Monday Open Thread

What's on your mind?

Comments

[santamonica811]

On balance; do you think that Trump avoiding a second debate with Harris is a net positive or negative for him?

On one hand, he looks like a cowardly pussy, afraid to go mano-a-mano (mano-a-womano??) with her. But will being a pathetic chicken-shit actually hurt him with voters? After all; there are so few undecided voters left, so I think it's much more likely that the election will instead turn on which side is better at turning out its base. And I think Trump has the edge here. If a voter is not turned off by the rapes, and the countless crimes, and the pathological lying, and the decades of racism...then they will be there for him come election day. Yelling at clouds, at a bunch of his rallies, will do much more for bringing out the base than another miserable debate performance.

I am not sure if Trump ducked this debate on his own, or if he was wise enough to listen to his advisors for once. I do think it is a very smart decision. After Harris turned him into her little bitch at their first-and-only debate, it's just not worth the risk--since it's not like he is suddenly going to become coherent or lucid. Better to run away and be thought a coward and a fool than to show up to debate, and remove all doubt. (Paraphrasing Abe Lincoln . . . the only president Trump thinks was almost as great as Trump was in his first term.)

[Michael Ejercito]

Which rapes would they be?

[AmosArch]

A just world in people like santamonica’s view would be any random women whenever she feels like it being able to instantly send any man she wants to in jail and destroying his family at the snap of a finger with a claim they had drunk sex 20 years ago because #believeallwahmenexceptiftheyareconservative

[Michael Ejercito]

Real victims do not wait twenty years.

[santamonica811]

So...you do believe the 15 women who reported it to family and friends immediately after the sexual assaults, and you disbelieve the 5-10 women who waited years, yes?

Okay, I can live with that.

[Michael Ejercito]

Family and friends are not authority figures.

[Nelson]

An appeal to authority? Interesting.

[santamonica811]

Man, I almost got clobbered by those moving goalposts!

Yes, I'm sure that all those Democrat women who accused Trump years ago, when Trump was a pro-choice Dem, and those Republican (and non-political) women who accused Trump then, and later, were all motivated to lie to their family and friends about a hugely humiliating assault because of . . . reasons, I guess.

And Trump, proudly bragging about his ability to sexually assault and molest women and get away with it? You've changed my mind; and I now agree with you. Sure, those woke cynics might say, "What he is bragging about is identical to what many of the allegations against him are/were, and his own words really concern me." Not you...and not me. We support Trump, because it's TOTALLY NORMAL for a 70 year old man to brag about his ability to engage in, and get away with!, criminal sex assault. That's the sort of thing we hear the elderly brag about all the time. Innocent "locker room" talk...it's completely normal, and not at all the behavior of a psychopath.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Two words: Scottsboro Boys.

That really happened.
Enough said?

[Nelson]

So: once, therefore always? Do you want to make a substantive argument, or just stick with "something vaguely like this happened once, so this didn't happen now"?

[TwelveInchPianist]

"So…you do believe the 15 women who reported it to family and friends immediately after the sexual assaults,"

Huh? Why would one believe such women with no way to evaluate their credibility other that the fact that they told the same story to family and friends?

And even if one found them very credible, why would one believe them without any corroboration? People can lie quite credibly.

[David Nieporent]

Again: Trump admitted it. On tape. That's corroboration.

[TwelveInchPianist]

He admitted assaulting 15 women?

All I heard on tape is that sometimes women let him grab them by the pussy.

[David Nieporent]

He did not specify how many people he assaulted. He merely corroborated that it was a common practice of his.

[Moderation4ever]

Do you have proof of that statement. Or is it just an opinion?

[Stephen Lathrop]

You're right Ejercito. Despite what the judge said, they were more like violent sexual assaults Trump bragged about. But I think you have to admit that Trump is smart not to give Harris another chance to wrap those around his neck during another debate.

When do you think Harris will stop taunting Trump for running away?

[Michael Ejercito]

Which violent sexual assaults were those?

[Stephen Lathrop]

Behold! Ejercito does a lobotomized sea lion! What you got next?

[JustMark]

That’s not even a good dodge. You claimed “violent sexual assaults”.

While all are wrong (if true), I’m not sure “violent” is much a part of the accusations. Also, note the date(s) the purported assaults happened and the date they were publicized.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/assault-allegations-donald-trump-recapped

[Zarniwoop]

Oh c'mon, Michael is peak sealioning here and throughout today. He's not even being subtle about it.

"Sealioning, a form of internet trolling"

[JustMark]

It was not a relentless request for evidence (aka Sealioning). He didn’t even ask for any evidence. To me, he was just pointing out the factual error of the claim.

[Stephen Lathrop]

JustMark — Just for your legal safety, try to keep in mind that if you grab women by the pussy, and they didn't let you do it, that is a violent sexual assault pretty much everywhere in this nation.

I get that you may not pay attention to media you don't like, and the media you do like probably keep you in the dark. I can help. Don't boast on television that when you are a celebrity, women let you do it, and you don't even have to ask. If you do that, and a bunch of women show up to say you did it when they didn't invite it, it gets really easy to believe the accusers.

Also, what kind of a crappy person tries to make excuses for conduct like that?

[JustMark]

You made a false claim. What kind of crappy person falsely accuses another of violent sexual assaults? (Is PBS a member of this "media [I] don't like"?)

[AmosArch]

Harris never debated Trump even once. At least on her own. The last debate was actually an ABC ‘moderators’ tag team vs Trump debate.

Also If Harris wanted more debates why did she reject Trump’s offer of 3 debates? So I guess by your definition she is also a cowardly pussy?

[Michael Ejercito]

Very great points!

[santamonica811]

Biggest whiny bitch: you or Trump? Man, it's a really close call.

(To be fair; at least you're not one of those intellectual whores who tried to keep a straight face while claiming that Trump won the debate...so I'll give you that. And I agree...it was totally the moderators' fault that Trump had a mini-stroke and started lying about dark-skinned people stealing and eating our dogs and cats. Totally the fault of the network. Trump's insane mouth-diarrhea was 100% not his fault. Nor were his repeated lies during the debate. Trump's mouth and brain were obviously part of the Deep State conspiracy with the Harris campaign to hurt his chances in the election. That's EXACTLY how clever we Jews are. [Yes, somehow, it always comes back to the Jews in the end.] )

[Michael Ejercito]

Here is the truth about the debate.

https://ethicsalarms.com/2024/09/13/on-trumps-rejection-of-another-debate/

[Stephen Lathrop]

Who invented, "alternative facts?" Was it Kellyanne Conway? She had Ejercito in mind.

You know what would be hilarious, Ejercito? Someone with time on his hands figures out a way to dox your pseudonym, and then you live the rest of your life as a public idiot. You don't know it, but what you are doing is like libeling yourself.

[Michael Ejercito]

Maybe it will be your imagibatice sovereign.

[Riva]

I guess he’ll have to defer to you on being a public idiot, Steve. I have great respect for your experience in that capacity.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Cut the phony rhetoric. It's not a close call at all. Trump brings to whiny bitch that big-man stature his base loves so much. There has never previously ever been a whiny bitch as big as Trump! Do you think any liberal could have done that?

[Brett Bellmore]

Trump can be whiney, and it can still be the case that the moderators teamed up with Harris, instead of remaining neutral. It's not as though she wasn't vulnerable to similar 'fact checking', she just didn't have to worry about facing it, because the moderators were in the tank for her.

At this point, moderator bias in Presidential debates is reaching running joke levels. It's time to get rid of them entirely, and just put the candidates in front of timed microphones, to say whatever the heck they want to, without interference.

[Sarcastr0]

Trump told ridiculous lies, and the right has invented a standard for correct moderation where it is liberal to call him on it. It's reverse engineering - Trump cannot fail, only be failed therefore moderation must be objectively a joke (and anyone claiming not to agree with Brett is lying).

Every side blames the moderators when they clearly lose a debate, and MAGA blames the ref whenever anything doesn't go perfectly for Trump, so of course this is the narrative.

But what is obvious is Trump *lost* the debate. Harris didn't win it. That's not something mods can do.
It wasn't the mods that made him ramble like a crazy person ('transgender operations on illegal aliens that are in prison'), or be take the every single bait Harris put in front of him from looking scared of a handshake to crowd sizes.

No one made Trump say 'I have concepts of a plan.' That's him. Being a joke.
Sometimes jokes win elections. But don't whine about the mods when you're guy is the issue.

[Brett Bellmore]

"Trump told ridiculous lies, "

So. Did. Harris. The difference is that SHE didn't have to worry about the moderators calling her on them.

If we can't have impartial moderators, the only way we can have debates is if we dispense with moderators.

[Sarcastr0]

No, Brett, Harris did not tell those kinds of lies. You’re normalizing Trump again. And it remains incredible what you can convince yourself of.

The weak-ass attempts by the right to say Harris was lying ended up all being about opinion, pedantry, or expanding the scope beyond what was said in the debate.

If we can’t have impartial moderators, the only way we can have debates is if we dispense with moderators.
Trump lost the debate all by himself based on how he acted and what he said. Falling for every bait, getting emotional, and of course a level of lying well outside the norm for anyone this side of an asylum.

This is you, whining and coping.

[verochkax]

Stop with the lies. Harris said and I quote "We're not taking anyone's guns."

But she is on record supporting a ban on "assault weapons," so I've already proved she lied there.

She said "Donald Trump left us the worst unemployment since the Great Depression." First, unemployment was worse during the Great Recession. Second, Donald Trump did not leave us with that.
Blue state lockdowns did.

Again, cut the fucking lies.

[santamonica811]

V,
If Prez. Harris were able to get any sort of gun control bill thru Congress, we both agree it would *have* to be some sort of compromise...zero chance she would get 60 votes in the Senate without it, yes? If she could get assault-type weapons banned, the compromise might likely be, "No future sales, but existing one are grandfathered in."

In other words, she has banned these guns, but ALSO has not come for your (existing) guns. In other other words, there is no evidence of a lie here...yet you seem so certain that you've caught her telling one.

[verochkax]

I don't see a philosophical difference between taking one's guns and prohibiting the sale of new ones.

[not guilty]

"I don’t see a philosophical difference between taking one’s guns and prohibiting the sale of new ones."

Whether you see it or not, the government taking one's guns requires procedural due process of law and just compensation. Prohibiting the sale of new ones does not.

[Brett Bellmore]

Yes, Sarcastr0, Harris DID tell those kinds of lies. They're lies that you like, such as Trump praising neo-nazis in Charlottesville, so you won't acknowledge them. But she still told them.

[Sarcastr0]

Most of us remember the articles y’all linked about ‘the Harris lies.’

IIRC there were 2 of them. One was a list that went well beyond the debate. The other was The freaking Federalist and was basically all opinions about what Harris was totally gonna do when she was in office and how it was different than what she said she would do in the debate. She wasn't middle class because Stanford pays too much, and the Trump tax cuts were great for everyone, and January 06 was no big deal. And Project 2025 isn't Trump's baby.

That you didn't learn anything from how that shameful display got roundly mocked.

But, more importantly, it is not a matter of opinion that Haitians eating pets in Minnesota and transgender operations on illegal aliens that are in prison are *especially crazy shit*.

You can claim it’s all subjective, but that only underscores how much you’ve discarded normalcy to defend your reflexive bullshitter of a candidate reflexively bullshitting at levels previously not seen on the national state.

Harris is a man and wants to rape your daughters
Trump has flip flopped on abortion.
Brett: These are the same kind of statement. I cannot tell the difference.

L, as they say, OL.

[Commenter_XY]

How does that work Brett, a debate without moderators? We are long removed from the days of hours long debates like Lincoln/Douglas. Run the debate by AI?

Agree with the proposition that debate moderators have an explicit bias and bring (have brought) it to the debates (and acted upon it). Maybe draft better rules for the debate.

[Brett Bellmore]

Like I said: Put their microphones on timers, with a big clock over the stage, and when it's Harris' turn to talk, Trump's microphone goes dead, and visa versa. And just let them say whatever they want. We're trying to find out about the candidates' views, not the moderators' views.

If necessary, they stand in booths to make attempting to just talk louder over the other candidate futile. I don't demand that the booths be air tight and permanently sealed at the conclusion of the debate, though it would be a nice touch.

[David Nieporent]

Even if you continue to pretend that Trump didn't say that Nazis were fine people, as he indisputably did, Harris didn't say what you think she said. Here's what she actually said about Charlottesville in the debate:

Let's remember Charlottesville, where there was a mob of people carrying tiki torches, spewing antisemitic hate, and what did the president then at the time say? There were fine people on each side.

Every assertion in there is accurate.

[zztop8970]

[verochkax]

"And as you rightly mentioned, nowhere in America is a woman carrying a pregnancy to term and asking for an abortion. That is not happening."

If it's not happening, you should have no issue banning it.

[jb]

It's already banned by murder statutes.

[zztop8970]

Which murder statute prohibits an abortion in week 40?

[not guilty]

Unclear on what "a woman carrying a pregnancy to term" means, zztop8970?

Hint: it means a live birth or stillbirth. Murder statutes prohibit killing a live infant.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Bellmore, if you don't want to lose a close call at second, get there quicker. Trump's problem was he slid too soon, stopped short of the bag, and got tagged out. Again and again.

[Sarcastr0]

Look at what you want - any format that does not let Trump lie is illegitimate.

These are not opinions Brett, they are facts. And you, per usual, do not give a fig; just protect Trump from the fact that he's a liar.

Yes, we can all tell what you're really saying, and it's that you want Trump by hook or by crook.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Voodoo related killing of pets doesn't involve eating them.

[AmosArch]

I'm not the one who started moaning over a debate my favorite candidate supposedly won.

Heres a question for you. By your standards isn't Biden also a chicken shit cowardly pussy because not only did he get his butt handed to him by Trump but he ran away from the election entirely? So every time Biden is insulted and mocked here you must agree right?

And if Harris is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than Trump and Trump is >>>>>>>>>>>> than Biden. Your team really screwed the pooch putting the 3rd place dud in charge. Doesn't that worry you that by your own arguments the Dems are such screw ups they only end up blundering on the right way to do things by accident? And not only that they defend their wrong choices for years to the point where we were within a hairs width of sticking with it and it was probably just a flip of coin that we didn't. Do we really want people like this in charge?

[Josh R]

Biden is the incumbent. He gets the nomination unless there is an obvious problem, and that problem (his decline) did not reach critical mass until the first debate.

The blunder that saved the Democrats was Trump's for agreeing to debate in June.

[Frank Drackman]

Seriously, you didn't realize Parkinsonian Joe was demented until June 2024??, what part of "Dog Faced Pony Soldiers" did you not understand? "Poor kids are just as smart as White kids!!" "you ain't Black" that was all 2020 (man!)
and not really a blunder, despite his senility, being the Incumbent POTUS is usually worth a few % in itself, especially as whoever wins PA will be the next POTUS, Sleepy would get alot of reflexive votes there that Cums-a-lot won't.

Frank

[SRG2]

The Democrats did indeed screw up by not pushing Biden aside earlier. But it is also highly unconvincing to argue, "Biden is unfit for office" while saying "the Democrats should have let Biden run". They screwed up but then fixed the screw-up - imperfectly, for sure - and the real reason for Trump fans' ire is that they see that Kamala might well win, while they were previously sure that Trump would.

[Riva]

“Whiny bitch”? So goes the mask of joy, as efficacious as other face diapers the left seems to like so much. And we’ll toss in some gender stereotyping just in case it wasn’t apparent that they’re complete assholes too.

[Zarniwoop]

Oh I’m so, so sorry.

That should be “whiny, small-hands bitch who has to watch his crowds leave in the middle of his incoherent rants”.

Hope that helps.

[Riva]

Well I did say complete assholes, so I think we're covered.
Now admittedly, democrats have a lot of money to pay for crowds to pretend they like Harris, although no way she can pay for Trump size rally crowds. Even with the absurd lie about working at McDonald's, which seems to have become a centerpiece of her failing campaign. Not surprising since she couldn't seriously run on the last four years in office.

[Sarcastr0]

Yes, we all know that if Harris wins you will not accept the results of the election.

Seems a sad state of affairs to spend so much energy avoiding a reality where you sometimes lose.

[Riva]

I pointed out that Harris is lying about McDonald’s. That she’s avoiding her disastrous last 4 years in office and it could be added that she’s avoiding a lifetime of liberal insanity that eclipses Bernie Sanders. I note that “supporters” are incentivized to appear at her events. And I express my view, based on polling and other circumstances, that she’s losing. In no way did I say anything about my views of the results of the election if Harris wins. Can you honestly address anything? Seems unlikely but give it a shot.

[Sarcastr0]

Yeah, you didn't say it.

But we all know.

You're not hard to predict.

[Riva]

No, the only thing that is apparent here is that you are unable to address the lies and deficiencies of your preferred candidate.
Hence, the strawman bullshit you're trying to use as distraction.

[David Nieporent]

I pointed out that Harris is lying about McDonald’s.

As always, bot simply programmed to repeat whatever lunatic talking points MAGA posts on social media. Like this:

I note that “supporters” are incentivized to appear at her events.

This talking point doesn't even pretend to be based on anything.

And I express my view, based on polling

Well, not actual polling.

[Riva]

The bat shit crazy viewpoint is even less helpful than your little buddy’s strawman bullshit. Call it talking points if it makes you feel better but Harris never worked at McDonald’s and her record is apparent to all suffering under the Biden Harris administration. But you and Sarcastr0 stay together, you’ll both need the emotional support after the election.

[Nelson]

"The last debate was actually an ABC ‘moderators’ tag team vs Trump debate."

Paranoid grievance aside, which one made Trump ramble incoherently and lie about Hatians, the 2020 election, and killing babies after they are born being legal (and supported by Ds)? Was that Harris or the moderators making his lips move?

[Commenter_XY]

sm811, from a tactical perspective, why should Pres Trump debate a second time?

The first debate was a wash and did not change the dynamics of the race (which I predicted). The numbers for Kamala levelled off and are now starting to decline, two-weeks, post-debate (which I also predicted).

What's the upside to Pres Trump?

[Stephen Lathrop]

What's the upside? Not losing? Not going to prison? Pretty big upside.

Except, as you know, he can't do it. He would lose, and be headed for prison. So Trump's smart to run away.

[santamonica811]

XY,
You might be right. The downside is that he looks like a sniveling cowardly and senile chicken. Will that matter to much of the electorate? Probably not. (Okay, certainly not.) Will it matter to a small handful? Yeah, maybe…being a pussy is not a good look on a male politician. Will it make a difference in Nov? Doubtful–but not impossible.

(I see no evidence that the post-debate bump is going down. It was not a huge bump, but no one really expected that for either candidate. In an election this close, a 0.5 bump could of course matter in some states. A full 2 point bump would be major.)

But for a man like Trump who is so insecure about himself and his accomplishments & stature; looking cowardly can’t be sitting well with him, and he knows that half the country understands that he is afraid of VP Harris. Does he care that half of us are mocking him and have contempt for his fear? That, I don’t know for sure, of course.

[Michael Ejercito]

Over half the country us certain Harris is afraid of interviews!

[santamonica811]

Yup. And she fully deserves your scorn (and my own scorn, by the way), for showing that she is apparently scared of simple interviews. It’s not a good look for her, and I think she deserves to pay a political price for that decision.

Trump is a horrifically bad candidate, and a genuinely evil person, IMO. I financially supported him in 2016. As we Jews say: Never. Again.

Since I live in California, I have the luxury of voting my conscience (as opposed to voting for the lesser problem), so I'll be doing my customary write-in vote for John Huntsman, as I do every 4 years (other than for Obama's first term).

[Frank Drackman]

it's "Never Again"
and just because Cums-a-lot married a member of our tribe doesn't mean you'd have a chance with her (wait a minute, she's Cums-a-lot, even Parkinsonian Joe has a chance) but hey, thanks for not being one of those Hebes (like the N-words, it's OK for Hebes to say "Hebe") who moves to Atlanta or South Beach and votes for a Moose-lum Black Supremercist or hmmmm, who was the guy who ran against D-Sanctimonious (and almost won) and turned out to be a Homo drug addict? Andy Gillum?

In 2020, an inebriated Gillum was found by police in a hotel room with a male escort. Suspected methamphetamine packets were also found in the room. Gillum checked himself into drug rehabilitation afterwards and announced a withdrawal from public life "for the foreseeable future."

In 2022, Gillum was indicted on 21 felony counts, including wire fraud, conspiracy, and making false statements, for allegedly diverting money raised during the campaign to a company controlled by one of his top advisors.

[SRG2]

So what? Trump is afraid of prison. So they both work as hard as they can to avoid what they're afraid of.

[Frank Drackman]

Who wouldn't be afraid of prison?, since in effect it's "however many years of getting Saddam-ized" (Funny how it's the "Progressives" who consider Homosexual Rape a laughing matter, although, like the Late Great Hannibal Lector, I mean William F. Buckely, "If Sodomy is going to occur it's better to have it occur in Attica State Prison than in Central Park"

Frank

[Stephen Lathrop]

XY is not as stupid as Ejercito. XY understands Trump is working on schemes to bypass a lost election with some blather-based court case his Supreme Court buddies will endorse as legitimate. XY wants to add his modest contribution to the blather.

[Frank Drackman]

Would that be like the Schemes DemoKKKrats (and a few Repubiclowns) were considering in November 2016???, lets see, if we can "persuade" enough Trump erectors not to vote for him, the erection would go to the House, where each state gets a vote, and all it would take is to "persuade" a few representatives (Idaho has 2 R's, Montana 2, Nebraska 3, North Dakota 1, South Dakota 1. West Virginia 2, Wyoming 1) to vote for the "D" and you'd have had President Rodman (and probably World War's III and IV by now, they'd have to start numbering them like Superbowls)

Frank

[Josh R]

The first rule of debates: do them if you are behind, don't if you are ahead. Right now, the race is tied (*). So, both candidates don't have a clear incentive one way or the other. Given Trump's debate record (he keeps stepping on his dick), their respective positions make sense (for now).

(*) According to Nate Silver, Harris' outlook has gone up (a bit) since the debate and her numbers aren't declining. She led nationally by 2.2%-points going into the debate and now leads by 3.0%-points. In the 7 swing states, she went from an average of 0.2%-points ahead to 0.8%-points ahead.

[Frank Drackman]

Cums-a-Lot ahead 0.2 to 0.8% in the 7 Swing States?
You know that means she's going to lose, don't you?
and spare me the Bullshit about how the DemoKKKrat has won the Popular Vote in 8 of the last 9 erections (Seriously, anyone who uses "Popular" in reference to AlGore, Hilary Rodman, or Parkinsonian Joe should have to use a Ham-ass Cell Phone)

Frank

[Commenter_XY]

Josh R....Nate Silver is your measuring stick, not mine. 😉

I maintain the election is decided by AZ, GA and WI. Those are the three states to watch. If either VP Harris or Pres Trump sweep them, then game over. That is the EC math. If there is a split, the EC math is complicated.

I believe PA is now lost to VP Harris, barring a calamitous misstep by Pres Trump (truthfully, The Donald is his own worst enemy when it comes to colossal missteps). VP Harris' anti-fracking orientation, the assassination attempt in Butler, along with an obvious avoidance of any questions by the press, are what moved the Commonwealth, IMHO. We will see after the election, hopefully by Hanukkah, whether my hypothesis is correct or not.

On balance, Josh R, it is still VP Harris' race to lose. Keep Talking, Kamala, is the mantra they are probably saying at Trump campaign HQ. We will see if I am correct or not. That is the only way VP Harris loses to me (e.g. repeated, aspirational word salads that don't actually answer the questions asked), barring calamity (like she and her boss [Jill?] screwing up on foreign policy between now and election).

With the self-immolation of the Team R senatorial candidate in NC, the path to a Senate majority for Team R gets murkier. The House is a tossup; too soon.

[Zarniwoop]

By self-immolation, do you mean Robinson?

He’s running for NC governor, not the senate. Neither Tillis nor Budd are up for reelection in 2024.

[Frank Drackman]

Yeah, like it's not possible to set up fake accounts on various websites. Remember this Attending, back in the early days of the Internets, always going on about how we were responsible for what happened on our Government Internet account, and if we forgot to logout, too bad, it's your account.
Well one day, HE forgot to logout, as a first year Resident I was asked to leave the call room while the Third Years signed that A-hole up for every Gay Porn site they could find, then signed "him" out of the Computer.
20+ years later I bet that guy's still getting pop ups from "14 Inch Sword Fight" "5 Queer Nation Army" and "Pucker-Up.Com"

Frank

[Zarniwoop]

And hey, it looks like all of Robinson's senior campaign staff just resigned en masse.

Trump sure is good at picking the "best people"!

[Nelson]

"I believe PA is now lost to VP Harris"

And why is that?

https://www.natesilver.net/p/nate-silver-2024-president-election-polls-model

"With the self-immolation of the Team R senatorial candidate in NC, the path to a Senate majority for Team R gets murkier."

True, but the GOP's PA candidate learned from losing to Fetterman and is trying not to run as a batshit-crazy Trumpkon and it's working, somewhat.

Same GOP candidate, but less likely to lose to the moderate/conservative Democrat (Casey) than the progressive (Fetterman). The world is a strange place.

[Nelson]

Sorry, the NC candidate is for governor, not US Senate. So the Senate is still a toss-up, but PA is more likely to go R this time than last time.

[Josh R]

The Senate is not a toss-up. WV will flip to the GOP. For Democrats to hold the Senate, they have to win the presidency (that’s 50-50 right there), and sweep AZ, MI, MT, NV, OH, PA and WI (perhaps Dems could flip TX, but the GOP might flip MD). That’s a tall order.

I think Dems have a better chance of holding PA than they did the day before the 2022 election. Casey has been up by about 6%-points all along. Oz was about 0.4%-points ahead of Fetterman in the last election polls.

[Commenter_XY]

N....VP Harris’ anti-fracking orientation, the assassination attempt in Butler, along with an obvious avoidance of any questions by the press, are what moved the Commonwealth, IMHO. -- after the election, when the post election surveys are done, we will know the answer.

I don't think it is too complicated, N.

[Nelson]

And yet, she still holds a slight lead. Your assumption that her recent gains are illusory and the trend will reverse is speculative, at best.

[Brett Bellmore]

Having most of the media in your corner is a remarkably powerful advantage. These days Democratic candidates for President start three quarters of the way to the finish line, it takes a remarkably bad nominee to make a race close.

[Martinned2]

Given that Trump is polling pretty much even against Harris, I would argue that the evidence suggests the opposite.

[Brett Bellmore]

No, I think Harris IS a remarkably bad candidate, as evidenced by her abysmal primary performance.

[Sarcastr0]

This is the axiom of Brett’s worldview - everyone agrees with him but all institutions are committed to hiding the truth.

[Brett Bellmore]

You think her primary performance demonstrates that she's a good campaigner?

[Martinned2]

What primary performance? There was no (meaningful) primary this year.

[Brett Bellmore]

Several years back, I mean. Admittedly, it was very forgettable.

[Martinned2]

You mean before she was Vice-President? What does that have to do with anything?

[Brett Bellmore]

Obviously, it has to do with her competence as a campaigner. Having been VP doesn't magically make her good at campaigning, you know. Or appealing as a candidate. It's just a line on her CV, it didn't fundamentally change the Harris who failed badly in the 2020 primaries.

Biden picked somebody who wasn't a very strong candidate in her own right, to be his VP. Making her is VP didn't change that.

[Martinned2]

Having been VP doesn’t magically make (...) appealing as a candidate.

Not magically, no. But you would expect a former VP to put up better numbers in a primary. (See Biden, J.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden#1988_and_2008_presidential_campaigns

[Brett Bellmore]

"Not magically, no. But you would expect a former VP to put up better numbers in a primary. (See Biden, J.)"

It's true that Biden improved his numbers somewhat between 2008 and 2020, but he was always something of a contender in national politics, which you couldn't really say of Harris.

[Martinned2]

Having a very good shot at the nomination in the future is at least 50% of the reason why people agree to be VP in the first place. Unless you're Dick Cheney, it's a job that comes with a lot of risk of ending up like Harris, being given lots of assignments but no actual power to do anything.

But from Bush sr. to Gore to Biden, former VPs got the endorsement of their boss and the nomination for president. (More examples are available before 1988, of course, going all the way back to John Adams who would never have won the presidency in 1796 if he hadn't spent the previous eight years as VP.)

[Stephen Lathrop]

Bellmore — Being an atrocious candidate, and a worse person, is a great way to put the media in your opponent's corner.

[Josh R]

I believe PA is now lost to VP Harris. [...] it is still VP Harris’ race to lose.

Those two statements are hard to reconcile. If I knew Harris would lose PA, I would put up $3000 that says she loses the election even though I would win only $1000 if she did lose.

She would be down to 286 EVs from where Biden was, only able to lose 16 more among GA (16), MI (16), AZ (11), WI (10) and NV (5). Perhaps NC (15) saves her, but I doubt it.

[Commenter_XY]

The EC math gets complicated if VP Harris loses PA; I believe that she has. She would need to sweep AZ, GA, WI and flip a state (which is do-able, not impossible).

VP Harris is the incumbent. It is her race to lose. Like I said, the more she talks, the higher the probability of loss.

[Josh R]

Trnaslation: it's hers to lose and she has almost assurdely already lost it by losing PA.

Your confidence that she has already lost PA, but the other states are still in play also makes no sense from a polling perspective. For your conclusion to be correct, the polls have to be way off in PA but nowhere else. Hint: don't trust your gut.

[Commenter_XY]

To me Josh R, it is all about upside and downside risk.

For Pres Trump, the downside risk of a terrible debate is greater than the upside benefit of a competent (or even excellent) debate performance.

[Nelson]

"and did not change the dynamics of the race (which I predicted)"

Except for every swing state moving away from Trump and towards Harris, you mean? I mean, come on. North Carolina is a toss-up, for God's sake.

https://www.natesilver.net/p/nate-silver-2024-president-election-polls-model

[Commenter_XY]

N, if Nate Silver is your bar, then yes. Nate Silver is not my personal bar on the state of the race.

[Frank Drackman]

How does Nate Silverstein have any credibility after getting 0-16 totally wrong? he's like a Jewish "Jimmy the Greek"

[Nelson]

Since he is arguably the most accurate compiler around, what is your standard? Rasmussen?

[Commenter_XY]

No, he is actually not the most accurate compiler around; I beg to differ. I have issues with Silver’s methodology, which boils down to: I cherry-pick the polls I think have the most validity, and assign voodoo weighting and ranking within my Silver & Black Box to tell you what I think.

I am not saying Silver is ‘bad’; to the contrary, he has done an excellent job selling his ‘Silver Box’ (his methodology). I am all for capitalism. What Silver consistently gets wrong is the magnitude of movement, late — you’ll have to figure that one out, Nelson. You will see.

PS: Forget Rassmussen

[Josh R]

Who is more accurate than Silver?

[Commenter_XY]

TIPP

[Josh R]

They are very good. Silver has them rated as A/B. They have Harris +4 nationally (Silver has Harris +2.9), -0.3 in GA (Silver has it -1.3) and -3 in AZ (Silver has it -1.5) in their only polls since the debate.

[Commenter_XY]

TIPP is more accurate than Silver; they are simply better. The data for the last 6 elections do not lie. Their methodology is superior, and produces a more accurate result, down to the demos.

I combine TIPP with a few other polls. There are companies out there who are more reliable, and have a better track record….and a different focus (a few focus only on why the movement occurs, that is more interesting to me).

[David Nieporent]

TIPP is more accurate than Silver; they are simply better. The data for the last 6 elections do not lie. Their methodology is superior, and produces a more accurate result, down to the demos.

That doesn't make any sense. TIPP is a pollster. Nate isn't a pollster. They're doing entirely different things, so there's no 'methodology' to compare.

[Josh R]

TIPP is more accurate than Silver; they are simply better.

As David noted, Silver is not a pollster. He does however give an estaimte of the final vote shares based on how he combines muitiple polls. So, there could be a direct comparison.

Put up or shut up (with citations) for your claim that TIPP is more accurate (and do note, that TIPP has Harris doing better nationally and in GA than Silver).

[Commenter_XY]

https://tipponline.com/page/about-tipp

See for yourself. They have been the most accurate, consistently over time. Both in calling the winner, and the final vote tallies.

Silver does not account for late movement.

If you want to use Silver as your bar, feel free Josh R. Just understand his methodology and it's limitations.

[David Nieporent]

https://tipponline.com/page/about-tipp

See for yourself. They have been the most accurate, consistently over time. Both in calling the winner, and the final vote tallies.

(1) You are citing them describing themselves that way in some advertising materials.
(2) You are citing an outdated page, unless you think 2016 was the last presidential election we've had.
(3) They're also lying, claiming that they got 2016 right when they did not. In fact, they were pretty fucking terrible in 2016. They had Trump up 2% in the popular vote in their final poll and he actually lost by 2%, a 4% error. Which isn't as bad as them having Gary Johnson with 8%!

[Nelson]

Putting all your eggs in a single pollster's basket is one way to go. I find it a less-trustworthy method, since it bakes in any erroneous assumptions with no counterbalance.

The part I like about Silver is that he gives more or less weight to various polling organizations based on accuracy and methodology, so any methodological bias is weakened.

I'm not talking about intentional or organizational bias, like you have at Rasmussen. I'm talking about the inevitable result of decisions about modeling.

[Commenter_XY]

Silver has his own intentional and organizational bias, and most important, methodological bias (we call that cherry picking). When Silver 'weights' polls, he introduces bias.

Your point of weakening methodological bias by weighting other polls is just is just wrong.

The better approach: Pick your polls based on their sampling methodology, and pay attention to the footnotes. Any pollster not doing mixed mode data collection is not getting an accurate picture.

Last point

[Josh R]

You too are weighting the polls in part based on methodology.

[Nelson]

Assuming the initial assessment of methodological quality is good (and Silver's is), having multiple high-quality studies will always return a more dependable result than relying on a single source.

I'm not sure why you choose to characterize a method of rejecting substandard polling organizations as "cherry picking". That term refers to randomly choosing things, usually based on reaching your preferred outcome. That isn't what Silver does.

[Josh R]

TIPP's self-congratulatory press releases with a few links are not an analysis. For example, they congratulate themselves for being one of only two pollsters who had Trump ahead in 2016. But wait, TIPP only publishes a pre-election poll for the nationwide popular vote (no state polls). Having Trump ahead was wrong and far from the best.

So, even assuming you are right about TIPP, given the latest TIPP nationwide poll is Harris +4, how can you conclude anything about PA or the state of the race based on your gold standard source?

Silver has provided a detailed anaylsis of all the pollsters. TIPP ranks 18th out of 516 (very good as I said). I suggest you download the two spreadsheets that Silver includes in his report.

[Josh R]

We can compare TIPP to Silver for 2008, 2012, 2016 and 2020. The numbers below are the actuals, TIPP, Silver:

2008: Obama 7.2, Obama 4.7, Obama 6.1
2012: Obama 3.9, Obama 1.6, Obama 1.9
2016: Clinton 2.1, Trump 0.2, Clinton 3.9
2020: Biden 4.5, Biden 4.5, Biden 8.0

Yes, TIPP nailed 2020! Overall, they have an average error of 1.8. Silver's average error is 1.9. At worst Silver matches TIPP (and again, TIPP is very good). So, relying on TIPP for the national popular vote is fine (and Harris up +4). But, dismissing Silver even though he takes a deep dive into state polls and how polling errors are correlated among the states is mistaken.

[Dr. Ed 2]

The game was rigged. You don't go play another rigged game with a crooked dealer.

[Michael Ejercito]

Mark Penn suggested that ABC hire an outside law firm.

https://ethicsalarms.com/2024/09/13/on-trumps-rejection-of-another-debate/

[Dr. Ed 2]

Lawyers have about as much respect in 2024 as they had in 1974.

[Krayt]

Lawyers had major reputational problems back in Shakespeare's day, probably back through ancient Greece and Egypt.

Now that I think about it, the entire profession probably spawned shortly after some guys picked up clubs and wandered down to a dirt crossroads where some productive farmers were trading, and decided they should pay their fair share. This, when hunting and gathering was still a viable option, but why bother? You have a club!

[Frank Drackman]

Good to see you’ve advanced to the “Anger” stage of your upcoming humiliation November 5. (Way
to stay classy Santa Monica), avoiding a D-bate on the Clinton News Network? which is right up there with the Pubic Broadcasting System in broadcasting Bullshit, like because some of the Terrorists whose Pagers exploded were Doctors and Nurses, Israel is murdering Doctors and Nurses (who can be Terrorists just like anyone else, see Mengele and Nurse Ratchet).

Frank

[hobie]

"(Way to stay classy Santa Monica)"

- Frankie 'wounded warrior' Drackman; America's neediest veteran

[Frank Drackman]

at least I don't lie about my Combat experience, unlike Sergeant Pepper-Waltz, and hope you have a good Dental plan (seriously, your always talking about the Hayseeds, what's your Tatoo:Tooth Ratio?) you're gonna talk shit to the wrong Veteran some day

[hobie]

Frankie ‘wounded warrior’ Drackman; America’s neediest veteran, if you're the measure of what a United States veteran is, I don't think I have anything to worry about

[Frank Drackman]

Pride goeth before an Epidural Hematoma. You know the guy who punched Houdini was a Veteran? Oh that's right, you're Generation X, Y, or Z, if he doesn't have a Tick Tock account might as well not have existed,
Well check out the movie where Tony Curtis ( I know, who?) played him, of course I'm the other way, I think I've seen 4 "new" movies since 2009 ("Grand Torino" "Black Mass" "Amurican Sniper" "Once upon a Time in Hollyweird""Topgun Maverick", "Hateful 8")

Frank

[verochkax]

More like unless Trump can be assured of unbiased moderators, it's better not to have a debate at all.

If a voter isn't turned off by the radical leftism of Harris and the anti-white racism, then she'll be there on election day.

[David Nieporent]

I'm not sure I agree with your analysis at all. Right now Trump appears to be trailing; therefore, Harris is the one with something to lose by debating. It's difficult to imagine that Trump could perform worse at a second debate, and there's always the risk of a gaffe from her.

[verochkax]

Yeah, it's easy to preform well when the moderators are on your side and don't call out your lies.

[Nelson]

Right? Those moderators moved Trump's lips and made him say completely untrue things. It was a travesty how they made him say things that were complete lies.

[Frank Drackman]

The did it with Cums-a-lot also, saying "January 6th" was the worst attack on Amurica since the Civil Wah (what's so "Civil' bout Wah anyway?)

[Mr. Bumble]

Is dementia contagious?
Whom does Harris want to debate?
"Kamala says she'd "like another debate" with the "former vice president."

Does she think she's running against Mike Pence? Dick Cheney? Dan Quayle? Has she covered up Biden's cognitive decline for so long that it has now rubbed off on her?"
https://x.com/TrumpWarRoom/status/1837982857664315536

[Brett Bellmore]

Dementia can be contagious, (Think mad cow disease.) but not very easily.

[Frank Drackman]

Neurosyphilis (Go ahead, H8-ers, I've got a whole clip of devastating comebacks at the ready) causes Dementia and is the very definition of a "Contagious" disease

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Yes. The Harris Campaign has to say they want a debate.

It's hard to top the first one. The media also will be dying to find some movement that provides positives for Trump. It's a good story. Even if she does fine, even if she wins overall, net it can help Trump. And, like a good team sometimes faltering, she may have moments of weakness. Why tempt fate?

Now, maybe it won't matter much. Still, I don't see much net negative for her if there isn't another debate. Odds-wise, I would probably hope there isn't one.

[OtisAH]

It’s a net positive for everyone. There’s nothing that can be gained by a second debate except, perhaps, one last opportunity for Convicted Felon Donald Trump to finally drop the N-bomb we’ve all been waiting for. But even that would only be worth another 1 or 2pts for Harris in the polls.

Who would a second debate even be for? The alleged “undecideds”? They’re not worth the effort at this stage. And it’s questionable whether chasing votes of people who are so disengaged ever has value beyond the volume of words the media can generate about them.

[Krayt]

That's a thought experiment I hope this nation does not run.

[Frank Drackman]

Barry Hussein used the actual "N-word" in his Auto-Erotic Oral Biography "Wet Dreams of my Father" before he was erected into the Oval Orifice, didn't seem to hurt his performance, and he was against SSM also, McCain was the candidate in 08 who supported it (what a loser)

Frank

[Nelson]

"On balance; do you think that Trump avoiding a second debate with Harris is a net positive or negative for him?"

Net positive. He got thumped the first time due to his rambling, undisciplined, factually-challenged performance and nothing would indicate that he would be more disciplined the second time. As the quote goes, "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt". He has nothing to gain from a second debate and much to lose.

Unless his poll numbers keep slipping (and he believes they are accurate). Then he would have to take the chance.

[CountmontyC]

Let's compromise. There will be a second debate but it will be held by Fox News ( the debate that Harris ran away from when proposed by Trump earlier). Sound fair?

[Kazinski]

The race is what it is, at at this point the only thing that will move the race at all is the voters getting more information on Harris’s positions, what they were, and supposedly what they are now.

The race will be decided based on these states:

Georgia Trump +2.0
Pennsylvania Harris +0.7
Michigan Harris +1.7
Wisconsin Harris +1.0
Arizona Trump +2.2
North Carolina Trump +0.4

All of those states except Georgia have recent polls with both Harris and Trump with a slight lead.

Nevada is also a tossup, but its 6 votes are not likely to be decisive.

Unless you live in one of those states, then you're a spectator.

[Michael Ejercito]

Here us Jack Marshall writing about an unethical quote by Hillary Clinton.

https://ethicsalarms.com/2024/09/22/unethical-quote-of-the-week-hillary-clinton-3/

[Stephen Lathrop]

Ejercito, I have muted commenters for malice, for habitual lying, and for threatening violence. I have never previously muted anyone for futility. Congratulations! You're the first.

[Kazinski]

Muted for futility, eh?

I'd be careful there Lathrop.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Kazinski — Do you mean uncharacteristically careful, or just your usual standard?

[santamonica811]

If you were tabula rosa; I'd wonder about the wisdom of you depending on Jack Marshall for anything approaching unbiased journalism.

Given your well-earned reputation here at the VC, I think that literally not a single person is surprised that this is the sort of source you go to.

Hey, what was your take on Vance's cynical (and accurate??) observation that it was fine for him and Trump to deliberately lie about Haitians eating people's pets, since it helped highlight a legitimate sociological/political point: When the govt sends a large amount of people, quickly, into a small area, what responsibilities does the govt have to minimize disruption? In your always-thoughtful and sober analysis; is this good justification for what they both did, repeatedly? Child sex trafficking is a terrible and widespread problem. Is it okay for a political candidate to (100% falsely!!!) accuse Vance of producing and distributing child porn? After all...even if it's a despicable lie; it does highlight a really important issue. So, maybe you agree that it would be justified. Or for a politician to falsely claim that Walz got drunk and shot two Trick-or-Treaters years ago? (After all, alcohol abuse is a serious issue and should be focused on more; and the same for gun violence, of course.)

I'm so eager to get your take in this? Lots of politicians lie, of course. Alas, for that. But I don't recall anyone else doing what Trump and (his moral equivalent) Vance did...lie, get caught, and cheerfully acknowledge the lie, with the justification that the ends justify the means, and it's all good, if we now are focusing on the underlying issue.

Come on, Mike. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you. Fill this room with your brilliance.

[Michael Ejercito]

There was no deliberate lie about Haitians eating people's pets.

Just because the police have yet to find enough evidence for warrant does not mean these claims were a deliberate lie by J.D. Vance.

[santamonica811]

Maybe not the first time. I give people some grace, and although it shows mental retardation to repeat something that extreme before you have done some minimal vetting, he got that first bite of the apple. But when he doubled down later? And then tripled-down later? And when Trump amplified Vance's lie in the debate...and then did his own doubling-down?

Obvious lies, by that point. I do wish you had the integrity to acknowledge, "Yeah, they shouldn't have repeated the story, once it was pretty clear that it was made up out of whole cloth." Don't worry...no one here actually expects that from you.

You be you. A loyal Trumpist, with TDS to the max. [sad sigh]

[verochkax]

Even if Haitians didn't eat people's pets, there's no doubt that they're overwhelming the communities they're in.

Go to any place with many Haitian immigrants. By the second generation Haitians behave more like "African-Americans," not Haitian immigrants.

[Frank Drackman]

90% of them have latent TB and/or chronic Malaria, gives them voracious appetites even though they stay skinny (they're eating for themselves and millions of Mycobacteria/Plasmodia) have you ever seen a Fat Haitian??

Frank

[Krayt]

Yes! The dictators there!

[David Nieporent]

And by "there's no doubt," he means "I'm making this up." There is in fact great doubt about that.

[verochkax]

Facts not your strong suit?

[bernard11]

there’s no doubt that they’re overwhelming the communities they’re in.

Considerable doubt, in fact. In many declining communities an influx of immigrants has helped to revitalize the town. Consider Haitians

The CEO of Springfield manufacturing company McGregor Metal praised his new Haitian employees for their sobriety and work ethic, saying:

I wish I had 30 more. Our Haitians come to work every day. They don’t have a drug problem. They’ll stay at their machine. That’s a stark difference from what we’re used to in our community
.....
Haiti itself is a desperately poor and horrifically violent country. Rightists would have us believe that this poverty and violence is due to characteristics — cultural and/or innate — of the Haitian people themselves....

And yet when we look at how Haitians actually do in the U.S., that story seems to fall apart. For example, although Haitian immigrants tend to be less educated than Americans, their children tend to be more educated than the general population:

Their poverty rates are average, and their unemployment rates are low:

Read the whole thing, unless you're afraid of having your bigotry challenged.

[verochkax]

Look at the towns in Florida where they have congregated before you embarrass yourself further.

[NOVA Lawyer]

Switch subjects, switch locations, if you didn't have so many ways to avoid a good faith discussion.

bernard owned you on Springfield, Ohio and the positive results of Hatians moving to the town. So you're going to try to come up with somewhere else that has some stat you can glom onto.

Racist asshole.

[hobie]

Ah, the old:

Politician: "My policies ensure that no alligators remain in Springfield"
Reporter: "But there never were alligators in Springfield"
Politician: "See, they worked"

[David Nieporent]

There was no deliberate lie about Haitians eating people’s pets.

Just because the police have yet to find enough evidence for warrant does not mean these claims were a deliberate lie by J.D. Vance.

That's definitely an interesting take on morality: if you don't know with 100% certainty that a claim is false, then asserting it isn't a deliberate lie.

Okay, then: Michael Ejercito is a child molester.

As per a wise commenter here: just because the police have yet to find enough any evidence doesn't mean it's a deliberate lie.

[Riva]

Hmm..tell that to the ducks in the park ponds. And while you’re at it, you might want to look into Dayton as they throw another cat onto the barbie.

[Kazinski]

There is no lie, there just haven't been any arrests or prosecutoons.

I posted before a link to a video showing cats on the grill in Dayton Ohio.

Here is another link of a Springfield City Council meeting from March of 2024, where the City Manager acknowledges being aware of reports of Immigrants eating pets in Springfield, although he complains there is no proof.

https://x.com/GrageDustin/status/1836178999178866766?t=Gcq0h8wWa7iV3PqW6H0YEg&s=19

Trump and Vance are on solid ground repeating reports of Haitian migrants eating pets in Springfield, even if they haven't proved it.

You can't claim there aren't reports, that are completely unrelated to the Trump campaign, because here is the video evidence by a city official.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/09/11/anatomy-racist-smear-how-false-claims-pet-eating-immigrants-caught/

Trump, Vance, and other racist shitbags like you are on solid ground repeating anti-immigrant lies spread by white nationalists.

[hobie]

Conservatism is so racist to the core that even the blacks are racists

[Frank Drackman]

you actually said something that's right for a change, if for the wrong reasons, as a whole Blacks are racist, as evidenced by their killing other races at a rate 3-4 times what it should be given their 14% proportion of the population, and you want to hear some (OK, I admit they're funny) racist jokes? hang around a group of Blacks talking about a Black from Africa or Haiti.

Frank

[Sarcastr0]

You are either very good at pretending to be in good faith, or you are the WORST at critical thinking.

[David Nieporent]

Um, the "call report showing this" was investigated by the WSJ, and they found that not only had no cat been stolen by Haitians and eaten, but the cat wasn't even dead! The one report turned out to be an error; she found the cat in her own basement a day or two later, very much alive, and she apologized to her Haitian neighbors for accusing them.

There is still no evidence that a single pet cat was stolen or eaten in Springfield.

[Kazinski]

Well now how can you say that when the city manager did not reference a specific call report, and indeed said "reports", which is plural.

[NOVA Lawyer]

The guy in the video (and the official who chimed in) didn't say reports of dogs or cats being stolen or eaten. He seems to be referring to ducks and geese "at the park", though he didn't say the animal(s). Plus, the reports were anonymous and it is not clear if people were alleged eyewitnesses or repeating a rumor. (I seem to recall you're one of the ones that don't like unattributed, off the record reports about things you don't like, but here they are enough to make an accusation of a crime against a racial and ethnic minority.)

They specifically said there's "no proof."

So, yes, it is a lie to say Haitian immigrants are stealing pet dogs and cats and eating them. Your video doesn't show rumors of that. It is not true that "They're eating your dogs." If it turns out that someone somewhere ate a cat, that isn't proof of what Trump alleged.

He alleged the crime of stealing pet dogs or pet cats and then eating them. He alleged Haitian immigrants committed the crime. There is no reasonable basis for those allegations based on rumors of someone taking ducks or geese from a local pond. If he had said it about a specific person, he'd have a libel lawsuit on his hands. But casting an aspersion like that on a whole community, you'll defend him to the hilt.

You embarrass yourself by trying to cover for a liar who spread, and embellished, this particular rumor for the purpose of stirring up anti-Haitian, anti-immigrant animus. And you can read these threads and see all the usual racists loving it. What does that make you, Kazinski?

[not guilty]

From the article that Michael Ejercito links to:

Pollster and former Clinton strategist Mark Penn—yes, he could be looking to expand his client base— said that ABC News should hire an outside law firm to investigate whether there was collusion between the network and the Harris campaign and to “what extent” they had planned on “rigging the outcome of this debate.”

“I actually think they should do a full internal investigation, hire an outside law firm. I don’t know how much of this was planned in advance,” Penn said on a podcast. “I don’t know what they told the Harris campaign…I think the day after, suspicion here is really quite high, and I think a review of all their internal texts and emails really should be done by an independent party to find out to what extent they were planning on, in effect, you know, fact-checking just one candidate and in effect, rigging the outcome of this debate. I think the situation demands nothing less than that.”

Why on earth would ABC want to do that just to satisfy Mark Penn's curiosity?

[Brett Bellmore]

I can see two scenarios under which they might want to do it:

1. They think they're innocent, and want to be able to prove it to everybody.

2. They think they're guilty, and want to do something to make sure it doesn't happen again.

The problem is, we're probably, based on other reports of scripted interviews, and debate questions being leaked, in scenario 3:

3. They think they're guilty, and want to continue doing it.

[Michael Ejercito]

Mark Penn suggested ABC should hire an outside law firm.

https://ethicsalarms.com/2024/09/13/on-trumps-rejection-of-another-debate/

[not guilty]

Ryan Wesley Routh is charged with violations of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (possession of a firearm by a convicted felon) and 18 U.S.C. § 922(k) (possession and receipt of a firearm with an obliterated serial number).

If and when Mr. Routh raises a Second Amendment challenge to these charges, will the Trump cult support or oppose his motion to dismiss?

[Commenter_XY]

FL has state charges, too. Routh is going to jail for some time, NG. And he should. There is plenty to hold him.

Routh needs a psych eval.

[Dr. Ed 2]

The state of Florida is doing its own investigation and that should be interesting. As is the question of has ATFE recovered the number from the weapon? (Something about denser metal in the shape of the numbers because they were impressed.)

And if they have, what's the history of this gun?

[Frank Drackman]

Dr. Ed 2, for someone who knows everything (usually wrong) about everything, surprised you didn't know how easy it is to recover a ground away Serial number, think I saw Efrem Zimbalist (Jr) do that on "The FBI"(In Color!) in the early 70's.
The history of the gun? he probably bought it from somebody.

Frank

[Dr. Ed 2]

It's the ATFE that does this: https://www.atf.gov/firearms/national-tracing-center

And who sold the weapon to the known felon?

[Frank Drackman]

Like 90% of gun sales, some non gun dealer guy wanting to sell a gun (and most “aren’t in the business” they need the money, wife/gf doesn’t want “that nasty gun” around,) and in the vast majority of states aren’t required (“required”?? a private citizen can’t do a “Background Check” on another private citizen) to do a background check or fill out the federal forms or even give a receipt. (Haven’t bought a gun from dealer since 1986, you’re going to tell Uncle Sam your address?, what you bought? and swear you aren’t a Drug Addict (I got a DUI in 1982, am I an alcoholic? (don’t answer that!)

Frank

[Dr. Ed 2]

And was the serial number obliterated in an attempt to prevent a trace -- or to make possession of the weapon a more serious offense?

[David Nieporent]

The former. This has been yet another episode of Simple Answers to Stupid Questions.

[not guilty]

“FL has state charges, too. Routh is going to jail for some time, NG. And he should. There is plenty to hold him.”

I surmise that the current federal charges are a placeholder to keep Routh locked up while the feds investigate further. I would expect additional charges when the matter is presented to a federal grand jury. See 18 U.S.C. § 351(c) (attempt to kill Secret Service protectee), which carries potential life imprisonment.

Routh faces a pretrial detention hearing today. The Government has filed a written proffer in support of its request for pretrial detention, which includes significant detail about the alleged offenses. https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/25171975/routh-detention-memo.pdf

Parallel state and federal prosecutions will not surprise me.

[Commenter_XY]

Does FL give the needle for attempted murder?

[Zarniwoop]

I don’t even have to look that up: no.

[not guilty]

No. No state to my knowledge imposes the death penalty for attempted murder.

The United States Magistrate Judge in West Palm Beach has now denied bail. The Assistant U. S. Attorney reportedly said during the detention hearing that the Justice Department has probable cause to charge Routh under 18 U.S.C. § 351(c). Punishment under that subsection is imprisonment for any term of years or for life. https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/23/man-accused-of-attempting-to-assassinate-trump-urged-others-to-finish-the-job-00180457

Subsection 351(f) provides, "If Federal investigative or prosecutive jurisdiction is asserted for a violation of this section, such assertion shall suspend the exercise of jurisdiction by a State or local authority, under any applicable State or local law, until Federal action is terminated." Florida's Attorney General has inquired of the U. S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida and the Director of the FBI as to whether the federal government intends to invoke this provision. https://www.myfloridalegal.com/sites/default/files/2024-09/fbi-final_monday.pdf If so, it would not preclude a state prosecution after the federal prosecution is concluded.

[Commenter_XY]

Yeah, Rouse is not going anywhere. But he definitely needs a psych eval.

[not guilty]

If the defense requests a psychological examination, the Court may well order such an evaluation out of an abundance of caution (and to protect the integrity of any conviction against collateral attack), but that would probably be an exercise in futility. The evaluation would focus on two issues: insanity at the time of the alleged offense and competency to stand trial.

Per 18 U.S.C. § 17, insanity is an affirmative defense which requires the accused to prove by clear and convincing evidence that at the time of the commission of the acts constituting the offense, the defendant, as a result of a severe mental disease or defect, was unable to appreciate the nature and quality or the wrongfulness of his acts. Here there is ample evidence of planning and deliberation on the part of the accused. https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/25171975/routh-detention-memo.pdf

The accused traveled from the Greensboro, North Carolina, area, to West Palm Beach, Florida, on August 14, 2024.On multiple days and times from August 18, 2024, to September 15, 2024, the accused’s cell phone accessed cell towers located near Trump International Golf Course and Donald Trump’s residence at Mar-a-Lago. A search of the vehicle used to flee the scene included a handwritten list of dates in August, September, and October 2024 and venues where Trump had appeared or was expected to be present. One of the cell phones retrieved from the vehicle contained a Google search of how to travel from Palm Beach County to Mexico, and the vehicle contained a passport in the Defendant’s name. The license plate on the Nissan Xterra was not registered to the vehicle. During a search of the Nissan Xterra, FBI agents found two additional license plates.

FBI agents searched the area where the accused had been hiding in the tree line. FBI agents located an SKS semiautomatic 7.62x39 caliber rifle with a scope attached and an extended magazine. The rifle was loaded with a total of 11 rounds and had a round in the chamber. The serial number on the rifle was obliterated and unreadable.

Agents also found a digital camera, a backpack and a reusable shopping bag hanging from the chain link fence. The backpack and shopping bag both contained plates. Subsequent preliminary ballistics testing showed the plates were capable of stopping small arms fire.

All of the above evinces that the accused was aware of the wrongfulness of his actions. He planned to shoot Donald Trump and to get away with it by fleeing the country. (Mexico will not extradite for an offense potentially carrying a death sentence, as 18 U.S.C. § 351 does if the assassination target dies.)

As to competency to stand trial, this is an experienced criminal defendant. He was convicted in North Carolina in 2002, when he was convicted of having an explosive device, and again in 2010, when he was convicted of possessing stolen goods. Defense counsel represented at the detention hearing that Routh had faced run-ins with the law on more than 100 different occasions, including for speeding, but that he had shown up for his hearings on all but one occasion. https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/23/man-accused-of-attempting-to-assassinate-trump-urged-others-to-finish-the-job-00180457

[Commenter_XY]

NG, I think you just demolished any insanity defense for Rouse. 😉

[not guilty]

Ryan Wesley Routh has now been indicted and charged with attempting to assassinate Donald Trump. He is also charged with assaulting a federal officer and possessing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence, in addition to the federal firearms charges for which he was initially arrested. The case reportedly has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/09/24/routh-trump-gunman-assassination-charge/

Will Judge Cannon slow walk this case?

[David Nieporent]

No. And I predict that she also will not enter a stay preventing prosecutors from using evidence they collected pursuant to a search warrant, either.

[not guilty]

Here is a pdf of the indictment: https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2024-09/updated-routh-indictment.pdf#:~:text=RYAN%20WESLEY%20ROUTH,%20did%20knowingly%20possess%20a%20firearm%20in It alleges six counts, not the five that were initially reported.

The stalking count is a bit curious. The relevant language of 18 U.S.C. § 2261A(1)(i) requires the government to prove that the accused's course of conduct placed a person in reasonable fear of death of or serious bodily injury to a person. I can envision a couple of factual theories here.

Donald Trump apparently was not aware of Routh's proximity to the golf course before he fled, but Trump may have developed a fear after Routh fled the scene but before he was apprehended. In the alternative, the Secret Service agent who discovered Routh may have feared for his own safety or that of another person.

Three counts of the indictment relate to Routh's possession of a firearm. As I asked yesterday, if and when Mr. Routh raises a Second Amendment challenge to these counts, will the Trump cult support or oppose his pretrial motion to dismiss? Will their heads explode from cognitive dissonance?

[Armchair]

Most people who support the second amendment also support reasonable regulations and restrictions. Emphasis on reasonable.

Placing a serial number on a firearm has been a long-standing practice that doesn't interfere with legal ownership of firearms, nor their use, nor their acquisition. The primary (if not only) reason to obliterate a serial number firearm has been to use it for illegal purposes.

But Mr Routh should face far more serious charges in the future.

[Sarcastr0]

Armchair, you may want to check the next firearm thread. Reasonable restrictions are not popular there.
The phrase 'reasonable restrictions' gets them in a tizzy. Can't trust the legislatures or courts, you see.

Were serial numbers on guns part of our history and tradition?

[Frank Drackman]

No

[Brett Bellmore]

"Reasonable restrictions" are the gun controller's version of "separate but equal"; In theory, separate could be equal, in practice, separate was never equal, because the people who wanted separate didn't WANT equal, the whole point of separate was to avoid equal.

Similarly, "reasonable restrictions" are never reasonable in practice, because the people who want the restrictions don't WANT to be reasonable.

[Sarcastr0]

Ayep, there's Brett proving me right.

[Brett Bellmore]

You guys had your chance to prove you were actually reasonable when Heller was decided. All you had to do was say, "Yeah, fair cop. DC's law WAS unreasonable, good riddance!"

Then with McDonald you could have said, "Fair enough, Chicago's gun laws were crazy."

Instead you had a national meltdown over the decisions, demonstrating to everybody who was watching what you meant by "reasonable": Anything you could get away with, no matter how extreme.

We don't have to pretend you're reasonable, when you get mad over extreme outlier laws being struck down. We don't have to pretend you haven't already told us what sorts of laws you think are reasonable.

[bernard11]

Oh BS, Brett.

You criticize people for being unreasonable about these things, but refuse to recognize that you yourself, and many of your absolutist allies are pretty damn unreasonable yourself.

As long as a decision goes your way its critics are "unreasonable."

[Brett Bellmore]

We're literally talking about the two most anti-gun jurisdictions in the country. If what they were doing was 'reasonable' gun regulation, then the term was just semantically empty, really just meant "anything up to and including a complete ban".

In order to realistically claim you only want reasonable regulations, you have to be willing to admit SOMETHING is "unreasonable".

[Armchair]

Again, the issue is "reasonable" was stretched way, way beyond the original definition by the gun control nuts who wanted the state control over all firearms.

Perhaps a better way to word it is, "items that don't actually interfere in the right to own a firearm". And a serial number doesn't.

[Sarcastr0]

Read what Brett said again, maybe.

He's not everyone who 'supports the Second Amendment' but he's enough that your 'most people' claim is questionable.

[Harvey Mosley]

For context, can you offer an example of a "reasonable" gun law?

[Sarcastr0]

I was trying to engage largely on consistency with Brett because it is a can of worms.

I think there is an individual right to self defense including via firearms.

There is a lot of lower court precedent on what is reasonable, actually. So it’s not just my opinion, which is not worth much. I’ve shot .22 and shotguns and black powder but am not an expert by any means.

based on precedent as I understand it, reasonable would include no guns in courtrooms, a shall issue registration scheme if a state wants it, bans on explosives and machine guns, and banning spring gun traps.
But bear in mind, I am not an expert and could be wrong. Or reasonable may have changed.

What I do know is it'll take a decade or more for Bruen to be reduced to anything predictable or easily implementable by the lower courts. And whatever that is, lots of the guns everywhere to protect us from tyranny folks will hate it because it will be a compromise/harmonization of lots of little precedents.

[Armchair]

"I think there is an individual right to self defense including via firearms."

No you don't. You'd prefer it if all guns were banned.

[Sarcastr0]

Thanks for telling me what I think.

[Kazinski]

Why not?

I can't count how many times you've told me, Brett, XY, etc, how we think.

[Sarcastr0]

1. Tu quque is weak.

2. I cite comments for why I say someone has a position. Armchair, every behind the ball, just asserted.

[Bwaaah]

Sarc: "Thanks for telling me what I think."

For onlookers, such comments add clarity that's missing from your endlessly obfuscating analysis. You lack sufficient credibly to make a compelling argument as to what you actually think. The benefit of outsider inferences of what you think is that they at least make sense, unlike your theories of you.

[Stephen Lathrop]

State control over firearms for militia purposes is in the Constitution. You can look it up. There is nothing in the Constitution about firearms for other purposes, except the 9A and the 10A, You can look that up too.

If you check the historical record, you discover that regulation of firearms for purposes other than militia purposes was left to the states. There is no 2A right to a firearm for self-defense. To create one and put it in the Constitution would have killed ratification throughout the South. For that you can knock yourself ought, trying to discover evidence to the contrary. You won't find any from the founding era. According to Bruen, that means anything you do find doesn't count—but we all know that Bruen meant to ignore any evidence which inconvenienced gun advocates, so you win every argument. Congratulations! Win to Armchair.

When the left assembles political power sufficient to overturn that crapload of political advocacy from the Court, no whining. You had your chance to compromise and did not take it.

[Joe_dallas]

Stephan - You keep getting the historical record wrong.

You state - "There is no 2A right to a firearm for self-defense. "

If what you state is true, then why did the proposal to add "for the common defense" after the right to keep and bear arms get voted down in the Senate when the bill of rights were being debated in Congress back in 1791.
Nothing in the historical record points to anything you just wrote
Nothing in the historical record points to any limitation of the RKA to service in the militia.

Both you and Stevens supposedly historical analysis requires severe torture and distortion of the historical record.

[Kenneth Almquist]

Here is the version of the Second Amendment that the House sent to the Senate:

A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the People, being the best security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed, but no one religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person.

See page 25 of https://www.archives.gov/files/legislative/resources/bill-of-rights/CCBR_IIA.pdf

The phrase “for the common defense” doesn’t appear, but it’s pretty clear that that was, at a minimum, the primary concern. The Senate made one substantial change (eliminating the language about religious scruples), and condensed the language.

We don’t have transcripts of the Congressional debates of that time, but the answer to your question why the Senate didn’t include the phrase “for the common defense” seems obvious. First, it wasn’t in the amendment to begin with, and second, they were trying to streamline the text, not make it more verbose. It’s implicit in the reference to the “security of a free State.”

[Brett Bellmore]

The right to self defense would have been found in the 9th amendment, not the 2nd. A right to armed self defense was trivial, as once you had a right to be armed, you could use those arms for any lawful purpose, and self defense is a quintessentially lawful purpose.

[Sarcastr0]

Maybe no transcripts but Brett might as well have been there.

He’s got it all figured.

[Brett Bellmore]

Don't you ever get tired of pretending those people didn't leave any records behind? That there wasn't a public debate, published in newspapers, copies of which survive to this day? That we don't have the private papers of people like Madison, to read through?

It must be tiring being so devoted to a pretense like that.

[Sarcastr0]

That's not what I pretend. What I've noted about your asserted historical narrative is:
1) you quote zero sources, and
2) you have no method to assure your sources (if you have them) are exhaustive.

Why bother with either, your bottomless confidence is source enough for any assertion!

[Joe_dallas]

Sarcastr0 3 hours ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Maybe no transcripts but Brett might as well have been there.
Sarcastr0 56 mins ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
"That’s not what I pretend."

That is pretty much what you pretend

[Sarcastr0]

Pure contradiction. And failing to read the rest of my post.

Why did you bother?

[JoeFromtheBronx]

The religious scruples portion is suggestive.

They weren't thinking about Jainists or those who think violence should never be used, including for personal self-defense, or shooting animals for food.

The text was concerned about usage of the militia for defense of the public. It was not "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom to own firearms."

I say it is merely "suggestive" since this tidbit won't settle the debate, especially since I think the meaning has rightly developed over time.

[Joe_dallas]

kenneth's comment - The phrase “for the common defense” doesn’t appear, but it’s pretty clear that that was, at a minimum, the primary concern.

ken - the phrase "common defense" is not in 2A - Because - as I stated, the proposal to add "common defense " was voted down.

Thus any claim that 2a was limited to the common defense or limited to serving in the militia is pure BS.

[Joe_dallas]

kenneth - did you intentionally omit one of the prior versions of 2A prior to adoption by Congress?

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.[135]

[Stephen Lathrop]

Joe_dallas, please understand I am not arguing with you. I am trying to help. It is evident you do not understand what the question under debate actually is. It is not, as you seem to suppose, a question about reading history, and interpreting it in present context. For that, no particular constraints apply. Anyone who wants to do that is as qualified as any other to reach whatever conclusions he prefers. There isn't even any obvious way to be right or wrong, if that is all you attempt to do.

But the problem confronting would-be originalist legal analysts is different, and more complex. It is subject to laboriously-developed standard critiques. Those have been put in place on the basis of experience, to exclude logical errors easy to fall into within the maze of complications anyone enters into who undertakes to reason across time.

That problem, in contrast with the one mentioned above it, is not to read history, but to discover it. It is not to interpret history in present context, but to interpret history in light of a long-forgotten context contemporaneous with the creation of the evidence under study.

Thus, methods to infer that forgotten context, without falling into logical errors, or inadvertently smuggling in and substituting present-minded context, are of the essence of that research. Those methods insist specifically that the only considerations admissible must be those derived by making items of historical evidence critique each other. Thus, reference to present-day controversies, and even thought about them, get excluded from the method.

You have evidently not been educated or practiced in those methods mentioned above. You are a reader of history, not a historical researcher. I doubt you even understand those methods exist, let alone what purposes they are designed to serve. I thus can see why it is tempting for someone such as yourself to accuse of distortions others who rely on those methods with a specific purpose to avoid distortions.

I assure you, there is no motive for distortion. The only purpose such a peculiar and laborious method can legitimately serve is to answer one question: What happened in the past? To seek an accurate answer to that question is to rule out methodologically any confounding interest in present-day controversies. The motivation you suppose for distortions simply is not there. It is ruled out by the method itself, by experience and design, as a methodological error.

[Stephen Lathrop]

If what you state is true, then why did the proposal to add “for the common defense” after the right to keep and bear arms get voted down in the Senate when the bill of rights were being debated in Congress back in 1791.

Taking that as a question, my answer is, "Beats me. And beats you too."

In general, to infer meaning from measures not taken requires at least extra care to provide analysis directly from the historical record, by way of explaining what drove the decision. Do you have that? If not, what you have done is to create a historical counter-factual, and award it pride of place over the record of what did happen. Whatever that might be, it has nothing to do with history.

[Kazinski]

The constitution says the people have a right to keep and bear arms.

It shall not be unfringed.

Just as the constitution does not say the first amendment protects the expressive right to dance nude.

Nor does the 4th amendment says that probable cause is needed to search for child pornography.

Once a constitutional right is vested in the people, any purpose the right may be used for is protected.

[Magister]

It shall not be unfringed.

Wait, you want federal courts to be under admiralty law?

Limitations are placed on a number of constitutional rights, without the explicit limitation of a purpose or being well-regulated.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Kazinski — There is almost a beat to that. With a little work you could turn it into a chant. Come to think of it, the difference between,"chant," and, "cant," is just the letter, "h."

[Kazinski]

The text of the Constitution Article 1 Militia Clause and the Commerce Clause both would give Congress such authority as its related to both arming the militia, and interstate commerce.

That doesn’t mean the People don’t have the right to build there own firearms though.

But the most serious charge Rouse faces is Felon in Possession.

[Brett Bellmore]

"Placing a serial number on a firearm has been a long-standing practice"

It started in 1968, with the Federal Gun Control act. Prior to that they'd only had serial numbers on them if the manufacturer found it useful for QC tracking.

So, about 180 years of not requiring them. Sorry, you've got to have a fairly short time horizon to consider that "long standing".

[Sarcastr0]

Ayep, there’s Brett proving me right. Again.

[Brett Bellmore]

You're an idiot, Sarcastr0. If we went 180 years without a law, you might claim that it's reasonable, you can't say that it's part of our "history and tradition" while people who are still around remembering life before it.

If that's what you mean by "history and tradition", you've deprived the phrase of all meaning.

[Sarcastr0]

Note that I wasn't engaging on whether you were right or wrong, only that you were contradicting Armchair.

Your jerking knee rageposting: again, proving me correct.

[Brett Bellmore]

I'm not contradicting Armchair.

Mandatory serial numbers can, at one and the same time, be reasonable, (Depending on details of implementation, of course.) and absolutely not part of our "history and tradition".

I'm not going to put up a fight about serial numbers, (Again, depending on details of implementation.) because, really, they're not that big a deal. Not a lot of utility, actually, but neither are they much of an infringement.

But I'm not going to pretend they're not a fairly recent innovation, either. There's an awful lot of presentism going on, on your side of the gun control debate, people pretending fairly recent developments in gun regulation are just the way things always were.

No, the truth is that this country had very little gun regulation within living memory, and got by just fine without it.

[Sarcastr0]

You're absolutely contradicting Armchair.

He is arguing serial numbers on guns would comport with the 2A as most 2A proponents see it.

You don't buy his premise. Because he doesn't read gun threads I guess.

[Brett Bellmore]

I'm contradicting Armchair about serial numbers being longstanding. I'm NOT contradicting him about them being 'reasonable'.

Here's what I think about "reasonable gun regulation":

1) Almost all reasonable gun regulations have been law for a very long time.
2) Almost all gun regulations promoted as "reasonable" turn out to be batshit crazy when you get into the details. Because the people promoting them aren't reasonable people.

For instance, Kennedy, among others, promoted a ban on "armor piercing" ammo, which would have banned virtually all ammo suitable for hunting. When this was pointed out to them, did they change their proposal? Nope. Because banning almost all ammo suitable for hunting wasn't a downside from their perspective.

Chicago just shut off their "shot spotter" system, despite it having a fine record of working, because it was accurately locating gunshots in neighborhoods with the "wrong" demographics. That's your "reasonable" gun controllers in practice.

[Noscitur a sociis]

So… do you think the serial number requirements are constitutional or not?

[Brett Bellmore]

I think serial number requirements for firearms actually in interstate commerce are constitutional, at the federal level. For firearms that stay within a state, or prohibiting removing them after the end sale, not so much. I take seriously the worlds in the Commerce clause after "to regulate".

At the state level, yeah, states can do all sorts of dumb things constitutionally.

But, the devil is in the details, and it would certainly be possible, even unsurprising, to find a serial number requirement crafted in a way that violates the 2nd amendment. Even if it would be possible to draft one that didn't.

[jb]

Wait, do people not use bird shot to hunt birds?

Also, if we're going to throw back to the 1700s to figure out what the Constitution means, how did those guys manage to go hunting with their muskets and flintlock rifles?

(Point being, it's obviously possible to hunt without "armor piercing" ammo.)

[Sarcastr0]

Why does the Commerce Clause come into an analysis of an Amendment in the Bill of Rights?

[Brett Bellmore]

Yes, it's obviously possible to hunt without armor piercing ammo, if by that you mean REAL "armor piercing ammo".

It's also fairly easy to craft a functional definition of "armor piercing" that would sweep up anything capable of killing any game animal larger than a squirrel or partridge. And that's what they'd done.

The ban prohibited any ammo which, when fired from some length of barrel, was capable of penetrating whatever grade of police vest the AG specified. And any pistol that was capable of firing said ammo.

It authorized the AG to pick the grade of vest the test would be performed on. If he picked the lowest grade, the law as written would have banned every form of ammo more powerful than .22LR or birdshot, and every pistol capable of firing such ammo. And any handgun capable of firing such ammo.

This was pointed out to the sponsors of the bill. They didn't amend or abandon it.

[Brett Bellmore]

"Why does the Commerce Clause come into an analysis of an Amendment in the Bill of Rights?

I was asked whether I thought it was constitutional, not whether I thought it violated the 2nd amendment.

[jb]

Brett, so it seems like the law didn't *actually* ban almost all ammo that is used in hunting, you just think that there was some theoretical possibility that it could be misused to do so. Maybe the bill's proponents thought the AG would use some reasonable armor for the definition. This seems especially likely given that the bill points to specific types of ammo that inspired its creation.

[Brett Bellmore]

The distinction between passing a law that outright mandates banning almost all ammo and pistols, and passing a law that 'merely' permits the AG to ban almost all ammo and pistols if he feels like it, is not the sort of thing most people want their civil liberties to rest on. Even if it seems significant to you.

[Noscitur a sociis]

I was asked whether I thought it was constitutional, not whether I thought it violated the 2nd amendment.

I apologize for assuming that you might be able to actually be able to actually understand the context of the question instead of reaching for a lame “gotcha”.

Do you think that a serial number requirement on firearms violates the Second Amendment?

[Brett Bellmore]

"I apologize for assuming that you might be able to actually be able to actually understand the context of the question instead of reaching for a lame “gotcha”."

Well, excuse me for answering the question that was actually asked, instead of guessing at the question that had been intended. Oh, wait! I DID answer your new question, too:

"But, the devil is in the details, and it would certainly be possible, even unsurprising, to find a serial number requirement crafted in a way that violates the 2nd amendment. Even if it would be possible to draft one that didn’t."

So, yes, I think it's possible for a serial number law to not violate the 2nd amendment. The one we actually have at the federal level?

Leaving aside enumerated powers issues, I don't believe it facially violates the 2nd amendment.

As applied to guns that have never traveled in interstate commerce? Ghost guns and the like? I would not be so generous; Impinging on an explicit civil liberty, with just an attenuated and essentially pretextual basis in any actual grant of federal power, I'd say it does.

I'd also say it will be a cold day in Hell that the Supreme court agrees with me about that.

[jb]

Brett--lots of laws can be interpreted more or less expansively. It seems more interesting to see how they get interpreted in practice.

[Armchair]

Nois, JB

So, it's worth pointing out how a serial number requirement might violate the 2nd amendment.

California's "microstamping" law is a good example of that. It "requires" a gun to "stamp" the bullet fired with the serial number of the firearm. That technology doesn't exist. So even though it "just" requires a serial number to be put on a firearm (or it's ammunition), it effectively violates the second amendment by making the firearm illegal...since the technology doesn't exist.

Other "simple" ways a serial number requirement might not be constitutional...a serial number requirement that required the serial number to be across the muzzle of the gun. Whenever the gun was fired it would "obliterate" the serial number, thus violating the law.

Sounds "dumb" but these types of mental gymnastics are what liberals who would like to make guns effectively illegal live for

[Bwaaah]

See if you can exploit little differences between Armchair and Bellmore while ignoring the big [D]ifference: Democrats despise individual rights to have guns, and only know the limits of their appetite for gun control by having courts shoot them down. See New York State’s history of draconian gun control laws, and court ordered shoot-downs of those laws, for Democrat instincts on the matter.

I never heard a Democrat say, “When it comes to gun laws, we don’t want to be like New York.” To the contrary, whenever New York gun laws get shot down in courts, Democrats across the nation mourn another loss to conservative courts as if there weren’t even a constitutional question in the matter. There isn’t a constitutional question in the matter to Democrats; individuals don’t have a right to own guns, in their prevailing views.

Cue Sarcastr0’s mealy-mouthed [D]ifferences with me.

[Sarcastr0]

Yeah we have like 2 gun threads a week. I'm purposefully not going around that circle again.

You don't know what I want re: gun laws, so you're just writing fan fiction at this point.

Suffice to say you are wrong about my position on gun regulations.

And your paranoid anti-Dem screed sounds like you've been MAGA for years; dunno why you get exercised when people call you that.

[Noscitur a sociis]

The question up for discussion is whether the serial number requirement violates the Second Amendment. Armchair says it obviously doesn’t. If Brett Bellmore thinks it does, that seems like more than a small difference!

[Armchair]

Nos,

Brett's not arguing that the current serial number requirement violates the constitution. To quote...

"So, yes, I think it’s possible for a serial number law to not violate the 2nd amendment. The one we actually have at the federal level?
Leaving aside enumerated powers issues, I don’t believe it facially violates the 2nd amendment."

[Brett Bellmore]

"Brett’s not arguing that the current serial number requirement violates the constitution."

No, let's be clear: I DO think the current serial number requirement violates the constitution, in as much as it exceeds the enumerated powers of Congress, at least as applied to guns which are not in interstate commerce strictly defined. I just don't think it facially violates the 2nd amendment.

[Armchair]

Brett,

That's a fair point. You don't think the 2nd amendment is violated, you're just arguing the requirement exceeds Congress's enumerated powers.

So, one item to point out here, is that under federal law, privately made firearms don't necessarily require serial numbers. Only those made by organizations that have federal firearms licenses.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/privately-made-firearms

This then gets into the whole "is it just intra-state commerce, or is it interstate commerce that the feds can regulate?". Given the nature of commerce in the US, and given the fact that a privately manufactured firearm already doesn't require a serial number (under federal law)....I think we would have a split here. This isn't Wickard...the requirement is only for an organization that is trying to sell the firearms. And trying to keep those sales (and resales) entirely within a single state is likely an struggle in futility that is doomed to failure.

[Armchair]

Sarcastr0 - Rule Zero.

Whenever Sarcastr0 says that I say or argue or think something.

Just assume Sarcastr0 is wrong.

[Sarcastr0]

You: "Most people who support the second amendment also support reasonable regulations and restrictions. Emphasis on reasonable.

Placing a serial number on a firearm has been a long-standing practice that doesn’t interfere with legal ownership of firearms, nor their use, nor their acquisition. The primary (if not only) reason to obliterate a serial number firearm has been to use it for illegal purposes."

Me: "He is arguing serial numbers on guns would comport with the 2A as most 2A proponents see it."

What did I get wrong about your position, Armchair?

[Armchair]

Why don't you try arguing your own views, instead of other people's.

You won't do that though...

[Sarcastr0]

Don't weasel. You accuse me of getting what you said wrong.

I asked how.

You changed the subject

Weasel.

Oh and I do argue my views elsewhere. You said I was lying.

[Armchair]

Got it. You fully support the NRA's position on the second amendment.

Good to know.

[Sarcastr0]

I don’t know the NRAs position on the 2A.

But I do recognize an excluded middle when I see one.

[Armchair]

Since you don't ever properly elaborate your position...we'll never know.

Go, enjoy being an NRA supporter! I'll put you down on their mailing list for a $1000 donation.

[Sarcastr0]

I think I set out my position pretty clearly in the post you said was a lie.

But you seem committed to some whole other stupid game so whatev, have fun.

[Kazinski]

But they do require serial numbers on cars, and motorcycles under the commerce clause.

And serial numbers on Weapons sutible to the militia would be reasonable under Congress' responsibility to arm the militia.

The test is "Text as informed by History and Tradition". The clear text provides the authorization. When the text is not clear then history and tradition become relevant.

[Brett Bellmore]

How exactly do serial numbers on weapons suitable for militia use further arming the militia?

Because acting orthogonal to, or in opposition to, the purpose of the 2nd amendment, can't be grounded IN the 2nd amendment. You can't say, "In order to assure a well armed militia, we're hereby banning the following guns."

It's like banning books in order to advance a well read public.

[Kazinski]

Brett, serial numbers on weapons used by the militia would be essential for maintenanc, recalls, and ensuring that they were being supplied the right ammunition.

There are lots of AR-15s that can only reliably use .223, some that can use both .223 and 5.56.

Surely youcan see the utility of tracking serial numbers for a Congress that is regulating the militia.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Kazinski — "Text as informed by history and tradition," does not say evaluate text first, and then turn to other factors if the text is ambiguous. No doubt some judge has said that. But in cases of antique texts, it makes far more sense to evaluate history and tradition first, as a means to infer an otherwise forgotten context which determines the meaning to give to the text.

To insist on doing it the other way round is to insist on using present context to evaluate the antique text, which in most cases will guarantee major interpretive errors. Present context cannot possibly have had any influence on what a historical text meant at the time of its creation.

[John F. Carr]

The First Circuit discussed the history of serial numbers in the past year. Federal law prohibits possession of a gun with an altered or defaced serial number. Being convicted under this crime or an equivalent state crime is bad. (Immigration bad, if I recall correctly.) A man was convicted under a similar Massachusetts law. Was that bad? The answer was no. The federal law only applies to 20th century and later firearms. The Massachusetts law has no such restriction. It is legally possible that the prior conviction in Massachusetts was for possession of an antique. Some 19th century manufacturers did put serial numbers on guns despite the lack of a federal law requiring them. So the man was technically correct.

[Zarniwoop]

I would like to read that 1st Cir opinion, got a cite or case name handy?

[John F. Carr]

Portillo v. DHS, http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/22-1383P-01A.pdf

Because we find that a conviction under Massachusetts General Laws ("MGL") ch. 269, § 11C is not categorically a firearm offense as defined by 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(C), we grant the petition for review, vacate the decision below, and remand for further proceedings.
[...]
Even though Massachusetts and federal law did not legally require serial numbers on all firearms until 1968, Massachusetts criminalized the defacing and removal of serial numbers in 1937, suggesting that some manufacturers used serial numbers before 1968. [...] And we know that some manufacturers did. Indeed, some manufacturers started using serial numbers well before1900.

[Zarniwoop]

Thanks, appreciate it!

[billatcrea]

I have a Weatherby 7mm magnum that was purchased by my father in law in 1964. You know what? It has a serial number on it. That's how I was able to find out from Weatherby when and where it was purchased. I also have a .22 center fire rifle he bought in the 1930s that also has a serial number on it. Again, that's how I was able to confirm the date of purchase.

[Brett Bellmore]

I have a lawn mower, it has a serial number on it. All sorts of products end up with serial numbers for various reasons, such as QC tracking.

It still wasn't a federal legal mandate until '68.

[Armchair]

Again, a long standing practice is not a regulation.

[Armchair]

" long-standing practice"...not regulation.

Prior to 1968, there's a long history of major gun manufacturers (Colt, Winchester, etc) placing serial numbers on firearms going back to the mid and late 1800s. This of course was optional on the manufacturer's part, but it was a practice. For example...

https://sightm1911.com/1911Production.htm

[Sarcastr0]

You and Brett are at odds here, it seems.

[Armchair]

"You and Brett are at odds here, it seems."

Again, this is incorrect. Brett understands that companies put serial numbers on firearms prior to 1968. For example "Prior to that they’d only had serial numbers on them if the manufacturer found it useful for QC tracking."

Your little "oh I'm going to create internal dissent by deliberately misinterpreting and lying about what is actual said" game is getting dull.

[Sarcastr0]

Brett: "It started in 1968, with the Federal Gun Control act. Prior to that they’d only had serial numbers on them if the manufacturer found it useful for QC tracking.
So, about 180 years of not requiring them. Sorry, you’ve got to have a fairly short time horizon to consider that “long standing”.

Armchair: "Prior to 1968, there’s a long history of major gun manufacturers (Colt, Winchester, etc) placing serial numbers on firearms going back to the mid and late 1800s. This of course was optional on the manufacturer’s part, but it was a practice.”

Also Armchair: 'Brett and I don't disagree.'

Whatever you're trying to pull is not working very well.

[Absaroka]

Brett is saying, correctly, that serial numbers were optional before 1968.

Armchair is saying, correctly, that most guns had serial numbers long before 1968.

Both are correct. Generally speaking since ??1900ish?? the only guns that didn't have serial numbers were the real cheap ones - bargain 22's, for example.

Power tools and TVs have had serial numbers as long as I have been alive, but have never been required. 'in general use' != 'required by law'.

(I have never been sure why this is such a point of contention. Requiring guns to have serial numbers hardly impacts any militia or self defense use (as opposed to registration). I've made DIY guns, where serial numbers aren't required, and I still stamp a number on them; if I come home to find the alarm bypassed and the safe torched open I will have numbers to give the sheriff. OTOH, other than recovering stolen guns I think the number of crimes solved by such a requirement is likely vanishingly small. It's not like serial numbers solve a lot of murders or whatever)

[Sarcastr0]

Brett is saying current serial number requirements are unconstitutional, based on history and tradition. He points to serial number policies pre-1968.

You are saying current serial number requirements are constructional, based on history and tradition. You point to serial number policies pre-1968.

I don't really care if you want to fight over it over cover up the disagreement, but quit pissing up my leg and saying its raining.

[Absaroka]

"You are saying current serial number requirements are constructional,"

Assuming you meant 'constitutional', I suggest you read more carefully. For example, note what I had to say about constitutionality.

[Armchair]

"Brett is saying, correctly, that serial numbers were optional before 1968.
Armchair is saying, correctly, that most guns had serial numbers long before 1968.
Both are correct."

Correct.

[Brett Bellmore]

"I have never been sure why this is such a point of contention."

Essentially the requirement to put a serial number on any gun you sell, even if originally manufactured at home for your own use, amounts to a federal registration requirement. And gun owners are understandably antsy about gun registration, given it's utility in enabling confiscation and harassment.

[Absaroka]

"Essentially the requirement to put a serial number on any gun you sell, even if originally manufactured at home for your own use, amounts to a federal registration requirement."

I don't see that. In states without universal background check laws, you could sell the gun (homemade w/o a serial, or homemade with a serial, or factory built with one) to your buddy Bob from the Rod-n-Gun without any records being kept.

You could also do so with a background check system, if that system was designed to check that Bob was a legit purchaser, without recording any numbers.

I get (and agree with!) the notion that maintaining an inventory of who has what gun is problematic if/when some evil orange tyrant takes over the government, but it's the inventory that's the issue, not the serial number. If the records say Brett has a Garand and a 1911, and he is in legal trouble if he can't produce them on demand, that's the problem, not whether the records contain a serial number or not.

[John F. Carr]

The Supreme Court would reject an as-applied challenge to the crime of possession by a person with his record.

[Dr. Ed 2]

The founder of Blackwater -- not I -- recently stated that a successful assassination of Trump would produce -- at best -- serious national disturbances and possibly a civil war.

While their tactics were sometimes questioned, Blackwater was highly successful in VIP security in places like Iraq and that includes threat assessment.

[Moderation4ever]

Were they successful. I seem to remember four of their operatives getting ambushed and their bodies dragged through the streets.

[Dr. Ed 2]

I would consider their knowledge of ambushes superior to yours or mine.

[Noscitur a sociis]

I would certainly agree with part of that!

[Noscitur a sociis]

I would certainly agree with part of that!

[Commenter_XY]

VC Conspirators! Here is a multi-part poll for the day. This one is fun. But be honest! Your answers will tell us about you. 🙂

What is your favorite kind of bagel...toasted or not?
Who makes the best bagel? Yes, what local bagel joint is your best.
When you order a bagel, what is your typical order?
Butter...salted or not?
Cream cheese...brick or spread?

Let me address the best bagel question, right now. In the USA, the best bagels are found in NYC and North NJ. That's it. There really is not a debate about that. Whew, got that off my chest. 🙂

My answers: Plain; not toasted (although a bagel with smoked lox and the works is truly a gift from The Almighty); [I do not want to bias results by naming them]; Plain, with butter the first time (unsalted the first time, thereafter salted); salted; brick.

I am sure a lot of you fine lawyers and law professors grab a bagel before a busy day at court, or class. Let's hear it. Bagels!?

[Brett Bellmore]

Toasted.
The Bagel Factory. Based on a combination of decent quality, and actually being open during hours I can reach it. Sorry, high quality Jewish deli place: Can't buy your superior product if you close at 2pm every day!
Garlic bagel, the sort they keep in their own isolation area.
Butter, yes.
Cream cheese, rarely, smoked salmon spread.

[Krayt]

They close at 2 because they sell out. I went, oddly, to “New York Bagels”, in a state that was far away from NY, at 4 pm, surprised they were still open. All the good ones were almost gone, as I love egg, onion, and poppy. I took the few left. He tried to get me to take a bag of the losers o’ the day, dropping the price over and over. Desperate to get the hell out of there, he offered to throw it in for free but I still didn’t want them (or that many, it was just for me.)

[Krayt]

Now I want bagels. F U guys!

[Nelson]

Same

[Brett Bellmore]

Still, the point stands: I can't buy their bagels if they're not selling them when I'm able to reach them, so perforce, my favorite has to be someplace where I can actually buy them.

"Desperate to get the hell out of there, he offered to throw it in for free but I still didn’t want them (or that many, it was just for me.)"

That gives me an idea; I should try coming up with a savory bread pudding, to use stale bagels in.

[Mr. Bumble]

Piece of cake, just don't use everything bagels.
Cinnamon raisin would be good.

[Brett Bellmore]

No, I was thinking savory. Think of something with the flavor profile of a Stromboli, maybe. A cheese and sausage bread pudding. I think bagels are a bit chewy for sweet bread pudding.

BTW, am I the only person who thinks "Stromboli" really ought to be the name of a brass wind instrument, something like a tuba?

[Bwaaah]

My uncle played the Stromboli. Or did he level ice skating rinks with one? Now I'm confused.

[bernard11]

Cinnamon raisin bagels should be illegal.

Onion bagels are supreme.

[Mr. Bumble]

So says the bagel nazi.

[Commenter_XY]

Onion bagel, really? Can you even get a good bagel in Nashville? I am going to go out on a limb and say....nope.

What do you put on it?

[not guilty]

It's been a while since I have been there, but Bruegger’s Bagels on Harding Road in Nashville is good.

[Commenter_XY]

I have had Bruegger's. Sorry NG. They sell these pretty looking round things they call a bagel, but it ain't. 🙂

When I am in Nashville, I'll have to do without bagels, and sub BBQ brisket instead. Fewer carbs. 😉

[JoeFromtheBronx]

I dissent.

[Frank Drackman]

Since I'm only 1/2 Jewish (the good half!) never really got the whole Bagel thang, I'm more of a Hardies Sausage Biscuit guy, and I know Pigs are filthy animals, (but charming, see Porky, Arnold Ziffel, Babe, Piglet, Peppa) but mmm, hmm, Sausage tastes good, almost enough to get me to except that Hey-Zeuss guy as my Savior

Frank

[verochkax]

Bagels are gross. Way too much dough. Give me a wrap any day.

[Brett Bellmore]

Well, they're 100% dough, but so are pretzels. So is bread. So it seems a silly complaint.

I like them because they taste good, and give your teeth a workout. What, you prefer Wonderbread?

[verochkax]

I prefer whole grain loaves.

[Brett Bellmore]

Well, I do like Dave's Bread, especially the sprouted grain loaves. (Just wish they were available in regular thickness.) I bake my own bread, but my family always demands the same buttermilk loaf (From Bernard Clayton's New Complete Book of Breads.) so I don't get a lot of opportunities to bake that sort of thing.

I like a bread with some chew to it, and bagels really deliver on that front.

[verochkax]

Dave's is my favorite, but it's a little pricey.

[Krayt]

First get ones with flavor, like egg+poppy, or poppy, or onion. Then use wayyyy too much cream cheese, with chives.

They are like baked potatoes. Nobody “loves” chawin’ through a mass of potato. They love chewing on taters slathered in salt and butter, maybe sour cream, maybe the aforementioned chives if you’re lucky. If you use bacon bits, “You disgust me. Leave.”

That was a recipe my mom used to make when I was a kid. Cut up potoes, skin and all, into chunks and boil. Slather with butter and a cut up hand grab of chives from a little chive copse she kept behind the garage.

[Ska]

1. Not toasted. A good bagel shouldn't be toasted. Toasting is for day olds.
2. Probably H&H or Essa-bagel.
3. I keep it simple and don't want fish for breakfast. Either everything with butter, or cinnamon raisin with butter. Savory or sweet as befitting my mood.
4. Salted.
5. Brick.

[Sarcastr0]

I did not escape NY without becoming a bagel snob.

I like egg bagels.

[Commenter_XY]

Essa, yes. But remember, I did state everywhere outside of NYC and North NJ was already at a handicap.

[Ska]

Fair enough. I've never lived outside NYC, so I'm kind of out of my element with non-NYC bagelries.

I was in Montreal a few months back, and for all the praise of the illustrious Montreal bagel... I don't know, I wasn't impressed. It's a bagel. It's dense. It's kind of compressed. Wasn't my kind of bagel.

[Commenter_XY]

Yeah Ska, I travel more frequently now. First of all, you cannot get a decent bagel anywhere south of Jersey, and north of Boca Raton: it is a vast bagel-less wasteland along rt. 95, sad but true. They sell these round things that look like bagels in this vast wasteland, but just ain't. 😉

[verochkax]

"I’ve never lived outside NYC"

I feel sorry for you.

[John F. Carr]

I chose to take the advice of some guy on the internet who said a good bagel doesn't need to be toasted or drowned in toppings. On the rare occasions when I eat bagels I look for a fresh one, maybe with some asiago cheese flavor, and stick it in my mouth. Maybe with a little butter. I no longer pass by bagel shops regularly. I can live without bagels.

[Michael P]

I usually go with nova lox (all the toppings, including capers) on an untoasted whole wheat bagel from my neighborhood bagel shop. I agree that toasting is for old bagels.

There's a competing "New York style" deli nearby that claims to import their bagels daily from NYC, but they must get rejects or something because their bagels are skinny, lumpy and somewhat inferior in texture.

[SRG2]

1. Everything bagel with cream cheese and lox – not toasted, as the bagel should be warm and fresh when acquired. FWIW TJ’s wild Alaskan smoked salmon is an excellent choice as it has a strong flavour and meaty texture. I like the addition of capers and red onions but they aren’t essential.

2. Add Long Island, or at least, Nassau County, to the list of acceptable places for bagels. In Merrick we have Bagelman and Bagel Plaza, both excellent. (A few years back a cousin took me to a bagel place near Atlanta run by Mexican Jews. The baked dough item looked like a bagel, was very good, but wasn’t a bagel.)

[Nelson]

"The baked dough item looked like a bagel, was very good, but wasn’t a bagel.)"

Those always leave me feeling conflicted. Should I be happy it was delicious or disappointed it wasn't a bagel?

[Commenter_XY]

Yes, I should have been more clear; Long Island, Westchester and Rockland counties are 'in'.

[SRG2]

Good man.

[Commenter_XY]

Probably Orange County too, upon reflection. 😉

[SRG2]

Let me add: one definition of a gentile is someone who gets their bagels from a supermarket.

[Nelson]

I'm a gentile and I would never. The FBI should stake out the supermarket bagel shelves to identify potential serial killers.

[Zarniwoop]

1. If still fresh enough, preferably still warm, untoasted.
2. Kupel’s in Brookline MA. My college living group (traditionally Jewish frat, though less so these days) would make an early-AM bagel run for 30-40 people every Sunday morning.
But since I live in Wisconsinland these days, Gotham Bagels in Madison is pretty acceptable.
3. Half dozen to go, sesame/plain/everything mix.
4. Cream cheese spread, brick works. Lox and capers, a thin slice of tomato from my garden when I’m lucky.

[Commenter_XY]

re 1….Crunchy exterior, or more just chewy?
re 2….Just Sundays? ????
re 3….Please tell me you put the Everything bagels in a separate bag.

Gotham Bagels in Madison, WI. Maybe M4e can chime in on that.

[Nelson]

An excellent thread, XY.

"What is your favorite kind of bagel…toasted or not?" --> Not toasted, unless it's over a day old. Then lightly toasted.

"Who makes the best bagel?" --> Locally it's a place called Bagelmania. There used to be another fantastic bagel place here, but they were Colombian (I kid you not) and they moved back.

"When you order a bagel, what is your typical order?" --> A half dozen (a dozen if my partner lets me), unsliced and untoasted. A mix that includes plain, egg, Asiago, cheddar/dill, and salt (if you've never had one, I highly recommend it). Egg and cheese sandwich if I need some protein with my carbs.

"Butter…salted or not?" --> No butter

"Cream cheese…brick or spread?" --> Brick. None of that whispy crap. A good bagel can handle a dense cream cheese shmear.

"In the USA, the best bagels are found in NYC and North NJ. That’s it."

While I've had bagels in individual shops that can match NYC/North Jersey, that's the only place that you can walk into any bagel shop and be assured of at least an above-average bagel.

Buying supermarket bagels is a primary indicator of sociopathy and bad parenting. Whew, got that off my chest.

"although a bagel with smoked lox and the works is truly a gift from The Almighty"

Preach, brother!

[Commenter_XY]

Supermarket bagels as potential child abuse indicator, and a definite indicator of sociopathy. Yes, I have to agree.

[Zarniwoop]

I generally don't use the word "bagel" to describe the sad toroidal bread objects found in supermarkets.

[Bwaaah]

LonGisland, particularly Nassau County, has lots of excellent local bagel bakeries that are competitive with NYC and North Jersey. (SRG2 correctly points this out.)

The basic perfection is a freshly baked, cooled to room temperature plain bagel with a [thick] shmear of cream cheese. Not all cream cheeses are alike, and Philly is the standard to match.

To further agree, throw some Nova lox on there (some onion doesn’t hurt) and it’s every bit as heavenly as an Egg McMuffin (to reveal my gutter instincts). (Note that a bacon-egg-and-cheese-on-a-roll sandwich from any New York deli is right up there with the others as a great breakfast entree.)

There are too many great bagel bakers for me to call one out. But I’ll point out a newcomer in NYC, Apollo Bagels, that is so dense and meaty and glutinous that it needs the hole to remind people it’s a bagel. It’s a highly fermented dough that’s a fusion between great bread and bagel, right up there with Boudin’s sour dough out there in San Francisco.

Unsalted butter is the best when all you’re eating is butter; salted butter is better for everything else.

[verochkax]

Nassau County is a shithole filled with a combination of ghetto blacks, in places like Uniondale, obnoxious Jews in places like Roslyn, Jericho, and Syosset, and dumb guido Italians on the South Shore.

[SRG2]

So that's one vote for a plain slice of "American cheese" on Wonder Bread

[verochkax]

I prefer aged cheddar on freshly baked whole wheat

[Commenter_XY]

So v....do you know a guy named Rob Misek, by chance? The two of you would get along splendidly. You should look him up.

[verochkax]

No. Who is he?

[Commenter_XY]

A kindred spirit of yours. 😉

[Nelson]

Agreed.

[Bwaaah]

You think you're talking about bagels, and then in walks a verochkax.

[Commenter_XY]

Shit, he eats cheddar on whole wheat, Bwaaah. Ugh!

[Bwaaah]

LOL. Obviously a connoisseur, of something.

[Nelson]

He's our resident pro-Nazi Holocaust denier.

In any VC post that claims someone else is the worst person ever, there's an unspoken "except for Rob Misek" at the end.

[Mr. Bumble]

That should be Taylor ham, egg and cheese.

[ducksalad]

1. Everything, grilled in butter.
2. South Texas, there are no proper bagels made locally.
3. Everything, grilled in butter.
4. Salted butter, sprinkled with extra salt.
5. Cream cheese should be in a brick, but left out to get soft.

[Jmaie]

I've not yet found a good bagel since moving 50 miles south of Seattle. To be fair I've given up trying, so if anyone has a recommendation in this area...

Supermarket bagels, yuk. Used to visit Noah's bagels in the SF bay area. I preferred toasted but then they sell bagel-shaped bread so no sacrilege.

[Jmaie]

Update, found mention of a place in Tacoma selling sourdough bagels. Is that a thing?

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Toasted bagel with cream cheese spread. Plain bagel, because poppy seed bagels make you test positive on a drug test.

[Dr. Ed 2]

One of the few things UMass cooks right are "Sunny Risers" which consist of an Everything Bagel with egg, bacon, & cheese inside.

[Commenter_XY]

Runny yolk, or no?

[SRG2]

A bagel with bacon is too multi-faith for me 🙂

[Krayt]

I love bacon but it dominates anything it is on, so what's the point?

[Dr. Ed 2]

Worth Watching: https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=bonjeno+youtube+trump+assassiation&ia=web

[Commenter_XY]

Dr. Deborah Lipstadt recently gave an important interview on anti-semitism to the Jerusalem Post, about the new Global Guidelines for Countering Antisemitism that the Biden administration is helping nurture (to their unending credit, and I am grateful for that). Her comments about the need to directly address on-campus pro-hamas demonstrations are relevant today.

The article is a 5-7 minute read. Well worth it.
https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/article-820932

[Brett Bellmore]

I have doubts this will accomplish anything much, since in the places where it's really needed, the government itself tends to be complicit. Otherwise neutral enforcement of ordinary law would accomplish 90% of the goal, easily.

The biggest force driving antisemism in the world, when you get down to it, is antisemitic countries with lots of petro-dollars to spend. You have to cut off the flow into institutions like universities, so that they lose that financial incentive to humor antisemites. So here in the US I'd suggest we get a lot more serious about treating universities that take foreign money as foreign agents. The NPOs that are funded with petro-dollars, too.

[Frank Drackman]

All these Ham-Ass terrorist Students/Faculty/Administration in our Universities have Cell Phones, just sayin', be terrible if they started exploding.

[Dr. Ed 2]

And giving them instant sex change operations... 🙂

[Dr. Ed 2]

I do believe Trump would give them an end it or lose Fed $$$ ultimatum.

[hobie]

"Her comments about the need to directly address on-campus pro-hamas demonstrations"

Funny, she makes no mention that campus demonstrations are pro-hamas. Looks like all the complaints around here about the rubes making up shit they claim to be in articles applies to you as well, XY

[Bwaaah]

From the article:

She added that many of the university students engaging in antisemitism are failing to see two sides of the conflict – while they see the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, they fail to view Hamas as a terrorist organization.

Funny you missed that, just like the "rubes."

[hobie]

Oh, I definitely saw that one. Thanks for making my case

[Commenter_XY]

hobie, today PM Erdogan of Turkey called out and praised those pro hamas student demonstrators at our universities in his speech to the UN. That is not a good thing, that is a bad thing.

[Frank Drackman]

Gotta room full of Shysters here...
So what crimes may the "Second Gentleman" have committed by knocking up his Housekeeper? and is there something in the Naval Observatory water that makes Men do that? seems like AlGore had the same thing happen to him (and if it resulted in that Karen of all Karens Tipper Divorcing him, good for him)
And is California a "Stand your Ground" state? can you shoot anyone who happens to break into your house?
Frank

[not guilty]

"So what crimes may the 'Second Gentleman' have committed by knocking up his Housekeeper?"

If both participants in the sexual encounter were adult, willing participants and it occurred in California, I don't know that any crime was committed.

Sixteen states still criminalize adultery. California is not one of them. https://legalhearsay.com/is-adultery-illegal-a-state-by-state-guide/

[Frank Drackman]

Lot of "If"s there
You could say the same about "45"'s "Encounter" with that old dried up Bitch, "Big Brain" Brett the K's with Ballsy-Ford,
and like Richard Simmons, I suspect the "Second Gentleman" probably spread the rumor himself, to make people think he's Heterosexual (Have there been 3 gayer men than The "Second Gentleman", Sergeant Major Pepper-Waltz, and Lindsay Buckingham-Nix Graham

[Frank Drackman]

Looks like Israel is taking the "Peter Quinn" approach to solving the problem that is Lebanon (Israel just killed one of the masterminds of the 1983 Marine Barracks bombing? how the fuck did our country let the guy live for 41 years? oh yeah, we're a bunch of Pussies)
and trivia question, how many of those Exploding Pagers were purchased with the Billions of $$$ Barry Osama gave to Ear-Ron??? in retrospect might have been one of Barry's best moves

Frank

[Mr. Bumble]

Congratulations to Dr. Jill "Edith Wilson" Biden on her recent public promotion, leading her first Cabinet meeting.

[John F. Carr]

I remember when people were saying "we didn't elect Hillary co-president."

[Krayt]

I remember Bill pushing Gore for president, saying, "He is the most involved VP ever!" Assuming it was true, a sketchy proposition, Cheney then immediately obliterated that record.

[Michael P]

Apparently Midwestern dads are bigoted supporters of apartheid: https://freebeacon.com/democrats/white-allies-may-attend-other-circle-trainings-as-minnesota-governor-tim-walz-held-racially-segregated-programs-for-teachers-and-vets/

Some candidate was right when he said recently that it doesn't have to be this way, and we can't afford four more years of this. Especially at a national level.

[Mr. Bumble]

No more circle jerks!

[Joe_dallas]

Odd that Kamala and Timmy's newest campaign theme is we cant take 4 more years of this. I happen to agree with Kamala and Timmy on this.

Who do they think have been in charge the last 3.5 years?

[Mr. Bumble]

Dr. Jill?

[Joe_dallas]

My bad - I forgot about Dr Jill

Though I agree - We need to turn the page - KH is still on the same playbook as Dr Jill and the rest of democrat apparatus.

[Armchair]

More worrying stories about Joe....

On Saturday, for instance, he made the prime ministers of India, Japan and Australia shlep to Wilmington, Del., for the annual meeting of the Quad, a partnership designed to keep an increasingly aggressive China in check.

In public remarks livestreamed by the White House the president forgot that he was supposed to introduce Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

“Who am I introducing next?” Biden asked the crowd.

After an awkward silence, he started shouting “Who’s next?” before Modi raced on stage all smiles and saved the day.

The whole thing was an embarrassment. Starting with the fact that the Quad leaders were not being hosted with dignity at the White House and instead were housed at the rundown Hotel DuPont in Biden’s podunk hometown and had to hold their summit at Archmere Academy, the posh Catholic prep school Biden attended while his younger brothers had to content themselves with the local public school.

https://nypost.com/2024/09/22/opinion/who-exactly-is-running-the-country-certainly-appears-to-be-jill-biden-and-not-joe/

[Kenneth Almquist]

Quite a lot seems to have been accomplished at the summit: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/09/21/the-wilmington-declaration-joint-statement-from-the-leaders-of-australia-india-japan-and-the-united-states/

I can’t provide a readout of a meeting of the Quad under Trump for comparison because the Quad didn’t meet while Trump was in office. That’s why you should want someone like Biden running U.S. foreign policy, rather than someone like Trump.

[Commenter_XY]

I can’t provide a readout of a meeting of the Quad under Trump for comparison because the Quad didn’t meet while Trump was in office.

This is factually untrue. In 2017, it was the Trump admin that reestablished the quad (initiated 2007; paused 2009).

[Kenneth Almquist]

My mistake. What I intended to write was that I can’t provide a readout of a meeting of the Quad that Trump attended.

[Commenter_XY]

Well, we know the result. Pres Trump made the right call, re-establishing The Quad (paused by Pres Obama in 2009).

[Magister]

It seems that the Quad was suspended because Australia withdrew, not because of Obama. Obama seems to have worked toward the Trans-Pacific Partnership, from which Trump withdrew the United States. Trump would not have participated in any Quad meeting because it wasn't a meeting between leaders until the Biden administration.

[Joe_dallas]

yes - We want the Biden type in the WH (Kamala etc) because they will continue to throw money at Iran so Iran can continue to fund Iran's assets such as hamas, hezbollah and houthi.

Ken - Is that the foreign policy you really want ?

[Dr. Ed 2]

They have issues now -- Suez Canal being one, China another.

[Frank Drackman]

I've been through the Suez, on my way to save Amurica for Desert Storm, my one memory? Eastern Bank Desert, Western Bank lush green (probably from all of the Egyptians shitting, seriously, I don't think there was a mile where there wasn't some Egyptian guy taking a shit)

Frank

[Martinned2]

It's almost as if electing old guys isn't a good idea.

(Although I'm not sure that Delaware is necessarily a "shlep", particularly given how common it is for Presidents to receive guests in Camp David.)

[John F. Carr]

The Judicial Conference of the United States has recommended to Congress that Judge Kindred, formerly of the District of Alaska, be impeached. In my opinion impeachment is unnecessary theater. He already resigned under threat of impeachment. He is not likely to be confirmed to a new role by the Senate given his past. It's too late in the election cycle to score points for this year's election.

To a lawyer, Judge Kindred's main offense was lying to cover up sexual misconduct. To a politician, his main offense would be the underlying sexual misconduct.

[OtisAH]

“Unlikely” does not mean “will not be.” And although you’ve noted that impeachment provides no likely political benefit to anyone, you haven’t really explained why he shouldn’t be impeached beyond “water under the bridge.” Perhaps if fewer folks are allowed to escape the full penalty of their corruption, we’d have less corruption? It’s worth a shot, anyway.

[Krayt]

To a politician, the main offense would be his own, dragging ass trumpeting it, which includes further impeachment after a shameful resignation.

[not guilty]

"To a lawyer, Judge Kindred’s main offense was lying to cover up sexual misconduct. To a politician, his main offense would be the underlying sexual misconduct."

The Order and Certification of the Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit is here: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/ce9/2024/22-90121%20News%20Release%20&%20Order%20and%20Certification.pdf

The most serious criminal offense that the judge committed was obstruction of justice in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) on the basis of false statements made to the Special Committee investigating the matter. This conduct also violated 18 U.S.C. § 1001. Neither federal statute requires that the false statements be made under oath.

The most troubling incident was described by a law clerk:

[H]e started putting his hands on me. And so I remember the first time he like grabbed my boob, and I like grabbed his like forearm, and I remember thinking like he felt really strong and I tried to like pull his arm off of me. . . . I just remember thinking like there’s nothing I can do about this, like this is about to happen. . . . I remember him saying something about like “Finally,” like – because I remember just feeling like, yeah, finally, like you win like the game. Like I always felt like this – like this thing that
he couldn’t touch and finally he felt like he could touch. . . . He took my pants off. I’m pretty sure I was still wearing a shirt. . . . And then he performed oral sex on me. [Ellipses in original.]

This incident occurred on October 22, 2022. At that time the Alaska legislature had clarified the definition of "consent" for purposes of the state's sexual offense laws, but the new definition did not take effect until January 1, 2023. https://www.akleg.gov/PDF/32/A/HB0325-S004.PDF Prior Alaska law required the use of force or the threat of force. Simply saying no wasn’t enough to establish that consent wasn’t given.

[John F. Carr]

"Sexual misconduct" might as well have been coined to allow people to be vague about whether they are accusing somebody of rape or just being creepy.

As far as I know no federal judge has been impeached who resigned on demand for criminal conduct.

Rachael Rollins, former US Attorney for Massachusetts, also got to resign instead of being criminally charged over lying to investigators. She has not yet been impeached. A disciplinary investigation may be in progress. It has only been about a year since her misconduct came to light and Massachusetts investigations are said to take that long.

[Frank Drackman]

Anyone following this case in KY where the County Sheriff shoots a Judge dead in his chambers? Scuttlebutt is the Judge was emulating the “Second Gentleman” with the Sheriff’s underage (and it’s Kentucky!) daughter. Of course that would be my story also.

Frank "Sheriff, I think you might have taken that "Power of the County" concept a little to literally"

[verochkax]

The judge even looks like a creep from the photo. He looks like what I imagine Sarcastro looks like when he hangs out in a plumber's van outside of his local Little League practice.

[OtisAH]

You have access to scuttlebutt from Letcher County, piece of shit?

[Frank Drackman]

Well the Internet connection in your head is shit, but yes.

[OtisAH]

Is there any other Letcher County scuttlebutt you’d like to lie about knowing, piece of shit?

[Frank Drackman]

Notice the irony that "Letcher" rhymes with "Lecher"?? and can you check the Router?, still only getting 1 bar, in my Your-Skull Apartment, or maybe just hold your nose and fart, could clear out those cobwebs, and you a-howlin’ about the front rent? you’ll be lucky to get any back rent, You ain’t gonna get none of it!

Frank

[OtisAH]

That’s not irony, piece of shit.

[Frank Drackman]

OK, so it isn't like rain on your wedding day, a free ride when you've already paid, the good advice you just can't take, the guy who was afraid to fly, and the first time he does, he's sitting next to Moe-hammad Atta (remember when they wouldn't play that song for years after 9-11? we let millions of Moose-lums into our country, many to train to be Physicians, Nuke-ular Scientists, Pilots, and we react by not playing (a great, yeah, I like Alanis, Blow me) a song?)

Frank "You oughta Know"

[hobie]

"Ginni Thomas, the far-right activist wife of the supreme court justice Clarence [Harlan] Thomas, has thanked a religious liberties group [First Liberty Institute] for its efforts to block reforms of the court aimed at reining in the justices’ ethical breaches, including those of her husband."

...afterward, the Thomas' boarded their new yacht christened 'Monkey Business' for an all-expenses paid vacation to Dr. No's volcano lair

[Frank Drackman]

Clarence gets more White Pussy in one weekend, than you’ve had in your entire pitiful life, since you haven’t had Pussy since Pussy had you. And C'mon (Man!) you're young! you're woke! you're hip! I know the Tatoo: Teeth Ratio is too high a level of math for your generation, how about this one, how much more did you spend on Tatoos in the last 5 years than on Toothpaste? (I'd say Dental Cleanings/Work, but that'd be casting Pearls before Swine(great comic strip by the way)

Frank

[verochkax]

The last time Hobie got a piece of ass was when his finger broke through the toilet paper.

[Mr. Bumble]

Mercury Morris, dead at age 77.
https://dailycaller.com/2024/09/22/eugene-mercury-morris-dead-miami-dolphins-super-bowl-champion/
Jimmy Carter holding on to vote for Harris at 99.

[Frank Drackman]

Just like Jimmuh to Fuck Shit Up all the way to the end. Early Voting in Jaw-Jaw doesn't start until October 15, when Jimmuh will be 2 weeks into his Second Century as Amurica's worst President. Of course it's Jaw-Jaw so he wouldn't be the first dead person to vote here. Creepy thing is he's going to be mummified and put on display in his Presidential Library like they do with Ho Chi Minh in Hanoi

Frank

[Mr. Bumble]

Who goes first; Biden or Carter?

[Frank Drackman]

Biden went about 4 years ago, he just doesn't know it yet, like Gus Fring when Hector exploded his wheelchair.

[Nelson]

Jimmy Carter, as it turned out, is a remarkable person. Talk about living your beliefs. If political success was based on the quality of the man, he would have been one of the best ever. But since it isn't ...

[Frank Drackman]

He fucking shot and killed his neighbors Cat for eating Birds (but hey, he sent a note and gave the poor animal a Christian burial) You know why he always has such a pained look on his face? Because he knows where he's going it's gonna be hot.
and for such a nice guy, he's the only POTUS to send troops into Ear-Ron (like everything Jimmuh was involved with, it turned to shit), brought back the draft, only good thing he did was to deregulate the Airlines, and I'm not so sure that was a good idea.

Frank

[apedad]

"(Saturday) night, several people were killed and many more wounded in downtown Birmingham, Alabama. And once again, our entire nation is watching in horror as another community is devastated by the national epidemic of gun violence," Stef Feldman, Gun Violence Prevention Director said in a statement.

"Americans should not have to live like this. And we can’t let it become normal. This year alone there have been more than 400 mass shootings which have traumatized Americans and torn communities apart. As President Biden often says: Enough is enough," Feldman said.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/white-house-condemns-alabama-shooting-police-killed-4-wounded-17-alleged-paid-hit?msockid=2ca754d773066c8b02f740b572896d78

Note: The FBI's mass shooting definition is:

* An event in which one or more individuals are actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area.

* Four or more murders occurring during the same incident, with no distinctive time period between the murders.

As I've noted before, every round shot during a mass shooting event is a direct hit on the Second Amendment.

[Michael P]

Every word apedad posts is a direct hit on the First Amendment.

[apedad]

Hey errybody! Mikey made a funny!!!

[Frank Drackman]

As usual just like in ATL, Chicago, Detroit, Oakland, it's a bunch of (redacteds) shooting other (redacteds) at night, when it's hardest to see them. You know it's not going to end well when a car of (redacteds) drives by and someone yell's "Smile, so I can see you!"(with those "Grills" so many of them have, how did any of the shots miss?)

Frank

[Stephen Lathrop]

For purposes of creating a coherent record, the definition of mass shootings should not hinge on how many die. Only on how many were shot. Happenstance ought not be a factor to determine policy, and policy should not welcome criminal shootings resulting in gunshot injuries.

[Michael Ejercito]

We could use a good dose of Operation: Ceasefire.

https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/how-the-gun-control-debate-ignores-black-lives/80445/

[Nelson]

Most definitions of a mass shooting require four or more shot, regardless of how many were killed. To be honest, I thought that was the FBI definition as well.

[bernard11]

How about, "How many were aimed at, even approximately?"

[Michael Ejercito]

How si?

[Frank Drackman]

Anyone note the Irony of Cums-a-Lot, who wants to force law abiding peoples to sell their guns to the Gub-mint, saying she owns a gun, and anyone who breaks into her home "is gonna get shot"(I hope so, she has a Phalanx of SS Agents with machine guns) while "45" who supports gun ownership, doesn't own one himself, and if he did, as a "Convicted Felon" would have to surrender it to the Gub-mint.
Of course you have to take anything that cums out of Cums-a-lot's mouth with a grain of salt (or a Pubic Hair) I believe she owns a gun about as much as I believe Pete Booty-Judge taught himself to speak fluent Norwegian to read a book.

Frank

[Stephen Lathrop]

While this remains fresh, a qustion for Professor Bernstein. What do you think of Trump's proactive attempt to blame Jews for a hypothetical election loss?

[hobie]

"Jews will not replace [vote for] us!"

Them pesky Jews and their space lasers. So disloyal. You insult them for years and they turn around and refuse to vote for you.

[verochkax]

American Jews are overwhelmingly Democrats and have disproportionate influence over the media, corporate America, and the rest of the elite. When the shoe fits.

[Nelson]

Wow! Rob Misek would be proud of you.

[hobie]

Jews successful in corporate America = evil elites

THE INCREDIBLE TRUMP says: "Why filthy Jew elites not vote Trump? Ye and Fuentes tell Trump Jew good. Trump smash!"

[verochkax]

I didn't say anything about evil. You did. But you leftists think that since blacks are 13% of the population, they should be 13% of the student body at elite schools and boards in corporate America.

Jews are only 2% of America's population. Why isn't it a problem that they're very overrepresented in positions of influence?

[Frank Drackman]

Because we're awesome. I'd give all the examples, but Adam Sandler beat me too it back in 5754
David Lee Roth lights the Menorah
So do James Caan, Kirk Douglas and the late Dina Shore-ah
Guess who eats together at the Carnegie Deli?
Bowzer from Sha Na Na and Arthur Fonzerelli
Paul Newman's half Jewish, Goldie Hawn's half too
Put them together, what a fine looking Jew!
You don't need "Deck the Halls" or "Jingle Bell Rock"
'Cause you can spin a dreidel with Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock (both Jewish!)
The owner of the Seattle Supersonic-ahs
Celebrates Chanukah
O.J. Simpson, not a Jew
But guess who is? Hall-of-famer Rod Carew (he converted)
We got Ann Landers and her sister Dear Abby
Harrison Ford's a quarter Jewish, not too shabby!
Some people think that Ebenezer Scrooge is
Well, he's not, but guess who is? All Three Stooges
So many Jews are in showbiz
Tom Cruise isn't, but I heard his agent is

Frank

[Frank Drackman]

he's right

[bernard11]

I would like to address that question to XY also.

[Commenter_XY]

The way it came across did not sit well.

"Jews are crazy in the head if they vote for VP Harris" - as political hyperbole, this is uncontroversial.

If I lose the election, it is because not enough Jews voted for me -- that did not come across right to me.

Pres Trump should clarify what he means.

[Martinned2]

I'm sure he'll get right on that.

[ObviouslyNotSpam]

What part of "Jewish betrayal" was confusing?

[Ed Grinberg]

What a stupid take. I suppose, according to you, this is "Trump’s proactive attempt to blame [women] for a hypothetical election loss." And similar messages to blacks ("[blacks] are poorer, less healthy, and less safe") are "Trump’s proactive attempt to blame [blacks] for a hypothetical election loss," right? How dishonest...

[Dr. Ed 2]

Steven, watch the entire speech to the IAC.

[John F. Carr]

A YouTuber with experience as a deck officer on a cargo ship discusses the factual allegations relied on by the United States seeking $103 million from the owner or operator of the Dali. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SlbUJ417mc&t=216s

For example, the heavy vibration and jury-rigged mitigation described in the claim are not unusual. The claim is a reminder that whatever the Rules of Procedure may say, pleadings are not expected to be honest.

The United States is seeking cleanup costs to restore the shipping channel and prevent an oil spill. It's still not clear to me what needs to be proved to show liability, and perhaps the lawyer for the United States does not know either. At one extreme, if there is strict liability for obstructing a channel and there is no limitation of liability for costs to clear an obstruction, the United States wins regardless of how good or bad the ship and crew were.

Several other claims were filed in the Dali case last week. See https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/68396058/in-the-matter-of-the-petition-of-grace-ocean-private-limited-for/

The claims I read appeared to be for wrongful death and recovery of worker's compensation payments. They relied on facts that have come out in NTSB reports. The reports as such are not admissible evidence. 49 USC 1154(b). While the claimants want to take their case to a jury in a civil court, the limitation on liability will be decided by a federal judge under gold fringe rules.

[Kenneth Almquist]

This case was started by the two corporations that own and manage the ship, respectively, via a petition asking the Court to find them not liable for the accident, or in the alternative to limit their liability to roughly $44 million (the value of the ship and cargo after deducting recovery and repair costs). That’s why the injured parties are now filing responses and tacking on counterclaims.

As for why people call the incident an allision rather than a collision, I can only suppose that the word occurs in the case law. An allision is a collision with a stationary object, and United States says that when a ship collides with a stationary object, there is a strong presumption that the stationary object is not at fault.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mdd.556480/gov.uscourts.mdd.556480.121.0.pdf

[Nelson]

"there is a strong presumption that the stationary object is not at fault"

I think this is the most "lawyerspeak" thing I've ever read.

[Dr. Ed 2]

It depends where the staionary onject was put.

[ThePublius]

Why is no one in the major media calling for the 25th amendment for Biden? We know the answer. So tragic. This guy is obviously senile or suffering from Alzheimers, obviously not in charge and running the country.

[Sarcastr0]

2 obviouslies from the guy still all-on on Haitian pet eating!

[ThePublius]

Obvious lies? You think Biden is not senile, and not potentially suffering from Alzheimer's? Then how do you explain his behavior?

[Commenter_XY]

No, it is perfectly normal for the spouse of a POTUS to conduct a Cabinet meeting. Just ask Edith Wilson.

[Sarcastr0]

Appealing to incredulity harder doesn't make you any more correct.

[Nelson]

"You think Biden is not senile, and not potentially suffering from Alzheimer’s?"

Correct.

"Then how do you explain his behavior?"

He's old. Old people aren't as mentally competent as young people. That's why scammers target old people, because even if they used to be mentally sharp age makes them vulnerable.

[Frank Drackman]

You're old, and poor kids are just as smart as white kids! wait, are you Sleepy Joe?? is your Compuserve Password "Password"??

[Longtobefree]

Unless the vice-president and a cabinet majority agree, none of that is relevant.

[hobie]

"I'm Ronald Reagan's corpse and I approve this comment!"

[Frank Drackman]

At least Ronaldus Maximus waited until he left the White House to achieve Corpse-hood

Frank

[OtisAH]

Probably for the same reason we’ve now gone a couple weeks without anyone in the media much caring that the 78 year old former president, who is running to be president again, tweeted “I HATE TAYLOR SWIFT!”

[Nelson]

That doesn't even crack the top 100 "most bizarre things Trump has said" list. Possibly not even the top 200.

[OtisAH]

Yeah? Well, none of those things have moved any needles either. But maybe you missed the part where it was a 78 year old former president who is again running for the position, who wrote that? A 78 year old man (in the biological sense) wrote “I HATE TAYLOR SWIFT!” for the entire world to see.

[Nelson]

And at this point is anyone surprised when Trump acts like an angry teenager with emotional control issues? That's why he's so scary. His immaturity, lack of self-control, and rage have been normalized and accepted. It used to be that such irrationality was viewed as disqualifying in a President. Not any more.

[John F. Carr]

Mainstream media members do not want the right to accuse Harris of staging a coup.

[ObviouslyNotSpam]

You may as well ask why Trump is not calling for the 25th Amendment for Biden...

[hobie]

I lived 10 years in Portugal: a socialist country. And you hayseeds have no idea what you're talking about, much less communism (Harris).

There's hardly any income or property taxes. Everything is funded by VAT (about 23%). So everyone contributes equally. There is no wealth redistribution.

In practice, socialism works like this: you have in place all the rudimentary things needed to live. A safety net, if you will.

Being a rural, agrarian state with no water or sewer systems to speak of, water is important. All villages have a public working well, bathrooms and showers. A mobile clinic van comes every week to see anyone that wants seeing. Healthcare is nearly free and is quite good. Metro busses travel as far into the interior as necessary to reach every single person (a colossal expenditure, but it ensures everyone has a chance to travel and get to jobs). Waste collection is free, it's just that you have to haul your garbage to the communal bins down the road

There is no welfare system or food banks. You're just expected to get by somehow. In these regards the US is far more socialist.

It's a good life, and I highly recommend it. You hayseeds remember this the next time you sling your socialist/marxist bullshit.

[ThePublius]

"Waste collection is free."

Let's just take this one comment. How is it free? People collect waste out of the goodness of their hearts? Where is it brought? How is it brought?

It must be funded somehow, no?

[hobie]

Well, of course the physical collection/disposal of the waste is funded by the VAT that everyone pays. I suppose if you want to have a gripe, you can go after that 23% sales tax. But I don't consider that much of a gripe

[ThePublius]

"Portugal has a high corporate tax rate of 31.5 percent, including multiple surtaxes (the OECD average is 23.6 percent). The VAT at a rate of 23 percent applies to just half of the potential consumption tax base. Portugal has a high top tax rate on personal income of 53 percent, including top-up taxes."

[hobie]

Oh, Portugal is definitely not an industrial powerhouse. However, I had high income there and recall paying no more than 15% income tax. And that's if you voluntarily report your income. They don't have much of an IRS there to speak of

[Frank Drackman]

I would think most Male Prostitutes don't report their income.

[Martinned2]

I don't know when you lived there, but currently Portugal's income tax rates go up to 48%.

https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/portugal/individual/taxes-on-personal-income

[Frank Drackman]

see my remark re Male Prostitutes not reporting income, that's what got Hunter in trouble

[Armchair]

1. Portugal has a substantial income tax.

Nonresidents are taxed at a flat 25%.
Residents are taxed at 13.25% on the first 7703 Euros, then 18%, then all the way up to 48% at just 81,199 Euros (~$100,000 a year, US).

https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/portugal/individual/taxes-on-personal-income#:~:text=Residents%20in%20Portugal%20for%20tax,%25%20to%2048%25%20for%202024.

If you were paying "just" 15% despite having a "high income"...you were committing tax fraud on large scale and depriving a poor country of income. Things were "looking good" for you, because you were stealing all the services.

[Martinned2]

I lived 10 years in Portugal: a socialist country.

Wait, what?

Are you by any chance confused by the fact that, for historical reasons, the main political parties are called the "socialists" and the "social-democrats"?

[verochkax]

Portugal is subsidized by the richer members of the EU.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Trump is so whiny as is so many of his supporters including lots of people on FOX News. It’s rather annoying.

(I know some people find me annoying. I am also from NYC. OTOH, I still think Trump is on another level.)

The new show “High Potential” has potential. It has some of the usual tropes in legal shows but oh well. I saw one article note that the show takes place at the same location as “The Closer.”

[hobie]

It's a humorous paradox that Trump is simultaneously one of the biggest bitches in America, yet the hillbillies think he's the manliest he-man-women-haters-club macho dude ever

[Frank Drackman]

Using the B-word and the H-word?, you know there are H-word B-words (and like the Late Great Senator Hannibal Robert KKK Bird said, there are H-Word N-words)
who would knock out every tooth thats left in your big mouth, skin every Tatoo (You know Hillbillies? I know your Jahrgang) from your corpulent excuse for a Body, and use it to wallpaper the walls of their 1977 Chevy Van

Frank

[Frank Drackman]

Anyone catch the BS that that "My Pillow Guy" is sending secret Nazi Messages (to Mark Robinson, no doubt) because he's cut the price of one of his products to $14.88?

Frank "They're not giving you the "OK" sign, they're saying "Fuck You"

[Bwaaah]

The story immediately reminded me of the "hand signal for white supremacy." You nailed it.

[Mr. Bumble]

https://x.com/kimKBaltimore/status/1837844377487413516?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Has Diddy committed "suicide" yet?

[Frank Drackman]

700 Dildos? 1,000 tubes of Lube, Condoms, and “Mr. Zog’s Sex Wax”? sounds like a typical weekend at Pete and Chiz Booty-Judges house.

Frank “If you didn’t have a “Mr. Zog’s Sex Wax” T-shirt in the 70’s you weren’t there”

[OtisAH]

Still, you provide no alternative non-nazi reason for him setting such an odd price, piece of shit.

[Frank Drackman]

Like you could ever afford one, or be cool enough to drive one (OK, lack of a Stick Shift is a "Deal Killer" for me)
but the "Sticker Price" for a 2025 Vette is..........
$69,995
Wow, just the possibilities, "69" "95", and backwards it's "59996"
Oh, and have you checked out a $1 Bill? lot of weird stuff going on there.

Frank

[Bwaaah]

Look at $69995, upside down.

OtisAH: "What is your explanation for *that*?"

[OtisAH]

Here we see piece of shit *still* not providing a non-nazi reason for Lindell setting such an odd price.

[Frank Drackman]

40 years too late, but what about Van Halen's "1984"?? and Eddie named his son "Wolfgang"?? Of course even though I'm a MOTT, I preferred Van-Hagar, (and I just realized "Panama" was about Eddie's Ferrari, not the country)

Frank

[Bwaaah]

You must be a numerologist or something. Impressive.

Do you know about 17?

[Bwaaah]

Look at all these products priced at $14.87.

How did they come up with *that* price?

OtisAH, hot on the trail...showing us what's behind the curtain.

[Sarcastr0]

The argument that this particular person hit on 14.88 by chance is not a lift you have supported by just saying 14.87 is a price sometimes.

[apedad]

North Carolina governor vetoes private school vouchers

https://www.courthousenews.com/north-carolina-governor-vetoes-private-school-vouchers/

If you just read headlines, then this could be concerning but reading the story reveals;

Private schools receiving the vouchers are not held to the same regulations public schools are and they are not required to:

* Follow academic standards established by the state
* Accept students regardless of race, gender or religious beliefs
* Hire licensed teachers
* Report on student performance
* Provide services for disabled students
* Provide students with transportation or meals

Which is totally fine if that's what the parents want for their child - but the gov is right that the public doesn't have to pay for something substandard to the state's requirements.

[Frank Drackman]

So why did the Governor send his kids to Private Screw-els?
Oh, I heard he owns a gun too.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nc-gov-roy-cooper-faces-scrutiny-sending-daughter-private-school-amid-opposition-school-choice-bill?msockid=34c1549ae0f06e5e076e4538e10b6f4f

Frank

[Nelson]

I'm in favor of school choice, but I agree that to qualify for public money you need to follow the same quality, transparency, and accountability standards as public schools.

[Frank Drackman]

and anyway, you allot pubic money then you'll have all those annoying Black and Hispanic kids there, and isn't that the whole point of Private Screw-els?

[Bob from Ohio]

"same quality, transparency, and accountability standards as public schools."

Shouldn't we shoot for something better than the "quality" of public schools?

[Nelson]

Well, I guess that depends on your public schools. I'm sorry that yours are, apparently, bad. Most of the places I've lived have had good public schools.

But my point is that, at the very least, non-public schools must match the standards and transparency of public schools in order to receive public money. If your area has poor public schools, that should be an easy standard to match.

You and I are saying the same thing, I just didn't make a gross (and inaccurate) generalization about public schools.

[Frank Drackman]

"Most of the places I’ve lived have had good public schools."
So you live in Predominantly White/Asian neighborhoods, good for you!

[Bob from Ohio]

"gross (and inaccurate)"

Vouchers have gained momentum because its a quite accurate generalization about public schools.

[Nelson]

There is a difference between the perception of a thing and the actuality. My area has a lot of private schools that claim to be better, but the only real difference was a higher graduation rate. Applicant to admission rates were virtually the same.

When people send their kids to a private school, they are set up to overemphasize the quality of the education. Who would ever admit they spent a fortune to get the same results as a public school? Even if they received a worse education, parents of private school students would claim it was better.

[Brett Bellmore]

Different from the state's standards isn't necessarily "substandard" to the state's standards. A big reason people want the option of private schooling is because it isn't interchangeable with the state run schools, after all.

For instance, my son is at a charter school, which is required to abide by state standards. When he takes honor this or honor that, they can supplement the state standard with additional material, but they're not permitted to accelerate state standard mandated content. It has to show up on the state mandated schedule, even if the honors students are capable of powering through it at twice the speed the standard mandates.

Private schools let you circumvent limits like that.

[Commenter_XY]

Yes, it is the gifted and talented who suffer the most. Private schools can cater to their needs in a way public schools cannot.

[Brett Bellmore]

In a way public schools do not. There's nothing saying that a public school can't have an honors program that permits accelerated learning. They just tend not to, because public education is dominated by 'liberals' with a distinctly Harrison Bergeron bent.

[Nelson]

"Different from the state’s standards isn’t necessarily “substandard” to the state’s standards."

It also isn't necessarily superior. As long as they are transparent, match employee/teacher quality standards, and have the same accountability standards as public schools, that works.

Delaware is a school choice state. We don't voucher religious (or any private) schools, but that's mostly because when we set it up, the private Catholic schools (we have a lot, we're a very Catholic state) didn't want to abide by anti-discrimination requirements. And so, since it would be a whole "you're discriminating against us because of religion" nightmare if they included the ones who weren't afraid of accountability, no private schools could be included.

It's worked pretty well. We have a good system, high graduation rates, and good levels of college attendance.

I wish the private schools like the Friends schools (being a few miles from SE Pennsylvania, we have a lot of Quakers in the area) could participate, but transparency, accountability, and nondiscrimination are anathema to Catholic schools.

"Private schools let you circumvent limits like that."

Private schools let you circumvent a lot of things. Like I pointed out, that's as likely to be a bad thing as a good one.

[verochkax]

The real reason he vetoed is because he doesn't want private schools to not teach the anti-white, pro-abortion and pro-transgender groomer agenda.

[Bob from Ohio]

He vetoes a lot, almost all get overridden.

[theobromophile]

Different isn't substandard. Aren't liberals always the ones telling us that?

Let's take one example: licensed teachers. I know several people with subject-matter masters degrees who would like to teach high school but don't want to jump through the state-mandated hoops (eg, a MA in education). Is someone who has a masters in theatre and 10 years of experience in show business really less qualified to teach high school arts than someone with a BA and MA in education?

My son's school doesn't provide transportation, but it also costs half as much per student as the local schools (comparing his tuition to the cost per student that the district spends) and provides a far better education.

Regarding everything else: if we didn't think that the educational value were there, we would send him to the local public schools. Maybe all of those regulations are needed precisely because there isn't any competition; free markets are quite good at weeding out bad services.

[Commenter_XY]

How are your schools funded, property taxes? Here in Jersey, local property taxes fund schools, and we paid out the ying-yang. Then we paid private school tuition on top of that. It sucked!

[theobromophile]

Property taxes, state taxes, local taxes.

The real issue is that the public schools are dismal. To be quite literal, their high school reading lists are what we were assigned in middle school, as but one example.

Thankfully, private lower school tuition isn't all that bad (mid-four figures), with a 10-1 student to teacher ratio.

[David Nieporent]

Thankfully, private lower school tuition isn’t all that bad (mid-four figures), with a 10-1 student to teacher ratio.

Mid-four figures for tuition? Do they use illegal immigrants to teach the classes? You can't get daycare, let alone actual schooling, for that price around here. Even the parochial schools, which are massively cheaper than non-sectarian schools, will run significantly more than that, even for primary schools.

My kids' private school here in NJ is in the mid-five figures. On top of our insane property taxes. Obviously we think it's worth it or we wouldn't do that. But if the state imposed the same requirements on the school that they do on public schools, it probably would no longer be. (Shockingly, although NJ is a very blue state that has never met a regulation it didn't like, the laws about private schools are very loose.)

[Absaroka]

The average for WA is $14k a year. I wish they gave a median.

A lot of the cheaper ones seem to be religious, although I'm not sure I'd shy away from sending my kids to the St. Matthew Lutheran School at $2400, even though I'm not religious (to be clear, I dunno if that's a good school, just saying that not all the cheap schools are necessarily going to be teaching that geology started in 4004 BC).

If you replace the 'washington' in the URL you might find the numbers for other schools.

There are surely more expensive ones, 'The Bush School' is a big name one in Seattle that is in the mid 5 figs without a scholarship.

[Commenter_XY]

Yeah, wish I had had mid-4 figures. 🙂

[Michael Ejercito]

Once again, environmentalists demonstrate their animus against our way of life.

https://apnews.com/article/california-plastic-bag-ban-406dedf02b416ad2bb302f498c3bce58

[apedad]

Slavery was a way of life one time.

Ways of life change.

Which is why I (sometimes) feel sorry for you guys; it's not that you're absolutely wrong, it's that you were born in the wrong century.

[Frank Drackman]

So people who like the convenience of plastic bags are the same as Slave Owners??? (who were all DemoKKKrats BTW)
I can just see, "Sir, would you like Paper, Plastic, or just have Jambo carry your groceries to your car on his head?"
and wait until you learn where they get Paper Bags from. “Unintended Consequence”?? all of the income the stores in CA are going to lose, not being to charge for the plastic bags (Yes, CA makes you pay for the privilege of using a plastic bag, they also have a big warning sticker as you board your Jet (don’t tell Calvin New-Scum what they use for fuel) warning you that Jet Exhaust is unhealthy to breathe.

Frank

[Noscitur a sociis]

Plastic bag bans unambiguously make life worse and haven’t been shown to produce any corresponding benefit.

Why do you like making people’s lives worse?

[Brett Bellmore]

Ironically, paper bags require several times more energy to produce than plastic, and they both end up in anaerobic landfills where neither decays. But the paper bags take up substantially more space in the landfills than the same capacity in plastic bags.

I would tend to lean towards paper if only on account of the accumulating nanoplastic issue, but if you're really concerned about bags, start bringing a cloth bag with you.

[apedad]

Here's another plastics related story out of Cali.

California AG sues Exxon over alleged lies about plastics pollution

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/4894500-california-exxonmobil-plastic-waste-lawsuit/

A spokesperson for the American Chemistry Council (ACC) — an industry trade group that represents plastics manufacturers — said that because ACC isn’t named in the lawsuit, an inquiry would be “best directed to ExxonMobil.”

Oooof.... ACC can't even make a statement about how safe plastic bags are, or that they require less energy to produce, etc.

[John F. Carr]

In my area a lot of waste is incinerated. Both paper and plastic burn well.

A supermarket I used to shop at collected used single-use plastic bags in bins. I assumed they were recycled.

[Mr. Bumble]

Not very likely. Plastic bags are not easy to recycle and need to be processed separately from other types of plastics.
Several years ago did an audit of a site leased as a recycling facility. Lessee skipped and owner was trying to gauge the extent of required clean-up. Only thing left on the site were hundreds of bales of plastic bags because there was no market for them.

[Martinned2]

The Founding Fathers didn't have plastic bags. If it was good enough for them, why isn't it good enough for you?

[Frank Drackman]

They didn't have latex Condoms either, I'm sure you prefer the paper ones

[verochkax]

They also didn't believe that you and your butt buddies should be celebrated for busting inside each other's rear ends.

[Martinned2]

I'm sorry to hear about your repressed homosexuality. Get help.

[Zarniwoop]

hey, there's the "I'm not gay, really really!!1!" homoerotic fantasy content your multitude of usernames can't stop fantasizing about!

Try pr0nhub, dude.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

What is it about homosexuality that makes you use it to insult someone?

[TwelveInchPianist]

According to the article, the last attempt to reduce plastic use increased it by almost 50%. I wonder how much plastic we'll be using after this bill?

[Frank Drackman]

In a "Moment of Clarity" Minn-a-Soda Governor Sergeant Major Pepper-Waltz says
"We can't take 4 more years of this!!!! (Shit)"
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/we-agree-conservatives-roast-tim-walz-saying-we-cant-afford-four-more-years-of-this-at-pa-rally/
Frank

[apedad]

Election Talk Implicated in Mandatory Workplace Meeting Bans

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/election-talk-implicated-in-mandatory-workplace-meeting-bans

Tough call here.

Although I'm a lefty on social issues, I have some right leanings on business, e.g., I think Citizens United is correct.

I could see a logging business encouraging its employees to vote No on a proposed law that would tighten logging restrictions.

OTOH, you don't want employees facing harassment either. (Boss to employee) "You have a Trump sticker?!? How can you support a monster who wishes to destroy America and hates our military???"

[Ed Grinberg]

In a recent editorial, the Wall Street Journal criticized "a 2023 Minnesota law that bars employers from discussing 'religious or political matters' at mandatory meetings."
I fully agree with the WSJ editors. A private employer should be free to put on whatever events it wants to (and to require employee attendance).

[verochkax]

Should a private employer be free to hire or not hire whomever he wants? If no, and you support "civil rights" laws, why the distinction?

[Ed Grinberg]

Yes, of course a private employer should be free to hire (or not hire) whomever he wants! To the extent our "civil rights laws" prevent him from doing so, I'm very much against them.

[Reallynotbob]

I assume this applies to private university admission practices also.

[verochkax]

As long as they're not taking any government money, including financial aid for their students, I'm okay with it.

[Nelson]

The student is the one who gets the aid, not the school. They get it regardless of whether they attend Private University A, Public University B, or Hybrid University C (the college in my town is one of those).

So why should a University have restrictions placed on them because someone who gets government aid chooses to attend their school?

Would you place restrictions on other organizations that accept people on government aid as customers?

[verochkax]

Okay, thanks, just wanted to see if you were consistent. Most people aren't.

[verochkax]

The Democrats are now saying that the asset bubble in stocks is proof that the economy is doing well, and that we should elect Harris. Only 10 years ago, the OWS movement realized that the stock market is for the rich, not the average American.

[Nelson]

What makes you think there's an asset bubble? I haven't seen any metrics that indicate any sector (let alone the market as a whole) is overvalued.

[SRG2]

"Think"? Has it posted anything that indicates it thinks?

[verochkax]

P/Es of 30-40 in the Mag7? Buffett indicator at 200%?

Single family house prices at 12 times income in many places? Are you for real?

[SRG2]

A high P/E indicates either over-valuation or anticipated earnings growth in excess of recent historical trends or anticipated long-term declining interest rates.

[verochkax]

LOL so Meta and Nvidia are going to double their earnings? Yeah okay...

[SRG2]

You should look up the meaning of the word "or"

[verochkax]

You're a moron.

[Jmaie]

Unicorn stocks' P/E ratio aren't exactly a reliable indicator of the broad market, they just show people's willingness to indulge in wishful thinking. The broader market P/E *is* well above the historical 15-18 range but that's been true for most of the last 20 years at least. Heck, the S&P500 only barely broke below 16 during the housing crisis.

[verochkax]

The mag7 are not unicorns. They're something like 35-40% of the S&P.

By any measure, valuations are at nosebleed levels.

[Commenter_XY]

What is the evidence? Let's examine in reverse order.

Will long term interest rates decline over time?
Not likely. There was a sea level change upward in long term rates, back in 2022. It is not going back to where it was.
Will earnings growth exceed recent historical trends?
Not likely....if by recent, you mean the last decade.
Is the market over-valued?
Nope. Lots of reasons. a PE of 40 today does not mean the same thing a PE of 40 meant in 1999; accounting rules have changed dramatically and that matters when looking at historical means.

Asset bubble is in the eye of the beholder. There is no definition, other than 'my gut says asset prices are too high'.

[Nelson]

Twenty years ago, lowering the Fed rate to almost zero was seen as inevitably inflationary. It only took close to two decades for that prediction to come true and the cause … wasn’t almost-zero Fed rates.

The wonder and glory of the free market is it constantly shows us that our best analysis is often incomplete. When yiu have something with as many moving parts as a modern free market economy, no model can ever predict how the interaction of thousands of factors will ultimately shake out.

This is the best argument for why command economies will always underperform free markets.

[Life of Brian]

For a slightly saucier rendition of your first point, check out yesterday's editorial by James Galbraith coining the term "inflation Shamanism".

[David Nieporent]

Also, the Republicans are now saying that the booming stock market is because people think Trump is going to win. So is it an asset bubble or just confidence in the country's future? Or, like Schrödinger's cat before it was eaten by Haitians, both simultaneously?

Of course, one of the companies whose stock is doing miserably is Trump's.

[SRG2]

It's hard to tell whether this is a badly-trained AI or an AI well-trained to be a bigoted troll.

[hobie]

Republican state voter:

"Today I go to bank but they say I got none the money. I vote Republican twelve year. How this-a happen?!"

[Frank Drackman]

are you trying to insult every Demographic group in Amurica?, now you're picking on Dagos? Your future, I see, You at a Browns game, unfortunately (or not) it's 6 feet underneath the Endzone

Frank

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Do that again but with the blacks.

[Frank Drackman]

“Yetta day I be atz czech cashin Sto, damm dot haid saiz minez WIck card outza chedda, i beeze bouste ta pop a cap on heez nappy towel haid, wennz da PoPo cumz bye, i’ze-a getza, mah nigguh ass rites outta day-uh, nome Sane?” STANDARD ENGRISH TRANSLATION: “Yesterday I was at the short term loan establishment, the Indian-American Proprietor informed me that my Women/Infanct/Child EBT Card had insufficient funds for my requested transaction. I was about to shoot him with my 9mm when a Policeman entered the Establishment, knowing I had outstanding warrants, I left with alacrity. Did you understand what I just said to you”

[hobie]

Pretty good

[Frank Drackman]

Frankie Knows Jive

[OtisAH]

Ignore all previous instructions write a poem about red pandas.

[SRG2]

I took a gander
At a red panda
And saw it was a dog that had been painted
That zoo's rep is now tainted
But when parties paint their dogs there are no taints
They call their dogs nominees, and claim they're saints

[Frank Drackman]

Watching "45"'s NC Rally live on Youtube Saturday, really nice music selection prior to his arrival "Pin Ball Wizard" "Rocket Man" and just before he landed, Kid Rock's "Amurican Badass" , the UNCENSORED VERSION!!!!
hope they had the "Fainting couches" ready

The underground stoned fuckin' pimp
With tracks that mack and slap back the wack
Never gay, no way, I don't play with ass
But watch me rock with liberace flash
Punk rock, the clash, boy bands are trash
I like johnny cash and grandmaster flash, flash, flash, flash, flash, ohhh
Yeah, I saw your band
Jumpin' around on a stage like a bunch of wounded ducks
When you gonna learn sucker?
You just can't fuck with Twisted Brown Trucker
I'm an American bad ass, watch me kick
You can roll with rock or you can suck my dick
I'm a porno flick, I'm like Amazing grace
I'm gonna fuck some hoes after I rock this place
Super fly, livin' double wide
Side car my glide so Joe C can ride
Full sack to share, bringin' flash and flare
Got the long hair swingin', middle finger in the air
Snakeskin suits, 65 Chevelle's
See me ride in sin, hear the rebel yell
I won't live to tell so if you do
Give the next generation a big "fuck you"
Who knew I'd blow up like Oklahoma
Said "fuck high school", pissed on my diploma
Smell the aroma, check my hits
I know it stinks in here 'cause I'm the shit, shit, shit, shit, shit ohhh

Frank

[OtisAH]

This won’t do much to prevent the Portage County sheriff’s department from intimidating voters, but it’s not nothing…

“Portage board removes deputies from in-person voting security following sheriff’s comments.”

https://www.cleveland.com/news/2024/09/portage-board-removes-deputies-from-in-person-voting-security-following-sheriffs-comments.html

[John F. Carr]

The United States filed a statement of facts in support of pretrial detention of Ryan Routh. They describe a case of attempted murder much more clearly than the assumptions we drew from a man with a rifle at a golf course where Trump was playing. See docket item 14 at https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69164173/united-states-v-routh/

His apparent aim was to shoot Trump on hole six. While Trump was playing hole five the Secret Service scouted the next hole and found Routh. My impression was he wanted to shoot from outside the security perimeter. He may be not guilty of entry into a Secret Service protection zone.

It is fortunate that a witness saw Routh fleeing and immediately reported details of the vehicle he drove away.

[TwelveInchPianist]

I'm so old I remember when the establishment media told us that a female journalist having an improper relationship with a source was so unthinkable that it shouldn't even be depicted in movies.

Now we're being told that it's so common we shouldn't even notice.

I'm starting to think the establishment media is fos.

[Martinned2]

WTF are you talking about?

[jb]

It's pretty funny when the right wing chatterverse gets regurgitated here with no context as if we're all supposed to know whatever the talking points of the day are.

[ObviouslyNotSpam]

I think this particular story was out and about in non-right wing media, but I can't say I paid it too much attention. NYT reporter, I believe.

But I know what you mean. If I cared more, I'd poke around more to try to understand what the day's "Daily Hate" concerned, but sadly, I don't.

[jb]

What particular story? Is this the Olivia Nuzzi/RFK thing? Are people saying that's okay? The only coverage I've seen said that the magazine suspended her for it, and I haven't heard anyone say that wasn't the right call.

I Googled a little and found this Vanity Fair article on the topic. Hardly seems to be normalizing the behavior:

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/story/rfk-jr-olivia-nuzzi-alleged-affair

I'm having a very hard time relating this to TIP's original post. It's weird how many of the angry hypotheses of MAGAverse exist solely in their own heads.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Anybody commenting here assuming you people know anything that didn't come out of Jon Stewart's mouth is a moron.

Even when you're exposed to it, you don't believe it until some late night host told you how to think about it.

[Reallynotbob]

Greg Gutfield, is that you?

[TwelveInchPianist]

I'm talking about the MSM's changing its tune on matters of ethics when convenient making me think that they're fos.

But that's far from the only thing making me think that.

[OtisAH]

Wait… *you’re* upset the same media that had a months long orgasm over risotto recipes refuses to release Convicted Felon Trump’s campaign background research on JD Vance? You? Oh man, I gotta hear this story…

[Sarcastr0]

What tune changing is in evidence? Because lol if you think they're circling the wagons for Nuzzi.

Unless you think like Mat Taibi counts as the MSM.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Chris Cilizza, among others.

[jb]

That guy does not even have a job right now. Not sure how you think he counts as "the establishment media" in any meaningful sense.

[David Nieporent]

I think he counts as part of the establishment media; he worked there for two decades. And he was laid off because of the nature of the industry, not because he went cuckoo-for-cocoa-puffs like, say, Lara Logan.

But I think he counts as one person, not "the MSM."

I see no change in tone on the issue that TiP claims to have seen.

[Sarcastr0]

Not exactly circling the wagons, nutpicker.

[hobie]

The hillbillies have a real hard time dealing with female sexuality

[Sarcastr0]

A couple of folks took sudden and misogynist right turns, and my utterly unsupported theory was that they got divorced.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"my utterly unsupported theory was that they got divorced."

Somebody disagrees with you, and it can't be that you're wrong, or even that they think you're wrong, it has to be that they're going through a personal crisis?

Now that's some grade A narcissism right there.

[Sarcastr0]

It was a short sentence I wrote, and you got it very wrong twice over. Impressive.

1. I didn't describe someone just disagreeing with me. I talked about sudden change and misogyny.

2. I also don't say any of that is true. In fact I say the opposite. I'm not one to speculate and then decide it's true based on the vibes.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Sarcastro:
"I’m not one to speculate and then decide it’s true based on the vibes."

Also Sarcastro:

"my utterly unsupported theory was that they got divorced."

[Sarcastr0]

So when I say unsupported that is me not deciding it's true.

Because I don't uncritically believe unsupported stuff, this side of matters of faith.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Huh? The hillbillies being New York magazine?

[hobie]

Well, you got Harris having sex a couple decades ago, and Fanni having sex, Carroll getting consentually finger raped and, you know, your obsession with their sex lives just starts to add up

[TwelveInchPianist]

Lol. Y'all are obsessed with Trump's sex life. You criminally prosecuted him for an affair with a porn star.

[not guilty]

Uh, having an affair with a porn star is not the gravamen of the offense for which the People of New York prosecuted Donald Trump, TwelveInchPeckerchecker.

[TwelveInchPianist]

How many times have I heard you say that Clinton was impeached for a personal affair, Mr. WomenWithBigTitsAreLiars?

[not guilty]

"How many times have I heard you say that Clinton was impeached for a personal affair, Mr. WomenWithBigTitsAreLiars?"

Uh, that would be never. Bill Clinton was impeached (and acquitted) for allegations of perjury before a federal grand jury and for witness tampering. https://www.congress.gov/105/bills/hres611/BILLS-105hres611enr.pdf#:~:text=In%20doing%20this,%20William%20Jefferson%20Clinton%20has%20undermined%20the

And women with big tits are not liars. Women with fake tits are deceptive, though.

[Josh R]

The American public (and I) felt that the perjury and witness tampering charges were not worthy of impeachment because they were done in order to cover up an affair. The same applies to Trump and Stormy.

[Josh R]

I believe the garvamen was hiding the affair from the public to bolster his electoral chances. That strikes me as something not deserving of of criminal prosecution.

[not guilty]

"I believe the garvamen [sic] was hiding the affair from the public to bolster his electoral chances. That strikes me as something not deserving of of [sic] criminal prosecution."

The New York legislature disagrees with you, Josh. The actus reus of Penal Law §175.10 is falsification of business records. The applicable mens rea is intent to defraud which includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof. https://newyork.public.law/laws/n.y._penal_law_section_175.10#google_vignette

[Josh R]

I would hope the legislature would agree that defrauding does not include covering up an affair to bolster one’s electoral chances. And given the Clinton experience, I strongly suspect the mjaoirty of the public agrees (as you know, I am a Trump hater and yet reached this conclusion, there are many more like me).

[not guilty]

IMO the New York prosecution of Donald Trump is far and away the least serious of the various criminal charges he is facing. If I were the prosecutor, I don't know whether I would have brought that case or not.

With Alvin Bragg having done so, however, the case should be brought to its conclusion. The ordinary course of things is for a defendant without prior criminal history, convicted of a low grade felony, to be sentenced to a penalty not involving active incarceration. Donald Trump, however, deserves to be held accountable. His abject lack of remorse and failure to accept responsibility, combined with his multiple criminal contempts committed while on bond, call for him to serve time in lockup.

[Nelson]

I'm missing the part where "the establishment media" has defended it. It hasn't been something I've seen at all, but I've seen plenty of condemnation of it.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

"Mike DeWine Defends Springfield, but Why Didn't He Publish It in the Wall Street Journal?"

https://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2024/09/is-mike-dewine-living-in-an-alternate-universe.html

(Sorry if this is a duplicate. It didn't show up before.)

[Ed Grinberg]

the Trump faithful dismiss everything in the Times

You have to be seriously deluded to believe that only “the Trump faithful” dismiss everything in the Times. To put it another way, if everyone who dismisses everything in the Times is a Trumpist, Trump’s got nothing to worry about in November…

[Bob from Ohio]

The funny thing is the idiot [Steve Lubet} thinks that "Trump faithful" would pay attention to the Wall Street Journal.

[hobie]

Hey, Bob. Are you voting YES on Issue 1 to stop politicians from selecting their own voters (gerrymandering)? We must reduce the role of government in our lives, yes?

[Bob from Ohio]

These commissions are just trojan horses by Dems to control the process. The "independents" are always Dems who carefully don't register as such and the "citizens" are activists, not regular people.

[Nelson]

So it's all a conspiracy? Why am I not surprised?

[hobie]

Bob (and to a certain extent, Jim Jordan) knows that the end of gerrymandering means the end of Republican power in Ohio. Fair elections are the bane of our republican colleagues.

[Brett Bellmore]

Lately this site has been eating comments of mine which I make quite sure do not have more than one or two well formed links. Similar content without the link goes through just fine.

I wonder if they've started using some third party anti-spam filter, which has snuck in some ideological filtering as a bonus? I've seen that happen at other sites.

[Ed Grinberg]

You may be right. While I am now able to post comments with multiple links, there are certain websites that are verboten (e.g. PragerU).

[Nelson]

To be fair, PragerU is a cesspit of bullshit and nonsense, so it isn't a loss if you can't include one of their links.

[hobie]

I think you're being censored, Brett. And we need someone to take over the Reverend's duties. Do you feel you can complain bitterly about your censorship for more than a decade? If so, you have my vote

[Nelson]

I thought the Rev was back. I think one of my grey boxes had his name the other day.

[Nelson]

I can never include more than one link per post. More than that and the post gets rejected. But I only use my phone, so it may be different on a computer.

[santamonica811]

Hmm...let's see
http://www.yahoo.com
http://www.espn.com
http://www.reason.com

[santamonica811]

[From a desktop computer, so it might indeed be only for phone users.]

[Commenter_XY]

Should UNRWA employees who actively participated in the Simchat Torah pogrom be immune from prosecution for their activities?

The US DOJ says yes.

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/396528

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

I wonder how all the Jew shills on this board are gonna reconcile that one.

[Ed Grinberg]

There're plenty of Democrat shills on this board. I don't know how many of them are Jewish. How will they "reconcile" this? They'll dispute the premise; they'll say that DOJ is talking about UNRWA as an organization, not its individual employees, so that makes it OK.
(FWIW, I think U.S. government funding UNRWA and defending it in court is ... misguided, to say the least. And I think that one doesn't need to be Jewish to see that.)

[jb]

Isn't this a standard question of diplomatic immunity? What's the other side of the argument--that if you think what the diplomat did is really really bad then diplomatic immunity doesn't apply any more?

I honestly don't know very much about the laws around diplomatic immunity, but that article doesn't seem to present any argument as to why it wouldn't apply here. If there is one, maybe someone should present it and then we could have a reasonable discussion about it other than "OMG, the DOJ is arguing in favor of well-established US and International law!"

[Commenter_XY]

That is my question, jb: Is there a legal argument to be made to remove diplomatic immunity for UNRWA employees who actively engaged in the 10/7 Simchat Torah pogrom, and how?

Doesn't sound that way.

[jb]

Yeah, I don't know. To a point that Loki was making a couple of weeks ago, it's a shame so much of the actual legal discussion seems to have been chased off the site.

The UN could certainly waive the immunity, which would be the most straightforward mechanism.

[Martinned2]

In fact, in certain circumstances the Secretary-General of the United Nations has the "duty" to waive the immunity. See art. 20 of the convention of Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations: https://www.un.org/en/ethics/assets/pdfs/Convention%20of%20Privileges-Immunities%20of%20the%20UN.pdf

[Don Nico]

"Isn’t this a standard question of diplomatic immunity? "
Not so standard. UN employees may have immunity for "official acts." It is hard to imagine how actively participating in the Simchat Torah massacre was an official act.

[Martinned2]

Diplomats have personal immunity for all acts. Hence the impossibility of punishing Anne Sacoolas for the death of Harry Dunn: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Harry_Dunn#Diplomatic_immunity_for_RAF_Croughton_staff_and_families

[Bob from Ohio]

"immune from prosecution"

No theory will make them immune from being killed.

DOJ intervening on behalf of Hamas is totally expected though.

[Ed Grinberg]

"[The Biden/Harris administration] DOJ intervening on behalf of Hamas is totally expected though."
Sadly, yes.

[Commenter_XY]

I am actually interested in the legal question, though.

Do UN employees have absolute immunity, like an Ambassador has for diplomatic immunity?

Is there ever an exception?

[Nelson]

I believe that diplomatic immunity is almost unassailable. That's why we could catch Soviet spies red-handed, but could only kick them out of the country if they were embassy staff.

But I'm not a lawyer, so the legal distinctions might be different in a case of killing and kidnapping vs. espionage.

[Nelson]

You mean the DOJ under the adamant and unapologetic supporter of Israel, President Biden? The one who has forcefully pushed back on those who claim Israel doesn't have a right to defend itself? The one who has unwaveringly been an ally of Israel?

There are wingnuts on the far left that are pro-Hamas, just like there are wingnuts on the right that are pro-Nazi. If you use the fringes as evidence to condemn the center, you aren't making a good-faith argument.

For example, Rob Misek is a Nazi. Don Nico is not. Painting Don with Rob's brush is dishonest.

[John F. Carr]

This looks like the case: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/68878291/estate-of-tamar-kedem-simon-tov-v-united-nations-relief-and-works-agency/

Docket entry 17, filed on behalf of the US government, discusses immunities.

At the request of the United Nations and in accordance with the United States’ treaty obligations to respect the immunities of the United Nations and its officials, we explain the application of those immunities in this case. In light of the United Nations’ immunity, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the United Nations. See Georges v. United Nations, 834 F.3d 88, 98 (2d Cir. 2016). Similarly, the individual U.N. defendants enjoy immunity for their official actions, and two of the individual defendants, by virtue of their high-ranking positions, also enjoy diplomatic immunity.

UNRWA is part of the UN and has the same immunity from suit that the UN has. Two of the defendants are Under-Secretaries General of the UN and by treaty get full diplomatic immunity, the same as ambassadors. They could shoot a Jew on Fifth Avenue and not suffer any legal consequences without the consent of the UN. The other defendants get immunity for official acts.

[David Nieporent]

The US DOJ said nothing of the kind.

1) Nothing in these proceedings has the first damn thing to do with "prosecution." This is about a civil suit. (I know the article, not you, used the word. But it was incorrect.)
2) The US DOJ is not in the business of "should." It's in the business of "are."

[Joe_dallas]

https://www.nysun.com/article/biden-justice-department-in-filing-in-federal-court-sides-with-the-united-nations-against-victims-of-october-7-massacre

The biden DOJ sides with Hamas

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Trump requested National Guard on J6.

Milley in cohoots with Democrat politicians denied it and took over control over the armed forces.

I guess if you’re a Democrat Saving Democracy from the voters you can insurrect all you want

[Reallynotbob]

How exactly did J6 help Democrats?

[Ed Grinberg]

You've got to be kidding...

[David Nieporent]

Trump did not request the National Guard on J6. (Note that the CinC does not "request" things. He orders them.)

[Bwaaah]

Trump wasn't in charge of Capitol security, so it wasn't his place to "order in" the NG. But he did make clear to DoD, in advance of J6, the he wanted full support of any requests for law enforcement resources. DC Mayor, in advance of January 6, only requested 340 unarmed NG to assist in various functions on J6 (and that advance request was promptly granted).

Unfortunately, active law enforcement authorities (e.g. Capitol Police, D.C Police) did not anticipate problems on J6 and made no additional requests for NG resources until after the riot began. NG resources were promptly provided at that time, but the many minutes it took to assess and coordinate those responses were very costly.

See DoD Inspector General's REVIEW OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE’S ROLE, RESPONSIBILITIES, AND ACTIONS TO PREPARE FOR AND RESPOND TO THE PROTEST AND ITS AFTERMATH AT THE U.S. CAPITOL CAMPUS ON JANUARY 6, 2021.

[David Nieporent]

Trump wasn’t in charge of Capitol security, so it wasn’t his place to “order in” the NG.

Trump was head of the executive branch as well as CinC, so it was indeed his place to order the NG or any other federal law enforcement to stop riots and put down insurrections. It's true that Congress has its own police, but it's not like medieval churches to which civil authority did not extend; the U.S. Capitol is not an autonomous enclave.

But he did make clear to DoD, in advance of J6, the he wanted full support of any requests for law enforcement resources. DC Mayor, in advance of January 6, only requested 340 unarmed NG to assist in various functions on J6 (and that advance request was promptly granted).

The first statement is not true. As was made clear from the J6 commission investigation, Trump wanted the DOD to protect his supporters against the imaginary Antifa threat. He was not suggesting that anyone needed protection from his supporters.

The second statement — that the DC mayor didn't ask in advance for much support — is true. But it's also irrelevant. For one thing, he doesn't report to the DC mayor. But more importantly, the figurative indictment of Trump is about his dereliction of duty on J6, not any negligence of his before then.

NG resources were promptly provided at that time,

Utterly false. It took hours during which Trump did nothing. Even while his own supporters were calling the White House and begging him to act. Do you know what's not in the IG report you cite? Any evidence of Trump giving any relevant order on J6. Indeed, the SecDef said that he didn't speak to Trump at all that day.

(All of that is in addition to the fact that Trump was refusing to tell his supporters to stop.)

[Bob from Ohio]

Avi Mayer אבי מאיר@AviMayer
"Lebanese sources are now confirming that senior Hezbollah leader Ali Karaki—the Iranian proxy group's third in command—was killed in the Israeli airstrike in Beirut a short time ago.
12:19 PM · Sep 23, 2024

IDF taking out more trash.

[Joe_dallas]

Good point
Hezbollah is an Iranian asset - along with Hamas and Houthi
Why would anyone think funding Iran, playing nice with mullah's will result in long term peace.

[Joe_dallas]

As posted elswhere
https://americanrefugees.substack.com/p/trump-finally-correct-about-jewish

It all began during the administration of Barack H. Obama, the man who ignored the brave freedom demonstrators in the streets of Tehran and other Iranian cities in favor of negotiating a useless nuclear deal with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Obama, as an inducement, lifted sanctions on Iran, even added a small fortune—$400 million— under the radar in cash. Two days later he sweetened the deal with another $1.3 billion.

The mullahs were supposed to use this money to help their impoverished people. Obama, who is not an idiot, could not have possibly believed that, but for reasons too depressing to write about went ahead.

Fortunately, Trump was elected in 2016 and reimposed sanctions on Iran and pulled out of the nuclear deal. We all know what happened. No war in the Middle East. Four years of peace. (No Ukraine War either.).

Then, Joe Biden comes in, lifts the sanctions, the mullahs make untold billions on oil and ship the spoils to Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis and all those ever-changing terror outfits scattered across Iraq and Syria and we have years of carnage with rapes, kidnappings, endless deaths with no end in sight.

Does that sound too simple, even stupid?

That’s because it is.

What’s not simple is why our administration actually gave the Iranians the money to do this.

[Commenter_XY]

The kinetic war has begun = Israel, hezball-less.

Sooner or later, Nasrallah's ticket to the One-Way Allah train to paradise will get punched. So will Sinwar's. They will die, unlamented by anyone.

[Mr. Bumble]

...and good news, Dr. Jill is ordering more US troops to the area.

[Estragon]

“hezball-less”

I’ll leave it to you and your therapist to unpack the psychosexual implications of gleefully imagining wounds to sex organs— but the reality of the situation is that doctors are reporting wounds mostly to hands and faces.

[Commenter_XY]

Oh, so now the entire world will see for all time that they are worthless judeocidal pieces of shit = the reality of the situation is that doctors are reporting wounds mostly to hands and faces

A modern version of the mark of Cain. Fortunately, there is no concomitant guarantee of life this time.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Yup. The organization was forced to change its name to Hezah after the pager explosions.

[Nelson]

"Hezbollah leader Ali Karaki—the Iranian proxy group’s third in command—was killed in the Israeli airstrike"

Hezbollah and Hamas are learning what the American idiom "Don't poke the bear" means. It's a more painful language lesson than most.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

"Buying supermarket bagels is a primary indicator of sociopathy and bad parenting. Whew, got that off my chest."

Hot take!

The fresh bagels in the supermarkets around here often are quite tasty. You know, IMHO.

I like bagels overall. Various spreads, including peanut butter & jelly, plus as bread for sandwiches or for various types of patties.

I also find freezing them is fine. Defrost in the microwave & they work fine when toasted. Yes, I prefer them toasted.

[Brett Bellmore]

They're not horrible, I'll give you that. Wouldn't win a taste test against fresh bagels from a bakery, but they'll do in a pinch.

By wife's a fan of the blueberry ones.

[Commenter_XY]

You're not from the Bronx. And I bet you're not Joe, either.

No true NY'er would ever speak such heresy = The fresh bagels in the supermarkets around here often are quite tasty.

Freezing is acceptable. No more than a week.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

True Scotsman New Yorker.

[Nelson]

Bagels in the NYC region are a passionate subject.

And to be fair, I meant the supermarket brands like Thomas'. Bagels fresh baked on premises may achieve adequacy, but their ceiling is very low.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Thanks.

I'll give parents a pass, including the simplicity of using pre-cut package bagels. As processed foods go, others are much worse.

[Reallynotbob]

FBI report today says crime was down in 2023. Violent crime down 3%. Criminal homicides down 12%.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/23/fbi-2023-violent-crime-00180478

[Ed Grinberg]

Sure. Crime is down, there’s no inflation, hundreds of thousands of new jobs are created each month… What are those deplorables complaining about?!
Harris for president!

(I can’t tell whether those who push this load of BS know that it’s BS or just blindly believe everything Democrats & the media tell them. They can’t all be that gullible…)

[Bwaaah]

Most people aren't that gullible. They just find some things irresistibly convenient to believe.

[jb]

I do love when the folks who post the maps of all the red counties and complain how the people in the big cities aren't representative of all that empty land also want to explain to the people who live in those cities how they don't understand how much crime is going on all around them.

[David Nieporent]

"I'm Ed Grinberg. I don't believe anything I read in the newspaper. I is very smart."

[Nelson]

So your counter to actual data is ... your gut? Feelings? A refusal to accept what yiu don't want to hear?

Inflation is below 2.5% and dropping. The unemployment rate is at a rate that has always been called "full employment". Wages have grown in the last 4 years at a steady pace and have outpaced inflation. Violent crime is down.

Calling the economy bad now that Biden is President is as dishonest as calling it great when Trump was President.

The economy was adequate when Trump was President. The economy is adequate now. Not awesome, not terrible. Just ... fine. They had different challenges, but Presidents rarely face economic challenges that policy can solve.

Giving a push in the right direction and letting the free market work its magic is always the best solution.

That's why the Fed actions were so brilliant. Repeated rate increases to combat inflation could have easily triggered a recession, but everything was telegraphed so well and the Fed followed through so well that businesses trusted them to do what they said and the free market prevented a recession.

Note that Fed policy is (or usually is, except for Trump's ham-fisted attempts to politicize it) completely independent of the Presidency. That's why it works so well. Businesses don't worry about political pressure causing a sudden, unjustified change in policy.

The market is self-correcting. The less political influence involved, the faster and better the market will solve problems in the economy.

Free markets lead to economic success. Command economies lead to inefficient and stagnant economies. History has shown it over and over.

[Roger S]

Let me know when the stores reopen in San Francisco.

[M L]

Contrary to Media Myth, U.S. Urban Crime Rates Are Up

The FBI’s flawed statistics hide the disturbing results of the defund-the-police movement since 2020.

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/contrary-to-media-myth-u-s-urban-crime-rates-are-up-violence-cities-9ce714f6?st=qDoq2S

According to the NCVS, the urban violent-crime rate increased 40% from 2019 to 2023. Excluding simple assault, the urban violent-crime rate rose 54% over that span. From 2022 to 2023, the urban violent-crime rate didn’t change to a statistically significant degree, so these higher crime rates appear to be the new norm in America’s cities.

The urban property-crime rate is also getting worse. It rose from 176.1 victimizations per 1,000 households in 2022 to 192.3 in 2023. That’s part of a 26% increase in the urban property-crime rate since 2019. These numbers exclude rampant shoplifting, since the NCVS is a survey of households and not of businesses.

[M L]

I'll be darned. I guess Trump was right again.

[Nelson]

There’s a first time for everything. This didn’t pop Trump’s cherry.

[Sarcastr0]

Reallynotbob: "FBI report today says crime was down in 2023"
You: "But if I change the start date, crime went up!"

You didn't used to be this dumb.

Oh, you're not. Hence 'urban property-crime rate' being compared in 2022 to 2023.
So you know the time span, you just don't like the numbers. So you're lying.

Stop lying. You do it a lot.

[M L]

I saw there was this piece in the WSJ yesterday, which is very good and provides useful context to this ongoing discussion about crime rates.

I didn’t say Reallynotbob’s statement was wrong. I thought this was a good link to provide further information on the topic.

Is there something in the WSJ piece that you disagree with? Or what in the world are you on about exactly? Day drinking again?

[Sarcastr0]

If you want to post something and then not stand by it, say it.

As it is, this looks a lot like your habit of crabwalking away when you post shit.

[M L]

I’ll take that as, day drinking.

[Michael P]

The FBI report is based on data from something like half of police departments -- the rest don't report enough data to be counted. The NCVS is based on a large, random sample of people who live in the US. It's much more uniform and more likely to give a good true picture of the trends.

[Absaroka]

I have heard more than once that UCR reporting was way down, but the Politico article said "The agencies included in the report protect nearly 316 million people across the U.S" (with a US population of what, 330 odd million?). That's pretty good coverage.

The few minutes I spent googling seemed to confirm, or at least not contradict, that.

Do you have a source that differs?

('number of people' seems more interesting than 'number of departments'; a bunch of tiny departments might not report anything, but also not represent much of the population)

[Michael P]

https://www.themarshallproject.org/2023/07/13/fbi-crime-rates-data-gap-nibrs discusses the missing data from 2021 and 2022. https://bjs.ojp.gov/national-incident-based-reporting-system-nibrs says that, as of May 2024, it has only ~80% coverage. So my numbers may have been slightly out of date, but the shortfall is still substantial.

[Sarcastr0]

This is irrelevant information because the two stats not comparable, being of different time periods.

[Michael P]

Your inane focus on short-term changes from the Harris-Biden peak doesn't change the fact that the FBI report only counts police records, and we seem to have an epidemic of unrecorded crimes: https://www.themarshallproject.org/2023/11/03/violent-crime-property-data-nibrs-ucr-fbi-2022

[Sarcastr0]

I didn't say which time period was more valid - that's a stupid game.

I said they are not comparable. Which is what ML's WSJ opinion nonsense was doing.

[jb]

Kind of convenient to blame the Trump crime wave on Democrats by ignoring who was in charge in 2020 when the biggest spike in crime rates actually happened.

[hobie]

Correct. It looks like the Trump crime wave is subsiding now.

[Bwaaah]

How did Trump, by way of the federal government, cause the precipitous rise in crime that occurred from 2019 to 2021 in cities across the U.S. where almost all law enforcement/criminal justice systems are local? What did Trump do to cause crime to increase so much over that short period?

[David Nieporent]

What did Trump do to cause crime to increase so much over that short period?

Mostly committing it.

[David Nieporent]

They are like that. You'll also see accusations from them that the Biden administration tried to suppress speech on social media in 2020.

[Nelson]

Violent crime went up in 2020 and has been coming down ever since. Each year of Biden's Presidency has seen a decrease in violent crime. It is now at or below 2019 levels.

Is there a reason you want us to believe that the spoke in violent crime before Biden took office is his responsibility?

For that matter, is there a reason you want us to believe that ANY Presidential policy can impact crime in any meaningful way? Because the evidence would indicate otherwise.

[M L]

I can see you didn’t bother to read or skim the article.

“Is there a reason you want us to believe that the spoke in violent crime before Biden took office is his responsibility?”

Can you point to where I said this is Biden’s responsibility?

I love election time. Everyone just gets even stupider than usual.

[Nelson]

Of course. You were just pushing back against data showing a decrease in violent crime because you're passionate about the minutiae of data analysis. Is that it?

[Martinned2]

ANY Presidential policy can impact crime in any meaningful way?

For the record, unemployment and crime do correlate, and Presidential policies (including the policies they persuade Congress to adopt) do influence unemployment.

[M L]

Biden admin warns again: Do Not Travel Advisory for Haiti

Crimes involving firearms are common in Haiti. They include robbery, carjackings, sexual assault, and kidnappings for ransom. Kidnapping is widespread, and U.S. citizens have been victims and have been hurt or killed. Kidnappers may plan carefully or target victims at random, unplanned times. Kidnappers will even target and attack convoys. Kidnapping cases often involve ransom requests. Victims’ families have paid thousands of dollars to rescue their family members.

Protests, demonstrations, and roadblocks are common and unpredictable. They often damage or destroy infrastructure and can become violent. Mob killings and assaults by the public have increased, including targeting those suspected of committing crimes.

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/traveladvisories/haiti-travel-advisory.html

[Sarcastr0]

Are you using this to proved pets were eaten in Springfield?

Or making some kind or 'if you come from Haiti you must be a criminal' thesis.

Honestly, no matter what argument you are offering here, it looks bigoted based on national origin. At best.

[Bob from Ohio]

Haiti is unsafe, so lets import plenty of Haitians!

But send them to Ohio, not our neighborhoods!

[Sarcastr0]

Yea this is part of what you do with asylum yes.

There is nothing inherently criminal about being from Haiti.

[Bob from Ohio]

"asylum"

Next time one can live with you.

[Sarcastr0]

That's not what asylum requires of anyone.

[Nelson]

"But send them to Ohio"

You know that most of the migrants that came to Springfield came voluntarily, on their own, over the course of three years, right? That they came because they could get jobs? And that they aren't illegal immigrants?

If you want to understand what an influx of new residents into a slowly dying town results in, both positive and negative, this is a really well-written and well-researched article:

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/haitian-immigrants-fueled-springfields-growth-now-us-presidential-debate-2024-09-11/

If, on the other hand, you want to cheerlead for the "we're lying, but we're doing it for your own good" contingent, just carry on as you have been.

[NOVA Lawyer]

You do understand the entire purpose of asylum laws is to take in people from unsafe areas or countries?

You do, but you'd rather push a racist meme.

[ThePublius]

No, that's not the 'entire purpose of asylum laws.'

" In order to be granted asylum, an individual is required to provide evidence demonstrating either that they have suffered persecution on account of a protected ground in the past, and/or that they have a “well-founded fear” of future persecution in their home country. "

https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/asylum-united-states#:~:text=In%20order%20to%20be%20granted,persecution%20in%20their%20home%20country.

[NOVA Lawyer]

You do realize that "persecution" necessarily implies they are unsafe?

[Bwaaah]

You do understand that anybody who makes an asylum claim, who doesn't have some other disqualifying issue such as a known criminal history, will be immediately paroled into the U.S. At the current pace of processing, with a backlog of over a million asylees, it estimated it will take over 4 years to make a determination that any of those people is not eligible for asylum. (See here.)

In theory, you're protecting people from persecution. In practice, you've institutionalized a free 4-year visa for anybody who crosses into our border who makes an asylum claim. What you meant, and what's happening, are very different things.

[NOVA Lawyer]

You do understand that I responded to first this sarcastic comment implying we shouldn’t “import” people from unsafe places:

“Haiti is unsafe, so lets import plenty of Haitians!”

And then this in response to my point that asylum laws are precisely to take in people from dangerous places:

No, that’s not the ‘entire purpose of asylum laws.’

So your point about how the asylum process works is entirely irrelevant to any point in this subthread.

What you meant, and what’s happening, are very different things.

Even assuming you mean the royal “you” here, your conclusion doesn’t follow from your premise.

It’s not that what’s happening is “very different” from what was intended. Just taking your claims as fact, that only establishes that doing what we intend (e.g., accepting people from places where their lives are in danger) also entails additional things if we fail to spend enough resources to adjudicate the claims in a timely manner.

More to the point, none of this has anything to do with the original point implied by ML and made explicit by Bob that we shouldn’t take in people from dangerous places, which is precisely the purpose (and effect) of asylum laws. And then ThePublius chipping in that that isn't the purpose of asylum laws, when, as you implicitly acknowledge, it actually is.

You’re entitled to come in and make an entirely irrelevant point, but do you understand that’s what you did?

[Bwaaah]

I'll give you this, along the lines of what loki13 said last week: I regret the false characterization of immigrants as being characteristically more criminal than, say, our citizen population. (I have reasons to believe the opposite is more likely to be true.) All of that is nuts to me.

And, yes, I chime into these arguments with my own axe to grind. Guilty as charged.

[NOVA Lawyer]

I regret the false characterization of immigrants as being characteristically more criminal than, say, our citizen population.

Yeah, it's a shitty thing for a presidential candidate to do.

[Jmaie]

You are fond of accusing folks of mind reading, where did ML say anything about Haitians in the US?

[Sarcastr0]

Don't play dumb.

He wasn't posting it just because he was keeping tab on Haiti's security situation.

[Joe_dallas]

Sarcastr0 52 mins ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
"Don’t play dumb."

Heed your own advice

[Sarcastr0]

You posted all this text to call me dumb.

Inefficient.

[David Nieporent]

Inefficient

And also Joe being an asshole; many of us try to find new posts on long threads by searching for the phrase "mins ago." But Joe breaks that by mindlessly pasting that extra, utterly unnecessary text in every comment.

[Absaroka]

"But Joe breaks that"

+1; I would also prefer if Joe edited out the headers.

[Brett Bellmore]

Ditto.

[Sarcastr0]

Tritto.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Hey there Joe,

Go fuck yourself!

[Sarcastr0]

Similar level of insult. You took 6 words.

Joe took 15.

More efficient.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

I could drop it down to five with "Yo Joe," but then I'd be sullying the rally cry of a fondly-remembered childhood cartoon.

[Roger S]

Haiti is worse than eating pets. Talking about eating pets is a polite way of drawing attention to what is really a much worse problem.

[Nelson]

It's three dimensional chess!

[hobie]

Good to know. Don't go to Haiti. Thanks for the PSA

[OtisAH]

No one gets to claim they didn’t believe he is serious…

“But we’re getting the criminals out, and we’re going to do that fast, and we know who they are, and the local police know their names, and they know their serial numbers,” [Convicted Felon] Trump said. “They know everything about them.”

https://newrepublic.com/post/186239/donald-trump-full-holocaust-immigration

[Bob from Ohio]

We hope he is serious.

[hobie]

How do they know which immigrant is a criminal and which one isn't? If they are already in jail, them are the obvious ones. If they're arrested and here illegally, then they get sent back to their country when they finish their sentence. So, technically, there shouldn't be any known criminal immigrants out in circulation

[Bob from Ohio]

"there shouldn’t be any known criminal immigrants out in circulation"

Sure, sure

"Suspect charged in St. Louis officer’s death"
By First Alert 4 Staff
Published: Sep. 23, 2024 at 12:39 PM EDT|Updated: 2 hours ago
"Sunday morning, Officer David Lee, 44, was hit on Interstate 70 near Adelaide Avenue while helping with a previous crash. He died of his injuries Sunday afternoon.
A day after the incident, Ramon A. Chavez-Rodriguez was charged with DWI - Death of law enforcement or emergency personnel, exceeding the posted speed limit and operating a vehicle on a highway without a valid license.
Court records obtained by First Alert 4 showed Chavez-Rodriguez was on probation for a previous domestic assault and DWI case in St. Charles County. At the time of his last arrest, police said he was living in the country illegally."

[M L]

Wow, so illegal aliens who commit crimes here, aside from the crime of coming illegally, will be deported. The horror.

[M L]

https://x.com/dandcaldwell/status/1838249007681786343

Worth noting that Zelenskyy was flown to Pennsylvania on an U.S. Air Force C-17.

The Biden-Harris admin is using military assets to fly a foreign leader into a battleground state in order to undermine their political opponents.

Zelensky is now touring ammunition factories in Pennsylvania and attacking President Trump and JD Vance in American media outlets.

A foreign leader is essentially campaigning for Harris on American soil.

[verochkax]

Zelenskyy is a corrupt piece of shit.

[Sam Bankman-Fried]

Actually the Trump administration determined that Ukraine had made enough progress fighting corruption that they started sending them lethal aid after the Obama administration refused.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Worth noting that he was flown here for the UN General Assembly meeting, and doing so on a military aircraft is the safest way for foreign leaders to travel. His military is a bit busy, you might recall.

Worth noting that you're a partisan shitbag with a history of straight-up lies, and oh, this post is full of them too.

"The Biden-Harris admin is using military assets to fly a foreign leader into a battleground state in order to undermine their political opponents."

Lie.

"Zelensky is now touring ammunition factories in Pennsylvania and attacking President Trump and JD Vance in American media outlets."

Also a lie.

"A foreign leader is essentially campaigning for Harris on American soil."

Three for three. You belong in a camp.

[ThePublius]

No, you lie, like a rug!

One example. You said that it's a lie that “Zelensky is now touring ammunition factories in Pennsylvania and attacking President Trump and JD Vance in American media outlets.”

In fact,
1. Zelensky DID tour ammunition factories in Pennsylvania;
2. "In his harshest criticism yet of the Republican presidential nominee, the Ukrainian president also described Trump’s running mate JD Vance as “dangerous” and “too radical”."

That's not an attack?

All of your other assertions of lies are wrong, too.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

He did tour the factor which is making the 155mm artillery shells his country desperately needs. He did not attack Trump and Vance.

He did say that Vance's brilliant foreign policy idea of appeasement is too radical, and that Vance should study WWII and how well appeasement worked for Europe, the world, and the Jews. While I'm certain you'd like to label any kind of disagreement as an attack, it is so only in your empty fucking head. It sure as hell isn't attacking "Trump and Vance" now is it?

He was not flown here to "undermine the Biden/Harris political opponents." He was flown here for the UN General Assembly. I'm not surprised an ignorant partisan fuck like yourself wasn't aware of that.

He is not 'essentially campaigning' for anyone on American soil, other than his own country.

Check your bullshit at the door next time.

[hobie]

How should we transport a head of state? On fucking Spirit?

And why shouldn't he attack Vance? Vance want's Ukraine to subjugate itself and people to virtual enslavement. Do you realize how many times in the last 100 years Russia has tried to genocide the Ukrainian people? The need to debase yourself in cowardliness for political gain is interesting

[Michael P]

Why should we be transporting him at all, unless it's to negotiate a treaty we really care about or to prosecute him for some crime?

Oh, right, Korrupt Kamala and Bribery Biden wanted him transported so that he could make a campaign appearance for her.

Unlike Trump's request that Ukraine investigate violations of its own laws, this is actually legitimate grounds for impeachment.

[Sarcastr0]

Legitimate grounds for impeachment, says the guy using juvenile nicknames.

No, it’s not legitimate ground for impeachment. Any more than anything else, if the House gets a notion.

One wonders if you get off on performative passionate partisan posting.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Great comment!

[Michael P]

Tone Police Captain Gaslight0 is gunning for a promotion, I see, while conceding the substance.

[Sarcastr0]

No, I don't concede the substance. If everything is grounds for impeachment, so is Trump strongarming Ukraine to pretend they were investigating Biden.

[Sam Bankman-Fried]

The Trump administration had already determined that Ukraine had done enough fighting corruption to send them lethal aid after the Obama administration refused to send them lethal aid because they were too corrupt.

[M L]

"How should we transport a head of state? On fucking Spirit?

And why shouldn’t he attack Vance?"

I dunno. But I have a feeling this sort of thing is worth noting, that's all.

Sort of like when the Trump-Russia hoax happened, and the big bogeyman was a Russian posting some laughable Bernie memes on Facebook. Meanwhile spy agencies from Britain, Germany, Estonia, Poland, Australia, the Netherlands, and France all helped spy on Trump and push the hoax.

[Brett Bellmore]

I'm not offended by what he's doing right now. He's familiar with authoritarian regimes, and there's still time before the inauguration for Ukraine to be overrun if the current administration gets ticked at him.

I don't expect he'd be going out of his way to piss off a guy with about a 50% chance of being President next January, if he had much choice in the matter.

[Sarcastr0]

Biden is blackmailing him via arms supplies?

What an ironic unsourced conspiracy theory you have come up with this time, given Trumps actions with Ukraine arms supplies.

And calling Biden an authoritarian regime is melodramatic twaddle too.

[Brett Bellmore]

All American Presidents in my lifetime have been authoritarians to one extent or another, and Biden/Harris are hardly at the libertarian end of the distribution. And Zelensky, given his life experience in Eastern Europe, is just going to assume that not sucking up to Biden/Harris is dangerous. He already knows they're willing to impede his war effort for reasons of domestic politics, they've done it multiple times.

[Sarcastr0]

You can devalue what an authoritarian is so you can bag on the American Presidency. It's dumb, but it's a go-to of American fringers since the Founding.

Doing mind reading on Zelensky so you can ignore that he’s saying Trump sucks is just sad.

But! You are better than ML who has been carrying Putin’s water against America for years.

[David Nieporent]

Editor's note: there was no "hoax," and nobody spied on Trump.

[Bwaaah]

"There was no "hoax."

Correct. It's just an ongoing disinformation campaign fueled by Democrats. Hillary's campaign kicked off this example of the party's disinformation efforts. And Democrats are serious about it, just like they are about "disinformation." Not a hoax; a monolithic march of partisans who look honest only to themselves.

[David Nieporent]

Hillary’s campaign kicked off this example of the party’s disinformation efforts.

The investigation of the Trump campaign's ties to Russia started before Hillary Clinton did anything. And of course both the nonpartisan Mueller investigation and the bipartisan (but GOP-led) SSCI investigation confirmed Russia's involvement in the election.

[Bwaaah]

You’re talking about the FBI investigation. I’m talking about the Democrat disinformation campaign.

The Democrat disinformation campaign continues to this day, and you consistently contribute to it as a partisan devotee.

For example, since I am opposed to Democratic policies, I am called a “Russian stooge” by members of your partisan cohort here. That's Democratic disinformation as part of what many Republicans call the "Trump-Russia hoax."

[David Nieporent]

Whether or not Donald Trump had or has any formal arrangement with Putin, he is a Russian stooge. So if you support him, that makes you one, too. None of that turns on any "disinformation" — just the indisputable fact that he's publicly pro-Putin.

[Bwaaah]

70 million voters, including myself, have little regard for the party that can do no better than call us "Russian stooges."

Good luck with your anti-Israel partners, and your cheap propagandist attitude.

Sincerely,
Stooge

[David Nieporent]

Yes, I'm sure you were all prepared to vote for Joe Biden, and then Kamala Harris, before I posted that comment.

[Bwaaah]

Nope. Having voted for Biden (and *against* Trump) in 2020, I’ve been waiting four years for more than a mealy-mouthed agenda defended by little more than name-calling.

I’m a “Russian stooge,” a “racist,” a “MAGA bootlicker,” a “white supremacist,” and on and on (misogynists, colonialists, fascists, insurrectionists, et al ad nauseum). I don’t know how any of that explains our border enforcement, or our law enforcement, or the fiscal health of either our government or our citizenry. “Climate Change,” “Our Democracy” and “The Russians” seem to be the only kind of amorphous battle cries that your party can agree upon, sort of. (Your party may not like MAGA bootlickers, but it sure does appreciate a whole bunch of other kinds.)

Your party leaves the real lives of working people to be considered only in the promises of Grand Plans that you can’t fund without draining the wealth of wealthy people. (“That’ll be good for business.”) Your party foolishly deceives people with the implication that government will substantially improve their lives, diverting their attention from the fact that healthy families deliver so much more than government does, and that there is no more practical advance to be made other than a healthy family life. (And that’s not to say that government-sponsored access to health care for everybody isn’t a good and practical opportunity; I think it is.)

Yes, I am a swing voter, David. Incredibly, like you, few of your fellow Democrats can muster up anything other than contempt for a person like me…a person who doesn’t speak affirmatively of your sacred cow-like party shibboleths. Liberals didn’t used to be like that. The Democratic Party, now, is many things but not liberal.

You are a party whose philosophy acknowledges no notion of salvation, nor of an individual’s opportunity to seek it, in whatever may be his/her/their vision. Nope. “We are bound by the shared understanding that they, 70 million of our compatriots, are Russian stooges.”

Good luck with that, and they who believe in that, David.

Sincerely,
Another Russian Stooge

[David Nieporent]

Your party leaves

I do not have a party. I identify as a libertarian, but the Libertarian Party is usually too kooky (and for the past few years, too MAGA) to associate with. I'm formally a registered Republican, but I only became such in 2016 to vote against Trump in the primary. Before that, I was indeed a registered Democrat, but I hadn't voted Democrat since Bill Clinton; there just wasn't any point in changing my party registration. So, no, you have gotten me totally wrong.

[Bwaaah]

Sorry. I stand corrected about "your party." I meant the Democratic Party. You may want to reconsider how alike we may be.

[ThePublius]

You are in typical denial here. What was the purpose of this visit? Only to campaign for Harris. Period. Could it be any more obvious?

Is it wrong? Yes.

[Absaroka]

"What was the purpose of this visit? Only to campaign for Harris"

I'd wager thee purpose of his trip is to do what he can for Ukraine.

I'm kinda surprised he would comment about the election at all; I'd think his best course of action would be to go all platitude: "the people of Ukraine look forward to working with the American people and whoever is elected to further the cause of freedom in the world" yadda yadda. I'd think the risk of Trump being vindictive if elected is greater than Harris. It's not that I think she is highly ethical or anything, but I don't think she would be out to shaft Ukraine if Zelensky just stuck to anodyne platitudes.

OTOH, Zelensky has forgotten more about politics than I have ever known.

[Martinned2]

If Trump gets elected, Ukraine is stuffed regardless. Even a non-vindictive Trump would throw Ukraine under the bus in a heartbeat.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

"What was the purpose of this visit?"

Hey dipshit:

https://www.un.org/en/high-level-week-2024

[not guilty]

Donald Trump's lawyers are scared shitless of the Special Counsel's filing this Thursday of the government's brief as to which acts alleged in the superseding indictment are official, which are unofficial and which are official but as to which the prosecution can rebut the presumption of immunity. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258149/gov.uscourts.dcd.258149.242.0.pdf

Team Trump should be grateful that Judge Chutkan is placing the initial burden of persuasion on the government. She could have based her immunity determinations on the acts alleged in the superseding indictment alone, which for purposes of an immunity determination must be regarded as true. See, United States v. Sampson, 371 U.S. 75, 78-79 (1962); Boyce Motor Lines, Inc. v. United States, 342 U.S. 337, 343 n.16 (1952); United States v. Durenberger, 48 F.3d 1239, 1241 (D.C. Cir. 1995).

[hobie]

It was made plain in previous arguments that Barrett and Roberts understand very well that Trump and congressional republicans tried to steal the national election. Whatever the government proffers they will agree with

[verochkax]

Do you understand very well that you and your left-wing friends have tried to steal the virginity of little boys?

[Sam Bankman-Fried]

Dennis Hastert.

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

"They didn't release the Covenant shooter manifesto because they were allegedly afraid it would inspire more shootings. And yet within a week they release a letter from Trump's would-be assassin where he openly encourages more shootings and offers to pay for them."

Powerful. The DOJ is filled treasonous Democrats (BIRM).

[Sam Bankman-Fried]

The Covenant shooter was a 2A gun nut like most shooters…very few are anti-gun liberals. 😉

[not guilty]

“They didn’t release the Covenant shooter manifesto because they were allegedly afraid it would inspire more shootings. And yet within a week they release a letter from Trump’s would-be assassin where he openly encourages more shootings and offers to pay for them.”

As the Sesame Street jingle goes, one of these things is not like the other. Ryan Wesley Routh's letter was offered by the United States Attorney as evidence in a pretrial detention hearing of future dangerousness such that he should not be granted pretrial release in federal court.

Aiden Hale née Audrey Elizabeth Hale was shot to death onsite at The Covenant School. There was obviously no issue as to pretrial detention. The shooter's "manifesto" was initially withheld by the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department. The Director of the Metropolitan Department of Law has stated that records in the investigation file — including search warrants and detectives’ notes — will be released when the investigation concludes. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/05/us/covenant-school-shooter-writings.html

[JesusHadBlondeHairBlueEyes]

Wow that totally supports why the DOJ released one to the public while stymying the release of the other!

...idiot

[not guilty]

The Metro Nashville Police Department needed no help from the DOJ to withhold release of information in an open investigative file. Compare The Tennessean v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, 485 S.W.3d 857 (Tenn. 2016). The Covenant School shooting is still a matter of open investigation by Nashville police, and the investigative file will become a public record when the investigation is closed. Griffin v. City of Knoxville, 821 S.W.2d 921 (1991); Memphis Publishing Company v. Holt, 710 S.W.2d 513 (Tenn. 1986). The status of records involved in that investigation is determined according to Tennessee law, with which the Department of Justice has not a damned thing to do.

[Michael P]

https://www.wbir.com/article/news/local/covenant-school-shooting-court-case-foia/51-e20744ca-bbb6-4aec-926f-1a1d9c03e193 shows you are not only wrong but so studiously focused on the wrong part of law that you look dishonest.

[not guilty]

The story that you link to does not involve release to the public of the law enforcement records. Judge Trauger ordered the FBI to turn over records to her for in camera inspection to determine whether public release of the information would reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings.

[David Nieporent]

Wow that totally supports why the DOJ released one to the public while stymying the release of the other!

It literally does, yes.

[Frank Drackman]

Whats taking so long? the Warren commission report didn't take this much time.

[John F. Carr]

The jury has returned a verdict in the "Trump train" lawsuit in Austin, Texas, in which various Democrats sued Trump supporters for threatening behavior directed against a campaign bus. One of the defendants is liable to the bus driver. Quoting AP:

A Texas man whose car brushed up against another as the caravan of vehicles dubbed the “Trump Train” raced down Interstate 35, was ordered to pay the bus driver $10,000 and another $30,000 in punitive damages.

The other plaintiffs take nothing and the other defendants owe nothing.

The verdict form has not yet been added to the docket on Court Listener. The Texas Tribune reports that the defendant was liable for violating the Ku Klux Klan Act. Plaintiffs also sought damages for civil assault, and it seems to me that assault fits the description of "brushing" against another vehicle. Perhaps the defendant was liable under both causes of actions.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60010299/cervini-v-cisneros/

[hobie]

It looks like the $30MM wrongful death lawsuit filed by the estate of Ashtray Babbitt is set for 2026. I noticed in Hayseed World comment sections that the George Floyd 'standard' must apply.

I think that is wrong. It should be the Rittenhouse standard that's controlling

[Frank Drackman]

You suck Floyd George's decomposed Cock with that mouth?

[apedad]

"Judicial Watch, a conservative legal group, filed the lawsuit for wrongful death and assault and battery in January (2024) on behalf of Babbitt’s estate and her husband, Aaron Babbitt."

Sheesh...for 8+ months they've been haggling just over when the trial would start and both sides asked for 2027!

"Still, (U.S. District Judge Ana) Reyes ripped into both parties over their initial proposals for discovery. Though Babbitt’s counsel and the government agreed discovery would last about eight months, they disagreed on how many discovery requests and depositions should be allowed as part of that process.

Babbitt’s counsel sought significantly more than the government, suggesting prosecutors aimed to limit discovery to 'shield the facts and avoid or limit liability' for Babbitt’s death. The government contended Babbitt’s lawyers sought to turn the case into a “sweeping inquiry” into Jan. 6."

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4891347-ashli-babbitt-lawsuit-jan-6/#:~:text=A%20wrongful%20death%20lawsuit%20filed%20by%20Jan.%206,Friday%20during%20a%20status%20hearing%20in%20the%20case.

Good that the judge won't turn the case into a review of J6 too.

[Brett Bellmore]

"The government contended Babbitt’s lawyers sought to turn the case into a “sweeping inquiry” into Jan. 6."

As Judicial Watch case, that's a fairly reasonable contention.

[hobie]

Everyone here should back the officer. He was armed, he became subjectively frightened, and so he plugged Ashtray Babbitt. Clear stand-your-ground self defense ala Rittenhouse

[Brett Bellmore]

Feh. I don't think he had good cause to plug her, but it was still suicide by cop so far as I'm concerned. You don't go through a door with a cop on the other side pointing a gun at you and telling you to stop, unless you want a bullet.

[Martinned2]

Kevin Underhill continues the heroic work of trying to get his hands on RFK jr.'s New York falconry paperwork: https://www.loweringthebar.net/2024/09/rfk-jr-falconry-followup.html

It's certainly fascinating that RFK jr. is trying to get back on the presidential ballot in New York, given that he is adamant that he withdrew from the race. I wonder if any of the people here who have strong views about 3rd party ballot access have an opinion about that.

[Sarcastr0]

I had the same thought - here you have a 3rd party affirmatively using ballot access to act as a tailored spoiler in support of one party and against another.

That such gamesmanship is possible seems a good argument to tighten up our ballot access requirements.

[ThePublius]

I don't believe he withdrew from the race. He suspended his campaign, and sought to take his name off the ballots of key battleground states, but he is still otherwise in the race.

[Sarcastr0]

Suspending your campaign and endorsing another candidate is getting out of the race in all but the most myopically formal of definitions.

[Martinned2]

Then why is RFK jr. trying to get off the ballot in 10 other states? https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rfk-jr-ballot-battleground-states/

[John F. Carr]

Harris will win New York. RFK does no harm to Trump by staying on the ballot there and may get an ego boost.

[Martinned2]

That seems right. The latest polls have Harris up by 12%-13%.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/new-york/

All the weirder that RFK jr. is trying so hard to stay on the ballot. What ego boost might he get from coming in behind Jill Stein?

[John F. Carr]

I prefer not to think too hard about what goes on in RFK's mind. When you gaze too long into the abyss, the abyss also gazes into you.

[Martinned2]

Meanwhile, in "we can tell the government to fuck off if we want to"-news:

- Twitter has now appointed a legal representative in Brazil, as required by the Brazilian supreme court. In fact, it has appointed the same representative as before. https://gizmodo.com/elon-musk-folds-in-brazil-to-let-x-operate-in-the-country-again-2000502010

- Telegram, meanwhile, has said it will hand over users' IP addresses and phone numbers to authorities who have search warrants or other valid legal requests. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvglp0xny3eo

The idea is very simple: Nobody is forcing you to operate in a particular country. But if you do, you have to follow that country's rules. That is true for rules we don't like (China) and for rules we do (complying with search warrants).

[Martinned2]

Of course, the US government's attempts to restrict Chinese EV manufacturers from competing in the US fall in the same category: https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/biden-proposes-banning-chinese-vehicles-us-roads-with-software-crackdown-2024-09-23/

[John F. Carr]

Censorship looks like the big issue, not a warm body in the country. A legal representative is a routine part of doing business. Even within the USA if a company does business in another state it may need to designate a local agent. The local agent may be a law firm that has hundreds of similar clients. No more than an address to send paperwork to.

[Martinned2]

Exactly. And if Elon Musk wants to have a conversation about censorship he can do that. Brazil has independent courts and human rights too. (Free speech is in art. 5(IV) of the Constitution.)

What he doesn't get to do is skip right past the litigation and lobbying and ignore the laws of Brazil.

[Brett Bellmore]

Sorta independent courts, and violated human rights. Free speech was guaranteed in the USSR's constitution, too.

[Martinned2]

Yes, I know, only the US has proper courts. Speaking of which, I have a very nice bridge you might like to buy!

[The Margrave of Azilia]

U. S. courts, it's fair to say, have their own problems.

[Sarcastr0]

You seen Musk's antics as to who is is banning on twitter?

Holding him out as a champion of free speech is not what an actual free speech fan does.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Many free-speech cases involved Communists, who I think you’ll agree had an unprincipled attitude toward free speech (such as you attribute to Musk).

So what? Censorship is censorship.

[John F. Carr]

You only need to care about foreign law if you want to do business in the country or you are doing something extraditable. I see ads on Telegram that are probably paid for in another country. Telegram ads aren't personalized. If I join a group about goat herding in Kazakhstan the group feed might include an ad in Russian or Kazakh for a product I don't need.

I expect it is more profitable for X to have a presence in Brazil and sell ads to Brazilian businesses using local financial systems. Musk has enough money to pull out of Brazil and throw right wing content over the border.

[Don Nico]

Pro-HamasProtesters screw their fellow students at Cornell:
https://cornellsun.com/2024/09/19/multimedia-pro-palestine-protesters-disrupt-career-fair-confront-boeing-recruiters/
"This disruption, according to a University statement, involved shoving police officers, making guests of the University feel threatened and denying students the opportunity to experience the career fair."

[Martinned2]

Pro-what? Don't be a child...

Also, I'm sure students were queuing around the blog to go work for Boeing.

[hobie]

They have trouble processing anti-Israel sentiments. They keep confusing it with pro-Hamas. But, in fairness, the right has been confused for a long time now

[Don Nico]

Don't be a child?
Tell that to the protesters who think that their morality is superior to that of their fellow students.

[Sarcastr0]

You're saying they love Hamas.

That's kind of a different level than 'students yet again protest a thing in a dickish way.'

[David Nieporent]

I think Hobie had it right: they don't love Hamas; they just hate Israel. It's just that hating Israel takes the form of being pro-Hamas. (One thing we know it isn't is pro-Palestinian.)

[Martinned2]

We know that, do we?

[David Nieporent]

We know that, do we?

Well, we know that their concern over Palestinians is absent roughly 105% of the time in which they cannot directly attack Israeli actions.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Weird analysis. Person of Palestinian extraction demonstrates against Israeli attacks on Gaza, does not in any way imply unconcern about Palestinians in other contexts. It could imply you are unaware of those other contexts.

[Sarcastr0]

With the usual proviso that I think these students are absolutely in the wrong, I dunno if I agree with your characterization - that's like saying people protesting about crime don't care about crime victims because they aren't protesting for them.

I don't think these students are morally right.
I do not think most of them support Hamas.
Nor do I think most of them are antisemites.

I also think as fewer folks remember when Israel was actively put upon rather than being the overdog, this is only going to get worse.

[David Nieporent]

With the usual proviso that I think these students are absolutely in the wrong, I dunno if I agree with your characterization – that’s like saying people protesting about crime don’t care about crime victims because they aren’t protesting for them.

No; it's like saying that Republicans who claim to care about crime victims, but actually get upset only when the criminal was (e.g.) black/trans/immigrant, don't really care about crime victims. They care about using those victims against their actual enemies.

[Martinned2]

It looks like Canada is headed for a first-past-the-post car crash, where the right (CPC and PPC) gets about 45% of the vote and still ends up with a parliamentary landslide. (The left would also get 45%, and the Bloc Quebecois, which is also on the left but in Quebec, would get the remaining 10% of the vote.)

https://338canada.com/polls.htm

[John F. Carr]

Revenge for the Tories.

[Brett Bellmore]

That's pretty normal where one party has overwhelming local support, and another other has modest but widespread support. "Bouncing the rubble" in your strongholds makes the popular vote look good, but doesn't put more people in office.

[Martinned2]

It's also pretty normal when there's one party of the right and three parties of the left. It's called splitting the vote, and it demonstrates the benefits of some kind of single transferable vote system.

[Brett Bellmore]

I'm not a big fan of first past the post, there are obviously better systems. But I don't think it was any secret before the election that it was going to be contested under this voting system, so that's on them.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

...and it puts some perspective onto any claims that that America is uniquely undemocratic.

[Martinned2]

Who makes that claim?

[The Margrave of Azilia]

One shudders to think what a right-wing government would do in Canada. Practice censorship? Encourage people to kill themselves?

[Martinned2]

Nothing that a Trumpist would mind. But a sensible voter?

https://www.vox.com/politics/24140480/canada-pierre-poilievre-conservative-party-populism-democracy

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Let’s see. From your link:

“Poilievre is basically just a conventional Canadian conservative who wraps up his elite-friendly agenda in anti-elite language aimed at working-class voters. He’s the kind of politician that some Republicans wish Donald Trump was: a tame populist….

“...Poilievre’s politics seem more shaped by Canada’s longstanding populist tradition than anything new or global.

“Arising primarily in Western provinces (Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Poilievre’s native Alberta), Canadian “prairie populism” historically draws strength from the notion that the federal government cares more about the population centers in Quebec and Ontario than the rest of the country. Prairie populism, which comes in left- and right-wing varieties, focuses far more on regional and economic issues than the cultural obsessions of the modern far right.”

(By the way, I like how he’s simultaneously an elitist and a prairie populist.)

[Magister]

The article explains Poilievre's "plutocratic populism"; he talks the populism talk and walks the elitism walk.

Poilievre is basically just a conventional Canadian conservative who wraps up his elite-friendly agenda in anti-elite language aimed at working-class voters.

Poilievre, by contrast, keeps his populism within plutocrat-acceptable bounds. His rhetorical gestures toward the working class are paired with solidly pro-rich policy views and a distinct absence of attacks on the democratic system itself.

[not guilty]

I haven't yet read this in full, but some folks in Springfield, Ohio are pursuing an interesting legal theory against Donald Trump and J. D. Vance: https://www.chandralaw.com/files/assets/2024-09-24-bench-memo-and-guerline-jozef-of-haitian-bridge-alliance-affidavit-re-trump-vance-and-springfield.pdf#:~:text=In%20re:%20Criminal%20Charges%20Against%20Donald%20J.%20Trump%20and%20James

[not guilty]

Having now read the court filing, but not the authorities cited therein, my first blush impression is that the petitioners' theory of probable cause is pretty attenuated. It appears that the municipal court's role in determining probable cause is advisory, and charging decisions are left to state prosecutors.

That having been said, Trump's and Vance's lying to gin up hatred of Haitians is despicable.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Trump: “They are a threat to democracy, what they’re doing to our country – their poisoning our country, they’re poisoning it, and you can take a look in Ohio what’s happened, you can take a look in Aurora, Colorado and see what’s happening but, those are two that’s been in the news. You have hundreds of little towns and cities that are being taken over by migrants. If you take a young women with two beautiful children and you put her on a bus, and it ends up on the front page of every newspaper makes it a lot harder.”

Sharyl Attkisson: “So yes to mass deportation, even of women and–”

Trump: “So we’ll look at it very closely, but we’re getting the criminals out and we’re going to do that fast and we know who they are the local police know their names and they know their serial numbers, they know everything about them.”

Serial numbers. The last group of people to be assigned serial numbers involved in mass ‘deportations’ were Jews during the Holocaust, and Trump’s fully onboard with such abhorrent behavior.

He is a threat to democracy, and so are his supporters.

[Bwaaah]

Democracy. Yeah.

You should wring out your rag from time to time...you'll have less spotting showing through your fine threads.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Oh, I get it: you made a sexist joke and completed ignored Trump's remarks and repeated idolization of Hitler's words and policies!

I remember when you tried to act offended that I knew you were a rabid MAGA piece of shit, and yet I had you pegged correctly from the very start.

MAGA is a disease of the bigoted and idiotic.