Open Thread

What’s on your mind?

Comments

[not guilty]

There was some discussion on an open tread earlier this week of the American Academy of Pediatrics lawsuit against the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services and other defendants regarding the termination of various federal grants, which the Plaintiff alleges to be in unconstitutional retaliation for its exercise of First Amendment rights. https://democracyforward.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/AAP-Complaint-as-Filed.pdf I think that lawsuit deserves further discussion.

As SCOTUS has opined in Hartman v. Moore, 547 U.S. 250, 256 (2006):

Official reprisal for protected speech “offends the Constitution [because] it threatens to inhibit exercise of the protected right,” Crawford-El v. Britton, 523 U. S. 574, 588, n.10 (1998), and the law is settled that as a general matter the First Amendment prohibits government officials from subjecting an individual to retaliatory actions, including criminal prosecutions, for speaking out, id., at 592; see also Perry v. Sindermann, 408 U. S. 593, 597 (1972) (noting that the government may not punish a person or deprive him of a benefit on the basis of his “constitutionally protected speech”).
Per Hartmann, retaliation by federal officials for the plaintiff's exercise of protected First Amendment rights can give rise to liability under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).

A plaintiff alleging a First Amendment claim of retaliation must allege that “(1) he engaged in conduct protected under the First Amendment; (2) the defendant took some retaliatory action sufficient to deter a person of ordinary firmness in plaintiff's position from speaking again; and (3) a causal link between the exercise of a constitutional right and the adverse action taken against him.”
Doe v. District of Columbia, 796 F.3d 96, 106 (D.C. Cir. 2015). The cancellation or non-renewal of a government contract in retaliation for the plaintiff's criticism of government officials on matters of public concern may suffice to establish liability for unconstitutional First Amendment retaliation. Board of County Comm'r Wabaunsee County v. Umbehr, 518 U.S. 668 (1996).

[not guilty]

With proper paragraph indents, the above comment should read:

There was some discussion on an open tread earlier this week of the American Academy of Pediatrics lawsuit against the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services and other defendants regarding the termination of various federal grants, which the Plaintiff alleges to be in unconstitutional retaliation for its exercise of First Amendment rights. https://democracyforward.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/AAP-Complaint-as-Filed.pdf I think that lawsuit deserves further discussion.

As SCOTUS has opined in Hartman v. Moore, 547 U.S. 250, 256 (2006):

Official reprisal for protected speech “offends the Constitution [because] it threatens to inhibit exercise of the protected right,” Crawford-El v. Britton, 523 U. S. 574, 588, n.10 (1998), and the law is settled that as a general matter the First Amendment prohibits government officials from subjecting an individual to retaliatory actions, including criminal prosecutions, for speaking out, id., at 592; see also Perry v. Sindermann, 408 U. S. 593, 597 (1972) (noting that the government may not punish a person or deprive him of a benefit on the basis of his “constitutionally protected speech”).

Per Hartmann, retaliation by federal officials for the plaintiff's exercise of protected First Amendment rights can give rise to liability under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).

A plaintiff alleging a First Amendment claim of retaliation must allege that “(1) he engaged in conduct protected under the First Amendment; (2) the defendant took some retaliatory action sufficient to deter a person of ordinary firmness in plaintiff's position from speaking again; and (3) a causal link between the exercise of a constitutional right and the adverse action taken against him.” Doe v. District of Columbia, 796 F.3d 96, 106 (D.C. Cir. 2015). The cancellation or non-renewal of a government contract in retaliation for the plaintiff's criticism of government officials on matters of public concern may suffice to establish liability for unconstitutional First Amendment retaliation. Board of County Comm'r Wabaunsee County v. Umbehr, 518 U.S. 668 (1996).

[DDHarriman]

Have you picked up how no one really respects your legal reasoning posts anymore? Your downfall from respectability - while definitely earned - is still quite stunning in how quickly it happened.

[Malika la Maize]

Says guy who everyone other than American Renaissance aficionados Mikie Q and Life of Bri Bri eschews as a racist, anti-Semitic nutjob

[DDHarriman]

I bet under that grey box is a mighty stupid comment.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Stake, meet hammer….

[not guilty]

"Have you picked up how no one really respects your legal reasoning posts anymore? Your downfall from respectability - while definitely earned - is still quite stunning in how quickly it happened."

What have I said here that, based on actual legal authorit(ies), you dispute, DDHarriman? Or is an insult all that you have?

[not guilty]

Still waiting, doofus.

[John F. Carr]

A conservative group asked the Department of Justice to investigate programs at MIT limited to "womxn" only. The same group had previously filed a complaint about a program limited to women of color.

The Trump administration loves this stuff. Guidance from the DOJ says that adding a disclaimer "open to all" to otherwise discriminatory advertising is not sufficient.

https://equalprotect.org/case/equal-protection-project-v-massachusetts-institute-of-technology-womxn-programs/

[Kazinski]

Well I am sure the program is very welcoming to men.

They just have to present as women.

[Frank Drackman]

With most MIT women it's the other way around.

[DDHarriman]

lol

[John F. Carr]

Men presenting as women are invited. Whether they will be welcomed, who knows?

[Dr. Ed 2]

The real question is how many men received it.

Men with peni.

[Krayt]

Guidance from the DOJ says that adding a disclaimer "open to all" to otherwise discriminatory advertising is not sufficient.

It's my understanding an ad to sell a house where the guy stated he disliked minorities, Disclaimer: According to law, I will accept all offers, would be illegal.

[John F. Carr]

Bloomberg Law has a year end review of judicial criticism of the Trump administration's conduct.

Government lawyers have been scolded for making misrepresentations in court, making legally flawed arguments, and sidestepping typical procedures. Their actions have prompted current and former judges to question if the government should still be entitled to the so-called “presumption of regularity,” the judicial doctrine that assumes the government is acting properly in court.

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/federal-judges-scold-doj-lawyers-over-courtroom-conduct-in-2025
https://apple.news/AmX2v_dHGSyKj9lL388XQIA

[not guilty]

There is a gossamer quality about a lawyer's reputation for integrity and candor with the Court. Once it is gone with a particular tribunal, it is gone for good.

The Trump lackeys at the Justice Department are tarnishing the reputation of the Department. I hope that the damage will not be permanent.

[Joe_dallas]

Did it bother you when the doj lawyers lied to the court when going after Trump?

[DDHarriman]

Of course not. He was arguing how DOJ lawyers and "indica" of ethics or some other bootlicking nonsense.

[not guilty]

In reality, a "presumption of regularity supports" DOJ lawyers' prosecutorial decisions and, "in the absence of clear evidence to the contrary, courts presume that they have properly discharged their official duties." United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456, 464 (1996), quoting United States v. Chemical Foundation, Inc., 272 U. S. 1, 14-15 (1926). The Trump administration lackeys' feckless conduct, however, has brought that presumption into question, and various courts are calling out government counsel for playing fast and loose with the truth.

Rule 3.3(a) of the Rules of Professional Conduct states:

(a) A lawyer shall not knowingly:

(1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer;

(2) fail to disclose to the tribunal legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel; or

(3) offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. If a lawyer, the lawyer’s client, or a witness called by the lawyer, has offered material evidence and the lawyer comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures, including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal. A lawyer may refuse to offer evidence, other than the testimony of a defendant in a criminal matter, that the lawyer reasonably believes is false.

The fact that a lawyer can face professional discipline for violating this rule should give credence to what counsel represents to the court. Again, the conduct of Trump's minions, combined with disciplinary authorities' lackadaisical approach to imposing sanctions, is eroding this professional norm.

[not guilty]

"Did it bother you when the doj lawyers lied to the court when going after Trump?"

If that had happened, yes it would have bothered me, but I am not aware of any such lies to a court there. Please give any examples of that which you have.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Kevin Clinesmith was convicted of lying to the court.

Judge Boasberg didn't seem bothered by it. He said Clinesmith was only trying to save himself a little work and sentenced him to probation.

He still has his law license.

[Joe_dallas]

Do you think NG will notice is hypocrisy?

[David Nieporent]

Kevin Clinesmith was not convicted of lying to a court, and the thing he was convicted of lying about did not involve "going after Trump" at all, but going after Carter Page.

[TwelveInchPianist]

He was convicted of making a false document on a matter within the jurisdiction of the executive and judicial branch that was relied on to seek a warrant from the court.

And you know that the fact that they were seeking a warrant for Carter Page doesn't mean that they weren't going after Trump.

[not guilty]

"Kevin Clinesmith was convicted of lying to the court."

I don't defend or excuse Kevin Clinesmith's false statement, to which he pleaded guilty, but saying that he "was convicted of lying to the court" is false. The Statement of Offense to which he pleaded is here: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.221058/gov.uscourts.dcd.221058.9.0_3.pdf

Clinesmith did not interact with any court; his false statement was to other FBI personnel.

As I have said time and time and time again, there is no substitute for original source materials.

[David Nieporent]

Did it bother you when the doj lawyers lied to the court when going after Trump?

As much as it did when the tooth fairy emptied the contents of my bank account and used them to fund her trip to Tahiti, which is to say that things that happened only in bookkeeper_joe's head are not of concern to any sane person.

[Joe_dallas]

Twelve just corrected you on your attempt to deny the DOJ lying to the courts to get Trump.
Try to make your denial bullshit look credible some place else such as the leftist echo chamber.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Harvey Silverglate wrote Three Felonies a Day nearly twenty years ago. Read it —- this is not a new problem.

[Magister]

That book was about a problem with federally overcriminalizing stuff; generally the DOJ has not prosecuted everyone three times a day, and courts or juries (grand or at trial) might block such prosecutions. The problem not guilty describes is that the current DOJ lies a lot and defies court orders, and courts notice that with negative results for their reputation.

[Commenter_XY]

Current DOJ, meet the old DOJ(s) = The problem not guilty describes is that the current DOJ lies a lot...

[not guilty]

By George, I think he's got it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDSPwexlyTo

[Commenter_XY]

Not exactly 'new' news that the DOJ lies. And has done so for a very long time.

[not guilty]

What examples of DOJ lawyers -- other than Trump lackeys -- lying to a tribunal do you have, XY?

[Magister]

Kevin Clinesmith appears to be the singular example, for creating a false document asserting something he believed was true to avoid the work of getting a true document, rather than lying directly to a court. The conspiracy theorists are doubtless sure that a massive conspiracy has covered up all other previous instances; of course, super competent at hiding dishonest efforts to get Trump but incompetent at actually getting Trump is most consistent with the absence of a conspiracy.

But even if it were true, it would support the original point: courts trusted the DOJ then because they did not know of numerous examples of the DOJ lying, and the reputation of the DOJ now has been harmed by the volume of known lies they have offered to courts.

[TwelveInchPianist]

You don't get to fabricate evidence just because you believe the genuine evidence would reflect the same thing as your fabricated evidence. I can't say I'm surprised the system doesn't take this sort of thing seriously.

And Clinesmith was the only one that was caught doing something bad enough to be prosecuted.

[bernard11]

You don't get to fabricate evidence just because you believe the genuine evidence would reflect the same thing as your fabricated evidence. I can't say I'm surprised the system doesn't take this sort of thing seriously.

I don't see anyone arguing otherwise.

[Magister]

You don't get to fabricate evidence, which was why he was convicted of a crime for doing that. Courts should probably not give him the benefit of the doubt in the future.

My second point was that, regardless of the number of lies past DOJs told and got away with, courts did not discover the dishonesty as immediately as is the case with this DOJ, nor discover vast numbers of lies much later, and so their reputation was appropriately better.

[Michael P]

It says a lot that this didn't happen, for example, after the DOJ repeatedly lied to the FISA Court to justify spying on Donald Trump -- and the core message is a partisan one.

[Malika la Maize]

Whatabout!

[Michael P]

Hypocrite.

[Malika la Maize]

Talking to yourself is one thing, posting to yourself….

But thanks for telling us you can’t defend what the article criticizes.

[Michael P]

I'm not the one who has to defend judges acting like partisan whiners, inconsistent with past practice and standards of behavior.

For another example, we now know that the FBI realized it didn't have probably cause in the raid on Mar-A-Lago, but it was pushed from the political levels anyway.

[Malika la Maize]

Doubling down on what about?

[Michael P]

No, you are doubling down on hypocrisy. You're happy to follow authoritarianism when it's destroying small businesses, seeding fraud, buying votes and persecuting the opposing party. But government naming what it does? Whoa Nelly, that's a bridge too far for you.

[Malika la Maize]

Michael P 58 seconds ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
No, you are doubling down on hypocrisy. You're happy to follow authoritarianism when it's destroying small businesses, seeding fraud, buying votes and persecuting the opposing party. But government naming what it does? Whoa Nelly, that's a bridge too far for you.

Reply

lol, did you post this in the wrong place on your authoritarian follower rage?

[Michael P]

Rage? Every accusation is a confession with you.

What a way to concede your hypocrisy and willingness to follow actual authoritarianism.

[DDHarriman]

He's a dumb two-brain-celled CCP bug.

You're arguing with something worth less than a gnat's fart.

[Malika la Maize]

Dodging the question I see.

Look, I get it’s tough to bend the knee so slavishly to a mad king.

You can’t even take Brett’s more honorable path: the guy is terrible but he’s better policy wise.

With the same terribleness of “no enemies to the right” you feel the sad duty to wake up and slavishly defend whatever daily madness comes out of this guy’s mouth

That’s gotta be rough, and probably explains things like this out of place response.

[Michael P]

It is not my fault that you can't read or understand why I tied your hypocrisy here to your hypocrisy elsewhere.

And I'm not going to criticize Donald Trump to assuage the hurt feelings of some insignificant Internet troll who is not worthy to polish the shoes of even the least beautiful and least gold-plated statue of Donald Trump.

[Malika la Maize]

Mikie is into those gold plated statues of his Dear Leader.

Also, what’s my hypocrisy on this issue elsewhere?

[Michael P]

Detecting sarcasm in a back-handed comment is advanced Internetting. Those who rely on hallucinated claims are advised to not attempt it. (I note that Malicia injected "on this issue" in order to our words in my mouth. Typical.)

[Malika la Maize]

I note that Malicia injected "on this issue" in order to our words in my mouth. Typical.)

Our words in my mouth?

I don’t want to know what you’re up to this morning!

[Michael P]

To *put* words in my mouth. As I have noted in the past, Android phone keyboards are terrible.

Of course, Malicia has no substantive response or rebuttal, and can only project about a typo. Sad.

[Malika la Maize]

A substantive rebuttal to your misplaced comment?

[not guilty]

"For another example, we now know that the FBI realized it didn't have probably cause [sic] in the raid on Mar-A-Lago, but it was pushed from the political levels anyway."

United States Magistrates don't hand out search warrants like Hallowe'en candy. While Trump's defense team moved to suppress evidence obtained pursuant to the Mar-a-Lago warrant on other grounds, they made no claim that the affidavit supporting issuance of the warrant was facially insufficient to show probable cause. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653.566.0_4.pdf

Moreover, while the motion kvetches about what the defense claimed to be omissions for the warrant application in requesting a hearing under Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978), the motion identifies no affirmative false statement essential to probable cause within the text of the affidavit.

[windycityattorney]

MichaelP - are you suggesting that the warrant application to a federal judge who agreed there was probable cause to search -actually didn't have probable cause? When the Govt knew they were missing documents and how many and Trump returned just a few and said that was all the documents responsive to a previous subpoena? And the search warrant execution actually recovered hundreds more documents responsive to the original subpoena?? You are suggesting that this raid was without probable cause???

Let me guess. One of his hired lawyers for that case who is now deputy Atty Gen now thinks the search was somehow unlawful or something similar?? What the fuck bizarro world do you live in??

They found what they were looking for in the search and charged him for obstructing the investigation by lying in his response to the subpoena and there wasn't probable cause?? INTERESTING

[David Nieporent]

For another example, we now know that the FBI realized it didn't have probably cause in the raid on Mar-A-Lago, but it was pushed from the political levels anyway.

You do not in fact "know" that, and it's stupid and wrong. The problem is that you don't know anything about anything, and just mindlessly repeat whatever clickbait you see on some right wing grifter's social media account. Every single fact or implication in that quoted sentence is incorrect.

[hobie]

MichaelP: "Alex, I'll take 'Whatabouts' for 800."

[jb]

As far as I can tell the FISA court has never looked skeptically at any application put before it, so it doesn't seem to say very much at all.

[Commenter_XY]

Then abolish it.

[David Nieporent]

Yeah, that's not really correct. It's like saying, "I can see this intersection from my front window, and everyone seems to stop at the corner before proceeding, so therefore this stop sign isn't really doing anything."

[not guilty]

"It says a lot that this didn't happen, for example, after the DOJ repeatedly lied to the FISA Court to justify spying on Donald Trump -- and the core message is a partisan one."

Supporting facts?

Who lied to the FISA Court, repeatedly or otherwise? Who "sp[ied] on Donald Trump"?

And who was it that wrote the following?:

Propaganda must not investigate the truth objectively and, in so far as it is favorable to the other side, present it according to the theoretical rules of justice; yet it must present only that aspect of the truth which is favorable to its own side. (...) The receptive powers of the masses are very restricted, and their understanding is feeble. On the other hand, they quickly forget. Such being the case, all effective propaganda must be confined to a few bare essentials and those must be expressed as far as possible in stereotyped formulas. These slogans should be persistently repeated until the very last individual has come to grasp the idea that has been put forward. (...) Every change that is made in the subject of a propagandist message must always emphasize the same conclusion. The leading slogan must, of course, be illustrated in many ways and from several angles, but in the end one must always return to the assertion of the same formula.

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

[jay.tee]

Quit sealioning. Each of the four FISA applications to spy on the Trump campaign had material, intentional misrepresentations and omissions. The evidence has been widely disseminated and it speaks to your ignorance if you haven’t read it.

Even Boasberg, that hoary Trumpist, admitted none of the warrants should have been granted.

[Kazinski]

Tim Walz is going to dedicate the rest of his life to find the real killer fraudsters.

"We’ve spent years cracking down on fraud - referring cases to law enforcement, shutting down and auditing high-risk programs.

Trump keeps letting fraudsters out of prison.

To the national news just now paying attention, here’s what we’ve done to stop it."
https://x.com/Tim_Walz/status/2006109443893674228?s=20

I am sure Tim Walz is still very popular in Minnesota, but some observers are starting to suggest he needs to spend more time with his family:

"“The governor, I think, has done a very respectable job, a good job, in Minnesota for the years that he’s been here. But he clearly is vulnerable and in my view, he is riskier than any Democratic candidate that might run,” said Ember Reichgott Junge, a former Minnesota Democratic state senator and a political analyst in the state."

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/5635849-walz-political-future-fraud-scandal/

[Sarcastr0]

Shades of Blackman telling Roberts to resign.

[Kazinski]

This what the local news is reporting:

KSTP/SurveyUSA poll results: Trump, Walz both below 50% approval in Minnesota

"Gov. Walz doesn’t fare much better in our survey. For the second survey in a row, Walz is at 48% approval and 48% disapproval. Those ratings are his lowest in the 20 times we’ve surveyed his approval in the past four years. He’s seeking an unprecedented third four-year term as governor of Minnesota.

“Gov. Walz’s approval puts him in sort of a flashing yellow light zone,” says Schier. “There’s some danger ahead. He’s below 50% approval.”

The Walz approval numbers are weighed down by just 14% who say he’s done enough to stop state government fraud."

https://kstp.com/kstp-news/top-news/kstp-surveyusa-poll-results-trump-walz-both-below-50-approval-in-minnesota/

[Sarcastr0]

You said he should resign.

This ain't that.

[Armchair]

"You said he should resign."

He did not. Gaslighting again?

[Sarcastr0]

"I am sure Tim Walz is still very popular in Minnesota, but some observers are starting to suggest he needs to spend more time with his family:"

Not technically directly calling on him to resign, but 'some people say'-ing it.

And his followup post does not support that call.

[Michael P]

That was quoting an in-state political analyst. Do you think that Kazinski is really Ember Reichgott Junge?

Take the L, delete your account, and find other hills to die on.

[Sarcastr0]

LOL, why do you think Kaz highlighted that quote?

Don't play dumber than you already are.

[Michael P]

"You said he should resign" ... by quoting media coverage of a political analyst who relates that some people say he should resign.

The only dumb person here is you.

[Riva]

“Respectable”? I don’t think it means what Junge thinks it means. But maybe it reads differently in Somali?

[Malika la Maize]

Trump keeps letting fraudsters out of prison.

Well, yeah.

It’s a bit funny to see MAGAns latch on to fraud given Trump’s clemency record (for starters).

[hobie]

Do you think the Somalis' suck-up letter to Trump can overcome their 'presumption of blackness'?

[DDHarriman]

Do you host on MSNBC or The View? You have the same dumbass take as the rest of them.

That it's somehow White Supremacy not to let a bunch of low IQ foreigners defraud us for billions.

It's fucking on the scale of tens of billions and you fucking idiots are trying to hide behind that old and tired shield of "DAS RAYYYCIIIISSTT"

lol wtf, how can you even look in the mirror.

[Malika la Maize]

This isn’t a difficult thing for most, fraud bad but racism also bad.

Walz let fraud happen, bad!

Somalis are garbage people, worse.

[DDHarriman]

Hey what does the data say about the Somalian average IQ?

[David Nieporent]

Nothing. There is no such data.

[hobie]

You know how presidents are to blame for every single thing that happens during their term? Well, the Somali scheme started in Trump v1, and continued in Trump v2. Not sure which entity finally figured we'd had enough and pushed for an indictment. Could have ben Walz!

[DDHarriman]

That's lazy af.

I get it, you're a Democrat Fanatic. Letting 70IQ Somalians rip us off to tens of billions year after year is like the Trump shoot someone on 5th avenue.

With the exception the Trump thing is a hypothetical. So if you don't count that part then we're the same!

[David Nieporent]

It's fucking on the scale of tens of billions

Yes, the 40 million Somalis illegally in the U.S. have stolen tens of billions of dollars. In retard/KKKland.

[DDHarriman]

If one federal building can cost $4B, then why can't 40M retards with the help of Democrat governance steal $10B?

[TwelveInchPianist]

That's a lot of simoleons per Somalian.

[Joe_dallas]

Given the massive extent of the Minnesota fraud, its doubtful that Walz was not aware of the fraud.

Same with Ilhan Omar, while she was not directly involved, its doubtful that she was not aware of the fraud.

[Malika la Maize]

When jd has to use the qualifier “doubtful” you know it’s weak.

[Joe_dallas]

Walz, Ellison, Omar may be stupid, but not that stupid.

[Malika la Maize]

Well, at least they’re not pardoning!

[Michael P]

That's not even a relevant whatabout, unless you think that issuing a pardon is worse than being in on a scam in advance. (Query: Does Malicia's logic get the Biden crime family coming and going?)

[jb]

Somehow we've jumped from "probably being aware of" to "in on the scam" in just a few quick posts. No evidence or logic to get from Point A to Point B, of course. Michael P doesn't even have a sketchy article from Powerloline to help do the work for him.

[DDHarriman]

The overnight 30M in new wealth for that foreigner congresswoman with the White prize husband whose new venture capital fund scrubbed their names from.

There's that data point that helps go from A to B.

[jb]

Oh, cool. So we're just assuming that all investment funds linked to politicians are presumptively fraudulent?

Man have I got a few billion to tell you about...

[DDHarriman]

Its not just linked its his firm.

Wtf why are you ppl so low information

[Michael P]

People raised red flags over Feeding Our Future in mid-2019 (https://www.crbcnews.com/articles/69333f7e69705c525f48f875) but those concerns were quashed when Somalis threatened to play the race card. State-level politicians knew about it by 2021. It's likely that the day-care and home-healthcare frauds are related: the same dynamic, relying on lax enforcement in the wake of FOF, or both.

jb is just playing the denialist card, ignorant of how long these frauds were going on and how well they were known by state officials.

[jb]

Aww, cute. And just like that we're back to "aware of".

Look, I'm sure that some politicians in Minnesota were aware of some fraud. They and you and I may all have different opinions about what the right response to being aware of some fraud is. I tend to take the view that there should be a lot more skepticism around various service providers in these programs; they seem to take the view that it's better to err on the side of service delivery even if fraud ups the overall price on the program; you seem to take the view that if there's brown people involved in the fraud, the whole program should be shut down immediately.

[Michael P]

Yawn. You people love your mindreading.

You similarly "seem" to be in favor of defrauding white taxpayers and of implementing a Great Replacement.

[ducksalad]

Reminds me of something that happened here.

The regional hospital got busted for a massive billing fraud scheme. The nature of it was such that it couldn't be blamed on a few executives or managers in the billing department, obviously large numbers of rank and file medical personnel at least passively went along with it.

But...can't really shut down the main hospital for a city with 100,000 people and tell people with heart attacks to take some aspirin while the authorities take a year to find a buyer and replace several hundred employees. So they got to keep operating and the penalty was fines only.

[jb]

MichaelP, as usual when you don't actually articulate your own position, we really don't have any option other than mind reading. Feel free to let us know what you'd do here, and maybe compare and contrast to the similar fraud that Rick Scott perpetrated in Florida.

Not sure how you get that I'm in favor of defrauding taxpayers since I said I think there should be more controls around service providers to prevent this sort of fraud. It's hard for large scale fraud to happen from the consumer side, but for whatever reason that's where Republicans seem to always focus on putting more controls.

[Michael P]

You want my position? I think "taking red flags seriously and not ignoring them because of race hustles" would be a pretty good start, but I understand why you might have trouble understanding that from "those concerns were quashed when Somalis threatened to play the race card". (And to be clear, I mean you and Gaslight0 specifically, not someone in general.)

[Sarcastr0]

CRBCnews is quite the aggregator. I could not find much about them online.

This appears to be the source story:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/minnesota-fraud-signs-before-covid/

It's a lot more evenhanded, and nothing about race. It's basically the history of the investigation, which like most of these things started some time ago. Longer than usual because of the pandemic.

[Life of Brian]

nothing about race

Your hopeful skim-reading remains legendary. Two paragraphs from the middle of the CBS article, in their entirety:

But as state workers asked more questions — and even stopped payment on some receipts — Feeding Our Future ratcheted up pressure in response. In 2020, the charitable group filed a lawsuit alleging the state had "harmed Feeding Our Future by subjecting it to additional procedural hurdles in violation of federal regulations."

The state "intentionally and wrongfully refuse[d] to do business with Feeding Our Future and the community it serves by discriminating … because of Feeding Our Future's race, national origin, color, and religion."

[Michael P]

Lol, LoB. *chef's kiss*

[Commenter_XY]

Seems like you missed a few things, Man of Science.

[David Nieporent]

People raised red flags over Feeding Our Future in mid-2019 (https://www.crbcnews.com/articles/69333f7e69705c525f48f875) but those concerns were quashed

Um, stupid: Feeding Our Future was investigated, and many indictments and convictions were handed down; the organization itself was shut down in 2022. This proves the opposite of what you claim.

[Michael P]

Why do you lie? Minnesota's government did give in to false accusations of racism, facilitating further fraud.

Thereafter, the Department of Education voluntarily resumed making payments to FOF. The Department of Education was not ordered by the court to do so. After the Department resumed voluntary payments, counsel for the Department of Education wrote the court asking that FOF’s motion for sanctions based on non-payment be denied as moot because the Department voluntarily resumed payments. In a later court filing related to FOF’s separate motion for sanctions based on the failure to approve or deny 144 applications for new food delivery sites, the Department of Education advised the court that FOF’s serious deficiencies were resolved as of June 4, 2021.

Emphasis in the original. As exposed by the federal prosecution, those serious deficiencies were in fact not resolved.

https://mncourts.gov/about-the-courts/newsandannouncements/feeding-our-future-v-minnesota-department-of-education-correcting-media-reports-and-statements-by-governor-tim-walz-concerning-orders-issued-by-the-court

[Sarcastr0]

Nothing you said contradicts what DMN wrote.

[Michael P]

The DaMN liar wrote "This proves the opposite of what you claim." It did not prove the opposite of what I claimed, because concerns over fraud were indeed quashed at the state level, and the state restarted payments to the fraudsters.

Don't you have a hapless hallucinating hater to defend?

[Life of Brian]

Nothing you said contradicts what DMN wrote.

That's of course because DMN took exquisite care to omit actors from the events in his timeline, so as to obfuscate the fact that the state knuckled under and the feds ultimately had to come in to clean up the mess.

[David Nieporent]

No evidence or logic to get from Point A to Point B, of course.

No evidence or logic to even get to point A!

[ReaderY]

The Constitution gives Congress the power to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the United States, but doesn’t provide a similar power for the regular army. The clause also includes suppressing rebellions and repelling invasions.

Does this clause indicate a Framer preference for using the militia over the Army - the regular forces - for this purpose? If “regular forces” is interpreted to refer ro the regular Army, does this create a tension with this Constitutional prioritization?

[hobie]

Employing the militia part of the second amendment could negatively define it as the framers intended. Hillbillies could lose their bump stocks.

[Brett Bellmore]

What's the reasoning there? We'd lose our bump stocks because we'd have select fire M-7s?

[ReaderY]

I think that both parts are relevant. I think the 2nd Amendment contains both an individual right to keep and bear arms, and a state’s right both to have a “well regulated” militia and to maintain control over it except in narrow situations specifically provided for by the Constitution and Congress. I don’t see one as in any way negating the other.

I think the 2nd Amendment could potentially justify construing Congressional statutes authorizing federal takeover of state militias strictly in favor of the states, i.e. as with certain other matters with federalism implications, Congress has to speak particularly clearly to justify it, and ambiguities get resolved in the states’ favor.

[Joe_dallas]

ReaderY 3 hours ago
"I think that both parts are relevant. I think the 2nd Amendment contains both an individual right to keep and bear arms, and a state’s right both to have a “well regulated” militia"

We agree - that is the most natural reading of 2A and the only one that makes any logical sense.
The Well regulated militia clause has no real purpose if it is only an individual right. While the right of the people clause has no purpose when the protected portion of the right is only during militia service.

[Brett Bellmore]

The fundamental problem with this approach is that the amendment doesn't speak to the right of states to maintain a militia, but instead the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

As the Court has previously observed, that phrase, "right of the people" appears several places in the Constitution, and uniformly means a right, of the people. Not a power of the states.

[Brett Bellmore]

Remember, the Constitution was written in the expectation that there wouldn't BE a standing army. You'd raise an army when needed, and otherwise rely on the militia to handle what they could, and buy you time to raise that army when they couldn't. That's why, for instance, appropriations for an army are limited to two years at a time.

So, of course it gives Congress the power to call forth the militia to execute the laws, but not the army. There wasn't supposed to BE an army to call forth, unless you were in the middle of a war!

[Magister]

It contains limits on the army, so there doesn't seem to be an assumption that there would be no army at any given time. Even if they had assumed there would be no need for a standing army, that attitude probably died pretty quickly. The limit on appropriations (which originate in the House) gives civilian control over the army, because voters could install Representatives to remove that funding after the next election.

Congress gets explicit power to call forth militia because otherwise states might be able to say no, and they can pass necessary and proper laws regarding the use of the federal military. The Posse Comitatus Act does put into law Congress's role in using the military for law enforcement, establishing only minor exceptions without Congress.

[Brett Bellmore]

The founding generation were actually quite explicit about their hostility to maintaining a standing army, but I'll agree that they pretty swiftly set it aside.

Ironically, because the militia system worked as intended! In the War of 1812, an optional war of aggression by the relatively new United States, many militia units refused to deploy.

Well, that was actually one of the selling points of a militia system, that it would only be useful for defense, not aggression.

But, you know, you don't put prohibitions in a Bill of Rights because you figure they're things the government will never want to do. You do it because you think they're things the government WILL want to do, and should be forbidden from doing.

Like discontinuing a militia system and then trying to make raising a militia difficult.

[Magister]

It remains that an explicit power over militia was needed and an explicit power over the federal army is not needed.

[Dr. Ed 2]

We were never intended to HAVE a standing army — Congress can RAISE armies but maintain a navy.

Hence no peacetime standing army to call upon.

[Armchair]

As Brett points out, at the time the Constitution was written, a large standing army wasn't considered an item.

Instead, it was expected that the Militia would be called out to enforce the laws. The Militia Act of 1792 is instructive, as is Washington's use of it during the Whiskey "Rebellion"

https://www.mountvernon.org/education/primary-source-collections/primary-source-collections/article/militia-act-of-1792

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

[Frank Drackman]

Every year it's the same, 3 months in, and I'm still writing "5786" for the year

[Josh R]

I will be writing "snake" for 3 months.

[ducksalad]

No, it's 1447 for another six months.

Although I'd prefer that it's 25 47 or 86 47.

[Dr. Ed 2]

On a serious note, what does the UCC say about contracts and negotiatiable documents using this date format?

[David Nieporent]

Literally nothing. Why on earth would it?

[Frank Drackman]

Remember the Southpark Episode where Randy Marsh goes on "Wheel of Fortune" in the Bonus Round he can win if he can answer

"People who Annoy You"
with one letter to go,
the word is "N_GGERS"
Randy answers (incorrectly) and hilarity ensues

So what was the correct answer??

Frank

[Michael P]

Is this the negative Monty Hall problem, where door A and door E both lose? (In addition to Randy's incorrect choice.)

[DDHarriman]

wrong spot

[Josh R]

Naggers.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Hey, at least Randy apologized.

[Moderation4ever]

A number of artists have cancelled engagements at the newly remained Trump Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. In response the interim board president, Richard Grenell, has suggested lawsuit of $1M. I assume for breach of contract. I wonder if any contract lawyers out there can give an opinion if any lawsuit would have merit as the Center's name change is significant. I also wonder if a lawsuit is possible given the question of whether the name can in fact be changed as it was set in law by Congress? I noted the law establishing the Centers name noted this was to be the only memorial to slain President in the Washington area. So adding Trump's name is stepping pretty hard on the tribute to a dead President. So it not just I am not performing at a venue bearing Trump's name, but also I am not performing at a venue who name was illegally changed.

[Frank Drackman]

"I noted the law establishing the Centers name noted this was to be the only memorial to slain President in the Washington area"

Check out the back of a Penny, or a $5 Bill

[Frank Drackman]

OK, the back of a Penny minted from 1959-2008.
The $5 Bill claim stands, and did you know if you can read the State Capitols on the Memorial holding the Bill at Arm's length you have 20/20 Vision??

Frank

[ThePublius]

Lincoln was on the obverse starting in 1909.

Once I was in a store and purchased something for cash, $6.91, and instead of rounding to $6.90 the guy gave me the 9 cents and 3 bucks for my ten. I was a bit annoyed. When I got home I examined the pennies, and one was older, a 1972 D (Denver mint), and, it turns out, a DDO (double die obverse) error coin. I sold it for $1,500. Ha, ha.

[Frank Drackman]

In the early 70's I had a Coin Collection, pretty much limited to Pennies as my weekly Allowance was $1.50 ($1.25 of which I spent on comic books and candy, the other .25 I wasted)
Mom would give me all of her pennies, and I must have looked at a million trying to find the 1955 "Double Date" that was going to put me on Easy Street....

Frank

[CountmontyC]

Marvel, DC or both?

[Frank Drackman]

Not the cool ones, sad to say, "Gold Key" they had some cool titles, "Twillight Zone", "Star Trek", "Ripley's believe it or not", I did get a few DC, "Superman", The "House of Mystery/Secrets/ that the used book stores would sell for a Nickle (usually with the covers torn off)
OH, and my sisters Archie comics, for the Betty/Veronica Centerfolds (Hey Now!)
Never got into the Marvel, they just seemed ridiculous even for imaginary Super Heroes

Frank

[CountmontyC]

Nothing wrong with having different tastes than the big two. Iirc Gold Key was Richie Rich, Casper, Hot Stuff and Wendy the Witch?

[Frank Drackman]

Trying to remember, there was this other Cartoon Comic Ghost, not as big as Casper.

[Malika la Maize]

Trump embodies crass egoism. What’s more interesting is why MAGAns champion that. There’s a term for that in psychology: authoritarian followers.

[Michael P]

Every accusation is a confession.

[Malika la Maize]

Really? Which politician that I support needs 1. Performance centers 2. Baby accounts 3. National park passes 4. Peace institutes 5. Coins 6. Immigration cards, etc., named after them?

You’re an authoritarian follower, slavishly bending the knee to this wanna-be king’s crass egoism. Why? Daddy issues?

[DDHarriman]

How much did you pay for your Obamacare or Obamaphone?

Anything? Probably not as you're a foreigner and they are given privileged status in the US by Democrats since you reliably vote Democrat.

[Malika la Maize]

lol, you dolt, Obamacare was a term Obama’s *opponents* started!

[Michael P]

That's probably why it has the benefit of being remotely accurate, unlike "Patient Protection" and "Affordable Care".

[ThePublius]

That's not so. It was started by Jean Schulte Scott. "March 2007: Jeanne Schulte Scott used "Obama-care" in a journal, comparing it to other potential "-care" plans (like "Hillary-care") in a non-derogatory way, notes The American Press The American Press, and The New York Times."

Now who's the dolt?

[Magister]

Conservatives previously derided health care proposals from the Clinton administration as "Hillarycare", and the March 2007 use of Obama-care was alongside Hillary-care, Romney-care, Giuliani-care and Edwards-care; they were associated with the candidates proposing them. Nobody would have noticed any of these except for the subsequent campaign use of both Hillarycare and Obamacare by Republican candidates and first used in Congress by Republican members.

In any event, that name was not initiated by Obama, unlike the many things Trump wants named after himself.

[Sarcastr0]

Every accusation is a confession.

Michael is so committed to partisan wankership on the Internet that he felt he had to defend Trump as not a crass egoist!

But that's not just obvious, it's Trump's fucking brand.

So, taking a page out of Riva's book, Michael just poops out a generalized rejoinder, hoping no one will notice it's not responsive.

[Michael P]

Gaslight0 is so committed to mindreading that he yet again attributed views to me that are tangential to anything I wrote.

Malicia and you are eager to fall in line behind Democrat authoritarians, you just get salty when people point that out.

[Sarcastr0]

Democrat authoritarians
You support Trump, so good luck with that, chief.

[Michael P]

I voted against Trump twice in 2016 (and for him twice since then, because I didn't know much about Jorgenson in 2020 and because I think Chase Oliver is a nut, plus Trump turned out a lot better policy-wise than I expected). Democrats chose the form of their destructor, to coin a phrase, and nominated a senile geezer followed by a token.

You people have made a point of defending every stupid, illegal and/or unconstitutional thing that Obama and Biden did, so I'm disinclined to concede anything about Trump. You can make your argument, so don't complain when I play the devil's advocate.

[Sarcastr0]

It don't care how you say you voted, you support Trump as much as anyone here.

To the point of very silly comments attempting to defend the indefensible.

You people have made a point of defending every stupid, illegal and/or unconstitutional thing that Obama and Biden did.
Nonsense - the left and Dems are in no way as much of a cult of personality as the MAGA right.

[Riva]

It may come as rather a shock to you but politicians are generally not the most perfect human beings. President Trump is great because he has risen above any personal foibles to accomplish great things. Get back to me when the abundant antisemitic socialist manages to accomplish something worthwhile as Mayor.

[Joe_dallas]

Moderation4ever 55 minutes ago
"A number of artists have cancelled engagements at the newly remained Trump Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts."

Are these the same artists that always promise to leave the USA if a Republican is elected president?

[Malika la Maize]

No.

[Michael P]

as the Center's name change is significant.

Significant to what? That seems like pure question-begging.

[Malika la Maize]

Someone thought it significant enough to do it via taxpayer funds.

[DDHarriman]

$10s of billions in Democrat/Foreigner fraud - Don't care
$50 to change the name of the Kennedy Center - Oh my taxpayer dollarooni's!!

[Malika la Maize]

You’re confusing “don’t want to blame Somalis generally and gas them” with “don’t care.” That’s you, of course. Mikie will swoop in soon to put the AR gloss on it.

[Michael P]

So you think it is insignificant to the performers' contracts?

Minnesota's DFL thought that billions of dollars of fraud was significant enough to do via taxpayer funds. Does that mean that other people can walk out on contracts with the state of Minnesota, or its healthcare / childcare / child nutrition / education agencies specifically? If fraud doesn't justify that in Minnesota, why does a policy disagreement justify it at a gaudy block on the Potomac?

[Sarcastr0]

What about what about.

[Michael P]

It's not a whatabout to point out that an arm-waving response is non-responsive and illustrate it with an analogous example.

I note that neither you nor Malicia have any substantive response. As usual.

[Sarcastr0]

Whattabouting does not actually show anything, much less that the comment about taxpayer funds being used for this ego trip is irrelevant.

Not many are even trying to defend Trump defacing the Kennedy Center. You, though, seem to have a compulsion or something.

[Joe_dallas]

Sarcastr0 18 minutes ago- "Not many are even trying to defend Trump defacing the Kennedy Center."

There was no defacing - But you have to make shit up to justify your inane response.

[Sarcastr0]

Yeah, there was.

You either know it and are still compelled, or are so twisted cognitively you'd defend a turd Trump laid on the floor as a masterstroke of political will.

[Joe_dallas]

If there was actual defacing of property you could show us that documentation of such defacement !

Instead of providing proof of you allegation, you attack the person questioning your allegation.
Nice argument

[Sarcastr0]

So it's turd defending for you, then.

[Joe_dallas]

SarDumbo - you made the claim that the property was defaced -

Yet you have come back twice with no proof -

Instead you get pissed and insult everyone when you got called out for your dishonesty.

[Michael P]

Engage with what I actually wrote, not some straw man of your imagining.

[Sarcastr0]

You did a whattaboutism. Insisting I engage is just a wish to change the subject.

Sorry dude, you gotta deal with the turd you seek compelled to defend.

[Michael P]

As I said, it's not a whataboutism. Meanwhile, you're putting words in my mouth as an attempt to distract, and then complaining about me asking you to engage with what I actually wrote.

Whether any funds were spent on renaming the Marble Monstrosity -- much less the source of those funds -- seems irrelevant to the debate over contracts to perform there. Malicia tried to distract from the original question, and you're continuing that effort.

Stop being such a pestilent troll.

[Sarcastr0]

You changed the subject, and then asked I deal with your changed subject.

Your passionate belief that you're not whattabouting does not change that it's about half of what you post, including this.

[Michael P]

No, I didn't ask you to deal with a particular subject -- I only asked you to stop accusing me of things based on your imagination, like this:

Not many are even trying to defend Trump defacing the Kennedy Center. You, though, seem to have a compulsion or something.

You are the one with a compulsion or something -- to lie about what other people have written. You do it all over these threads.

[Dr. Ed 2]

The new Boston Garden kept getting renamed as banks with naming rights kept getting bought. That was not grounds to vacate contracts.

[hobie]

"Lawmakers in Ohio have introduced a bill that could give a short part of Interstate 70 a new name honoring President Donald Trump. The proposal would rename about two miles of the highway in central Columbus as the “President Donald Trump Freedom Highway.”"
https://www.cleveland.com/news/2025/12/why-some-ohio-politicians-want-a-famous-road-renamed.html

Just find some other monument dedicated to a dead person (I hear there's another recently dead young Kennedy. Fresh tombstone, Baby!), Sharpie out the name and add 'Trump'.

[Frank Drackman]

"Dead Kennedy"??
She's another of the "Dead Kennedy's" who isn't even named "Kennedy" her last name was "Schlossberg" just like the guy who raped the Chick with his Uncle Ted was "Bill Smith", "Kennedy" was his middle name.

[Commenter_XY]

Just look at the contract. It will spell out remedies.

[Estragon]

Maybe it isn’t even political— maybe these artists just don’t want to be stiffed. Trump is famous for paying contractors in full and on time.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/music/music-news/kennedy-center-backlash-artist-payments-1236439599/

[John F. Carr]

The legal concept you are hinting at is "anticipatory breach". In some states you can back out of a contract if you have reason to believe the other party will not pay you.

[ReaderY]

Who would have standing to sue? Can you identify a situation where someone personally loses an actual stake by the name change?

The only situation I can think of is a case where somebody snuck in and put a similar sign with the old name over the current sign (without destroying it) and then got arrested for vandalism. In that case, I think arrestees (whether or not subsequently criminally prosecuted) would have standing to argue that since they in fact provided the correct name, they didn’t deface the sign.

Can you think of another? Just because something is illegal and you don’t like it isn’t enough to create Article III jurisdiction.

[Moderation4ever]

First I was referring to the Center's board president brining suet against artists for cancelling. So I am assuming simple breach of contract.

[John F. Carr]

That comes close to a case posted by Eugene Volokh recently. A Catholic removed an object from the wall of a city building claiming it was a religious display forbidden by the Establishment Clause. There was probable cause to arrest for theft and vandalism. The analysis did not depend on whether the display was illegal. Separately, it was held not to be illegal. As a special exception to standing rules, offended observers can sue over religous displays.

No Establishment Clause Violation in Display of Taoist "Bagua Mirror"

[John F. Carr]

The terms of a contract are divided into material terms and all the other thousands of words lawyers insert out of habit. When you buy a house the material terms include the buyer, the seller, which house, which lot, and what price. The location of the closing is not important. The date of the closing is important only if the contract says so ("time is of the essence"). The identities of the parties are important. The names are not. I can not become President and take control of a business empire by legally or informally changing my name to Donald Trump. A woman can't get out of a contract by getting married and taking her husband's name.

As for remedy, normally if you don't do the work you don't get paid and that's it. You got sick, your flight is delayed, you change your mind, whatever. No work, no pay. If the buyer of your services wants to claim consequential or liquidated damages the contract needs to say so.

If Trump has his eye on any other cultural icons performers can negotiate a right to cancel without penalty if the name is changed.

[Moderation4ever]

Reading today that measles was detected at the Newark airport. A very contagious respiratory virus at a major transportation hub. This is like something out of a movie thriller. I wonder at what point do we decide we need an HHS Secretary that treats the nation health seriously?

[Frank Drackman]

1: Even with Anti-Vaccine Bullshit (is it Bullshit? have you had your Rabies Vaccine? Cholera? Plague? Tetanus up to date??what are you? some kind of Anti-Vaxxer???)
the vast majority of Peoples in the US, Legal or Ill-Legal, are vaccinated against Measles (or had Measles and are Immune) and it's one of those where the Shot's good for a lifetime.
2: The MMR Vaccine is a Live Virus, so not a good idea for Peoples with compromised Immune Systems,
3: It's friggin Measles, not something really horrible like (the) Herpes (have you gotten your Herpes Shot?? want one?? (it's a Joke)

Frank

[ThePublius]

The U.S. declared measles eradicated in 2000. Where do you think this is coming from? Could it possibly be from illegal immigrants, who are not screened, or perhaps lax screening of legal visitors from foreign nations? I tend to blame Biden before RFK, Jr. While he's a skeptic he has stated "that the MMR vaccine (measles, mumps, and rubella) is the "most effective way to prevent the spread of measles.""

Who, exactly, is presenting with the disease? Is it people entering the country (since Newark is an International airport), or some other vector? Were these people subject to the vaccine, or was it available to them? Who are they are how did they end up in the airport?

There was a time in our history where before you could enter you were screened for health and even quarantined to make sure you had no communicable diseases. Perhaps we should return to that protocol.

I think you should be more curious about this, rather than just indicting RFK, Jr.

[Malika la Maize]

I don’t think all this can be pinned on RFK.

Having said that, do you think people should get these vaccines?

[ThePublius]

Oh, so when you said "I wonder at what point do we decide we need an HHS Secretary that treats the nation health seriously?" you weren't referring to RFK?

[Malika la Maize]

I didn’t say that. Stop rage posting.

[ThePublius]

That's a direct quote, you dolt! You did say it! Just scroll up 4 comments! Holy cow, now you're denying you said it? Are you daft?

[Malika la Maize]

*Moderation4ever* 2 hours ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Reading today that measles was detected at the Newark airport. A very contagious respiratory virus at a major transportation hub. This is like something out of a movie thriller. I wonder at what point do we decide we need an HHS Secretary that treats the nation health seriously?

Reply

[ThePublius]

You're right, I was mistaken.

[John 4]

Shocking from such a careful reader

[Estragon]

Um…. My dude. Are YOU daft?

[Commenter_XY]

Dipshit, The Publius quoted you.

[Estragon]

“Dipshit”

JFC.

[Magister]

ThePublius quoted Moderation4ever and admitted the mistake of attributing it to Malika la Maize and apologized in another comment hours before your comment.

[David Nieporent]

That having been said, there's actually no contradiction anyway. RFKJ is not responsible for this case of measles, but his policies are terrible for public health and we need someone who is more scientifically literate than bookkeeper_joe in order to keep more epidemics from happening.

[ThePublius]

I don't think ANY OF IT can be pinned on RFK, Jr.

I think we should more carefully vet people entering the country legally for diseases, and absolutely stop illegal immigration. That would solve most if not all of this problem.

[Malika la Maize]

So Americans should stop getting vaccines?

[ThePublius]

Oh, get lost, troll. I never said that, and that wasn't the topic of your original post. It was about blaming measles on RFK. I responded to that. Don't start changing the topic with your gotcha nonsense.

You are the most annoying troll on here, and produce the most thread-spam of anyone, since Martinned has apparently stopped (we hope). Go find some other group to annoy.

[Malika la Maize]

Of course you’re just mad I point out your mistakes and bias, there’s not a principled bone in your body.

[Joe_dallas]

Publius corrected your error
You did not point out any mistake Publius stated. Not only you were wrong, you in fact , showed your lack of any comprehension of the subject matter.

[jb]

"The U.S. declared measles eradicated in 2000. Where do you think this is coming from? Could it possibly be from illegal immigrants, who are not screened, or perhaps lax screening of legal visitors from foreign nations? I tend to blame Biden before RFK, Jr. While he's a skeptic he has stated "that the MMR vaccine (measles, mumps, and rubella) is the "most effective way to prevent the spread of measles.""

LOL, this is like a few weeks ago when Michael P tried to blame the big Texas/New Mexico on immigrants from Mexico, when it turns out that the big Mexican outbreak started because of people visiting from the US.

Some of the measles outbreaks in the US have indeed started as the result of international travel, but the big ones are all the result of home grown vaccine skeptics. You can see good data on the topic here if you're willing to expose yourself to information that runs contrary to your animus towards immigrants: https://publichealth.jhu.edu/ivac/resources/us-measles-tracker

[Frank Drackman]

Which adults don’t need a booster?
Anyone born before 1957. Measles vaccines first became available in the 1960s, and almost everyone born before 1957 was likely exposed to measles and gained natural immunity, which is lifelong, said Dr. Brad Hare, chief of infectious diseases and HIV at Kaiser Permanente San Francisco.
Anyone who has gotten the recommended two doses of the MMR vaccine, which has been used for decades. This is likely most adults born in the 1970s or afterward who got their routine childhood vaccinations.
“If you’ve gotten two doses at any point in life, you’re set,” Hare said. “You don’t need a booster.”

[Joe_dallas]

Moderation -
RFK jr has only been the head of HHS for 10 or so months.

Did a bunch of previously vaccinated people suddenly become unvaccinated? Not Likely!

So something else is the cause other than anything the new HHS secretary has said or done. Just an other partisan attack attempting to place the blame in the wrong place.

[Magister]

RFK Jr. has been an antivaxxer for decades, along with a lot of others linking childhood vaccines to autism (for which numerous studies find no evidence). MAGA have been against vaccines since even before the 2020 election; but vaccine hesitancy has been rising for decades, despite the strong evidence of their effectiveness and safety.

[DDHarriman]

> (for which numerous studies find no evidence).
This is the Democrat fanatics version of PBUH.

[Joe_dallas]

true RFK has been an idiot antivaxer for decades.
That however doesnt make RFK jr , the cause of the measles outbreak for many of the reasons explained.

Your attempt to inject "MAGA " into the discussion shows you are not even attempting to be honest with where the blame resides.

[Magister]

Without MAGA anti vaccine attitudes, RFK Jr would not have been a significant presidential candidate nor been welcomed by Trump into his present position, so MAGA's attitude on vaccines is relevant to RFK Jr having the opportunity to reduce vaccination rates. Anti-vaxxers (including his contributions) have increased vaccine hesitancy and therefore decreased vaccination rates, which has made the US vulnerable to diseases that were previously eliminated. He may not since January have caused the current outbreaks, but at HHS he is an obstacle to keeping the number of outbreaks from increasing.

[DDHarriman]

I saw someone sneeze at ATL the other day. I was running around demanding everyone take the nations health seriously by putting on masks and I was yelling for the authorities to close the airport and setup a quarantine. But everyone looked at me funny and just kept going on about their lives. WTF? Don't they care about our nation's health seriously?

Can we get people who do? The sniffles is serious business. Deadly serious.

[windycityattorney]

You know who we need in this health debate? Herman Cain. He took a proud stand and was an up and comer on the GOP political stage. This pizza slinger is going places!

Herman Cain: *crickets*

Oh noes.

[Riva]

You really are an obnoxious POS. I know that's somewhat redundant but well deserved.

[ThePublius]

"Moderation4ever 2 hours ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Reading today that measles was detected at the Newark airport. A very contagious respiratory virus at a major transportation hub. This is like something out of a movie thriller. I wonder at what point do we decide we need an HHS Secretary that treats the nation health seriously?" [emphasis mine]

"ThePublius 17 minutes ago
Oh, so when you said "I wonder at what point do we decide we need an HHS Secretary that treats the nation health seriously?" you weren't referring to RFK?"

"Malika la Maize 9 minutes ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
I didn’t say that. Stop rage posting."

Are you kidding?

[Malika la Maize]

You idiot, I’m not Moderation4ever!

[ThePublius]

Ah, you are correct. I apologize.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Would that be like the guy who flew COVID into Logan?

We could ban foreigners….

[Malika la Maize]

A nonprofit group that advocates for law clerks has taken the rare step of filing a misconduct complaint against a federal appeals court judge, alleging that she bullies and mistreats law clerks and that the courts' process for fielding such claims is broken.

The complaint from the Legal Accountability Project against Judge Sarah Merriam of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit states that it is based on conversations with multiple former law clerks who fear retaliation if they come forward themselves.

"She is a bully, in all the ways one might bully their employees: yelling, berating clerks, sending all-caps unhinged emails," said Aliza Shatzman, president and founder of the Legal Accountability Project.

https://www.npr.org/2025/12/30/g-s1-103922/judge-complaint-clerk-legal-accountability

[Frank Drackman]

In Med Screw-el there was this Chick Surgery Resident who was known for bullying and mistreating the 3rd year Medical Screw-dents (Officially we were "Clerks" and the Rotations were officially "Clerkships" but nobody ever called you a "Clerk" or asked what "Clerkship" you were on)
She'd point out your most sensitive weakness, physical, emotional, occupational, right there on Morning Rounds, in the middle of the hall, with everyone from Nurse Jackie to Omar the Janitor there to witness your humiliation,
I loved it!
Umm, perhaps I've said too much......

Frank

[Commenter_XY]

Another 'gift' from The Cauliflower = Judge Merriam

[Malika la Maize]

More than 500 women sued a Virginia health system and its senior executives on Monday for negligence, claiming that for nearly a decade one doctor performed medically unjustified operations, including unnecessary C-sections and sterilizations without consent.

The 510 plaintiffs are seeking $10 million each from the Chesapeake Regional Medical Center, which employed the doctor. The claims are notable both for the number of women who say they were victimized and for the fact that their lawsuit names individual executives whom the patients blame for not preventing the abuse.

The former gynecologist, Javaid Perwaiz, already is serving a 59-year prison sentence for Medicaid fraud stemming from the unnecessary operations. His medical license expired in 2020.

The plaintiffs, most of whom are Black, were covered by Medicaid, the government health plan for the poor. Many were in their childbearing years when Mr. Perwaiz removed their reproductive organs under duress or without their knowledge, and performed other unnecessary procedures, according to federal investigators.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/29/health/chesapeake-hospital-lawsuit-perwaiz.html

[DDHarriman]

Javaid Perwaiz,

Oh? Malika, stop being a racist and respect that foreigners culture. It's totally normal in his country to commit fraud and hurt others, and he's a Democrat voter. So we must protect, cover up, and defend his fraud AT ALL COSTS.

[ReaderY]

Poe’s law strikes again. Are you satirizing MAGA views, or expressing them? Hard to tell.

[DDHarriman]

It's the MAGA position to let foreigners commit crimes in the US and protect them while doing so?

I thought I was satirizing the current, actual, events happening in real life like right now all around us by Democrats.

My bad. What's happening in your alternate, bizarro universe where you'd think my comment could possibly be about MAGA? That will help me understand where you're coming from. In your made up reality, what are you seeing?

[Dr. Ed 2]

The MAGA position is that regulating MDs is a STATE authority — and hence a state obligation. The schmuck had a valid state license.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Where was the state medical board?!?

THEY have the authority to license and un-license MDs….

[DDHarriman]

Why did Democrat civil servants and government official let foreign nationals commit so much fraud? Why are they defending it and covering up for it now with their MSM agents?

What is their motive? Is it just their governing philosophy? Is this the Living Constitution of Democrat governance? That policies and laws can mean whatever a Democrat wants at any given time to achieve their goals? But what is their goal?

White Replacement?

[Malika la Maize]

Talk about shoehorning!

[DDHarriman]

I wish you bugs could think like us humans.

That would be neat.

[Malika la Maize]

He can’t respond.

Why are our white supremacists so mentally inferior?

Don’t speak for us, goofball!

[John 4]

Yes, white replacement is coming to your trailer park soon. Watch out!

[ReaderY]

Pretty much the same tactic as the Klan. Similar language too.

One black person commits a rape somewhere, and suddenly liberals all get berated as responsible for it. By asking for civil rights, the franchise, etc. for black people, they are all endangering your daughter by letting a bunch of notorious rapists go near her and even, horror of horrors, potentially have power over her.

The assumption that foreigners are all notorious fraudsters is as blatant as the former one that black people are all notorious rapists.

[Michael P]

Why would someone ban specific products by name, rather than banning the product category or functions?

https://blog.adafruit.com/2025/12/30/nyc-mayoral-inauguration-bans-raspberry-pi-and-flipper-zero-alongside-explosives/

The Flipper Zero is a penetration testing device for wireless protocols -- but an Android phone can do the same things, and at most needs a simple accessory to reach all the same wireless protocols.

Raspberry Pi devices are banned, but not workalikes like Orange Pi or microcontroller-based boards like those from Arduino.

[ThePublius]

I honestly don't understand why they are banning these things, and whether they can legally do so. And if you have one in your pocket, how would they know?

[Michael P]

People running an event like that usually have broad latitude to define contraband (within the bounds of the event), and usually have security checkpoints to control entry where they could check what people are carrying. I imagine they want to block security testing/exploit devices for the obvious reasons, and programmable devices that could control distracting lights or sound -- but it seems like it would be better to ban noisemakers, bright lights and large display devices broadly.

The Flipper Zero is harder to suggest an alternative way to handle: using one without permission would typically violate terms of use, laws or both, and they're not very common. It's hard to guess whether the organizers are worried about particular threats or vulnerabilities, or are just being very conservative about risk in a curiously specific way.

[ThePublius]

This may result in a Streisand effect, by telegraphing a vulnerability and enticing folks to exploit it.

[Brett Bellmore]

Bans are normally promulgated by people who don't understand the thing being banned, which results in some pretty stupid laws at times.

[jb]

To be clear: this isn't a law. This is a list of prohibited items at a particular event. I'm not sure it's important to get the exact implementation details right for one-off situations, and suspect if that event wasn't Mamdani's inauguration neither Michael P nor anyone else would care about this detail at all.

[Michael P]

Most of the items on the list make sense, although of course one could debate whether they should be allowed. Is your hypothesis that the people who made the list don't understand large bags, strollers, blankets or umbrellas?

And to address a vacuous comment by a denialist, lists like this are readily re-used or used as reference for future events, so it's worth not being stupid about them.

[ducksalad]

Raspberry Pi devices are banned, but not workalikes like Orange Pi or microcontroller-based boards like those from Arduino.

Well, yeah, the ban doesn't make sense. But then on the other hand, it will likely be enforced by equally uninformed guards confiscating anything that looks like unfamiliar electronics. The danger isn't an Arduino getting through, it's some poor guy getting his Holter or insulin pump taken away.

Whenever we send students to a robotics competition we tell them to drive if possible, otherwise ship it UPS. It's just too hard to get homemade electronics past TSA.

[Absaroka]

And in the case at hand, no one up to mischief would think to gut a cell phone or whatever and put the raspberry pi or arduino or whatever inside.

It's like the TSA rule that you can carry as many bottles of liquids as you want, as long as they are each 3 oz or less, and an empty quart bottle. No terrorist would just dump the 3 oz bottles into the quart after going through security.

(plug for Raspberry Pi's ... lotsa people get the bare boards for various hobby things, but they make two models that build the board into a keyboard, which makes for a dandy general purpose computer. The Pi400 with 4G is $66 and the Pi500 with 16G is $200ish. We have a couple of the 400's running Ubuntu as general purpose computers to do email, web, word processing, light photo editing, playing DVDs, yadda yadda. Very low power draw if that matters to you (at the cabin it matters to us).)

[ducksalad]

Yes, I've been surprised that stuff pops up in Ubuntu often faster than my regular Windows machine. Compiler is faster than Visual Community also.

Shows how much waste there is in Windows.

[John F. Carr]

It will be enforced by the same types of people who arrested a college student for having electrical stuff on her shirt just after they thwarted the Mooninite invasion of Boston, all back in 2007.

Don't think you can smuggle your Raspberry Pi in by adding a sticker with the name of another fruit.

[Malika la Maize]

Starting with the body language of the three principals, it is evident that Ukraine, the victim of the worst cross-border aggression and war crimes since World War II, is confronting both a supremely confident and unbudging aggressor and an American mediator struck with admiration for Putin. What’s more, Trump’s personal disdain for the diminutive and beleaguered Ukrainian leader constantly shines through. Zelensky’s basic integrity and moral courage, which reflects the character of his countrymen, obviously discomfits Trump who, in his business and political world, is not accustomed to encountering men, or women, with such qualities.

Zelensky for his part has learned to swallow his moral outrage, but not his pride, as he is compelled to endure the most demeaning treatment Trump can mete out.  Trump repeated at their news conference that if Ukraine and Russia cannot reach an agreement to end the war, they will just have to “go on fighting.” His implicit threat is that he will make Ukraine do so without American help — and in fact he has already twice cut off U.S. aid when Zelensky, his back to the wall, nevertheless balked at Putin-Trump demands for major concessions. 

https://thehill.com/opinion/international/5665270-trump-betrays-americas-values-siding-with-the-russian-aggressor-over-ukraine/

[Michael P]

You still can't quote and can't think for yourself. Sad.

[Malika la Maize]

You mad, bro? Lol

[Michael P]

Simply observing that you still haven't grown. You should talk to a child psychologist about the fixed mindset and why it's not good to have that, much less to laugh about it.

[Malika la Maize]

Fixed mindset ? You’re obsessed with my posting style!

[Michael P]

I'm not obsessed; you just keep stuffing the comments section full of crap. Take Hillary Clinton's advice, delete your account, and I'll stop remarking on your inability to comment like a normal person.

[Malika la Maize]

A normal person is like you, posting a tweet and your half assed assessment?

I’ll stick to what I do, thanks. You can rage all you like.

[Michael P]

I’ll stick to what I do

You say "half assed assessment", but you just proved that I correctly identified your fixed mindset from the start. Y so jelly, raging bro?

[Malika la Maize]

He mad, bro!

[Commenter_XY]

Zelensky is just as corrupt as the people around him. Zelensky's integrity? GMAFB.

[Malika la Maize]

What’s Putin’s credibility?

[Commenter_XY]

Even less.

[Josh R]

So far, the pattern has been NATO, the UK and the EU step in and stop Trump from abandoning Ukraine. Will at some point, Trump sever our post-WWII alliances that have held the peace? Additionally, those alliances have been built on minimal tariffs which led to prosperity for all parties. That one has already been discarded.

Steve Bannon likes it. The rest of us shouldn't.

[ReaderY]

I don’t see America as being any more a mediator right now than the police officer who plays the good cop role in a classic good cop/bad cop interrogation.

[Michael P]

When did these fraudsters enter the US?

https://www.foxnews.com/us/illegal-immigrants-allegedly-ran-multi-million-gift-card-fraud-scheme-hitting-stores-daily-texas

[ducksalad]

Just like in Minnesota, the responsibility to combat statewide fraud schemes lies with the state's attorney general.

In the Texas case you posted, that would be Ken Paxton.

[Michael P]

Indeed. The fraud in Minnesota is only possible because of cooperation -- if not complicity -- of the state government. This fraud was tiny in comparison because Texas actually enforces its laws.

But neither Texas nor Minnesota are responsible for enforcing immigration laws, which is why the immigration history of these fraudsters is relevant.

[Sarcastr0]

So it's just Minnesota fan fiction time for you, eh?

the immigration history of these fraudsters is relevant.
I don't think it is relevant, except our President and his administration are working hard to push the idea that a subgroup are all illegal alien fraudsters.

Populist hate politics.
It catches on with a certain sort of person, and Michael is that sort. Not a stream of bigotry like Lex, but ready and willing to get real prejudiced real fast as needed when called upon.

[Michael P]

It's not fiction of any kind, denialist.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/how-fears-of-being-labeled-racist-helped-provide-cover-for-the-exploding-minnesota-fraud-scandal

And your sad insistence that everything is about race just exposes you as a racist. The Texas fraudsters are very white Latvians.

[Sarcastr0]

""The whole story kind of died under these accusations that people were being racist," Bill Glahn, policy fellow with Center of the American Experiment, told Fox News Digital""

The Center of the American Experiment is a Minnesota-based think tank that advocates for conservative and free-market principles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_of_the_American_Experiment

You're kind of a joke these days, eh?

[Michael P]

Ad hominem much?

Your own CBS story higher up corroborates what Glahn said, and you ignored the other quotes in this story agreeing with him. Of course you don't have a substantive response.

You should just pack it in and take the L. Delete your account and find new hills to die on.

[ducksalad]

If you get a chance send a note to Abbott and Paxton reminding them that they're not responsible for enforcing immigration laws. Judging by their press releases they seem to not understand that.

[Michael P]

https://legalclarity.org/can-states-independently-enforce-immigration-laws/

There a lot of law and history that can help remedy your ignorance. You don't have to just wave your arms in a general direction.

[ducksalad]

Michael P 3 hours ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Indeed. The fraud in Minnesota is only possible because of cooperation -- if not complicity -- of the state government. This fraud was tiny in comparison because Texas actually enforces its laws.

But neither Texas nor Minnesota are responsible for enforcing immigration laws, which is why the immigration history of these fraudsters is relevant.

WHOOSH! Self-own of the Year for 2025! Just before the deadline.

[Michael P]

I have no idea what point you think you're making. The United States is a federal country. The federal government is responsible for certain things, but does not have a general police power. States are responsible for certain things. Defining and enforcing laws about immigration is a federal responsibility, although the states may assist if they wish. As the Supreme Court held in Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012) -- and as explained early in the page I linked to earlier -- states have very limited independent authority, and no responsibility, to enforce immigration laws.

The fact that you don't understand this reflects only on you, as does the fact that you think me pointing out simple facts is any kind of "self-own".

[ducksalad]

I repeated your own statement virtually verbatim, and then you called it ignorant.

I know it's humiliating but just live with it, don't dig further.

[Michael P]

No, I called this comment ignorant:

If you get a chance send a note to Abbott and Paxton reminding them that they're not responsible for enforcing immigration laws. Judging by their press releases they seem to not understand that.

I have no idea what press releases you are talking about, and I don't think either Abbott or Paxton needs to be reminded that Texas has some ability -- but no legal responsibility -- to enforce immigration laws.

You seem to think that your whatabout has some point, so I wish you would make it instead of running around yawping like an idiot.

[ducksalad]

Tripling down.

[David Nieporent]

Silly ducksalad; these people are white, so did they even commit crimes at all?

[Malika la Maize]

The K-pop band NewJeans plunged deeper into turmoil this week after its management label said it had dropped one member of the five-person girl group, one of the genre’s most influential acts in recent years.

The announcement on Monday by the group’s label, Ador, that it was terminating the contract of Danielle Marsh, who performs as Danielle, is the latest flashpoint in a more than yearlong legal battle between the label and the band…

Last year, the five members of NewJeans tried to break their contract, claiming workplace hostility and creative sabotage. But in October, a South Korean court upheld its validity.

During the dispute, the members briefly rebranded as NJZ, performing once under the name in Hong Kong. They also filmed advertisements individually for major Western brands. But they later said they would suspend such activities after court rulings prevented them from operating independently.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/30/world/asia/new-jeans-danielle-ador.html

[ThePublius]

Why don't you start your own news aggregation site instead of clogging this thread with your crap?

[Malika la Maize]

What kind of cheese do you want with your whine? I assume not French…

[DDHarriman]

You're worse than that Martinned guy who used to shit up the board with his no-one-cares Euro politics.

You're shitting up the board with copy & pastes from your Teen Cosmo membership portal.

[Malika la Maize]

You could use some real reporting and commentary after your steady diet of tweets.

[ThePublius]

I subscribe to the NY Times, WaPo, WSJ and other outlets. I don't need you to constantly crap up this thread with snippets from those sources.

[John 4]

You can barely read. Calm down.

[DDHarriman]

If his IQ was any lower, he'd be Somalian amiright?

[DDHarriman]

I was wondering if the affinity Walz has for the Somalian fraudsters is because Somalians, on average, have the same IQ as his son?

[Joe_dallas]

Another example of the corruption in the Minnesota DFL party.
The son of Keith Ellison, the AG in MN who was supposed to have done something to stop the massive fraud in MN.

https://www.campusreform.org/article/son-minnesota-ag-collecting-110000-city-salary-despite-full-time-harvard-fellowship-1000-miles-away/28562

[DDHarriman]

That's okay. He's a POC it's their culture to rip off White nations so we must be tolerant of that and enable it for reparations and social justice reasons, having fewer Whites also helps save the planet and protects the Jews.

We want to be, no we MUST be, on the Right Side of History and not with the bigots and lowlifes. We must not be antisemitic or White Supremacist by expecting POCs to live by White standards (which is shitty White culture stuff like not stealing, murdering, raping, or defrauding others...)

[Sarcastr0]

September 4, 2025.

Is Powerline playing the hits again?

[Joe_dallas]

Try to address the fraud

[Sarcastr0]

There was fraud. It was found, and is being addressed.

The administration is using it as an excuse to go after all childcare in MN, and do some thuggery in Boston as well.

Weeners on the Internet are tying to tie it to the governor, mostly by repeating that he's totally involved over and over again.

It's hateful, and inept. But it doesn't need to be a well executed haterdom to give rise to some awful suffering aimed at those that do not deserve it, but who MAGA wants to attack for...reasons.

Joe's going to pretend Dems are denying the fraud, and then move from that to some stupid shit or other. And when pushed back on, he'll say it's common sense and we're all in denial and he'll flounce off.
Gotta start the new year with rituals!

[Joe_dallas]

The dems were ignoring the fraud for at least 3 years. Quit trying to defend the fraud,
Likewise quit trying defend the Dems facilitating the fraud.

[Sarcastr0]

Well, if you say so!

[Joe_dallas]

Is your Head in sand on purpose - or are just sitting you your regular echo chamber?

Do you really think Walz, Ellison or Omar were so stupid to not be aware of the massive fraud. Almost all the fraud occurred in MSP and all three are well connected with all the DFL players.

[David Nieporent]

What does intelligence have to do with having knowledge of concealed facts?

[Joe_dallas]

an inane and non responsive comment
- as usual

Of course DN is playing the same game as Sardumbo - only a idiot would think Walz, Ellison and Omar were not aware of the fraud. It involved too much money, and it involved too many DFL overseers.

[David Nieporent]

No, it's entirely responsive. You claimed that if they were not stupid they would have been aware of the fraud. So I'm asking how that follows. Some fraud can be detected via the application of intelligence; if a guy on a street corner offers to sell a Rolex for $50, a smart person knows he's being cheated. But what about the particular fraudulent activity allegedly taking place among Somalis in Minnesota is something that would be obvious without having personal knowledge?

[hobie]

Dear AI, what have been the largest financial frauds in recent US history

FTX - Sam Bankman-Fried, white, Jewish
Theranos - Elizabeth Holmes, white, unaffiliated (father was vice president of Enron)
WorldCom - Bernard Ebbers, white, devout Christian
Waste Management - unknown, white, unknown
Enron - Kenneth Lay, white, devout Christian (father was a Baptist minister)
Ivan Boesky - white, Jewish
Bernie Madoff - white, Jewish
HealthSouth - Richard M. Scrushy, white, devout Evangelical

You sure black and Somali are the standard indicators of financial fraud?

[hobie]

"Alex, I'll take 'Race and Religion of Most US Fraudsters' for 800."

[ThePublius]

You're the racist. No one is complaining about their race, it's the fraud. Don't you get that?

[Sarcastr0]

The 'don't go to events with large groups of blacks' wants hobie to know he's the racist.

[Michael P]

Of course the Tone Police swoop in to criticize the guy calling out an explicitly bigoted comment.

(I specifically decided against posting a preemptive criticism because I thought there were very good odds I wouldn't need to. Sadly, Gaslight0 lived down to my expectations.)

[Sarcastr0]

Yes I think you should defend TP and his open racism. Maybe next you can defend Lex and his antisemitism.

Certainly you got no problem making common cause with either of them.

[Michael P]

If you don't like getting called out for awful, hypocritical comments that make common cause with racists... don't post those comments.

Joe_dallas's original comment was in very similar vein to all the stories about Hunter Biden. It's newsworthy for the same basic reason: a privileged scion of a big-name politician got caught lining his pockets from a sinecure due to his connections, raising questions of corruption.

hobie zoomed in with a bunch of whatabouts -- do you think he was somehow suggesting that the younger Ellison should be sent to prison like the people he named? He was facially just stirring up bigotry, and you followed up to cover for him.

[Sarcastr0]

hobie sure did some whattabouts, and TP bit on that bait. Hard.

And now you're stuck defending not TP's original post, but his fullowup as well. Did you see his post below about being a pragmatist? Good luck!!

You're just having quite a day today, eh?

[Michael P]

As far as hypocrites go, you are incredibly stupid. Nobody wants me to chime in on every comment on this blog, yet you're trying to blame me for not responding to a different thread while you're busily still defending hobie's bigoted comments. You set new standards for being unreasonable by the minute.

Take the L, delete your account, and find other hills to die on.

[Sarcastr0]

You replied to: "The 'don't go to events with large groups of blacks' wants hobie to know he's the racist."

Now you're all 'I can't respond to a different thread!'

Jeez, you're just getting owned by multiple parties all over this thread, today.

[Michael P]

As usual, you resort to spectacularly stupid straw men, and then put imagined words in quotes. I didn't say I was unable to respond to a different thread, I pointed out how unreasonable it is to criticize me (or really anyone) for not responding to arbitrary comments.

You might wish to contrast that with the parenthetical shortly above.

[hobie]

Michael, for the past two weeks I've been dinging on you constantly for picking out black-on-white crime from the myriad of pedestrian US crime. Now, consistently, I'm dinging you and your fellow hayseeds for being apoplectic about this fraud committed by immigrant, antisemitic, marxist, terrorist, tranny, liberal-hoax Muslim blacks. What have I gotten wrong here?

[Michael P]

Well, hobie, since you asked, here is a shortlist of some of your more significant factual, logical and moral failings in this thread:

1. Whatabouting.
2. Relying on the base rate fallacy.
3. Cherry picking in ways that exacerbate your base rate fallacy.
4. Appealing to racial and religious bigotry.
5. Inferring guilt and identity from parentage.
6. Arguing against a straw man.
7. Conflating fraud in private industry that was criminally prosecuted with fraud in public office that has been financially rewarded.
8. Using an AI-generated response to substitute for actual thinking or research.
And now you appear to be confusing me with someone else.

But we really don't expect any better from you.

[David Nieporent]

a privileged scion of a big-name politician got caught

"Got caught" is a weird phrase for "openly did something that isn't illegal that some people are complaining about."

[Michael P]

(moved)

[ThePublius]

I'm not a racist, I'm a pragmatist, interested in sensible self-preservation. I haven't heard any trip reports from you of your visit to Virginia Beach Greekfest.

[Sarcastr0]

Hell yeah that’s the stuff.

[hobie]

"No one is complaining about their race"

Lot of fraud in the world, Publius. Lot of fraudsters getting pardoned as well, Publius. Why the fixation with this one (as if we didn't know)?

[not guilty]

Don't forget Columbia/HCA, then headed by Rick Scott, white, Christian.

The HCA Board dropped Columbia from the name, gave Scott a golden parachute to get out of town and called the company co-founder Thomas Frist, Jr. out of retirement to right the ship.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

I don't really listen to books, but happened to find the audio version of As You Wish (about The Princess Bride).

They found someone who sounds quite like the author (who played Westley) to read and included a bunch of people involved in the film to drop audio. It is a good listen so far.

Such a cast. Chris Sarandon was also in the original Child's Play, which later became a series of films (Jennifer Tilly came in the fourth film), a remake, and t.v. series.

He provided audio, too.

[Sarcastr0]

I just listened to a podcast about My Dinner with Andre which lead me down a rabbit hole that ended with me purchasing
Remembering Mr. Shawn's New Yorker.

I'm not a big New Yorker reader, but his management style seems singular and interesting.

[loki13]

On the "this is the DOJ, now" front! Two new filings (both Abrego Garcia, different cases).

The order in the criminal case was unsealed-
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70475970/241/united-states-v-abrego-garcia/

While it looks dry, you have to understand the context. The DOJ, in order to avoid dismissal of this action and disclosure of documents and testimony has made a single argument. "[T]he government’s primary argument that it did not prosecute Abrego in retaliation is that Acting U.S. Attorney Robert McGuire (“McGuire”) made the decision to seek an indictment."

The order shows, repeatedly, that this was simply a repeated lie, and that the DOJ repeatedly hid documents, filed documents under seal, and has refused to provide testimony, knowing that their main argument was a lie.

In effect, the Court is now proceeding on a "put up or shut up" basis- there will be evidentiary hearing for the DOJ to rebut the prima facie case of vindicative prosecution, and if they do not do so, the case will be dismissed. If they do, then further discovery will be allowed regarding their misrepresentations.

Meanwhile-https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71191591/129/1/abrego-garcia-v-noem/

I don't think I've seen something so calculated to anger a judge. This is a declaration stating that as soon as the TRO ends, ICE will take Abrego back into detention. They give two bases for this-

1. After they deported him against a court order to be tortured, unlawfully, and were ordered to have him returned ... he was then a "new arrival" and they can detain new arrivals. That's some chutzpah. "Sure, we violated the law when he sent him out, but now we can use our unlawful actions to treat him as someone who just entered the country illegally!"

2. In the alternative, despite the Court finding there was no order of removal, the creation and backdating of an order of removal just after the Court's order finding that there wasn't one magically means that there was, and therefore he can be detained due to the creation of the order of removal that doesn't exist but was created "sua sponte" and backdated despite the Court's holding.

Also, the repeatedly say that he's part of MS-13 and a foreign terrorist... again, a claim that has been repeatedly rubbished by courts, facts, and reality (non-photoshopped).

[ThePublius]

Let me ask a simple question: is Abrego-Garcia in the U.S. illegally?

[Sarcastr0]

It's sad you think that's a defense of the administration here.

Certain humans, you can do what you want with, eh?

[ThePublius]

How is it a defense of the administration? Geez, I'm just wondering. I understand he is here illegally, and is therefore eligible for deportation. Doesn't that make sense?

[Sarcastr0]

I’m not walking you through the story.

[Frank Drackman]

He is, just like the new Mayor of New York, and Representative Mullah Omar of Minn-a-Sod-a, both of who, like Hunter S. Thompson suggested with Humbert Humphrey (also from Minn-a-Sod-a, must be the Water)
"“Hubert Humphrey is a treacherous, gutless old ward-heeler who should be put in a goddamn bottle and sent out with the Japanese current.”

[Commenter_XY]

The wife-beating, child trafficking, gangbanging POS illegal alien is in the US illegally. One way or the other, he will leave. Maybe some of his fellow MS-13 gangbangers will solve the problem for us.

[loki13]

The reason they lie is because people like you will repeat the lies.

No matter how many times the lies are pointed out.

At a certain point, you aren’t gullible. You are actively malicious.

[David Nieporent]

Let me ask a simple question: is Abrego-Garcia in the U.S. illegally?

He was. Arguably not anymore. He didn't enter the U.S. in 2025, after all; the U.S. brought him here. The government cannot bring someone into the country and then accuse that person of being here illegally.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

And we still get takes where people acknowledge things are bad, and Trump says and does a lot of really stupid things, but hey, past DOJs were bad too. So, oh well. Maybe things will go better in a few years.

[Frank Drackman]

So let Kill-more Garcias free to Kill more Garcias??
Do you think Kill-more Garcia's has read "A Message to Garcia"
Remember on one of Nixon's tapes he talked about "Sending the message to Garcia" and the Media went nutz, thinking this "Garcia" must be one of the Cubans who didn't get caught, blablabla, not even realizing the supposedly dullard Nixon was using a literary phrase.

Frank

[Magister]

So if the DOJ considers him a new arrival, can he now apply for asylum? He previously missed the opportunity by not doing so within a time limit of his original arrival in the US.

[David Nieporent]

The thing is, this attempted scheme may backfire. If he's treated as having just entered the country, then he would be entitled to a new hearing, and his previously time-barred claims for asylum may be revivable.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

What cute historical tidbit will Chief Justice Roberts use in his annual report this year? Should know in about five hours.

[Michael P]

https://nypost.com/2025/12/30/us-news/hud-spent-5b-in-questionable-rental-assistance-under-biden-including-dead-tenants/

WASHINGTON — A US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) report found more than $5 billion in taxpayer funds went to “questionable” rental assistance recipients during the final year of the Biden administration — including around 30,000 “deceased tenants” and “thousands” of potential non-citizens, The Post can reveal.

HUD officials said a “large concentration” of the suspicious payments went to New York, California and Washington, DC, with dead recipients getting at least some funds in all 50 states — in what federal officials are calling widespread abuse of taxpayers’ dollars under the Biden administration.

Some people will claim it's populist bigotry to care about fraud and how to minimize it.

[Sarcastr0]

No one says don’t care about fraud.

Though trusting a conveniently targeted and timed story from Trump’s HUD as quoted in the NYP?
Seems a bad move.

[Michael P]

No one says don’t care about fraud.

Tell that to David Lieporent, who in a different thread suggests that we should disregard fraud as a crime, at least when perpetrated by white people.

[Sarcastr0]

Yes, that sounds like you did a super fair interpretation of what he said.

[Michael P]

You could check!

Now, he was likely being sarcastic and snide in suggesting what he did, but he wrote what he wrote and did not bother to make any actual point or to clarify his meaning.

Being wrong is a hazard inherent to making such blanket statements as "No one says ...".

[Magister]

Looking at the link (and it's hard to check a vague description without a link), David Nieporent asked "Silly ducksalad; these people are white, so did they even commit crimes at all?" which is vastly different from "in a different thread suggests that we should disregard fraud as a crime, at least when perpetrated by white people" even for those like Michael P who are uncertain about obvious snideness or sarcasm.

In support of the premise of that sarcasm, one could point to the convicted Aimee Bock "who is White, was described by investigators as the mastermind" (from the cbsnews.com article linked above) but who never gets mentioned by all the usual posters complaining repeatedly about fraud by Somalis.

[Michael P]

I would ask that you not play dumb, but I don't think you are playing.

The obvious implication of what DMN wrote is that he thinks (some people claim) white people definitionally cannot commit fraud. This refutes what Gaslight0 claimed -- or ar least shows that DMN disagrees with him, as I said in the first place.

Aimee Bock is white, but her own lawsuit against the Minnesota Board of Education claimed that MBE discriminated against her organization on racist or national-origin grounds (by stopping fraudulent payments). They were the ones who cast it that way. And the other fraudsters have agency ... unless you think Bock somehow enslaved them.

[Absaroka]

In the 'trust but verify' dept, I remember DOGE announcing hundreds? thousands? of fraudulent centenarian SocSec recipients ... but eventually produced zero.

The 'PAYMENT INTEGRITY INFORMATION ACT' section starts on page 171 of the report linked in the Post article. It doesn't have a lot of meat. They used big data analytics to identify 'questionable payments totaling $5.8 billion'. Which reminds me of the previous DOGE SSA stuff. It is not saying 'we found $X of *fraudulent* payments and have *convicted* Y people'.

To be clear, welfare cheaters are loathsome people - it's like taking money out of the collection plate. I applaud HUD for looking into questionable payments - but at least some of those will prove to be perfectly legitimate upon inspection.

To date the only actual result is 'five law enforcement referrals for further investigation'. When those referrals result in convictions we'll have actual data on the fraud rates.

(and FWIW, I think we frequently don't look nearly hard enough for fraud, so kudos to them for trying. But the fat lady hasn't even started singing yet.)

[David Nieporent]

(and FWIW, I think we frequently don't look nearly hard enough for fraud, so kudos to them for trying. But the fat lady hasn't even started singing yet.)

As I've said before, the optimum fraud rate in a program is not zero. (All fraud is bad, but the cost of eliminating it is more than the money saved.)

[Bwaaah]

DMN: "the optimum fraud rate in a program is not zero"

That important point is so typically ignored in rhetoric that cites an example of fraud as implying there is too much fraud, because "any amount of fraud is too much fraud."

That goes right up there with, "If the program can save just one life, then it's worth it." (No, not necessarily...that depends on the cost of saving that one life.)

[Absaroka]

"All fraud is bad, but the cost of eliminating it is more than the money saved."

That would depend on what those two costs are. Pretty obviously there are some measures that are cost effective. The tellers at my bank ask for ID for cash withdrawals, but don't do a cheek swab for DNA. I'm pretty sure the first is a cost effective means of fraud prevention, and that the second would be overkill (for the amount involved ... other times the pain of getting a medallion guarantee is justified).

As I've said before, my father was one of those depression babies who kind of abhorred not going to work. After retirement he got a part time job interviewing applicants for one of the winter heating support programs. He said half the applicants were good people so hard up he would have pulled out his own wallet if he couldn't get aid for them, and half were obviously scammers. Early on he asked his boss what the procedure was for obvious frauds and was told 'approve them ... we're not in the business of denying claims'. I'd want to see the numbers to conclude that was cost effective.

We had a section 8 house across the street for a while. One of the tenants certainly ... lived a high consumption lifestyle. As in custom paint jobs on their Mercedes (as in more than one ... what's the plural of Mercedes??), etc, etc. And a drive-by once - I found shell casings in our yard. I have this suspicion that they might not have accurately declared their profession and income.

(and, TBC, I sincerely doubt all welfare programs have as much fraud as Dad saw. I also think his estimate was likely accurate. I don't really have much of a guess how much fraud there is overall, and I get the sense the people in charge don't look too hard)

[David Nieporent]

Remember that there are two types of costs to eliminating fraud:

1) The actual costs of hiring the fraud investigators, implementing the anti-fraud checks, etc.
2) The Type I errors: denying legitimate claims by lowering the threshold for calling something fraud.

[Commenter_XY]

Will we see more US political assassinations in 2026? Yes or No.

'Yes'

[Michael P]

By "more", do you mean any additional ones, or more than 2025? I want there to be zero, although I think it's more likely that we will have at least one. I'm not so foolhardy as to predict a more specific count, or what the political valence(s) might be.

[Commenter_XY]

I mean additional assassinations, and, greater than the number in 2025. I believe political assassination is here to stay, and it is becoming normalized, which is why we are seeing more of it. It is openly justified. Hence my answer.

Do we care about the political valence, in the end? It is the phenomenon, political assassination is becoming normalized, that is the issue.

[John F. Carr]

At what level? Some nobody in local government, yes. A "Squad" member or well known Republican, no. Kirk-level, maybe.

[Moderation4ever]

I am going to say no. Not to worry, there are still likely to be plenty senseless shootings.

[Brett Bellmore]

Trying to divert this in a more pleasant direction, I just finished a large batch of pecan tassies, for a New Year's Eve party tonight. (My wife is making chop suey now, for the same party.)

The meat dishes were already taken, but there was room for a vegetable and a dessert.

What are your favorite cookies? I think tassies might be mine, though there's a strong case for lemon bars.

[ThePublius]

"What are your favorite cookies?"

Italian rainbow cookies.

[Brett Bellmore]

Hm, I'll have to try them some time. They look good.

[Malika la Maize]

My wife makes a variant of chocolate chip cookies with macadamia nuts, that’s my favorite.

[Malika la Maize]

Brett, chop suey recipes seem to vary quite a bit, what’s your wife’s?

[Brett Bellmore]

Random cut up veggies and shrimp mixed with a sauce made from shrimp stock and oyster sauce, thickened with corn starch.

[Moderation4ever]

Easy choice peanut butter cookies. Simply the best.

Interesting follow up question. My wife and I are among the few who seem to like oatmeal raisin cookies and we would go oatmeal raisin over oatmeal chocolate chip. So who are with us raisin over chocolate chip?

[ducksalad]

You are correct.
Raisins with oatmeal cookies.
Chocolate chips need a basic flour/butter/sugar based cookie, cooked to dark tan.
Currants need a basic cookie, cooked to a very light tan.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"So who are with us raisin over chocolate chip?"

Oatmeal raisin cookies should be banned or at least served with extreme caution. They can be mistaken by an unsuspecting person for chocolate chip cookies. And once you touch it, you have to eat it, thereby wasting your allotment of calories.

[SRG2]

Testify, brother! There is no crueler food-based outcome than finding that a highly desired and anticipated chocolate chip cookie - oatmeal or otherwise - is in fact a raisin cookie.

FWIW I have noticed that a popular brand of LI cookies has recently reduced the number of chips in their chocolate chip cookies.

[ThePublius]

There appears to be another cloudfare meltdown in progress.

[hobie]

Happy New Year everyone! At midnight the past two years here, the neighborhood has lit up entirely with gun fire and not fireworks. If it happens again I'll film it and post it here. Free exercise of the 2nd Amendment, Honkeys

[ducksalad]

Used to have that custom in some of the towns around here. It petered out due to improving economic conditions - people with nicer cars and more of their lot covered by house don't want the falling bullets.

[SRG2]

Happy New Year to all and sundry!

(I was ruined for fireworks elsewhere by spending Chinese NY in Hong Kong. Doolittle or Bomber Harris could not have lit up the sky for as long or as loudly - and certainly not as colourfully)

[Michael P]

For those who don't know, the Second Amendment protects a right to keep and bear arms, not to recklessly discharge firearms.

[hobie]

From today's NY Times. Pete Hegseth kills two more people in a boat. Here's the NY Times photo accompanying the article
https://static01.nyt.com/images/2025/12/29/multimedia/29DC-BOATSTRIKE-gjth/29DC-BOATSTRIKE-gjth-superJumbo.jpg?quality=75&auto=webp

[hobie]

Judging by the photo, Pete used to be someone's baby...he still has a boyish face. Now here he is...killing people in boats with missiles. Every boy's dream.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Assistant principal demoted to teacher for profane, unhinged rant about Demtards on Facebook, CA9 says OK. I guess they thought it was important to get this guy in front of kids.

[MarkJawz]

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-judge-blocks-texas-app-store-age-law-meant-protect-children-2025-12-23/

I'm really tired of homosexual Obama or Biden judges thinking that they are kings. Or really queens, as the case may be.