

Nige - again you are displaying only a left wing talking point grasp of the subject.

Most all vaccines are very beneficial, MMR, polio , etc. The covid vaccine was very beneficial for the elderly and at risk population. However, the covid vax for children had virtually no benefit since children had extremely low risk ( with the exception of children who had pre existing life threating illnesses).

Is summary, it was the heavy push for a vaccine with little or no benefit for children that tainted the benefits of the good vaccines.

[Nige]

Bullshit. If the vaccine reduced the chances of children catching covid, that reduced the chances of covid spreading – that right there is the benefit. But why would any of that matter without massive anti-vaxx disinformation trying to scare parents away from vaxxing their children?

[Reallynotbob]

We can't trust the scientists because they... didn't design good subsidies? Huh?

[Joe_dallas]

Reallynotbob 2 hours ago
Flag Comment Mute User
"We can’t trust the scientists because they… didn’t design good subsidies? Huh?"

No its a failure of the good scientists to police/call out the bad actors masquerading as scientists which has tainted the good scientists, Mann, Gergis, pages 2k with the paleo reconstructions: Jacobson, Delucci with the 100% renewables studies and bogus 30sec reliability test, etc

Very simply, the bad actors and advocates are being called out

[Joe_dallas]

correction - the last line should read - Very simply, the bad actors and advocates posing as climate scientists are not being called out by the good climate scientists.

[grb]

Too bad the people “calling out” the “bad actors” are almost never climate scientists. Hell, they’re rarely scientist at all!

[Joe_dallas]

GRB - Gergis, pages 2k, jacobson, delucci should be called out. huge quality problems with their work.

[Reallynotbob]

Okay, but that doesn't have anything to do with subsidies.

[Joe_dallas]

My reference to subsidies is that the numerous claims that the fossil fuel industry receives large subsidies is based on huge distortions of the meaning of term subsidies. For the claimed tax subsidies, with the exception of percentage depletion in excess of basis, there are really no subsidies.

Most of the reports of “subsidies” provide little or no detail of how the supposed subsidies are computed, just huge claims that the subsidies exist with no detail of what the subsidies are or any detail of how the amount of the subsidy is calculated. The reports of tax subsidies when the details are provided have huge math and logic errors.

[SimonP]

"I don't dispute that an increased concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere caused by human activity is resulting in global warming. I just dispute the precise mechanism by which this is happening."

[Sarcastr0]

You have not, actually, disproven climate science.

"There are several different types of greenhouse gases. The major ones are carbon dioxide, water vapor, methane, and nitrous oxide. These gas molecules all are made of three or more atoms. The atoms are held together loosely enough that they vibrate when they absorb heat. Eventually, the vibrating molecules release the radiation, which will likely be absorbed by another greenhouse gas molecule. This process keeps heat near the Earth’s surface. Most of the gas in the atmosphere is nitrogen and oxygen, which cannot absorb heat and contribute to the greenhouse effect."

[Armchair]

SarcastrO says some dumb stuff, but "Most of the gas in the atmosphere is nitrogen and oxygen, which cannot absorb heat" may be one of his dumbest in recent memory.

Remind me again, how nitrogen and oxygen can't absorb heat, so they can't actually get warmer...

[Absaroka]

This is Sarcastro's source. Not sure why he doesn't link; maybe it's hard to do with voice to text and he's unwilling to type.

That write up seems to be 'global warming for third graders'. What I think they are saying is that some molecules - greenhouse gases - are way more active at trapping and reradiating in the infrared spectrum, not that N and O aren't subject to the usual mechanisms of heat transfer. The argument is that if you emit IR into pure N or O (actually N2 and O2, I think), more will pass through than if you add tiny amounts of CO2, methane, etc to the mix).

[Armchair]

Typical he'd get his education from a 3rd grade level.

FYI, the usual mechanisms of heat transfer are conduction and convection. Both of which are "very" common ways for oxygen and nitrogen gas to be heated. Radiation is the third. Nitrogen and oxygen gas absorb plenty of photons as well (radiation), but typically not in the IR bands

[Absaroka]

"Typical he’d get his education from a 3rd grade level."

He has a physics major.

"Nitrogen and oxygen gas absorb plenty of photons as well (radiation), but typically not in the IR bands"

Yes; that's exactly what the source is saying, that's why greenhouse gases trap heat.

[Armchair]

If he has a physics major, that makes it worse. He posted a 3rd grade explanation, that gets critical details incorrect. It shows he has no actual grasp of the subject matter. As a scientist, the statement made was so error-ridden is was painful to read.

I only pointed out one of the details. Among other issues is that when re-radiation occurs, it's statistically unlikely that another greenhouse gas molecule captures the photon. Instead, it's radiated ~50% towards the earth, ~50% towards space.

But to reiterate...a physics major posting a 3rd grade explanation? A serious lack of understanding is present.

[Absaroka]

" it’s statistically unlikely that another greenhouse gas molecule captures the photon."

That likelihood is going to depend on the concentration of greenhouse gases, which is of course the issue.

"Instead, it’s radiated ~50% towards the earth, ~50% towards space."

Right. In pure N2/O2, ~100% goes into space, whereas with greenhouse gases some is re-radiated down. The more greenhouse gases, the more gets radiated down. That is precisely the mechanism at work.

[OtisAH]

Presumably you recognize it as a “3rd grade explanation” because your reading comprehension skills are stuck at a 2nd grade level.

[Nelson]

"If he has a physics major, that makes it worse. He posted a 3rd grade explanation, that gets critical details incorrect."

Your texting accent makes "simplified" sound like "incorrect".

Unless you actually believe that any explanation geared towards a layman is automatically incorrect. Do you believe that?

[Kazinski]

Yes Sarcastro, they vibrate when they both absorb energy by absorbing a photon, OR when they collide with another molecule that is vibrating. Because those molecular vibrations are transferred to other molecules as kinetic energy when they collide, which happens billions of times a second for a molecule at standard temp and pressure (mean free path of a gas molecule is ~65nm, the average molecule is traveling 475m per second, which is 475 billion nm per second.)

There are also different kind of vibrations and radiant emissions, spontaneous emissions where a molecule releases photons at a specific frequency because it's vibrating at a frequency specific to that molecule and it's energy state, and blackbody radiation which every molecule above 0k is emitting at a frequency that is directly determined by its temperature(which is a measure of the kinetic energy of the vibrating and colliding molecules and atoms of a substance).

[Sarcastr0]

Thanks for dropping all undergrad textbook stuff. Takes me back to my undergrad years. It's not quite statmech, but I actually took enough of an interest in thermodynamics I made it a focus of my graduate studies, albeit as applied to cosmology.

The issue you are missing is that the extra degrees of freedom in the vibrational modes allow for additional energy absorption.

Treating each gas molecule as a blackbody is reductive, especially due to the vibrational modes of the ones that go beyond diatomic. But not required to observe the greenhouse effect.

For that you just need to see that a blackbody layer like the atmosphere that is opaque at the infrared.

Most of the sun's incoming energy is not going to see that layer at all - the sun is hot, most of it's flux is hanging out in the UV and beyond.

But the energy coming back up from the much cooler earth is more in the IR area. And suddenly our blackbody is in business.

The atmosphere absorb the IR energy going out from earth into space and re-emit it going not just out but half out half in.

Now the earth is receiving twice the energy flux the uncovered body receives. The equilibrium temperature thus also rises.

There some other gases that absorb at other wavelengths. And there's convection...but you get the element your model missed, yes?

You'd better hope you've not disproven the greenhouse effect; under pure blackbody the earth is 256K.

[Kazinski]

"But the energy coming back up from the much cooler earth is more in the IR area. And suddenly our blackbody is in business."

You are confusing the greenhouse effect with blackbody radiation. The greenhouse effect is in business because greenhouse gasses, primarily H2O, absorb radiation in the black body spectrum of the earth's temperature, but the moon with no appreciable atmosphere has a "blackbody in business" too.

[Sarcastr0]

Since one can model the atmosphere as a blackbody blanket in the IR spectrum, then there is a greenhouse effect due to the bidirectional re-emitting, while being as you noted being largely transparent to incoming sunlight.

That’s all that’s needed.

The moon has no atmosphere, and thus no re-emitting.

[Armchair]

Lord...

Once again, Sarcastr0 speaks confidently...but wrong.

"Most of the sun’s incoming energy is not going to see that layer at all – the sun is hot, most of it’s flux is hanging out in the UV and beyond"

1. No, most of the sun's irradiation is below the UV spectrum. Primarily in the visible spectrum

https://www.e-education.psu.edu/meteo300/node/683

"Now the earth is receiving twice the energy flux the uncovered body receives"

No. No, no, no. It is not "twice the energy flux" This ignores too many things to mention. The energy of longwave IR isn't nearly that of visible irradiation.

Sacastro needs to go back to the textbook.

[DaveM]

I am an amateur geologist. I don’t think I’ve ever met a geologist who doubts that there is climate change — just not on a human time scale. Also, it is universally observed that this change goes in both directions in a cycle of oscillations which has been repeating.

If we take the geologic record at face value, we can use it instead of attempting to model the dynamic, chaotic system that is climate. Whatever happened to the climate is in the rocks. Written like on paper.

The only thing we need to do is separate natural variation from man-made variation. You don’t need to model anything, just measure it. This has been done recently, in fact, and the answer is that whatever variation is man-made, it is entirely swamped by natural variation. The difference cannot be detected.

To me, that satisfies all climate change questions. Yes, there is change. Yes, it is significant. But it is also measured in thousands of years of elapsed time. And, the vast majority is naturally occurring. Thus, we need to ADAPT to the change. We can neither hasten nor delay it.

[Nige]

If you're going by the geological record, how can you reach conclusions about current events that have not been recorded geologically yet? The current change is in contrast to previous changes because it is accelerated due to human emissions.

'To me, that satisfies all climate change questions'

You've completely ignored the actual climate, but sure, go with it.

[Joe_dallas]

Nige 2 hours ago
Flag Comment Mute User
If you’re going by the geological record, how can you reach conclusions about current events that have not been recorded geologically yet? The current change is in contrast to previous changes because it is accelerated due to human emissions.

Nige - the resolution of the data is not nearly high enough to reach that conclusion. It may or may not be true. However, based on the scientists ability to measure the data with any degree of accuracy, it is impossible to know whether that statement is true or false.

[Nige]

‘It may or may not be true.’

Never seen anyone so determined to stay on a burning fence before. We're not going to hang around long enough to check the geological record to see if things that are happening now are actually happening just to keep self-appointed doubting Thomases happy.

[Joe_dallas]

Nige - another response demonstrating knowledge limited to left wing talking points without any grasp of the actual subject matter.

[Nige]

This is your response to every comment that disagrees with you on any subject. It's self-parody.

[JasonT20]

In 1988, NASA scientist James Hansen testified before the Senate about climate model projections. Here is how those projections did.

The only thing we need to do is separate natural variation from man-made variation. You don’t need to model anything, just measure it. This has been done recently, in fact, and the answer is that whatever variation is man-made, it is entirely swamped by natural variation. The difference cannot be detected.

You are going to need to cite where you got the idea that natural forcings and variation are larger than man-made climate forcings. Everything I find (including the article I linked) says otherwise.

[Brett Bellmore]

I'm curious why the null hypothesis was a flat temperature, when we know that temperatures have been rising over time even before CO2 did.

That said, can we beat with a rubber chicken anybody who touts worst case fears based on Scenario A?

[Nige]

Rising over thousands of years as opposed to shooting up in a century and a half.

[Joe_dallas]

Nige - the resolution of the data is too poor to make that statement with any degree of confidence. Its a AGW activist talking point .

You are comparing high resolution instrumental data with weak/very low resolution proxy data.

[Nige]

How fine does the resolution have to be when you're looking at trends over thousands of years? This is nitpicky dead-end bullshit.

[JasonT20]

Nitpicking is all that skeptics have. They act like picking at certain aspects of climate science and casting doubt on them is enough. It is also a shotgun approach, since when someone with enough knowledge or Google skills points out how their claim is wrong, they just jump to something else. (Or disappear until the next time the topic comes up.)

We don't know that humans are causing climate change because of the Hockey Stick or climate models or melting glaciers, sea ice, and permafrost or rising temperatures in the instrumental record or changes in weather patterns or changes to wildlife migration and life cycles or coral bleaching or sea level rise. We know humans are causing climate change because of all of that and how we can't explain it all any other way.

Joe-dallas, Steve McIntyre, and all self-described skeptics just never offer an alternative explanation that can explain all of the changes we are seeing. They might suggest something that could explain one aspect of it, but then that would contradict other things that are being observed, or different skeptics will latch on to different alternatives and they won't argue against each other. Unidirectional skepticism like that isn't skepticism at all. It is just motivated reasoning.

[JasonT20]

I’m curious why the null hypothesis was a flat temperature, when we know that temperatures have been rising over time even before CO2 did.

Were temperatures rising before CO2 did? What time frame, specifically, are you looking at?

Reconstructed temperatures prior to widespread instrument measurements show a small downward trend in temperatures prior to industrialization. But that trend is really small compared to how temperatures changed over the last 200 years. To choose anything other than relatively flat temperature curve as the null hypothesis would require knowledge that other climate variables would have a significant impact over that time frame. The fact that the 1988 models produced results that were relatively flat if human-caused forcings were excluded justifies a flat null hypothesis to me.

[Joe_dallas]

As I noted above, the paleo reconstructions have some serious issues, See Gergis, See Pages 2k,

https://climateaudit.org/?s=pages+2k

One of the major issues is the discrepancies of the short proxies (less than 300-400 years) and the long proxies (going back 800-1200 years)
Most all the short proxies have a blade (mann's hockey stick blade) which is generally not in dispute. Its the long proxies that are the problem. Most, of which have a semi flat shaft with some with an elevated mwp, but no blade. All the HS graphs whether it is from Mann or Gergis or pages 2k take the long proxies with no blade , then slap the short proxies with the blade thus superimposing the blade onto a shaft with no blade creating the HS.

[Nelson]

"I’m curious why the null hypothesis was a flat temperature"

It isn't. As I understand it (and I'm just a layman on climate), the trend was slightly downward on the geologic scale and that is the baseline. There is a sudden acceleration of warming observed in things as varied as tree rings and ice cores that corresponds to the Industrial Revolution. That "hockey stick" isn't explainable by natural processes.

You also like to claim that the inaccuracy of measuring devices nullifies their data, but unless there are wild fluctuation in the accuracy of each device, consistent readings over time from the same device are dependable as data points, correct?

Also, the more sources of data that contribute to a data set, the lower the size and rate of errors and the higher the confidence in the data becomes, correct?

Those are both serious questions. You are clearly a very knowledgeable engineer and work with statistical data sets in your professional life. I am not and have not. So I am truly asking if I am mistaken.

[Brett Bellmore]

"but unless there are wild fluctuation in the accuracy of each device, consistent readings over time from the same device are dependable as data points, correct?"

All else being equal, sure. Typically all else is not equal. Weather stations have covers painted white, the paint gets dingy, it gets repainted with a slightly different "white" paint. Urban heat islands encroach on rural stations, trees grow up and provide shade, then get cut down...

There are a fairly limited subset of US weather stations, and I'd assume in other countries, where everything has remained essentially unchanged across the entire period of observation. Most of the stations have had changes of this sort that have to be corrected for, and the correction process is pretty fraught.

[Nige]

You are once again making shit up.

[Joe_dallas]

nelson
A very good source for an analysis of the paleo reconstructions and the deficiencies is at climate audit dot org.

There is search bar on the website
do a search for pages 2k and search for gergis - his critique of those will provide significant insight into the quality of many of the paleo reconstructions.

A few basic concepts S McIntyre stands by
A) the earth is going through a warming period,
B) Co2is likely a contributing factor,
c) there may or may not have been a MWP,
d) the paleo reconstructions due to the problems of the studies do not provide any insight into the mwp.
e) whether the mwp was warmer or cooler than present day is a distraction since the roman warming period was considerably warming than both the mwp and present day.

[JasonT20]

e) whether the mwp was warmer or cooler than present day is a distraction since the roman warming period was considerably warming than both the mwp and present day.

Wait, there are "problems" with paleo reconstructions, but you and Steve McIntyre are confident that global temperatures ~2000 years ago were warmer than the present?

And "CO2 is likely a contributing factor" to the Earth going through a warming period now is all you and he are willing to commit to? What is your alternative explanation for why the Earth is warming at the present?

[Zarniwoop]

DaveM sez:

I am an amateur geologist. I don’t think I’ve ever met a geologist who doubts that there is climate change — just not on a human time scale.

Hi DaveM, pleased to meet ya. My undergrad degree is in Geology (MIT), though I have moved on from that professionally in the many years since.

I don’t doubt there is abundant evidence of climate change in the geologic record either. We’re in agreement there, same as every geologist I’ve ever met*

That does not rule out (or, in fairness, rule in) that human-mediated climate change can also exist. With all due respect, the geologic record is not telling us about the present.

To me, that satisfies all climate change questions. Yes, there is change. Yes, it is significant. But it is also measured in thousands* of years of elapsed time. And, the vast majority is naturally occurring. Thus, we need to ADAPT to the change. We can neither hasten nor delay it.

That’s where your argument goes off the rails. Part of the problem we are experiencing is that climate change is occurring significantly faster than the geologic timescale (by at least a few orders of magnitude!) precisely because humanity is> hastening it.

Ultimately, your entire argument is “it didn’t happen in history, so it can’t be happening now”. That’s not how the world works.

*I had an undergrad job in the EAPS library in Building 54. One day while reshelving books I noticed there was a “the Earth is 6000 years old, all geology is biblical flood stuff”-type book in the stacks. The head librarian shrugged her shoulders when I pointed it out. Those “geologists” might disagree with us.

**I’d have put in “millions” personally. The clearest example I can think of for rapid climate change in the geologic record is the Chicxulub impact, and that didn’t end well for Earth’s then-residents.

[Joe_dallas]

Zarniwoop 31 mins ago (edited)
Flag Comment Mute User
"That’s where your argument goes off the rails. Part of the problem we are experiencing is that climate change is occurring significantly faster than the geologic timescale (by at least a few orders of magnitude!) precisely because humanity is> hastening it"

Zarn - that is where the AGW activists argument goes off the rails.

Your statement is a common AGW activist statement without any basis.

The resolution of the data is not nearly accurate enough to make that statement. The comparison is with low resolution proxy data against high resolution instrumental data. Resolution of the proxy data more than 2k - 4k years ago is often no better than over a period of 100-500 years where as the resolution of the instrumental record is over periods of hours. The further back in time, the lower the resolution. You simply cant make comparisons with an accuracy greater than the accuracy of the measuring device.

[Commenter_XY]

It has started here.

https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/11/anti-israel-rioters-attempt-to-breach-the-democratic-national-committee-in-d-c/

This is intimidating an entire national political party (Team D) by antisemitic political nihilists to support Judeocidal terrorists. This is not right. We have a serious problem here.

If you think they'll stop with just the Jews, think again.

[Kazinski]

Why wouldn’t you try to kill the Democrats?

https://youtu.be/YZFNUJeDldw?feature=shared

[Brett Bellmore]

They're not even pretending that they intend to stop with the Jews, if you pay attention to what they say. All this talk about North America being "Turtle Island", for instance.

They're not just coming for the Jews, they're merely coming for the Jews first. And they're not pretending otherwise.

[Nige]

All these thing are ultimately about finding ways to claim they're coming for you.

[Brett Bellmore]

Yes, they ARE finding all sort of ways to say they're coming for me. But when people claim they're coming for me, I think the safe thing is to believe them.

[Nige]

'It's not paranoia if you really believe they're coming for you except no wait that *is* paranoia.'

[Brett Bellmore]

"It's not paranoia if they SAY they're coming for you."

[Nige]

'It's not paranioa if they say Turtle Island and you are suddenly convinced they are coming for you.'

[bernard11]

Trump says he is coming for me.

By his definitions I am a communist, probably, and he promises to crush his critics, which I certainly am one of.

Do you believe him?

Do you think immigrants are "poisoning the blood" of our country?

Look, Brett, this guy is a fascist. He has made that plain as day. And you support and defend him and say you'll vote for him.

Your comments are repulsive.

[Kazinski]

No Nige, we all know they will come for the rest of the left first.

The Mensheviks were liquidated long before the kulaks.

[Nige]

You think they might vote for Trump? He's the only one explicitly promising to 'come for' anyone, and it ain't Brett.

[Brett Bellmore]

Nige is firmly in the "no enemy to the left" camp, and views anti-Semites as honorary leftists. So we're supposedly obligated to ignore anything they might say or do to suggest they're a threat, even as they're rioting and murdering people.

[Nige]

Now there was a riot and murder done at the DNC, truly the city will be on fire by the time you're done telling this story to yourself.

As a matter of interest, to you and other subscribers, what role do Jews play in the Great Replacement?

[bernard11]

Brett, you are the one supporting antisemitism, defending right-wing associations with them.

You have blinded yourself so you don't see a reality you don't want to admit exists.

How about your boy Musk, eh?

[Ed Grinberg]

"The Mensheviks were liquidated long before the kulaks."
Correct. The Mensheviks were opposed to liquidating the kulaks. So, the Bolsheviks liquidated them first. Convenient!

[David Nieporent]

And by "all this talk" Brett means, "Four or five crazy people."

[Brett Bellmore]

The organizers of a 25K protest, you mean?

[Nige]

Oh, hey, when the President Of The United States loses an election, refuses to accept the reuslts, tries to remain in power thriugh fraud and conspiracy and a bunch of his supporters invade the Capitol in an effort to prevent the election being certified, Brett refuses to believe any of it. Now the same guy is calling his opponents vermin and promising vengeance and a regime of people who are personally loyal to him and who will go after his enemies and concentration camps and mass deportations and shooting shop-lifters. But Turtle Island something something.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

The organizers of a 25K protest, you mean?

Hey, he's only ignoring 99.98% of them.

[Nige]

0.02% of 25k is probably closer to the actual numbers at the DNC.

[Nelson]

"The organizers of a 25K protest, you mean?"

How many of those organizers said the crazy stuff? You seem to be trying to hide behind the fact that 25k people came out for a protest that was absolutely NOT about coming after you.

[Michael P]

Lots of Very Fine People here insist that these riotous, genocidal thugs are just exercising their rights, and therefore you must be some kind of fascist if you think the pro-Hamas brigades are "not right", much less problematic. Criticizing them is "lame" or being an "anti-DEI" "scold" "clown" "right wing grifter".

Relatedly, a lot of this crowd has recently decided that Osama bin Laden was right, and by implication 9/11 was justified: https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/guardian-deletes-osama-bin-laden-022904181.html

We'll see whether any of these Very Fine People reconsider their claims.

[Nige]

Lots Of Very Fine Straw People.

[Nelson]

"Lots of Very Fine People here insist that these riotous, genocidal thugs"

I haven't seen anyone defending Hamas or the terrorist attacks of Oct. 7.

However, I've seen a lot of strawmanning about pro-Palestinian statements and protests being "pro-Hamas". That is demonstrably untrue. Palestinians in Gaza aren't all Hamas. Like most wars, many are innocent civilians caught in the crossfire.

Israel not only has the right to defend itself, it should absolutely hunt down and eliminate every member of Hamas. They are terrorists, target the innocent, and view cruelty and torture as legitimate behaviors.

But I fear what I worried about has come to pass. Israel, who has a questionable track record (especially with West Bank settlements and ultra-Orthodox terrorist groups), has gone way too far.

They started with the clear moral high ground, but their inability or unwillingness to try to differentiate between legitimate Hamas targets and the civilians around them. This hospital clusterfuck is just the latest self-inflicted wound by Israel.

Israel has a highly-trained, professional, skilled military. They could be more judicious in their choice of targets. They are muddying up the clear moral superiority of their position with poor decisions (or possibly poor intelligence).

[Drewski]

"I haven’t seen anyone defending Hamas or the terrorist attacks of Oct. 7."

You should try reading this blog, then. It has documented several instances of college professors and student leaders making explicitly pro-Hamas statements and even celebrating their attack on innocent civilians. Every major news outlet has run stories of explicitly pro-Hamas celebrities and politicos. But you should also pull your head out of your ass and recognize that a lot of these protestors do, in fact, consider themselves allied with Hamas.

[Nige]

'It has started here.'

People trying to get into a place to protest? Has 'started?' You're so desperate to replicate the Israeli siege mentality because you want to bomb a bunch of people the same way.

[Brett Bellmore]

Are you under the impression that people are entitled to violently enter private property for the purpose of "protest"?

[Mr. Bumble]

...as long as it's "mostly peaceful".

[Nige]

No, I’m under the impression that this is not the first time such a thing has happened. It's not even the first time it's happened this month.

[Brett Bellmore]

No, that's true, there are a lot of rampaging Hamas supporters out there at the moment.

[Nige]

As many as there are Turtle Islanders and BLM Marxists coming for you, I'm sure.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

If they were really interested in "justice" they'd be torching car lots and smashing commercial building windows.

[Nige]

Turns out they weren't even trying to get in. They blocked the entrance for about five minutes.

[Sarcastr0]

Commenter, this is a worthwhile story to discuss. But it is not the beginning of an American Holocaust.

It is still not happening here.

[Nige]

The Jewish link in the Great Replacement theory is surfacing here and there, it's a can o' worms.

[Sarcastr0]

Yeah, I don't expect many here to discuss Tucker and Musk's latest anti-Jewish takes.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

I presume you're talking about Tucker Carlson. I'm not going out of my way to read anything he has to say.

Does Musk's latest scandal surprise you? It seems entirely on-brand to me.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

No barrages from Prof. Bernstein, Blackman, or Volokh yet with respect to the Musk comments? Should someone conduct wellness checks? Are they all in surgery, or stranded at roadside in a blizzard somewhere, or in comas . . . simultaneously?

Carry on, clingers.

[bernard11]

I too would like to hear from them.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

“I don’t expect many here to discuss Tucker and Musk’s latest anti-Jewish takes.”

Why would you write that? Are you sure? Do you genuinely doubt that Prof. Bernstein, in particular, will not be quick to rise in loud outrage and intense indignation against a perceived slight or threat against . . . oh, wait, Musk and Carlson are fellow clingers, so . . .

never mind.

Carry on, clingers. Especially the partisan hypocrites and polemical right-wing cowards.

[David Nieporent]

Why are you relying on Legal Insurrection for news? Dave Weigel, who was there, says that there was no attempt to break into the building. That does not exonerate the protesters, because what they were doing was also illegal and immoral: blocking the doors so that people couldn’t get out. (Or in, I suppose, but why would one want to get into that building given the circumstances?)

[Bob from Ohio]

Weigel also tweeted that the building wasn't surrounded because only the doors were blocked, not the walls. Smart guy.

[Nige]

Yeah, that's what 'surround' doesn't mean.

[Commenter_XY]

Is this better, David? I don't know that it sounds better from CNN.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/15/politics/dnc-headquarters-violent-protest-democrats-evacuated/index.html

It is a problem. It is happening here.

[shawn_dude]

Whatever "it" is...

Hard to take it seriously from someone who is unable to distinguish between a terrorist and an anti-war protester.

[Nelson]

Not unable. Unwilling.

[Commenter_XY]

This is intimidating an entire national political party (Team D) by antisemitic political nihilists to support Judeocidal terrorists.

That was my quote.

They (the DNC rioters) are antisemitic political nihilists. Hamas are the terrorists.

You're the Useful Idiot.

[bernard11]

XY,

Do you think there is any problem of antisemitism on the right?

[Commenter_XY]

Of course. What kind of question is that?

[Brett Bellmore]

Reading left-wing blogs lately, I'm starting to be concerned about increasing signs of what I can only describe as a sort of Manichean insanity. An ever increasing tendency to start telling 'just so' stories about how one's opponents are, not just wrong, but actively and consciously evil.

Silicon Valley’s worldview is not just an ideology; it’s a personality disorder.

"Silicon Valley ideology is a master-slave mentality, a hierarchical worldview that we all exist in extractive relation to someone stronger, and exploit and despise anyone weaker. Its only relations to other humans are supplication in one direction and subjugation in the other, hence its poster-boys’ constant yoyoing between grandiosity and victimhood. Tech bros like Thiel, Musk and Andreesen are the fluffers in the global authoritarian circle jerk. Putin is the bro they’d be tickled to receive calls from, making them feel they’re on the geopolitical insider’s inside track. MBS is the bro they envy but tell each other scary stories about."

They seem to have gathered in a circle to compete in telling ever uglier stories about people they don't like, with anybody who'd contradict them excluded from the circle. And, of course, if you actually believed this stuff, what wouldn't you be justified in doing to stop it?

[Nige]

'They seem to have gathered in a circle to compete in telling ever uglier stories about people they don’t like'

Talk about a just-so story. "People are criticising other people for the things they do and say - My God Where Will It Stop?"

[David Nieporent]

The leading figure in the Republican Party calls his opponents 'vermin,' and from that Brett's takeaway is that left-wingers view their opponents as evil.

[VinniUSMC]

"If you're so offended by Hillary calling some Trump supporters 'deplorables', you must be one of them."

Shoe on the other foot?

[Nige]

'No, he's right you *are* vermin.'

[Michael P]

That's different because shut up, they explained.

[Sarcastr0]

'Deplorable' has a rather different history than 'vermin' when applied to human beings.

[Nige]

Yes, and it didn’t upset Trump supporters at all, no more than Obama’s ‘clingers’ did.

[Don Nico]

Neither is very charitable

[shawn_dude]

False equivalence. A person can be deplorable but one only calls an exterminator for vermin.

[Sarcastr0]

Not Hillary's best moment, but vermin hits different, due to it's history.

As I said, people around here throw around a *ton* of insults, but vermin is actually pretty absent. I hold there's a reason for that.

[bernard11]

True, but you don't exterminate deplorables, you just deplore them.

You exterminate vermin, or perhaps, in Trump's words, crush them.

Big difference.

And what do you do with people who are "poisoning our blood?" Per Trump you start by rounding them up and putting them in camps, so you can concentrate them, I suppose.

[SimonP]

We get it, Hillary hurt your fi-fi’s several years ago, and you’re still sore about it.

[VinniUSMC]

I can't be a deplorable, I didn't vote for Trump. Are you butthurt simple Simon?

[Sarcastr0]

You can be deplorable whether or not you voted for Trump. It's not a term unique to Trump supporters, no matter how the right pushes the persecution narrative.

[SimonP]

I can’t be a deplorable, I didn’t vote for Trump.

Hillary wasn't talking about Trump voters. She was talking about the people Trump was trying to appeal to.

Just because you were too lazy to vote on Election Day doesn't mean you're not of a piece with them.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

She was talking about some of the predictable attributes of Trump supporters . . . the racism, the misogyny, the homophobia, the xenophobia, the antisemitism, the Islamophobia, the transphobia, the fondness for FreeRepublic, the Volokh Conspiracy, and Stormfront . . .

[VinniUSMC]

Just because you were too lazy to vote on Election Day doesn’t mean you’re not of a piece with them.

I voted Libertarian, numbnuts. Thanks for playing.

[SimonP]

Is that supposed to be better?

[Drewski]

It kind of is. Gary Johnson ran as a libertarian but historically he was a Reaganesque conservative. He'd have been a much better president than Trump and probably better than Clinton, and I say that as a registered Democrat that hasn't voted for the GOP since Bush Sr.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

The leading figure in the Republican Party calls his opponents ‘vermin,’

The quote in question:

"the communists, Marxists, fascists and the radical left thugs that live like vermin"

You're such a tool.

[Nige]

You think you're making a point? Anyone to the left of Atilla is a communist, Marxist, fascist, radical leftist. That's been right wing rhetoric for decades now.

[VinniUSMC]

C'mon Wuz, you know they can't read without their "OrangeManBad" colored glasses.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Explain the substantive difference between the two statements. I'm sure the class would be appreciative of your nuanced and insightful clarification.

[VinniUSMC]

"that live like vermin" vs called them "vermin.

Is it that hard for you? Seriously? Oh, Jason, yeah, nevermind.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

I asked for a substantive response.

Somehow after all these years, you still mistakenly believed you could provide one.

[Commenter_XY]

So your reading comprehension is just as fucked up as your moral compass, Jason. At least you're consistent.

[Sarcastr0]

Don't cheerlead calling people vermin Commenter.

You of all people.

FFS.

[Mr. Bumble]

Lie, rinse, repeat the lie. "...live like vermin"
Calling someone vermin and saying they live like vermin are two different things.

[Sarcastr0]

What exactly is the difference in this distinction you are making between vermin and living like vermin?

[bernard11]

What difference does it make given that he threatens to "root them out?"

What do you think that means, XY?

[VinniUSMC]

I asked for a substantive response.

I asked you to learn to read. Get on that, would you?

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Actually no, you did not - unless you've discovered a way to break causality?

It does indeed seem that one of us needs to learn to read. It's just a far more ironic result than you had hoped for.

[Sarcastr0]

Someone in a lefty blog wrote something over the top about how Silicon Valley sucks.

Brett creates out of whole cloth some sort of zealousness cycle that this is leading to.

I take it he's never read the VC comments on gun threads.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Or the steady stream of racial slurs and other bigoted content that are the Volokh Conspiracy’s signature element

[Randy Sax]

Genuine question; Are you upset about a kind of perceived racism behind the racial slurs or or just the use of the word entirely? Does it bother you when an actor in a movie says nigger?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

This blog’s fixation regarding, fondness of, and tolerance of racial slurs seems to involve a mixture of at least low-grade bigotry; disaffectedness or contrarianism; a lack of knowing better; a desire to own the libs; a desire to establish Republican street cred and flatter a bigoted target audience; and maybe a few other factors.

What do you think? Does the motivation underlying the frequency of racial slurs at the Volokh Conspiracy differ from the reasons that generate so much transphobic, gay-bashing, misogynistic, antisemitic, immigrant-hating, Islamophobic, white grievance content at this blog?

I don't like the motivation and I don't like the obsession with publishing (certain) slurs.

[Jerry B.]

Read the comments after any Washington Post article that mentions Trump, Republicans, government, abortion, firearms law, etc. and you'll see what Liberals think of anyone who is not them.

[SimonP]

And, of course, if you actually believed this stuff, what wouldn’t you be justified in doing to stop it?

Brett, in this very comment thread, you can be seen darkly warning that anti-Israel protesters have a plan to continue on to destroying the U.S. via ethnic cleansing of anyone of non-native descent. In other threads, you have pointed to the censorious attitudes of college students as presaging what they would do if they were ever permitted to gain political power. If you actually believed any of that, what wouldn't you be justified in doing to stop it?

I also don't think there's anything inaccurate in the blogger's description of people like Thiel, Musk, and Andreesen. Thiel used his wealth to shut down a critical media outlet, is openly hostile to democracy, and has been using political contributions to support politicians who would help further empower him. Musk bought Twitter and then immediately made it more conducive to serving the agendas of authoritarian governments, seeing profit potential in making the platform just a propaganda-for-hire outlet. And Andreessen has a whole unhinged manifesto you can read, if you want to understand what the blogger is talking about.

There's nothing "Manichean" about observing a class of hyper-wealthy people who are using their wealth to forcefully re-shape our public discourse to serve their narrow purposes. That is what they are doing. And the only thing anyone is really suggesting, as a response, is, adopt regulations and tax policies that can minimize the harmful impact they have on society.

Thiel, Musk, and Andreessen are not my friends, and they're not yours, either. They'll buy up the houses in your neighborhood for their tech utopia experiments, stop you from complaining about it online, and constrain your ability to do anything about it politically. They make Wall Street executives look beneficent.

[Joe_dallas]

Brett - following up on your comment - that has basically always been the leftist ideology dating back from the days of Karl marx. The leftist ideology hasnt changed very much, just repetitively rebranded as each new gyration has failed.

[Martinned]

Failed how?

[Krayt]

“I hate capitalism!” he thumbed into his iPhone and pressed post, which saved on a monster, portable data shipping container, then took a bite of a pristine, organic banana in the middle of winter.

[Martinned]

I love capitalism. It's brought us lots of good, whenever it has been combined with healthy social-democratic policies. As it has been in every free country in the last century or so.

[Joe_dallas]

Martinned - Let me know which country, which society had an improvement in social economic status via the adoption of leftist economic policies.

[Martinned]

Literally every democracy on earth, even the US. (Which is well to the left from where it was in Marx's time.)

[gVOR08]

“ I’m starting to be concerned about increasing signs of what I can only describe as a sort of Manichean insanity. ” On this site, that’s pure projection.

[Reallynotbob]

I'm lost. Is "Silicon Valley" on the right or left? How am I supposed to know which team it's on?

"Silicon Valley ideology is using private equity to buy a new marketplace, flood it with capital to flush out competitors, and use economic dominance to eviscerate working conditions and the cost of labour before jacking up the prices again, this time with the surplus all going to investors. It’s hyping specific technologies as universal, structural game-changers in accelerating hype cycles designed to fleece their marks quickly enough to drive growth and cash out before most people realise the technology simply doesn’t work as they were told. Bonus points for damaging trusted institutions (crypto) or labour (AI) along the way."

[Kazinski]

I was fixing some Lamb Chops tonight, which I had to cook because I got bunch at Costco.

Since it was the second night in row I was looking for something different. So I cut them off the bone to make medallions, then I made a bernaise sauce, which isn't that far different than a hollandaise sauce.

It didn't turn out too bad. But I overdid the wine vinegar, which as it turns out is usually a forgivable sin with red meat.

[Commenter_XY]

Post the recipe. Sounds good. 🙂

[Mr. Bumble]

Thanksgiving is one week away, so isn't it time for those favorite Thanksgiving recipes?

[Kazinski]

I'm through with turkeys, but I'll cook lamb or beef. I could possibly be talking into splatchocking a turkey in the grill cause I like cutting the spine out with a big knife, and ripping it apart to flatten it with my bare hands., but id feel terrible in the morning.

If someone does cook a turkey I'm always up for cooking a post thanksgiving dark meat turkey hash. Nothing better that deboning the drumsticks and carcass and frying it up in a giant cast iron skillet with cubed unpeeled potatoes (Dan Quale alert there is an E in Potato) and whatever kind of oil you got hanging around, including bacon grease.

[Brett Bellmore]

I always thought it was amazing what a bad rep Quayle got over that, when it almost immediately was revealed that the school itself had given him a spelling card with the "potatoe" spelling on it. I guess we can ding him about not being confident enough to reject the card, but you'd think the media would have shown more interest in exactly how that had happened.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

but you’d think the media would have shown more interest in exactly how that had happened

You might think that...if you had just arrived here from another planet.

[David Nieporent]

Who "almost immediately" "revealed" that, Brett?

[Brett Bellmore]

To Quayle it's potatoe

"The misstep may not have been entirely Quayle's fault. Reporters, some of whom had to look potato up in the dictionary themselves to be certain about the spelling, checked Quayle's cue card and found potato spelled 'potatoe.'"

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

Yet another condescending attempt by Nieporent to make someone else look stupid backfires.

[David Nieporent]

Not surprisingly, the point went over WuzYoungOnceToo's head.

[David Nieporent]

Yes, Brett, that was the point: you got this from the media. That is, the media — the ones you're denouncing — are the ones who told you the thing you claim the media didn't tell you.

[Commenter_XY]

Mr. Bumble, you are right. I actually DO have a brine recipe to brine the bird for 1.5 days. We have used this brine for years (at least 20); not every year, but it is our 'tried and true' go-to recipe.

https://www.emerils.com/125271/funky-bird-aka-southwestern-turkey-breast

Some Commenter_XY notes.
I brine the entire turkey, not just a turkey breast; have brined 24-lb bird multiple time.
Use a very large stock pot, lined with clear plastic bags, for brining*
I have been known to double the jalapeno (you really do not get heat, just flavor)
I use fresh, minced garlic cloves (organic, of course)
I have also doubled the cilantro (love it, very healthy, too)
I tend toward a heavier hand with cumin and a lighter hand with brown sugar. But you need the brown sugar, don't skip it.
I brine minimum 36 hours, and up to 48

*The failure to use enough bags will result in a significant cold water cleanup event in your kitchen; turkey + brine = weight. Ask me how I know this. 🙂

I have a couple of side dish recipes, but the brine is key. Enjoy!

[Life of Brian]

Intriguing -- I'll have to see if I can get this past my pack of picky eaters one of these years. Is the mole just for serving? I didn't see any mention of it past the ingredient list.

[Commenter_XY]

LoB....The chocolate poblano pepper mole is really good. Make sure you have an immersion blender. I've done it 3x over the years. The final consistency is like a thicker gravy.

https://www.emerils.com/125272/poblano-chocolate-mole

[Don Nico]

I've made chocolate mole for turkey for many years. It is excellent. Naturally you should adjust the fiery aspect for your taste.

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

That sounds amazing! Personally I've been smoking my turkeys for many years, I think it's the best way to prepare them. Hickory.

[Moderation4ever]

I never cook a whole turkey anymore. This year the breast will be Sous Vide. Never tried this before so any tips will be appreciated. Dark meat this year is going into a pot of chili.

[Brett Bellmore]

Don't use fresh garlic. Not only does it go funky, but there's a risk from botulism if it takes too long to get out of 'the zone'.

Fried or roasted garlic is safe for sous vide, and tastes a lot better anyway.

[Moderation4ever]

Thanks for the advice. I will make use of it.

[shawn_dude]

I've yet to sous vide a turkey but I do chicken breasts all the time. There's a few tricks I use to get a great result:
1) season the meat lightly (lightly!) when it goes in the vacuum seal bag. It's not a waste of time but a little goes a long way. When I vacuum seal costco steaks, I include fresh herbs and seasoning before sealing but you can add them after.
2) you don't need to thaw first but you do need to add more time. It can go from freezer to sous vide bath.
3) I cook chicken breast to 145 degrees. Low temp, long cook (2 hours from frozen) gives you a safe meal. Stick to the low end of the turkey breast range if you're serving straight from the sous vide + sear and move to the mid-range if you expect to eat cold leftovers. The chicken breast can have a bit of a "raw" mouthfeel at the really low end and when cool that can ick people out. But, it's super tender a juicy. The lower end eliminates the stringy texture for those that don't like that in a breast.
4) Searing the chicken breast is generally pointless and can overcook it but if you leave the skin on, crisping it will be essential. I remove the skin and rely on a nice gravy. I would expect turkey breast to be similar.

The Anova website says turkey breast needs 145 degrees for 3 hours. If it's frozen, I'd suggest 3.75 - 4 hours.

[Jmaie]

I take the skin off before cooking the meat, little salt, placed cold in a skillet with a bacon press on top. Low flame to render and crisp.

[Kazinski]

Sorry, I don't measure or use recipes.

Slice off a dollup of butter, mix it with a tablespoon or 3, (3 was my mistake) of red wine vinegar, add some tarragon, and salt and then whisk in an egg yolk, or two depending hon how many you are cooking for.

Heat it in a double boiler fo thicken it while you grilling the chops and that's it.

[Commenter_XY]

What do you do with the egg whites?

[Mr. Bumble]

Make meringue?

[Kazinski]

One egg white? It went down the drain.

Sorry, if it had any cholesterol in it, I might have saved it for something.

[Commenter_XY]

Ahhhhhhh! Heresy! = egg white down the drain

So many yummy uses, washed away. Kaz, Kaz - Commenter_XY is going to help you out on what to do with leftover egg whites.

First: You can freeze them. The volume of the egg white fits nicely in an ice cube tray. Don't toss it. Eggs are expensive.

See link...Some of these are easy-peasy
https://www.allrecipes.com/gallery/leftover-egg-whites-recipes/

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

Ahhhhhhh! Heresy! = egg white down the drain

I keep a flock of hens (and one small rooster), and even though they usually keep us in far more eggs than we can use (to the benefit of family members, friends and neighbors) it still chaps my hide whenever we lose one due to inadvertent breakage (a chicken stepping where they shouldn't, or a clumsy egg collector).

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Wasting food should be avoided, but eggs are cheap. Strikingly so.

[Commenter_XY]

Not the eggs I buy Arthur. Try Wegmans cage free, pasture raised organic eggs. I do try to be careful about the eggs I eat.

Plus...I am old school. Don't waste food. I did not come from wealth, Arthur.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

And just wait until the next wave of Avian Influenza sweeps through the country.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Not the eggs I buy Arthur. Try Wegmans cage free, pasture raised organic eggs.

Fancy eggs raise the cost of an omelet to roughly $1.00.

I agree that food waste is wrong.

[ThePublius]

A crucial ingredient in a good whiskey sour.

[Commenter_XY]

My God....Yes! 🙂

[Kazinski]

As as a story to the aside my mother was telling me a story a few days ago about Prescott Arizona in the mid 30's. She was being boarded on a cattle ranch by her widowed mother that worked in the VA hospital. She was planning on coming to pick up her and her siblings, but the owner of the ranch told her his brother has been kidnapped by some sheep ranchers to keep him from voting in the election, so it would be best for everyone to stay out of downtown until it was all settled.

I personally am neutral in the sheepman cattleman's controversy, however if I had to choose between lambchops at 6$ or ribeye at more than10$ I'll go with the lamb, but pork or chicken at under 3 are also attractive.

But I'll vote for beef in the election.

And look up Whiskey Row in Prescott if you doubt the story.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

if I had to choose between lambchops at 6$ or ribeye at more than10$ I’ll go with the lamb

I've often said that as a share of our meat consumption we don't eat nearly enough lamb in this country...or goat, for that matter. I love a good steak, but to this day the best piece of red meat I've ever eaten was a cabrito dish I had in Cabo San Lucas about 15 years ago.

[Brett Bellmore]

Yeah, I made the mistake of thawing a turkey, parceling it out, and after freezing most of it, making turkey confit last week. (Did this mostly so I could make some turkey stock to have on hand for Thanksgiving.)

No, the family loved it, but now my wife has announced that I can't cook turkey for Thanksgiving because that's 'just too soon to have turkey again'.

I explained to her that that's a nonsense concept, that before we met I roasted turkey every month, half my diet was turkey, there's no such thing as "too soon to have turkey again". To no avail.

So apparently we're having rack of lamb for Thanksgiving. Well, I do have that Barbara Kafka book, "Roasting: A Simple Art", so I won't lack for guidance. And I did get her to agree that I could cook the wings, anyway, to get my turkey fix.

What goes well with rack of lamb? (With rosemary crust, natch.)

[Kazinski]

I got a duck once and roasted it (ate it too). Then a saved the duck fat, mixed it with a pork sirloin roast all ground up, witch was way too lean for sausage in its own.

Then I took the partially frozen ground pork and duck fat and extruded into sausage casings.

Not the worst thing I ever made. But probably would change a few things if I did it again.

[Brett Bellmore]

The turkey confit was mostly cooked in duck fat, actually, since I had that on hand from some duck confit I'd made a month earlier. I keep a small pail of fat from birds of all sorts in the fridge for making confits. (It doesn't matter all that much, tradition aside, that the fat and the bird match.) And my wife loves confit, despite her horror at the large quantity of fat involved.

Of course, when you cook confit, very little of the fat ends up on your table.

[bernard11]

Use the duck fat to fry potatoes, you fool.

[Brett Bellmore]

Heated Debate Cookbook Author Barbara Kafka Causes A Stir With Her 500-Degree Roasting Recipes

I will confirm that this book is why we gave the smoke detector near the kitchen the nickname, “The oven timer”. Anyway, I’ve made this, and duck fat does work well in this recipe, replacing both the butter and the olive oil.

” Melting Potatoes

Not for the diet-minded, but Kafka says: “I would gladly sacrifice fat and butter for several days to eat as many of these potatoes as I can.” You can also use red potatoes, although the texture will be firmer.

3 tablespoons unsalted butter cut into 6 pieces, plus 1 tablespoon reserved in refrigerator

3 tablespoons olive oil

6 large baking potatoes (3 pounds)

1 teaspoon kosher salt

Freshly ground black pepper to taste

2 cups fresh or canned chicken stock (see note)

Place rack in top third of oven. Heat oven to 500 degrees.

Put the 3 tablespoons butter into an 18- by 12- by 2-inch roasting pan. Set pan over medium heat just until butter has melted. Remove. Add olive oil.

Peel potatoes. Cut in half lengthwise, then cut each half in half again across. Cut each quarter into 3 wedges. Put into roasting pan. Roll wedges in butter and oil until evenly coated; arrange so that they touch as little as possible. Sprinkle with salt and pepper.

Roast 15 minutes. Turn wedges with pancake turner. Roast 10 minutes more. Turn again. Roast 10 minutes more. Remove pan from oven. Turn wedges again, making sure to turn white sides of each wedge face up. Add stock. Return to oven for a final 15 minutes. Potatoes can be made to this point and held 4 to 6 hours.

When ready to serve, dot wedges with small pieces of reserved tablespoon of butter. If potatoes have been at room temperature, roast 15 minutes. If they are still warm, 5 minutes will do nicely. Remove potatoes to a platter right away or they will stick to the pan.

Yield: 8 to 10 servings.

Note: Canned broth lacks the gelatin that makes this dish so sumptuous in texture, and usually has lots of salt; add no more.”

[Don Nico]

once a year is plenty often for turkey

[SRG2]

I am a big fan of lamb in general, and I find it strange that so many Americans dislike it.

I hope you kept the bones and fried them - seems perfect for air-frying - so you could gnaw on the crispy fat.

Turkey was never a significant dish for us in England, but my mother would occasionally roast a turkey leg - dark meat - which was very tasty. I find that in general - turkey or chicken - the dark meat is superior to the white meat: more tasty and less prone to dryness. Certainly when making stir-fried chicken, thighs are far superior to breasts, but I can tell from supermarket prices that breasts are far more popular.

As for Thanksgiving - why did no-one mention goose? It's an excellent Thanksgiving or Xmas dish for a small group - far better than chicken or turkey. Or you could have a duck or two.

[Brett Bellmore]

The turkey breast is fine in its own way, though I do like the thighs more. Where the breast shines is in sandwiches after the main meal. But being very lean, you have to avoid over-cooking it. Which means not trussing the bird, but do stuff it, so that the legs will get properly cooked before the breast over-cooks.

These days when I cook a duck or goose, I save out the breasts to grill as though they were a steak, and use the rest for confit. Grilled duck or goose breast is superb!

[Krayt]

Whatever happened to brining the turkey for 24 hours? That was a fad some years back and has wonderful results for keeping the meat from being dry.

As for most Americans not liking lamb, is that true? It isn’t super common, but that’s not the same thing.

[bernard11]

I like lamb a lot, FWIW. Better than beef.

I cook it very rare.

I think it is less popular than it deserves because it is too often overcooked, and served with that awful mint jelly.

[Brett Bellmore]

Well, I brine my turkeys, more like 2-3 days. Sweet tea turkey brine

But, what happened to it is that most turkeys are sold pre-brined now. As a convenience, sure, but also so that they can sell you water and salt at meat prices...

I'd be hard put to pick between lamb and beef, I like them both. But lamb chops, really hard to beat, you need a REALLY good steak to compare.

[Mr. Bumble]

I think that one of the reasons people disfavor turkey is that too many tend to overcook it causing it to be dry (think the turkey in Christmas Vacation).
If you make stuffing try stuffing the bird under the skin of the breast. Use your hand to separate the skin from the meat and fill the space between with stuffing. Helps to keep it moist and adds flavor to the white meat.
Also, beside basting, I use an injector to infuse white meat with the drippings.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

I am a big fan of lamb in general, and I find it strange that so many Americans dislike it.

It's an issue of what people are exposed to early on in life. I don't know all (or even most) of the reasons for it, but the dietary meat (not including seafood) staples in the U.S. have long been beef, pork, chicken and, to a lesser extent, turkey. Many other things are available as well, but are consumed at far lower volumes.

For some things (like organ meats) a lot of it is just child-like squeamishness...though I don't think that's a U.S.-specific phenomenon. When in Scotland we spoke with a great many locals (as well as those in other parts of the British Isles) who were grossed out at the thought of eating Haggis, which both of us dearly love. Other things like wild game that were once common table fare have simply fallen out of favor for one reason or another, like squirrel and rabbit. I've heard it claimed that people stopped eating things like that because the aforementioned commercially-raised meats became more readily available, and so people didn't have to "resort" to eating wild small game. But that doesn't really explain the reaction of semi-revulsion you get from some people when you talk about it, especially given that those meats are quite healthy (as meat goes) and delicious when well-prepared.

That's why I made a point of exposing my kids to all manner of "exotic" cuisine when they were to young to have already formed "I won't like that" expectations against them. As a result they're the farthest things from being picky eaters, and are taking the same approach to raising their own children.

I'd like to find a scholarly work by someone who has researched this phenomenon of the evolution of culinary history in the U.S. to get a better understanding of how these changes have occurred over time.

[SRG2]

I’d like to find a scholarly work by someone who has researched this phenomenon of the evolution of culinary history in the U.S.

I can’t help you there specifically, but the anthropologist Marvin Harris has written a number of books that include explanations for why we eat some foods and shun others, including why cows are sacred to Hindus and why pork is prohibited in Jewish law. He may not always be right but he’s always interesting..

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

Thanks, I'll look into his work.

[Brett Bellmore]

I've always eaten organ meats, but this may be because my parents grew up during the great depression, and raised us to eat anything that wasn't outright toxic. My wife, of course, comes from the Philippines, and has a similar perspective on food: Anything that holds still long enough to be eaten.

I'm not terribly fond of tripe, needs a lot of work to get that odor out of it, but my wife makes batsui, which I really like.

That reminds me, I've got some pork hearts and livers in the freezer. Time to make some braunschweiger while I'm off during the Thanksgiving break.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

My wife, of course, comes from the Philippines, and has a similar perspective on food: Anything that holds still long enough to be eaten.

Which makes me feel the need to confess a slight amount of hypocrisy on this topic. I will (and have) try almost anything that is safely edible by humans, but the one thing that I know of that is considered a delicacy by many but that I just can’t get past my innate revulsion at the thought of is Balut. I’d really like to, just to be able to say I’ve had the experience and am not squeamish…but I just can’t. I’m so ashamed.

[Brett Bellmore]

LOL! I tried Balut once, never again. My wife says that I just got a bad one, but I like my soft boiled eggs just a little fresher, thanks.

[SimonP]

A huge part of it, for Americans, is where we shop. Most Americans are driving to large supermarkets with cases upon cases of frozen turkeys right now. You're not going to find a duck or goose at Kroger.

Personally, I can go to a meat counter nearby, where I can get lamb, duck, quail, guinea hen, as well as various cuts of beef, pork, and chicken, and an assortment of sausages and cured meats. They no doubt have a case of frozen turkeys on stock for the Thanksgiving holiday, as well. But that is by no means a typical American experience, even in supermarkets with dedicated meat counters.

[Brett Bellmore]

I have a friend who's a farmer, I can basically get duck or goose any time I want, in barter for my mead. Catch is that I have to clean it myself. I can get pork from him on the same terms, but my wife doesn't like kunekune pork, it's a bit on the fatty side, (But I appreciate that, I make sausage!) and typically has a bit of bore taint to it. Still makes great braunschweiger, though.

[SimonP]

Also not a typical American experience. Sounds like you have access to the same sorts of things I do, just with more steps and effort.

[Brett Bellmore]

Well, I did grow up in the country, so I'm used to associating with farmers, and processing whole animals in my kitchen.

[SimonP]

*looks around, wondering who this is for*

[shawn_dude]

I married into a Kiwi family so our Xmas dinner is always a rack of NZ spring lamb with mint sauce (aka: mint steeped in simple syrup not the jelly stuff.) I tried serving a locally raised California rack one year--didn't mention the source and assumed no one would notice. They noticed quickly. So no lamb gets eaten in my household that hasn't traveled from about as far away from California as one can get. Not at all an environmentally sound practice. So Xmas only.

Thanksgiving is always turkey. It's traditional along with the pumpkin pie.

[apedad]

Criminal trials can be such bizarro worlds. (Jump ahead to 4:28 on the link below)

On one hand you have a convict in absolute, utter, and total despair, and on the other hand you have lawyers and judges discussing mundane nuances of scheduling appointments, making small talk, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpqFTztYJXs

[SRG2]

Judge Dorow is not unattractive

[not guilty]

The defendant who is on trial for beating Paul Pelosi with a hammer and attempting to kidnap Nancy Pelosi is reportedly claiming that he actually sought to hold her captive over her “wholly unrelated” role in a bizarre conspiracy theory. Defense attorneys are effectively claiming that he was living in an alternate reality where her role as speaker of the House did not factor into his thinking. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/11/15/paul-pelosi-jan-6-riot-00127267

Jury deliberations are underway in federal court. The defendant is also charged in state court with attempted murder, assault with a deadly weapon, elder abuse, residential burglary and other felonies.

[Michael P]

Can lawyers be sanctioned for standing up in court and asserting "certain far-out strains of digital-age American radicalism" when that radicalism is obviously frivolous? Specifically, have they laid out any kind of remotely credible explanation of why interrogating Nancy Pelosi (while wearing a uniform costume) would be at all relevant to revealing a conspiracy except for Pelosi being a member of Congress?

[not guilty]

Judges tend to give criminal defense lawyers some latitude in advocating outré factual theories. It is unethical to assert personal knowledge of facts in issue or state a personal opinion as to the justness of a cause, the credibility of a witness, or the guilt or innocence of an accused. A defense lawyer may nevertheless defend the proceeding so as to require that every element of the case be established.

Here the prosecution must prove as an essential element of 18 U.S.C. § 115(a)(1)(A) that the accused acted with intent to impede, intimidate, or interfere with Nancy Pelosi while she was engaged in the performance of official duties, or with intent to retaliate against her on account of the performance of official duties. The prosecution likewise must prove as an essential element of 18 U.S.C. § 1201(d) that the accused attempted to kidnap Nancy Pelosi while was engaged in and on account of the performance of her official duties.

The defense appears to be trying to argue reasonable doubt as to these elements by suggesting that the defendant acted for other reasons. That is the longest of long shots, but it is not sanctionable.

[David Nieporent]

Judges tend to give criminal defense lawyers some latitude in advocating outré factual theories.

You're right, but in this case the defense lawyer isn't advocating that the notion described is true — just that his client believed it. Which is not an outré factual theory at all. It's perfectly reasonable to advance that argument. (And I'm not sure how much of a long shot it is, either; his client is obviously a few Cheerios™ short of a breakfast.)

[Reallynotbob]

Nuts does not equal insane.

A defendant can be convicted of murdering a person even though the prosecution concedes the defendant actually believed the decedent was a space alien who sought to kill humans, specifically including defendant, and could only be stopped by killing.

Clark v. Arizona, 548 U.S. 735 (2006)

[Estragon]

I note for the record that referencing this incident continues to be a laugh line at the rallies

[SRG2]

A fair number of posters on the main Reason fora were willing to credit the story that the accused was Pelosi's husband's gay lover.

[Estragon]

I’m well aware of that.

I continue to be amazed at the number of conservatives who are willing to show up at political rallies to laugh at the idea of an 80+ year old being struck in the head with a hammer in the entryway of his own home.

Then again, if you view some of your fellow citizens as “vermin”… maybe it’s hilarious?

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

Then again, if you view some of your fellow citizens as “vermin”

Or “deplorable”, or “Fascists”, or “Nazis”, or….

[Sarcastr0]

Posters on here of both sides and the middle have been called awful names, including everything you just typed.

But no one went for vermin.

There’s a reason for that.

[Bob from Ohio]

"But no one went for vermin."

People have used "MAGAts" for Trump supporters. David N, for one.

Per Wiktionary: "Blend of MAGA +‎ maggot. MAGA is the acronym of "Make America Great Again", Donald Trump's campaign slogan."

[Sarcastr0]

You're pretty silly, Bob.

[Bob from Ohio]

You are deflecting.

[Nige]

When did Joe Biden or any other Democratic politician do that? Shocking, if true.

[Sarcastr0]

No, I see a distinction between a shitty pun and out-and-out calling people vermin.

So do you, but you're proudly bad faith about politics so here we are.

[Bob from Ohio]

"distinction between a shitty pun and out-and-out calling people vermin."

There is no distinction. When people used strange takeoffs on Obama's name, you saw that as bad.

[Bob from Ohio]

"When did Joe Biden or any other Democratic politician do that? "

Sarcasto said "posters" here. Is Joe posting here?

[Nige]

Just pointing out a crucial disparity.

[shawn_dude]

There's "bad" and then there's "prelude to violence and genocide."

These are not equal.

Sorta like the difference between lighting a bag of dogshit on fire and throwing on someone's lawn and lighting a cross on fire on someone's lawn.

[Estragon]

“at the idea of an 80+ year old being struck in the head with a hammer in the entryway of his own home.”

Funny? Or no?

The lack of human decency on display is… something.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

The lack of human decency on display...

Where? And by whom?

[Estragon]

“conservatives who are willing to show up at political rallies to laugh at the idea of an 80+ year old being struck in the head with a hammer in the entryway of his own home”

[Estragon]

Funny? Or no?

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

Funny? Or no?

No more so than elements of the left cheering on Hamas' acts of rape and murder, laughing about/celebrating the deaths of notable conservatives (like Scalia and others), some who died from Covid, etc. Of course I'm sure you were not only disgusted by that sort of thing but were quite vocal about it as well.

But why even ask me that question? I've said nothing at all to suggest that I thought it funny.

[Estragon]

“I’ve said nothing at all to suggest that I thought it funny.”

How would you describe people who DO find it funny enough to laugh about— in public— at a political rally for their preferred presidential candidate?

I’m sure we all remember people laughing at Scalia/scalise/Ivana trump at biden rallies, and I condemn them wholeheartedly. In fact, I would call such behavior “deplorable”. How about you?

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

“I’ve said nothing at all to suggest that I thought it funny.”

How would you describe people who DO find it funny enough to laugh about— in public— at a political rally for their preferred presidential candidate?

Have you stopped beating your wife yet?

Your Sarcastr0-esque tactics aren’t as clever nor as virtuous as you’ve fooled yourself into believing.

[Estragon]

“Yeah, laughing about a senior citizen (regardless of who he’s married to) getting hit in the head with a hammer isn’t cool and Trump shouldn’t joke about it”

That’s it. Can you bring yourself to say that? I promise you won’t turn into a rino or a squish. We’re living in a society here!!

(That last line was for Frank)

[Estragon]

“ Have you stopped beating your wife yet?”

Uh wut?

[Estragon]

“Have you stopped beating your wife yet?”

Classic paradigmatic loaded question. But what’s loaded about this?

“How would you describe people who DO find it funny enough to laugh about— in public— at a political rally for their preferred presidential candidate?”

I’m just asking for your opinion, man. We’re approaching 3+ hours of colloquy here and still nothing to say?

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

I’m just asking for your opinion, man. We’re approaching 3+ hours of colloquy here and still nothing to say?

And you still haven’t addressed:

But why even ask me that question? I’ve said nothing at all to suggest that I thought it funny.

Since I’ve given you absolutely no reason suspect that I would find any such thing funny (that’s called a clue) there is also zero reason to ask that question of me. What you’re doing here is a playing a dishonest game of attempting to put me on the defensive and dance to your rhetorical tune over something that has nothing to do with anything I’ve ever said, because you have no real argument other than childish virtue signaling.

[Estragon]

You came in over the top on the Paul pelosi thread. If you don’t want to talk about Paul pelosi, why are you commenting?

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

You came in over the top on the Paul pelosi thread. If you don’t want to talk about Paul pelosi, why are you commenting?

I explicitly quoted exactly what I was commenting on. If you're too lazy/stupid to read what people post then why are you responding?

[Estragon]

“I explicitly quoted exactly what I was commenting on.“

Trump calling citizens vermin. Got it.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

Trump calling citizens vermin. Got it.

The only things you've "got" are severe problems with honesty and reading comprehension.

[Estragon]

“The only things you’ve “got” are severe problems with honesty and reading comprehension.“

That, and your number. That’s three things mujambo

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

And one of the worst cases of self-delusion I've ever seen.

[Estragon]

Lil wuzzie keeps running his mouth. So precious

[Estragon]

Wuzzie do you think maxwells silver hammer are words to live by??

[Estragon]

“Lazy/stupid” — why do you do this?

I quoted trump. You said this:

“Or “deplorable”, or “Fascists”, or “Nazis”, or….“

Ok, whatabout huckleberry. I’m done with you for today. Bless your heart!

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

“Lazy/stupid” — why do you do this?

I quoted trump.

And now you're lying.

[Reallynotbob]

Aaaaaand convicted.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/11/16/conviction-in-conspiracy-fueled-attack-on-paul-pelosi-00127648

[Zarniwoop]

I hope the state proceeds with their charges “including attempted murder, burglary, assault with a deadly weapon and elder abuse”.

Not because more time needs to be piled on … but because Trump might be petty enough and/or vindictive enough to pardon DePape to appeal to his bases “own the libs”

[apedad]

Lawyer of Georgia defendant in Trump election case admits to leaking witness video

Media reports detailing confidential interviews with four defendants who were divulging their knowledge to state prosecutors in the Georgia racketeering case involving former President Trump set off a bizarre “whodunnit”-style hearing in state court Wednesday afternoon.

It culminated with a confession by one defendant’s lawyer and a Georgia judge weighing whether to issue a protective order placing restrictions on how defendants can disseminate materials they receive in discovery.

“In being transparent with the court and to make sure that nobody else gets blamed for what happened — and so that I can go to sleep well tonight — Judge, I did release those videos to one outlet,” said Jonathan Miller, an attorney for defendant Misty Hampton. “And in all candor, I need the court to know that.”

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4311369-lawyer-georgia-defendant-trump-election-case-admits-leaking-witness-video/

Setting aside the serious #ETTD vibes, lawyers - is this a serious transgression of some court rules?

[not guilty]

I wonder what the defense lawyer was thinking as to how his stunt could possibly benefit his client. But in that there was no protective order then in place, I don't see that any rules were violated.

[Commenter_XY]

not guilty, was Jonathan Miller a 'stand up' kind of guy in 'fessing up' to the judge or an idiot? What do you say?

[not guilty]

It is good that he admitted being the culprit so that no one else would be blamed. He probably won some points with his fellow defense lawyers.

Miller represents Misty Hampton, a former Coffee County election supervisor. What I have read of the content of the proffers did not relate to Miller's client. I remain puzzled as to what motivated his dissemination of the videos.

[Brett Bellmore]

When I looked at what had been released, I'd sort of assumed the prosecution had leaked it. Though it wasn't ALL helpful to the prosecution. For instance:

"And Powell told prosecutors that she may have apologized to the former president for the legal efforts’ failure, noting that Trump frequently contacted her because he “always wanted to know where things were in terms of finding fraud that would change the results of the election,” according to the Post."

That would tend to confirm that Trump actually DID think he'd been cheated, and could overturn the election outcome by proving it. Which is not a particularly nefarious way to 'overturn an election', after all.

[Nige]

It shows he knew nobody was finding fraud while claiming the election was fraudulent.

[OtisAH]

Hilarious you think anybody believes you “sort of” thought the prosecution did it. If not for you seeing this post you’d have already declared they did. The only surprise here is you’ve yet to declare Miller is taking the fall for Willis for some incoherent reason.

[bernard11]

I think it would tend to confirm that he knew he lost, because efforts to find fraud were coming up empty, per Powell.

[David Nieporent]

When I looked at what had been released, I’d sort of assumed the prosecution had leaked it.

And now that you know otherwise, I'm sure that will cause you to reassess your worldview that the most conspiratorial explanation is always the right one.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Wouldn't it be enough for Trump to think that he MIGHT HAVE BEEN cheated, and that finding evidence of that would prove that he had been?

A police officer thinks that someone MIGHT BE drunk and stops the person to look for evidence that the person is.

[Brett Bellmore]

Election Law Blog: “How Trump and His Allies Plan to Wield Power in 2025”

I couldn't help but think, as I read it, that it all sounded awfully familiar. It seems to all amount to: He plans to return the favor, the cad! And do unto his enemies as they've been doing unto him.

[apedad]

I see nothing about the budget, taxes, foreign affairs, national security, policies, trade, immigration, etc., you know - normal govt issues.

[Michael P]

Isn't that what Brett said? For example, Biden is refusing to do any of that. Biden's border plan, for example, seems to mostly involve being ordered by a court to stop destroying Texas's property. His federal budget plan involves leaving the spigots fully open. Taxes are the status quo. Foreign affairs are just undermining what Trump did, funding Hamas via Iran, and kowtowing to Winnie the Pooh. Biden's efforts on national security are limited to paying for transgender interstate abortions or whatever, leading to a one-person block in the Senate on promotions of senior officers.

[apedad]

You disagree with Biden's policies/actions and that's OK - BUT AT LEAST BIDEN HAS POLICIES AND ACTIONS.

Trump's only focus is retribution. PERIOD.

THAT'S the kind of govt you want?!?

[Michael P]

You have an awfully weird definition of “policies/actions” if you think what I listed for Biden constitutes more than what the NYT listed for Trump. Most of what I listed was inaction and capitulation to our country's enemies.

[Nige]

‘Isn’t that what Brett said?’

No. Even your dumb parodies of Biden’s policies is more substantive than Trump on policy. Trump’s planning to be Putin. Brett thinks that’s okay because the DOJ had the cheek to treat Trump as if he isn’t above the law.

[Brett Bellmore]

Trump is threatening to sic the DOJ on his political opponents, in between court appearances due to... the DOJ having been sicced on him by his opponents. I find the irony of the complaint palpable.

[Nige]

The DOJ was not sicced on him by his opponents. The guy tried to overturn an election, stole government documents, some of them classified. The idea that there could be no consequences is staggering. You're supporting his lawlessness.

[Mr. Bumble]

Guess you forgot about Crossfire Hurricane etc.

[Nige]

'Siccing.'

[Randy Sax]

"Stole government documents" is kind of a stretch. He had classified documents in boxes when he moved out of the white house. Like getting fired and taking some office supplies with you. Ya, it's a dick move but, I don't think we should lock people up in this country for being kinda a dick. With the amount of people running around with security clearances I'd estimate that a good proportion of U.S. homes have classified information in them.

[Nige]

I think the ‘stolen’ is justified given that he was afforded multiple opportunities to return them with no fuss no foul and he refused. This case is all his own doing.

[Randy Sax]

“Hey Trump this is HR, were gonna need you to give back that stapler you took”

Trump – “NO! Whahhhhh” *whines like a baby*

Like I said, dick move and a little pathetic, but not jail worthy. Maybe a timeout.

[Sarcastr0]

Seems like you have a problem with the law as passed, not the law's application to the facts.

[Nige]

Stealing office supplies is also a crime, I mean, they're not government documents covered by specific laws, but still.

Remember when Bill Clinton left office and he and Hilary were supposed to have stripped the White House bare on the way out?

[Martinned]

Well, they took the letter W out of all the keyboards.

[David Nieporent]

Seems like you have a problem with the law as passed, not the law’s application to the facts.

Sounds more like he has a problem with the facts, if he thinks that national defense information is the equivalent of a stapler.

[Randy Sax]

To people that work with classified documents everyday, they are almost equivalent. Almost all of it it useless junk.

[Sarcastr0]

I don't work with classified documents every day, but no one I talk to who does treats it casually in a 'I'll just take it home' manner, that's insane.

[Randy Sax]

I guess you and I know different people.

[OtisAH]

The people Sarcastro knows probably exist outside of his imagination or prison.

[Drewski]

In my extensive experience with classified materials, Army personnel tend to be extremely casual while the Department of Energy employees are extremely strict, and will lock up even confidential materials to take a coffee break. Private companies are usually strict below the C-suite, but executives vary a lot in how seriously they take classification versus their egos. I expect other organizations likewise range pretty wide.

One thing is sure, though: Every one of these organizations will turn on someone who gets caught mishandling materials, without hesitation or mercy. The office supply analogy breaks down there, no matter what your background. Nobody but Trump wants to be accused of a conspiracy involving classified materials.

[David Nieporent]

I think the ‘stolen’ is justified given that he was afforded multiple opportunities to return them with no fuss no foul and he refused. This case is all his own doing.

"Refused" fails to capture it. He refused for a long time, and then lied that he had complied.

[Don Nico]

No Kidding. The idiot has jail coming to him.
Unlike Randy S, I have found that people who work with special compartmented information take its protection extremely seriously.
Trump's bad example is reason enough to prosecute

[Mr. Bumble]

I wonder how Nige-bot would classify Biden’s possession of “government documents” in multiple locations? How is Robert Hur’s investigation into that progressing?

[Nige]

I would call it ‘under investigation.’ Also 'refreshingly free of histrionics and threats of civil war.'

[David Nieporent]

First of all, most of that is either delusional or outright lies. Second, no, that isn't what Brett said. What you're saying is that you don't like Biden's policies on these issues. What Brett said — as apedad noted — was that Trump planned to use the government to go after his enemies, not to enact policies at all.

[VinniUSMC]

Did you not read that before posting to see how silly you look?

Trump retaliating means that there's no other possibility for policy? Is that really your assertion?

Trump's not even likely to be President, thankfully, so it's probably better to focus on the actual transgressions of the actual people with actual government power.

[Nige]

Trump 'retaliating' is his policy.

[Brett Bellmore]

Of course it's possible for Trump to do unto his enemies as they're currently doing unto him, AND have policies. Administrations can walk and chew gum at the same time.

Currently the left and NeverTrump right are hoping that the norm violation of conducting lawfare against a President and candidate for the Presidency can be contained; Just against Trump and his allies, nobody else. And that the previous norm of ex-Presidents and candidates being off limits can be maintained for everybody else.

Well, it was a corrupt norm, holding Nixon harmless was the worst of Ford's political sins, but it sure held up through some serious stress testing until the desperation to take out Trump ended it. Still, I'm not going to be sad to see that norm die, as long as it genuinely dies, instead of being another case of TrumpLaw.

So, if Trump gets elected and subjects his foes to real legal accountability, I'll be happy.

Of course, the people freaking out about this are fully into the TrumpLaw mindset; Trump, being uniquely bad, is the only appropriate target for such actions. His opponents, by definition being good, can never be appropriate targets. From that warped perspective, it's definitionally impossible for Trump to appropriately sic the DOJ on his enemies, their very status as his enemies means they can't be appropriate targets for legal action. That they may have done illegal stuff is beside the point.

[Nige]

'So, if Trump gets elected and subjects his foes to real legal accountability, I’ll be happy.'

Trump is above the law, nobody else is.

Genuine authoritarianism in action.

[Brett Bellmore]

At present, it appears that only Trump is beneath the law.

[Nige]

Only Trump tried to overturn an election and stay in power and only Trump stole a bunch of secret documents some of them classified and only Trump is explicitly promising to use government power against his enemies and calling them vermin.

[Sarcastr0]

Trump's action in trying to hold onto office were extraordinary Brett.

You can't even bring yourself to endorse them. But you will kinda waive you hand and say everyone does it.

No, everyone doesn't. You're waiving away a contempt for our system of government established in the past and planned for in the future.
Trump sucks. People like you enabling him is a big reason why.

[Brett Bellmore]

Oh, I agree he went way too far in contesting the election. I don't think he went as far as to reasonably characterize what he did as "insurrection", but he sure did NOT know when to quit.

I do have contempt for the norm of letting 'important' politicians get away with crimes, which had stood since Ford's pardon of Nixon. I'm not unhappy to see that norm die, so long as it dies for EVERYBODY, not just Trump.

But that doesn't mean I have to agree that everything they're going after Trump on is legitimate. A lot of it is total BS.

[Sarcastr0]

Yep, that's the handwaiving.

[OtisAH]

Brett obviously stopped and topped off his bullshit tanks before coming to work today.

[Magister]

Brett is kind of a breeder reactor of bullshit.

[bernard11]

But that doesn’t mean I have to agree that everything they’re going after Trump on is legitimate.

BS. You plainly believe that everything they are going after him for is bullshit, and decline to provide reasons.

[Brett Bellmore]

No, I actually think that the classified documents stuff would generally result in 'unimportant' people getting prosecuted and ending up in prison. The only thing off about that is that this is clearly not a law that would routinely have been enforced on somebody in Trump's position. Stupid of Trump to think he'd get the same pass on it, though.

OTOH, the NY 'fraud' case, for over-valuing properties used as collateral for loans that have already been paid off? Yeah, that's bullshit.

[Sarcastr0]

It was not routine enforcement, Brett. Trump went above and beyond to lie and delay.

You've been told this over and over and somehow it never takes.

[Brett Bellmore]

Trump only had the occasion to go 'above and beyond' because they went after him in the first place. As they didn't go after Pence or Biden, for instance. Who had the opportunity to act AFTER getting notice that the informal rules were changing.

Mind, the fact that they DID go after him should have clued him in on the fact that he wasn't going to be afforded the normal allowances for technically illegal behavior, and he was way too slow to pick up on that. So I'll fault him there.

[Sarcastr0]

They contacted Biden and Pence just as they did with Trump.

They immediately complied.
Trump didn't just not comply, he lied and moved the docs.

We have had this discussion so many times. It's like you are born new every week on certain issues.

[Nige]

‘because they went after him in the first place.’

Ie gave him multiple time and opportunity to return them without any legal repercussions.

[David Nieporent]

Trump retaliating means that there’s no other possibility for policy? Is that really your assertion?

No. My assertion is that Trump isn't talking about, because he's not interested in, policy. Except for rounding up 10 million+ people, I guess.

[VinniUSMC]

So, there is a policy, or not? Make up your mind.

[Michael P]

No, I am saying that Biden has no real policies and no real actions on those things, except what pittance I mentioned. The NYT pointed to some specific Trump policy plans, for example on immigration. But you lot seem to define it as not-policy because you don't like it, which makes your complaints here look like projection.

[Nige]

Oh sorry we focused on his fascism and blew past some of his other fascism.

[bernard11]

You're defending Trump because he is going to round up all the illegal immigrants and put them in camps?

[Moderation4ever]

My guess is that we can expect the same level of incompetency that we saw in the four years he was President. President Biden has the economy on the road back and so the first years will be OK. Somewhere in the term a crisis that Trump can't handle, like the pandemic, will happen and result in more chaos. Those people who thought they were better off 4 years ago will be reminded why they voted for Biden in 2020.

[Nige]

Biden is frustrating and in the case of his support for Netanyahu, appalling, but the world can't afford four years of Trump wrecking already-limited progress on climate change, to say nothing of providing torture porn of migrants at the border for his supporters. Lots of people died who didn't have to because Trump was in charge during the pandemic.

[David Nieporent]

in the case of his support for Netanyahu, appalling,

He's supporting Israel, not Netanyahu. Because Israel is our close ally and was brutally attacked by an enemy and is thus at war. One might have deemed the UK's dealings with Northern Ireland, or India, or Kenya, or whatever, to be questionable, but October 1939 was hardly the right time for FDR to address that.

[Nige]

And if this was WW II all over again, you might have a point. But this is Natanyahu, as nasty a piece of work as ever there was, prosecuting an assault that's killing thousands of civilians.

[David Nieporent]

​

And if this was WW II all over again, you might have a point.

This is a war. For some reason the left doesn't seem to get that. In a war, civilians die. That's awful, but inevitable. It doesn't make the country prosecuting that war "nasty." There is no elected official anywhere in the world who would be doing something different at this point if he or she were in Netanyahu's place.

[Nige]

Yes, they'd be desperate to postpone any reckoning with accountability, too, and willing to kill as many people as necessary to do so.

[David Nieporent]

Sounds like you're opposed to accountability… for Hamas.

[Nige]

If holding Netanyahu accountable meant over 11,000 Israelis were killed, I'd object to that particular approach also.

[Noscitur a sociis]

as nasty a piece of work as ever there was,

As nasty as the people who masterminded coordinated rape and beheaded babies?

prosecuting an assault that’s killing thousands of civilians.

What do you think the proper Israeli reaction to the 10/7 attacks would have been?

[Nige]

Not immediately killing thousands of civilians, for a start. Getting rid of Netanyahu might have helped.

[Moderation4ever]

Your point is well taken. President Biden and President Obama both had issues with Netanyahu. My hope is that after things settled down the Israeli people give Netanyahu the bum's rush. He bears some guilt in 10/7 as he was covering his own backside rather than looking out for his citizens.

[Mr. Bumble]

You must be living in the alternate universe Margrave is talking about below.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

President Biden has the economy on the road back

The level of stupidity behind rhetoric like that is difficult to fathom.

[Brett Bellmore]

Relative to the depths of the Covid policy induced mini-depression, sure. Funny how the economy picks up when you stop ordering businesses to shut down.

[Moderation4ever]

And when did that Covid policy occur under President Trump. Could another President have done better, I don't know but they could not have done worse.

[Moderation4ever]

Like President Clinton and President Obama, President Biden came into office with a damaged economy and like Clinton and Obama he has rebuilt the economy. The fact is that economic indicators are good at this time whether that is believed or not. If you think they are not good then show me why not.

[OtisAH]

And you’d be wrong. There will be a lot more Steven Millers and Jeffrey Clarks (though the OG JC will be in jail) than there will be Rudys and George Papadopouluseseses.

[Sarcastr0]

Yet again -
Facts matter

Trump is indicted for actual bad acts, both criminal and civil. There has been and will continue to be due process

Trump plans to go wild based on nothing more than spite. Investigations without predicate, targeting for sake of targeting. You know, dictator shit.

That's the difference. And those who are claiming this is turnabout are mistaking their subjective delusions for objective reality.

And via those delusions, they give up fidelity to our republic and support this shit.

[Brett Bellmore]

Oh, so you're pretending that there's no predicate available for going after anybody opposed to Trump, like, say, the Bidens. Gotcha, you're delusional.

[Sarcastr0]

The investigations into the Bidens have been at a manic level in Congress and found nothing much, so yeah I am saying that.

[Brett Bellmore]

Like I said, you're delusional about them having found nothing.

[Sarcastr0]

If the GOP found a morsel, they'd be trumpeting referrals to the DoJ and more.

They haven't so all you have is breathless reporting about what whistleblowers were going to say before they all evaporate.

You take that chaff as sign there's a fire, because you're a true believer who doesn't even know that's what he is.

[Nelson]

"Like I said, you’re delusional about them having found nothing."

What actual evidence do you think they've found? I'm not talking vague yarn-and-thumbtack third-level connections. I mean actual, comfirmable, falsifiable, corroborated, admissible-in-court evidence?

I underatand that those who hate Biden think that the fact that his family has profited from the Biden name (welcome to the real world), the fact that his son is a scumbag, and the fact that he loans large amounts of money to family members (who then pay ot back) all prove he is somehow corrupt. But that's just opinion, and a motivated, biased opinion at that.

What is the hard, demonstrable evidence that Joe Biden has ever done anything that would warrant impeachment?

[Nige]

Republicans can't even get their impeachment rolling despite having all that evidence about the Biden Crime Family.

[David Nieporent]

Oh, so you’re pretending that there’s no predicate available for going after anybody opposed to Trump, like, say, the Bidens. Gotcha, you’re delusional.

You're doing it again. There is no "the Bidens." Hunter Biden and Joe Biden are different people. Hunter has done some things wrong, and has already been "gone after," and is of course none of Trump's business since he's a private citizen.

There is no predicate for "going after" Joe Biden, no. Which everyone knows, which is why everything is about "the Bidens" or "the Biden Crime Family" and why no investigation has resulted in anything.

[Brett Bellmore]

” Hunter Biden and Joe Biden are different people.”

Hence the “s” at the end of “Bidens”. If they were the same person I’d have referred to him as just “Biden”, rather than “the Bidens”.

"There is no predicate for “going after” Joe Biden"

Just denial, that's all, and delusional if you actually think that. We've got more than enough testimony from Hunter's business partners about Joe getting a cut to provide that predicate.

[Sarcastr0]

That's twice you've refused to engage with those questioning the evidence you say is there, claiming it's too obvious to bother.

[Brett Bellmore]

I'm not seeing any "questioning", just flat, mocking denial.

Hearing Wrap Up: IRS Whistleblowers Expose How Bidens Were Treated Differently

Hunter Biden’s biz partner called Joe Biden ‘the Big Guy’ in panicked message after Post’s laptop story

[Brett Bellmore]

IRS whistleblower in Hunter Biden probe says he was stopped from pursuing investigative leads into “dad” or the “big guy”

Whistleblowers say IRS recommended far more charges, including felonies, against Hunter Biden

[Sarcastr0]

The Committee promised Biden admin interference. These whistleblowers were unable to establish that.

But you proceed as if they had, because they kinda papered over their whistleblower's failure to deliver.

[Nige]

What a succession of damp squibs those were.

[grb]

Brett Bellmore : “Whistleblowers say IRS recommended far more charges, including felonies, against Hunter Biden”

Well, you find that convenient to believe that and have a long history of believing things based on convenience alone.

But really, Brett, how persuasive can you find it? How many times in your six decades have you seen some public figure in trouble for tax problems like Hunter Biden? In what percent of those times has the issue been handled with an agreement for payment and penalties? Per my memory, damn near 100%.

Probably there were a few IRS employees hungry for blood in some of those cases as well, and that’s ignoring the tribal/partisan blood present in the water here. If that’s your last hope of proving something (anything!) beyond Hunter’s leeching off his daddy’s name (or his other grubby offenses), then you’re holding on to a very slim reed indeed.

Certainly you’ll get no help from the House Republicans or Comer. Once again, he’s made a fool of himself for the zillionth time – in this case over Biden’s brother repaying a loan. It was priceless to see Comer throw a raging tantrum after someone observed his financial transactions with his own brother were indistinguishable from Biden’s.

Ya know, I’ve seen enough people of all persuations argue the Trump-Daniels prosecution was exceptional to be convinced. And I’m not sure about the other NYC case (can repeated & systematic fraud about asset valuation really not be a legal issue?), but am open on that issue as well. Certainly it would be convenient for me to set aside doubts, but who wants to live like that?

Who indeed?

[Brett Bellmore]

Yes, I find it convenient to believe the evidence, just as you find it convenient to dismiss it out of hand.

[Sarcastr0]

You linked to people saying that other people said that there is totally evidence, Brett.

I'm sure you find this very credible. No one else does.

Which you seem to kind of sense because you keep not engaging.

[David Nieporent]

.

Hunter Biden’s biz partner called Joe Biden ‘the Big Guy’ in panicked message after Post’s laptop story

This one is particularly amusing. One might wonder how a text message can be determined to be "panicked." One might also wonder how the New York Post could pretend to be a journalistic outlet. The answer is the same in either case: it can't.

[not guilty]

Brett, suppose you were a member of Robert Hur's staff drafting an indictment charging Joe Biden with violating one or more federal criminal statutes, to be considered by a grand jury immediately upon Biden leaving office as president.

What statute(s) would you allege that Biden has violated? What act(s) or omission(s) by Biden would you allege? As to each such act or omission, when and where did the offending conduct occur?

[Brett Bellmore]

New evidence may destroy Biden’s defense in his classified documents case

To answer your question, that would be the Espionage act, among others.

[Sarcastr0]

The committee now alleges that the White House “omitted months of communications, planning, and coordinating among multiple White House officials, [Kathy] Chung, Penn Biden Center employees, and President Biden’s personal attorneys to retrieve the boxes containing classified materials. The timeline also omitted multiple visits from at least five White House employees, including Dana Remus, Anthony Bernal, Ashley Williams, Annie Tomasini, and an unknown staffer.”

If true, the evidence demolishes the timeline long maintained by the Biden team.

If true.
Lets wait a bit on that, based on past timeline.

[David Nieporent]

The issue here is simple: if you assume Biden knew that there were some classified materials in those boxes, then his account is a problem. If he didn't know, then there's still no there, there. And there is no evidence — old or "new" — that he did. All they have is evidence that the boxes were moved. Which is not actually new, or inculpatory.

[Sarcastr0]

The title even says 'may.' Which is a giveaway to most folks it's clickbait.
But Brett is not most folks.

[not guilty]

"To answer your question, that would be the Espionage act, among others."

No, Brett, that doesn't come close to answering my question. What specific act(s) or omission(s) by Joe Biden do you claim violated the Espionage Act, or any other federal criminal statute(s)? When and where did each such act or omission occur?

Every criminal defendant has a Sixth Amendment right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation. An indictment that says merely, "the grand jurors present that Joe Biden violated the Espionage Act" would be quickly dismissed on motion. And the attorney drafting it would very likely be fired for rank incompetence.

[not guilty]

Still waiting, Brett.

[Brett Bellmore]

Don't hold your breath. Why don't you direct your question to Turley?

[Nige]

All that 'evidence' just melts away, don't it?

[Sarcastr0]

Haha - asked for evidence, Brett posts a nothing and when called on it says 'well, take it up with the author of the nothing I posted.'

Not how it works - you're the one talking.

[bernard11]

New evidence? From those noted scumbags Jordan and Comer?

Yeah. Right.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Just so nobody else has to click on the link to determine the obvious:

There's no evidence presented. It is an opinion piece by Jonathan Turley, who has actively participated in pursuing Biden's impeachment, based purely on Comer's latest "revelations."

Turley has already testified to his buddies about 4 different reasons Biden could be impeached. One would think that such conclusions would be accompanied by solid evidence.

...but no.

[David Nieporent]

You have no testimony — let alone actual documentary evidence — of Joe Biden getting a cut of anything.

[Armchair]

Depends how you define cut.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

You’re doing it again. There is no “the Bidens.” Hunter Biden and Joe Biden are different people.

I'm going to need to remember to pounce and correct my wife when she refers to one of the families with which we're acquainted as "the Smiths" (or whatever) so she can wonder how the hell I made it to my age without ever learning what plural forms are.

[shawn_dude]

Well, if the only reason you're using the plural form for is to imply guilt by association, then stop. That's rude. It's no wonder the Smiths haven't invited you back.

[Nelson]

"when she refers to one of the families with which we’re acquainted as “the Smiths”"

If the husband is a criminal and the wife isn't and she refers to them, collectively, as criminals? Yeah, you should tell her to stop doing that.

Hunter Biden is a criminal. That comes as no surprise to those of us who knew about him long before the political right even realized he existed. Joe Biden is not a criminal. If you have to say "the Bidens" in order to dirty up Joe with his son's shenanigans, you are playing that most dishonest of semantic word games, guilt-by-association. Or in this case, guilt-by-shared-chromosomes.

So what do you have on Joe? Not "the Bidens". Joe Biden.

[Nige]

'He plans to return the favor, the cad!'

Brett accepts the pretext for Trump's authoritarian regime's action.

[apedad]

I know Dr. Ed won't support this (he wants to overturn 19A), but is Nikki Haley someone the Republicans could actually throw their (almost) full support to?

She seems to be the most sanest and least controversial (R) candidate.

Is there any possibility of a Republican candidate besides Trump?

Haley vies to overtake DeSantis in Iowa

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4310970-nikki-haley-ron-desantis-iowa-caucus-donald-trump/

[Brett Bellmore]

Haley has about as much chance among Republicans as Tulsi Gabbard has with Democrats. Appealing to the opposing party has never been an indication that somebody has a political future.

[apedad]

So Trump - do or die?

[Brett Bellmore]

I've stated before: I think he's too old at this point, and demonstrates too little indication of having learned anything from his time in office. He keeps walking into stuff somebody who was learning from experience would have avoided.

I'd prefer DeSantis, actually. He has executive branch experience and I mostly agree with him on policy.

I'm warming a bit to Ramaswamy, having done a bit of research on him and finding that he actually shows some signs prior to this year of having been a conservative. (I've liked what he's been saying, my chief concern was that he didn't actually mean any of it, he was just putting on a focus grouped mask.)

But, if Trump ends up with the nomination? I see no sign that the Democrats are likely to nominate somebody better, so I'd probably end up holding my nose and voting for him.

[Life of Brian]

I’d prefer DeSantis, actually. He has executive branch experience and I mostly agree with him on policy.

Ditto all around. He’s the only principled doer on the stage.

I’m warming a bit to Ramaswamy, having done a bit of research on him and finding that he actually shows some signs prior to this year of having been a conservative. (I’ve liked what he’s been saying, my chief concern was that he didn’t actually mean any of it, he was just putting on a focus grouped mask.)

What have you unearthed? I share the same concern and have found no comfort thus far (he even seems to be grossly recalibrating in the midst of his campaign).

[Life of Brian]

This blockquote bug is irritating. Interesting that the second one closes properly, but not the first.

[Brett Bellmore]

Do a search for him on OpenSecrets. He's been, with just a couple of exceptions, donating to Republican candidates for years now.

[Nige]

Ah, yes, the patent troll. For proud capitalists, you sure pick the lowest form of businessmen who think they know how to run a government.

[Don Nico]

Yup it sounds that way and the result is… die

[David Nieporent]

Haley has about as much chance among Republicans as Tulsi Gabbard has with Democrats. Appealing to the opposing party has never been an indication that somebody has a political future.

You're delusional. Haley is not running to appeal to the opposing party. There's nothing about her that's appealing to Democrats other than the simple fact that she's not Trump. If you had wanted to point to someone arguably trying to appeal to Democrats, you could have said Christie or Hutchinson. Not Haley.

But to answer apedad's question: Haley is currently looking like the strongest non-Trump candidate, so if Trump is forced out of the race — I don't anticipate even a criminal conviction and prison sentence doing that, but health reasons (he's obviously both physically and mentally unwell) could — she could be the nominee.

[Brett Bellmore]

Apedad does not give me the impression of being a Republican, and apparently finds her appealing, and that's what I was referring to.

"Haley is currently looking like the strongest non-Trump candidate, so if Trump is forced out of the race — I don’t anticipate even a criminal conviction and prison sentence doing that, but health reasons (he’s obviously both physically and mentally unwell) could — she could be the nominee."

The failure here is in not recognizing that the reason she's possibly the strongest non-Trump candidate is that her appeal has the least overlap with Trump. (Among candidates with non-negligible support.) The market for candidates who are like Trump is dominated at the moment BY Trump.

Should Trump drop out of the race, the other 'trumpy' candidates would pick up his current supporters, while she would likely gain few if any of them.

538 current numbers for Republican nominee candidates

Trump 59.1%
DeSantis 14.1%
Haley 9.4%
Ramaswamy 5.1%
Christie 2.5%
Everybody else bupkis%

Of these, DeSantis and Ramaswamy are both competing with Trump for the same faction within the GOP, and add up to 78.3% of the field. If Trump drops out, Haley might make it into the double digits, she will NOT end up even a plurality winner.

[shawn_dude]

Perhaps Apedad's appreciation for Haley is her apparent ability to be a rational and reasonable president who is interested in making the nation and all its people better off (from a Conservative perspective) than she is in seizing the moment to be America's first elected dictator. The country is ripe for an Orban or Putin. A full 30% of the electorate has given up on democracy in general and embraced authoritarianism (and one authoritarian specifically.) If Trump is too much of a buffoon to follow through, Desantis is happy to make his own try.

[Brett Bellmore]

"A full 30% of the electorate has given up on democracy in general and" express this by voting? While the people who haven't given up on democracy in general express it by attempts to keep candidates they don't like off the ballot?

[Life of Brian]

Is there any possibility of a Republican candidate besides Trump?

Haley vies to overtake DeSantis in Iowa

A weird juxtaposition that answers your own question, I think.

[Life of Brian]

Edited 4 times to try to fix the blockquote, btw -- apparently a weird site bug I haven't run across before.

[Magister]

A very annoying bug.

Edited 4 times to try to fix the blockquote, btw — apparently a weird site bug I haven’t run across before.

It’s started doing that a few days agp, even to old comments that previously displayed correctly.

Edit: it appears to avoid it if the first blockquote is preceded by non-blockquote text. But after so many edits maybe it was solved for this comment by something else.

[Zarniwoop]

ah neat, I've been struggling with the recent blockquote bug too. Let's give your suggestion a try:

Edit: it appears to avoid it if the first blockquote is preceded by non-blockquote text. But after so many edits maybe it was solved for this comment by something else.

If I don't edit this comment, it works!

[Zarniwoop]

Bingo! props to M4ever for coming up with a viable work-around.

[David Nieporent]

Ditto. The most useful comment posted here this day/week/month/year.

[Magister]

I actually made a comment that was most useful, and M4ever beat me to it, or at least got the credit for it. 🙁

Also, I made more than 10 edits within 5 minutes trying different combinations of tags and I never replaced "agp" with "ago". 🙁 🙁

[Zarniwoop]

Magister sez:

I actually made a comment that was most useful, and M4ever beat me to it, or at least got the credit for it. ????

D'oh! Apologies for the mis-attribution! That's totally my bad.

Props to MAGISTER for coming up with the work-around!

[Magister]

OK, canceling the waahmbulance.

[Voize]

Actually I solved it first but could not post my truly remarkable explanation that the margin was too small to contain.
- Pierre de Fermat

[Moderation4ever]

What he is promising is chaos. He can investigate people all he wants but bringing that to court is a different matter. I have noted that a number of civil actions Trump brought have been tossed out of court and his lawyers sanctioned. I would expect no less were he to try to get DOJ to throw out indictments.

On a related matter Hunter Biden is set to subpoena Trump on his indictment on gun charges. If Hunter succeeds Trump may have to say if his did put DOJ onto charging Hunter. Trump talks about using the DOJ to pursue his enemies, so how will he feel if he has to admit that this has already happened.

[Nige]

'He can investigate people all he wants but bringing that to court is a different matter'

Hence the promise of installing personal loyalists everywhere.

'so how will he feel if he has to admit that this has already happened.'

I can predict he will feel completely justified and that he has been proven right about everything.

[SRG2]

And I can predict that the Trumpists will defend his actions as entirely justified because Hunter Biden! Laptop! The Big Guy! Gyna!

[Brett Bellmore]

Entirely justified because of evidence you mock, you mean? Yeah.

[Moderation4ever]

What evidence? You can wave the laptop in public, but I am guessing it will be waved out of court quick. How do you introduce evidence from a device that was not in Hunter's hands for several month and from which the data was sold to political operatives? Tell me how you get that admitted as evidence?

[Nige]

'because of evidence you mock'

It's the best evidence, so long as it doesnt have to stand up to scrutiny, let alone get presented in court.

[Nelson]

Calling that stuff "evidence" is grossly overstating things.

[SRG2]

No - my point is how they will deflect or justify Trump's actions if/when he does go after his enemies.

[Bob from Ohio]

A summary of a content free NYT piece.

Its just fear mongering, setting the stage for a pre-inauguration coup.

Trump is so dangerous we cannot let him take power again!

[John F. Carr]

Australia's top court has declared illegal the government's policy of permanently detaining some immigrants. The court overruled a 2004 precedent allowing the practice. The plaintiff was a stateless person who had been convicted of a crime that made him deportable. There was no place to send him. The government kept him in detention. A few hundred noncitizens are expected to be freed due to the new precedent.

In related news, the UK's top court has declared illegal the government's plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda. Like Australia, the UK wanted to make itself unappealing as a destination.

[Martinned]

Those evil foreign courts telling the British government what to do...

[apedad]

(Any Freemasons out there?)

Vatican reaffirms 'grave sin' of Freemasonry, says Catholics cannot join the world's largest secret society

"On the doctrinal level, it should be remembered that active membership in Freemasonry by a member of the faithful is forbidden because of the irreconcilability between Catholic doctrine and Freemasonry," the document reads, citing the 1983 "Declaration on Masonic Associations" by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who would go on to become Pope Benedict XVI.

https://www.foxnews.com/faith-values/vatican-reaffirms-grave-sin-freemasonry-catholics-cannot-join-worlds-largest-secret-society

In the mid 90s, I was assisting an investigation of a moving company that stole items from military families and we were inventorying items they had stored in a warehouse.

There was a fez and tucked inside there was a piece of paper with a bunch of hand signs and signals (I forget if it was a Mason or Shriner thing).

If I had camera/cell phone then and no ethics, I could have posted that on the internet.

[Commenter_XY]

If it was a Fez, then it was a Shiner thing. The hand signs and signals, could be either.

[shawn_dude]

Shriners are an order within Freemasonry. Or, to quote them directly "While not all Masons are Shriners, all Shriners are Masons."

[Commenter_XY]

That is correct.

[Mr. Bumble]

...but it's OK to be a Communist.

[Martinned]

Is it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decree_against_Communism

[Mr. Bumble]

Words and actions are often miles apart.

[Martinned]

It's the Catholic Church. Words is literally all they do.

[not guilty]

"It’s the Catholic Church. Words is literally all they do."

Uh, no. There are plenty of evil acts by the Catholic Church, which has paid out billions of dollars in judgments and settlements arising from an institutional inability or unwillingness to keep its priests out of its parishioners.

[Sarcastr0]

My old apartment got a Freemasons magazine sent to it for a former tenant.

It read like an alumni magazine. Extremely boring profiles of adjacent-to-important people who were Masons.

[SRG2]

And yet there were Catholic masons for hundreds of years. like Haydn and Mozart.

[Armchair]

January 6th, but for real this time?

Pro-Palestinian protestors surrounded the DNC and assaulted police officers. Democratic Congressmen trapped within the building had to be escorted out.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/capitol-police-arrests-pro-palestinian-protesters-outside-dnc-headquarters/

[Nige]

'January 6th, but for real this time?'

Trump watching the news waiting to see if these guys make him president again.

[Armchair]

These are your people Nige.

[Nige]

And John Hagee is yours.

[VinniUSMC]

January 6th, but for real this time?

Well, no.

Setting aside that January 6th wasn't even the thing that you're alluding to, the DNC headquarters is not the seat of American legislators.

It's just a run of the mill lefty shit "peaceful protest". Honestly, I'm all for the in-fighting of the left right now. It's hilarious.

[Nige]

It's the DNC, so that's where the servers are, so that's what'll prove Trump is really President.

[Estragon]

“I’m all for the in-fighting of the left right now. It’s hilarious.”

I’ll admit, I was amused by this:

https://gaetz.house.gov/media/press-releases/congressman-matt-gaetz-files-ethics-complaint-against-kevin-mccarthy

Kevin responds: “If I kidney punched someone, they would be on the ground.”

[Brett Bellmore]

It's not the seat of American legislators, but there were, in fact, a lot of American legislators at the DNC headquarters at the time the mob was trying to break in.

[SRG2]

And were these protestors trying to prevent any major legislation or constitutional activity?

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

And were these protestors trying to prevent any major legislation or constitutional activity?

What do you think their intent was in choosing as their target the party that controls the White House and Senate?

[SRG2]

I'll take that as a "no", then.

Much of the American right has this pathological need to argue "they did it too" regardless of how dissimilar in substance the conduct cited compared to that they're implicitly defending.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

I’ll take that as a “no”, then.

Then you'd be interpreting what I said inaccurately.

Much of the American right has this pathological need to argue “they did it too”

Perhaps, but that has nothing to do with my comment/question.

So do you have an answer to that question?

[Sarcastr0]

You seem to be implying that there's a sinister plan in protesting in front of our nation's leaders.

I don't much like the protests' ends or means, but you're coming up hilariously short trying to intimate this is J6 all over again.

[David Nieporent]

It’s not the seat of American legislators, but there were, in fact, a lot of American legislators at the DNC headquarters at the time the mob was trying to break in.

They weren't trying to break in.

https://x.com/daveweigel/status/1725145949117300827?s=20

[Armchair]

That's not what the Democratic Congressmen in the building said...

Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif., posted on X that he was evacuated from the DNC "after pro-terrorist, anti-#Israel protestors grew violent, pepper spraying police officers and attempting to break into the building.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/capitol-police-evacuating-dnc-palestine-protest-turned-violent-rcna125459

[Nige]

Oh, and apparently they blocked the entrance for a few minutes, and were quickly removed. That's it, that's the New Jan 6th.

[Commenter_XY]

Let's call it what it was: a naked attempt to intimidate a national political party with thuggish tactics. It was a mob of antisemitic nihilists who support Judeocidal terrorists (Hamas).

[Sarcastr0]

You know, I don’t think if you talked to the protesters that’s what they thought they were doing. Which one might expect for a ‘naked attempt.’

Unless one were being overdramatic.

We have seen protests that go beyond legality like this before; they are in fact old hat. We know how to deal with them, how to keep things deescalated, and how to put people in jail if needed.

This is not ordinary, but also not particularly new.

[Don Nico]

It may not be new, but of course, the mob is trying to pressure Mr. Biden through his party apparatus

[Sarcastr0]

Sure- that's kind of what protesters do.

[VinniUSMC]

Let’s call it what it was: a naked attempt to intimidate a national political party with thuggish tactics.

Yes, business as usual for leftist thugs.

[Reallynotbob]

PrObAbLy jUsT cRiSis aCToRs...

[Frank Drackman]

Kinder Gentler Frank here, from Tel Aviv
Haven't been here since 2008, I think there was one bar with a Plasma TV, now they might be the last country with Plasma TV's.
Like Vincent said to Jules, they got the same shit there we got here, it's just a little different (You dial "101" instead of "9-11" but if you do dial "9-11" it gets forwarded, so just go ahead and dial 9-11)
First meal, yes, McDonalds, (no Cheeseburger!)
. Lots of American volunteers, EMT's, Nurses, Docs, 2 Nursing students from Brooklyn who were here on Vacation on October 6, helping out in the recovery room.
Hospital staff very friendly, nicer than in most of the US of A, and my Summer Hebrew course from 1983 has been of no value, but hey, bowel obstructions are the same in any language.

https://vfi-usa.org/program-options/

Frank

[Commenter_XY]

Stay safe.

[Brett Bellmore]

My nephew, a convert to Judaism, has been making noises about moving to Israel and volunteering. Mostly, I think, because he failed a critical exam, so his attempt to become an engineer is pretty much over. My bro is horrified, but can't really argue that it's a bad cause he'd be volunteering for.

But could Israel use him? I suppose you don't have to be good at Dynamics to volunteer for the army...

[Mr. Bumble]

"Mostly, I think, because he failed a critical exam, so his attempt to become an engineer is pretty much over."
One and done?

[Brett Bellmore]

Second time on this class.

[Mr. Bumble]

Maybe you should tutor him.

[Commenter_XY]

Tell him to try a third time. It could be the charm.

[apedad]

Tell him to join the military (US that is).

Recruitment numbers are down so I'm guessing he'd be able to pick some type of engineering field.

[Brett Bellmore]

We have suggested that.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

My father served with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers during WWII (I know he was at Normandy on D-Day, but I could never get him to talk about it in any detail). He had previously been growing up on his dirt-poor parents' farm, but learned enough in the CoE to become a masonry contractor on his return.

[Estragon]

Very commendable, Frank

[apedad]

From the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI)
Consolidated Annual Report on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena – Oct 2023

This report covers unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP) reports from 31 Aug 2022 to 30 Apr 2023, and all UAP reports from any previous time periods that were not included in an earlier report.

https://www.aaro.mil/Portals/136/PDFs/FY23_Consolidated_Annual_Report_on_UAP-Oct_2023.pdf?ver=BmBEf_4EBtMRu9JZ6-ySuQ%3d%3d

There’s a lot of activity that (perhaps) our govt can’t explain – just not sure it’s from outer space.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

It could be from another dimension.

[VinniUSMC]

Another dimension? New galaxy? Intergalactic? Planetary!

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Coming from Uranus to check my style.

[Martinned]

That is by far the best comment I've ever seen from you. Applause!

(Never let it be said that I only ever disagree with you.)

[The Margrave of Azilia]

"...the American Ornithological Society has vowed to change the English names of all bird species currently named after people, along with any other bird names deemed offensive or exclusionary....

""It's going to feel like a bother to some people, but I think it's actually an exciting opportunity," says [field guide author Kenn] Kaufman. "It's an exciting opportunity to give these birds names that celebrate them — rather than some person in the past."...

"[biologist Erica] Nol says she recently was visiting some salt marshes this summer and saw a common bird there that's called Wilson's Snipe, which has a long bill and engages in dramatic displays such as flying in high circles, which produces a whistling sound as air flows over specialized feathers. "And I thought, what a terrible name," she says. "I mean, Wilson was the father of modern ornithology in North America, but this bird has so many other evocative characteristics.""

https://www.npr.org/2023/11/01/1209660753/these-american-birds-and-dozens-more-will-be-renamed-to-remove-human-monikers

[Nige]

A lot of people who started caring about Confederate monuments going to start caring about bird names.

[VinniUSMC]

What's next? Rename the "g-spot" to Whipple's Tickle?

8oo10c

***For those who don't know Jimmy Carr, this is mildly NSFW***

[Sarcastr0]

This was posted by ML a couple of weeks ago.

Nobody, including birdwatchers, much cares. You are straining for outrage, and it's extremely obvious.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Outrage? I'd settle for a few giggles.

[Sarcastr0]

Ah yes, 'I'm not mad. I'm laughing actually.'

OK then.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Why do you insist on attributing anger to *other* people?

[Sarcastr0]

You posted an article with no take coming from you. It looks like outrage bait and has been used on this blog for that in the past. You say naw, it’s for humor.

OK, then. Enjoy.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Ah, so you're trying to piss me off, then say "see? you're angry just like I claimed!"

If I knew it had been posted before, why would I post it again? What kind of commenter posts and re-posts the same content obsessively?

[Sarcastr0]

No, I believe you. It looked different but then said but it was for humor.

OK then!

Enjoy.

[VinniUSMC]

Outrage? I’d settle for a few giggles.

I'm almost tempted to see what kind of terrible strawman-tastic retort Sarcastr0 barfed up to get this response.

Sarcastr0 has trouble with jokes?

[Sarcastr0]

Post more about how you have me blocked.

I think you've only mentioned it twice so far today.

[John F. Carr]

If they want to improve birdwatchers' lives rename the "red-bellied woodpecker", which has a white belly. And all the warblers that are named after places they don't live. The Tennessee warbler, for example, breeds in Canada and winters in the tropics.

[Dan Schiavetta]

I am struck by how many names the English language has for various species of birds. And these words have been in the language for hundreds of years.

[VinniUSMC]

Never mind fruits like the pineapple (roughly "anana" in nearly every other language).

Yay English

[Krayt]

And they just named a bird for David Attenborough!

The only thing more lamely self-important than naming bird species after people, are thinking that’s wrong, and standing there virtue signalling, imagining people looking glowingly on you as a paragon of humility and righteousness.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Headaches with intersectionality: An Iowa State University building is named after Carrie Chapman Catt, who was a suffragist but also a racist. What to do? Keep the name, they decided. The building will remain as Catt House...I mean Catt Hall.

https://www.thegazette.com/higher-education/iowa-state-to-keep-catt-hall-name-after-yearslong-review/

Catt said: "White supremacy will be strengthened, not weakened, by woman suffrage."

(Carrie Chapman Catt, "Objections to the Federal Amendment," in *Woman Suffrage by Federal Constitutional Amendment,* Carrie Chapman Catt. ed., New York, National Woman Suffrage Publishing, 1917, 74-79)

[Nige]

That should please the anti-woke mob, I suppose.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

They might also pounce on this official report, especially pp. 20-27:

https://iastate.app.box.com/s/rw7igjtl5iet6vb6s3xdu3yfkhqin9ck

[Nige]

America: so racist even the sufragettes had white supremacists.

[Commenter_XY]

Yes, Margaret Sanger, just to name one.

[Nige]

Quick, cancel her.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

You're three years too late:

"...Planned Parenthood of Greater New York (PPGNY) announced that it would be removing Sanger’s name from their Manhattan Health Center."

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/22/us/margaret-sanger-planned-parenthood-trnd/index.html

[Nige]

Better luck next time.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Better luck at what?

[Nige]

Canceling someone.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

I didn't have to lift a finger. I am content.

[Nige]

All is well.

[Commenter_XY]

Cancel the patron saint of progressives (Sanger)?

[Nige]

Uh, sure, go ahead, knock yourself out.

[Sarcastr0]

Who the fuck calls Sanger the patron saint of progressives?

Liberal strawmen, that's who!

[Dan Schiavetta]

Sanger is unfairly maligned these days. Yes, she was in favor of eugenics, but lots of people were in that period. But that is not why her name got attached to various clinics and institutions, and why portraits and statues were put up.

She took brave stands (and spent time in prison) on issues where we all agree she was on the right side. Equal rights for women, free speech, reproductive health, and birth control.

[Sarcastr0]

She was especially enthusiastic about eugenics even for her time. But that just means her past, like so many others, is checkered even when ignoring presentism (which I don't think you should entirely).

Conservatives have real trouble with their side's important figures being alloyed in their virtue. Hence they think FDR and Japanese internment is a huge own, when liberals are like 'yes, I have priced that in.'

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Many lefties were rightly cheesed off about it. And of course some righties defend it. I’d call it “the right wing case for FDR” and “the left wing case for Ronald Reagan [for signing the compensation bill].”

Sanger, of course, was not for reproductive freedom.

“The main objects of the Population Congress would be:…

“(d) apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization, and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.

“(e) to insure the country against future burdens of maintenance for numerous offspring as may be born feeble-minded parents, the government would pension all persons with transmissible disease who voluntarily consent to sterilization.

“(f) the whole dysgenic population would have its choice of segregation or sterilization.”

https://m-sanger.org/items/show/1373

So I guess in some sense, Sanger was pro-choice.

[Nige]

‘Many lefties were rightly cheesed off about it.’

Two lefties? Three? More than three?

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Peter Irons, a lefty, wrote *Justice at War* exposing the Roosevelt administration's misconduct in the Japanese Exclusion Cases, and Irons also was a sort of lobbyist for the former internees.

[Sarcastr0]

That is not responsive to Nige's question/point.

Intimate that Reagan wasn't perfection personified, and you get angry disgusted posts. (See also General Robert. E. Lee.)

The right thinks the left will be similarly discomfited if they point out one of their side's luminaries did some bad stuff. But we're not so brittle and myth-based.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Of course right-wingers criticize their own. They criticize Hitler, don’t they?

/sarc, by the way. Not sarc as in sarcastro, but sarc as in “that was sarcasm.”

Less sarcastically, I’ve seen right-wingers fret about National Review’s old white-supremacist position.

Here you go: "Bill Buckley wrote some ill-considered columns about racial politics in the 1950s"

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/08/senator-richard-russell-history-of-racist-progressives/

And as I’ve shown above, NY Planned Parenthood criticized its own founder, another case of hot left-on-left action.

[Nige]

'Peter Irons, a lefty,'

Let's not cancel him, then, but not exactly responsive.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

If compensation passed Congress, I suppose many lefties supported it, thus opposing internment.

[Michael P]

In similarly amusing news, Fairfax County (VA) decided to rename W. T. Woodson High School. It's still Woodson, just Carter G. Woodson High School instead. They showed their courage by renaming the school after a token Woodson. They could have taken a page from ornithologists and not named it after any person -- demonstrating that they are really for the birds.

[Randy Sax]

I don't understand the obsessive need to change the names of everything. You ask college students about the person their dorm is named after, 9/10 ain't gonna know jack. I genuinely don't understand, who cares.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

I don’t understand the obsessive need to change the names of everything.

It's a form of virtue signaling that allows the actors to pretend to be making a contribution to making the world a better place without actually doing anything meaningful.

[Brett Bellmore]

It's worth remembering that Winston's job, in 1984, was going through old books changing things to agree to revised standards. Going through ornithology books changing the names of the birds would have been just another day for him.

[Randy Sax]

If I was alive in 1984 I would have been against that too.

[Sarcastr0]

I think you missed the point of that book.

[Randy Sax]

I'm an idiot, I thought he was talking about the Wilson, the bird guy from the thread above. Wilson - Winston, you can see my mistake.

[Sarcastr0]

Fair put.

I did think it a honestly amusing to hear ‘Brave take - I'd be against Big Brother if I lived under IngSoc.'

Sad to lose the joke, happy you weren't actually going there.

[Absaroka]

"I’d be against Big Brother if I lived under IngSoc"

Alas, I think the point of 1984 is ... you wouldn't be against him. If you mistakenly thought you didn't love Big Brother, MiniTrue would fix you :-(.

[Sarcastr0]

Yeah.

I was in middle school, and had found Brave New World kind of unsatisfying. My teacher suggested I read 1984, and it was electrifying. For one thing the bad guys winning was itself kind of new.

[Nige]

There was a generation of young people who read Robert Cormier and were well prepared for 1984.

[Sarcastr0]

Says a lot of good things about Orwell that he can make those subjects accessible to a 12 year old.

[Dr. Ed 2]

No, it was the back issues of the London Times newspaper.

[Sarcastr0]

'If those fools didn't care about white supremacy, this'd be easy!' Is the idea that it's silly to care about navigating this stuff?

History and our interaction with it is and should be complicated. Anyone finding otherwise is either ignorant or a zealot.

[Mr. Bumble]

Is anyone taking bets on how long it will take for the homeless to repopulate the streets of San Fransisco?
Where were they and all of their stuff moved to?

[Michael P]

Some coworkers and I were talking about that during lunch yesterday. My money was on "the planes are still at the airport gates".

[Ben_]

It won't take long. That's where the drug dealers are. And the NGOs that exist to enable and perpetuate homelessness are all there.

SF residents could use this time to form vigilante gangs to keep criminals out of their neighborhood. But they won't.

[Mr. Bumble]

"SF residents could use this time to form vigilante gangs to keep criminals out of their neighborhood. But they won’t."
Maybe they should start by not electing criminal gangs.

[Ben_]

They vote to make a statement about themselves. Then they wonder why the leaders only put on shows and don't actually do any work for the public.

Also it's all mail-in ballots. So voting matters when the people counting the votes and handling the ballots agree with the voters. If voters step out of line, batches of ballots can magically appear or disappear.

[Martinned]

Didn't you hear? Homelessness is a lifestyle choice.

[Ben_]

Taking drugs every day isn’t a lifestyle choice?

[Martinned]

I'm sure you and Suella would be fast friends.

[Ben_]

No idea who that is. Is it someone who thinks government should work to make civic life better for citizens and residents and merchants instead of drifters, criminals, and junkies?

[Bob from Ohio]

She is the former UK Home Secretary. Got sacked because she wrote an op ed which suggested the London police were biased and ineffective.

[Nige]

Yeah, that was the 'reason.' But, yes, she hates poor people too.

[Sarcastr0]

Podcasts I'm listening to:

Welcome to Nightvale
More Perfect [someone here recommended - thanks!]
A History of Rock and Roll in 500 Songs
Radiolab [but not every episode]
Divided Argument[Baude's podcast]
Sidedoor from the Smithsonian
Supreme Myths [Another VC recommend]
NPR's Pop Culture Happy Hour
Slate Political Gabfest
Role Playing Public Radio
Talking Politics - the History of Ideas
Cocaine and Rhinestones
Pod Castle [short fantasy fiction]
Major Spoilers [comic books]
Switched on Pop
Slow Burn [Last season was on Justice Thomas]
BBC Radio 4 -
Analysis
In our time
More or Less Behind the Stats

[Randy Sax]

For pure comedy my favorite is The Boyscast

[Nige]

Mostly fiction:
Weeping Cedars
Old Gods Of Appalachia
Midst
White Vault
Mockery Manor

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

A few recommendations along those lines:
Derelict
Passenger List
Red Valley
Within the Wires

[Nige]

Forgot Red Valley - top notch.

[Ben_]

working for the government is like that

[Sarcastr0]

Making a lot of assumptions here just to be an asshole, eh?

[Ben_]

You have time to listen to 20 (!) podcasts.

[Noscitur a sociis]

This was posted by ML a couple of weeks ago.

Nobody, including birdwatchers, much cares. You are straining for outrage, and it’s extremely obvious.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

https://www.science.org/content/article/why-are-we-naming-birds-after-people-behind-plan-scrap-many-bird-names

"Q: Within AOS, was the idea of changing the names controversial?

A: I would say this is probably one of the most controversial subjects we’ve had to deal with in the bird world for a very long time. Everyone had an opinion. Over conversations, we all came to pretty much the same conclusion: Yes, we have to change all the names. The debate really centered on whether we should change some names or all the names, [and] how do we preserve some of the history of ornithology while also making [the field] more welcoming [to those who find the names offensive]."

[Sarcastr0]

This is the podcast thread. You listen to any podcasts?

[Reallynotbob]

This is an underrated reply.

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

A couple more you might like:
Embedded – NPR documentary podcast
The Rest Is History – Two British historians with senses of humor

I’m surprised you listen to BBC Radio 4. I enjoy that too. There is a British group that do a similar thing with SF stories, called Dust. They haven’t done a new one in a while, but they are really good.

[Sarcastr0]

I've had some misses with BBC Radio 4.

I tried some of the BBC radio plays...Tumanbay for instance.
Not quite my speed, for whatever reason. (Though their old Star Wars and Foundation series are good fun).

Also 'You're Dead to Me' is a bit too...millennial humor for me.

[MoreCurious]

I assume most of us have seen the stories out of Gaza about babies who have been removed from incubators because of the loss of power in hospitals. Regardless of what side you're on, regardless of who you think are the good guys and who are the bad guys, you cannot deny that allowing babies to die is immoral, unethical, inhumane, and contrary to the teachings of whatever God you believe in. Rather than try to find a way to bring those babies to safety, however, the Israelis and Hamas both seem to have lost their minds over this issue.

Accordingly, would it be realistic for the U.S. to step in and rescue those babies? We have two aircraft carrier groups with dozens of war planes and presumably scores of special forces sitting in the eastern Mediterranean. President Biden could immediately inform both sides that U.S. forces are going into Gaza to remove those babies within 24 hours. He must, of course, make it clear that if either side acts in a hostile way toward our forces, the consequences will be severe and unforgiving. How many babies will die before the U.S. takes the lead to address at least this component of this terrible tragedy?

[Nige]

OR he could call for a ceasefire and stop funds and try to save everyone.

[Mr. Bumble]

Starting with "stopping funds" to Iran. The world's largest state sponsor of terrorism.

[Nige]

We don't hear much about that these days, since it got so completely debunked.

[Mr. Bumble]

Only "debunked" in your world and there is another $10 billion Biden is seeking to free up.
Look up "fungible".

[Nige]

Lol "fungible." When you need to say stuff is probably happening without proving it.

[David Nieporent]

​

OR he could call for a ceasefire

GLENDOWER
I can call spirits from the vasty deep.

HOTSPUR
Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them?

[Nige]

Netanyahu really is out of control, isn't he?

[David Nieporent]

Why would an elected leader of a sovereign country be in the U.S.’s “control”?

And, also, you understand that it takes two sides ceasing fire for there to be a ceasefire, right?

[Nige]

Did I say 'the US?'

'it takes two sides'

The question hardly arises. I'm sure all of the civilians never fired anything in the first place.

[David Nieporent]

The question hardly arises. I’m sure all of the civilians never fired anything in the first place.

Are you unaware that, for instance, Hamas has launched roughly 10,000 rockets at Israel since this conflict began (about 30% in the initial attack)?

[Nige]

I am. Are you aware that Netanyahu supported Hamas because he basically didn't want peace, effectively wanted the rockets to keep coming?

[David Nieporent]

No.

[Randy Sax]

I really don't think the U.S. needs to be the world's police. Yes, it's tragic, but also, not my problem. People are dying and suffering all across the globe in various despicable and horrific ways. You're never gonna stop all of it.

There is an argument for stopping what you can when you can but, how far do you go? Where is the line? Do you spend billions of dollars invading North Korea to save all those people? Do you overthrow every African warlord and institute an occupation to ensure none raise up again?

[MoreCurious]

No one's suggesting that we spend billions to invade other countries to take out dictators and warlords. And I'm not proposing that we act as the world's police. I'm talking about a humanitarian mission to rescue babies and take them to safety. We know exactly where they are because they're on the news every night. We can warn Hamas and the Israelis to cease fire until the rescue operation is over and then they can continue to do whatever it is they were doing before we conducted the humanitarian mission. And, as I said, there will be severe consequences if either side engages in hostile action against the U.S. while those babies are being relocated.

[Commenter_XY]

War is all hell — William Tecumseh Sherman

Hamas should surrender immediately and stop the suffering of their own people, and then face Israeli justice. There is no escape for Hamas. They will surrender unconditionally, or they will die in the tunnels. Every baby who dies, every child wounded, every civilian killed, every hostage who dies; this is all on the heads and hands of Hamas.

It is tragic. War is terrible. The world can take it up with Hamas.

If the US military can extract US hostages, they should do so. Beyond that, just stay the hell out of Israel's way while they take out the world's trash: Hamas.

[Sarcastr0]

I'm sorry but I don't see the military necessity of this kind of action. And the indiscriminate bombing continues, by and large.

What's the necessity of a controlled demolition of the parliamentary building.

Retribution against Hamas has drifted to license to do some anti-Palestinian stuff, as I was concerned about.

I fear this is going to be a bloody transition to a status quo that is worse for everyone.

[Mr. Bumble]

Says you from the safety of your new digs in the burbs.

[Sarcastr0]

Yeah, I can't have an opinion unless I'm in the IDF.

I'll bet you have an opinion, so quit with the bad faith arguments.

[Mr. Bumble]

Un-muted me again?

[Sarcastr0]

I guess.

[Brett Bellmore]

Yeah, you don't see the military necessity of Israel taking out Hamas military assets, which they deliberately co-site with things like hospitals.

[Sarcastr0]

Yes, that's what I said, Brett.

[Brett Bellmore]

Just confirming that your position is actually that stupid.

[Sarcastr0]

I was being sarcastic. That is not actually anything like what I said.

And I think you know that.

[Brett Bellmore]

The bombing isn't "indiscriminate", it's highly discriminating, or else it wouldn't have taken remotely that long for them to have captured the Hamas HQ under that hospital. You're demanding a level of precision here which is just unrealistic.

[Sarcastr0]

You can just say things but that doesn't make them true.

Again, there are stories about this all over the media (NPR, The Guardian, NYT, Reuters, the UN...)
I also discarded the first couple of examples as fog of war uncertainty.

But at some point it's willful blindness.

[Aunt Teefah]

"captured the Hamas HQ under that hospital."

You're going to have to update your propaganda talking points. The Hamas HQ under the hospital" claim is fake news, as was obvious at the outset to all but the most gullible.

" IDF yet to prove Hamas’ headquarters lie in tunnels beneath"
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israel-gaza-al-shifa-hospital-idf-palestine-b2448500.html

[Bored Lawyer]

Did you even bother reading what you linked to?

The area under the hospital was used to store arms, and civilian hostages were held there. That made it a legitimate military target, whether or not it was the "command center" for Hamas.

[Aunt Teefah]

"The area under the hospital was used to store arms"

Wrong. Israel has produced no proof at all of any arms having been stored under the hospital.

"civilian hostages were held there."

Wrong again. They found the body of one (1) singular hostage in the hospital compound. Probably someone injured in the bombings and sent for medical care. The article makes no claim that the hospital was used as a hostage holding area.

[Bored Lawyer]

“In the structure in which Yehudit was located, military equipment including Kalashnikov rifles and RPG’s were also found,”

"The Israeli military displayed guns it said had been found hidden in one building"

"On Thursday, the US insisted it was confident in its intelligence assessment that Hamas was using the hospital as a command centre and possibly as a shortage facility."

"In footage that could not be independently verified, the IDF also released video from inside Shifa showing three duffel bags it said it found hidden around an MRI lab, each containing an assault rifle, grenades and Hamas uniforms, as well as a closet that contained a number of assault rifles without ammunition clips."

https://twitter.com/IDF/status/1724934932718293286?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1724934932718293286%7Ctwgr%5E33e678131120bfc6805b14304053f56b9c3df637%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-2830385027863586095.ampproject.net%2F2310301456000%2Fframe.html

All of the above from the article AT linked to.
Leftists must think everyone else is stupid.

[shawn_dude]

It's a cliche, but the first casualty of war is the truth.

Though I'm loving the fact that some of the VC's "deep state" conspiracy theorists are happy to believe intelligence reports that confirm their own biases.

[Aunt Teefah]

Ok, you've found ten guns, three duffel bags, and a laptop. A bust barely worth of a picture on the local police department's facebook page. Where's the secret underground hideout that was promised??

"On Thursday, the US insisted it was confident in its intelligence assessment that Hamas was using the hospital as a command centre and possibly as a shortage facility.”

Yeah, I'm talking about PROOF, you buffoon. Not just more ipse dixit bullshit from US and/or Israeli "intelligence."

"Leftists must think everyone else is stupid."

No, just you. And everyone else who continues to believe this tripe.

[Nige]

Assuming you believe the IDF.

[Noscitur a sociis]

Go on, Nige. What’s actually going on?

[Nige]

What's going on is we're waiting to see the evidence, is what's going on.

[mydisplayname]

Exactly. And I have absolutely no reason to believe the Israelis; in fact, much of what Israel has offered so far has been "iffy," to put it mildly. If there was a smoking gun, I feel confident that that it would be on video shared worldwide: in contrast, there is an active attempt to conceal video of (for example) the destruction of perfectly benign Palestinian monuments (such as the one to Arafat).

[Commenter_XY]

Take it up with Hamas, Sarcastr0. Do you have any shame at all?

This is simply a blood libel = And the indiscriminate bombing continues, by and large.
The truth: There is no such thing occurring. It is a deliberate falsehood. Israel delivers incubators to gazan hospitals, opens daily humanitarian corridors for gazans to flee South, provides humanitarian aid to gazans daily. Oh, they call people in the vicinity where fighting will occur to tell them to evac. All while fighting a declared war against Judeocidal terrorists (who btw, enjoy broad support among gazans).

When Hamas put their tunnels under hospitals, schools and mosques; they lost their protection.

We now also know that Hamas did a truly shitty job at municipal administration. Look at that dirty parliament building! The roads are a disaster too. About the only thing that works in Gaza is Hamas Metro, the great Hamas building project...something akin to Basil Al Bayati style (lol).

Israel will fix that for Gaza, just as soon as they are done taking out the trash: Hamas.

The biggest question post-war, is what to do with an entire society steeped in Judeocide.

[apedad]

"Israel will fix that for Gaza . . . . "

You win the stupidest comment of the day award.

And it's not even noon on the East Coast.

[Sarcastr0]

Pretending Israel has no agency and thus cannot be criticized is bad. It lets you condone awful stuff while thinking your hands are clean.

Thanks for letting me know Hamas is bad.

The low standards of 'supplies aid' is some faint praise. And Israel bombed those humanitarian corridors.
They are doing stuff that do not further the mission of wiping out Hamas, but does further the mission of targeting Palestinian people and places of authority.

It's looking more and more fucked up. I hope it stops soon, but I know I can count on you to ride this all the way to the bottom if it does not.

And FFS quit asking how to deal with 'The Palestinian Question.'

[Bob from Ohio]

"Israel bombed those humanitarian corridors."

"indiscriminate bombing"

Arab propaganda.

The bombing was targeted, if it was indiscriminate, there wouldn't be a building standing.

[Sarcastr0]

It's been reported in NPC, CBS, NPR, the Guardian, CNN, and I'm sure others.
No retraction seems evident.

Do you have any evidence, or are you just ignoring stuff you don't want to have to think about?

Reality is complicated, Bob.

[Bob from Ohio]

"NPC, CBS, NPR, the Guardian, CNN"

You are so gullible.

Lefty sites regurgitating Hamas controlled sources.

[Sarcastr0]

Awesome you don't need media to know what's going on.

You just go with what you want to believe.

[Bob from Ohio]

I see the secondary explosions at bombing sites indicating munitions and the pictures showing specific targets destroyed but buildings next door with only superficial damage.

Its not 1970, I don't need Uncle Walter telling me that's the way it is.

All of the "journalists" writing these reports from Gaza are Arab and either vetted by Hamas or subject to being killed at anytime by Hamas. They are not objective truth tellers.

"You just go with what you want to believe."
Pot calling the kettle black.

[Nige]

They're more likely to be killed by the IDF.

[Brett Bellmore]

"All of the “journalists” writing these reports from Gaza are Arab and either vetted by Hamas or subject to being killed at anytime by Hamas. They are not objective truth tellers. "

Something similar was going on in Bagdad during the Gulf war, remember.

[Sarcastr0]

Actually, I don't want to believe this stuff, Bob.

I just listen when people tell me things, rather than doing my own analysis of secondary explosions and their meaning.

The controlled demolition of the parliament building - what's the reason for that, other than delegitimize Palestinian government in the future>

[Bob from Ohio]

"I just listen when people tell me things,"

You just refuse to deal with the total lack of objective sources in Gaza. They report all sorts of wild stuff and the editors in London and NY have no way to check, its just put on tv or the internet as fact and all the publications build on the others stories.

"The controlled demolition of the parliament building – what’s the reason for that, other than delegitimize Palestinian government in the future>"

Why do you care?

[Sarcastr0]

Accusing every bit of western media of being pro-Hamas so you don't need to deal with their reporting. Seems about your speed.

"Why do you care?"
Because I like and respect Israel and don't want it to fuck this up.

[Bob from Ohio]

"Because I like and respect Israel"

Yet you repeated these slanders:

“Israel bombed those humanitarian corridors.”

“indiscriminate bombing”

Strange "like and respect"

[Sarcastr0]

No, actually, it does mean that, Bob.

Blind loyalty does not come from respect, it's lack of self-respect.

[Don Nico]

"It’s been reported in ..."
Yup, organizations that quickly adopted to jihadi lingo to try to appear "impartial" journalists

[Sarcastr0]

It's facile to discard these reports as 'jihadi lingo.'

If they're wrong, bring in some countervailing facts other than 'media is all pro-Hamas.'

Is Biden pro-Hamas? He's called it indiscriminat bombing, though he says that's all over now.

Here's a good story for my one link:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/16/middleeast/israel-palestinian-evacuation-orders-invs/index.html

I also don't much like the controlled demolition of the parliamentary building that's already well within IDF control.

[Martinned]

Stop throwing around accusations you don't understand: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_libel

[Commenter_XY]

The shoe fits, Sarcastr0 can wear it.

[Martinned]

It's not even a shoe.

[Sarcastr0]

Commenter, don’t accuse me of blood libel.

[Commenter_XY]

Maybe not do it, next time?

You uttered a blood libel, and I called you on it. There is no indiscriminate bombing going on in Gaza. That is just Hamas propaganda.

[Nige]

'There is no indiscriminate bombing going on in Gaza.'

Really, none? Every bomb precisely targeted, is it? More ordinance in one week than in the enitrety of the US occupation of Afghanistan, all precisly targeted? So every civilian death was, therefore, intended and deliberate? That might be worse. Is the killing of civilians in Gaza somehow representative of all Jews? If you're claiming that, then the blood libel is on you, and not just because all over the world, Jewish people reject Netanyahu's bombing campaign.

[Bob from Ohio]

"More ordinance in one week than in the enitrety of the US occupation of Afghanistan,"

FFS, you will believe anything.

According to The Progressive Magazine, it was 85,108 bombs in Afghanistan. 17,000 in 2001, the year of the actual invasion. "Hey, Hey, USA! How Many Bombs Did You Drop Today?’ New numbers shed light on how the U.S. military rains terror from above. by Nicolas J S Davies, Medea Benjamin January 13, 2022 9:01 AM"

Medea Benjamin is Code Pink, fyi

[Nige]

You'll believe it was all precision targeted.

[Noscitur a sociis]

Oh boy.

More ordinance in one week than in the enitrety of the US occupation of Afghanistan, all precisly targeted?

First it was more than in one year, then more than ten years, and now? Guess if you’re going to make shit up, you might as well go for broke.

[Nige]

Sigh. I should have checked. One year, yes, not entire occupation. Completely misremembered. That's 6,000 bombs in six days. Much precision, I'm sure.

[Sarcastr0]

I’ve pointed to tons of sources. You’ve pointed to ‘Hamas bad’ and ‘you are doing a blood libel if you believe the media.’

Maybe the sources are wrong, and I should be more skeptical. But accusing me of blood libel is way beyond the pale.

I’m putting you on mute for a bit. It’s really troubling to see you like this.

[Armchair]

Whoops Commenter, you got muted because Sarc was saying anti-Semitic stuff, you called him on it, and he didn't like it.

He reminds me of the guy who says all sorts of sexist stuff, then when he's called on being sexist, gets all upset.

[Mr. Bumble]

GaslightO, you are such a pussy.

[Sarcastr0]

I don't keep my sense of manliness in how I post on Internet politics boards, Bumble.

I guess you do?

[Jason Cavanaugh]

"Every baby who dies, every child wounded, every civilian killed, every hostage who dies; this is all on the heads and hands of Hamas."

Let me put your position in schoolyard terms: "They started it, so I am absolved of any and all agency or responsibility for any action whatsoever I happen to take, no matter how disproportionate or unnecessary those actions may turn out to be."

Most of us learn as children that such an excuse doesn't fly. When will you?

[Commenter_XY]

Poor Jason, befriending the friendless Hamas. Everybody needs a friend, even Judeocidal terrorists, it would seem. How quaint. Tell me Cavanaugh, do you always root for the Judeocidal terrorists? Just asking for a friend.

You see, most of us learn as children that isn't a good idea, to root for Judeocidal terrorists. What's your excuse for you arrested moral development, dipshit?

[Jason Cavanaugh]

If anything you said was remotely true, you'd deserve a legitimate response. Your bloodthirst and hatred has made you dumber than science could ever have predicted.

Do you think that trying to make enemies out of people is helping your cause? It's unfortunate that there aren't more Jewish folks around here to call out your extremism and hate.

[Nige]

Right-wing anti-semites love Israel. You can tell they care about actual anti-semitism the same way they care about protecting children. The accusation is all that matters.

[zztop8970]

Left-wing anti-semites love Hamas. You can tell they care about actual Arab lives the same way they cared about them being slaughtered in Syria, Lebanon, Kuwait or Yemen. The accusation is all that matters.

[Nige]

Yes, they do. They're scum too.

[Bored Lawyer]

Let me put your position in schoolyard terms: “They started it, so I am absolved of any and all agency or responsibility for any action whatsoever I happen to take, no matter how disproportionate or unnecessary those actions may turn out to be.”

What a complete bullshit characterization.

Let me try it for you in schoolyard terms:

"I hate you and plan to exterminate you and your family. I have this AK-47 in my hand and am going to use it for that purpose. I strapped this baby to my chest, so you can't do anything to me. Just sit there and watch your family die before I kill you."

[Nige]

'The IDF have reported that a Hamas with an AK47 and a baby strapped to his chest is in a schoolyard we have killed fifty children so far, but that is to save lives and even though the Hamas cunningly was not actually there we also shot a journalist and a doctor.'

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Oh fuck off. He thinks Israel has a blank check to kill anyone and everyone. At no point in the last 40 days has he indicated that there could be any line which would be too far for him.

Commenter_XY would sit there with a smile if all 2+ million Palestinians in Gaza were killed while saying it was necessary, and he hides behind cowardly accusations of anti-Semitism when his murderous desires are called out.

My characterization is thus 100% accurate.

[Commenter_XY]

Jason, the true friend to Hamas. Way to show your true colors.

I won't be sorry to see every Hamas member die.

[Nige]

You won't be sorry thousands of civilians die and Hamas survives, or some other even worse group comes out of this. But Holy War!

[Jason Cavanaugh]

You're a despicable, racist cunt disingenuously pretending that anyone who doesn't agree 100% with your genocidal hopes is an anti-Semite.

Meanwhile you don't have a fucking word to say about Brett's actual anti-Semitic remark.

Your attitude, and Hamas' attitude, are two sides of the same coin, and you're too stupid to realize it, or too dishonest to admit it.

[Nige]

War is hell, so I will fuly support this especially hellish war!

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Where “just stay the hell out of Israel’s way” means continue to provide weaponry to Israel, run interference for Israel’s immoral conduct at the United Nations and elsewhere, subsidize Israel’s shitty right-wing belligerence, compromise our principles to support Israel, etc. — all at great cost to an America that increasingly regards Israel as not worthy of our sacrifice.

[Bob from Ohio]

"babies who have been removed from incubators"

Rather than just leaving them in the incubators and using more blankets to keep them warm, they got spread out on a big table as a photo op. So they lost warmth.

Of course the hospital was running out of fuel in "6 hours" for 3 weeks.

There is no actual evidence those babies were at risk.

[MoreCurious]

Looks like this could be a great opportunity for you, Bob. We'll send you to Gaza to be the official dead-baby counter.

[Bob from Ohio]

Why are you mad at me, I didn't use them for propaganda.

[MoreCurious]

They're endangered babies, not propaganda. Anyone with heart, soul, and sense of decency should easily be able to tell the difference.

[Bob from Ohio]

"endangered"

Says who?

Why were they put on a big table and photographed?

[Don Nico]

That damned Human Shield gets more effective every day.
The Iron Dome is no match.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

How long will the Iron Dome work after Israel exhausts America’s willingness to subsidize Israel’s right wing nuttery and immoral belligerence?

I am beginning to sense Israel might not change course. If so, fuck ‘em.

[Nige]

'There is no actual evidence those babies were at risk.'

You see, you can excuse the kiling of babies if you just hide behind propaganda.

[MoreCurious]

Be sure to keep us up-to-date with your findings, Bob.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Bibi N as requested a French hospital ship and said he would make sure the babies could get out to it. We have two -- Mercy & Comfort and while there are issues staffing it (it takes medical folks from other places) it has a crew and he ought to have already sent one down there. We can fly the med folks in a day but she takes a week to sail there.

What we really need is a helo landing zone which in Gaza, ummm....

And Hamas would just as soon see the babies die.

[MoreCurious]

The U.S. could pull this off in 48 hours from Biden issuing the order. The babies could be flown to any of a number of countries without having to wait for hospital ships.

[Michael P]

It's depressing being right about groomers (again): https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1724569331399373155

[Nige]

Except when they're Republican officials and Christian pastors and people who support banning books and anti-trans campiagners. You're never right about them, oddly enough.

(Hope you checked your source by the way. Lots of disinfo on X these days.)

[Randy Sax]

I don't know about you but, I keep my Color Climaxes on the top shelf, away from the kiddies.

[Noscitur a sociis]

The buzzfeed story is real (though curiously, it’s been removed).

https://web.archive.org/web/20180515172722/https://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanschocket2/people-are-touched-by-this-writers-conversation-with-a?utm_term=.nxrLWlrJv#.vkMeZwmrM

So is the CSAM arrest.

https://people.com/slade-sohmer-former-editor-the-recount-child-pornography-charges-8402426

[Sarcastr0]

It's depressing anyone posts libsoftiktock for for anything truth related.

She fucking sucks, and is proud of the bomb threats and school closures she engenders.

Her anecdotes, when they are not lies, prove nothing in general.

[Brett Bellmore]

Have you identified any of the 'anecdotes' as actual lies? As I understand it, her gig is just reposting embarrassing public posts by other people. Which they then take down upon realizing that they'll be seen by unsympathetic eyes, too.

[Sarcastr0]

The litter boxes in schools was bullshit, for one.

Here’s another from an extremely quick search: “Childrens’ hospitals in Boston, Seattle, Chicago, and Portland, Oregon, have also been targeted. Last week, Boston Children’s Hospital warned it was receiving “a large volume of hostile internet activity, phone calls, and harassing emails including threats of violence toward our clinicians and staff” after false claims it performs genital surgeries on minors.” https://www.npr.org/2022/08/26/1119634878/childrens-hospitals-are-the-latest-target-of-anti-lgbtq-harassment

Incredible you think of the account as big with truth telling at this point.

In other news, did you see her posting with newspapers about the bomb threats she caused? What a piece of shit.

[Brett Bellmore]

I'm not on TikTok, my only exposure to her has been repostings at various sites like NotTheBee. This is actually the first I've heard about the litter box thing. Though doing a search on it you'd think that it's the only thing she ever posted...

[Sarcastr0]

Whatta post, Brett.

She lies, you thought she didn't, and now you complain about media bias because they made it so easy to find that she was full of shit.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Where's the evidence of a lie? She tweeted a link to a video made by Boston Children's hospital about "gender affirming hysterectomies" and said they were for young girls. BCH claims they don't perform them on minors. She may have been mistaken, but there's no evidence she was lying.

[Nige]

Is it still lying when the truth is just irrelevant?

[Sarcastr0]

I linked to a story laying out other lies too. Even posted yet another at the top of my comment.

He doesn't care.

[Bob from Ohio]

"did you see her posting with newspapers about the bomb threats she caused?"

She was mocking the paper you putz.

"she caused"

She is not responsible for what other people do.

[VinniUSMC]

The only people that have agency are people that lefty shits hate. Israel, LibsOfTikTok, men, white people. Everyone else is a "victim", even when they target, rape, torture and kill people.

[Sarcastr0]

As a white guy, it'd be pretty weird for me to hate men or whites.

[Sarcastr0]

She is not responsible for what other people do.

Not criminally, but morally she sure as shit is.

And she's proud of it.

[TwelveInchPianist]

You are free to have whatever weird religious/moral beliefs you want, Sarcastro. It’s a free country.

[Sarcastr0]

I remember we once had a reasonable discussion about abortion and religion. That was in like 2013.

Now you're making bedfellows with this woman who looks excited to engender bomb threats against hospitals and schools.

How do you manage to live with yourself?

[Nige]

What religious/moral belief do you hold that makes it ok for someone to repeatedly provide targets for harassment, abuse and threats?

[Nige]

'She is not responsible for what other people do.'

She's responsible for what she does. Which is provide targets.

[Michael P]

Another S_0 comment with nothing but ad hominems. Yawn.

[Sarcastr0]

Yet again you don’t understand that a credibility determination is not an ad hominem argument.

[Michael P]

And yet again, I'll remind you that that's exactly what it is. https://www.britannica.com/topic/ad-hominem

[Ben_]

Where will Jews go after communists finish taking over the US?

Israel might be safe for a while, but will ultimately fall with the US aligned against it. Israel has nukes, but there’s no strategy where using them is a long term winning move.

The other western countries aren’t going to be safe. There’s hope for Poland maybe, but unless the EU breaks up, there’s no way to keep the mobs of hostile people on the other side of a border. Others in Europe will offer talk but no actual help.

Canada will fall to the communists before red states in the US, so that probably won’t be an option.

Latin America obviously isn’t safe from communists.

Japan might be safe for a short time. But without the US, Japan can’t defend itself from local enemies. Same for other Asian countries. China will decide what happens to everyone in that region. Including Australia.

[Nige]

It's always Red Dawn somewhere in America. Most American Jews are probably more concerned about Trump's attitude to 'bad' Jews who disagree with him should he take power and follow through on his fascist visions.

[Ed Grinberg]

Yeah, sure, it's Trump American Jews need to worry about, not the screaming hordes of Middle-Eastern "anti-Zionists" and their "progressive" allies!

[Sarcastr0]

Hey what's Elon Musk been up to lately?

[Brett Bellmore]

He's got a launch tomorrow. Hopefully it is a success.

[Sarcastr0]

So do I.

But he's also explicitly endorsing antisemitism on his platform.

The fact that no one here cares is shameful and calls into question the good faith of the recent concerns about antisemitism on the left.

[Ben_]

Free speech includes unfortunate speech.

You’re being a censor and a busybody .

[Nige]

Weird, lot of people passionately performative about anti-semitism here all of a sudden, are they all censoring busy-bodies?

[Brett Bellmore]

"But he’s also explicitly endorsing antisemitism on his platform."

Ah, you must be talking about this.

Well, as a statistical matter, Jews in America tend overwhelmingly to be left-wing, and, yeah, left-wingers are promoting "dialectical hatred against whites" and mass illegal immigration, so, yeah, while not true of every Jew, (Certainly not of the Jews of my acquaintance, who happen to be right-wing Jews.) it's certainly generally true.

But, of course, I know that the only negative generalizations we're allowed to express are negative generalizations about whites.

[Nige]

All the Jews Brett knows are Good Jews, the rest are driving the Great Replacement.

[Sarcastr0]

Post: "To the cowards hiding behind the anonymity of the internet and posting "Hitler was right":
You got something you want to say? Why dont you say it to our faces…"

Reply: “Jewish communties (sic) have been pushing the exact kind of dialectical hatred against whites that they claim to want people to stop using against them.”

In response, Musk said: “You have said the actual truth.”

Brett: "as a statistical matter, Jews in America...”

I wonder if the fuckers calling me a Jew hater will have any issue with Brett here?

[Jason Cavanaugh]

What a surprise.

Brett repeats and confirms his agreement with a bullshit, stereotypical anti-Semitic remark, and 11 hours later there isn't a single peep from the "any criticism of Israel means you're an anti-Semite" crowd.

Where are you at Commenter_XY? Bored Lawyer? Hypocritical cowards.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Don’t forget the curiously selective partisan hacks such as Bernstein, Blackman, and Volokh, who sometimes leap at the chance to call someone else a bigot . . but other times are predictably silent.

#PartisanHacks
#DeplorableHypocrites
#CowardlyClingers

[Ben_]

In other words, stop supporting DEI and CRT and the hate that comes with them. Because what goes around comes around, and it came around on American Jews.

[Nige]

'Teaching that slavery is bad and not hating gay people are causing anti-semitism.' Beyond parody.

[Brett Bellmore]

Ah, and if only DIE and CRT were anything like that, you might have a point.

[Nige]

If only DEI and CRT were anything like the right's twisted and inflated versions, then they'd be right wing tools to shut people up, as the accusations of anti-semitism while professing anti-semitic beliefs show.

[Brett Bellmore]

Precisely.

[Sarcastr0]

There is no actual connection between DEI and anything anti-Jewish.

The right is really working to blame antisemitism on their own villains. DEI, or wokeness (from the federalist society speech), or just Democrats.

Meanwhile Musk and Tucker are full on Jewish Question and y'all are silent.

The Jews: just another partisan cudgel. Heck, a lot of them are liberal and thus antisemetic themselves, so no big loss.

[Nige]

'and y’all are silent.'

They've made it clear they're in agreement. Not all, but enough of them.

[Ben_]

DEI and CRT are part of the same Marxist pie that includes the "anti-colonialism" that anti-semitie leftists are animated by.

[Sarcastr0]

Ah yes, the Marxist pie that includes all the bad things.

Wat a joke.

[Magister]

Apparently Groucho liked date and pecan pie. And he was also good at jokes.

https://www.silverscreensuppers.com/groucho-marx/a-marx-brothers-menu

[Nige]

'DEI and CRT are part of the same Marxist pie'

It' soccasionally weird to recognise how this stuff is both utterly normal for you lot to spout, and yet also completely incoherent.

[Nige]

I think they see you guys with your foam-flecked blood lust and obsession with a Jewish homeland that isn't theirs and a nationalist cause they don't share, for which you non-Jews brand them disloyal, and your entirely independent reality, and figure you will believe anything and you will do anything.

[Ben_]

Trump showed kindness and support and got hatred and contempt in return.

Obama people got kindness and support from American Jews and offer hatred and violent attacks in return.

[Nige]

Trump disparaged American Jews for not being loyal to Israel.

'Obama people got kindness and support from American Jews'

Whatever the hell that's supposed to mean.

[David Nieporent]

​

Yeah, sure, it’s Trump American Jews need to worry about, not the screaming hordes of Middle-Eastern “anti-Zionists” and their “progressive” allies!

It’s both!

[VinniUSMC]

Yeah! One might make mean Tweets, the other only wants to eradicate them from the face of the Earth. But, same same!

Who had "leftist Nazis come out of the closet" on their 2023 bingo card?

[Nige]

Who had the far-right loves Zionists and Israel but hate all other Jews on their bingo card, oh, no, that's been the case for a while.

[Ben_]

Leftist haters we all knew were haters decided to publicly target Jews specifically instead of whites or Americans or the other broader groups they always target.

[Nige]

Lots of Jewish 'haters' 'targeting' Jews, apparently, like there were all those white Americans 'targeting' white Americans.

[Sarcastr0]

While some here are clearly serious in their concern about left wing anti-Israel sentiment, posts like this make it hard to take the general GOP drama over it very seriously.

[Nige]

I get the impression hardline Zionists kind of hate Jews who aren’t Zionist? It’s the common ground between them and the non-Jewish hard right. Not saying this doesn't put non-Zionist Jews in an invidious position, because, yeah, anti-semitism from all sides.

[Bored Lawyer]

As many know, the BBC was recently caught misreporting an Israel military action.
The IDF reported: "we’ve taken medical teams & Arabic speakers to Al-Shifa hospital to ensure medical supplies reach those in need”.
BBC News: IDF “are targeting people including medical teams as well as Arab speakers.”

Here is their apology:
https://twitter.com/i/status/1724752564300792212

This is actually worse than I first thought. The BBC did not base its statement on its own journalists in the field, but on a Reuters report. Reuters reported the facts accurately. Reuters is a British news organization that reports in English.
So the BBC read an accurate report in English, by a reputable news source, and then misreported it to make Israel look bad.
To me that, is prima facie evidence of bad faith, either gross negligence or outright lying.

[SimonP]

Conservatives once again demonstrating that no one can criticize you for lying, if you never purport to be telling the truth.

[VinniUSMC]

Conservatives once again demonstrating that no one can criticize you for lying, if you never purport to be telling the truth.

Another hot take by simple Simon. Thanks for always proving you can, in fact, be more stupid.

[Sarcastr0]

"To me that, is prima facie evidence of bad faith."

Yes, the right often takes corrected media stories and calls them proof of a liberal media agenda.

Meanwhile they post libsoftiktok like she's the gospel truth.

[Heedless]

If you are arguing that we should treat the BBC as though it were about as reputable as LibsofTikTok, I can't really disagree.

[Sarcastr0]

The BBC screwed up, as everyone even they note. I've never seen Libsoftiktok do that, have you?

To the right, there is no good faith and wrong if they disagree, it's always bad faith.
But stuff they want to believe is not only always in good faith, it's never a lie even when roundly debunked. It at best fades away, and often becomes received wisdom that cannot be doubted.

The right's discarding of actual media with internal controls for propagandistic nonsense is not going to end well for anyone.

[Commenter_XY]

BBC does quite a lot of 'correcting' of late. Color me surprised.

[Martinned]

It's almost as if war reporting is hard.

[zztop8970]

War reporting is hard. But reading an item by Reuters and accurately repeating what it says shouldn't be.

Unless you're a clown organization like the BBC.

[Bored Lawyer]

Thank you. Someone got my point.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Or unless you're so biased that you don't stop to double check when you think you've read in Reuters that the IDF said it's targeting Arabic speakers and medical staff.

[Sarcastr0]

Look at TiP's standards for Libsoftiktok and look at it for BBC.

Just pure partisan no consistent standards.

[zztop8970]

If what you're saying is BBC is as credible as LibsOf TikTok, we have no argument.

[Sarcastr0]

What I'm saying is that TiP finds perfidy in BBC's mistake and retraction, but demands proof of intent to deceive in LoTT's multiple repeated posts that aren't true.

The sources themselves are not the main show in my comment. It's about the utter lack of any principled center other than your side is always good and the other always bad,
LoTT and BBC themselves are important only in as much as TiP has chosen who he will bend over backwards to support and who he will work very hard to insist are Hamas supporters.

[Nige]

If YOU'RE saying LibsOfTikTok is as credible as the BBC, you've probably sent a few bomb threats to a childrens' hospital.

[zztop8970]

I am less interested in TiP's alleged double standards than I am with a Western government-funded organization pretending to be a news outfit but acting as a mouthpiece for a terror organization

[Nige]

Be more strident, it won't make it any less false.

[Sarcastr0]

"acting as a mouthpiece for a terror organization" *after a retraction* is a great way to sacrifice your own credibility on the altar of Internet drama.

[zztop8970]

Many people hear the fake news the first time it is read , not all of them hear the retraction.

But I'm curious: how, in your opinion , does a "journalist" read a Reuters article that says "The IDF forces include medical teams and Arabic speakers,", and "happens" to render it as "the iDF is targeting medical teams and Arabic speakers" ? Does the BBC employ people who can't read a simple English sentence?

[Nige]

You're asserting it was deliberate and calculated, otherwise your accusations make no sense. It's nonsense.

[zztop8970]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Aren’t you the right-wing asshole who shrugs “nobody’s perfect” when you can no longer try to defend Israel’s severe fuck-ups?

[M L]

"The BBC screwed up, as everyone even they note. I’ve never seen Libsoftiktok do that, have you?"

Interesting point. No, I haven’t seen libsoftiktock screw up like that. So your point is she’s actually more reliable than the BBC? I hadn’t though of that, but I don’t follow either regularly.

[Nige]

Yeah, only when you're in the mood to send a bomb threat to a school or a hospital.

[Sarcastr0]

If you haven't seen anything negative about Libsoftiktok's accuracy, that says a lot about your media diet.

Almost as much as your habit of linking to white supremacists.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Nothing as bad as the BBC did.

[Sarcastr0]

Sure dude. BBC corrected themselves. LoTT is still engendering bomb threats.

[Nige]

The BBC repeatedly gave Farage a huge platform, despite his repeated lack of success in elections, so, in that sense, yes.

[Nige]

They admitted they were wrong, and corrected. As we've seen, true bad faith actors never do either.

[Martinned]

It looks like she misread a Reuters article that she only just saw for the first time live on air. I don't know if that's a sensible way to do TV news broadcasting, but I hardly think it's a blood libel.

[zztop8970]

It's not a blood libel, but it is certainly reason enough to doubt their competence and discredit them.

Funny how all these "errors" always seem to paint one side of the conflict in a bad light, never the other way around.

[Commenter_XY]

Bored Lawyer, I am convinced....somewhere, Jeremy Corbyn is involved with BBC.

[Martinned]

He's not even allowed in the building. You are aware the that the BBC board is full of Tory cronies, right? Richard Sharp, whose major political donations to the Tory party and to Boris Johnson personally bought him the chairmanship, finally had to resign in June, but there are plenty of Tories left. For example, the former deputy chairman of the Hammersmith and Fulham Conservative Association has been the BBC director-general since 2020.

[Sarcastr0]

This is not a rational post.

[not guilty]

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis has reportedly said she expects the trial of Donald Trump and more than a dozen others facing election interference charges could extend through next year’s campaign season and into 2025. https://www.ajc.com/politics/fulton-da-election-probe-trials-could-extend-into-2025/BP6WLHHLCJECLADX4FGS4Q52GU/

It is time to nail down a trial date. Trump’s federal trial in Florida is presently scheduled to begin on May 20, 2024. (It remains to be seen if that date will hold firm.) If I were the Fulton County prosecutor, I would request a trial date of June 24 or July 1, 2024.

[OtisAH]

“It is time to nail down a trial date.” -Nige

“I couldn’t Disagree moor.” -Donald J. Turnip

[Mr. Bumble]

If you were the Fulton County prosecutor, would you have brought this bogus case in the first place?

[not guilty]

It is not at all a bogus case. That having been said, I might have asked the grand jury to indict fewer defendants, focusing instead on the most culpable.

[not guilty]

The State has now filed a motion requesting a trial date of August 5, 2024. https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24171035/da-office-motion-to-schedule-111723.pdf

[John F. Carr]

Pro-Palestinian lawyers have sued Joe Biden over the war in Gaza. Federal common law, they say, incorporates customary international law and imposes a duty to prevent genocide.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/68000231/defense-for-children-international-palestine-v-biden/

The complaint seeks a declaratory judgment that Biden, Blinken, et al. are in violation of international law. It seeks injunctive relief, most of which is too general to grant or would violate separation of powers. This part appears to be within the jurisdiction of the court to grant:

Enjoin Defendants from providing, facilitating, or coordinating military assistance or financing to Israel; from initiating, acting upon, continuing, expediting, or completing sales, transfers, or delivery of weapons and arms to Israel; and from providing military equipment and personnel, advancing Israel's commission of genocidal acts

This prayer for relief will fail on the merits because Congressional authorization for military aid to Israel overrules customary international law, federal common law, and any treaties that precede the authorization. It will not be necessary to decide whether Israel is in fact guilty of genocide.

The complaint notes that genocide is a crime, 18 USC 1091. I note that this presumptively makes enforcement the job of the Department of Justice.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

The Israelis are the most inefficient genociders I've ever seen.

[Bored Lawyer]

Two other problems. First, the statute requires the crime to be done “with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in substantial part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group as such.” Which no sane person believes is the case here. And while the Complaint no doubt pleads that at least in conclusory fashion, that’s not enough under the Iqbal/Twombly standard. Without specific factual allegations to back that up, I doubt that a plausible allegation could be made.

Second, the statute has a jurisdictional component:

(e)Jurisdiction.—There is jurisdiction over the offenses described in subsections (a), (c), and (d) if— (1)the offense is committed in whole or in part within the United States; or (2)regardless of where the offense is committed, the alleged offender is— (A)a national of the United States (as that term is defined in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101)); (B)an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States (as that term is defined in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101)); (C)a stateless person whose habitual residence is in the United States; or (D)present in the United States.

None apply here.

And, of course, there is the good old doctrine of standing.

[John F. Carr]

The defendants Biden, Blinken, and Defense Secretary Austin are U.S. nationals. The complaint alleges “complicity” as defined in a treaty. To win a conviction under the criminal statute a prosecutor would need to prove incitement, conspiracy, or aiding and abetting as defined in federal criminal law.

[Bored Lawyer]

Aiding and abetting is not in that statute, although it is in the general criminal statute.
Biden, et al., did not engage in conspiracy or incitement. Arguably they are aiding and abetting, but that is not in the statute. If the predicate offense is outside the jurisdiction, then aiding and abetting cannot be punished here.
(Which is a hole in the law, if someone sells equipment to someone else abroad, knowing it will be used to commit genocide there, it seems like there is no US crime committed.)

[Commenter_XY]

Bored Lawyer, was this lawsuit frivolous?

My understanding is Federal District Court judges take a very dim view of frivolous lawsuits.

[David Nieporent]

It's frivolous. It's reminiscent of the time that some liberal politicians tried to get the Supreme Court to enjoin the Vietnam War. (They briefly got it, thanks to wacky Justice William O Douglas, after even Thurgood Marshall rejected their request.) The whole Supreme Court quickly reversed.

You can't get more political question-y than this.

[Commenter_XY]

Wait, seriously?! = (They briefly got it, thanks to wacky Justice William O Douglas, after even Thurgood Marshall rejected their request.)

See, this is why I come here. I never knew that - some schlub sued to enjoin a war....and won (for a short time). Only in America.

You would not happen to know the name of that wacky case, would you? 🙂

[not guilty]

Justice Douglas's order involved the bombing of Cambodia, not the war in Vietnam.

A Congresswoman from New York and several Air Force officers serving in Asia brought an action to enjoin continued United States air operations over Cambodia. They argued that such military activity had not been authorized by Congress and that, absent such authorization, it violated Art. I, § 8, cl. 11, of the Constitution. The United States District Court agreed and, on applicants' motion for summary judgment, permanently enjoined respondents, the Secretary of Defense, the Acting Secretary of the Air Force, and the Deputy Secretary of Defense, from "participating in any way in military activities in or over Cambodia or releasing any bombs which may fall in Cambodia."

The Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, granted a stay of the District Court's order. The applicants then filed a motion to vacate the stay with Justice Thurgood Marshall, who declined to vacate the stay. Holtzman v. Schlesinger, 414 U.S. 1304 (1973). Justice Douglas then vacated the stay and reinstated the District Court's order. Holtzman v. Schlesinger, 414 U.S. 1316 (1973).

Within hours of Douglas's order, Justice Marshall reversed and reinstated the stay, reciting that all other members of the Court agreed with his action. Schlesinger v. Holtzman, 414 U.S. 1321 (1973).

[Commenter_XY]

Whoa! That is something. Thx not guilty.

Was this a SCOTUS slap (much worse than bench slap) = Justice Marshall reversed and reinstated the stay, reciting that all other members of the Court agreed with his action -- that sounds pretty extreme.

[Bob from Ohio]

The lawyers should be sanctioned and lose their licensees. I won't hold my breath though.

[John F. Carr]

(moved)

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Speaking of law professors whose last name begins with "V":

"And this will lead me into a paradox: because the founding era was not itself originalist, at least not in anything like the modern sense, the highest version of originalist fidelity is not to be an originalist....

"...to fully internalize the expectations of the framers and ratifiers, to be fully faithful to the founding, one must abandon the positivist premises on which “original methods originalism” or indeed any modern originalism is based. The highest fidelity to the legal premises of the founding era is to overcome, and abandon, the idea that the sole touchstone of legal validity and legal interpretation is fidelity to the will of authorized framers and ratifiers....

"As an articulated theory of interpretation, [originalism] is essentially an invention of the era of legal positivism that prevailed after the 1960s...

"...When judges administer justice according to their oaths, they do so by reading texts to accord with and impound traditional, indeed immemorial background principles of legal justice, not according to speculative whimsy. One of the false alternatives encountered in recent debates over interpretation is that the judge must choose between objective text and “subjective preferences” or “personal values,” between pure fiat and unstructured, unguided speculative reason, making the judge an ersatz philosopher. The reason of the jurists is not like that and never has been..."

https://thenewdigest.substack.com/p/the-paradox-of-originalism?publication_id=1859436&post_id=138859699&isFreemail=true&r=y5f4o

[Krayt]

Does this increase or decrease weasels increasing their own power at their own whim, sans amendment, in ways the Founding Fathers would have said, "Hell, no, government doesn't have that power!" ?

[The Margrave of Azilia]

It certainly won't *increase* it!

If a law is vague (and not otherwise), then ambiguities should be resolved based on more or less tried and true methods of ascertaining the common good (to coin a phrase). That won't make the law any more vague, but it might make the situation more just.

[Life of Brian]

For the folks here who purport to really, really care about judicial candidate quality and competence: In her confirmation hearing, Biden's latest pitch-perfect intersectionality play Sara Hill couldn't explain the difference between an injunction and a stay order.

Clip here of the question and her answer: ""A stay order would prohibit, um, sorry. An injunction would restrain the parties from taking action. A stay order … I'm not sure I can, actually can, can give you that"

Seems like pretty basic stuff that you'd get straight in the first year or two of practice if not in law school, but I'm sure I'm missing some sort of super-sophisticated reason why I'm wrong and/or this sort of knowledge gap has no impact at all on someone's suitability for a federal judgeship. Just for this candidate, mind you.

[Dan Schiavetta]

In practice the terms are often confused. A stay (not a “stay order”) is also an injunction in that it prevents the parties from doing anything. Attorneys can go through their entire careers mixing them up and the effect is nil because everyone knows what they mean. I’ve seen it myself.

I would like to see the transcript and why Kennedy thought it was important for her to answer that question. It seems like a strange question to ask.

[John F. Carr]

Recall that one of Trump's nominees couldn't explain a motion in limine. Basic legal questions are fair game now.

[Dan Schiavetta]

Odd you would mention this just this moment. Not two hours ago a lawyer I advise called me. He wanted to include at trial (starts Monday) two exhibits that the judge said at a hearing (last week) were inadmissible. Did this require a “motion in limine”? (Which is the usual eve-of-trial vehicle for evidentiary questions.) I told him it should be a motion to vacate the judge’s ruling.

[Noscitur a sociis]

I mean, that guy probably shouldn’t be a federal judge either.

[Dan Schiavetta]

He’s a trial attorney, and trial attorneys tend to be not good on the law (though they think they are). It’s often up to appellate attorneys like me to try to fix their blunders. The person I’m advising, though, is admirably self-aware and knows when to ask for help.

[Brett Bellmore]

Is it possible that, as an appellate attorney, you're more likely to see the work of bad trial attorneys than of good ones?

[Dan Schiavetta]

I suppose.

Though in reading the transcript I’m also seeing the work of the opposing attorney.

Trial attorneys necessarily have a lot of discretion. They have to decide on the spur of the moment whether to do something or not do something based on their sense of what the judge will do or what the jury will do. In the record on appeal this sometimes comes across as a mistake being made. Also it’s hard for the stenographer to take everything down and sometimes things don’t get taken down correctly. I have a fair amount of trial experience myself and it’s happened to me.

[Noscitur a sociis]

My practice these days is pretty much exclusively federal, but I find knowing about the law to be pretty important for a trial attorney. And certainly for a trial judge…

[Dr. Ed 2]

The case for cameras in the courts.

[David Nieporent]

​

I told him it should be a motion to vacate the judge’s ruling.

I guess it depends what jurisdiction, but it sounds more like a motion for reconsideration than it does a motion to vacate.

[Dan Schiavetta]

There was no proper record made the first time around. It was just a hearing and there were no papers submitted.

This kind of thing happens with discovery conferences. Say the judge orders you to produce something you think shouldn’t be produced. He writes it into the conference order. Your remedy is to move to vacate, and attach to your motion all the facts and law relevant to why vacatur is warranted. (P.S. If it’s denied, the order denying vacatur is what you appeal from, with the motion papers for and against being the record on appeal.)

[The Margrave of Azilia]

In limine, in limine, in limine,
This judge is as happy as judges can be

[ThePublius]

But what about...

[Noscitur a sociis]

For some reason (Reason?) this comment keeps disappearing. I give up.

[David Nieporent]

​

I would like to see the transcript and why Kennedy thought it was important for her to answer that question. It seems like a strange question to ask.

Kennedy makes a habit of treating judicial confirmation hearings as pop quizzes. I'm not sure why.

[Life of Brian]

If you'll indulge me to think a bit outside the box, perhaps he keeps doing it because it's good at surfacing stuff like this -- actual mile-wide gaps in basic knowledge of the practice of law -- that are difficult if not impossible to determine just by looking at a buffed-up CV or counting how many of the candidate's buddies in the ABA wike them (or believe they're supposed to wike them because box-checking equity).

[Life of Brian]

Hmmm.

In practice the terms are often confused.

I haven’t seen you get a second on this, and I highly doubt you will. I can count on the fingers of my amputated hand the number of times I’ve heard someone say “oh, I’m going to draft a motion to enjoin the case while the parties work on settlement” or “hey, let’s move for a preliminary stay to maintain the status quo while the case… well, proceeds.”

A stay (not a “stay order”) is also an injunction in that it prevents the parties from doing anything.

This, my friend, is known as trying just a bit too hard. (It’s also just plain wrong, since as I alluded to above an exceptionally common use of a stay is to put case deadlines on hold so the parties can focus on hashing out a settlement. It’s permissive, not prohibitive.)

[Dan Schiavetta]

A stay is a court order. It is not permissive; it is prohibitive. If you want to do something to move the case along you make a motion to lift the stay. The other side might join in the motion, but lifting the stay is something only the court has the power to do.

This might vary by state. But I know something about this because I have summarized upwards of 300 Supreme Court decisions where the Court is deciding a motion to lift (or restore) a stay.

[Life of Brian]

.

A stay is a court order. It is not permissive; it is prohibitive.

You're just determined to die on this hill, aren't you? I can continue to work on my end of a stayed case if I choose to -- and sometimes do when the settlement negotiations look like they're crumbling. What I don't have to do is meet pending case deadlines, and the only thing I can't do is pursue discovery or make other demands from the other side. And that's the court simply suspending the permission I had to do those things in the first place, not enjoining me from doing something I otherwise had the right to do.

But I know something about this because I have summarized upwards of 300 Supreme Court decisions where the Court is deciding a motion to lift (or restore) a stay.

And how many of those 300 cases characterized the stay as a form of an injunction? (That's a rhetorical question.)

[Bored Lawyer]

"A stay (not a “stay order”) is also an injunction in that it prevents the parties from doing anything. Attorneys can go through their entire careers mixing them up and the effect is nil because everyone knows what they mean. I’ve seen it myself."

I have never seen anyone confuse the two, and there is no reason to confuse them.

An injunction is an order from the court to do or not do something. It restricts a party from acting outside the court, or mandates some action. Failure to obey can be punished as a contempt.

A stay is simply a court stopping something, either staying proceedings (pending something, like an appeal) or staying an injunction (also pending appeal). It does not restrict the party in any way, other than court proceedings, such as discovery, for example.

Which is why an injunction is much harder to get than a stay. The Supreme Court lately has made injunctions harder to get.

[Life of Brian]

Oh, and just for the sake of completeness:

A stay (not a “stay order”)

https://dictionary.justia.com/stay-stay-order

"To begin with, the principal dissent is wrong to claim that the Court's stay order makes any new law regarding the Voting Rights Act. The stay order does not make or signal any change to voting rights law. The stay order is not a ruling on the merits, but instead simply stays the District Court's injunction pending a ruling on the merits." Merrill v. Milligan, 142 S. Ct. 879, 880-81 (2022) (Kavanaugh, J., concurring)

Etc. etc.

[Aunt Teefah]

Your tax dollars (hard) at work:

Apparently, the Israeli government operates a program to retrieve semen from its recently-deceased soldiers. No, I am not joking. From the Times of Israel:

“In normal times, posthumous sperm retrieval (PSR) can be done at the request of a widow without any need for legal bureaucracy, but parents who want their dead son’s sperm to be retrieved and preserved must obtain an order from a family court. This requirement has been eliminated, at least temporarily.

lab in Melbourne, Australia. (AP Photo/Wong Maye-E) The Health Ministry is allowing parents to circumvent usual legal procedures to have the sperm of their fallen soldier sons, or civilians sons killed during the war, to be retrieved before burial.

According to a report in Haaretz, sperm has been retrieved from 33 men in the last month — four of them civilians and the rest soldiers.

In normal times, posthumous sperm retrieval (PSR) can be done at the request of a widow without any need for legal bureaucracy, but parents who want their dead son’s sperm to be retrieved and preserved must obtain an order from a family court. This requirement has been eliminated, at least temporarily.

The Health Ministry has set up a special unit that works 24/7 with the IDF and the four hospitals housing sperm banks — Ichilov, Sheba, Shamir (Assaf Harofeh), and Beilinson — to notify families of the option of PSR and set it up as quickly as possible following the death of their son or husband.”

And from a recent post by the Israeli government’s twitter account: https://twitter.com/Israel/status/1724392576516600204

” Shaylee Atary’s husband Yahav was murdered by Hamas terrorists.

She did everything in her power to retrieve his sperm so that their dream of having more children would live on even without Yahav.

Unfortunately she was unsuccessful.

There are still so many families that we can save.

Every minute counts.

BRING BACK OUR CHILDREN NOW.”

When you operate a fascist ethnostate, you’re going to end up doing weird eugenics, “pure bloodline” shit. And that usually leads to weird sex shit like this.

[Aunt Teefah]

On second thought, this actually presents an excellent opportunity for the many psychotic Zionist keyboard warriors on this site. Why simply be jerkoffs, bootlickers, and wankers on the internet when you can put those same skills to use for the cause? Join the IDF's Foreign Legion - Cum Extraction Brigades today!

[Dr. Ed 2]

This is an alternative to exempting last surviving sons from military service.

[Aunt Teefah]

"Grandpa, what did you do during the war?"

If you can't look them square in the eyes and tell them that you did everything you could to suck the spunk out of corpses - and that you put your whole neck into it - could you ever forgive yourself?

[VinniUSMC]

On second thought, this actually presents an excellent opportunity for the many psychotic Zionist keyboard warriors on this site. Why simply be jerkoffs, bootlickers, and wankers on the internet when you can put those same skills to use for the cause? Join the IDF’s Foreign Legion – Cum Extraction Brigades today!

Imagine hating Jews so fiercely that you post shit like this.

[Aunt Teefah]

I'd bet just about anything that the overwhelming majority of you demons lusting for the blood of Palestinians are evangelical Protestants, not Jews.

[David Nieporent]

Aunt Teefah's antisemitism is getting more and more blatant. Not even pretending to couch it in concern for Palestinians anymore.

[Aunt Teefah]

"Every criticism of Israel is antisemitism." Do you guys ever get tired of saying this shit? Do you think it's convincing anyone? It's beyond pathetic at this point.

[Bored Lawyer]

Not every. But yours are increasingly so.

Straw-man deflections are an admission of a weak position.

[Aunt Teefah]

"But yours are increasingly so."

Perhaps you could provide an example of a single thing I've said that is antisemitic in the slightest, as opposed to anti-Israel. I guarantee you won't. I have nothing against Jews at all, in any manner. In fact, many Jews have been among the strongest voices against Israel's unconscionable treatment of the Palestinians.

"Straw-man deflections are an admission of a weak position."

Indeed. Which is why every time you guys resort to bad-faith allegations of antisemitism, I know you're losing.

[David Nieporent]

Why on earth would you attack a policy where grieving widows or parents can preserve their dead relatives' sperm as "fascist ethnostate, you’re going to end up doing weird eugenics, 'pure bloodline' shit"?

Why would you rant and rave about it at all?

Why would you talk about our tax dollars doing that?

[Commenter_XY]

Wait, I don't get it. Are you trying to help Israeli taxpayers? 🙂

[Aunt Teefah]

More concerned for the American taxpayers, but hey, I'm all for fiscal responsibility worldwide!

[Commenter_XY]

American taxpayers don't fund it; Israeli taxpayers do.

Listen, right now is a bad time to be calling Bibi with your budgetary suggestions and expertise. Why don't you wait, say 1-2 years after Hamas is obliterated, to bring this to Bibi's attention. They're all a little busy right now in Israel taking out the world's trash: Hamas. 😉

[Aunt Teefah]

"American taxpayers don’t fund it"

Interesting, I had no idea that money stopped being fungible when it was given away to Israel. Fascinating the lessons you learn of Economics on this site!

[Bored Lawyer]

All of the aid given to Israel must be spent in the US with US arms producers. So, no, it's not fungible. (It is welfare for US arms producers, but that does not help your point.)

[Aunt Teefah]

"must be spent in the US with US arms producers."

And then given to Israel, so they don't have to pay for their own weapons. Which frees up resources for them to expend on other things (including apparently sucking the seed out of dead soldiers). That's what "fungible" means.

[shawn_dude]

Being forced to spend it in the US doesn't make it less fungible. Israeli cash is freed to be spent on other things than bullets because Uncle Sam is buying.

[Bored Lawyer]

That assumes they would spend the money anyway on arms. Which is in no way proven.

[Bored Lawyer]

If I give you a $ 50 gift certificate to McDonalds, that is not the same as giving you $ 50 in cash to go eat dinner. The latter is fungible, the former is not.

[Bob from Ohio]

Israel spent $23.4 billion on defense, US funding added another 3.3 so about 15% more.

Military Expenditure in Egypt was 4.6 billion in 2022. got an additional 1.2 billion from the US, about 25% added.

Then add $1.6B to Jordan so the aid to Israel is about equal to its two neighbors.

Nobody complains much about aid to Egypt or Jordan, I wonder why?

[Nige]

Lots of people complain. They just don't get much attention.

[Aunt Teefah]

You don't think people complain about giving military aid to EGYPT?? What planet are you on?

[Aunt Teefah]

"Sometimes attacking a hospital saves lives", says leading Zionist intellectual and Lolita Express frequent flyer Alan Dershowitz.

https://twitter.com/AlanDersh/status/1724913915857948753?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

[TwelveInchPianist]

Like when the hospital is being used for the headquarters of a terrorist organization?

[Nige]

No, it's still literally killing people. If it's even there.

[Heedless]

And jails literally lock people up against their will.

Defeating Hamas will save lives in the long run because they are murderous fanatics. Even if doing so requires that Israel kill people to accomplish.

[Nige]

'Even if'

Good news, over 11,000 dead, about sixty of them Hamas!

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

The good news is that Israel's conduct is hastening the day at which Americans no longer will be subsidizing or enabling Israel's right-wing belligerence.

I hope Israel changes course. But if it doesn't happen soon and to great degree, we should ditch Israel (and Saudi Arabia, and a few others) entirely.

[Bob from Ohio]

"about sixty of them Hamas!"

A lie. It was 60 leaders. Do you think every "fighter" is a "leader"?

[Nige]

Maybe the babies were Hamas.

[Life of Brian]

[Heedless]

Yes, because Israel was dropping bombs so as to deliberately avoid ever targeting Hamas members. This is why we can believe those reliable folks at the Gaza health ministry when they assure us that almost everyone who died was just an innocent civilian.

Even by your standards of uncritically believing Hamas propaganda, this is a really pushing the bounds of good taste.

[Nige]

‘when they assure us that almost everyone who died was just an innocent civilian.’

I don’t know about that, but the IDF occasionally claim to have killed ‘dozens’ of Hamas members, not that the 11,000 plus so far were all or even mostly or even significantly Hamas. The Israeli Prime Minister did claim they found a copy of Mein Kampf in a Palestinian child’s room, though, so who knows.

[shawn_dude]

"Defeating Hamas?" If the goal was to defeat Hamas, there were be a lot fewer civilian deaths. The only way to defeat a terrorist organization is to starve it of volunteers not create even more.

[Aunt Teefah]

Maybe, if that ever happened. But it certainly did not at the hospital in question. After all the Israeli propaganda buildup about this being the big command center headquarters for Hamas, they were able to produce a grand total of . . . ten guns and a laptop. And that big underground lair in the tunnels beneath, the one they used to hatch their schemes? Doesn't exist. You were taken in by a hoax.

https://twitter.com/Megatron_ron/status/1724869428746043525

[Commenter_XY]

Yeah AT, mistakes sometimes get made. Remains to be seen.

Still though, those dead Hamas assholes will still be dead. And the world will still be a better place without them.

[Aunt Teefah]

"Ah! Well, nevertheless."

Just another one of those oopsies the IDF seems to find itself in. What happened? They had a whole artistic rendering of the underground lair and everything! Where could it have gone?

[David Nieporent]

Ah, well if Megatron_ron says so, who can argue with that? (Editor's note: that's not even what the tweet says.) But riddle me this: if Hamas wasn't using the hospital as a base, then who was it shooting at the IDF soldiers when the latter tried to enter the hospital?

[Aunt Teefah]

I don't care what the tweet says - watch the video of Israel's "big reveal" of the Hamas command center they found, you dolt.

"if Hamas wasn’t using the hospital as a base, then who was it shooting at the IDF soldiers"

I know this is going to blow your mind, but stay with me: Sometimes armies position their fighters at locations OUTSIDE of their main command centers. Crazy, I know, but it's true! Hamas may have wished to defend the hospital from the enemy even though it didn't have a super-secret underground lair below the building. Kind of like how the US or Israeli armies sometimes use their soldiers to defend positions, even when those positions are not themselves bases or command centers.

[Commenter_XY]

Oh, so Hamas was there to defend the hospital from the Israelis. And Yehudit Weiss (the dead Israeli hostage found near Shifa hospital)? What, she was wandering around Gaza and just got lost in city traffic? Please.

The truth will come out in time. We will see soon enough if there are tunnels under Shifa hospital or not. I'll go out on a limb and hazard a guess there is some shit underneath that hospital that should not be there - more than enough to make it a legit war target.

In the meantime though, I am pleased to see the IDF hunting down Hamas members, singly and in groups, and killing them. I won't be sorry to see Hamas members buried in their magnificent construction projectsown tunnels, touched by a darkness that can be felt.

[Aunt Teefah]

"The truth will come out in time."

It already has. The IDF has full control of the hospital compound. It has the tools to determine whether there is anything beneath it. If there was anything more damning than the ten guns and one laptop, we'd know about it.

As for the war effort generally, your hubris seems to be greatly misplaced. Word is that most Israeli soldiers are too scared to go down into the tunnels (can't say I blame them on that front, but still). They also won't use infantry to defend their tanks and other armored vehicles, so they remain sitting ducks and are taking heavy losses. And more than a month on, they have very little to show in terms of Hamas casualties. We'll see, but this is not looking likely to be the cakewalk you think it is.

[David Nieporent]

Of course, most people are talking about how badly Hamas is doing, how ineffective their, e.g., ATGMs have been, but Aunt Teefah has special inside information about Israel "taking heavy losses."

[Dr. Ed 2]

Do you know what Cambridge is like in February?
I can think of other reasons one might want to spend a few days in the sun on orgy island -- quite innocent reasons...

[Aunt Teefah]

I'm sure you could - emphasis on "you". Everyone else sees you and he for the revolting predators you are.

[TwelveInchPianist]

CNN:

"Arrest made in death of Jewish protester who fell and hit his head"

[Brett Bellmore]

Arrest made in death of Jewish protester who fell and hit his head

Until I found it, I assumed you'd been exaggerating.

"A 50-year-old man has been arrested in connection with the death of a Jewish protester who fell and hit his head during Israel-Hamas protests in Southern California earlier this month, the Ventura County Sheriff’s Office said in a news release Thursday. "

The coronor's findings are consistent with him being struck, falling, and dying as a result of his hitting his head in the fall; Non-lethal injuries on one side of the front of his face, from the blow, and a fatal skull fracture on the back of his head.

But, yeah, if somebody strikes you and you hit the ground, it's normally described as being knocked down, not as having fallen...

[Ridgeway]

Don't you remember the CNN headline after Charlottesville?

"Arrest made in death of counterdemonstrator who collided with vehicle."

[ThePublius]

If you bonk someone in the head with a megaphone causing them to fall, and as a result of the fall they die, you are guilty of murder, not involuntary manslaughter, with which he has been charged. Travesty.

[NOVA Lawyer]

This is not true. Murder requires intent to kill under California law (and generally). Involuntary manslaughter, the correct charge, is an unintended death caused by extremely risky behavior (“conscious disregard of human life”).

Do you have any evidence the person who hit the deceased intended to kill him by hitting him with a megaphone? Really?

Unless the physical stupidity was mutual (which I don't understand to be the case at this point), I hope he gets the max. Play stupid games, get stupid prizes.

[Brett Bellmore]

I agree, involuntary manslaughter appears to be the correct charge, based on the evidence. Now, if he'd followed up on the blow after the guy was down, that wouldn't be the case. But he didn't, so far as any evidence indicates.

[Life of Brian]

Um:

Murder requires intent to kill under California law (and generally). Involuntary manslaughter, the correct charge, is an unintended death caused by extremely risky behavior (“conscious disregard of human life”).

Did you actually look at any California cases before posting this? Conscious disregard for human life is also a basis for implied malice, which routinely supports second-degree murder convictions in California.

[NOVA Lawyer]

"Conscious disregard for human life is also a basis for implied malice, which routinely supports second-degree murder convictions in California."

Do you have a citation to a case that you think is on point and supports a second degree murder charge in this case?

What facts lead you to believe that the defendant's actions in this case imply malice such that a charge of second degree murder is warranted?

Both second degree murder and involuntary manslaughter may be supported by acting recklessly, but to sustain a second degree murder charge the prosecution must show beyond a reasonable doubt implied malice which is defined as a defendant's awareness of engaging in conduct that endangers the life of another. The likelihood of causing great bodily harm is not enough for a murder conviction, but it is for involuntary manslaughter.

If you have a California case where a single punch in an impromptu altercation between two people who didn't know each other resulted in the conviction for second degree murder, by all means share it.

[Life of Brian]

Bug-busting lead-in.

Do you have a citation to a case that you think is on point and supports a second degree murder charge in this case?

My goodness, I believe those new goalposts are no longer in California.

You said: “This is not true. Murder requires intent to kill under California law.”

That was flatly wrong, so I pointed that out. You’re now pivoting. No need to be haughty about it.

If you have a California case where a single punch in an impromptu altercation between two people who didn’t know each other resulted in the conviction for second degree murder, by all means share it.

Any other arbitrary limitations from this fact pattern that you’d like to pile on? I suspect this means you did actually (if belatedly) take a look and discovered that California convicts people of second-degree murder for hitting someone over the head with an object all the time, and are rather clumsily trying to thin the herd.

[NOVA Lawyer]

“That was flatly wrong, so I pointed that out.”

No, it wasn’t. Of course, intent can be inferred. I didn’t write a treatise on all the elements of murder. I didn’t mention felony murder either and I’m sure an enterprising internet prosecutor such as yourself could imagine a way to make this a felony murder case. But it’s textbook involuntary manslaughter. If you have cases that fit this fact pattern and result in a murder conviction, please do cite them.

No one is impressed with your attempt to play at attorney.

“California convicts people of second-degree murder for hitting someone over the head with an object all the time,”

Speaking of moving goalposts. The mental state of the person doing the hitting is crucial and, to be murder, it requires either intent or action which could reasonably kill the victim and the defendant knows it could reasonably kill the victim. It’s certainly not enough to simply hit a person over the head with an object, such as this object (a megaphone), that is not generally considered a weapon capable of killing.

Your link to an inept google search provides little of use. The first result is a felony murder case with the predicate felony being robbery. Not relevant. The second case involves the question of whether intoxication is a defense to aiding and abetting and involves murder by shooting someone in the head with a rifle. Not relevant. The third case involved specific intent to kill using a large rock (with the legal issue being whether duress may defeat the malice element of a murder charge, it doesn't). Not relevant.

So, in short, the answer is you have no such cases.

Stick to selling used cars.

[Life of Brian]

Not going to engage with the sophomoric name-calling. It just reinforces how desperate you are to change the subject. But I'll briefly address a couple more particularly egregious misstatements, just to more firmly establish that you don't have any reasonable grasp on the state of second-degree murder law in California:

The mental state of the person doing the hitting is crucial and, to be murder, it requires either intent or action which could reasonably kill the victim and the defendant knows it could reasonably kill the victim.

In the real world, California routinely finds implied malice by drunk drivers, which clearly involves no particular victim (much less a preestablished relationship as you demanded earlier).

It’s certainly not enough to simply hit a person over the head with an object, such as this object (a megaphone), that is not generally considered a weapon capable of killing.

Utter bollocks. A number of cases involve hitting someone over the head with a quite comparable object such as a bottle. Again, you'd know this if you actually took a reasonable look at the landscape instead of sticking your head in the sand and slinging mud trying to get through this.

[NOVA Lawyer]

"In the real world, California routinely finds implied malice by drunk drivers, which clearly involves no particular victim (much less a preestablished relationship as you demanded earlier)."

I didn't "demand" a preestablished relationship as if that was part of California law. As far as I know, there wasn't one here and a preestablished relationship might entail other evidence of malice, so, yes, a similar case would involve no such prior expressions of intent to kill or malice towards the victim. You have a weird way of interpreting things.

"A number of cases involve hitting someone over the head with a quite comparable object such as a bottle."

Cite the case so we can see whether, in fact, the situations are at all comparable. You previously pretended to cite legions of cases, only none of them were relevant in that none of them involved a conviction of murder for hitting someone over the head without an intent to kill. At least, none I saw in your list until I decided your list was crap. If there was one, cite it.

You heard "conscious disregard for human life" and have latched onto that but have failed to cite any case from California, or any other jurisdiction, which suggests the defendant's actions in this case meet that very high standard. The reason is because his actions in this case do not meet that standard.

You can keep referring to all these many cases that you know about that are just like this one and resulted in a murder conviction, but, for some reason, you refuse to cite even one.

You are full of shit. Cite a case to prove otherwise.

[David Nieporent]

I'm betting that pretty much all of the cases you think you're referring to are ones where people died from being hit over the head. But this person did not; the object was not particularly dangerous. This person died from hitting his head on the ground when he fell down. That's a step removed from the assault, and I would be shocked if it was ultimately classified as murder rather than manslaughter.

[not guilty]

Whenever Life of Brian is challenged to cite legal authorit(ies) for his ipse dixit assertions, he runs away like Usain Bolt from doing so. Why should this thread be any different from before?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

If you bonk someone in the head with a megaphone causing them to fall, and as a result of the fall they die, you are guilty of murder

It no longer seems reasonable to describe this as a "legal" blog.

[Dr. Ed 2]

I'd like to see the perp executed, but -- as I understand it -- if you didn't INTEND to kill him and a reasonable person could conclude that he might not have (i.e. if he hadn't also fell), that's manslaughter or 3rd degree. It bounces up to 2nd degree if you intended to kill, and then to 1st degree if you premeditated.

The problem with overcharging is that you can wind up with nothing.

[Estragon]

“I’d like to see the perp executed”

Strafe ‘em from a lamppost with an A-10 Dr. Ed strikes again!

“I don’t make stuff up”

[David Nieporent]

In addition to everything else Dr. Ed gets wrong, he has apparently never heard of lesser included charges.

[Commenter_XY]

Totally not slanted coverage at all. Oh, and the name of that suspect was.....?

[Brett Bellmore]

Professor Loay Alnaji. Just got arrested and charged with involuntary manslaughter.

The guy "fell" because Alnaji had hit him in the face with a megaphone.

[Nige]

Wait'll you hear about the use of passive voice and police-involved shootings.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

If you disliked slanted coverage you wouldn’t be at this disingenuous clinger blog.

[not guilty]

Nevada's attorney general is reportedly investigating Republicans who falsely claimed to be presidential electors for Donald Trump in 2020 even though Joe Biden won the state. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/nevada-ag-investigates-pro-trump-electors-who-falsely-claimed-he-won/ar-AA1k2nEY

It's about time. Fake electors are under indictment in Georgia and Michigan. The attorneys general in Arizona and New Mexico are investigating in their states.

[not guilty]

New Mexico's situation is a bit different from other states. The pretenders there included a caveat: “We, the undersigned, on the understanding that it might be later determined that we are the duly elected and qualified Electors …” https://sourcenm.com/2022/01/25/five-people-behind-fake-election-certificates-likely-broke-nm-law-prof-says/

That caveat makes it less likely that they acted with intent to defraud.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Much less likely, and to their credit (at least, with respect to those who crafted or understood the disclaimer). I believe some fake electors elsewhere provided similar disclaimers.

The phony electors who did not provide disclaimers belong in jail, if not prison. Unless they wish to and are in a position to trade valuable testimony for leniency.

[Commenter_XY]

I agree: That specific disclaimer is very important.

[apedad]

House Ethics Committee releases scathing report on George Santos

The House Ethics Committee in a report released Thursday said there is clear evidence that Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.) committed serious crimes, though it stopped short of recommending formal sanctions, as some had hoped it would do.

The panel referred its findings of “potential violations of federal criminal law” to the Department of Justice, and its report will raise questions about whether the House will expel Santos, who has been a subject of controversy since before he formally became a member of Congress — and has publicly admitted to fabricating aspects of his backstory and resume.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4312814-house-ethics-committee-releases-scathing-report-into-george-santos/

Can't blame this one on the Dems.

[Magister]

And he's not going to seek reelection, or at least so he says.

[Sarcastr0]

Will the GOP circle the wagons once again?

[Magister]

With such a thin margin in the House, they can't possibly lose anyone, even Santos.

[Magister]

Huh. Apparently they are going to expel him, at least in the same way that Republicans keep the government running, with Democrats voting for it.

[Aunt Teefah]

"There are about 7,000 people under total siege inside al-Shifa compound, including 650 injured people, 45 dialysis patients and 36 premature babies.

A few hours ago one dialysis patient died and 4 are at imminent risk of death because no power for dialysis machines. Three premature babies died in recent days. Two injured persons died in recent hours due to lack of treatment.

There is no water, fuel or electricity. Israel broke the main water line into the hospital. There is no purified water to make the special formula for the babies, so they are using ordinary water and some have become sick with diarrhea, infections, fever.

There is no food. Children are starving and distressed. There is no medicine and the wounds of injured people are becoming horribly infected, some with maggots.

Hospital administrators tried to send a delegation to the occupation forces to ask for food, fuel, medicine and safe evacuation of the sick and injured but the Israelis refused to to talk to them.

The hospital is besieged from all sides by tanks and bulldozers. The bulldozers are destroying areas around the compound, but no one can see clearly what they are doing. Anyone who tries to move between hospital buildings is shot at by snipers or drones. There are hundreds of soldiers in the hospital compound searching all over and causing severe damage to hospital premises and equipment."
https://twitter.com/AliAbunimah/status/1725178495477657788?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

[Commenter_XY]

Take it up with Hamas, the great builders of the Gaza Metro.

[Aunt Teefah]

And tell them what? "Don't put your command center under the hospital"? They already did that. Didn't stop Israel from torturing and killing medical patients anyway.

[Commenter_XY]

Was it this hospital? 🙂

https://babylonbee.com/news/palestinian-at-hospital-for-colonoscopy-not-sure-about-this-doctor-holding-grenade-launcher

[Aunt Teefah]

"Conservatives are getting better at comedy", they say. But the proof remains lacking.

[David Nieporent]

​

“There are about 7,000 people under total siege inside al-Shifa compound, including 650 injured people, 45 dialysis patients and 36 premature babies.

Aunt Teefah still not smart enough to understand that if there are no Hamas forces at the hospital there wouldn't — couldn't — be a "siege." The IDF would've just strolled in.

[Aunt Teefah]

David Nieporent still not smart enough to realize I never said there were no Hamas forces at the hospital (just not a command center, as Israel claimed). Or that there doesn't need to be resistance in order to conduct a siege.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"David Nieporent still not smart enough to realize I never said there were no Hamas forces at the hospital..."

OK, then the answer to you "tell them what" question is, "don't put your forces at the hospital."

It's really a shame that Hamas is responsible for all those deaths.

[grb]

Oh for God’s sake! Can both sides give this shtick a rest! Two points:

1. This is a war, and in war both sides always lie. We saw Hamas lie earlier about the missile attack on Ahli Arab Hospital and now we’ve seen Israel lie about the “command center” in the Al-Shifa hospital. The proof they’ve provided for this claim has been a Baghdad Bob-level embarassment.

And for the record, the “always” above is always true. Take the other war underway between Ukraine and Russia. Despite championing the former, I can still admit the Ukrainians have lied dozens of times. If you don’t understand that, you’re not seeing a real war, but a cartoon production that exists wholly in your mind.

2. If the damage and the disruption to the the Al-Shifa Hospital only resulted in the capture of ten weapons and a laptop, the Israelis made a stupid ugly mistake. That happens in war too, but there’s no reason to make threadbare excuses over it.

[apedad]

‘Like a stalker and their victim’: Trump lawyers argue Jan. 6 caused by rioters’ ‘unrequited love’ for him in bid to keep him on Colorado ballot

To convince a judge in Colorado that Donald Trump should remain on the ballot ahead of the 2024 election despite claims from a group of voters that he is disqualified under the Constitution’s insurrection clause, lawyers for the former president argued the violence of Jan. 6, 2021, wasn’t Trump’s fault but the product of “unrequited love” from extremists, much like a “stalker and their victim.”

Scott Gessler, Trump’s attorney . . . made the comparison during closing arguments at the trial in the Mile High state. Conceding to 2nd Judicial District Judge Sarah Wallace that the point didn’t fare well under scrutiny during the six-day trial, he nonetheless offered it again to invoke the film “Dumb and Dumber.”

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/liker-a-stalker-and-their-victim-trump-lawyers-argue-jan-6-caused-by-rioters-unrequited-love-for-him-in-bid-to-keep-him-on-colorado-ballot/

Trump’s attorney is using “unrequited love” and “Dumb and Dumber” as references to support their case.

Can Republicans just sit out 2024 and come back strong in 2028?

[Krayt]

We love democracy until we don't.

Many initiatives to use the power of government against a political enemy, most before Jan. 6-related items.

This state-by-state effort to disqualify your political enemy reminds me of the end of Watchmen, where Ozymandias, having thoroughly kicked the ass of the other heroes, finally says, "Do you think I'd explain my plan like a supervillain if there was even the slightest chance you could stop it? I triggered it 35 minutes ago."

Just in case. Just in case, get him kicked from a handful of states.

[Krayt]

And I didn't vote for him twice already, and really, really wouldn't a third time, as he's the anti-Libertarian. We don't need dictator tanks rolling through Europe, redefining it.

So I guess massive inflationists seeking to flat out seize wealth?

What crap choices.

[apedad]

Actually I don't think Trump is an "officer" of the US and this case should be tossed.

HOWEVER, Trump DOES consider himself an "officer" of the US and has said so in written court documents in his civil fraud case in NY where he argued the president is an officer of the United States in a bid to remand that case.

POINT 1: THE PRESIDENT IS AN OFFICER OF THE UNITED STATES WHO CAN REMOVE CASES TO THE FEDERAL COURT.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24169363-ny-v-trump-opp-to-remand-1

[Brett Bellmore]

Well, I do accuse anyone who blames the Jan 6th break in on Trump of also thinking the dog was responsible for the Son of Sam killings. It's the same reasoning, if you can call it that.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

How is the search for Obama's Muslim Kenyan socialist communist birth certificate coming along, Birther Brett?

[NOVA Lawyer]

Well, I do accuse anyone who makes this analogy of not understanding how analogies work, unless Brett believes the dog was actually talking to the killer.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Artie Ray Lee Wayne Jim-Bob Kirkland respects Prof. Volokh's entitlement to impose partisan, viewpoint-driven censorship at this blog, so he hasn't posted since Prof. Volokh banned him, but he was with me at a family gathering the other day and was trying to decide whether to legally change his name.

Not to evade the Volokh banhammer -- I think he has more integrity and character than that -- but instead to pay homage to someone Artie Ray perceives as a hero and role model. A fellow uneducated, backwater, bigoted, ignorant, election-denying, superstition-addled, un-American, hayseed.

So what do you guys* think? Should Artie Ray Lee Wayne Jim-Bob Kirkland head down to the office of local magistrate Jefferson Davis Wayne Lee Dummass and legally change his name to Artie Ray Lee Markwayne Jim-Bob Kirkland?

*But not you, Prof. Volokh. Artie Ray said he lost respect for you when you turned tail and let those elitists at UCLA win.

[Commenter_XY]

I think you need to move on = your banishment. It isn't healthy to have this obsession Arthur. 🙂

(Hey, I still am finding different uses for Flavacol)

[Krayt]

VC and FIRE now do go after private universities for failing to live up to their boilerplate of freedom of speech and inquiry. His sarcasm has had a beneficial effect.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Look up the joke whose punch line [deleted - too offensive]

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I think you need to move on

It was mostly a set-up for mocking (1) the only senator with no undergraduate degree; (2) the proud possessor of a knuckle-dragging, knuckleheaded mentality; and (3) a vivid example of the type of loutish and hypocritical losers inhabiting the Republican caucuses at the Capitol.

Also, why do references to the proprietor's partisan hypocrisy and fondness of censorship bug you so much?

[Commenter_XY]

Arthur, if you dropped the 'Clinger Schtick', I am certain you'd be a formidable debater and I am equally certain you can elegantly insert a stiletto into an opponent's argument.

What is done is done (by you, by proprietor). Can't change that.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

"What is done is done (by you, by proprietor). Can’t change that."

What would prevent this blog from reinstating Artie Ray or lifting the ban on certain words (when used by certain commenters to describe conservatives)?

Censorship isn't (necessarily) forever.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"Arthur, if you dropped the ‘Clinger Schtick’, I am certain you’d be a formidable debater and I am equally certain you can elegantly insert a stiletto into an opponent’s argument."

Naw, he used to try that back when this blog had more discussion. He adopted the clinger schtick precisely because he's not a formidable debater.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Does it surprise you that my arguments are kicking the everlasting shit out of your ideas at the modern American marketplace of ideas, making me a winner and you a loser in the culture war?

Or are you delusional enough to believe that conservatives -- and their stale, intolerant, ugly thinking -- still have a chance in that settled-but-not-quite-over American culture war?

[David Nieporent]

Speaking of stolen valor. Your arguments? You couldn't win an argument over change with a checkout clerk at Safeway over whether two quarters equalled 50 cents.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Disturbing medical news in Boston -- Mass General/Brigham is no longer accepting new patients and the MMA is talking about the shortage of primary care MDs.

https://www.boston.com/news/health/2023/11/16/mass-general-brigham-primary-care-patients-limited-capacity/?p1=hp_featurestack

[Krayt]

Boy, it's too bad Bill and Hillary were stuffed in their attempts at communist central planning, ending freedom to pursue your own way, where they decide who gets to be specialists and who is told by the government to be GPs or go be a garbage man or something.

[Krayt]

Seriously, doctors can basically walk into this country.

Spivak called for several measures to address the workforce shortage, including reducing the cost of training new primary care physicians and tackling the causes of burnout, including “unnecessary administrative burdens.”

[Magister]

Maybe we can call that "podiatry voting".

Seriously, doctors can basically walk into this country.

[Sarcastr0]

Communist central planning...like most other countries in the world do their healthcare.

If everyone is communist, no one is.

You can think something is bad policy without bullshit redbaiting about it.
Or...maybe you specifically cannot.

[Brett Bellmore]

If everyone's communist, no one is we're hosed.

[Nige]

If people get access to not-for-profit health care, they’ll realise how stupidly malicious your efforts to stop them actually are.

[Sarcastr0]

Use the actual definitions of words.

This is a wrong and useless one.

Well it is useful for drama I suppose.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Thomas Hobbes spoke of a life in a state of nature being "boorish, brutal, and above all else, brief."

https://www.boston.com/news/politics/2023/11/13/live-updates-massachusetts-reacts-to-israel-hamas-war-2/?p1=hp_featurestack

If these dirty hippies are going to block a bridge in Downtown Boston in the midst of rush hour, why can't the aggrieved motorists simply pick up said dirty hippies and toss them into the "dirty water" (Charles River, which isn't dirty anymore)?!?

If one side won't obey the law, why should anyone else?

How I wish John Silbur was still running BU....

[David Nieporent]

​

Thomas Hobbes spoke of a life in a state of nature being “boorish, brutal, and above all else, brief.”

JFC. Can you get anything right? Ever?

No, Hobbes did not. He said "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."

Side note: Although Dr. Ed used up his once-a-year "Got something right" the other day, I still briefly wondered whether Hobbes had used Dr. Ed's formulation in addition to Hobbes's famous one. So I googled it. Turns out that his version had appeared three times online before… all by Dr. Ed. (And as a surprise bonus, one of those three times also included in the same paragraph his infamous butchering of Yeats' Second Coming: "And the middle can cease to hold...")

[Dr. Ed 2]

Is there an inherent difference between my version and the correct one? And you're assuming that the professor who told me this was accurate -- I am not so sure he was.

As to Yeats, that was a cute Smith undergrad. She was cute.
I've never studied Yeats -- I can't study EVERYTHING and she was majoring in it.

But do I have the meaning more or less right? More or less?

[not guilty]

Uh, quotation marks are ordinarily used to indicate that the quoted language is verbatim.

[Estragon]

Dr Ed: “I don’t make things up”

[SimonP]

Don't cite Hobbes if you're so unfamiliar with his work that you don't understand how he would respond to this facile objection.

[Defenderz]

Google "Texas border bill cnn"

Leftists are even traitors. That's what's on my mind.

[Ben_]

New York City is cutting education by $1 billion because housing for migrants is expensive:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/16/nyregion/nyc-budget-cuts-schools-police-trash.html

Also cutting libraries and police. So more people, more kids in schools, less money for it.

That’s the price of Democrats' hatred of Trump and virtue signaling in NYC this year.

[SimonP]

No.

Adams is a horrible, corrupt mayor who is using his power to exact broad-based financial pain on city programs in order to build consensus in favor of kicking migrants out of shelters. Previous proposals in this respect have included building tent cities in Central Park and locating them throughout the city.

This is all political theater by a guy who has no idea how to run the city. The migrants are only a small piece of the budget issue - and they are an issue in the first place only because state law requires that they be housed.

Never mind the whole upstate-downstate dynamic, where NYC sends tax dollars upstate for the Governor to burn on stadiums and her own brand of corruption. The money's there. It's just that chodes like your chucklefuck cohorts in upstate NY think it's theirs to keep.

[Defenderz]

Upstate New York would be much better off without the city's Democrat Party cont

[SimonP]

NYC funds the highways we build up there, provides medical care for upstate seniors, funds their schools. It's the same thing blue cities do for red states around the country. Just a straight-up wealth transfer to idiots who think the socialism they benefit from is just the natural state of affairs.

Cut off NYC? Sure, try it. We have to beg state government to give our money back to us. Would love to cut the round trip.

[Ben_]

New York libraries will be closed on weekends.

[grb]

I just read a forgettable piece in the Guardian on the 20th anniversary of Peter Weir’s Master and Commander, which was based a mash-up of two or three of the Aubrey-Maturin books by Patrick O’Brian. The write-up and most of the +500 comments were very postive (the latter surprising since snide & churlish comments about movies are common in that publication).

Yet I didn’t like it. Now, the major reason is obvious : I’m a big fan of both the books (having read all twenty of’em) and the audiobooks read by Patrick Tull (having listened to them all, and my favorites multiple times). So it’s to be expected I’d nitpick a film adaptation.

But I remember another objection as well : The books are often a comedy of manners, like the very different Jane Austen novels (set in the same time period) that O’Brian adored. Part of the pleasure in the Aubrey-Maturin stories is people thinking and interacting in ways strange ( and often funny) to modern sensibilities. I recall believing that was lost in the film – that the book’s sense of a completely different social world was flattened down to nothing.

On the other hand, I only saw the damn film once, so can that grumpy memory be trusted?

[The Margrave of Azilia]

"a comedy of manners"

-"Pardon me, my good sir, would you be so kind as to splice the mainbrace?"

-"Why, Captain, it would be a pleasure."

[Nige]

The film is great. It's got the weevil joke in it. Everything you need to know aout Aubrey and Maturin is right there in that joke.

[Dr. Ed 2]

A hypothetical Massachusetts question -- can one subdivision of the Commonwealth sue another subdivision of the Commonwealth?

1: Can a regional school committee sue one of it's member towns for extra construction costs caused by the town's stopping construction of a new school on environmental grounds that the state DEP overrulled?

2: Are suits *by* a municipal entity against another still limited by the $100K limit of the state tort claims act? If not, why not?

Now politically, it's a whole other story with lots of other factors including that the district doesn't pay the town for police or fire protection, and the AG would probably step in before it went to court (all claims must first be filed with her) -- but in terms of legal technicalities, is there anything preventing this?

[Magister]

Past Usenet experience says Dr. Ed 2 is fishing for answers to a homework assignment.

[Dr. Ed 2]

No, double checking my own research before writing an op ed.

I have a terminal degree, I don't *have* homework anymore.

[Magister]

OK, substitute "someone else to do his work" for "answers to his homework assignment".

Why would anyone want an op-ed from Dr. Ed 2? Opining/bold assertions about things Dr. Ed 2 is wrong about is on brand but doesn't seem a high recommendation.

[BrotherMovesOn]

2. Are suits *by* a municipal entity against another still limited by the $100K limit of the state tort claims act? If not, why not?
You are truly deranged.

[John F. Carr]

The situation you describe strikes me as one where a private party would not be able to sue. You don't ordinarily get back the costs associated with appealing a government decision.

In general, a regional school district has the power "To sue and be sued, but only to the same extent and upon the same conditions that a town may sue or be sued." (General Laws Chapter 71 Section 16)

[Dr. Ed 2]

Thanks, I didn't think of that.

[John F. Carr]

There is no absolute rule barring one town from suing another.

[BrotherMovesOn]

"— but in terms of legal technicalities, is there anything preventing this?" -Dr. Ed 2

Well, first of all, since it's Dr. Ed, as a threshold matter we need to determine if the incident he is raving about actually occured.
As it is in any of Dr. Ed's tall tales.

[Dr. Ed 2]

While I stated "hypothetical", it's not *my* hypothetical.

While without going into the details (which wouldn't be believed anyway) a political figure is alleging that the municipality could be sued for millions of dollars and I think he is totally out to lunch.

Knowing how many here LOVE to say "Ed is wrong", I'm just double checking my work by seeing if anyone does.

[Magister]

The best solution would be to work at being wrong less often; in many cases a simple internet search reveals the error.

[Sarcastr0]

A few of the right wing figures who have been publicly and overtly antisemitic in the last 24 hours:

Elon Musk
Tucker Carlson
Charlie Kirk
Ian Miles Cheong
Candace Owens

Meanwhile folks on here are breathlessly waiting for the next 750 person protest at Cornell or something so they can cry that The New Holocaust is Here, and it's Woke.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Do you have links to their statements?

[Sarcastr0]

I do. But they are easy to Google and reason doesn't much like links.

Here's some quotes in no particular order:

"It’s almost as if [Neo Nazi] Nick Fuentes was ahead of the curve and a couple years from now everyone is gonna be saying what he was canceled for saying. Wild."

“I’m deeply disinterested in giving the tiniest shit now about western Jewish populations coming to the disturbing realization that those hordes of minorities that support flooding their country don’t exactly like them too much.”
“You have said the actual truth."

“Some of the largest financiers of left-wing anti-white causes have been Jewish Americans”

“The ADL unjustly attacks the majority of the West, despite the majority of the West supporting the Jewish people and Israel.”

“If the (((biggest donors))) at, say, Harvard have decided, well, we’re going to shut it down now, where were you the last 10 years when they were calling for white genocide? You were allowing this. And then I found myself really hating those people, actually,” [brackets mine]

“No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money. Christ is King.”

[ThePublius]

You know, I've seen those things elsewhere, and know pretty much who said each quote, but for the most part, I fail to see how it's antisemitic. It's stated mostly as an assertion of a fact, not as disparaging of a person or a people for their nationality or ethnicity or religion.

Calling these things antisemitic is like the media calling Israel's counterattack in Gaza genocide; it's just cooption, corruption of the language. Like 1984.

[Sarcastr0]

They're saying Jewish money is at war with western civilization by driving the white replacement. And they are endorsing actual neo-Nazis.

What WOULD it take to count as anti-Semitic for you?

[Brett Bellmore]

No talk of "Jewish money" in the quote Musk endorsed. But, so what?

I find this kind of silly in a way. Like the way you're not allowed to notice Soros backs lots of nasty causes, because he's Jewish and a banker, and if you notice that a guy who's Jewish and a banker does something bad, that's anti-Semitic.

Sometimes people live down to tropes. Other times, not so much. Do we have to ignore the the times when they do? If a black guy eats watermelon, you have to pretend not to see it, or something like that?

[Sarcastr0]

No, the Musk one was about Hitler being right.

You can criticize Soros, you can't talk about how he's a rootles cosmopolitan with tentacles everywhere. Because he's not, and because that's antisemitic.

It's not hard to avoid antisemitic tropes, and yet..."Sometimes people live down to tropes."
You're really bad at this.

[David Nieporent]

.

Like the way you’re not allowed to notice Soros backs lots of nasty causes,

"Nasty causes" like democracy and criminal justice reform. I can see why that would trouble some.

[Absaroka]

I'm all in favor of reforms that, for example, result in fewer false convictions. But, for example, there seems to be a correlation between Soros backed district attorneys getting elected and having to wait for a store employee to unlock the cabinet if you want to buy some exotic item like laundry detergent. I can do without that kind of reform.

[Sarcastr0]

Seems to be is hard to suss out with the constant rage bait articles trained his way.
I wouldn't be surprised if there was a correlation, but I also wouldn't be surprised if it was all nonsense.

Either way, liberal causes, including criminal justice reform, are not a priori nasty.

[Absaroka]

"Either way, liberal causes, including criminal justice reform, are not a priori nasty."

Sure. But Brett's claim was "Soros backs lots of nasty causes". That's a different claim from "every liberal cause is nasty". Brett may believe that, but it's not what he wrote.

[Sarcastr0]

He is claiming *this* cause is nasty. A priori, I don't think it is.

Maybe the upshot is crappy, but 1) that's not established, and 2) that's hindsight.

[Nige]

'you’re not allowed'

Not sure anyone's ever been impeded even slightly from Soros conspiracy-mongering, but the claims are that Jews are trying to destroy the whote race by importing minorities into the US and that Soros is evil and explicitly out to destroy western civilization, so, yeah, classic anti-semitism.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Do you agree that any of them are anti-Semitic?

Which ones, if any, are you not disputing?

[SimonP]

"It's all about the Benjamins, baby."

[Nige]

‘I fail to see how it’s antisemitic.’

How is claiming the Jews are trying to destroy the white race by not rabidly opposing the immigration of white people and funding calls for the genocide of white peope (which are totally real guys!) *not* anti-semitic? You've been accusing generic liberals of this bullshit for so long you've forgotten where it all comes from and what lies behind it, and now it's circling back to being explicit again you're shocked that other people are noticing.

[SimonP]

It's interesting to me that, after an initial period where everyone agreed that bombing Muslims was cool again, Republicans and Democrats are hearing the mood music and changing their tune.

Democrats are responding by trying to backpedal and urge restraint by Israel.

Republicans are finding new ways to blame the Jews for all of it.

[Sarcastr0]

These people are not the GOP itself, which hasn't moved much that I can see.

[Dr. Ed 2]

I don’t see how those are antisemetic. A variant of one of them I have been saying for some time: “What part of ‘Kill the Jews’ do American Jews not understand?!?”

That is not antisemetic — it’s saying wake up people — they’re telling you what they want to do -- to YOU….

[Sarcastr0]

American Jews are all blind and asleep and is not anti-Jew at all!

[Dr. Ed 2]

https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/4871877728/reasonmagazinea-20/

[Magister]

Dr. Ed 2 wants the sheeple to be woke.

[Frank Drackman]

Frank from Tel Aviv again,
lot of unkindness/ungentleness in this room,
and to borrow from one of the Reverend Sandusky's "Bettors"

"There are many people in the world who really don't understand, or say they don't, what is the great issue between the free world and the Islamic world. Let them come to Israel! There are some who say that Islam is the wave of the future. Let them come to Israel. And there are some who say in Europe and elsewhere we can work with the Islamists. Let them come to Israel. And there are even a few who say that it is true that Islam is an evil system, but it permits us to make economic progress. Let them come to Israel!"

Frank

[Ben_]

Do you know a mom who would like to keep pornographic books out of her 7-year-old's school library?

Levar Burton says he might want to punch her:

https://x.com/publisherswkly/status/1724957754589061500

[Sarcastr0]

Oh my stars and garters.

As noted above, you strain for outrage. Can't be healthy.

[Ben_]

That’s an interesting defense of punching some kids' moms.

It’s 1000x worse than what Elon Musk said about anything.

[Nige]

My gosh did someone get punched? Did someone treat censorious facists with disrespect? Oh no!