Monday Open Thread

What's on your mind?

Comments

[The Margrave of Azilia]

"A statue of President Abraham Lincoln in Louisville, Kentucky, is missing a bronze top hat after it was pried off of a stone base recently."

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/dec/12/lincoln-statues-bronze-top-hat-pried-off-stolen-fr/

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Police are investigating this incident as...

...wait for it...

...a hat crime.

[santamonica811]

2 comments in, and we already have the thread-winner.

[jb]

Kind of cheating to set up your own joke, though!

[Zarniwoop]

I'll give'em pas on this one.

[SRG2]

I can't beat that, but apparently there's a video on TikToque

[Bwaaah]

This is beautiful.

[bernard11]

Excellent.

[Frank Drackman]

Forget it Jake, it's Louisville

[Dr. Ed 2]

An interesting article about Putin's theft of Western countries although the thing not mentioned is the related theft of IP and trademarks.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/12/17/world/putin-companies-economy-boycott-elites-benefit-ukraine-war.html?utm_source=pocket-newtab-en-us

[Dr. Ed 2]

An interesting search & seizure question: https://commonwealthbeacon.org/opinion/wastewater-surveillance-a-proactive-tool-in-stemming-drug-abuse/

There are a lot of questions here, but I think the biggest is the merger of law enforcement and public health.

[not guilty]

Who do you surmise has standing to complain about collection and analysis of wastewater? The Fourth Amendment does not prohibit the warrantless search and seizure of garbage left for collection outside the curtilage of a home. California v. Greenwood, 486 U.S. 35, 40-41 (1988). Where is the reasonable expectation of privacy in wastewater?

[Dr. Ed 2]

I don't know -- and I'm no fan of druggies. This just strikes me as Orwellian....

[Krayt]

And why not put air sensors on the street outside houses while they're at it? Cameras pointed at houses recording 24/7?

You could put towers up where government could watch all the time. Since they can see everything, sense air, sense water, you could give it a name, all-seeing tower! Good old government!

Someone brighter could translate that to Latin.

[Mr. Bumble]

Welcome to the Panopticon.

[John F. Carr]

"Cameras pointed at houses recording 24/7" already happened in Massachusetts. The First Circuit went en banc to rule that maybe it was constitutional and maybe it was a little unconstitutional but not so much so that evidence should be suppressed. U. S. v. Moore-Bush (1st Cir. 2022).

[Mr. Bumble]

Is there a difference between 24 hour cameras and 24 hour human surveillance?

[John F. Carr]

Practically, yes. The number of humans doing surveillance work is much more limited than the number of cameras.

Legally, maybe. The First Circuit said no (3 votes) or not clearly established (3 votes).

[Mr. Bumble]

Of more concern would be thermal imaging or infra-red cameras.

[John F. Carr]

On that we have clearer precedent. Police need a warrant to use thermal imaging on your house because they are not looking for anything visible to the eye from the street.

[Krayt]

I think you can thank Scalia for this one. Or maybe it's sniffing dogs on your porch. Or warrentless trackers on your car.

But yes, IIRC can't use Star Trekky tech to "see through walls", at least without a warrant. Presumably this would extend to even more exoticy stuff than IR. People have demonstrated wifi or bluetooth signals can be used to position things inside a building.

[Mr. Bumble]

Any thoughts on the use of drones?

[Dr. Ed 2]

24 hour cameras IS enabling SELECTIVE prosecutions in academia...

[Sarcastr0]

This is the issue with persecution complexes.

Insisting (without even an anecdote to cite to) that institutional controls aren't functioning properly means you're asking for some kind of external controls.
But a persecution complex means you it won't be long before said external institution has also enabled persecution, so they need oversight.

And so on ad infinitum.

Great way to be able to blame your own issues on some external force keeping you down. Not much use solving actual problems.

[Dr. Ed 2]

The problem, Gaslight0, is that student judicial is confidential and hence neither reported nor verifiable. This is part of why public records are so very important for the legitimacy of the judicial system.

For example, there is a lot of qualitative evidence that Black males are disproportionately sanctioned for sex offenses. While still a minority of those accused, the numbers are far greater than what people would expect to see based on the percentage of Black males amongst the male cadre.

"People" being disinterested university employees (including janitors) but more secretaries and administrative assistants, along with the ResLife (housing) folks who have to do a bunch of paperwork when someone is kicked out, and usually personally know (at least on a "hello" basis) the kid kicked out.

This is quietly discussed as a matter of concern but without statistics, there is nothing that can be said or done.

Likewise, (as a janitor -- right...), I have seen a vastly disproportionate percentage of conservative undergrads get into trouble for things that almost all undergrads do, e.g. underaged drinking.

The problem, Gaslight0, is that one has to rely on qualitative data when one has no quantitative data.

[Sarcastr0]

Sure dude.
We're supposed to trust your objective understanding of broad trends.

I'm all for reforms as to the procedure schools use for sexual offenses - the incentives have been to keep it internal and quiet and it's made for a lot of closed internal systems, each jankier than the last.

But despite your claiming it is impossible, we have *evidence* of the issues in that system.

You want to complain, you need either evidence or to be less of a noted liar.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Not to confuse you with the facts, Gasligt0, but Betsy DeVos publicly stated that the prosecution of innocent male students was a problem, and an increasing number of them are not only suing BUT WINNING suits against schools.

But I am lying. Right...

[Sarcastr0]

Betsy DeVos publicly stated that the prosecution of innocent male students was a problem

Betsy DeVos can say a lot of things. Doesn't make them true.

This is a problem worth reforming. It is not, however, "SELECTIVE prosecutions in academia." It is a process problem.

[bernard11]

I have seen a vastly disproportionate percentage of conservative undergrads get into trouble for things that almost all undergrads do, e.g. underaged drinking.

"OK John, so you've been drinking, like Sam here."

"Well, I guess so."

"Who'd you vote for, Trump or Biden?"

"Biden."

"And you, Sam?"

"Trump."

"OK, Joe. Go to your room and sleep it off, and stop drinking until you're old enough."

"As for you, Sam, I'm filing a report with the dean and recommending disciplinary action."

Happens all the time.

[bernard11]

"John, go to your room...."

Damn disappearing edit.

[Zarniwoop]

Yo Ed. I think you are conflating a "person specific search" with "monitoring community trends". Specifically, wastewater monitoring is not specific to any particular person:

In addition, using wastewater to monitor the presence of drugs in a community shows how much drugs are being used rather than who is using them and reduces the risk of those who are using to become involved in the criminal justice system. The information can be utilized by law enforcement to set and plan priorities in concert with public health officials rather than for law enforcement against individuals.

So before you get your panties in a bunch about the 4th Amd, maybe try to understand the frackin' basics of what is even happening. BIG HINT: it's not a 4th Amd issue in the 1st place.

[Dr. Ed 2]

And then, in the category of what the heck did he think was going to happen: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12872333/Fired-Democrat-senator-aide-gay-sex-tape-criminal-charges.html

What is with gay young men and their need for everyone to know they are gay?

[santamonica811]

Agreed. And what's with straight young men, and their need to show everyone that they are hetero? Holding hands with their girlfriends in public. Sometimes kissing in public.

I (as a straight person) am ashamed to admit that I've engaged in decades of this sort of "I'm here; I'm straight; get used to it!" behavior. Now I realized that, in doing so, I probably made all of (or a significant number of) the non-straight community uncomfortable with my brazen flouting of their convention.

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

I (as a straight person) am ashamed to admit that I’ve engaged in decades of this sort of “I’m here; I’m straight; get used to it!” behavior.

Then you were (and possibly still are) a childish dumbass.

[Zarniwoop]

hey WYOT ... check the batteries on your sarcasm meter. They're clearly as dead as your sense of humor.

[Michael P]

It was a pretty awful attempt at sarcasm to conflate holding hands with publishing a hardcore video of sexual intercourse at one's workplace (especially when one is not the proprietor of said workplace).

[Brett Bellmore]

It's not that they want people to know they're gay. Big deal.

It's that they want people to see them doing it.

Big difference between hand holding and creating sex videos.

[John F. Carr]

Divide gay men into two camps. One has impulse control problems and spreads HIV and monkeypox and so on. The other is the stereotypically neat, polite man women would love take home to mother if they could turn him straight. I remember a man of the second kind talking about how he had no desire to go to Provincetown where the first kind lives: "They're my people, but they're not my kind of people."

[Sarcastr0]

Gay men turn out to be people with a whole continuum of views, I hear.

spreads HIV and monkeypox
Nice to see the filthy disease-ridden queers slur continues to shamble along.

[Dr. Ed 2]

It IS a small minority of gay men who spread a lot of things.

[Sarcastr0]

Same as with straight men.

Only the lesbians are free from the Taint.

[Sarcastr0]

Whatever happened to monkeypox? I guess that impulse control thing ended up not being so big a deal?

[Mr. Bumble]

They stopped fucking monkeys?

[Sarcastr0]

At least when unprotected.

[Absaroka]

That made me go hmmm...that did drop off the radar, so I went looking.

First, it has been renamed to mpox; you are awarded 3 Woke Demerits for deadnaming it.

Why the outbreak ended wasn't all together clear to me. Wiki mentions vaccines: "The United States expanded deployment of JYNNEOS vaccines, allocating 296,000[113][114] doses over the coming weeks, 56,000 of which will be allocated immediately. Over the coming months a combined 2.5 million[115][116][100] additional doses will become available.[117] As of November 2022, New York state ended its state of emergency, mobile mass vaccination sites set up since summer in New York city closed, but vaccinations were moved to outpatient and sexual health clinics".

Is this just another entry in the long story of how much we owe vaccines, or is there some other epidemiology involved? Behavioral changes during the outbreak?

(to elaborate, does the epidemiological math work so that a couple million vaccines doses were enough? Those vaccines were widely enough deployed across the country? It just seems like a really happy ending)

[Mr. Bumble]

"(to elaborate, does the epidemiological math work so that a couple million vaccines doses were enough? "
That hardly seems possible in a country of 330 million people.

[Zarniwoop]

TL,DR: your intuition sucks.

Pointing to one and only one potential variable and assuming without further thought process that it is determinative of an outcome is pretty much the exact opposite of actual epidemiology.

If there's a virus that infects left-handed people 95% of the time with occasional transmission to righties, and vaccinating only left-handled people dramatically reduces the spread, would you still argue that the good outcome "hardly seems possible in a country of 330 million people"? Yes yes, mpox transmission is certainly not quite that simple, but the absolute size of the population is likely not a driving factor.

See also the concept of "ring vaccination" for smallpox outbreaks after vax development and before eradication.

[Mr. Bumble]

OK, or they stopped fucking monkeys and other monkey fuckers.

[Brett Bellmore]

Though some effort was made to obscure it, the group at risk were a fairly small fraction of the population, and people in the group knew they were in the group. That meant that a targeted vaccination program was perfectly feasible.

[Sarcastr0]

A targeted information campaign was aimed at gay men due to their higher risk (for physical, not behavioral reasons). It included both behavioral modification and vaccinations.
Some lefties got bent out of shape about it, actually.

The campaign worked, the cases dropped, and the story is done. But the right likes to say monkeypox and go after the gays. So it's still an issue to some.

[Bob from Ohio]

"not behavioral reasons" and "behavioral modification"

So which was it? Behavior or not?

[Sarcastr0]

You can work this out, Bob, I know you can!

[2 things are true:

1. Gay men were vulnerable because anal sex was especially good at transmission, not because they are all sluts.

2. Gay men started using condoms more than they had previously, and that helped kill the spread.]

[Bob from Ohio]

Having "anal sex" isn't a behavior?

[Absaroka]

Zarniwoop, that's an excellent explanation; populations aren't homogenous. It would be interesting to see the epidemiological numbers. The outbreak seemed to drop off worldwide, even in countries where I would not expect a huge public health response.

[Zarniwoop]

Despite our apparent philosophical differences, I appreciate that you have a reasoned and logical approach to things. Props for that.

[Absaroka]

We have philosophical differences? Who knew!

I actually don't try and track people's politics here. For the most prolific posters you can't really help knowing where they stand on most issues, but generally speaking I like to let each comment stand or fall on its own merits, instead of thinking 'Oh, that must be right|wrong because Alice|Bob said it'. So the only thing I have on file for Zarniwoop is 'his comments are worth reading' :-).

As long as I'm getting all emo, thanks to you and the other posters here who do try and make substantive comments, wherever they land on the issues. I don't come here for reinforcement or validation; that would be a waste of time. Sometimes the signal to noise ratio here isn't all that great, and I really appreciate folks who are contributing to the signal and not the noise.

[John F. Carr]

There were enough doses for promiscuous gay men and the system was trying to get it to them. I got an email from my health care network about monkeypox (I think it was still called that) vaccination. The author of the email was afraid to say "gay men should consider this" so it was very vauge. They may have hired a copywriter who also writes drug ads. "Ask your doctor if demonkifier is right for you". (Answer: for probably 95-99% of people, no, just like most of us don't need the latest miracle allergy medicine.)

I use "gay men" consistent with popular usage. The medical community tends to use "MSM" (men who have sex with men) because it's what you do and not what you identify as that matters.

[Commenter_XY]

Did that congressional aide actually break any laws, though?

/smh....gives new meaning to do not shit where you eat

[Longtobefree]

Trespass in a federal building?
Which implies insurrection - - - - - - - - -

[David Nieporent]

No, of course it implies no such thing. This is just yet another instance of MAGA's IKYABWAI?

[not guilty]

"Did that congressional aide actually break any laws, though?"

I don't know, but apparently Capitol Police are investigating that question. https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2023/12/19/congress/sex-tape-investigation-00132431

[Absaroka]

What's interesting is that there are diseases (syphilis, for example) that are strongly associated with sexual contact; you don't get syphilis from gas station toilet seats, despite the urban legends. But monkeypox (from the wiki description!) sounds like it can be transmitted by fairly casual non-sexual contact, like its cousin small pox.

But perhaps it is just much less transmissible than smallpox, and so vaccinating gay men was enough to end the outbreak - that seems to comport with the data.

[Brett Bellmore]

Yeah, that's the difference between possible to acquire in other ways, and likely to acquire in other ways. A lot of sexually transmitted diseases are capable of being transmitted in other ways, just not with a high enough probability to not die out if that's the only way available.

[Longtobefree]

Like the old joke of a high society matron learning her daughter has "the French disease", and asking the doctor if it were possible she caught it in a public restroom.
The doctor says "it's possible, but they both would have been very uncomfortable".

[David Nieporent]

.

demonkifier

I first parsed that as demon-kifier, and was trying to figure out what it meant.

[SimonP]

I view this episode as having less to do with "gay men" than it does with "young" men/women.

People are desperate for attention and relevance, in an information environment where we're drowning in things demanding our attention. The more our lives are filled with nonsense, the less significant we feel. People need to disconnect, slow down, return to the analogue. But that's hard to do, given the way we're wired.

So I think what this episode shows us is how this "TikTok generation" is expressing itself, trying to find that relevance. The meaning you might derive from going to a Klan rally, these kids get by doing something "for the Vine/Insta/TikTok", grabbing a moment of fame and attention. It's not particularly well-considered, it may accurately be described as essentially a mental illness. But I think that's probably what we're witnessing.

I wish this was really a subversive, political act. But by all accounts the aide just doesn't seem to have seen it as other than an attention-grab.

[David Nieporent]

That's the least scandalous thing that has ever happened in that room.

[not guilty]

The Alliance Defending Foolishness Freedom had a bad day before SCOTUS last week. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/12/supreme-court-adf-conversion-therapy-ban.html

[not guilty]

In 1901 Peter Finley Dunne's fictional bartender Martin J. Dooley famously observed, "no matther whether th' constitution follows th' flag or not, th' Supreme Court follows th' iliction returns." Perhaps Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Kavanaugh and Bear It (each of whom helped George W. Doofus become President in 2000) are slowly coming to realize in the wake of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, 597 U.S. 215 (2022), that SCOTUS taking the wrong side in the culture war is making it harder to elect Republicans to office.

[Krayt]

What happened to standing up for rights against culture and popularity? You'd ban Nazi flags and marches? You'd ban burning US flags? Since we're sitting around thinking our received wisdom tromps all rights, where does popularity stop?

Nevermind. If you read the article, they probably had major reservations about thes cases that had little to do with the subject itself.

[Frank Drackman]

I know it did, but getting rid of Slavery was the right thing to do

[Krychek_2]

Not everyone agrees with you that the fetus analogizes to the slaves. Forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term that she doesn't want sounds a lot like slavery to me.

[Mr. Bumble]

...and where and when has this occurred?

[Krychek_2]

It's occurred whenever and wherever a woman who wants an abortion hasn't been able to get one.

[Dr. Ed 2]

"Forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term that she doesn’t want sounds a lot like slavery to me."

No, God is forcing her -- she could miscarry, and it happens a lot more than women realize as they often didn't know they were pregnant.

Now as to forcing the man to work for 18-22+ years to support the child (and its mother), THAT is slavery.

[bernard11]

Now as to forcing the man to work for 18-22+ years to support the child (and its mother), THAT is slavery.

I didn't think even you were that stupid and immoral. Do you think parents shouldn't be responsible for supporting their children?

Is that a common view among "pro-family" conservatives?

[jb]

There's the old saw that pro life people only care about babies until they are born. Rarely do they come out and say it so explicitly, though.

[Michael P]

There's also the old saw that Democrats want to legalize abortion up to birth, and often afterwards. The difference between that and this is that a Virginia governor actually said the Democrat version, and you hallucinated what you implied here.

[jb]

I hallucinated Ed saying that the real problem in the abortion debate is fathers having to pay child support? You just have to scroll up to see what he wrote.

Speaking of hallucinations, though, here's what Northam said:

"And it’s done in cases where there may be severe deformities, there may be a fetus that’s non-viable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother."

Not only did he not support abortion up to or after birth, he said that even in the case of a non-visble fetus during labor doctors should and would attempt to keep it alive. You should maybe read some primarily sources every once in a while rather than relying on the right wing meme machine.

[Bob from Ohio]

"Is that a common view among “pro-family” conservatives?"

No.

In fact there are some who want the father to pay support during pregnancy.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"Do you think parents shouldn’t be responsible for supporting their children?"

Do you think that? Are you opposed to polices that allow moms to give up their children for adoption? That allow moms to abandon their children at fire stations?

[myself]

From almost any other account I'd call that satire.

[John F. Carr]

When slavery was abolished abortion on demand was not an option, so the 13th Amendment does not provide a right to abortion. Looking to recent news, it would be over a century before medicine could detect trisomy in routine testing in time for abortion to be an option. See Evolution of prenatal testing. Amniocentesis was not used for routine testing because there was too great a risk to the fetus.

[Krychek_2]

Totally irrelevant. When the 14th Amendment was adopted, protecting women from discrimination wasn't on anyone's radar either.

[Krychek_2]

Plus, the point of my comment wasn't about whether the Constitution requires abortion rights (though I think it does). Rather, it was about who, as between the woman and the fetus, is the person more analogous to the person being held in involuntary servitude.

[not guilty]

"Not everyone agrees with you that the fetus analogizes to the slaves. Forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term that she doesn’t want sounds a lot like slavery to me."

Well, control of female slaves' sexuality was very much an incident of chattel slavery. Women were often required to service slave owners sexually. If pregnancy resulted, the slave had no agency regarding the offspring.

And some owners treated slaves, both male and female, as breeding stock.

[Mr. Bumble]

"And some owners treated slaves, both male and female, as breeding stock."

That would have included T. Jefferson. This especially became true after the ban on the importation of slaves.

[Longtobefree]

Amy Coney Barrett, Assumed office October 27, 2020.

What is worse than lies? Stupid lies.

[NOVA Lawyer]

What are you on about?

[not guilty]

Uh, John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Bear It were each part of George W, Bush's legal team following the 2000 election.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Eventually the ban will be extended to all CBT and that is a good thing.

[bernard11]

Because the ravings of idiot preachers are just as valid as the work of actual trained, experienced, psychologists.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Justice for Giuliani? Who thinks the $148 million judgment ought to be reduced in the name of justice? Please explain what legally cognizable principle reduction would serve.

My own take is that if I consider Giuliani's plight in million dollar increments, each extra million-dollar increment he has to pay to his defamation victims increases the amount of justice in the nation. At least until Giuliani is down to his last $2,000 or so, and is living the typical month-to-month subsistence life of Americans in the bottom quartile—among whom $2,000 in savings amounts to unheard-of prosperity.

Giuliani also ought to be subject to routine stop-and-frisk, to be sure he isn't carrying around any useful amount of cash that ought to go to his victims instead. But no more than twice a week.

[Mr. Bumble]

Makes the $24 million Floyd George's family got seem like chump change.

[Frank Drackman]

and they probably didn't get the drug dealer responsible for their windfall a dime.

[MoreCurious]

Derek Chauvin was a drug dealer?

[Bwaaah]

No. He was America's scapegoat for all its racial ills, an evil Jesus, if you will, who had the misfortune of restraining a person who had advanced heart disease, who was abusing opioids, who had been resisting arrest, when, oops, a drug-induced fatal cardiac event occurred.

But as long as evil Jesus stays in jail, our souls are cleansed of the racist stain that, thank goodness, predominately affects police.

[David Nieporent]

Sigh. Yet another Internet coroner, making up stuff that the actual medical examiner didn't say.

[Bwaaah]

Sorry. Mine is a non-expert opinion. I don't know that it's correct. I am skeptical, no, cynical, in considering the integrity of such a highly politicized trial. Medical examiners want to keep their jobs, and keep their families safe, just like everybody else.

Here's the medical examiner's report for anybody who may be interested:

https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/residents/public-safety/medical-examiner/floyd-autopsy-6-3-20.pdf

Case title: CARDIOPULMONARY ARREST COMPLICATING LAW ENFORCEMENT SUBDUAL, RESTRAINT, AND NECK COMPRESSION

[Dr. Ed 2]

The purpose of a libel judgement is to make the victims whole, not to make them rich, and to the extent it is supposed to be punitive, that can't violate the 8th Amendment.

Some rich A-hole is tailgating me and runs into me -- why can't I get a few million from him for damages to a car that is only worth a few thousand? Because he is an A-hole and I deserve it.

What's next? Little league umpires and high school basketball referees suing for libel? (And don't think for an instant that they don't get abuse from parents & fans.)

What's next, filing a libel suit against every opposing counsel in civil litigation? Imagine if, say, Walmart (which has a reputation of aggressively defending "slip & fall" lawsuits) were to routinely include libel suits against the lawyers bringing them?

Above and beyond the fact that I don't think he got a fair trial, I don't see the compensatory harm that he did. If *other people* made death threats, sue THEM for that.

And this is *not* a hypothetical -- there *are* police officers suing BLM-ish folk for defamation.

The $148M judgment against Giuliani will be chilling for those who wish to criticize governmental officials -- any aspect of the government at any level. And it is the Left that tends to like to do that and hence the Left that ought to be concerned about this.

Heck, can't Israel sue in US Courts? So imagine Israel suing everyone claiming the IDF is committing "genocide" in Gaza...

[OtisAH]

Giuliani didn’t “criticize public officials,” you saggy tit. He knowingly and purposefully victimized these women with vicious lies and made their lives a living Hell.

[Krayt]

And they should get compensation. I do wonder how normal workers can possibly have $16 million in damages, and $20 million in emotional damages.

[grb]

This may be a non-lawyer simplification, but I thought it was commonplace for juries to exercise their indignation with massive cash damages, only to have amounts cut down to a fraction on appeal.

[David Nieporent]

That's basically right here, though note that roughly half of the award was punitive damages for Rudy being an extraordinary asshole. Like, going out during the trial and repeating the false claims to the tv cameras.

[Sarcastr0]

My understanding (via Popehat so not direct source) is that above the usual, Rudy's done shenanigans as to evidence of his assets, which actually leaves the court with a lot of options as to what to decide damages.

[Bob from Ohio]

Popehat fanboys are the worst.

[Sarcastr0]

Eh, he's not my main jam - citing him does not make me a fanboy.

You seem like he got under your skin some, so maybe I should follow him more closely.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Worse than bigoted, disaffected, antisocial, superstitious, right-wing Volokh Conspiracy fanboys from Can't-Keep-Up, Ohio?

[OtisAH]

With any luck, Krayt, maybe you get to experience what they went and are still going through. Then you can tell us what the right amount is. Until that day, $148m sounds about right.

[Krayt]

Oh I underdtand it. But I am not the lawyers and politicians trying to codify a reasonably objective rational for it.

[Stephen Lathrop]

I do hope the reasonably objective rationale doesn't come to rest on any notion that rich, powerful, high-status persons cannot be made to suffer life on a basis of equality with powerless wage slaves. Impunity of that sort would not encourage the powerful to make the right choices in their treatment of everyone else.

[bernard11]

You mean normal workers can't suffer as much emotional damage as billionaires?

[not guilty]

"The purpose of a libel judgement is to make the victims whole, not to make them rich, and to the extent it is supposed to be punitive, that can’t violate the 8th Amendment."

Uh, no. Tort damage awards to a private party in a civil suit when the government neither has prosecuted the action nor has any right to receive a share of the damages do not implicate the Eighth Amendment. BFI, Inc. v. Kelco Disposal, Inc., 492 U.S. 257, 264 (1989). In rem civil forfeitures may raise Eighth Amendment concerns, Austin v. United States, 509 U.S. 602 (1993), and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits a State from imposing a "'grossly excessive'" punishment on a tortfeasor. BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore, 517 U.S. 559 (1996).

[David Nieporent]

.

and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits a State from imposing a “‘grossly excessive'” punishment on a tortfeasor. BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore, 517 U.S. 559 (1996).

You're making me nauseous in having to defend Dr. Ed, but his claim you're responding to was expressly about punitive damages.

[not guilty]

Which is not an Eighth Amendment claim as Dr. Ed 2 posited.

[David Nieporent]

I know, but close enough for government work. There are so many things he gets totally wrong, like "The Supreme Court can't interpret statutes," that when he gets the gist of something correct — that the constitution does put limits on punitive damage awards — it's not worth getting exercised over.

[NOVA Lawyer]

LMFAOO.

David has a heart. And you right. You definitely right. We should congratulate Dr. Ed for coming so close to making a valid argument.

[Zarniwoop]

I'm down with "Cut Ed some slack, he's less wrong than usual."

[OtisAH]

Justice in this matter is reserved for Freeman and Moss. And justice for Freeman and Moss requires a penniless Rudy Giuliani. Also, this is not Giuliani’s “plight.” It’s Freeman’s and Moss’s. You’re referring to Giuliani’s consequences, every bit of which he deserves.

[Bob from Ohio]

At least we can bury the idea that Trump can get a fair trial in Atlanta.

[Sarcastr0]

It’s always jury bias and liberal judges if Trump people get in trouble, eh?

I Don’t think even you believe that.

[Bob from Ohio]

You are defending a ludicrous damage award.

"A jury of eight Washington, D.C., residents was selected from a group of over a dozen, including an Al Jazeera journalist" Two Georgia election workers sue Giuliani for millions, alleging he took their "good names" By Robert Legare, Melissa Quinn
Updated on: December 11, 2023 / 3:53 PM EST / CBS News

[I assumed it was Atlanta but it was DC, my mistake, Atlanta has fewer Democrats.]

[Sarcastr0]

A defamation case for millions? How unprecedented!

We all know you lie; at least have the self-respect to make it believable.

[Bob from Ohio]

"We all know you lie;"

Speaking of libel.

[Sarcastr0]

You SAY that lying for your political cause is a virtue, and those who do not are suckers.

Don't go weak on us now, Bob!

[Bob from Ohio]

Politicians yes, if need be. Example, Harry Reid: "he lost didn't he", about lying [from the safety of the Senate] about Romney's taxes.

you said "you lie” so stop crawfishing and point where I said I, Bob from Ohio, lies.

[Sarcastr0]

So you think Harry Reid was doing a good thing there?

Also, I have not heard you make the distinction between politicians lying and randos.

Glad to hear, I guess, that you haven't made a virtue out of personally lying.

Though small praise, since you still seem to take it as axiomatic that Trump folks are never guilty of anything. Being sincere but so disconnected from reality is not a huge step up.

[Bob from Ohio]

"So you think Harry Reid was doing a good thing there?"

Just an example from your side. Many from my side and from every side in every nation. Politicians lie, some are just better at it. We call them winners.

"Also, I have not heard you make the distinction between politicians lying and randos. "

Well, i don't talk here just write.

[grb]

Bob from Ohio : "Politicians lie, some are just better at it. We call them winners"

Why do you believe that, Bob? All politicians lie, as I've noted many times. Some lie more often; some lie better. But I for one don't see much correlation between a politician's lying frequency/skill and that pol's success. I don't think any politican - Democrat or Republican - can rely on lying to generate success. To the extent they do, they envitably fail. Of course Trump tries, but he's been a plague on the GOP. Most politicians who live off lies (Comer being an example) come to be seen as jokes.

[Nige]

He believes that because he votes for liars, and this is a justification.

[Sarcastr0]

The idea that the American People respond best to liars is a pretty anti-American take.

It's also not supported. Santos and Trump stand out for being such insane liars. Even Harry Reid when he pulled the dirty pool about Romney's taxes stood out.

As they are asked to defend the indefensible, many conservatives (and, to be fair, leftists) take refuge in a hand-wavy nihilistic cynicism that justifies everything because nothing matters.

Bob's tried to turn it into a worldview. It's turned out more freakish than cleverl

[LawTalkingGuy]

Lol. Imagine You caring about fair trials. JFC.

[bernard11]

Um. How much do you think was appropriate, Bob? Have you read about what happened to the plaintiffs as a result of Giuliani's willful lies?

Remember that the trial had nothing to do with whether Giuliani actually libeled the two women. He conceded the point.

[Bob from Ohio]

People suffer horrible physical injuries and often don't get a fraction of this travesty.

Nobody suffers emotionally or has a reputation worth 70+ million.

[Sarcastr0]

often!

[LawTalkingGuy]

You're right. Tort reform WAS bad.

[bernard11]

To repeat myself, how much, Bob?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Anybody who thought the plaintiffs might not continue to make Giuliani's disgusting life a living hell seem to have been mistaken.

They sued Giuliani for defamation. Again.

I do not know the limits of pursuing a judgment debtor, but I hope these plaintiffs are aggressive and unmerciful with respect to Giuliani. Some people suggest Giuliani could be jailed if he continues to act boorishly and unlawfully.

Carry on, clingers . . . but, as Rudy Giuliani is learning with exquisite precision, only so far and so long as your betters permit.

[not guilty]

Last week Dr. Ed 2 posed a hypothetical question about what would happen, if SCOTUS rules that it is unconstitutional to apply 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) to the January 6 rioters, regarding the defendants who had pleaded guilty to violating that statute. That is hypothetical because the only question before the Supreme Court involves statutory construction and not constitutionality.

OTOH, what will happen if SCOTUS reinstates District Judge Carl Nichols's order that as a matter of statutory construction, § 1512(c)(2) is limited by § 1512(c)(1) to corrupt conduct involving a record, document, or other object with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding is not hypothetical -- that could indeed happen. If so, those defendants who have pleaded guilty under § 1512(c)(2) may have grounds to move the District Court to set aside the guilty plea pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. See, Welch v. United States, 578 U.S. 120 (2016); Bousley v. United States, 523 U.S. 614 (1998).

Setting aside the plea agreement would reinstate the original charges, so that a defendant originally charged with violating statutes other than § 1512(c)(2) could still be tried on such charges, with the caveat that he would be constitutionally entitled to sentencing credit for time served pursuant to the guilty plea. North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 718 (1969).

[Dr. Ed 2]

The second paragraph IS the question I was asking, and what you refer to as a limit to as a matter of statutory construction (?), I refer to as "unconstitutional."

My rationale is twofold -- (a) the only authority SCOTUS has in such matters is to rule things unconstitutional, and (b) isn't it unconstitutional to exceed a matter of statutory construction?

If it is wrong to do it, WHY is it wrong to do it? When you go past all the precedent and legal phrases, don't you eventually get to the "due process" clause of the 5th Amendment?

[ReaderY]

And why would the Supreme Court of the United States lack authority to construe statutes of the United States?

[Dr. Ed 2]

All Article Three says is that "[t]he judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority..."

I always thought their power to interpret statutes came from the power Marshall invented to interpret & enforce the Constitution. (I may be wrong on that.)

[Zarniwoop]

Janitor Ed sez:

I always thought their power to interpret statutes came from the power Marshall invented to interpret & enforce the Constitution. (I may be wrong on that.)

Yers, you’d be wrong on that. In more excitingly different ways than you have the capacity to imagine.

Marbury v. Madison is probably what you’re thinking of. Broadly speaking, that case stands for the proposition that the S.Ct. has the final power to declare a statute unconstitutional. This is first week of law school sort of stuff, but also a bit more convoluted than this 1 sentence summary.

How do you get from there to the whackadoodle notion that the S.Ct. doesn’t separately have the power to answer questions that purely relate to statutory construction, that are completely and utterly NOT constitutional questions and NOT within the scope of Marbury?

Often the Q before them is as simple as “Congress wrote this here law. The 1st, 3rd, and 5th Circuits say that means interpretation A. The 2nd, 4th, and 6th Circuits think it means interpretation B. Both interpretations are fully constitutional, but which statutory interpretation is correct?” Meaning they rule on a case arising (solely) under the LAWS of the United States, per Article III. Which you copy-pasted, but apparently didn’t bother to read or understand.

[Bored Lawyer]

"Judicial power" means what it meant at the adoption. Which long included interpreting and applying statutes, both in Britain and the colonies.

[Zarniwoop]

Janitor Ed clarifies:

The second paragraph IS the question I was asking, and what you refer to as a limit to as a matter of statutory construction (?), I refer to as “unconstitutional.”

There is a fundamental difference between “statutory construction” and “constitutional analysis”.

The first is “does the statute mean A or B?”
The second is “does a statute that means A violate the constitution?”

Think of it this way: “Do you prefer Twinkies or Ho-Hos?“ is a different question than “Are Twinkies food?” The S.Ct. can resolve one or both if the right case comes up.

If you don’t know/accept that there is a difference between these two types of Qs, that’s your problem.

My rationale is twofold — (a) the only authority SCOTUS has in such matters is to rule things unconstitutional, and (b) isn’t it unconstitutional to exceed a matter of statutory construction?

Where on Dog’s green earth did you get the idea that (a) is true? The S.Ct. decides statutory - meaning statutory only, no constitutional issue - on a routine basis. Those don’t generate as many headlines at times, but it’s a vital portion of their work. Your misconceptions about (a) are breathtakingly wrong.

And you may have to further clarify what you even mean in (b). Who is supposed to be exceeding what?

[not guilty]

There is a substantial difference. If the Supreme Court issues a decision interpreting or construing a federal statute, and Congress disagrees with the decision, Congress can avoid the impact of such decision going forward by amending the statute in question. If, however, SCOTUS grounds its decision on its conclusion that a federal statute is unconstitutional, Congress if it disagrees would have to go back to the drawing board and enact new legislation.

[John F. Carr]

The Supreme Court, as it likes to say, decides what the law is. The decision may be based on the text of a statute. The decision may be based on the Constitution. There may be a mix of both.

I think you're getting at the argument that the January 6 defendants did not have fair notice that their conduct was a crime. That argument can win, rarely. The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts ruled that a man wearing a thong (and nothing more) was being criminally icky, but he did not have fair notice that he was comitting a crime so he got off this time. In the civil rights era a (Maryland?) state court broadened the legal meaning of tresspass. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled the new meaning could not be applied retroactively. The defendants who refused to leave a restaurant were not guilty this time. Next time, they could be.

[Ed Grinberg]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nci_1Nr8n1g

Being raised in the 60s -- days of segregation -- this is truly déjà vu. One thing that I did learn through my growth over the years is that hate is not passed down our genes; it is taught or untaught. What we're seeing here is hate being perpetuated. We keep people segregated, keep them from building bridges of trust, never allowing them to find commonality. We teach them that everything that's gone wrong in their life is because of somebody else's actions. We teach them to look at our differences -- our color, creed, and culture -- and then teach them to judge each other. It's dehumanizing. It robs people of individuality. But if the endgame is [to foster] hate, it is very effective. We teach one race -- all "minorities" -- that they are oppressed (through DEI). We then teach that another race -- whites and Jews -- that they are oppressors. The result is hatred, segregation, the inability of our children to see evil when they're in its presence.
One of my Democratic colleagues was asked recently about the use of a strategy by Hamas to rape Jewish girls and women -- as terror. Her response was not to defend these [girls and] women against these evil men, but [to say] that you needed to discuss hierarchical oppression [of Palestinians by Israelis]. That is DEI.

I'd say: Rep. Owens's Democratic colleague is "woke" to "Israeli oppression of Palestinians" -- which makes any atrocities by the latter against the former fully justified.
This is how Lenin (and, arguably, Marx) felt about the "oppression" / "exploitation" of "workers & peasants."

[Nige]

'We teach one race — all “minorities” — that they are oppressed'

You can only teach (some) white people they're oppressed beause they're white. We know this because the oppression they claim is 99% ludicrous. You can't teach oppressed people they're opressed - they already know. Because some white people are taught they are oppressed they assume all others are taught the same and that those teachings are equally bogus.

'We then teach that another race — whites and Jews — that they are oppressors.'

Interesting conflation. Israel is not the same as Jews. Either side who conflate them are being anti-semitic.

Is this monstered DEI to actual DEI the same as monstered CRT is to actual CRT?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Are you bothered by the nearly inexplicably racial roster at the Volokh Conspiracy? What are the odds against the whiteness of participants selected by Eugene Volokh for participation at this movement conservative blog?

Are your thoughts concerning the astonishingly against-the-odds maleness of Volokh Conspirator posts?

To what would you ascribe the white, male roster at this blog? Racism? Misogyny? An awkward, on-the-spectrum, antisocial nature? Obsolete and disaffected thinking? A middle finger flashed at the educated, inclusive, modern mainstream? An effort to generate street cred among right-wing bigots?

[Brett Bellmore]

My wife and son have requested Beef Wellington for Christmas. Alvin Zhou's version. I raised with my son having to make his tiramisu for the desert.

But, are these recipes actually written down anywhere? The videos don't provide any quantities!

[Sarcastr0]

Someone puzzled out his chocolate cake.

I Googled and am not finding the same for the Beef Wellington.

[Brett Bellmore]

Yeah, I think I'm going to have to adapt somebody else's recipe.

[hobie]

All modern wellingtons now stem from Gordon Ramsey's...including Alvin Zhou's. We all now use Ramsey's cling film technique as well. Just try Ramsey's version here. https://youtu.be/Cyskqnp1j64?si=CP18bTYs_yKa-hUW

It is pretty straightforward and largely foolproof

[Brett Bellmore]

Yeah, we were binge watching Wellington videos last night, and one of them didn't use the clingwrap. It was painful to watch.

I have the 1957 "The Gourmet Cookbook", which is usually my go-to for classical dishes, it's insanely comprehensive, and it doesn't even MENTION Beef Wellington. I guess it was out of style for a while.

[hobie]

Haha! Looks like you're stuck in the 50's in all aspects, Bellmore. Never trust a cookbook pre-1990. They are all...lacking. A general all purpose cookbook I would recommend is the former NYTimes food critic Mark Bittman's How to Cook Everything. It's a revelation

[Don Nico]

"Never trust a cookbook pre-1990"
Foolishness to the nth degree.

[Don Nico]

If you actually want to understand what you are doing in the kitchen, download On Food and Cooking by Harold McGee, first published in 1984.

[bernard11]

Amen to both of these comments.

[santamonica811]

Hobie,
You're 100% correct!!! It's my go-to gift for any friend who says he/she wants to start learning how to cook. College freshmen should be given this book their first day they move into an off-campus apartment.

[hobie]

Indeed

[Brett Bellmore]

I said it's my go-to for classical dishes. It only takes up about 4 inches out of 6 shelf feet of cookbooks in my library...

My actual primary source is the Culinary Arts Institute's Encyclopedic Cookbook, 1948 edition. If you want food just like your mom used to make, it helps to have inherited her cook book, with all the marginal notes.

[Don Nico]

Brett,
The two volumes do not contain every recipe that was published in the magazine under Earl MacAusland

[Brett Bellmore]

Well, yeah. If they did, they'd occupy an entire shelf in my library.

[Brett Bellmore]

Reviewing the Ramsey recipe, I see most of the videos take sensible steps omitted from his description, such as seasoning the meat before wrapping it. I'll have to patch together something from multiple recipes.

[ThePublius]

Joy of Cooking

[Nelson]

A.classic, but unbelievably comprehensive. If you like the taste chocolate (the notes, not just the general flavor), their vegan chocolate cake is amazing. Because it's vegan it doesn't have butter, so your tongue doesn't get coated. That leaves your taste buds free to go to town.

It's especially tasty if you use a good balsamic or chocolate balsamic (to layer the flavor) is an upgrade.

Just make sure you use a good cocoa powder. The flavors really come through so it will make a difference.

[TwelveInchPianist]

The Chef Jean-Pierre version is pretty good.

The only thing that's really quantity-sensitive is the duxelle.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Anyone come across the recipe for Lemon Snow?
It involves plain gelatin and other things, it's Old Maine and my Great Aunt used to make it.

[Zarniwoop]

Janitor Ed asks:

Anyone come across the recipe for Lemon Snow?

Frank Zappa advises to watch out where the huskies go, and don’t you eat that yellow snow.

[Don Nico]

You'll find the recipe in Mastering the Art of French Cooking v.2 by Julia Child.
You'll also find the recipe for Veal Orlorff.
If you can really splurge and find the ingredients, in the Gourmet cookbooks you will find the recipe for Tournedos Rossini

[Paladin_44]

James Beard's "American Cookery" (1972 edition). He concludes with "And with this, one should dirink a great Burgundy - an Echezeaux, perhaps."
A 2001 Domaine de la Romanee-Conti Echezeaux Grand Cru, Cote de Nuits wiill set you back about $4000/bottle.

[Don Nico]

Sure, Beard gives great advice... for hedge fund owners

[bernard11]

The advice was perhaps a touch more reasonable in 1972.

[Don Nico]

Funny that you should say that.
I recall going into my neighborhood wine shop in Hyde Park Chicago. There was a bottle of Echezeaux on one of the shelves. Only $200. I though, I could make a huge splurge, but I never did. Now the matter is not whether I can pay the $4000, but whether I can even find someone to sell me a bottle of Echezeaux.

[Commenter_XY]

VC Conspirators....any holiday bakers? Let me tell you what I recently observed. At Wegmans, German Xmas Bread (stollen) is priced at an eye-watering $17/loaf. Below, you will find a recipe for stollen over a century old, from a NYC bakery at turn of previous century (early 1900's). The yield is 4 very large loaves, or 6 'Wegman's size' loaves. I will simply say, it is a very time-consuming recipe. For me, it has been my personal labor of love for my family, a way to pass on a tradition and to keep that connection with distant ancestors. Bon Appetit!

Ingredients
Large dry ingredients bowl
Three (3) packages of dry Yeast (I always use Fleishman's)
2 cups milk - warmed (not hot, but more than room temperature – ideal is 105-110 degrees Farenheit)
Three sticks of butter melted (melted at low heat, you don't want the butter too hot)
One (1) stick of butter, room temperature - you will melt this after dough rises the first time.
Six (6) eggs beaten (room temperature)
one (1) cup rum
Candied fruit (32-40 Oz)
1 Pkg sliced almonds (approximately 4 oz); note, some like walnuts instead
Eleven (11) cups of flour
1 tsp salt
3/4 cup sugar
1/2 tsp nutmeg
1/4 tsp mace; this is optional, it really changes the taste of the stollen
Powdered confectioners sugar - optional
Wax paper, pastry brush (to brush melted butter)

1 - Combine flour (9 cups), salt, sugar, nutmeg, mace into a very large mixing bowl. Stir gently to mix the dry ingredients. I always use a really large metal mixing bowl. This is the 'dry ingredients bowl'.

2 - Add the yeast to the slightly warm milk (105-110 degrees – measure with digital thermometer!), stir gently with a fork. Put into oven for 10 minutes (use a timer if you have it).

3 - In a small saucepan, slowly melt the butter over low heat - do not clarify the butter

4 - Butter a large bowl and set aside (this is what you will have the bread rise in the first time. The butter is to make sure the dough does not stick to the bowl when it rises). This is the 'Butter Bowl'.

5 - Combine eggs, melted butter, rum and milk/yeast mixture into a single mixing bowl. Gently stir to mix the ingredients. Take care not to kill the yeast by overly stirring. This is the 'wet ingredients bowl'. Do not use an electric mixer - it will kill the yeast (I made this mistake - trust me).

6 - Set aside 2 cups of flour (you will add to the dough to make it the right elasticity as you knead the bread). Add the fruit, almonds, and the wet ingredients into the dry ingredients bowl. You will knead the dough (gently) to mix the ingredients. This is tricky - you can't knead too much. This kneading usually takes 5-10 minutes.

7 - The dough will probably be very sticky and 'cling' to your hands. Add 1/2 cup of flour, and knead gently. If the dough is still sticky, keep adding flour 1/2 cup at a time. The dough is the right consistency when you rub your hands together and the dough comes off your hands without being really sticky. Be careful, it is easy to add too much flour.

8 - When the dough is kneaded, and it does not stick to the sides of the bowl, it is ready for the first rising. Put the dough into the 'Butter Bowl', cover with plastic wrap, and put into the oven. Set the timer for 1:30 - 2:00 (yeah, 1.5 to 2 hours). Measure dough temperature. Ideal dough temperature is 85 degrees for proofing.

9 - Now wash the dry ingredients bowl and the wet ingredients bowls. Put them away. Remember, cleanliness is next to Godliness in the kitchen! 🙂

10 - Butter two cookies sheets (this is what you put the loaves on to rise the second time and bake). Set aside. Or parchment paper.

11 - Melt the 4th stick of butter when it is about 10 minutes from the time to take the 'Butter Bowl' out of the oven.

12 - Get two sheets of wax paper (about 16" length) - this is where you will cut the dough into loaves and roll it out. I use wax paper so the dough won't stick to the counter.

13 - When the dough has risen (it should be close to doubled), take it out of the oven, put onto wax paper. Now cut the dough (gently!) into four (4-6) equal size pieces. Roll out (or form with hands) the loaves (one at a time) into rectangular shapes (usually 8" x 12"). Brush with melted butter

14 – Put the loaves on the cookie sheets. Put both cookie sheets back into the oven. Let rise until doubled (again!). This will take about two hours.

15 – After the loaves have doubled, remove from the oven. Now set the oven to 350 degrees. Bake the loaves at 350 degrees for 45 minutes. One trick I learned over the years. At the 22 minute mark, switch the cookie sheets between the racks (move the cookie sheet from the lower to higher rack, and vice versa). Do this so the loaves all bake evenly. The loaves are done when a toothpick comes out clean.

17 – Optionally, you can sprinkle with confectioners sugar after loaves have cooled

[Brett Bellmore]

I work for a German multi-national. The owner's wife sends out stollen to all the employees world-wide every Christmas, from her favorite bakery in Germany.

Nobody has the heart to tell her that it's dry... But it makes great French toast!

[Dr. Ed 2]

Was it dry when she mailed it?

[Brett Bellmore]

By all accounts, yes. It's just the way she likes her stollen.

[David Nieporent]

I like my stollen the way I like my elections: STOLLEN.

[santamonica811]

Nooooo. You're ruining a potentially superb pun.

"I like my German pastry the way I like my elections: stollen."

(You don't ever use the pun in the set-up and the punchline.)

*For more election-German giggles, Google "JFK + Berliner + doughnut" [. . . and I don't want to hear from any spoilsports with their 'Pfannkuchen' nonesense.]

[Mr. Bumble]

Filling in for Martha today is Commentator XY.

[Mr. Bumble]

...and edit is still not working.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

This is a shit-rate website. Anyone who expects better from misfits, contrarians, and malcontents is delusional.

[SRG2]

Thomas didn't think he was paid enough.

https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-money-complaints-sparked-resignation-fears-scotus

the justice had borrowed $267,000 from a friend to buy a high-end RV.

What would most of us do in that situation? I think I'd probably forego the RV.

When someone complains about a salary of $300,000 (in current value), it's more because it doesn't allow them to live the lifestyle they think they deserve, rather than because it's not enough to lead a very comfortable lifestyle

[loki13]

Sure!

I mean, when you suddenly have all of these new Billionaire friends showing you what Real Money looks like ... $300,000 to decide the fate of the United States seems like a small amount, amirite?

Almost makes a person think that he deserves to get a little of that money that they are handing out.

[Sarcastr0]

Yeah, I think this is right.

There wasn't any bribery, but holy crap was there a huge sense of entitlement and concomitant willingness to dive into conflicts of interest.

He's pretty out there doctrinally in a pretty awful way, and he's no great shakes writer but there's a lot of things I like about Thomas (the way he treats is clerks, where he hires them from, his skill in statutory interpretation).

This whole pattern reflects quite poorly on his character. For as much as that matters for a sitting Justice.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

.

the way he treats is clerks

Does he ever hire someone who is not a disaffected, obsolete wingnut?

[Sarcastr0]

Also dovetails with his past behavior at the Civil Rights Division.

[grb]

Sarcastr0 : "Also dovetails with his past behavior at the Civil Rights Division"

Speaking of Thomas' past behavior: If you go back to when he was trying to move-up in the conservative world, one of his clever moves was a speech at a larger right-wing event. In it, he trashed his own sister as being dependent on welfare:

"She gets mad when the mailman is late with her welfare check. That's how dependent she is ..... What's worse is that now her kids feel entitled to the check too. They have no motivation for doing better or getting out of that situation.'

Of course the audience ate that shit up. They cheered and cheered. It might have made a deciding difference, as Thomas got his appointment from President Reagan a few months later.

And it was partially true. The sister had worked two minimum-wage jobs while her brother attended law school, but stopped working to take care of an elderly aunt who had suffered a stroke. That led to four or five years on welfare, trying to make it on $169 a month. After that, she worked as a cook at the same hospital where her mother is a nurse's assistant. And her children all found professions and work.

Who would have guessed back then that Clarence would prove the real welfare queen? That he'd be the "entitled" one, always on the dole to someone else's charity?

[Sarcastr0]

Did you listen to the Slow Burn podcase series on Thomas?

It's...he's got issues, and his sense of entitlement is only a symptom.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Thomas is an asshole who will be remembered solely for shameful conduct that precipitated ethics reform at the Supreme Court.

[LawTalkingGuy]

So how is using outside gifts and benefits to try and keep someone in office who otherwise might not be there not corruption? We'll never get a smoking gun on this obviously, but "here is money, do not resign your office" is likely quid pro quo corruption even under McDonnell. Haha JK, the Court would 9-0 say that deciding not to resign in exchange for millions of dollars is not an official act, because deciding not to do something isn't an act.

[SRG2]

The SC would follow Roberts, who has ruled, IIRC, that the quid pro quo must be specific - "I give you X so you do Y" rather than "here's X, Y, Z, etc..." in the expectation that later on the favour would be returned.

[bernard11]

So the defendant's brother shows up at the judge's office and drops off an envelope with $50K in it.

"Just a gift to show my appreciation as a citizen for your fine work on the bench. That's all."

[NOVA Lawyer]

Pretty much. Only we know that only works for a certain social set. Below a certain level of social status and wealth, it's obviously corruption.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Not a single Volokh Conspirator has the courage or character needed to address Justice Thomas' corruption and low character in a meaningful manner. What a bunch of cowardly, partisan hacks.

[SRG2]

A question for lawyers: a search of person A's house is deemed illegal and so evidence obtained from it is excluded in a subsequent trial of A. But suppose that amongst the evidence are materials that inculpate B, who is not living there. Can that evidence be used against B?

[David Nieporent]

B's rights are broader than just "living there"; for instance, an overnight guest may also have 4th amendment rights. But assuming B has no relationship with the place — maybe he just left his stuff there while attending a backyard barbecue, for instance — then yes, the evidence can be used against B.

The question has more permutations — for example, if B left his password-protected laptop there, the cops would likely need a separate warrant to search the device. But not to seize it.

[SRG2]

Thanks - that's what I suspected but I wanted to be sure.

[Krychek_2]

The Vatican has just announced that the pope has given his approval to blessings for same sex couples. Can't wait to hear all the outrage and indignation from all the closeted conservative cardinals and bishops.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Gives a new meaning to the question: "Is the Pope Catholic?"

[Bob from Ohio]

Avignon is a nice place. Too bad Benedict passed away.

[SRG2]

Excellent reference!

When a pope and an antipope meet, presumably they're extinguished in a blast of radiation.

[ThePublius]

This pope is a dope.

I'm a Catholic, and he has not only given me nothing to return to the church, he's turned me off.

I'm fine with the same sex thing, I don't care.

But, he's gone back to banning Freemasonry, is a rabid AGW adherent, and has now accused the IDF of "terrorism" in a supposed sniping of two Catholics in Gaza - which never happened!

What a jerk.

[Nige]

'is a rabid AGW adherent'

He should be working to bring about the apocalypse, not averting it!

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

You were OK with decades (if not centuries) of torture; incessant authoritarian brutality; to-the-core corruption; hypocritical opulence; the facilitation and concealment of systematic, longstanding sexual abuse of children . . . but this pope is the final straw for you?

It takes a remarkable level or gullibility to be a Catholic . . . and, in your case, a profound lack of character.

Enjoy your nonsense, clinger.

[Sarcastr0]

Love the 'why be catholic if you gotta change with the times and maybe treat gays as people?' cohort here.

Y'all have in the past shown yourselves to be consumed with partisan spite and bitterness. Maybe read up on your gospels and chill the fuck out about being nice to outgroups.

[ThePublius]

Are you talking to me?

[Sarcastr0]

All 3 of you.

Faith can be a balm or a spur.

You seem to need the balm.

[Ben_]

Since Thursday we've seen Democrats doing their usual Democrat stuff:

- Post photos from Boston government's segregated holiday party
- Tear down a monument at Arlington cemetery
- Release pornography filmed in a senate meeting room
- Defy a congressional subpoena to testify

[Dr. Ed 2]

Photos were posted by conservatives upset at the Wu Klux Klan.

[Ben_]

- They also changed Minnesota's state flag to a Somalia-like flag to indicate that another area of the US has been conquered.

[Sarcastr0]

Haha you are hilariously bigoted.

Stars are a sign of Muslim conquest. Of the state of Minnesota.

What a ridiculous thing to say.

Maybe you should get some old timey armor and start a crusade!

[Sarcastr0]

Dems released the porn video? Love a party that serves it's constituents.

Anyhow, you should maybe specify what the monument in Arlington was to. If you're going to defend the nobility of the Confederacy, you should own it.

[SRG2]

As I've noted before:

Republicans: it was the Democrats who put up all those Confederate monuments!
Democrats: and now we want to take them down.
Republicans: No.

AFAIC anyone who defends the retention of Confederate monuments and symbols is a defender of treason. It would be like a German opposing the removal of a statue of Hitler, or objecting to the renaming of Josef Goebbels Hochschule.

[Bob from Ohio]

"defender of treason"

LOL 160 years later you are so hardcore, so brave in your indignation. Not like those weaklings who actually fought the rebs but later wanted reconciliation.

I bet you think you'd be the only abolitionist in rural 1860 Georgia too!

[Sarcastr0]

No one here is claiming to be brave. You took an odd line of attack, there. Says more about your self-image than SRG2's, IMO.

Reconciliation did not mean worshiping the Confederacy. That started up well later when people wanted to be racist but not super open about it.

You aren't even in that club; you're just reflexively defending it because the GOP likes it. No other reason. Because, as you used to remind us regularly, substance does not matter, rules do not matter; only victory of your side over the other matters.

[Nige]

'who actually fought the rebs but later wanted reconciliation.'

I feel like there's some group left out of all that post-war collegiality.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Not from the perspective of conservatives such as Bob from Ohio.

[SRG2]

Bob wouldn't think of them as they're not "real Americans"

[David Nieporent]

It's worse than that. Hitler was the ultimate evil, who caused a ton of harm to Germany, but at least he was Germany's leader. This would be more like France trying to protect a statue of Hitler.

[Mr. Bumble]

Piss poor analogy. By their nature civil wars are fought among citizens of the same country and when it's over animosities need to be buried if the country is to move forward.
That happened after our civil war but now some groups, 160 years later need to pick at the scab and reopen the wound.

[David Nieporent]

1) Bullshit. Like most confederate monuments and uses of the confederate flag, this one had nothing to do with healing wounds after the civil war. It was erected 50 years after the war to say fuck you to black people, by the most racist president of the 20th century.

2) There is a difference between forgiving the traitors and honoring them.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"...by the most racist president of the 20th century."

More racist than the president who sent the Japanese to concentration camps?

[Sarcastr0]

I presume you know about Wilson's incredible levels of racism and are not an utter moron.

Which means you just wanted to take a cheap shot at FDR because you are all pettiness and no shame these days.

(I will note that the statute was authorized by TR but DMN was clearly referring to Wilson).

[Mr. Bumble]

"The group noted on its website that “the monument was erected in the spirit of reconciliation and was the brainchild of US President McKinley, himself a Union veteran, after the Spanish-American War.” It’s removal, the group said, is “outrageous and driven by bigotry.”

The monument was designed by Sir Moses Ezekiel, a Jewish VMI Cadet who served in Gen. Robert E. Lee’s Army. It is literally the grave of Ezekiel, who died in WWI and was buried at the base."
https://amgreatness.com/2023/12/18/judge-issues-restraining-order-blocking-removal-of-confederate-memorial-from-arlington-national-cemetery/

[Mr. Bumble]

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

[Sarcastr0]

Why does the entire GOP go to the mat for the Confederacy?

[SRG2]

White Grievance

[Nige]

'the spirit of reconciliation'

Yes, reconciling the whites, some of them anyway, fuck you to black people.

[Ben_]

^ Lots of hatred for dead Americans

[Sarcastr0]

I love this country, which means I don't like traitors.

You seem flipped on both.

[SRG2]

Show me a Confederate supporter and I'll show you a man with an acute case of White Grievance

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

A Confederate supporter is a worthless, un-American, bigoted clinger whose stain and drain on our society will be ended by replacement.

By better Americans.

[Don Nico]

" White Grievance"
What the hell is that? Another form of self-loathing. I'll bet.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

An example of white grievance is the Volokh Conspiracy's incessant whining about how whites (like males, and conservatives, and religious claimants, and heterosexuals) are the real persecuted class in modern America.

[SRG2]

It's not so much hatred for dead traitors as hatred for those who would keep the treason alive.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Those people were traitors, losers, and bigots.

Their vestigial defenders and fanboys are un-American jerks and worthless culture war casualties.

They, like the Confederacy, will be replaced.

[OtisAH]

As you goofballs are fond of noting, democrats put that monument up. It’s theirs to do with as they please.

[Ben_]

See this thread where replies indicate Democrats applaud the Senate porn video.

[Sarcastr0]

Oh, I'm doing more than applauding...it's my duty as a depraved liberal.

[Ben_]

See this thread where Democrats show you how they will use hatred to justify literally anything, no matter how depraved or evil it is.

[Sarcastr0]

Senate buttsex is not just depraved, it is evil!
Evil!
EVIL!
EEEEVIIIIIL!!!

You're in rare form today, Ben!

[Nige]

If those are the closest you got to depraved and evil, two of them purely by association, they're not doing too bad, actually.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

THE VOLOKH CONSPIRACY

This white, male, movement conservative
blog with a vanishingly scant academic
veneer has operated for no more than

ONE (1)

day -- just one single day --
without publishing at least
one racial slur; it has published
vile racial slurs on at least

FORTY-SIX (46)

occasions (so far) during 2023
(that’s at least 46 different,
distinct discussions that include
vile racial slurs, not just 46 racial slurs;
many or most of those discussions
have featured multiple racial slurs).

This assessment does not address the
incessant stream of gay-bashing, white
nationalist, misogynist, Islamophobic,
antisemitic, racist, transphobic, xenophobic,
and Palestinian-hating slurs and other
bigoted content published daily
at this faux libertarian blog, which
is presented from the receding,
disaffected right-wing fringe of
modern legal academia by members
of the Federalist Society
for Law and Public Policy Studies.

Amid this blog’s stale and ugly right-wing thinking, here is something worthwhile.

This is a good one, too.

Happy holidays, everyone!

[Kazinski]

WSJ has a poll out that shows the underlying reason why Biden trails Trump in almost every poll. Its because voters are paying attention.

"Among voters overall, 53% of voters said Biden’s policies hurt them, and less than a quarter—23%— said they were helped by his policies. Some 49% of voters said Trump’s policies personally helped them, while just 37% said they hurt them.”

https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/joe-biden-poll-donald-trump-73cfa7d9

[Sarcastr0]

Kaz, it's nearly a year out still, you need to pace yourself.

[LawTalkingGuy]

I wonder if anybody, media, left-wing doomers, right-wing boosters, liberals and centrists with too much copium, is truly ready for the general election when its all Trump all the time. Americans have short collective memory, but once they start seeing Trump again everywhere, and are actually forced to listen to him all the time...things are going to change.

[Sarcastr0]

Point is, polls are meaningless at this point.

[Mr. Bumble]

For the most part they are meaningless at any point except as fodder for talking heads.

[Sarcastr0]

Can't gainsay you on that take.

I tend to disagree that they're not probative at all, a reasonable person could conclude thus.

[LawTalkingGuy]

Agreed.

[Don Nico]

You hope. But don't count on it.

[Kazinski]

Tell that to Joe.

https://news.yahoo.com/joe-biden-blames-aides-polls-194325527.html

[Ben_]

"…Biden’s policies hurt them…"

As intended.

They should give the guy with 10,000 ballots extra weighting in this poll if they want it to be predictive. He likes Biden just fine and the money he gets puts him solidly on the "helped" side.

[Sarcastr0]

This some 2020 truther thing?

[SimonP]

Yes, I'm sure these voters could point to a specific policy by Biden that hurt them, as opposed to just general anxiety about inflation. How many of them have lost their jobs, I wonder?

Personally, I was directly targeted by Trump's policies, and am now paying higher taxes because of him. Nothing Biden has done has impacted me as much as that did.

[Mr. Bumble]

Blue state blues?

[SimonP]

"Hurting the right people."

[bernard11]

Did they also say they were worried about their blood being poisoned?

Anybody who supports Trump after his ravings about vermin and poisoned blood, and all the rest is a damn fool. I don't care what you think about Biden's policies. Trump is a threat to damage the country far beyond anything you imagine Biden might do.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

They're not just fools, bernard11.

They are half-educated, gullible losers.

Despicable, obsolete bigots.

Disaffected, un-American stains on our society.

And, of course, conservatives and Republicans.

[Ben_]

Chicago school board likely to close all the good schools in Chicago to increase "equity":

https://abc7chicago.com/amp/chicago-public-schools-cps-board-of-education-news/14184452/

The Chicago Teachers' Union wants these schools gone.

[Sarcastr0]

:As part of a five-year strategic plan, the board voted to approve a resolution to support neighborhood schools and move away from the school choice system. That's where students have to be accepted into selected enrollment schools, and often have to travel long distances to get to those schools.

The selective schools include some of the highest ranked schools in CPS. They include charter schools as well as magnet schools, like Walter Payton Prep and Jones College Prep.

Critics of the selective enrollment system said it began almost 30 years ago as a way of offering education opportunities to everyone. However, some board members said the district has put schools and students against each other. They said the system has increased the racial inequity it was meant to help solve.

The shift to neighborhood schools was one of Mayor Brandon Johnson's campaign promises.

The resolution signals the direction the board intends to move in as far as strengthening neighborhood schools, but there will still be much more work involved in terms of how they plan to implement it.

The board expects to have more of the new strategic plan ready to release next summer."

So what makes a school 'good' in your book? I have a theory!!

[David Nieporent]

.

That’s where students have to be accepted into selected enrollment schools, and often have to travel long distances to get to those schools.

No; they choose to be accepted into selected enrollment schools, and often choose to travel long distances to get to those schools. Gotta love that left-wing spin.

[Sarcastr0]

Not sure I'm going to read a partisan bias into this kind of brief copy of a local news site.

Not sure I agree with the policy either, but it was campaigned on, and so hardly some teacher's union kill-shot.

[Nelson]

"No; they choose to be accepted into selected enrollment schools, and often choose to travel long distances to get to those schools."

That's not how the Chicago system works. My nephew goes to Payton and went through the whole weird process. Apparently everyone has to apply, no one is automatically enrolled in their local school. I don't remember all the details, but it is a bizarre and convoluted process.

[Mr. Bumble]

Looks like the VC has been playing disappearing Open Thread again.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Maybe someone poked fun at or used mean words to describe conservatives and Prof. Volokh was clumsy with his censor button.

[loki13]

The 11th Circuit just rejected Meadows' attempt to remove the Georgia case to federal court.

Opinion is by Pryor. Pretty thorough- Pryor starts by saying it doesn't apply to former federal officers, and even if it did (which it doesn't), it wouldn't apply here.

[loki13]

I will add that while the statutory analysis is both interesting and persuasive, it only applies to the removal statute.

I think that going forward, the more damaging part is the second part- that's not good in terms of any possible immunity defense raised.

[David Nieporent]

I'm not sure I agree on the "former officer" part — the statute is at least a bit ambiguous, and the policy concerns behind the statute do not evaporate just because the person has left office — but I absolutely think the claim that Meadows was acting as an officer is a joke.

[loki13]

I think that Pryor is, for whatever else you can say about him, a committed textualist. And based on the oral argument reports, I found that part completely unsurprising. To be honest, I actually thought that as a matter of interpretation, I found it to be very persuasive (if you're of the "If this was Congress's intent, then Congress can correct it" school).

Importantly, however, in terms of optics and future persuasiveness, the opinion was authored by Pryor.

[not guilty]

The full text of the Eleventh Circuit opinion is here. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca11.84175/gov.uscourts.ca11.84175.11013125164.1.pdf

It is encouraging that a federal appellate court recognizes that conspiring with others to steal an election is not an act under color of federal office.

[Krayt]

Germany is deploying troops for the first time since WWII...to Lithuania!

[Bob from Ohio]

They sent some to Afghanistan.

[Defenderz]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/18/politics/texas-border-bill-abbott/index.html

You just know that the leftist pieces of shit who infest this country will say "Nope! The federal government is the only one who can regulate immigration, but it has the discretion to not do so, and let every migrant who wants in! Sorry! Americans are out of luck,"

Fuck you Biden. Fuck you and your worthless son. I hope he gets a tumor too, like Beau, who was a traitorous piece of shit as well.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

How are those "civility standards" -- the ones you claimed to be enforcing when you were censoring liberals at this white, male, right-wing blog-- coming along, Prof. Volokh?

#Hypocrite
#Coward
#Hack

[Defenderz]

There's nothing uncivil about criticizing the piece of shit diaper shitter who is illegally squatting in the white house.

[Don Nico]

Nope, not uncivil...just brain damaged.

[Nameless But Highly Opinionated]

Winter is so lovely when you don't have to drive in it.

But it becomes so lovely again when you want to drive just to be alone, and you don't have to put up with all the other drivers who chose to stay home.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

It appears I am not the only person who expects the Volokh Conspiracy to become even more bigoted and unhinged when the proprietors leaves mainstream academia for a clingerverse posting.

Roseanne Barr is auditioning for a position with the unleashed Volokh Conspiracy.

[not guilty]

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has scheduled Donald Trump's appeal of Judge Chutkan's order denying his motion to dismiss for oral argument at 9:30 a.m. on Tuesday, January 9, 2024 before Judges Henderson, Childs, and Pan. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cadc.40415/gov.uscourts.cadc.40415.1208580631.0_2.pdf

The Special Counsel had previously suggested that SCOTUS, if it opts not to grant review immediately on the government's petition for certiorari before judgment, to consider postponing action on
the petition pending further proceedings in the Court of Appeals, so the Supreme Court could grant certiorari immediately upon the issuance of a decision by the Court of Appeals. The expedited schedule for briefing and argument in the Court of Appeals will facilitate that option, in hope of preserving the March 4, 2024 trial date.

Of course, a SCOTUS denial of the government's cert petition immediately upon issuance of a decision by the Court of Appeals would be even better.

[Mr. Bumble]

Funny how fast the courts can move when the goal is gotcha rather than justice.

[Sarcastr0]

Trump the innocent lamb.

The things that can make you feel righteous once you conquer your sense of shame...

[Nige]

Or how fast they can move when an accused has a chance of ascending to the position of being able to grant pardons and threaten witnesses, prosectors, clerks and judges with impunity.

[Don Nico]

Hmm.. another conspiracy theory:

"China “tacitly approved efforts to try to influence a handful of midterm races involving members of both US political parties” – likely as part of a broad series of directives by Chinese Communist Party leaders since 2020 to “intensify efforts to influence US policy and public opinion in China’s favor.”
CNN

[Sarcastr0]

So what did the PRC actually influence and how?

[Don Nico]

From CNN:
China intensified its efforts to heighten sociopolitical divisions, according to the assessment, but still focused more on efforts to support or undermine a small number of specific candidates based on whether Beijing perceived their policy positions to be in its favor. Party leaders “repeatedly have instructed officials to focus on Congress because Beijing is convinced that Congress is a locus of anti-China activity,” according to the report.

Still, “Beijing almost certainly viewed the US midterm elections as an opportunity to portray the US democratic model as chaotic, ineffective, and unrepresentative, and frequently directed [People’s Republic of China] messaging to highlight US divisions on social issues, such as abortion and gun control.”

US intelligence agencies’ conclusion that China has been more active in election influence activities aligns with reports from tech firms. Suspected Chinese operatives have used images made by artificial intelligence to mimic American voters online and provoke discussion on divisive political issues, Microsoft analysts warned in September.

Chinese officials likely had freer rein to conduct influence operations because they believed they were under “less scrutiny during the midterms” and that the risk of any US retaliation was lower than in 2020, the US intelligence report said.

[Don Nico]

Of course, the U.S. would never try to influence a foreign election.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Are there even Chinese elections for the US to influence?

[Sarcastr0]

I'm not really concerned about US hypocricy.

The only thing I saw of actual acts by China was: 'Suspected Chinese operatives have used images made by artificial intelligence to mimic American voters online and provoke discussion on divisive political issues, Microsoft analysts warned in September.'

[Don Nico]

"I’m not really concerned about US hypocricy."
I guess that is because it is your employer that does it.

"The only thing I saw..."
You're correct, The CNN piece was woefully short on detail. What it does suggest is a great potential of internet software (such as deep fakes) to provoke civil discord and distort elections.

[Sarcastr0]

Weird you would think being a Fed is dictating my views on foreign policy.

Or that I’m not critical of US foreign policy in plenty of other areas.

[Commenter_XY]

Which races?

[Don Nico]

No indication. But the same article did say that Russia did target primarily Dems in certain races.

[Bored Lawyer]

Recieved this letter from a relative in Israel. (She's not the author, just passing it on. It speaks for itself:

Hello.
My name is Prof. Aryeh Eldad from Hospital Hadassah Ein Kerem.

Years ago I founded the Skin Bank in Israel, which is the largest of its kind in the world. The skin bank contains skin for ongoing treatment and for war times. The Skin Bank is located at Hadassah Ein Kerem Hospital in Jerusalem, where I was the director of the Plastic Surgery Department.

One day I was asked to send skin for a Muslim woman from Gaza, who was hospitalized in Soroka [Medical Center in Be’er Sheva] after her family burned her. Such atrocities occur quite a bit in Muslim families when they suspect that the woman was having an affair.

We provided all the homograft (skin cells from donors) necessary for treatment. She was successfully treated by my friend and colleague, Prof. Lior Rosenberg and was released to her home in Gaza. She was invited to regular review visits to the Foreign Clinic in Beer Sheva.

One day she was caught at the border crossing with an explosive belt on. Her mission was to blow herself up in the outdoor clinics of the hospital where she saved her life. After an inquiry it apparently turned out that her family promised her that if she did, they'd forgive her.

This is only one example of war between Jews and Muslims in the Land of Israel. It is not a territorial dispute. This is a cultural conflict, or more precisely war between civilization and barbarism.

I never wrote a letter I asked to disseminate. This time I ask you to pass it on so that the world can understand what extreme Islam means And what awaits the world if he doesn’t worry about stopping him.

Thanks for listening. Professor Aryeh Eldad, Hadassah Ein Kerem

[Nige]

I wonder how many Muslim women have burned since Oct 7th? Just because your savagery is inflicted by your standing army with sophisticated military technology doesn't make it less savage than an abused woman sent to die with a belt-bomb. The US sprayed Agent Orange. Britain caused then stood by while millions died in famines in Ireland and India. Belgium turned the Congo into hell on earth. France repressed its colonies in Vietnam and Algeria with brutal violence. Germany committed the first genocide of the 20th century in South West Africa. People who talk about civilisation vs savagery don't know what the fuck they're talking about.

[Mr. Bumble]

...and what is the civilized answer to an attack the killed a thousand plus of a countries citizens?

[Nige]

Let me know if a 'civilised' country ever works it out.

[Sarcastr0]

Getting close to turning your support for Israel into bigotry against Islam in general.

[Mr. Bumble]

Islam was born in barbarism, expanded in barbarism and justifies barbarism today.
It is what it is.

[Sarcastr0]

The Confederacy supporter has a bad hot take on history.

Shocker.

[Mr. Bumble]

Sorry to disappoint but I am not a supporter of the Confederacy.
Erasing history does not change it.

[apedad]

Glorifying history doesn't change it either.

[Sarcastr0]

Statues from 50 years later aren’t history.

They are statues.

[Mr. Bumble]

Created at the suggestion of Civil War veteran and President William McKinley.

[Sarcastr0]

This is not relevant information to your thesis that it is history.

[Nige]

Statues are municipal decoration, not history.

[Mr. Bumble]

In this case it is a grave marker located in a cemetery.

[Nige]

So?

[SimonP]

Islam has many strains and has evolved throughout different historical eras, the same way every other longstanding religion has. No single categorical thing can be said about it.

In western civilization, Christianity once was the animating force behind all kinds of conflicts among people and nations, and was intimately tied to power disputes throughout Europe. American Christians started out as refugees, became entrepreneurs, then ideologues, and are now a big part of rising sentiment to overthrow our democracy. They're really only a generation or two behind where some Islamic extremists are today.

[Nige]

So were most of all enduring human institutions and polities.

[Don Nico]

That is just a nasty, bigoted extrapolation in response to a horrible story. Would you want a daughter of yours growing up among the Taliban? You manage to bush aside things that you don't want to hear by dishonest exaggeration.
The Eldad recounted an actual event. Are you calling him a liar?

How are you in so much denial about the level of hate taught in madrassahs?

[Sarcastr0]

Generalizing based on a story is bigotry 101.

This is not a war against Islam.

[Mr. Bumble]

Please address your concerns regarding bigotry to the Rev.

[Sarcastr0]

Who?

[Don Nico]

You are the one who was generalizing.
You do that: accusing another what you just did.

[Sarcastr0]

"war between Jews and Muslims in the Land of Israel."

Come one, dude.

[Nige]

Would you want your daughter blown to pieces by US drones because she had the misfortune of growing up amongst the Taliban?

[SimonP]

You forgot to include the bit where you'd be cursed if you didn't pass it on to ten others.

[David Nieporent]

So, new information shows that Trump had planned the march on the Capitol on J6; his sycophants will claim that he didn't plan the attack itself, which would be convincing to anyone who pretends to be gullible enough to believe that telling a mob "Your country is being stolen in that building right over there and nobody's doing anything about it and you need to fight like hell to prevent it" isn't telling them to attack the building.

[Randy Sax]

A three way with two chicks is never gay.
There are two different commonly used connotations of gay.
1. Homosexuality
2. Anything your average straight dude isn't into. ex.
watching wrestling with the boys - not gay
going to a play with your girlfriend - gay

[Dr. Ed 2]

Someone famous once said that tough cases make bad law, and we've had bad law on sexual assault, spinning from one extreme to the other, since at least the Civil War. Imagine how the same set of facts would have been addressed in the 1950s....

And how'd he get into her apartment????

These cases are often sordid messes.

[Zarniwoop]

Queen Almathea sez:

Both Zieglers have acknowledged having that earlier sexual encounter with the woman.”

Glad to see that Bridget Ziegler, “a Moms for Liberty co-founder”, takes her own liberty seriously, even as she tries to tell other people what they can and can’t read. Because, you know, they might think about sex (gasp, clutch pearls, won’t someone thing of the spawns!) if they read the wrong book.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JLDzjSy5DxY

[Dr. Ed 2]

Would a rational person purchase a cake from someone who hates the person?

[Brett Bellmore]

Sure, they do. And it's frowned on, isn't it?

[Dr. Ed 2]

First staffer to have sex in a Senate hearing room -- I doubt it.

First one stupid enough to make an IDENTIFIABLE video of it -- likely not.

First one to do that and then distribute it with his name on it -- yes.

[Krychek_2]

Friendly amendment agreed to.

[Sarcastr0]

Depends on who you ask.

And I would guess if you get caught using Senate meeting rooms.

[Mr. Bumble]

See recent Dem candidate in VA.

[Zarniwoop]

Brett asks:

Sure, they do. And it’s frowned on, isn’t it?

What do you mean by "frowned upon"? Are you talking about public piety, or reality?

Check out pr0nhub stats. Sex seems to be quite popular in red states. Almost as if evangelicals are also MASSIVELY HYPORITICAL!!1!. Even Utah's Mormons, for that matter.

[Krayt]

Girls flash and strip for cameras in U libraries, and sometimes get sanctioned for it.

[Mr. Bumble]

Well, it isn't the taping that is wrong, but the act itself. in this case if it hadn't been taped no one would have known about it.

[Zarniwoop]

1) Fine
2) Fine (the risk goes up that it will leak to FOX News if anyone is even semi-famous)
3) Fine (basically this is the pr0n industry)

That out of the way!

4) I might need more clarity here about the fundamental parameters:
are we talking "in a national forest"? Or "in Times Square"?
are we talking "no minors within a mile" or "in front of an elementary school"?

[Edmund Burke's Hastings spy]

Queen , you are wrong for an obvious reason : Group 4 gets many of their wares fromt the first 3. Really, you always seem out of it.
The Virginia pee tapes
Yes, family-friendly Virginia, there is a 'pee tape,' courtesy of Susanna Gibson. Democrat for House of Delegates

It is always the case that when it is valued in the public sphere ( for blackmail,for political purposes, or by accident)Money will find it
You are just clueless about actual reality
Here is maybe the most extreme example just to show your Pollyanna reasoning
"When Judge Robert Bork was nominated for the U.S. Supreme Court in 1987, a reporter politely asked his local video store assistant for a Xerox copy of handwritten entries of Judge Bork’s 146 prior rentals. Having convinced the editor of the Washington City Paper that this was perfectly legal, the reporter then published these records under the heading “The BORK Tapes.” "

[Brett Bellmore]

They're not purchasing a cake. If they were purchasing a cake, they'd find somebody who wanted to bake it.

They're purchasing a lawsuit.

[not guilty]

Most human conceptions fail to survive to birth. https://theconversation.com/most-human-embryos-naturally-die-after-conception-restrictive-abortion-laws-fail-to-take-this-embryo-loss-into-account-187904

How many anti-abortion fanatics give their feminine hygiene products a proper Christian burial on the chance that one may contain a microscopic human being?

[Mr. Bumble]

Equating spontaneous abortion over which we have no control and occurring even before the woman is aware of a pregnancy hardly seems the same as choosing to end a pregnancy later.

[Mr. Bumble]

But is it?

[John F. Carr]

Right, if you place a high value on a just-fertilized egg you have to explain why you value something that only has a 50-50 chance of surviving to birth even with all of modern medicine to support it.

The pro-life crowd could compare to euthanasia bans. It's usually illegal to euthanize a terminally ill person who will certainly die in the near future. But I think the people who say something like "personhood begins at fertilization" are unaware of the odds facing the just-fertilized egg. As I like to put it, neither God nor Darwin seems to value it highly.

I don't like the "life begins at conception" line for an unrelated reason. Both sperm and egg are alive before they meet.

[Krychek_2]

Well, if you accept the premise that human personhood begins at conception, then yes, all of those spontaneous abortions are babies. So this is yet another illustration of just how silly the idea that premise is.

[grb]

John F. Carr : "I don’t like the “life begins at conception” line for an unrelated reason. Both sperm and egg are alive before they meet"

I would have assumed the anti-choice people would have chosen implantation. That would at least do away with the problem of God being the biggest abortionst by far. Unfortunately, that definition permitted too many contraception options, so the anti-choicers rejected it.

Of course when scientific studies proved some type of contraceptives don't work by preventing implantation, we had a teaching moment of anti-abortion hyprocrisy. Were they relieved and thankful those types don't "murder" per their own definition? Of course not. They ignored the studies and continued to push the bans.

[Sarcastr0]

Not sure I agree.

I am sure a ton of sex has happened in the halls of Congress.

No one has been harmed.

The issue is they got caught.

[bernard11]

Going to defend Brett here.

If I understand his point he is indifferent to the fact that the participants were gay, but doesn't like other aspects of the behavior, and would feel the same if it involved heterosexual activity.

If that's accurate, then I think his comment is not unreasonable.

[Mr. Bumble]

Like getting a Lewinski in the White House?

[Sarcastr0]

I do recall when our Republic crumbled after that BJ became public.

[grb]

Mr. Bumble : "Equating spontaneous abortion....."

Sure it's the same. It's just means God is most prolific abortionist by far. Attorney General Paxton should get after Him. Bully the Old Guy around until He gets in line.

Of course the distinction Bumble draws - "choosing to end a pregnancy" - has always been the real issue for the anti-choice crowd. That's why you find talk of women's "selfishness" and "irresponsibilty" in any extended exchange of anti-abortion views. It's always there just below the surface: The real beating heart of the movement has always been disgust over the effrontery of women. They think they can have their bit of fun and just walk away from the consequences. Suffer no repercussions at all!

That's what makes the proto-babyhood of an embryo blaze with tragic glory. That's why IVF clinics don't count. That's why some anti-choice believers accept rape-incest eceptions. That's why abortion is "murder", but normal laws of murder don't apply. The anti-abortion creed is "absolute" enough to blight the lives of thousands upon thousands of women each year, but it's not really absolute. Just enough to ensure the "selfishness" and "irresponsibilty" don't have a cheap out, wages-of-sin-wise.

[bernard11]

Seems like there's a lot of phony plaintiffs running around these days.

Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, Brian Tingley,....

[Dr. Ed 2]

I remember Wilbur Mills and Gary Hart.
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/fanne-fox-wilbur-mills-washington-hubris.html

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Is anyone wondering why none of Professors Blackman, Volokh, or Bernstein has expressed concern or outrage concerning that "poisoning our blood" statement?

Or has everyone learned that those three are unprincipled, partisan polemicists and hypocritical right-wing hacks?

[TwelveInchPianist]

"Glad to see that Bridget Ziegler, “a Moms for Liberty co-founder”, takes her own liberty seriously, even as she tries to tell other people what they can and can’t read. "

Huh? She's been trying to prevent parents from giving books to their children?

And as long as she doesn't have her three-ways in kindergarten class, what's the problem?

[Sarcastr0]

She's a hypocrite puritan busybody.

You don't need to defend everyone who attacks schools, you know.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Bridget Ziegler is a right-wing dreamgirl . . . an obsolete hypocrite, a superstitious dumbass, a half-educated phony, and an unreconstructed bigot.

[TwelveInchPianist]

A baseless insult? How typical. You’re becoming more like Kirkland every day.

[Jerry B.]

Good thing for the Kennedys there weren’t convenient ways to film back then.

[NOVA Lawyer]

well said.

[not guilty]

Well, Yahweh is no slouch when it comes to killing infants as well. He put a targeted hit on Bathsheba's firstborn, causing the child to suffer for several days before offing it. The Great Flood and the Tenth Plague didn't spare babies.

Through the prophet Samuel, Yahweh told King Saul, "Now go and smite Am'alek, and utterly destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, infant and suckling, . . ." (I Samuel 15:3 RSV)

[grb]

It's always interesting to step back and look at Bible/Torah events with an ethical eye. In the Martin Cruz Smith mystery, Wolves Eat Dogs, there's an exchange between the Russian detective hero and two Jews. One is lapsed and the other observant, but both take a dim view of Noah. The mystified detective asks why:

"Why Noah?" Arkady asked. This was a new indictment.
"He didn't argue."
"Noah should have argued?"

Yakov explained, "Abraham argues with God not to kill everyone in Sodom and Gomorrah. Moses pleads with God not to kill worshippers of the golden calf. But God tells Noah to build a boat because He's going to flood the entire world, and what does Noah say? Not a word."

"Not a word," said Bobby, "and saves the minimum. What a asshole.”

[David Nieporent]

FYI, that's a pretty standard Jewish reading of the Noah story: that Noah was not as righteous as Abraham or Moses, because Noah thought only of saving himself and his family, while Abraham and Moses pleaded with God to save others.

[grb]

I've seen the passage quoted twice. One was in a blog on Jewish religon and history. That person saw it as an unusual place for Torah commentary or scholarship. The second was in a person's Catholic blog, and she was very skeptical about the very idea of arguing with God. As a non-religious person with a smidge of Bible on audiobook, my favorite sections are Job and the Psalms, where questioning divine authority and purpose is most intense. (Well, that and the Song of Solomon, but that's a special case).

I knew a fundamentalist Christian couple who filled their house with Noah images, baubles. and knick-knacks. But she was campaigning against the HPV vaccine on Facebook and he was trying to buy parts to make an AR-15 fully automatic. They were a special cases too.

[Sarcastr0]

The mind boggles.

[Sarcastr0]

The organization she started exists to be a puritan busybody and this story shows that she is a hypocrite.

Pithy; not baseless.

[TwelveInchPianist]

You’re consuming your own bullshit, Sarcastro.

The organization is opposed to exposing children to sexual content, and she has not done that.

So you’re full of shit as usual. And you have never been pithy.

[NOVA Lawyer]

Are you under the impression that two women having sex is not a homosexual act?

[NOVA Lawyer]

"The organization is opposed to exposing children to sexual content, and she has not done that."

No:

Moms for Liberty is an American conservative political organization that advocates against school curricula that mention LGBT rights, race and ethnicity, critical race theory, and discrimination. (Wikipedia)

And, she has quite clearly exercised her LGBT rights.

Hence, yes, she is a hypocritical puritanical busybody.

[Sarcastr0]

exposing children to sexual content
The want to ban Forever by Judy Blume, TiP.

They are way overtuned on what sex is, because *they are puritan busybodies.*

If you don't know the facts, you shouldn't pretend you do.
But you knee-jerk defend every shitty asshole going after schools because you got a thing going on I do not understand.

[Nige]

'The organization is opposed to exposing children to sexual content, and she has not done that.'

Sarcastro's point stands. That's just the moral-scare pretext.

[Commenter_XY]

No way FDR was more racist than Wilson. NFW.

That said, wrt FDR, there is the matter of The St. Louis to consider. That incident is exactly why I say to my Tribe friends, "Never forget that it actually happened here, and it can happen again".

Fifteen years ago, my Tribe friends thought that POV was a little extreme. Today? We have very different convos now. They're shocked at what they're seeing in our streets, our schools, our elite institutions.

[Randy Sax]

No I'm not under that impression, it is homosexual. But it's not gay according to the people who commonly use the second connotation. That's the whole point I was trying to make.

[David Nieporent]

I think he's just making a point of common usage: gay is generally understood to refer to homosexual men, not homosexual women. That's why there's an 'L' in addition to the 'G' in the LGBTQ.

[NOVA Lawyer]

The more common meaning, especially among younger people, is just lame, boring, stupid, with no intended reference to homosexuality or masculinity at all.