Sunday Open Thread

What's on your mind?

Comments

[Mr. Bumble]

What will today bring?

[Dr. Ed 2]

Someone suing Trump for something...

[Kazinski]

Somebody suing Trump for nothing.

[Randal]

Trump suing someone for saying mean things.

Or deporting them.

[not guilty]

A couple of days ago, Donald Trump squawked on Truth Social:

Just in: Documents show conclusively that Christopher Wray, Deranged Jack Smith, Merrick Garland, Lisa Monaco, and other crooked lowlifes from the failed Biden Administration, signed off on Operation Arctic Frost. They spied on Senators and Congressmen/women, and even taped their calls. They cheated and rigged the 2020 Presidential Election. These Radical Left Lunatics should be prosecuted for their illegal and highly unethical behavior!

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/115432378654253078?ftag=YHF4eb9d17

This missive curiously omits identification of any particular "illegal . . . behavior" that Messrs. Wray, Smith and Garland of Ms. Monaco engaged in, for which any of them should be prosecuted.

The motto of the Trump Department of Justice appears to be the maxim coined by Lavrentiy Beria, the head of the Soviet Secret Police: "Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime."

How about it, MAGAts? Which federal criminal statutes did Wray, Smith, Garland and/or Monaco violate, whether before, during or since the Biden administration? What is the nature and cause of the accusation that the Sixth Amendment requires that the alleged offenders be informed of?

[Dr. Ed 2]

I don't know the statute, but fir "illegal wiretapping" to BE illegal, it has to violate SOME statute. It was illegal when Nixon's men did it...

[Kenneth Almquist]

18 U.S.C. 2511 makes wiretapping illegal, but it’s not a criminal statute.

Of course Trump is lying about taping calls of members of Congress.

[Darth Buckeye]

18 USC 2511(1) describes the crimes and states that anyone who commits any of the actions described in that section will be punished as provided in 18 USC 2511(4). I don’t know if this section applies to people in law enforcement or intelligence agencies that misuse their powers to illegally make surveillance of electronic communications or data.

[Darth Buckeye]

It’s worse when people working in the intelligence or law enforcement agencies misuse their powers to illegally wiretap someone. They can create a pretext for their illegal action that will shield them from detection and prosecution if detected.

[not guilty]

What facts indicate any illegal wiretapping here? When? By whom? Whose phones were tapped?

[Riva]

Since you repeat this response, allow me to repost mine from below:

Not sure what's going on now with this seeming schizophrenic sealioning. Are you now back to denying the details exposed through whistleblower disclosures and documents released by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and confirming the wide scope of the operation? Details which, among other things, include a September 27, 2023 FBI memo titled CAST [Cellular Analysis Survey Team] Assistance listing the phone numbers of the targeted senators.

Why do you even post your bullshit if you don't actually intend to respond seriously and are, apparently, intellectually incapable of doing so?

[Sarcastr0]

Fucking time travel.

I knew it.

[Riva]

WTF do you mean little communist girl that never smiled? Arctic Frost was part of the corrupt weaponization of law enforcement conducted by the Biden administration. The Biden administration is, thankfully, not in power anymore. But those worthless thug hacks like Smith still have to answer for their wrongs. Otherwise, democrats will feel free to return to the same abuses if they ever cheat their way back into power.

[David Nieporent]

And I'll repeat my response from below: that, of course, was neither illegal nor wiretapping, so as was 100% guaranteed, you failed to respond to the question.

[Riva]

In case you missed it from below, here's a new concept for you asshole. Lack of probable cause.

Kindly fuck off now,

[David Nieporent]

In case you missed it from below, what does probable cause have to do with this discussion? Answer: nothing. The only thing that has been revealed is that the government obtained call logs (which is not "wiretapping," which is why words matter.) That does not require a warrant or probable cause.

[Riva]

You phenomonally dumb fucking asshole. The existence of probable cause or a valid investigative predicate is essential to justify criminal charges. If there was no lawful basis for obtaining phone records or monitoring communications, the thug could face a lot of charges, with no qualified immunity.

Why the are you even commenting here you fucking clown? Do everyone, and yourself, a favor and shut the fuck up.

[David Nieporent]

The existence of probable cause or a valid investigative predicate is essential to justify criminal charges

We're not talking about "criminal charges." We're talking about obtaining phone records. Which does not require probable cause.

If there was no lawful basis for obtaining phone records

The only lawful basis required for subpoenaing phone records is relevance to an investigation.

[not guilty]

How do those "whistleblower disclosures and documents released by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley" show whose phones were illegally tapped, Riva? When? By whom?

If you don't know, then grow a pair and say so.

[Riva]

Your sealioning is almost endearing considering the asshole trolls above.

[not guilty]

Riva, if and to the extent I am "sealioning," that is because nothing that you have described is even in the same ballpark as Illegal wiretapping.

[Riva]

And it should be noted that one could literally be blinded staring too long at NG’s projection. He must have some faint memory of the Lavrentiy Beria quote from the countless times it has been used to describe, quite aptly, the Biden administration lawfare.

[gVOR08]

And who was president during the 2020 election? How did Biden appointees rig an election before being appointed? The same time machine Obama used to plant a birth announcement in the 1961 Honolulu papers?

[Riva]

At least, NG, you’re no longer pretending that this massive weaponization of federal law enforcement power directed at political opponents did not occur. And how massive was this effort? These creeps targeted President Trump and 92 Republican groups and individuals, including Charlie Kirk’s Turning Point USA. And what might the crimes be for this massive partisan weaponization? Did the thug unlawfully obtain the records, which let’s not forget included the phone records of eight Republican senators? Well if the thug lacked probable cause, the future doesn’t look that rosy.

And next, brushing away corruption that makes Watergate seem like a walk in the park on nice Fall afternoon, NG will whine about immunity. Uh huh. Smith’s illegal appointment casts some doubt on immunity. And even if that were not at play, any immunity would be only qualified immunity. If the thug still lacked probable cause for acts during the investigatory phase, he can kiss any immunity claim goodbye.

And of course beyond criminal concerns, there is also civil liability. And the gross abuse of power which itself merits attention. The thug Smith has some ’splaining to do. So do many others who facilitated this disgrace.

[not guilty]

Supporting facts, Riva?

Whose phones were tapped? When? By whom?

[Riva]

Not sure what's going on now with this seeming schizophrenic sealioning. Are you now back to denying the details exposed through whistleblower disclosures and documents released by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and confirming the wide scope of the operation? Details which, among other things, include a September 27, 2023 FBI memo titled CAST [Cellular Analysis Survey Team] Assistance listing the phone numbers of the targeted senators.

Why do you even post your bullshit if you don't actually intend to respond seriously and are, apparently, intellectually incapable of doing so?

[David Nieporent]

No phones were tapped. Words have meaning.

[Riva]

No probable cause. That also has a meaning asshole.

And just so you know, when assholes you feel compelled to insert yourself, it's actually a good thing. Let's me know I struck a nerve.

[David Nieporent]

What does probable cause have to do with this discussion? Answer: nothing. The only thing that has been revealed is that the government obtained call logs (which is not "wiretapping," which is why words matter.) That does not require a warrant or probable cause.

[Riva]

I'll just repost my response from above. It's all you deserve you stupid fuck:

You phenomonally dumb fucking asshole. The existence of probable cause or a valid investigative predicate is essential to justify criminal charges. If there was no lawful basis for obtaining phone records or monitoring communications, the thug could face a lot of charges, with no qualified immunity. Why the fuck are you even commenting here you fucking clown?

And didn't I tell you to fuck off? Why are you still commenting asshole?

[David Nieporent]

The existence of probable cause or a valid investigative predicate is essential to justify criminal charges

We're not talking about "criminal charges." We're talking about obtaining phone records. Which does not require probable cause.

If there was no lawful basis for obtaining phone records

The only lawful basis required for subpoenaing phone records is relevance to an investigation.

[not guilty]

Is this the (heavily redacted) document you are relying upon? https://www.grassley.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/arctic_frost_toll_analysis_of_us_senators.pdf

Let's look at some actual statutes, Riva. Wiretapping is prohibited under circumstances defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2511(1):

(1) Except as otherwise specifically provided in this chapter any person who—

(a) intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, oral, or electronic communication;
(b) intentionally uses, endeavors to use, or procures any other person to use or endeavor to use any electronic, mechanical, or other device to intercept any oral communication when—

(i) such device is affixed to, or otherwise transmits a signal through, a wire, cable, or other like connection used in wire communication; or
(ii) such device transmits communications by radio, or interferes with the transmission of such communication; or
(iii) such person knows, or has reason to know, that such device or any component thereof has been sent through the mail or transported in interstate or foreign commerce; or
(iv) such use or endeavor to use (A) takes place on the premises of any business or other commercial establishment the operations of which affect interstate or foreign commerce; or (B) obtains or is for the purpose of obtaining information relating to the operations of any business or other commercial establishment the operations of which affect interstate or foreign commerce; or
(v) such person acts in the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any territory or possession of the United States;

(c) intentionally discloses, or endeavors to disclose, to any other person the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communication in violation of this subsection;
(d) intentionally uses, or endeavors to use, the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communication in violation of this subsection; or
(e)
(i) intentionally discloses, or endeavors to disclose, to any other person the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication, intercepted by means authorized by sections 2511(2)(a)(ii), 2511(2)(b)–(c), 2511(2)(e), 2516, and 2518 of this chapter, (ii) knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of such a communication in connection with a criminal investigation, (iii) having obtained or received the information in connection with a criminal investigation, and (iv) with intent to improperly obstruct, impede, or interfere with a duly authorized criminal investigation,

shall be punished as provided in subsection (4) or shall be subject to suit as provided in subsection (5).

The relevant definitions are set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 2510:

(4) “intercept” means the aural or other acquisition of the contents of any wire, electronic, or oral communication through the use of any electronic, mechanical, or other device.

* * *

(8) “contents”, when used with respect to any wire, oral, or electronic communication, includes any information concerning the substance, purport, or meaning of that communication

The words "preliminary," "toll" or "analysis" appear nowhere in either statute, Riva.

Ctrl-F is your friend.

[Riva]

Feel free to cut and paste the entire US Code. It actually doesn't give you any special credibility NG. But feel free to engage in more of the same ignorant half-assed reviews if it makes you feel better. I'm tired of this nonsense. Like I wrote, the thug Smith has some explaining to do. He's in some shit and, assuming the little thug's appointment was invalid, he's in even deeper shit.

And it must be noted, that there are other broader concerns at issue than merely the criminal liability of the Biden bad actors. Investigations need to be thorough to expose and correct the systematic problems in the system that allowed this gross weaponization to occur. You, and the other trolls, would be concerned about that, if any of you actually had any integrity.

[not guilty]

IOW, you got bupkis.

"I'm tired of this nonsense" is Rivaspeak for crying Uncle.

[David Nieporent]

They cheated and rigged the 2020 Presidential Election.

Setting aside all the other lies here — and Trump manages to pack a lot in, in just a few words — MAGA suffers from a mass delusion about who was president in 2020.

[ThePublius]

So, you're saying that you have to be the president to rig the election?

[ReaderY]

You’re just realizing this?

[ReaderY]

And I completely agree the claim that the Biden Administration rigged the 2020 election - which occurred entirely while President Trump was in office - would require us to believe they possessed a time machine.

Perhaps the statement is carefully written so that, if presented to members of a class possessing a capacity for logical thinking such as the judiciary, it could be readily dismissed as not possibly meant seriously and hence not libelous. Yet when published, most members of the public would focus on the tone and main points and wouldn’t even notice the odd chronological discrepancy thrown into the background. Or remember the relevant history.

Even most commentators so far haven’t noticed and have proceeded to comment as if it were something capable of happening.

[ReaderY]

[Sarcastr0]

That Reagan quote Canada used is real.

[Mr. Bumble]

BFD!

[Stephen Lathrop]

Bumble — Except to quiet inner psychological turmoil, what purpose did that serve? Why publish that world-wide?

Do you suppose that when some great scorer comes to mark against your name, he will even notice you did that? If so, do you think you get a good mark for that?

[ThePublius]

And who the heck are you to criticize what he posts?

[Michael P]

He's a washed-up newspaper editor with logorrhea and crazy ideas, of course. Why do you ask?

[Mr. Bumble]

But he does have several billionaire friends.

[Stephen Lathrop]

ThePublius — I commend the wit in that reply. Did you do it on purpose?

[Mr. Bumble]

Well, aren't you special.
H/T Church Lady.

[Dr. Ed 2]

And Ross Perot was right about the "giant sucking sound."

[David Nieporent]

He was, of course, not. You should stick to topics about which you know something, like which floor polish to use.

[Mr. Bumble]

Shimmer?

[ThePublius]

Reasonable people disagree on this topic (and do so without insutling each other, I might add).

There's this, from 2019:

"The Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning think tank, concluded that the U.S. lost about 850,000 jobs from 1993 to 2013 as a result of NAFTA and that number has undoubtedly risen. And the “social progress as well as economic growth” in relation to the agreement never seemed to appear. Despite strong productivity growth in U.S. and Mexican manufacturing, real wages sank by 17% in Mexico from 1994 to 2011 and slid in the U.S. as well.

In key manufacturing industries, such as the auto industry, NAFTA has had a clear impact. Global auto producers built 11 new assembly plants in North America from 2009 to 2017. All but three were sited in Mexico – even though they all primarily made vehicles for the U.S. market.

As a result, Mexican employment in the sector has soared, while American auto jobs have declined. Last year, Mexico had almost the same number of people working in its motor vehicle industry as the U.S. did, with about 800,000 in each country. Mexican employment in this sector has almost doubled since 2007 while U.S. employment has slightly slipped.

An even more significant impact has been pushing down on U.S. manufacturing wages as a result of suppressed wages in Mexico due largely to a lack of independent unions in the export sector. With the threat of shifting production to Mexico a factor, real autoworker wages in the U.S. plummeted 26% from 2002 to 2013 and have stagnated since.

Ultimately, it’s not just manufacturing workers who are affected by the “sucking sound.” Families and entire communities can be devastated when a worker loses a job as a result."

https://theconversation.com/the-giant-sucking-sound-of-nafta-ross-perot-was-ridiculed-as-alarmist-in-1992-but-his-warning-turned-out-to-be-prescient-120258

[Mr. Hook]

So what response does the cult settle on? 1) Reagan was ardently pro-tariff; 2) Reagan was a woke Marxist RINO; 3) LOL whatever, liberal tears are delicious.

[Riva]

The question, little communist girl that never smiled, is not whether the clip is “real.” For those who believe in truth (not gaslighting clowns of course) the question is whether the small edited clip is accurate in the effort to give the impression that Ronaldus Magnus was absolutely opposed to tariffs.

And the Canucks are being decidedly inaccurate and deceptive in editing one small preemptory part of a larger message in which President Reagan explains why he SUPPORTED tariff measures against Japan for violating trade agreements.

Shades of the “Nazis are fine people” hoax. Leftists can never be honest. That includes you “Sarcastr0.”

[Sarcastr0]

Nah, you're making shit up about Reagan to try and make him MAGA.
By your very explanation, Reagan was explaining why a tariff against Japan was an *exception* to his general dislike of tariffs.

Free trade, along with free markets, was a big part of the small government GOP.

It began to waver some under Obama, and then under Trump it's one of many things about which the party turned on a dime.

But Trump says it's a lie, so here you are responding as programmed.

[Riva]

It’s NOT simply because President Trump “says it’s a lie.” The unedited clip makes it undeniably clear that it’s a lie.

You’re just beclowning yourself more by doubling down on the gaslighting after your lie has been exposed. With a touch of parroting more dehumanizing insults. What a fucking disgrace. A decidedly stupid disgrace. And since we’re back to that, this exchange is now over clown. Fuck off.

[bernard11]

The unedited clip makes it undeniably clear that it’s a lie.

This is just psychotic. It has no connection with reality.

[Riva]

“It.” You’re acquitting yourself quite well, BuffaloBill11.

[David Nieporent]

Riva is programmed to be a lying POS. The ad is real — which actually is the question, since Trump called it fake — and accurately distills a several minute speech by Trump into a one minute ad. Reagan was saying that tariffs were bad and harmful. He argued that one narrow issue — one specific product, involving one specific country — was a "special case" that justified very short term restrictions.

The full speech is here, and it was an argument against tariffs.

At the end of it, Reagan says this:

So, with my meeting with Prime Minister Nakasone and the Venice economic summit coming up, it's terribly important not to restrict a President's options in such trade dealings with foreign governments. Unfortunately, some in the Congress are trying to do exactly that.

Now, if you were as ignorant and dishonest as Riva, you might think that by "important not to restrict a President's options in such trade dealings," Reagan meant — as Trump would — that he should be allowed to impose tariffs when he wanted. In fact, Reagan meant the opposite; he was opposing a Congressional bill that would've required tariffs against countries that had trade surpluses with us.

[Riva]

The Canuck ad is a disgraceful lie using deceptively edited material, much like the Charlottesville hoax bullshit, which, as an aside, asshole still clings to (not a pleasant metaphor I admit).

I guess it never occurred to asshole that context matters. Just like it mattered to President Reagan when addressing trade issues in the 80s. The important point is he advocated for the use of his presidential authority to address trade imbalances, including the use of tariffs, just like President Trump.

But this is a concept that is beyond the average asshole, let along an exceptionally stupid asshole like crazy Dave. And not something that concerned the Canadian hacks intent on the deceiving the public with a maliciously edited ad.

Conversation and lesson over asshole. Fuck off now.

[David Nieporent]

Reagan thought tariffs were bad. He gave a speech explaining why tariffs were bad. The Ontario government accurately quoted him explaining why tariffs were bad. QED.

[ReaderY]

And that of course is why Trump cracked down all the harder for saying it. It’s what makes it crimethink. For the same reason as the leaders of Oceana in Orwell’s 1984, Trump wants no version of reality to come before the public mind that contradicts the version of reality that he wants people to believe. To this end. He wants to make it very clear that crimethink will be severely punished.

We are dealing here with elements of real Orwellian-style totalitarianism, of rule based on naked power and power based on lies. He has gained enough power and self-confidence for these elements, which have underlain his approach since even before he insisted his 2017 inauguration crowd was the biggest in history, to become more clearly manifest.

[David Nieporent]

The good news is that Trump is undermining his legal position on the tariff issue. Trump is telling SCOTUS that IEEPA gives him authority to declare an emergency regardless of any fact and impose tariffs to solve it. But he's telling the public that he's imposing tariffs on Canada out of spite because the government of Ontario aired an ad that offended him. (He's not even pretending otherwise; he said he added 10% tariffs on the country because of the ad. I hope the plaintiffs are smart enough to bring this exact point up at oral argument.)

[ReaderY]

Assuming that administration officials continue to obey the courts despite knowing, as they now ought to know, that in all likelihood they will be fired and quite possibly investigated and prosecuted for doing so.

I would not lightly assume that it will be long before this administration flatly ignores the courts.

[myself]

Democrats are apparently the party of Regan.

[David Nieporent]

As I said in a thread the other day, Harris was the more conservative of the two candidates in 2024.

[Mr. Bumble]

"June Lockhart, beloved mother figure from 'Lassie' and 'Lost In Space,' dies at 100"
https://www.newschannel5.com/news/june-lockhart-beloved-mother-figure-from-lassie-and-lost-in-space-dies-at-100
Note at the bottom of the article this obit was primarily written by a reporter who died in 2014.

[not guilty]

Obituaries of public figures are often prepared while the subject is still living. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2009/08/how-far-in-advance-do-newspapers-write-obituaries.html

[Mr. Bumble]

No shit Sherlock. I just think it is ironic that the major contributor to Ms. Lockhart's obit died at least 11 years before she did.

[Bwaaah]

I don't recall having seen her in anything lately. So all they need to add is a date and tasteful statement of cause of death. Done.

[Dr. Ed 2]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tX6jdoruH8

[NvEric]

So, it's a voice from the grave ? much like the Democratic Party.

[Frank Drackman]

IIRC she was also on “Petticoat Junction”
“Here’s a Lady MD she’s as pretty as can be…..”

Frank

[William of Brooklyn]

No, that was Bea Benaderet.

[Mr. Bumble]

Wrong.
She was added to the cast when Bea Benaderet died from cancer as the Lady MD as Frank stated.

[darkknight9]

Any bow/gun/spear hunters out there? With the season rolling around hereabouts I'm curious.

[Frank Drackman]

Is it Wabbit Season or Duck Season??

[Mr. Bumble]

FWIW the first session for black bear closed in NJ with about 250 taken ( archery only for six days and archery and muzzeloaders for three days).
A second season opens in Dec. for shotgun and muzzeloaders.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Sounds excessive: 250 in 9 days, in New Jersey. Hard to see how it could happen under sporting conditions. Baiting? Maybe so. Does NJ permit hunters to bait bears? Silly me, of course it does, while pretending not to.

The law even acknowledges baits will be used. It keeps hunters back, to wait for a baited bear at a no-doubt closely-supervised 300-foot perimeter. And it admonishes the hunters to clean up the baits afterwards.

It's a shame black bears have temperaments about as aggressive as deer. What I want to see is an archery season for polar bears.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Not that a couple of very dry summers in a row might change bear behavior, mind you. No, it couldn't be that....

[Mr. Bumble]

Update:
"Hunters killed 368 bears during the first part of New Jersey’s annual bear hunt, a decrease compared to the same time last year, data from the state Department of Environmental Protection shows."
"The hunt is limited to archery during the first three days in October, while both guns and archery are permitted during the final three days.

A second segment of the annual hunt will be held Dec. 8 to Dec. 13. Hunters will be limited to guns during that week.

Under a provision in the law, the hunt can be extended into a third December segment if less than 20% of the estimated bear population is culled.

If the state calculates 30% of the bears have been killed, the hunt will be stopped early.

It’s unclear exactly how many bears are in New Jersey, but some state Department of Environmental Protection estimates put the population at around 3,000.

However, the state uses the number of tagged bears when calculating the percent of the population culled during the hunt. Only 15.7% of the tagged population was culled during the first segment, state officials said. "
https://www.nj.com/data/2025/10/njs-controversial-bear-hunt-just-killed-368-bears-and-its-not-over-yet.html

[ThePublius]

New Jersey does, indeed, have a bear overpopulation problem, with bears wandering into residential neighborhoods searching for food. They are not just cute, they are very dangerous animals, and will, on occasion, maim, kill, and even eat people. It's important to cull the heard.

[SRG2]

They are not just cute, they are very dangerous animals, and will, on occasion, maim, kill, and even eat people.

I assume you didn't know that the bears in NJ are black bears, which are shy, can readily be chased away even by house cats, have apparently killed only one person in NJ in the last 150 years and attack about one person every two years.

Brown bears, different matter

[ThePublius]

"have apparently killed only one person in NJ in the last 150 years"

Untrue.

There was an attack this year, and a fatal attack in 2014.

"Black bear attacks are rare in New Jersey, but have occurred, with the most recent being a woman being bitten by a bear in a Dollar General store in Vernon in September 2025. The state's most notable attack was the fatal mauling of a hiker in 2014 in West Milford. When encountering a black bear, remain calm, back away slowly, and make yourself appear larger by being loud and waving your arms, advises the New Jersey Division of Fish and Wildlife. "

[Mr. Bumble]

...and never fuck with a mama bear's cubs.

Next up; coyotes.

[SRG2]

When was the previous fatality before 2014? There's even a Wikipedia page for you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_bear_attacks_in_North_America
According to the State Department of Environmental Protection, this was the first fatal bear attack on a human in New Jersey on record.

I said that they "attack about one person every two years." Was there an attack in 2024?

Untrue

There's your problem. You don't know the meaning of some common English words.

[ThePublius]

You can't admit that you were wrong and move on. You have to move the goalposts instead.

[John 4]

Is your brain legitimately broken or something?

[SRG2]

Fuckwit, I said that bears " killed only one person in NJ in the last 150" - and provided a link showing that. One person was killed in 2014. For that statement to be false, you'd have needed to find someone else killed by bears from 1875 to now. There hasn't been anyone.

And I said, " attack about one person every two years." which means that if one person was attacked this year, and no-one attacked last year I was probably right, and when you look at the average, I am definitely right. Google AI reports:
2024: 0 human attacks
2023: 1 human attack
2022: 2 human attacks
2021: 0 human attacks
2020: 1 human attack
2009–2017: 7 human attacks

How this translates as my being wrong - well, that supports my note about your not knowing the meanings of some common English words.

[ThePublius]

No, you're right, I was mistaken. Still, I'm not at all opposed to hunting, black bears or just about any other game.

[David Nieporent]

Untrue.

There was an attack this year, and a fatal attack in 2014.

I am unclear how citing one fatal attack proves the claim that they've only killed one person to be untrue.

[Mr. Bumble]

Hey SRG2. Now do mute swans.

"Californians being urged to take up arms to deal with 'aggressive' invasive species attacking children.

California residents have been urged to hunt a 'destructive' and 'aggressive' water animal invading the state.

New legislation will allow Californians to kill mute swans for five years, as authorities worry about the 'invasive' bird that has previously attacked children.

The measure was adopted to address the 'growing concerns' about the spread of the 'destructive' swans in California, the state's Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) said."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15226323/california-mute-swans-bill-gavin-newsom.html

[TwelveInchPianist]

"apparently killed only one person in NJ in the last 150 years"

How steady has the population been in the past 150 years? At least in southern New England, bears were gone for a long time, and only recently returned in force.

[SRG2]

Yes, but not germane to the foolish claim by ThePublius that I was wrong about black bears. He would only have needed to concede that his observations were about brown bears, but being who he is, he couldn't.

[Life of Brian]

According to NJ Fish & Wildlife, black bears were almost exclusively concentrated in the relatively unpopulated NW corner of the state in 1995, but cover almost the entire state today. That trajectory appears to have been set back in 1971, when the state banned hunting because the population was almost wiped out.

So yeah, that suggests recent attacks/fatalities are more representative of the rate you might expect from the current population.

[wvattorney13]

While brown bears are certainly more aggressive than black bears the claim that they are docile and chased away by house cats is grossly incorrect. Black bears when they get hungry and/or feel cornered can become terribly aggressive. And when these bears come into populated areas it shows that they are hungry. They get trapped in garages and the like.

They aren't attacking a large number of people...yet. But this is simply being proactive because the authorities KNOW that it will become a very serious problem if the population is allowed to grow more. Should a few kids die before we start hunting them?

[David Nieporent]

Should a few kids die before we start hunting them?

I don't think we should start hunting kids at all!

[SRG2]

the claim that they are docile and chased away by house cats is grossly incorrect.

I never said they were docile - but there are non-AI clips and photos of black bears being chased away by house cats.

[Mr. Bumble]

Please link to one. I'd love to see that.

[SRG2]

One example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdAKxxdRYTE

Another: https://preview.redd.it/cat-chases-bear-up-a-tree-suzanne-giovanetti-v0-droyhjvd7ti81.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=0616619ddb2692c9527d7d4c97fab47f055bc77e

[Hugh]

Written by Thomas Jefferson, July 4, 1776, about the abuses of England's King George III:

"For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world.” “He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us.” “He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our Legislatures.” “He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people.” “Obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither.”

Sound familiar?

And yet the proponents of the unitary executive theory, who also claim to be originalists, would have is believe that's what the writers of the Constitution intended.

[wvattorney13]

You packed so much misleading and incorrect information in one post. That is pretty amazing.

[Stephen Lathrop]

wvattorney13 — Did he get the quote wrong? If not, what are you talking about? Is this a new trend, like Trump/MAGA retaliation against Canada for quoting Ronald Reagan accurately on tariffs?

[Stephen Lathrop]

Hugh — Excuse me please while a I hobby horse off your fine comment.

Please, VC libertarians, go back to the Declaration and read again the bill of particulars part. My civics teachers always skipped past that, to leave more time to drill down on what a fine specimen of rights-protective history it was.

I read the bill of particulars and stuck up my hand: "If this is all about rights, why are most of the specifics about government powers, and a list of offenses by Britain against colonial ambitions to wield those powers themselves?" I asked. Silly me. That was not in the lesson plan. I got the brush-off.

I mention this to counter assertions—heedless, habitual, and reliable as clockwork on July 4—that the DoI was written as a, "Rights first, then government," sort of proclamation. That was not in fact its purpose, nor is it a faithful summary of what it says.

Its purpose was to proclaim a new and independent sovereignty, which might afterward become the protector of whatever schemes of government the jointly sovereign People might choose at their pleasure. The DoI says that explicitly. It is astonishing to me that so few ostensible students of government even notice what is right there in the preamble, and afterward supported in detail with a bill of particulars.

I think this point matters a lot. It notes the starting point for a cascade of constitutional misinterpretations which have been rolling along like a fattening snowball ever since. If you do not get that sovereignty newly proclaimed on behalf of the People themselves was the whole point of the Declaration, then it is a short step before you end with a conclusion that government itself is sovereign. After that, all the rights go up for grabs, in contests among government officeholders to say who gets what. That is exactly what the Roberts Court is doing to the nation now.

[David Nieporent]

If this is all about rights, why are most of the specifics about government powers

They aren't, as I pointed out last time you made that claim. I could see how one could think that if one stopped reading about three line items in.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Readers are invited to look for themselves. Nieporent, being a libertarian, is averse to even acknowledge sovereignty as a political concept, let alone to notice his bias to let government behave as if it were sovereign.

Problem is, a moment's reflection ought to clue anyone that it is paradoxical to insist government is at the same time the principal defender of individual rights, and the principal threat to individual rights. Thus, only a power outside government is a logical candidate to constrain government abuse of rights.

As the founders saw it, that role to constrain government was reserved for the People themselves. That is what the Declaration of Independence explicitly says, despite continuing insistence by government officials, supported by Nieporent, to read the text as empowerment for them.

[David Nieporent]

Nothing about my response had anything to do with your weird ideas of political philosophy. Just reading the items in the Declaration.

[Poxigah146]

"A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people"

Was TJ talking about Obama or Biden?

[David Nieporent]

No.

[Area Man]

So, is this y’all’s new thing? Just labeling everything you don’t agree with “unitary executive theory,” even if it has nothing to do with that theory?

Let me help you. No proponent of the UET thinks the president has the power to unilaterally impose tariffs. The people saying the president can impose tariffs are saying that *Congress has already given the president that power.* I don’t agree with those people who say Congress did so. But their argument isn’t based on the UET.

The same goes for deploying the National Guard. The argument is that Congress has given him that authority, not that he could do it on his own. Again, that is highly debatable. But their argument has nothing to do with UET.

I don’t even understand some of your other arguments. Has anyone claimed Trump created new offices, or obstructed naturalization laws? Trump is accused of doing lots of stupid things. And, in fairness, he does lots of stupid things. But I’ve never even heard of those accusations. And can’t all presidents, by exercising the veto power, refuse to pass migration laws? Again, what does that have to do with UET?

I happen to agree with the UET, but it isn’t above debate and critique. But it’s not what you apparently think it is. If you’re going to bitch and moan all the time, at least know what you’re talking about.

[William of Brooklyn]

Precisely.

[wvattorney13]

That's about 1/75 of the problems with that paragraph which seems to be a meme now. I have no energy to rebut it point by point. Perhaps instead of one sentence per beef, the poster could illustrate what King George III did and show how the action can be analogized to what Trump is doing instead of plucking terms wildly out of context.

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

UET is errant nonsense, supported neither by text nor by history.

[Mr. Bumble]

Nobody told Lincoln.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Bumble — That comment conveys that you could be more conversant with Lincoln's conduct of the Civil War. He was, famously, among the most collegial of presidents, as he had to be to keep his government coalition going during the most fraught and divisive era in American history.

It worked because Lincoln was a quick study, and learned on the job to stay conversant with a vast range of politically interested parties, not merely in the federal government, but also in state governments. And he was forthright to take advice which impressed him, and use it to shut down advocacy he found wanting, without much apparent bias for anything but fidelity to the Constitution and/or prospects of success.

[not guilty]

According to Politico, it appears that some blastocystophiles are harshly critical of the Trump administration's meager efforts to make in vitro fertilization more readily available to those who have difficulty conceiving offspring. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/10/25/the-pro-life-movement-still-has-some-real-juice-how-trumps-promise-of-free-ivf-fizzled-00622464

What is it with these busybodies? Why do they regard it as any of their freaking business whether and how other folks reproduce or not?

In purely political terms, opposition to both IVF and abortion rights makes little sense for Republicans. Stable couples with enough disposable income to afford IVF are a natural Republican constituency. The demographic groups of females most likely to abort are also more likely to produce offspring who, if they vote at all upon reaching adulthood, are likely to favor Democrats.

This makes no sense.

[Mr. Bumble]

"What is it with these busybodies? Why do they regard it as any of their freaking business whether and how other folks reproduce or not?"
Forgetting the issue of the morality of abortion or IVF, should the government be paying for these procedures?

[Stephen Lathrop]

Bumble — Do right-wingers suppose an obligation in government to deliver right-wing-friendly programs at no cost? Or is the pretense to put aside morality mere hypocrisy?

[Dr. Ed 2]

Bumble, they said the same thing about the Abolitionists.

[Frank Drackman]

Shhhhh......(I'm trying to "shush" you)
If Afro-Amuricans figure out "Roe" resulted in 70-80 million fewer of them "shaking their bootie" (HT P Smails)
OK, depends on your model, but easily 500,000 Black Babies (OK, what are they? Tadpoles??) killed a year for 50 years, that's 25 million right there, and 1/2 were girls, so figure a few progeny from each, and we're into the 4th child bearing generation, so we're talking great grandchildren of murdered babies.....

[Malika la Maize]

Francis weeps for babies! We deserve a better class of edgelord.

Or, in Francis speech:

francis weeps for Babies we deserve a
better Class )of Edgelords) !!!

[Frank Drackman]

You wept for Floyd George, who died of a Fent-a-nol OD, I’m weeping (I don’t really weep) for the unborn Floyd George’s.

[not guilty]

A lawful abortion and a murder are mutually exclusive, Frank. One cannot be the other.

And how many black females who once aborted, later had a child that she would not have had if that fetus had not been aborted? That figure is unknowable.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

It's no news to abortion opponents that Trump is willing to sell them out for votes. You are of course correct that, in the current corrupt state of public opinion, Trump can probably pick up votes by promoting the killing of human beings, provided they're (a) inconvenient and (b) small enough to "not look like us."

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

or (c) floating in a small boat in the Caribbean Sea.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

You're aware I was *criticizing* Trump?

[Stephen Lathrop]

The Guardian reported today that a Honduran man was killed when struck by a vehicle as he bolted through traffic after being stopped by ICE on a Virginia highway.

Two points:

1. A Honduran immigrant may have had good reason to flee threats of violence in that country. He may suppose with reason that Honduran gangs also operate in this country. For such a person, masked, anonymous, unbadged, thugs driving unmarked vehicles might reasonably create fear of a gang reprisal, instead of a legitimate arrest.

2. The longer this nation permits irresponsible ICE, "law enforcement," tactics to continue, the more likely it will become that gangs operating internationally will try to exploit ICE-alike activities. Those would be not only convenient as terror tactics against gang members' targets living in the US, but also useful to intensify fear and despair in places like Honduras, by foreclosing prospects for safety abroad.

That is not a result which wise law enforcement policy, or wise foreign policy, should abet. Gang reprisals are often anti-family reprisals. Danger to US citizens—especially including children born in the US to immigrant parents—would also be implicated.

If those happen, can anyone imagine Trump/MAGA fans doing anything but hooting approval? On what evidence would anyone expect anything else?

In the current political climate, what means exist to hold criminally accountable politicians who visited such Gestapo-like activities on this nation? May we at least hope for future accountability if election results put anti-Trump/MAGA majorities in Congress, and later permit Democratic Party control of the Executive?

If we can hope for that, what does that portend for prospects of a free and fair US election come next November? Does anyone suppose Trump/MAGA government officers facing criminal accountability will stand meekly aside to permit any such election result?

[Frank Drackman]

He should have stayed in Honduras.

[ThePublius]

"masked, anonymous, unbadged, thugs driving unmarked vehicles"

Nowhere in that article does it say anything other than "masked." You made up the part about anonymous, unbadged thugs driving unmarked vehicles.

And then you made up a narrative about gangs pretending to be ICE agents.

Well, what is the truth about that unfortunate Honduran man? Was he in the country illegally? I presume he probably was, given that he fled; behavior inconsistent with innocence is an admission.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Approval predicted. Approval delivered. QED

[Michael P]

The lunatic left need to make things up because reality has a well-known pro-Trump bias. For some reason they are ideologically devoted to the 20% side of just about every 80-20 issue.

[Malika la Maize]

“behavior inconsistent with innocence is an admission.”

Yeah, the reneging on releasing the Epstein files does suggest fishiness.

[David Nieporent]

Evading the gestapo is an "admission" that the gestapo are scary, not that one has done something wrong.

[Mr. Bumble]

Are you seriously equating ICE to the Gestapo?

[Z Crazy]

He just wants white girls to be raped by illegalkind!

[Dr. Ed 2]

Stephen, if people behaved themselves, ICE wouldn't need masks.

[CountmontyC]

So a man pulled over by law enforcement flees into traffic and gets hit. No sympathy.

[Frank Drackman]

Probably did some bad damage to the Car

[Z Crazy]

A Honduran immigrant may have had good reason to flee threats of violence in that country. He may suppose with reason that Honduran gangs also operate in this country. For such a person, masked, anonymous, unbadged, thugs driving unmarked vehicles might reasonably create fear of a gang reprisal, instead of a legitimate arrest.
Then he should have fled to Singapore, which has the lowest violent crime rate in the world.

I mean, America is kind of a good place for those fleeing political or religious persecution from the government, or lfeeing a war zone.

But to flee crime. Why flee to a place that has crime, instead of Singapore?

[JRipplefireEsquire]

Is it conceivable that Dem open border policies were what got us to where you either brusquely round up between 10 and 20.million illegal aliens or amnesty the unvetted lot of them? The voters conceived it and went for the first option. Do you think reoffering them open border days is a promising political platform? I haven't come across one Dem who thinks otherwise.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Masked Gestapo tactics in the U.S. are not, "brusque," they are criminal when applied against citizens, as they have been. And they remain unwise when applied against anyone. Why do you think you like them?

[Poxigah146]

The point is to impose fear on immigrants so they self deport and that future ones don't come.

[Frank Drackman]

That’s a Bing-O!!!!!!!!!!!

[Poxigah146]

https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/26/us/immigration-chicago-daughter-cancer

This is the problem with birthright citizenship. These people will never support the removal of their parents. So by allowing these people to be citizens, you create a voting bloc against law & order.

[Krayt]

Maybe if you were a little nicer to people coming here.

[Poxigah146]

Bullshit. It has nothing to do with "nice" and everything to do with rolling out the red carpet for lawbreakers. If we're not willing to do that, you'll say we're being "cruel" and "mean spirited."

[Z Crazy]

Mollie Tibbets

Kayla Hamilton

Rachel Morin

Laken Riley

Al of them white girls who were murdered because illegals wanted to rape their white pussies!

Make no mistake.

simping for illegals is rooted in anti-white animus.

I know this because the same people who excuse illegal immigration because whites are not indigeous to North America ALSO support mass migration into Europe where whites ARE indigenous, instead of saying that white Europeans get to gun down invaders en masse.

They believe in this colonizer-colonizee dynamics. They feel that whites are responsible for all the evil in the world, so they support violent criminals immigrating in and committing crimes against whites, especially sex crimes against white girls.

They cheered the Colonge Sex Attacks.

2015–16 New Year's Eve sexual assaults in Germany - Wikipedia

Of course, if little black boys like AJ Wise are killed by illegals, they just consider it collateral damage!

White Girls Matter!

[JRipplefireEsquire]

I wish they all followed due process. And that legal remedies will be available to those wronged. Meanwhile, the restoration of law to Bidens lawless border fiasco continues. But I don't see the Dem party turning away from that in the future.

[Dr. Ed 2]

I'd like to see the citizens interfering with ICE treated like the Jan 6 folk.

[SRG2]

That would mean, being treated like heroes by people like yourself, you'd claim that "I"CE welcomed the interference, and you'd support a president who pardoned them from any acts committed against ICE.

[David Nieporent]

treated like the Jan 6 folk.

And by that you mean being called patriotic tourists and then pardoned for assaulting ICE agents?

[Z Crazy]

Illegalkind needs to be terrorized after what they did to Clarence Nelson!

How many people on that freeway felt terrorized?

(By the way, where is the black lives matter?)

https://ktla.com/news/california/former-pomona-basketball-coach-wife-among-victims-of-10-freeway-crash/

[Malika la Maize]

I’m rooting for the Jays, but wow last night.

The extent of Yoshinobu Yamamoto’s postseason dominance is most clearly enumerated as follows:
Before this year, no starting pitcher had thrown a complete game in any round of the postseason since 2017. No starter had thrown a complete game in the World Series in a decade. No pitcher had thrown back-to-back complete games in the postseason since Curt Schilling in 2001.

Yamamoto broke the first drought in the National League Championship Series last week. He broke the second and third with nine sparkling innings in Game 2 of the World Series on Saturday night, a 5-1 win for his Los Angeles Dodgers over the Toronto Blue Jays.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2025/10/26/dodgers-blue-jays-game-2-yoshinobu-yamamoto/

[Stephen Lathrop]

Malika — Late in life I got the insight to understand that on first impression some folks judged me competitive, in an unseemly way. To offset that, I got myself a Red Sox cap, and that has worked like a charm. No one newly met thinks I am competitive anymore. I am surrounded everywhere with others who believe as I do that any team which would trade away Mookie Betts has little interest in being competitive. If not for the residual pain of that, I would be a Dodgers fan.

No matter what they do, nothing about the Blue Jays, from their anodyne blue north, with their anodyne blue everything, strikes me as anything but boring. I worked for years for a graphics design firm with an owner whose business methods included threatening to fire anyone who showed up for work in blue clothing. The place was a roaring success for decades, until the owner died. He loved warm colors. When he saw anything else, he exclaimed, "My pills, get me my pills!"

[Jmaie]

Unrelated to your comment, but Mookie Betts has to be the best baseball name since Vida Blue (who holds my favorite baseball record, him being the last switch hitter to win a league MVP award).

[David Nieporent]

Not quite. He was the last switch hitter to win the American League MVP award. Numerous NL players have won it since Blue, including Chipper, Jimmy Rollins, Pete Rose, Terry Pendleton, Ken Caminiti, and Willie McGee.

[William of Brooklyn]

Yes, extraordinary.

[Malika la Maize]

Where’s Kaz?

New data released Friday showed inflation heated up in September to a pace not seen since January, according to the first dataset to be released during the government shutdown.
The September consumer price index showed prices rising at a 3 percent annual rate — up slightly from 2.9 percent in August and above April’s post-pandemic low of 2.3 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/10/24/delayed-inflation-report-tariffs/

[ThePublius]

Yet, I paid $2.99/gallon for gas yesterday.

[Frank Drackman]

When corrected for Inflation that’s cheaper than it was in 1965, of course back then you got the Tetraethyl Lead to lubricate your Valves (and your Brain) and maybe a Knife Set

Frank

[NvEric]

Or the glass ; or the coins ; or the stamps ; or the map ; or use the restroom ; or the air - all free ! even the crabs if you sit

[Frank Drackman]

That’s not how people get crabs.

[Stephen Lathrop]

I saw some excellent looking beef yesterday, for twice the price of the halibut in the adjacent fish counter.

"Can I help you?" asked the butcher's helper.

"No thanks, I'm just here to admire the meat museum."

[ThePublius]

You know, people complain about the increase in beef prices, but at the end of the day, the marginal increase in cost to one person, or a couple, is no more that one or two Dunkin iced coffees. You can get beef on sale, too. Do you have a freezer? I just checked: my local market has, for example, USDA Choice Beef Petite Sirloin Steak Value Pack - 3.5 Lb, at $8.99/lb. That's pretty good! That's probably three one pound plus steaks at about $10.50 each, and for me, more that twice what I'd eat in one sitting anyway. And going out is not super bad, either. I went to a Texas Roadhouse Thursday. An 8oz. sirloin, loaded baked potato, green beans, and bread and butter for $15. Cooked to perfection, and of course, served to me by very nice waitstaff. The place was packed! Couples, families, indeed, 8 to 80. And there were dozens and dozens of staff working. No sign of inflation there.

So, I don't know. I'm on a fixed income, and I'm not feeling any pain regarding beef prices. Then again, I'm not feeding a family, and I don't eat that much.

[Malika la Maize]

Pubes loves his government so much he happily sucks it up when it costs him money, and so should you! I mean, how many dolls, or donuts, do you need? A little sacrifice for Dear Leader, please!

[ThePublius]

That's baloney. It has noting to do with my support for Trump, it's just the way things are now, and an observation about the relative costs of things. Who's responsible for the huge natural gas costs in New England? Well, Healy blocked three new pipelines, that might have something to do with it. But what are we powerless consumers to do?

[John 4]

Holy bootlicker.

[Malika la Maize]

With Halloween coming there’s also:

The price of chewing gum and candy has risen 39% since February 2020, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

All the major chocolate brands have raised their prices, including Nestlé, Lindt, Hershey and Mars, which makes M&Ms, Snickers and Twix.

And they're resorting to tricks to make their treats, says David Branch, who tracks the cocoa market at Wells Fargo's Agri-Food Institute.
"We're seeing a lot more fillers going in," Branch says. "They're putting more nuts, less chocolate, keeping the price the same, just reducing the amount of cocoa cost."

Reese's makes a Halloween-themed peanut butter cup called "White Ghost" that's dipped in "white creme" instead of chocolate. KitKat's Halloween flavors include cinnamony "Ghost Toast" and marshmallowy green-colored "Witch's Brew," both very light on cocoa.

https://www.npr.org/2025/10/24/nx-s1-5582259/halloween-candy-prices-chocolate-cacao

[Mr. Bumble]

"...since February 2020,..."

[Life of Brian]

Man, it took some crazy combination of surgical precision and blind luck for you to somehow accidentally slice just this part out of the middle of your quote:

Why has the price gone up?

The cost of chocolate's main ingredient — cocoa — has nearly doubled since the beginning of last year, hitting historic records again and again.

That's because harvests of cocoa have come up short for three years straight. The vast majority of the world's cocoa beans grow in West Africa, where farmers have dealt with extreme weather, changing climate patterns and disease in their aging trees.

[Poxigah146]

Amazing that printing trillions of dollars and holding rates at 0 for far too long to help the Wall Street banksters causes inflation! It's not like we have any historical analogue to that!

[Z Crazy]

Is there any way to cause mild deflation?

[not guilty]

Don't say his name three times, Malika.

[Malika la Maize]

Francis Ford Coppola, Who Says He’s ‘Broke,’ Is Selling a $1 Million Watch

The famed director will put some pieces from his personal collection up for auction later this year.

“I don’t have any money because I invested all the money, that I borrowed, to make ‘Megalopolis,’” he said in March during the “Tetragrammaton” podcast, speaking with the music producer Rick Rubin. “It’s basically gone.”

At the center of Mr. Coppola’s sale with Phillips is a timepiece that he designed himself in 2014 in collaboration with F.P. Journe, a Swiss watch company whose horological marvels are expensive enough to make Rolex look like Swatch.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/23/fashion/francis-ford-coppola-watch-auction.html

[ThePublius]

That's interesting. How could a guy who made so much money in his life have been so careless, so cavalier, as to not prepare, not invest and provide for himself? One shouldn't invest money in risky endeavors that one can't afford to lose. Now he has to sell his possessions to live? And about buying a million dollar watch; what the heck?

[Malika la Maize]

I think a fair amount of artists might not be great money managers.

[ThePublius]

Or they have lousy, or even corrupt, personal managers.

[Malika la Maize]

Of course. I mean, the World Series is going on, not that long ago (athlete not artist but similar position) Ohtani’s translator got into trouble for bilking him out of gobs of money.

[ThePublius]

Yes, it's a shame. A good manager for an artist or athlete should guide and advise them regarding investing money for their lives, allocating portions for "fun," and so on. They make decent money without being corrupt. There is probably a business opportunity for a firm that would audit artists' managers.

[Malika la Maize]

Agreed.

[Ska]

I like the idea, but the artists/athletes would have to demand audited managers. Then the managers would have to hire auditors to opine on their systems and financials so that the managers could say they have been audited.

[Mr. Bumble]

Coppala has a long history of money problems (he had to sell his winery) mostly in order to finance his artistic vision.
Art for art's sake the money be damned.

[Malika la Maize]

Yes, and he also has had some experience with rolling the dice, taking on risk and loss but then eventually coming out ahead (Apocalypse Now). That can give a guy a feeling of invulnerability to try again when those around him tell (or should be telling him) to be cautious.

[Mr. Bumble]

Early success can do that.

[Area Man]

George Lucas, who directed exactly three good movies, should help Coppola out. Coppola helped Lucas at the beginning of Lucas’s career, and Lucas has way more money than his work product can justify.

[John 4]

He’s thinking about selling a watch worth seven figures. I think he’ll survive.

[Z Crazy]

"The rich get richer" is extremely simplistic.

Most in fact lose their fortunes due to being profligate spenders.

[ReaderY]

It’s like being so hard up you have to sell the second yacht.

[Poxigah146]

It's accepted as gospel that the Civil Rights Act public accommodation laws have made things better for racial and religious minorities, but for many things, the evidence says otherwise.

An example. Many restaurants in places like Chicago and New York City limit bathroom use to paying customers. Most of them don't really have an issue with a nice middle class white woman using the bathroom, but they can't let her use it without also letting the black homeless druggie use it, so they prohibit it for everyone.

From a utilitarian perspective, the solution is to allow businesses to impose de jure discrimination again. The law has not improved things in my example for blacks, it's only made things worse for whites.

[ThePublius]

It's not a race thing. There are plenty of white junkies who will camp out in bathrooms. Management can, if they care, use their discretion as to who may use their bathrooms, and just turn away obvious undesirables. But, it consumes personnel time and attention to vet those seeking accommodation, so it's just easier to deny access to all but paying customers.

[Malika la Maize]

Most fast food places are really pushing for you to go through the drive through or get mobile orders to go, they don’t want to have to clean dining areas and restrooms. I don’t blame them. Non-paying public shouldn’t use the restrooms, they’re not rest areas.

[Poxigah146]

Then the municipalities need to provide public bathrooms.

[Mr. Bumble]

They have. They're call parks and public streets.

[Poxigah146]

LOL

[Poxigah146]

Not in large cities. In large cities, the druggies are almost exclusively black. You'll find white meth heads in more rural areas, but the bathrooms aren't an issue there.

[ThePublius]

That's not true, man. I've been to Mass and Cass in Boston, and it's almost all white.

[wvattorney13]

The pertinent question is would the restaurant let a nice middle class black woman use the restroom while denying it to a white homeless druggie.

I take your larger point, though. The law invites lawsuits. A restaurant denies a black homeless druggie the use of the restroom and gets hit with a civil rights suit regardless of whether race was the determining factor, and they have to pay lawyers. So the easier course is to simply deny all non-paying customers the use of the restroom.

I have said in many threads that the 1964 Civil Rights Act was a good law and necessary to achieve what it did....in 1964. Now 60 years later it does cause more problems than it solves.

[Poxigah146]

I agree. By 1980, it outlived its usefulness.

That said, I don't believe Congress had the authority to pass it as applied to private businesses, but that has been a losing battle since the 1930s.

[Malika la Maize]

“The law has not improved things in my example for blacks”

This is a laughable statement. In 1955 over half of black families lived below the poverty line, by 1969 that had fell to a third and now is around a quarter. In 1960 26% more whites completed high school than blacks, by 1970 that fell to 19% and by 1980 that fell to 12%. Etc.

[ThePublius]

He's not talking about wealth or academic achievement, he's talking about access to supposed places of public accommodation.

[Malika la Maize]

Access to public accommodations is tied to wealth and educational attainment (having businesses and schools and other public accommodations not be restricted to you makes it a lot easier to attain things like that).

[ThePublius]

Not when managers exclude all in order to exclude blacks.

[Malika la Maize]

And yet there are all those darn statistics I cited which suggest these exclusions might not be significant.

[ThePublius]

You just like to argue.

[Sarcastr0]

Malika brought numbers.

You've provided zero evidence for your factual contention.

A contention that has you defending a perhaps our most open and unironic white supremacist poster.

[Poxigah146]

Correct. Another example is a university near me. They used to let non-students use the library, and their computers, but black teens started coming in and watching Youtube on them, so now they banned all non-students.

Prior to the 1960s era civil rights laws, race was used a proxy for certain undesirable traits and behaviors, and its users were right 80% of the time. Now that they can't do it, they have just made things worse for everyone.

[Drewski]

No major or public university in the US bans the general public from their libraries.

[Poxigah146]

Absolutely not true, especially for urban universities.

[Poxigah146]

What's your basis for that?

[ThePublius]

Germany is insane.

They continue to destroy nuclear powerplant infrastructure while their electricity prices are triple those of the U.S. Can you imagine? For me, living alone, albeit in a big house, it would mean $300/month for electricity, in addition to the average gas bill of $500/month.

Business are closing, and leaving, because they can't make a go if it with those electricity prices. People are living colder in the winter, and sacrificing things like better food and clothing to pay the electricity bill. They country is going backwards. And, it's only due to ideology. Leftist, woke-ist ideology. No sensible, reasonable reason to do this. They should be building more nuclear plants, not destroying them! Geez....

https://x.com/WallStreetMav/status/1982070361887039792

[Malika la Maize]

Germany’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and Christian Social Union (CSU) are acting only by leftist woke-ist ideology?

[ThePublius]

I don't understand your comment.

[Malika la Maize]

I doubt the CDU acted because of lefty woke-ist ideology, it’s more likely due to reaction to the Fukushima nuclear accident.

[Mr. Bumble]

Germany has tsunamis?

[Frank Drackman]

They have a coastline so Ja!

[Mr. Bumble]

Near as I can tell only two were located on the coast and when was the last time Germany issued a tsunami warning?

[ThePublius]

Well, yes, this all started in Germany in the wake of the Fukushima incident, an emotional, over-reaction led by Merkel. It made no sense then, and it makes no sense still.

[Malika la Maize]

Merkel was hardly a lefty woke—ist, instead of trying to shoehorn every bad thing into that maybe be more nuanced: it was a run of the mill risk averse politicians acting to counter a perceived panic caused by a disaster thing (see Simpsons the Bear Patrol episode).

[ThePublius]

She was woke. This nuke phobia continues under the current woke government.

[Malika la Maize]

Again, woke has become a word for anything to the left of you. Merkel was hardly woke, she acted like risk-averse politicians have to panics have for centuries.

[Mr. Bumble]

What panic?

[Bob from Ohio]

"Merkel was hardly a lefty "

Sure, she was an official of the East German Youth league but not a lefty.

[Bwaaah]

Environmentalism, characterized by anti-nuclear, anti-fossile-fuel, anti-development activism and policies, is a hallmark of the political left in Germany and in the U.S. and across the wealthier parts of the world.

The Democratic Party in the U.S. has been the popular political representative of regressive anti-development environmental policies for decades. That has included full-throated anti-nuclear advocacy.

But you know these things.

[ThePublius]

Paris Police Arrest Two Men in Connection to Louvre Crown Jewel Heist

Some idiot leaked this news to the media, hampering the investigation, which continues. Such leakers should be rooted out and dealt with harshly.

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2025/10/26/paris-police-arrest-two-men-in-connection-to-louvre-crown-jewel-heist/

[Michael P]

If the news was leaked, why did the Interior Minister congratulate the investigators instead of criticizing the news release?

[ThePublius]

Well, once the cat is out of the bag....

“I deeply regret the hasty disclosure of this information,” Ms. Beccuau (Laure Beccuau, the Paris prosecutor) said in her statement. She said that the leaked information would hinder “the 100 or so investigators who mobilized in the search for both the stolen jewelry and for all of the criminals.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/26/world/europe/louvre-heist-arrests.html?campaign_id=60&emc=edit_na_20251026&instance_id=165171&nl=breaking-news&regi_id=55741502&segment_id=209344&user_id=1a4eba98b22b102feb084316d14a6ce7

[Bored Lawyer]

Since you mention the Louvre Jewel Heist.
The thieves used a lift-truck made by a German company to get to the second floor. So the German company decided to capitalize on the event and put out social media ads.

“IF YOU’RE IN A HURRY.”

“The Böcker Agilo carries your treasures—up to 400 kg at 42 m/min, quiet as a whisper thanks to its 230 V electric motor.”

https://www.instagram.com/p/DQORppnjACl/

Gotta admire the creativity.

[Life of Brian]

Ha -- I saw that in passing the other day but didn't have time to check whether it was real. Right on the bleeding edge of funny/not funny.

[SRG2]

Amongst the many lies that infest Trump's speeches and tweets, the least believable of all of them was the denial, following a leak,. that Trump intends to name the WH ballroom after himself, and that he'd not given it any thought.

Report: Trump gives update on White House ballroom after name was 'leaked'

Trump denied he was looking to add his own name to the ballroom.

He said: 'I don't have any plan to call it after myself. That was fake news. Probably going to call it the presidential ballroom or something like that. 'We haven't really thought about a name yet', despite an ABC News report on Friday emerging that officials are already calling it The President Donald J Trump Ballroom.

There is absolutely no fucking way that Trump hadn't thought about calling it after himself, probably even before he'd decided what he wanted to build

[Mr. Bumble]

Are you ABC's source?

[SRG2]

Do you really believe that Trump hadn't thought about it?

[Mr. Bumble]

Unlike you I don't profess to be able to read minds.

[SRG2]

That doesn't answer the question, which means that you know the answer but don't want to concede the point.

[Mr. Bumble]

I don't know the answer and neither do you.

[Michael P]

SRG2 quite sure he knows (even though he doesn't really). After all, he has granted Donald J. Trump a lifetime rent-free space in his brain.

[Bob from Ohio]

Who cares. Next president can re-name it easily enough.

Keep chasing the laser pointer.

[William of Brooklyn]

Exactly. Did Truman name it the Truman Balcony? I doubt it. But 100 years from now? The Trump Ballroom is a really good guess. But really, who cares?

[ThePublius]

How about The Big Balls Ballroom?

[David Nieporent]

I saw some MAGA online suggest the Charlie Kirk ballroom, which might appeal to Trump's sense of being an online troll.

[Mr. Bumble]

From the NY Post:
The Big Apple’s hotly contested mayoral race sparked a massive first-day voter turnout Saturday, with about five times more voters hitting the polls compared to 2021 as early voting kicked off, according to the Board of Elections.

The increase comes as a high-stakes showdown to replace Mayor Eric Adams pits former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, running as an Independent, against Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic Party nominee and beret-wearing Republican Curtis Sliwa.

The New York City BOE reported a total of 79,409 early voter check-ins as the polls closed Saturday night – a sharp jump from the 15,418 who showed up when early voting began four years ago.
New Yorkers casting their ballots on the first day of in-person early voting in Manhattan on Oct. 25, 2025.

[David Nieporent]

Caution, though, that it's never clear whether early votes mean more votes, or just time-shifted votes. (I know you didn't say otherwise, but lots of people like to project from early turnout figures.)

[Mr. Bumble]

I didn't say anything. I neglected ellipses but the comment is from the Post.

[Sarcastr0]

Bumble and ThePublius together are responsible for over a third of the comments so far this morning.

Y'all need to get more hobbies.
I'm going to head out to a Halloween parade.

[Mr. Bumble]

Hahahahaha.
"I'm going to head out to a Halloween parade."
Dressed as a giant douche bag?

[Bob from Ohio]

"Dressed as a giant douche bag?"

Of course not, that is his everyday wear.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"Dressed as a giant douche bag?"

Naw, it's Halloween, he'll probably wear a costume.

[Bwaaah]

LOL

[Bob from Ohio]

"Y'all need to get more hobbies."

So, tomorrow, when our Dutch friend posts and posts, you will make the same comment?

[Life of Brian]

Y'all need to get more hobbies.

This, from the guy who had over 40 posts in Friday's open thread.

But in all fairness, his overall posting rate has slumped a good bit over the past few weeks, when he's had to do it on his own time rather than ours.

[ThePublius]

1. So f'ing what?
2. You are among the most prolific posters on here, typically exceeding the number of posts by me in any given thread. So, you should talk.

[ThePublius]

Sarcastr0's hobby is apparently pretending to work as he's posting here. Usually during working hours; I'm surprised to see him in a Sunday. (Same goes for Martinned, who essentially admitted it a couple of weeks ago.)

[SRG2]

Why will the cultists here not want Jack Smith to testify in a public hearing in Congress as he has requested?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jack-smith-asks-to-testify-publicly-before-congress/

[Mr. Bumble]

Mind reading again or just vibes?

[SRG2]

Well, you - and any other cultists here - can easily prove me wrong by explaining why you want Jack Smith to testify publicly

[Mr. Bumble]

I thought it was Smith who wanted to testify publicly.

[SRG2]

Yes. Do you want him to?

[Mr. Bumble]

I really don't care. Do you want him to testify publicly and if so, why?

[Bob from Ohio]

"Hillary Clinton@HillaryClinton
Oct 26, 2016
Happy birthday to this future president."

Happy anniversary to all who celebrate!

[Mr. Bumble]

From a WAPO editorial (paywalled):
"But this piece is an Editorial, presented as the official position of the Editors. And it is a slap in the face to liberals, both by endorsing the ballroom itself and by slamming how hard it is to do anything in America anymore.

The teardown of the White House’s East Wing this week is a Rorschach test. Many see the rubble as a metaphor for President Donald Trump’s reckless disregard of norms and the rule of law, a reflection of his willingness to bulldoze history and a temple to a second Gilded Age, paid for by corporate donors. Others see what they love about Trump: A lifelong builder boldly pursuing a grand vision, a change agent unafraid to decisively take on the status quo and a developer slashing through red tape that would stymie any normal politician.

In classic Trump fashion, the president is pursuing a reasonable idea in the most jarring manner possible. Privately, many alumni of the Biden and Obama White Houses acknowledge the long-overdue need for an event space like what Trump is creating. It is absurd that tents need to be erected on the South Lawn for state dinners, and VIPs are forced to use porta-potties."
" Though the fundraising for the ballroom creates problematic conflicts of interest, two examples validate Trump’s aggressive approach. After a fence jumper got inside the White House in 2014, it was obvious that better perimeter fencing needed to be installed. But doing so involved five public meetings of the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) over two years, as members took pains to ensure the fencing complied with environmental rules. Construction didn’t begin until July 2019.

Or consider the modest Dwight D. Eisenhower Memorial near the National Air and Space Museum. Congress authorized its creation in 1999. Architect Frank Gehry was selected in 2009. The NCPC rejected Gehry’s initial design proposal in 2014 before approving a revised plan the next year. The Commission of Fine Arts gave its approval in 2017. The memorial wasn’t opened until late 2020. By contrast, Eisenhower planned and executed D-Day in about six months."

[Life of Brian]

Privately, many alumni of the Biden and Obama White Houses acknowledge the long-overdue need for an event space like what Trump is creating.

And in select cases, not privately at all. It's good that there are at least a few with the intestinal fortitude to speak truth to power.

[David Nieporent]

If everyone agrees it's a good idea, then why did Trump not follow procedure, or — if that's really too bureaucratic — go to Congress to get approval for it?

[Mr. Bumble]

What he would need from Congress is funding not approval.
The funding has been secured privately as when the March of Dimes paid for the installation of a pool for FDR.

[gVOR08]

The March of Dimes presumably expected the publicity would help their fundraising. What do the guys donating for Trump's ballroom expect?

[Mr. Bumble]

Ask Rachel Maddow what her bosses expected.

[Life of Brian]

If everyone agrees it's a good idea

How in the world did you get to "everyone" from "a few select defectors from Le Resistance"?

go to Congress to get approval for it

You may have missed my polite request the other day for support for this being a requirement. I'll politely renew that here.

[David Nieporent]

Where in the constitution or law is the president given authority to tear down government buildings?

[Mr. Bumble]

With regard to the White House where does it say he can't?
I am not being facetious but it seems as if several presidents have made modification to the White House without anyone's permission starting with Jefferson's colonnades.

[David Nieporent]

With regard to the White House where does it say he can't?

Where does it say he can't tear down the Washington Monument? That's not how presidential power works under the constitution; it's not "The president can do anything unless expressly forbidden."

I am not being facetious but it seems as if several presidents have made modification to the White House without anyone's permission starting with Jefferson's colonnades.

Again: Congress appropriated funds for those modifications, starting with Jefferson's colonnades. You say you've found one exception — FDR's indoor pool — but that's certainly not the norm in history.

[Mr. Bumble]

Suggest you take some time to read the wiki entries on the White House and it's various parts.

[Mr. Bumble]

"An exemption leaves little protection for the People’s House

Despite the White House’s historic and symbolic significance, there was little to protect it from the demolition work now underway. The White House, along with the Supreme Court building, the Capitol building, and several other properties, is exempted from historic preservation rules that would otherwise stand in the way of such a building being torn down.

Under section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, a strict review process is required for federal projects that may affect historic buildings, leading to both public scrutiny and legal obligations surrounding any proposed changes to existing historic resources. When it comes to the White House, various other entities have some level of oversight, including the National Park Service, the Commission of Fine Arts, and the National Capitol Planning Commission, but none can fully override a project like the demolition and ballroom addition due to the building’s Section 106 exemption."
https://www.fastcompany.com/91426331/trump-demolish-white-house-for-ballroom
Have a good night.

[David Nieporent]

The National Historic Preservation Act does indeed expressly exempt the White House, Capitol, and Supreme Court. But the National Capital Planning Act — an entirely separate statute — exempts only the Capitol and military installations. (Last week, it was reported that the administration's position is that the NCPA applies to the construction of the ballroom but not the demolition of the East Wing, pretending that those are two independent things rather than part of the same construction project.)

[Life of Brian]

But the National Capital Planning Act

Well hey -- why didn't you say so all this time? Betcha a nickel or two that's because it actually doesn't apply here (I note you very carefully said a number of things about it, but not that it's actually controlling).

The full text of the Act is here. Please provide the specific statutes you believe cover this project, and why.

[David Nieporent]

Okay, I did that. Where does it address this issue — one way or the other? Just because Wikipedia repeatedly says "Such-and-such president made such-and-such changes" does not mean that it was a unilateral process.

[Life of Brian]

but that's certainly not the norm in history

Yeah, we're down to the wastebasket "norms" argument. Just as I suspected.

The drop-dead simple explanation for why most renovation projects have been done in conjunction with Congress is that the Prez needed Congress's power of the purse to execute them. Since that's not the case here, you're just frantically making up other supposed constraints.

[David Nieporent]

That MAGA rejects norms is precisely why it is not a conservative movement in any way, shape, or form.

[Life of Brian]

Hey, feel free to lob in all the distractions you like that you think might help distract from the fact that, contrary to your repeated representations, Congress has no authority here at all.

[David Nieporent]

You might want to try reading the constitution. Article I, Section 8 gives the Congress all relevant authority.

[Life of Brian]

"all relevant authority"

It just keeps getting lamer.

[David Nieporent]

Which part of "exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District" do you not understand? Which part of "all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers" escapes your mental grasp?

[Life of Brian]

That would be totes cool if we were taking about legislation. I note you declined my invitation to provide any specific cites to the legislative scheme you want us to think applies here.

[David Nieporent]

Um, your claim was that "Congress has no authority here at all." But the constitution in fact gives Congress plenary authority.

[wvattorney13]

I would think that the burden would be on your side to cite the statute that the president would be violating in that circumstance. When a person does something, he is not required to cite a statute allowing him to do it but the other side must point to the prohibition.

And the phrasing is wrong. Tear down, destroy, demolish, eliminate, etc. It would certainly be concerning if buildings were being vandalized (except when protestors do it) but that isn't what is happening here. This is a remodeling, a refurbishment. The default assumption is that is an economic positive, even if some people don't like the design.

I think it is rather clear that this issue has not been addressed in history. Presidents have typically remodeled the White House but in nearly every instance funding was required so they got Congressional approval. You concede that in at least one instance, when private funds were used, there was not Congressional approval.

[David Nieporent]

Tear down, destroy, demolish, eliminate, etc. It would certainly be concerning if buildings were being vandalized (except when protestors do it) but that isn't what is happening here. This is a remodeling, a refurbishment

They tore down, destroyed, demolished, eliminated, etc. the East Wing.

[not guilty]

LoB, as Donald Trump's handmaid John Roberts has opined, "No matter the context, the President's authority to act necessarily 'stems either from an act of Congress or from the Constitution itself.'" Trump v. United States, 603 U.S. 593, ___, 144 S.Ct. 2312, 2327 (2024), quoting Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579, 535 (1952).

What specific act of Congress or constitutional provision authorizes the unilateral destruction of the East Wing of the White House?

[Life of Brian]

Under that cutesy-but-lame burden flipping effort, the President would have no authority to fart. About the best you could do under the circumstances, I suppose.

Which of Congress's enumerated powers gives it the exclusive domain of both granting permission to alter any federal structure, and micromanaging the details of any such effort? Please also supply a dossier of their recent efforts in this domain so we can check your work.

Oh, and you'll also need to squirm and dance a bit over, if it's really that clear-cut, why lawsuit #5718 wasn't filed under that theory to enjoin the project.

Giddy up.

[David Nieporent]

Oh, and you'll also need to squirm and dance a bit over, if it's really that clear-cut, why lawsuit #5718 wasn't filed under that theory to enjoin the project.

Who do you think would have standing to sue? (One suit actually was filed last week, but it's going to quickly be tossed for precisely that reason.)

[Life of Brian]

As I'm sure you know, the suit that was filed didn't claim the President needed authority from Congress, but from a couple of bureaucratic agencies. That doesn't help the Congress-may-I argument at all.

[David Nieporent]

The suit claimed that pursuant to Congressionally enacted laws, the President needed authority from those agencies. (One of the laws cited clearly did not apply, since — as mentioned above — it expressly exempts the White House. The other did, but — as also mentioned above — the people suing had no standing to enforce it.)

[Life of Brian]

pursuant to Congressionally enacted laws

Cute (and I invited you in the other thread to flesh out that theory -- plaintiffs' 1-pager certainly didn't), but you've been saying for days that Trump needed to work with/get approval from Congress.

If you're pivoting so be it, but don't pretend it's the same argument.

[David Nieporent]

Not sure what confuses you. If Congress has established a procedure, then the president's two routes to proceed are to (a) follow that procedure; or (b) get direct approval from Congress to ignore that procedure. (The statute expressly provides for the latter option.)

[Life of Brian]

(The statute expressly provides for the latter option.)

I'll ask for a specific cite just one final time, then confidently conclude you're just handwaving yet again.

[not guilty]

IOW you got bupkis, LoB, but lack the integrity to admit it.

[ThePublius]

Indeed. Trump has gotten more done in the last couple of weeks than Newsom has in California since the fire, which is pretty much nothing.

I recently saw a graphic showing how long it took to build things previously compared to now, showing the Golden Gate Bridge, Hoover Dam, Empire State Building, and so forth. Now we can't even get the permits done in the time it took them to build these things.

[Z Crazy]

Is it just me, or are pro-choicers so fucking stupid.

Heres a Threads thread.

https://www.threads.com/@zc2125034/post/DQSC1zhEsJU

"Just remember, the Party of Pro Life is taking food, healthcare and education from children (& the elderly).
So if you’re a Republican, fuck off!:"

"The party of pro-choice used OSHA to try to force women to take a newly-developed vaccine that could threaten their fertility."

do pro-choicers think their arguments through?

[myself]

Apparently more than you do.
"The party of pro-choice used OSHA to try to force women to take a newly-developed vaccine that could threaten their fertility."

That point is only an good retort if you accept the bizarre reality of the poster where the COVID vaccines threatened fertility.

[Michael Ejercito]

In 2021, was this firmly established?

[myself]

Still waiting for all the terrible things claimed of the COVID vaccines to come true.

Maybe the career scientists do in fact understand vaccines and how to evaluate evidence better than influencers and political pundits?

[ThePublius]

Two recent news stories that fascinate me, and I want more details:

1. The Mafia-run rigged poker games and sports betting schemes involving NBA players and coaches (coach?). I'd really love more details on the poker rigging technology, like what exactly the shuffling machines did, and about the supposed X-Ray tables, the marked cards and special contact lenses and glasses to read them, and so forth. Of all of those things, one I have given thought to is the shuffling machine, as I think this would be the easiest and most straightforward to rig.

2. The Louvre heist. A couple of aspects: the abject incompetence and complacency of those responsible for security; and how this was planned and executed overall. I mean, in this day and age, to not have security cameras everywhere in that museum is ridiculous. I heard somewhere that the security guards ran away as this unfolded. Wow. Why not armed security guards who will really shoot, rather than mall cops or Uvalde types who save themselves and take no action. I guess the crooks knew this. That's one of the problems. I mean, these are irreplaceable cultural artifacts, in the largest, and perhaps most prestigious museum in the world!

I love a good Mafia story, and a good art heist story. It's been a great week.

[David Nieporent]

Some of your points may be well taken, but I don't want trigger happy security guards in one of the busiest buildings in the country.

[ThePublius]

Armed guards doesn't have to mean trigger happy. We have armed cops in the streets of NYC, one of the busiest cities, after all. With proper training it could work well. It's 99% deterrence. They could even be armed with less than lethal arms, like Byrna.

The point is, you need something more than mall cops in that place.

[Life of Brian]

I'd really love more details on the poker rigging technology, like what exactly the shuffling machines did

I watched this WIRED video the other day on the shuffling machine vulnerabilities.

To me it's a fascinating example of hubris: building a shuffling machine that has an internal camera that can identify each card in the deck, and "shuffles" via a mechanism that deterministically arranges the cards in an order dictated by the software. The video shows a proof-of-concept that exploited the (cough) exposed USB port and the (cough cough) ability to upgrade the firmware through that port, but even if they fixed that gobsmackingly asinine security hole it wouldn't prevent the compromise of privately-owned shufflers in games like the ones the FBI just busted.

[ThePublius]

Thanks

[SRG2]

As yesterday was St. Crispin's Day, here's version of the speech, by Richard Burton, you may not have come across.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TU7NrnLsr5g

I always liked the edited version by Olivier in the film. I wasn't a fan of Branagh's version - well-delivered but not inspirational. There's a truly lamentable version by Mark Rylance, filmed at the Globe. There are a few others one can find if one is so minded, but AFAIC it's Olivier and Burton.

[ThePublius]

What I don't get is why is it written "St. Crsipin's Day" when it was twins, Crispin and Crispinian who were martyred. Why not "St. Crispins' Day?"

[SRG2]

Good question. I suspect, on no evidence, that originally the two were mentioned separately and then, as happens, people just shortened the day to St. Crispin.

There is a very find brand of shoe called St, Crispin - the bros are the patron saints of cobblers.

[ThePublius]

Nice reminder, thanks. I like Henry V. And the speech gives us "band of brothers."

[bernard11]

I like the speech, but it does lend itself to histrionics. IMO Burton's version is better controlled than Olivier's.

The play is excellent, almost by definition, But I prefer Henry IV, part 1.

As for Henry V himself, I am one of those who do not admire him, as presented in the plays, at all.

[SRG2]

As well, I very much like the prologue "O for a muse of fire", and the other battle speech, "Once more unto the breach!" - which gave Sherlock Holmes the line, "the game's afoot"

[ThePublius]

I came across a new acronym today: and EVIL camera (as compared to SLR, DSLR, etc.). It means Electronic Viewfinder, Interchangeable Lens. What the heck were they thinking when they came up with that?

[ThePublius]

Make that "an EVIL camera." I hate that there's such a short time limit on edits here.

[Harvey Mosley]

That's some acronym. I still have and use two Nikon manual focus film SLRs. If the person behind the viewfinder knows what they're doing (and sometimes I do) these cameras are still amazing.

[Mr. Bumble]

What film do you use?
I miss my Kodachrome.

[ThePublius]

I used to love Ektachrome because I could process it myself. You couldn't do that with Kodachrome. And then I learned that the contrast gradient was so steep with reversal films that you could lose detail at either end, so I switched to negative film. What I have on hand is Fujicolor 400 and some Kodak Elite Chrome 200. I also shoot B&W, lots of Tri-X; I liked Plus-X (discontinued in 2011). I might give Ilford Delta 100 a try.

[bernard11]

I used to shoot Fujicolor in my Contax rangefinder. Wonderful combination.

Too bad Contax went away.

[ThePublius]

Contax were great cameras! Do you still have yours? I understand they are quite valuable.

[ThePublius]

Indeed. I have a hardly-used Miranda Sensorex outfit with a still-working meter, three lenses, and the optional waist level finder (in addition to the pentaprism). The optics are superb. I just loaded it up with a fresh roll of Fujicolor 400.

I have more, including Konica and Exacta. And, several medium format cameras including Bronica S and S2a outfits and my prized Rolleiflex (with the Rollei Marin underwater housing!). Oh, and a bunch of Nikonos II's and a Nikons V. That one's meter and shutter (electronic) still works, too.

Too bad film processing is so expensive.

And yes, I do have a couple of pretty good DSLRs, and great lenses for them, and many strobes (do they still call them strobes?).

[Gasman]

Another shooting at a Black college.
No rush to dub a terroristic threat, because lit ke so many ‘mass’ shootings of blacks, it is just street crime that comes with the affinity group.
It is unfortunate that there is no differentiation among gangs between ‘civilians’ and legitimate targets. Seems that thug based gun crime is mostly spray and pray.

[Z Crazy]

Where is the black lives matter?

[Area Man]

Looks like Argentina has retained its sanity. Way to go Milei! Though, he better not let Trump hear that his stated goal is to “put an end to populism.”