Open Thread

What’s on your mind?

Comments

[Kazinski]

If this Washington Post Editorial seems a little familiar its because they are just repeating what I've already said here a few times.

"Jack Smith would have Blown a Hole in the First Amendment"

"The House Judiciary Committee privately interviewed former special counsel Jack Smith last month and published the transcript last week. The good news is that the exchange was mostly substantive and respectful. The bad news is that Smith is still clinging to flawed legal theories. They’re worth highlighting because even well-intentioned prosecutors can do damage when they lose sight of constitutional limits."

"Political speech — including speech about elections, no matter how odious — is strongly protected by the First Amendment. It’s not unusual for politicians to take factual liberties. The main check on such misdirection is public scrutiny, not criminal prosecution.

Of course fraud is a crime. But that almost always involves dissembling for money, not political advantage. Smith’s attempt to distinguish speech that targets 'a lawful government function' doesn’t work. Most political speech is aimed at influencing government functions."

"Smith fought to broadly limit Trump’s ability to criticize him or the prosecution in general, claiming such statements would interfere with the legal process. He seemed unconcerned about interfering in the democratic process by seeking to muzzle a candidate for high office.

While some restrictions were appropriate, the appeals court said, Trump had to be able to rebuke his prosecutor — as a candidate and a defendant.

The former special counsel apparently has no regrets about this heavy-handed approach, even though it failed legally and probably helped Trump win the 2024 election."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2026/01/09/jack-smith-trump-judiciary-first-amendment/

Does anyone have access to a good plagerism checker?

[Mr. Bumble]

"Does anyone have access to a good plagerism [plagiarism] checker?"
A job for AI?

[Magister]

Would that job be plagiarizing or checking?

[Stephen Lathrop]

Kazinski — No doubt the Washington Post is capable to get constitutional law advice every bit as good as that the Trump administration itself relies upon.

[hobie]

"Of course fraud is a crime. But that almost always involves dissembling for money, not political advantage."

He fucked up there. Fraud can indeed encompass coercive language. 'Find my votes or else...'

Threats to induce agreements is a staple of contract law and domestic abuse

[DDHarriman]

I don't recall where those threats you seem to be referring to happened in Trumps situations. Can you share?

I am not denying or trolling, just genuinely curious. I recall the "find vote" reference, I don't recall any "or else".

[hobie]

'or else' is my artistic license at work

[David Nieporent]

'or else' is my artistic license at work

It was a paraphrase, but an accurate one. In the same conversation, Trump said it would be criminal if the bogus votes were not "found."

[DDHarriman]

Did he say it right after he said "find my votes"?

If not, then it wasn't a paraphrase at all, or an accurate one.

He invented "or else", then when challenged you tried to bail him out with an out of context cherry pick.

You should stick to your straight denials of reality. That's the only thing you're good for.

[DDHarriman]

So the key part that makes a non-threatening comment a problematic threat is your "artistic license".

Good work, Comrade, here's your revolutionary chit for an extra piece of bread with your socialist gruel warmed by collectivism alone.

[Darwinnie]

There’s always an “or else” with Trump. Have you not been paying attention?

[Kazinski]

Even the manufactured "for else" is perfectly legal unless its a threat of violence or some other illegal action.

Or else:
- I'll campaign against you
- I won't donate to your campaign
- I won't appoint you to any Federal office

All of those are perfectly legal.

[Josh R]

I can't access the article, but I agree Smith is not permitted to silence Trump's criticism of him. On the other hand, intermediate scrutiny applies to knowingly false statements of fact per the controlling in opinion in Alvarez.

The bulk of Smith's case alleges Trump defrauded the United States. So even if you believe such fraud is not covered by existing doctrine (a doctrine that all nine justices in Alvarez said is not protected by the First Amendment), Trump's speech can still be unprotected.

[Michael Ejercito]

Lies for political gain do not constitute fraud.

[Josh R]

Ipse Dixit. But again, even if that is the case, Trump's speech might not be protected under Alvarez.

[not guilty]

"Lies for political gain do not constitute fraud."

The presidential salary is $400,000 annually. So Trump by his lies stood to gain $1.6 million that he was not lawfully entitled to.

[Kazinski]

That's not how fraud works either.

[Krayt]

"Smith fought to broadly limit Trump’s ability to criticize him or the prosecution in general, claiming such statements would interfere with the legal process."

Reminds one of the initial SC argument approving censorship of pamphlets that urged all legal resistance to the draft, because Congress' plenary power to raise armies superseded it.

[David Nieporent]

Of course fraud is a crime. But that almost always involves dissembling for money, not political advantage. Smith’s attempt to distinguish speech that targets 'a lawful government function' doesn’t work. Most political speech is aimed at influencing government functions."

This was a context in which there was no government function that could legitimately be influenced. Counting votes is ministerial.

[Brett Bellmore]

Of course it's ministerial. But try getting Congress to admit that anything they do, anything at all, is ministerial.

[Kazinski]

"Counting votes is ministerial".

That would be nice, but lets be honest.

But the "lawful government function" framing was Smith's, and certainly any speech about any government function, and whether the government is actually faithfully fulfilling that function is protected speech.

[Josh R]

In an earlier Open Thread, Kaz analogized Trump's targeting a "government function" to Obama's "you can keep your doctor" as a knowing lie targeting the "government function" of providing health care.

It's a ridiculous analogy because the statute applies to the processes of running the government itself such as counting votes, executing warrants or conducting trials. It does not apply to knowingly false promises about policy outcomes.

[not guilty]

I haven't written much about the fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good by an agent of ICE. I realize that the facts surrounding the shooting are disputed. I haven't watched any of the various videos posted online. I surmise that one's view of the shooting is heavily subject to confirmation bias. As Jonathan Swit observed, it is useless to try to reason someone out of something he was not reasoned into.

One thing I can contribute is my thoughts as to whether Ms. Good had a legal right to resist what she may have perceived to be an unlawful arrest.

At common law there was a privilege to use reasonable force to resist an unlawful arrest. See, P. Chevigny, "The Right to Resist an Unlawful Arrest," 78 Yale L.J. 1128 (1969), and authorities cited therein. Most jurisdictions have modified that rule by statute.

Minnesota Statutes § 609.06 appears to be the statute applicable here. https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.06
This statute specifies that individuals may use reasonable force when they believe it is necessary to resist or prevent an offense against their person. This belief must be both honest and reasonable, meaning the individual genuinely perceived a threat and that a reasonable person in the same situation would have perceived the same threat.

There has been much blather as to whether the decedent's attempt to flee constitutes the use of her vehicle as a deadly weapon. Subdivision 2 of the Minnesota statute states:

Deadly force used against peace officers. Deadly force may not be used against peace officers who have announced their presence and are performing official duties at a location where a person is committing a crime or an act that would be a crime if committed by an adult.

Statutes in derogation of the common law are to be strictly construed. A statute will be construed to alter the common law only when that disposition is clear. A Scalia and B. Garner, Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts § 52, 318-319 (2012). The maxim expressio unius est exclusio alterius holds that the expression of one thing implies the exclusion of others. Id., at § 10, 107-111.

Applying these maxims to Minnesota's § 609.06, subdivision 2 would indicate that deadly force may lawfully be used against peace officers who have not announced their presence or who are not performing official duties or who are not at a location where a person is committing a crime or an act that would be a crime if committed by an adult.

SCOTUS has opined in John Bad Elk v. United States, 177 U.S. 529, 534 (1900):

At common law, if a party resisted arrest by an officer without warrant and who had no right to arrest him, and if in the course of that resistance the officer was killed, the offense of the party resisting arrest would be reduced from what would have been murder if the officer had had the right to arrest, to manslaughter. What would be murder if the officer had the right to arrest might be reduced to manslaughter by the very fact that he had no such right. So an officer at common law was not authorized to make an arrest without a warrant for a mere misdemeanor not committed in his presence.

But for agent Jonathan Ross's shooting Ms. Good to death, she could have been arrested and charged with any violation of law that she may arguably have committed. In that event, a jury pf twelve men and women good and true could have sorted out the disputed facts.

As it is, however, Mr. Ross forever deprived Ms. Good of that constitutional right by arrogating to himself the functions of judge, jury and executioner. If his culpable mental can be shown beyond a reasonable doubt, that could be a federal capital offense under 18 U.S.C. § 242.

The following dialogue from Clint Eastwood's The Unforgiven is relevant here:

The Schofield Kid: [after killing a man for the first time] It don't seem real... how he ain't gonna never breathe again, ever... how he's dead. And the other one too. All on account of pulling a trigger.
Will Munny: It's a hell of a thing, killing a man. Take away all he's got and all he's ever gonna have.
The Schofield Kid: Yeah, well, I guess they had it coming.
Will Munny: We all got it coming, kid.

It's not going to happen under the current administration, but let's hope that Jonathan Ross someday faces the twelve men and women that he forever denied Renee Good the right to face.

[not guilty]

All of that having been said, resisting a police officer is a monumentally bad idea, no matter what the law provides as to self-defense. The legality or illegality of the arrest can be determined later, and resistance is highly likely to result in a beatdown at best. As the police mindset often goes, "You may beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride:"

[Commenter_XY]

NG, I am glad you said this: All of that having been said, resisting a police officer is a monumentally bad idea, no matter what the law provides as to self-defense. The legality or illegality of the arrest can be determined later...

You might have just saved a life.

[Joe_dallas]

NG - your entire commentary is based on facts which dont exist.

Is it possible you could apply your legal analysis to the actual facts? Never mind - we know the answer to that.

[Nelson]

Sure. Linking and referencing cases and precedent doesn’t count as “facts” in your world. Definitely a MAGA mindset.

[Joe_dallas]

Nelson dont be stupid (at least not any stupider than previously)

NG analysis of case law is based on facts that dont exist in this case. I made clear that the cases he cited dont apply to the actual facts. Yet you fail to grasp that extremely important distinction.

Citing case law that is not on point while pretending the cases are on point simply makes the attorney looks stupid in court and makes the attorney look incompetent.

[Mr. Bumble]

See this from Bill Shipley:
https://shipwreckedcrew.substack.com/p/minneapolis-is-not-even-a-close-call

[Joe_dallas]

Both NG and Nelson are playing games with the facts with the citation of case that simply is not relevant because the facts are not even remotely on point.

[Joe_dallas]

Nelson - Dont blame me for your failure to recognize NG's failure to cite cases on point.

[Kazinski]

The law by itself is meaningless, unless it's applied to the facts of the case.

If the law doesn't apply to the facts of the case he may as well be citing a statute on shoplifting.

[David Nieporent]

bookkeeper_joe wouldn't know an "actual fact" if you handed him a video showing what happened in a given situation. (We know that, because he's been handed videos showing what happened in this situation, and he doesn't know the facts in them.)

[DDHarriman]

Was the ICE officer struck the by car driven by Good?

[MoreCurious]

I haven't seen evidence that answers that question. Have you? If so, please share it with us.

[not guilty]

Joe_dallas, one reason that we build courthouses is to allow juries to sort out disputed facts, based on evidence adduced by the parties.

Such as what Ms. Good believed, and whether that belief was held both honestly and reasonably, meaning the individual genuinely perceived a threat and that a reasonable person in the same situation would have perceived the same threat.

If she had been arrested and charged with a crime, she could have offered as a defense that her attempt to flee was lawful, and both the prosecution and the defense could have developed evidence on that point by examination of witnesses, including the defendant if she had chosen to testify. In the words of Dean John Henry Wigmore, cross-examination is “beyond any doubt the greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth.” 3 Wigmore, Evidence §1367, p. 27 (2d ed. 1923).

Who prevented that from happening? Agent Jonathan Ross. He should be held to account once a new president takes office.

[Kazinski]

I got this far before I realized I would be wasting my time:

"I haven't watched any of the various videos posted online."

[Commenter_XY]

The MSM have been nothing more than civic arsonists with their coverage. The MSM look positively sclerotic pushing their false narrative.

An AWFL FAFO. That basic truth has not changed. This woman acted stupidly, egged on by her partner (Rebecca Brown Good), and paid for her stupidity with her life, leaving behind an orphan, age 6. That is the tragedy.

Rebecca Brown Good will walk away scot-free, free to live her life; her actions in egging on her partner contributed to her death. Now she can live with that reality.

Hopefully others will see what happens, and be dissuaded from claiming a Darwin Award. Look, it is a really bad idea to interfere, impede or threaten an LEO performing their job duties. It doesn't matter if they are ICE, the FBI, a state LEO, or a local police officer -- it is a bad idea, so save it for the judge. NG is 100% correct about this.

POTUS Trump was elected on a platform of detaining and deporting every illegal alien we can lay hands upon. ICE detaining and deporting illegal aliens will not stop because of stupid actions by AWFLs. The pace and intensity of detentions and deportations will increase. Millions more illegal aliens will be deported this year, and for the next three (yes 3) years.

[hobie]

"Rebecca Brown Good will walk away scot-free, free to live her life; her actions in egging on her partner contributed to her death. Now she can live with that reality."

"Donald J. Trump will walk away scot-free, free to live his life; his actions in egging on Saint Ashtray Babbitt contributed to her death. Now he can live with that reality."

[Sarcastr0]

‘The libs, the provoked us. So really their deaths are their fault!’

Freedom of speech ends up scraping off real easy and the fascist comes out.

[DDHarriman]

Are you a paid agitator like Good and hobie?

Is that why your hot takes are so stupid?

[Brett Bellmore]

I wouldn't be terribly confident that Rebecca will walk away scot free. She was collaborating with Renee to commit a crime, and somebody died as a result.

[Sarcastr0]

Brett working hard,

How long till this becomes an Antifa op?

[Brett Bellmore]

Until there's evidence of it for you to ignore, I suppose.

[Sarcastr0]

‘Crimes.
Liberal crimes everywhere

Why won’t they comply?

I guess some gotta go to jail after we scoot and kill the rest!’

You may not see what you are, but this stuff reveals what you are to everyone else.

[Brett Bellmore]

I could throw that last line right back at you.

They set out to obstruct law enforcement. They were TRAINED to obstruct law enforcement. Obstructing law enforcement is a crime even if they're enforcing laws you don't like.

She was obstructing law enforcement when they walked up to her. A crime.

She refused to exit the vehicle when lawfully ordered to. A crime.

They tried to escape when they attempted to open the door. A crime.

She put her car into motion with one agent having an arm inside it. A crime.

She accelerated forward with an agent in front of her, and hit him. A crime.

You'll doubtless ask, were any of these crimes capital crimes? No, they weren't. Were any of them worth a human life?

She was the one who needed to have thought about that.

[Sarcastr0]

What you choose to convince yourself of says it all.

None of the crimes you asset are on the tape and the NY Post multiple sources story is trash.m

As I said it’s only a matter of time before you discover she’s the CEO of Antifa.
Done with you and your delusional excuse making for murder today.

[DDHarriman]

There isn't a video of her refusing to exit?

She didn't hit the agent?

OK, you're not a real person.

This proves it.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"What you choose to convince yourself of says it all."

This is the guy who thought cops should have tackled Ma'Khia Bryant.

[David Nieporent]

She did not hit the agent, no. He may have grazed against her car as it passed him.

[Josh R]

DMN, she clipped him. That qualifies as 'hit" in my opinion.

[Brett Bellmore]

"She did not hit the agent, no. He may have grazed against her car as it passed him."

So he hit the car, rather than the car hitting him? Despite the fact that it was the car that was moving?

[TwelveInchPianist]

Wow! The agent attacked her car with his body before shooting her?!? Terrible!

[Kazinski]

Mayor Frey admits the car hit him and he was injured although he too tries to minimize it.

"Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey (D): “The ICE agent walked away with a hip injury that he might as well have gotten from closing a refrigerator door with his hips."

But the first shot was a fraction of a second before he was struck, or simultaneous with the strike, when she has driven almost directly at him.

But that leaves a couple questions.

If the first shot was the fatal shot, then there is no question it was justified.

If the first shot was not the fatal shot was the sight of his gun and the discharge enough to get her to crank the wheel to the right and keep him from being seriously injured?

And also if the first shot was not the fatal shot, is there any case law where a court has ruled a first shot lawful, and a second shot less than half second later unjustified?

The Supreme court has said multiple times that courts should not try to parse split second decisions by law enforcement.

[Life of Brian]

So he hit the car, rather than the car hitting him?

As I said before, it's like a drop-dead serious variant of "come on, man, stop hitting my fist with your face!"

[Joe_dallas]

David Nieporent 4 hours ago
"She did not hit the agent, no. He may have grazed against her car as it passed him."

What is the over / under on when DN will tell the truth?
The Vegas odds makers want to know.

[David Nieporent]

So he hit the car, rather than the car hitting him? Despite the fact that it was the car that was moving?

Both he and the car were moving.

[Nelson]

Was she jaywalking, too? A crime.

The response wan’t proportional to the crimes you point out.

ICE are trigger-happy, masked, unaccountable, and untrustworthy.

[Brett Bellmore]

No sensible person points a car at a police officer, guns it, and expects a peaceful response. You can complain all you like about the officer's shooting, but it never would have happened if she hadn't set out commit a crime, and then doubled down on breaking the law at every subsequent decision point.

[DDHarriman]

He was struck by the car. if an officer is struck by a car, what's the proportional response? To get in his car and hit her back?

[David Nieporent]

No sensible person points a car at a police officer, guns it, and expects a peaceful response.

Which is probably why she did none of those things.

[Brett Bellmore]

"unless by "obstruct law enforcement" you include first amendment protected activity like warning the public when and where ICE is active."

You're doubtless going to be horribly shocked that, yes, warning criminals that the cops are coming actually does count as obstructing law enforcement.

[Kazinski]

"Which is probably why she did none of those things."

9 feet in 1 second from a dead stop. That is gunning it on a Honda Pilot.

"She did not hit the agent, no. He may have grazed against her car as it passed him."

By the time her car passed him she was already dead.

[David Nieporent]

You're doubtless going to be horribly shocked that, yes, warning criminals that the cops are coming actually does count as obstructing law enforcement.

Which part of the First Amendment confuses you?

[David Nieporent]

9 feet in 1 second from a dead stop.

9 feet in 1 second is supposed to sound like a lot? Maybe? If one can't do math? That's all of 6 mph.

[Joe_dallas]

David Nieporent 4 hours ago
"No sensible person points a car at a police officer, guns it, and expects a peaceful response."

"Which is probably why she did none of those things."

Another BS lie from the most prolific liar on this thread - upwards of 50-60 lies over the course of three days from DN - you are on a roll.

[Kazinski]

"9 feet in 1 second is supposed to sound like a lot? Maybe? If one can't do math? That's all of 6 mph."

Its .56gs, which is 0-60 in under 6 seconds, and 25mph in two seconds.

Which is right about full acceleration for a Honda Pilot.

But you knew that.

[David Nieporent]

Its .56gs, which is 0-60 in under 6 seconds, and 25mph in two seconds.

Which is right about full acceleration for a Honda Pilot.

But you knew that.

I mean, didn't; I don't have the foggiest idea what full acceleration for a Honda Pilot is. And — without knowing the actual model/trim/year — I couldn't even find out for sure. But since you bring it up: a quick google suggests that Honda Pilots cannot do 0-60 in "under 6 seconds," so it's not so much "full acceleration" as bad analysis on your part.

[Kazinski]

No, I don't think it was bad analysis on my part the acceleration of a car over 6 seconds from 0-60 is dependent on the torque in the various gear ranges and engine speed.

.56gs is not going to be constant over the entire 6 seconds as anybody who floors it to get on the freeway can probably tell you, every time you feel the transmission shift you can feel the g force ease.

Torque is going to be highest in lower gears which is when you will have your highest g force.

But of course you aren't even trying to refute to go 9 feet in the first second from a stop is high acceleration and someone would never do that in a parking lot with pedestrians around, and certainly not when they can see someone directly in front of them, not without a reckless disregard for their safety. You might even call it a 'depraved disregard'.

[David Nieporent]

That article, besides lying about lots of stuff, does not say she was "trained to obstruct law enforcement," unless by "obstruct law enforcement" you include first amendment protected activity like warning the public when and where ICE is active.

[DDHarriman]

BB placed this in the wrong spot:
---
"unless by "obstruct law enforcement" you include first amendment protected activity like warning the public when and where ICE is active."

You're doubtless going to be horribly shocked that, yes, warning criminals that the cops are coming actually does count as obstructing law enforcement.
---

It deserves an answer

[Joe_dallas]

DN - For a lawyer - you have a grave misunderstanding of the right to protest.

you cant engage in unlawful activities while exercising your first amendment rights.

You have developed a reputation for being one of the most dishonest individuals posting on this site.

[Kazinski]

Actually I think there is a Blue city exception that allows unlawful activities while demonstrating.

That's how we got here.

[David Nieporent]

DN - For a lawyer - you have a grave misunderstanding of the right to protest.

For an idiot, you are very confident about topics you don't understand. But to be fair, for an idiot you also read about as well as an idiot.

you cant engage in unlawful activities while exercising your first amendment rights.

You cannot engage in unlawful activities at any time; that's the definition of unlawful. But your comment has literally nothing to do with mine, which was about her supposed "training," not about what she did on that day.

[Joe_dallas]

DN - the only idiot posting here is the attorney that believes he can fool his fellow leftists with the multitude of lies.

Are you that deficient in your legal knowledge to be unaware that engaging in illegal activities during a protest doesnt make the illegal actions legal?

[hobie]

I'm actually surprised they hadn't invoked Antifa from the get-go.

BTW, I'm the president of Antifa. Prove me wrong.

[DDHarriman]

Its the same foreign billionaire club that funds your revolutionary activity.

Antifa is just under the same umbrella you are. Subversives and revolutionaries serving foreign interests.

[Joe_dallas]

Sardumbo - Her wife was absolutely participating in the same crime as Renee Good. Denying reality only makes you look stupid.

[David Nieporent]

Sardumbo - Her wife was absolutely participating in the same crime as Renee Good. Denying reality only makes you look stupid.

Retarded bookkeeper is even less of a lawyer than he is a climatologist, virologist, epidemiologist, economist, psychologist, or nuclear physicist. And that's saying a lot.

[Joe_dallas]

DN a retarded lawyer not understanding the law. Pathetic

Just like Sardumbo - DN cant understand that actively impeding law enforcement is a crime.
Who is the retarded one? DN answered that with his juvenile response and his misstatement of the law.

perhaps David - instead of being a prick you can explain why she was not committing a crime. Man up.

[not guilty]

Suppose Ms. Good (arguably) was committing a crime -- an issue as to which I express no opinion. If so, she should have been arrested charged with that crime and tried if she pleaded not guilty and persisted in that plea.

Not summarily executed.

[David Nieporent]

Suppose Ms. Good (arguably) was committing a crime -- an issue as to which I express no opinion.

I'm not even arguing about that; I'm talking about bookkeeper_joe's claim that Good's wife was "participating in" a crime.

[Joe_dallas]

David Nieporent 45 minutes ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Suppose Ms. Good (arguably) was committing a crime -- an issue as to which I express no opinion.

I'm not even arguing about that; I'm talking about bookkeeper_joe's claim that Good's wife was "participating in" a crime.

.Impeding enforcement of federal law - how stupid and dishonest you continue to be. NG the same dishonest behavior.

[Joe_dallas]

David Nieporent 39 minutes ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Suppose Ms. Good (arguably) was committing a crime -- an issue as to which I express no opinion.

I'm not even arguing about that; I'm talking about bookkeeper_joe's claim that Good's wife was "participating in" a crime.

DN - Again proving he is the most dishonest commentator on this blog.

In spite of numerous other commentators pointing out the specific crime she was committing you chose to double down on denying she was committing a crime.

[David Nieporent]

Which act of Good's wife constituted any crime?

[Kazinski]

That's not too hard, if Nicole was committing any crime then there is a very good case Renee was her co-conspirator. Both by her own admission after the fact, and the 'Drive Baby Drive' exhortation.

But to be clear, at least right now, I wouldn't support prosecuting her, seems like piling on.

[Joe_dallas]

David Nieporent 14 hours ago
"Which act of Good's wife constituted any crime?"

That is an extremely stupid question, even by the standards that have been set by your prior posts.

Note that there have been a few dozen comments detailing the crime[s] committed by Good's wife. Did you miss those?

[Frank Drackman]

It's Mini-Apolis (more like Mini-Tehran), they'll probably dig up Floyd George, "Transition" Him to "Floyd Georgina" and have Rebecca marry His/Her Corpse at the Mall of Amurica.

Frank

[hobie]

"It's Brooky-Lynn (more like Mini-Tel Aviv), they'll probably dig up Ann Frank, "Transition" Her to "Anne Franfurter-meat" and have Joseph Goebbels marry His/Her Corpse at the Reichstag."

[Frank Drackman]

Hobie-stank shows he hasn't been to Brooklyn in the last 25 years.
And bad on me for not giving proper attribution to the "Mini-Tehran" reference, it's of course from "One in a Million" by lead singer of Guns N Roses, Bill Bailey, I mean Axl Rose.
"Immigrants and faggots, they make no sense to me
They come to our country and think they'll do as they please
Like start some mini-Tehran or spread some fucking disease
They talk so many God damn ways, it's all Greek to me"

Frank

[hobie]

This your boy holding up the flag of Palestine?

https://www.wikimetal.com.br/en/axl-rose-palestinian-flag-show/

[Frank Drackman]

Wow, Axl looks horrible, and I don't understand it, he's always been such a Health Nut.

[DDHarriman]

It's "gay marry", Frank. Marriage is natural and welcome. Gay marriage is some other government thing.

Precision in language matters.

[Frank Drackman]

I defer to the Expert in marrying Gays.
Now I'm going to break this down for you, like Nick Satan showing how the receiver beat the Zone,
See how I just effortlessly responded reflexively with a comeback that pierces right through your 8 inches (of Adipose, stop dreaming)???
That's what we Jews do, comes from 4,000 (or is it 3,000? I lose track of my Milleniums) years of people giving us shit, it's natural, like you fucking a donkey.
So put down that Slim Jim Joe, stick to yelling N-word at the N-words (see, when you're really rich, you can live where there's few if any N-words)

Frank

[DDHarriman]

You're half Jew, Frank, and its all in your nose.

[hobie]

"I wouldn't be terribly confident that Trump will walk away scot free. He was collaborating with congressmen and fake electors to commit a crime, and somebody died as a result."

Au contraire, Brett. Trump did indeed get away scot free. So why couldn't this antisemitic, marxist, narco-terrorist tranny in MN skate as well?

[Michael Ejercito]

JFK used "fake electors"

[Josh R]

The JFK slate of Hawaii electors were an honest just in case as a recount continued. Smith alleges Trump knew he lost and used the alternate slate of electors to steal the election.

[John F. Carr]

Which crime did she assist in or conspire to assist in?

The obvious candidate is 18 USC 111, forcibly resisting or impeding federal agents. Sandwich guy got off probably because the jury didn't want to find a sandwich hitting body armor was forcible resistance. Asking a jury to find that conspiring to park a car is forcible resistance is going to be a tough sell. So prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the survivor had specific intent to cause a federal officer to be hit with a car, or be in fear of being hit.

[Brett Bellmore]

I would think 18 U.S.C. § 1501. It does NOT require that the interference be violent.

[not guilty]

Brett, what "legal or judicial writ or process of any court of the United States, or United States magistrate judge" was Jonathan Ross "serving, or attempting to serve or execute"?

An administrative warrant or arrest order, not issuing from a federal judge or magistrate judge, does not meet the statutory requirement.

[Kazinski]

-

[Kazinski]

As NG said felony murder is not on the table.

She wasn't driving.

I didn't see any crimes on the video.

I'm not sure what crime you could charge her for.

Perhaps aiding and abetting assault or obstruction when she yelled "Drive Baby Drive", but that doesn't seem a slam dunk.

[Frank Drackman]

Leopold and Loeb weren't driving either.
Actually they were, (forget if it was Leopold who was driving or Loeb)

[Joe_dallas]

Commenter_XY 4 hours ago
"The MSM have been nothing more than civic arsonists with their coverage. The MSM look positively sclerotic pushing their false narrative."

Correct - I have read the NYT , ABC version of the frame by frame analysis. Both skip over (gloss over) the key frames where the vehicle is going directly at the officer and skip over (gloss over) those same frames which was when the officer is drawing his firearm to protect himself. Omission of those key frames cast the event in very different light of what actually happened.

Similarly, Jack Jordan commentary from yesterday skips over those same frames in his analysis.

[Josh R]

An AWFL FAFO. That basic truth has not changed. This woman acted stupidly, egged on by her partner (Rebecca Brown Good), and paid for her stupidity with her life

The ICE agents acted stupidly by implementing FAFO. What is their punishment? All they had to do was inform the two women they must desist in partially blocking traffic or face arrest (*). Instead, they invoked the FAFO protocol with "get out the car, get out the fucking car."

(*) Do federal agents have jurisdiction over local laws (the agents were not blocked from proceeding as other vehicles were going around her). If not, or even if they did, how about calling in local police to handle the situation? No, we can't do that. We live by FAFO.

[Life of Brian]

All they had to do was inform the two women they must desist in partially blocking traffic or face arrest

Do you genuinely believe 1) the two women were at all confused that they were breaking the law, and 2) the ICE agents had any reason to remotely think they might be confused?

[Josh R]

Of course they knew they breaking the law. The problem is the ICE agents went to DEFCON 1 far too quickly.

[Life of Brian]

What is the correct number of minutes to tolerate brazen and calculated obstruction of both traffic and law enforcement efforts before detaining the brazen and calculated actor(s)?

[Josh R]

Minutes. But the clock begins to tick after law enforcement warns them.

[Life of Brian]

They had many, many minutes before the truck arrived, including a first round of interactions with the agents who tried to go around her and got stuck. Have you not yet seen the "come at us, go ahead -- go get yourself some lunch big boy" video?

And where is this supposed requirement for a warning before apprehending a criminal (much less one brazenly taunting LEOs as they commit those crimes) codified in the law?

[Josh R]

There were a few minutes between the initial interaction and the truck. Were the women told to leave? Were they told they would be placed under arrest if the didn't? Even assuming both are true, did the agents who interacted with them inform the agent who came rushing out the truck like George Brett after he was called out for the pine tar bat?

Of course a warning isn't required. But, it is an unnecessary escalation to not warn unless there is something grave at stake. Obstruction and taunting is not grave.

Again, this reached DEFCON 1 way too soon because that's the way ICE operates. It's wrong even if it is legal.

[Life of Brian]

Of course a warning isn't required.

Right. Which is why all your questions about whether certain magic words were first spoken, informing the women about facts you agree they already knew full well, are completely irrelevant.

Again, this reached DEFCON 1 way too soon

You said they needed minutes; they got minutes. They knew full well they were breaking the law by obstructing both traffic and ICE's operations -- that was their entire purpose of being there. And they made a series of conscious decisions to stay there and continue their obstruction as the situation escalated, right up to cheekily waving around the ICE truck rather than trying to leave right then.

That's plenty more chances than the zero required before detaining them (which, let's be reality-based, is routine LEO activity, not "DEFCON 1").

[Josh R]

The fact a warning was not required does not make my questions irrelevant. Again, even if it was legal, it was wrong.

The DEFCON1 was "get out of the fucking car" (*) with the agent reaching inside the window while trying to open the car door. Missing was "you are under arrest, please step out of the vehicle," followed by getting out of her way completely if she fled (you got the plate number, arrest her later).

It wasn't "fucking" in and of itself that was DEFCON1. It was the hyper-aggressive tactics captured by the language.

[Life of Brian]

Yeah, if you're just saying it wasn't ideal, I actually agree with that. But those that want his scalp (which I took you to be, but maybe I misread) need to get to unlawful, not unideal.

In any event, while I agree in an ideal world they certainly could have been more pleasant and professional, your uber-detailed checklists of things they supposedly should have done first seem to me just hindsight-loaded and unrealistic. "Get out of the car" is a perfectly lawful and sensible order even if you're not right then under arrest, and telling someone behind the wheel that you're about to arrest them just invites them to flee. That's why they get the driver out of the car first, and go from there.

[Josh R]

I do not want anyone's scalp. Although I don't have enough information to be sure, I think the shooter is likely not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

However, Trump and company are claiming 1) Goode tried to run over the agent, and 2) only Goode is to blame. The former is a blatant lie. The latter is a nonsensical opinion.

[Kazinski]

She still had minutes to make a decision.

She stopped the clock when she put the car in drive.

The problem seems to be the agents didn't defer to their White Female Privilege. Which her organization specifically tried to weaponize.

ICE couldn't touch them, if they did, a jury wouldn't convict them. But they took it too far.

[Josh R]

DEFCON 1 ("get out of the fucking car") happened while the clock was still running.

Weaponize? In what manner?

[Life of Brian]

"Get out of the car" is an utterly routine up-front order to a driver being detained for breaking the law (ironically, to prevent exactly what ended up happening here).

Are you really suggesting inserting the word "fucking" is all it took to get from routine to "DEFCON 1"?

[Michael Ejercito]

They had the authority to arrest people obstructing their operations.

[John F. Carr]

What is the source of that authority? As I've written, I don't believe merely being in the way violates 18 USC 111. There may be a regulation requiring all present to be nice to ICE. I haven't seen it.

[Joe_dallas]

John F. Carr 3 minutes ago
"What is the source of that authority? As I've written, I don't believe merely being in the way violates 18 USC 111. "

Merely being in the way may not violate 18 usc 111.
But why play the same game as NG or Nelson?
Yet you are applying facts that dont exist in this case which means your citation of 18USC 111 isnt relevant.

[John F. Carr]

I am replying to the repeated assertions that being in the way is a crime. If I drop a concrete barrier across the road before agents arrive, I haven't acted "forcibly" against them within the meaning of 18 USC 111. If I have committed a different arrestable offense under federal law it's up to the proponent of arrest to cite the law. Maybe there is such a law. I have not seen it.

[Joe_dallas]

As stated - you are playing the same game as NG & Nelson. Using facts not in existence to argue the statute doesnt apply.

[John F. Carr]

I am using the facts offered in this thread. Consider them a hypothetical if you like. She's sitting there parked and an agent wants to arrest her for that and not for trying to run him over.

As for some objective truth, this is another in a long line of cases where police shoot drivers dead and I don't think the details matter. The legal system is very protective of police officers. This is a big deal politically only because it involves Trump. So it needs to be called a heroic act or murder depending which side you are on.

[Brett Bellmore]

You seem to be laser focused on 18 USC 111. Take a gander at 18 USC 1501.

[John F. Carr]

18 USC 1501 criminalizes willful attempts to interfere with execution of judicial warrants. Immigration warrants are not judicial warrants.

[jay.tee]

[..]
Whoever assaults, beats, or wounds any officer or other person duly authorized, knowing him to be such officer, or other person so duly authorized, in serving or executing any such writ, rule, order, process, warrant, or other legal or judicial writ or process—
[…]

Looks like it applies much broader, beyond just judicial warrants.

[Joe_dallas]

John F. Carr 25 minutes ago

"I am replying to the repeated assertions that being in the way is a crime. If I drop a concrete barrier across the road before agents arrive, I haven't acted "forcibly" against them within the meaning of 18 USC 111."

Your legal analysis is both shallow and wrong. Your aforementioned example is directly impeding and interfering with law enforcement.

(a)In General.—Whoever—
(1)forcibly assaults, resists, opposes, impedes, intimidates, or interferes with any person designated in section 1114 of this title while engaged in or on account of the performance of official duties; or

[Josh R]

Perhaps. But, is partially blocking traffic obstructing their operations (they could go around them)? And again, assuming you are right, the FAFO tactics are not warranted.

[Dr. Ed 2]

No.

She was a tactical threat in and for a reason that a lot of people are notthinking about. You want a secure bubble if you are in a hostile environment, particularly if you cannot rely on the local police to come to your assistance.

You must control your perimeter at all cost — the absolute last thing you want are hostile parties inside your bubble. What ICE appears to have done is what I would have done, have the first vehicle go through the roadblock and stop on the far side to provide back up and then have the second vehicle confront the roadblock.

This leaves the vulnerable part of your bubble, or convoy, further back where it is safe while you deal with whatever you’re confronted with. If they had let her into the middle of their convoy, presumably let more people further down the down the street into the middle of the convoy, those unfriendly vehicles would have the opportunity to break up the convoy, to block off parts of it, and prevent the vulnerable parts of it for being supported by the rest if things got ugly.

A presidential motorcade is the classic example of this, the USSS simply isn’t going to let random vehicles get into the middle of that.

[Josh R]

Again assuming you are right for the sake of argument about impeding operations, the FAFO tactics aren't warranted.

[not guilty]

"They had the authority to arrest people obstructing their operations."

And assuming <arguendo that is correct, it is a damned shame that that didn't happen.

[not guilty]

Kazinski, one reason we build courthouses is so that juries can determine disputed facts in criminal cases. If Renee Nicole Good committed a crime, she was entitled to the Sixth Amendment right to have a jury determine whether the prosecution could prove every essential element thereof beyond a reasonable doubt. Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 478 (2000); In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 361 (1970).

Jonathan Good, by summarily executing her, forever deprived Ms. Good of that fundamental constitutional right. He deserves the opportunity to explain his conduct, should he choose to do so, to twelve men and women of the United States District Court of the District of Minnesota.

[not guilty]

Correction: that should read:

Jonathan Ross, by summarily executing her, forever deprived Ms. Good of that fundamental constitutional right. He deserves the opportunity to explain his conduct, should he choose to do so, to twelve men and women of the United States District Court of the District of Minnesota.

[Michael P]

Criminals who use deadly force against others waive their right to be free of responsive deadly force. Good did that -- no one else deprived her of that right.

One can easily realize that by contrasting the actual Sixth Amendment with "not guilty"'s misrepresentation of the same.

[Frank Drackman]

I thought Shysters were supposed to be good with words? You couldn't even get the Heroes name right.

[Joe_dallas]

not guilty 1 hour ago
"Jonathan Ross, by summarily executing her, "

You stated that you have seen any of the videos - Yet you make an absolute BS statement.

[DDHarriman]

What disputed facts are you relying on in your determination it Good was summarily executed and why aren't you waiting a jury to resolve them for you before drawing your conclusion? Doesn't Ross deserve that deference from you?

[Joe_dallas]

DDH - Its the whiplash that caused NG's injuries which is why his law license is on disability status. As noted elsewhere today, it likely explains his inability to apply his legal analysis to the actual facts in this case.

[DDHarriman]

Whiplash?

Dang, I thought it was retardation. After being on this blog for awhile, I'm beginning to think I was completely wrong. Being a retard doesn't appear to be disqualifier, it might be even a requirement for the Bar.

[not guilty]

Joe_dallas quite obviously doesn't care whether he tells the truth or not. I have never experienced a "whiplash" injury. (For the benefit of the ignorant, see https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/11982-whiplash )

I sought disability inactive status because clinical depression was adversely affecting my ability to represent clients. When that condition improved through medication and therapy, I simply elected to retire rather than seek reinstatement to active status.

[not guilty]

"What disputed facts are you relying on in your determination it Good was summarily executed and why aren't you waiting a jury to resolve them for you before drawing your conclusion? Doesn't Ross deserve that deference from you?"

If Mr. Ross is charged with a crime, whether under 18 U.S.C. § 242 or otherwise, he is of course entitled to a jury trial if he pleads not guilty and persists in that plea. The burden would be on the prosecution to prove every essential element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Civil rights violations are notoriously hard to prove in a criminal prosecution.

That, however, is no impediment to my pointing out as a blog commenter what legal authorities potentially apply. It is undisputed that the woman was shot to death by an agent of the federal government. It is undisputed that he acted under color of law. That is a deprivation of life -- whether it was without due process not is likely to be disputed.

It is disputed as to whether Ms. Good had committed a crime. If so, it is undisputed that she was denied the protections available to accused persons under the Sixth Amendment, to-wit: the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against her; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in her favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for her defense.

Jonathan Ross is alive and entitled to those rights, even though he saw to it that Renee Nicole Good is not.

[Kazinski]

But once you are on a jury then you are presented the evidence, and required to consider it carefully before making a decision, or expressing an opinion.

Keeping yourself pure of factual contamination serves no purpose If you are going to express your opinion before you have any inkling of the facts.

[not guilty]

I would undoubtedly not be qualified to sit as a juror in judgment of Jonathan Ross, in that I could not be impartial. Which has not a damned thing to do with commenting on this blog.

[Mr. Bumble]

Get some sleep. 3:00 AM will be coming soon enough to start all over again.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Not guilty, he was trying to keep his people from being not dead.
This is pretty much why you do not want to have vehicles able to stop your convoy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJlmYy-mAZY

Now that was Columbia and not Minnesota, but once the police are told not to back you up, which is what they have been told, you have to be aware that this sort of thing could happen to you.

[not guilty]

Uh, the Clear and Present Danger movie was set in Colombia, not Columbia.

[Malika la Maize]

Amateur examinations of various videos are thin gruel, instead relevant experts examining them, along with other evidence and with standards of police conduct (including any warranted deference to the in the moment realities of the profession) understood by the relevant professionals in the field should all be part of an investigation of any LEO fatal shooting. The findings of such investigation should be given to relevant prosecutors who should then use their professional judgment to decide if it should go to a grand jury or trial

[Commenter_XY]

Queenie, the video does not lie. Good made a BAD decision. Now she is dead. Hopefully this will not be repeated.

[Malika la Maize]

As Kerr’s post or the Rodney King trial suggests the “obvious” conclusions drawn from videos can be facile and misleading. You need professionals and experts to closely examine them along with all other relevant evidence.

[Joe_dallas]

Experts to tell us what seen in the video is false?

Experts to tell us that Good was turning right and never at the officer

Even though the video clearly shows the car was initially going straight at the officer as it began its acceleration.

[Kazinski]

You should address your comments to Frey and Walz, they were calling it murder before even the first video was out, when there were no facts available at all just unreliable and conflicting witness statements.

[Frank Drackman]

As "Toad"'s friend said to him in "American Graffiti"
"Man, what a waste of Machinery"
I've got a more apropos Eastwood Quote

"Dyin' ain't much of a living, Boy" (HT J. Wales)

Frank

[Michael P]

Good's behavior made it perfectly clear that knew she was committing a crime and was being lawfully arrested by ICE agents.

A judge would be compelled to dismiss any charges against Ross rather than waste a jury's time with a trial.

[not guilty]

Good's behavior made it perfectly clear that knew she was committing a crime and was being lawfully arrested by ICE agents.

A judge would be compelled to dismiss any charges against Ross rather than waste a jury's time with a trial.

As I said, If Renee Good was committing a crime, arrest her and afford her due process, up to an including a jury trial if she chose to exercise that right.

Because Jonathan Ross summarily executed her, there is probable cause to believe that he violated 18 U.S.C. § 242 by willfully depriving her of life without due process of law contrary to the Fifth Amendment and by willfully depriving her of her Sixth Amendment rights, including but not limited to her right to a jury determination of whether she had committed a crime.

Should he be charged with that crime, Mr. Ross is still in a position to exercise the same constitutional rights that he denied Ms. Good.

[Michael P]

There is something vaguely resembling probable cause if one ignores the evidence like you have, at least. I do not think going off half-cocked and uninformed is how the law works, in contrast to our leftist commenters.

[rswallen]

I would disagree that Ross "summarily executed" her. People acting in self-defence aren't summarily executing their would-be assailant; they are just defending themselves. He defended himself, and in the course of that defence, she died. Sure, it might (and perhaps should) be the case that this goes to trial before a jury, but this wasn't summary execution.

[Bwaaah]

Little, carefully chosen mis-speaks like that reveal NG's smallness. It's not worth wading through his legal reasoning when you know that's what guides it.

It's always well-formatted, though.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

It is a stretch, given the evidence available, that he was "acting in self-defense." He was not "just defending himself."

The term "summarily executed" is colloquial, but the evidence suggests he recklessly used lethal force and that was the net result.

[Mr. Bumble]

..."summarily executed"... is illustrated by the famous (infamous) picture from Vietnam of a VC at the moment his head is exploding.
Good was not murdered or executed.

[grb]

Mr. Bumble : "summarily executed"... is illustrated by the famous (infamous) picture from Vietnam of a VC at the moment his head is exploding."

So that's the mental image of "summarily executed" to you, huh? Then you must be really be disgusted with Ross' actions. As a reminder, he did this:

1. Shot at Ms Good three times and was in zero personal danger with all three. I saw another video analysis yesterday from USA Today, but it concluded the same as all the others. There is video from behind the car and it shows clear space between the killer and his victim's car with her auto pulling away. Another officer is between Ross and the camera but you can see all four legs and the car edge. And there is already significant open space between Ross and the car before his first shot. The argument Ross needed to murder because his life was in danger falls apart with just that one image. Since Good's car was already pulling away from Ross, he could only squeeze his first murder attempt in the very corner of the windshield. It's possible the shot didn't even hit her.

2. So then Ross went gangland-execution-style with two more shots, fired at Good's head point-blank range thru the open driver's side window as the car drove by. And even rightwingers can't weasel fast, deep, and wide enough to find any "personal danger" in those shots. They were pure murder. Ross was angry. So he killed.

3. And it's a close match, isn't it? The Vietnamese was shot in the head close-range as an act of ruthless murder, even though he posed no danger to his killer. Good was shot in the head close-range as an act of ruthless murder, even though she posed no danger to her killer. The two are much more alike than different.

[Kazinski]

BBC says all three of Ross's shots were within .7 seconds. If that first shot was legal then all 3 were.

It seems to me it was actually quicker than that, but I will defer to them.

And of course that illustrates how fast she was accelerating he was 3 feet in front of her car when she floored it, and her window was at least 6' back of the front of the car.

[Mr. Bumble]

You be you, but I'll stand by my statement that Good was not summarily executed nor murdered.

[DDHarriman]

>Because Jonathan Ross summarily executed her,

Support thus claim.

[Joe_dallas]

Its typical fact free commentary from NG. Forgive him, his suffers from a mental illness caused by whiplash.

[Mr. Bumble]

Hope he had a good lawyer.

[Joe_dallas]

quite a few ambulance chasing lawyers available. I am sure NG knows quite a few and based on his history, he would be quite willing to provide additional revenue stream for those attorneys via his disability claim.

[not guilty]

"Its typical fact free commentary from NG. Forgive him, his suffers from a mental illness caused by whiplash."

Putting aside that I have never sustained a whiplash injury, where do you get the idea that such an injury, if it does occur, causes mental illness, Joe_dallas? https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/11982-whiplash

You beclown yourself here routinely.

[Joe_dallas]

You regular demonstrate you suffer from a severe case of mental whiplash- Why get pissed at others for your illness.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"As I said, If Renee Good was committing a crime, arrest her and afford her due process, up to an including a jury trial if she chose to exercise that right."

Weird, that's exactly what I said about Ashli Babbit.

[Joe_dallas]

NG -
Why omit any reference in your commentary to the period of time where Good is driving her vehicle directly at the officer. Your intentional omission of that key fact destroys your legal analysis.

[Kazinski]

It wasn't really intentional, other than intentional ignorance.

When you are intentionally unaware of the facts, you can't be expected to conform your opinion to the facts, which makes any discussion of his opinion a waste of time.

That's a fact.

[CountmontyC]

The ICE agents were attempting to arrest her when she attempted to flee in recklessly dangerous manner putting Agent Ross in danger. We know this because the videos show the ICE agents approaching her vehicle ( and yes they were wearing uniforms identifying them as ICE agents) and giving her a clear and legal command to exit the vehicle. It is at this point that she puts her vehicle in reverse to back up a few feet and then putting her vehicle in forward gear whereupon she hits the gas pedal hard ( as evidenced by her vehicle's wheels spinning rapidly) which then causes her to accelerate forward and hit Agent Ross. At this point Ross is quite allowed to defend himself from assault up to and including ending the life of his assailant.

[Sarcastr0]

You really need to get with the other boot lockers here to get your story straight about what’s obviously happening on the video.

This is like the third incontrovertible story I’ve heard.

[TwelveInchPianist]

I don't know what the boot lockers are saying, but CountmontyC's recitation is what we see on the video, and what people have consistently been saying happened.

[Life of Brian]

This is the same tactic as the other day, when he announced out of the blue that a bunch of us had backed off her having hit the gas hard. Just trying to concoct dissent so he can pretend the videos aren't clear without actually having to take a position on why.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Yeah, we didn't see her foot as she stomped on the gas, we just saw her vehicle accelerate rapidly.

[CountmontyC]

What is your version of what occurred?

[Sarcastr0]

Same as the consensus outside of MAGA. She was not a threat, and got killed by an ICE thug for being a non compliant bitch.

There aren’t multiple stories over here. You all are the ones flailing and insisting it’s separate versions are all super clear.

[CountmontyC]

You base your conclusion that she wasn't a threat on what? She clearly accelerated her vehicle and hit the ICE agent after she was clearly ordered to exit her vehicle. This after several minutes of obstructing traffic.

[Bob from Ohio]

"consensus outside of MAGA"

Finally, an admission that both sides are just following their tribe. Based solely on their view towards immigration enforcement or Trump,

[Sarcastr0]

You think there are only 2 sides in the US: MAGA and not MAGA? That's the real admission here.

Around here there's you, Kaz, LoB, TheAntisemite, Amos, TiP, Joe_dalls, Bumble, Michael P, Brett, and Ed.

All of you reflexively defend Trump against everything.

And all of you all insist things are super clear and absolve ICE, but can't keep your stories straight.

Meanwhile, tons of other people who encompass worldviews from libertarianism, conservativism, liberals, leftists, or just no labels hodpodges? All of them manage to have the same story.

I'm a bit surprised at the depths the 10 of you were immediately willing to go, but that's about it.

[Sarcastr0]

And who could forget Riva and Commenter. Truly credits to your cause.

[Magister]

So that makes twelve? Kind of like The Dirty Dozen except they're all crazy. Or 12 Angry Men except they're all angry bigots.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"All of you reflexively defend Trump against everything."

It seems like just yesterday we were all fucking the age chicken.

[Kazinski]

What depths?

While that sentiment has not been universal, I've been consistent that Nicole Good, and her partner, were misguided activists out of their depth who made a tragic mistake. As Renee good said immediately after the shooting:
“I made her come down here, it’s my fault,” the woman said through sobs. “They just shot my wife.”

Its difficult not to have sympathy for all 4 victims, Nicole, Renee, their son, and Officer Ross.

But speaking of depths, what about Frey, Walz and legions of others, including here, immediately calling Ross, Trump, Noem, Hohman murderers with blood on their hands immediately with no evidence whatsoever?

[TwelveInchPianist]

"Meanwhile, tons of other people who encompass worldviews from libertarianism, conservativism, liberals, leftists, or just no labels hodpodges? All of them manage to have the same story."

Sarcastro has really convinced himself that everyone he doesn't consider "MAGA" is thinking in lockstep on this incident? Somehow, I can't say I'm surprised.

[Kazinski]

An evidence free story.

Sarcastro's feelz.

[Joe_dallas]

None of use are defending Trump - which goes to show how deep your TDS runs through your head.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"consensus outside of MAGA"

"I can't believe Nixon won! I don't know anyone who voted for him."

[hobie]

Watching the lady make a three-point turn at 2mph was almost more than I could take. It was terrifying!

[DDHarriman]

Did you see the officer get hit in the video you watched?

[hobie]

Oh? Did he get hit now?

I look back at my life and think about all the times I got grazed by a car going 2mph, and I think, "You know, I could have shot all them motherfuckers."

I consider all of it as lost opportunities.

[Joe_dallas]

the car wasnt going 2mph. But that never stopped you (or any other delusional leftist ) from lying.

[Kazinski]

She could have kept in reverse until she jumped the curb, and not gotten shot because their wasn't anyone behind her.

You notice on the video he didn't start pulling his gun until she shifted to drive.

As for her speed, she was on a pace of 0-60 in less than 6 seconds, She could have been going 2 mph when her front wheels rolled over him and almost 20 when her rear wheels went over him if he didn't get snagged up in the undercarriage,

He was lucky he had been walking to her left while facing her so he was hit in the chest and bumped free by the corner of the hood.

It wasn't because of any care she was taking when she floored it with him directly in front of her.

[Joe_dallas]

Yes accelerating at him, granted she turned to the right, but that was after about 6/10 of a second going directly at him.

20mph is about 3 ft in 1/10 of a second.

[Joe_dallas]

NG Great job - Applying a legal analysis based case law and facts that are not present in this case.

[DDHarriman]

This is my favorite: "summarily executed".

He's such a preening poseur.

[Krychek_2]

It strikes me that cases like this are why juries were invented. The people here have widely varying opinions about whether the shooting was justified, and under our system, a jury should decide. Show the video to a grand jury and let it decide whether to indict. If they do, show it to a trial jury and let it decide whether to convict. Understand that no matter what happens some people will be disappointed in the outcome. And even in Minneapolis juries tend to be pro law enforcement so he would start off with the odds in his favor.

He should not be given immunity because he's law enforcement. The same laws should apply to them that apply to the rest of us. But how the law should be applied is why we have juries.

[Kazinski]

No.

Prosecutors don't bring cases where there is no evidence of a crime.

Probable cause that a crime occurred is the very first step, and this case won't clear that bar.

[not guilty]

"It strikes me that cases like this are why juries were invented. The people here have widely varying opinions about whether the shooting was justified, and under our system, a jury should decide. Show the video to a grand jury and let it decide whether to indict. If they do, show it to a trial jury and let it decide whether to convict."

That is a splendid idea.

While Kazinski self-servingly kvetches that there is no probable cause here as to Mr. Ross, different inferences can be drawn by different persons who have viewed the same video presentation. (Professor Kerr had an excellent post on this a few days ago. https://reason.com/volokh/2026/01/08/the-minnesota-ice-videos-and-they-saw-a-protest/?comments=true#comments )

Probable cause is a low threshold. SCOTUS has described probable cause as a flexible, context-dependent concept. In Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 241 (1983), the Court characterized it as a “practical, non-technical” standard based on “factual and practical considerations of everyday life on which reasonable and prudent men act.”

A charge of deprivation of rights under color of law under 18 U.S.C. § 242 requires four essential elements (taken here from Federal Pattern Criminal Jury Instructions of the Seventh Circuit at page 242:

1. The defendant was acting under color of law; and
2. The defendant deprived [name of victim] of his right to [name of right], which is secured or protected by the [[Constitution] [and] [laws]] of the United States; and
3. The defendant acted willfully, meaning he intentionally deprived [name of victim] of this right. The government is not required to prove that the defendant knew this right was secured by the [[Constitution] [and] [laws]] of the United States; and
4. [Name of victim] was present in [name of State, Territory, or District of the United States].

https://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/_assets/_documents/7th_criminal_jury_instr.pdf

The following facts seem to be undisputed:

Jonathan Ross shot Renee Nicole Good to death in the federal District of Minnesota on January 7, 2026.

Mr. Ross was then on duty as an agent of the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Mr. Ross's actions deprived Ms. Good of her life.

Ms. Good had a clearly established right not to be deprived of her life without due process of law by the federal government.

It would be entirely appropriate to let a federal grand jury sort out the issue of probable cause here, including whether the agent acted willfully. Mr. Ross, if he chooses to waive his privilege against self-incrimination, could apply to testify before the grand jury himself.* If at least twelve grand jurors concur that probable cause exists, an indictment would be found. Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(f).

That would be far preferable to randos commenting on the internet speculating.
________________________
* Section 9-11.152 of the U.S. Department of Justice manual states:

It is not altogether uncommon for subjects or targets of the grand jury's investigation, particularly in white-collar cases, to request or demand the opportunity to tell the grand jury their side of the story. While the prosecutor has no legal obligation to permit such witnesses to testify, United States v. Leverage Funding System, Inc., 637 F.2d 645 (9th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 452 U.S. 961 (1981); United States v. Gardner, 516 F.2d 334 (7th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 861 (1976)), a refusal to do so can create the appearance of unfairness. Accordingly, under normal circumstances, where no burden upon the grand jury or delay of its proceedings is involved, reasonable requests by a "subject" or "target" of an investigation, as defined above, to testify personally before the grand jury ordinarily should be given favorable consideration, provided that such witness explicitly waives his or her privilege against self-incrimination, on the record before the grand jury, and is represented by counsel or voluntarily and knowingly appears without counsel and consents to full examination under oath.

[David Nieporent]

It would be entirely appropriate to let a federal grand jury sort out the issue of probable cause here, including whether the agent acted willfully. Mr. Ross, if he chooses to waive his privilege against self-incrimination, could apply to testify before the grand jury himself.* If at least twelve grand jurors concur that probable cause exists, an indictment would be found. Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(f).

Well, yes, but DOJ policy — not applied to Trump's enemies, of course — is that prosecutors aren't supposed to pursue charges solely because they think they can meet the probable cause standard. If they don't think they can get a conviction, they're not supposed to proceed. Barring new evidence — like finding out that he texted his buddies saying, "Yeah, I didn't think she was gonna hit me, but I was pissed at her for making me move backwards" — I don't see any planet on which you're going to get 12 petit jurors to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Krychek_2]

"I don't see any planet on which you're going to get 12 petit jurors to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."

That's probably true, although the argument could be made that trying even a losing case would bring finality to the public psyche in a way that simply announcing no charges wouldn't.

[Riva]

No, she almost deprived a federal law enforcement officer of his life by making the bad decision to use her vehicle as a deadly weapon in the course of her violent interference of an ICE operation. Try waxing poetic on the sick leftist group or groups instigating this violent interference.

And remind me, what deadly weapon was Ashli Babbitt using before she was shot in the face. Where were your Clint Eastwood quotes on that offense? You defended it, didn’t you? Just a political hack clown, like the other troll jokes here. How many are paid like the left’s rent-a-mobs I wonder?

[DDHarriman]

Riva, he admits he's a partisan hack using motivating reasoning and lies.

Just ask him. He wears it like a badge.

[not guilty]

You lie, DDH. I proudly admit to partisanship, and I acknowledge my confirmation bias. That is why I support my advocacy with legal authorities and original source materials where available.

I have never admitted, and I vigorously dispute, hackery using motivating reasoning and lies.

[Joe_dallas]

NG comment -
"One thing I can contribute is my thoughts as to whether Ms. Good had a legal right to resist what she may have perceived to be an unlawful arrest."

How stupid would Renee Good have to be to think it was an unlawful arrest? We realize she is an idiot leftist, but it still takes an extreme level of stupidity to knowingly commit a crime and think an arrest during the commission of that crime would be an unlawful arrest.

[Mr. Bumble]

White lesbian supremacy is very powerful.

[Joe_dallas]

No doubt NG wants to omit key facts to push his fact free agenda

[Michael P]

She spent several minutes honking at the officers. Her passenger felt safe enough to get out and mock the officers. It was evident that those two recognized the authority of the officers and the illegally of their efforts to impede those officers. Any reasonable person would understand that the arrest was lawful. To the extent that Good did not, it was a continuation of other unreasonable behavior and decisions, including criminal acts.

[Joe_dallas]

One question is how long had she been there in the area prior to parking perpendicular to the normal direction of travel?

Second question is How long had she been parked perpendicular to the normal direction of travel.

nothing would indicate that her arrival in the area and the shooting occurred in less than a minute. Seems an important detail omitted.

[Michael P]

The video I saw of the honking showed her crosswise in the street while honking for at least a minute before the ICE agents started to approach her vehicle. I don't know how long she was there before the video started.

[Bunny495]

There was a video posted in yesterday in the open thread showing it was at least 3 minutes where she was perpendicular parked before the shooting. Interestingly the video seemed to have been edited so it stopped just after the second shot was fired.

[Joe_dallas]

Bunny and MP - Thanks

The childs school is approx 7-10 minutes away. The school starts at 9 am, which would place them at the scene at about 9:15-9:20 ish, the shooting was at 9:37 (?) so they were likely there for 10-12 minutes beforehand. Though I would like to get better info. The video's show a very small crowd forming (albeit a very small crowds / a few bystanders of course in winter) before the shooting which would indicate they had been there for some period of time.

[not guilty]

"How stupid would Renee Good have to be to think it was an unlawful arrest? We realize she is an idiot leftist, but it still takes an extreme level of stupidity to knowingly commit a crime and think an arrest during the commission of that crime would be an unlawful arrest."

Joe_Dallas, why don't we ask Renee Nicole Good what she was thinking?

You supply the Ouija Board.

[Joe_dallas]

NG - Its even more stupid of you to think that Renee Good would think it was an unlawful arrest - unless she got such an inane idea from individuals such as your self pedaling such nonsense.

[EllaWilson]

You said you did not take into account the evidence. You could have stopped there.

[Dr. Ed 2]

OK.

One: Announce their presence. Did she know that they were ice agents — yes, she was protesting them as such. QED they had announced their presence to her.

Two: Doing official business. Isn’t that exactly what she was protesting? QED…..

Three: Crime being committed. Isn’t parking your vehicle sideways in a street so block it and force people to detour through a bike lane a crime of some sort?

QED……

[John F. Carr]

Parking a vehicle to block traffic on a city street is probably not, on its own, a crime within the jurisdiction of federal agents. In many states it is not a crime at all under state law. Write her a parking ticket for having the wheels more than 12 inches from a curb. Or a noncriminal motor vehicle violation for not staying in a single lane.

The agents don't need to be able to arrest to take action. A Terry stop will do. She's supposed to look into the barrel of the gun and ask "am I free to go?"

[Dr. Ed 2]

I’m thinking common law, definition of crime, and preventing the public travel has got to be a common law, crime of some sort.

[John F. Carr]

There are no common law crimes under federal law. Most states have also abolished common law crimes.

A regular police officer probably could have ordered her to move her car. In Massachusetts drivers have a duty to obey directions of police officers. The catch-all crime "disorderly conduct" could also apply.

[Michael P]

One pertinent federal crime would be as described at 18 U.S. Code § 111 - Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees. (In this section, "certain" is very broad.) 18 USC 1501 might additionally apply, depending on the specifics of what the ICE agents were doing when Good decided to obstruct them.

[John F. Carr]

18 USC 111 is a version of assault. Being in an inconvenient place is not a violation.

[Michael P]

Non-binding precedent (Lovgren v. Byrne, 787 F.2d 857 (3d Cir. 1986)) says that the classic elements of assault are not necessary to satisfy "forcibly" in this kind of context.

[John F. Carr]

The federal officer in that case was climbing a ladder towards an angry man, considered himself in a vulnerable position, and testified that he feared being harmed if he reached the top where he was to perform his duty as a fish cop. At common law a threatened battery is an assault.

[Dr. Ed 2]

I thought there was no federal common law,

[John F. Carr]

There are no common law crimes. The courts still look to common law to fill gaps or resolve ambiguities.

Without a statute courts would not consider assault a federal crime. If Congress criminalizes "assault" the courts will assume Congress meant what was known as assault under the common law.

[not guilty]

Michael P, as I asked Brett upthread, what "legal or judicial writ or process of any court of the United States, or United States magistrate judge" was Jonathan Ross "serving, or attempting to serve or execute"?

An administrative warrant or arrest order, not issuing from a federal judge or magistrate judge, does not meet the statutory requirement.

One rule of parsing criminal statutes is don't attempt to do so with your head up your ass.

[Michael P]

It might have been an arrest warrant, deportation order, or anything similar. That is why I explicitly said the applicability of 18 USC 1501 would depend on what they were doing.

I would advise you to remove your head from your ass, but you have never managed it before.

[Estragon]

“block traffic”

In the video I saw, the shooter actually drives around and passes Ms Good’s car. So at best you could say partially blocked, right? Did you see different?

[Dr. Ed 2]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJlmYy-mAZY

[Armchair]

" Whether Ms. Good had a legal right to resist what she may have perceived to be an unlawful arrest."

What she "perceived" as an unlawful arrest? Yeah....

"I don't believe ICE has the authority to arrest me, so I have the right to resist them"
"I don't believe non-Muslims have the right to arrest me, so I have the right to resist them"
"I don't believe that Trump's FBI has the right to arrest me, so I have the right to resist them"
"I'm a white supremacist and don't believe black officers have the right to arrest me. So I have the right to resist them".

[not guilty]

Reading comprehension -- try it sometime.

As I explained upthread, the Minnesota statute which I cited specifies that individuals may use reasonable force when they believe it is necessary to resist or prevent an offense against their person. This belief must be both honest and reasonable, meaning the individual genuinely perceived a threat and that a reasonable person in the same situation would have perceived the same threat.

[Kazinski]

And if you looked at the video you would know anyone with any sense at all would have a more than reasonable fear of serious injury or death when some floors the accelerator when you are walking about a yard in front of their vehicle, while they are looking right at you.

[David Nieporent]

And if you looked at the video you would know she didn't floor it and wasn't looking right at him, and that the car was moving very slowly.

[not guilty]

As he often does, Garry Trudeau has nailed it: https://www.gocomics.com/doonesbury

[Frank Drackman]

Doonesbury is about as funny as one of those St. Jude Commercials.

[hobie]

All the first place trophies are kinda hilarious

[Riva]

At least the creep Trudeau earns his money honestly with his tired infantile rants, unlike the feigned outrage of the left rent-a-mobs and rent-a-trolls. Maybe past time someone followed the money?

[Frank Drackman]

I give Trudeau props for bagging that Jane Pauley, who was what passed for Hot in 1979, before News Networks started hiring former Fashion Models.
She hasn't aged particularly well, but then neither has Garry(he's 77??? wait! how old does that make me!?!?!?!?"

Frank

[Dr. Ed 2]

The problem is that you really can’t write college frat house humor after the age of 40. You are simply too mature to still be able to think like a college frat boy anymore.

If Trudeau is 78 now, that meant he turned 40 in 1988. And that’s really when he stopped being funny ~~ he still political, but he’s not funny anymore. He’s not even controversial anymore, anyone remember his spring break column from the 80s that got censored? Today that would run nonchalantly, the society has changed and he hasn’t.

[Nelson]

It’s much worse to be a troll for free, like Reason’s Paleocon Idiot’s Brigade. And the worst is Riva, a paid Russian troll.

[Riva]

I am neither Russian nor am I paid for offending the delicate sensibilities of leftist hacks. It’s just an amusing distraction from time to time. And not actually too much of a challenge to be honest. You’re all fairly ignorant of, well, pretty much everything. Some of you may be paid hacks, some just students who don’t know the limits of their own ignorance, and some just TDS insane.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

"Oregon bill would speed up process to rename locations with offensive titles"

"...The Oregon Historical Society has already identified 107 locations across Oregon with offensive names that remain unchanged. Many of them include derogatory terms used to demean Black individuals, immigrants and Native American women — such as Squaw Creek in Douglas County, Chinaman Hat in Josephine County and Cannibal Mountain in Lincoln County."

https://www.centraloregondaily.com/news/regional/oregon-renaming-offensive-geographic-names-bill/article_27302773-6cfa-4e6d-8375-8291d522ec97.html

OK, I can see the first two being offensive, but who's going to step forward and say they're offended by "Cannibal"? The Donner Party?

[The Margrave of Azilia]

Here's a review of a book about Oregon place names:

"Page 118’s Cannibal Mountain entry, while not directly involving Chinuk Wawa, is a splendid example of McArthur’s careful research. Among the competing origins known to have been put forth for this name, he says it “was sometimes called Canniber Mountain, supposed to be an Indian name meaning saddle, but search so far has disclosed no such Indian word.” We certainly don’t know any CW words with a matching sound and meaning, and I’ll wager we won’t find an etymology in any other tribal language, no matter how attractive the story may be. (See page viii above!) The mountain is known locally only as “Cannonball”, which tells you something. Nobody knows how this became “Cannibal” on maps, but that’s not a very unusual occurrence. I’m impressed with McArthur’s good ear for locally spoken English, which surely helps him to have a healthy skepticism about folks freely invoking so-called “Indian” names."

https://chinookjargon.com/2021/02/23/mcarthurs-oregon-geographic-names-part-1-of-8/

OK, then, I hope that clarifies matters.

[Dr. Ed 2]

The fallacy here is presuming the name came out of the local Indians vocabulary and not that of a visiting Indian of a different language. Remember these were people whose marriage Rituals consisted of kidnapping brides from other tribes,

Perhaps someone’s new “bride” called it something in her language, and everyone else adopted it as the name of the mountain.

[Darwinnie]

Do you just have to insert a negative race-based conspiracy? Can’t help yourself?

[not guilty]

The text of the enrolled House bill is here:
https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/2025R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/HB3532/Enrolled

One question that occurs to me is, who has done the original naming of the subject gulleys, gulches, rivers and creeks in Oregon? If it is a state or local unit of government, I would think that the renaming would be government speech, to which First Amendment guaranties would have very limited application.

If, however, the naming was done by private parties or entities -- think of Governor Rick Perry's family's hunting camp known as "Niggerhead", https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/rick-perry-familys-hunting-camp-still-known-to-many-by-old-racially-charged-name/2011/10/01/gIQAOhY5DL_story.html -- a government compelled renaming would likely have to satisfy strict scrutiny analysis.

[Brett Bellmore]

Remind me what Winston's job was in 1984?

[Frank Drackman]

Remind me who Winston is

[Brett Bellmore]

He was the guy in 1984 whose job was changing the past in official records. You know, like renaming things when the party decided that they'd always had a different name?

[SRG2]

You lack a sense of proportion, evidently.

[Riva]

History is only offensive to Marxists engaged in their rewrites.

[Joe_dallas]

history is also offensive to muslims who frequently destroy historical artifacts, monuments, etc.

[SRG2]

You would retain statues of Hitler, Stalin and Saddam. Gottit.

[Riva]

Add Hamas and other islamo-terrorist bad actors to your list. I wouldn't try to erase and whitewash their atrocities, like some Wikipedia creeps and academics are wont to do, anymore than I would the crimes of communists and nazis.

[SRG2]

Would you remove statues of Hitler, Stalin, and Saddam?

[Riva]

Removing the propaganda pieces of a recently overthrown communist/authoritarian regime is not equivalent to the left’s cancel culture offenses and distortion of history. Offenses the modern left actually has in common with those overthrown communist/authoritarian regimes.

[Joe_dallas]

SRG - Are that ignorant of what Muslims have down to historical artifacts in regions they have conquered?

[SRG2]

I am not ignorant of that and I don't approve. But that doesn't address my point. Not all removals of statues and artifacts are the same - yet you appear to be arguing that they are, without considering the nature and purpose of those statues and artifacts,

[Joe_dallas]

If you arent ignorant of the facts, then why did you post an inflammatory accusation that had zero relevance and which has no bearing on anything I believe.

[SRG2]

Yes, many people really don't like it if you show that their approach leads to an unacceptable conclusion - or at least, inconsistency.

There are times when it is right to remove names, statues, etc. and times when it isn't. You imply otherwise without thinking it through.

In order to resolve the inconsistency - rather than whine about being caught about it - all you need to do is argue that sometimes it's right and sometimes it's wrong, preferably with associated reasoning.

[Joe_dallas]

That is twice you switch subjects - Why ?
To make two non relevant points.

[Kazinski]

Karoline Levitt provides some advice:

Stop what you are doing and read this…" White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt wrote Saturday on X, drawing fresh attention Saturday to a chilling eyewitness account."

"This account from a Venezuelan security guard loyal to Nicolás Maduro is absolutely chilling—and it explains a lot about why the tone across Latin America suddenly changed.

Security Guard: On the day of the operation, we didn't hear anything coming. We were on guard, but suddenly all our radar systems shut down without any explanation. The next thing we saw were drones, a lot of drones, flying over our positions. We didn't know how to react.

Interviewer: So what happened next? How was the main attack?

Security Guard: After those drones appeared, some helicopters arrived, but there were very few. I think barely eight helicopters. From those helicopters, soldiers came down, but a very small number. Maybe twenty men. But those men were technologically very advanced. They didn't look like anything we've fought against before.

Interviewer: And then the battle began?

Security Guard: Yes, but it was a massacre. We were hundreds, but we had no chance. They were shooting with such precision and speed... it seemed like each soldier was firing 300 rounds per minute. We couldn't do anything.

Interviewer: And your own weapons? Didn't they help?

Security Guard: No help at all. Because it wasn't just the weapons. At one point, they launched something—I don't know how to describe it... it was like a very intense sound wave. Suddenly I felt like my head was exploding from the inside. We all started bleeding from the nose. Some were vomiting blood. We fell to the ground, unable to move.

Security Guard: No, not at all. Those twenty men, without a single casualty, killed hundreds of us. We had no way to compete with their technology, with their weapons. I swear, I've never seen anything like it. We couldn't even stand up after that sonic weapon or whatever it was.

Interviewer: So do you think the rest of the region should think twice before confronting the Americans?

Security Guard: Without a doubt. I'm sending a warning to anyone who thinks they can fight the United States. They have no idea what they're capable of. After what I saw, I never want to be on the other side of that again. They're not to be messed with.

Interviewer: And now that Trump has said Mexico is on the list, do you think the situation will change in Latin America?

Security Guard: Definitely. Everyone is already talking about this. No one wants to go through what we went through. Now everyone thinks twice. What happened here is going to change a lot of things, not just in Venezuela but throughout the region."

https://x.com/nettermike/status/2009843044028428714?s=20

What do you think it was, a recording of Trump doing the weave at a campaign rally shifted to a subsonic frequency?

[Commenter_XY]

Greenland should pay attention, LOL. /jk

This was the Money Shot: I'm sending a warning to anyone who thinks they can fight the United States. They have no idea what they're capable of. After what I saw, I never want to be on the other side of that again. They're not to be messed with.

The MX cartels are next. Their members should prepare to die. Because they will.

[Kazinski]

There is speculation its a microwave weapon, and if that's true then protective clothing should be sufficient to neutralize it, and there is a good chance it needs line of sight to work.

India claims that China used a microwave weapon a few years ago during their border dispute.

Microwaves of course are low energy photons, between infrared and radio waves. Visible light is much higher energy but usually we handle that well, although it can have disorienting effects in the morning if not rapidly countered by caffeine.

[Michael P]

Microwaves are low frequency light waves -- usually one wouldn't call a single photon a wave, notwithstanding the wave/particle duality.

And microwave frequencies (1 GHz to 100 GHz) are a subset of radio frequencies (20 kHz to 300 GHz), although AM and FM radio are below microwave frequencies. Visible light is 400 to 800 THz, so hugely higher in frequency.

[Brett Bellmore]

I wouldn't say microwaves.

1. You could hear it.
2. Made noses bleed, people vomited blood.
3. Was not described as intensely painful.

Microwave weapons work by inducing either localized or deep tissue heat. Localized heat causes intense pain, deep tissue heat causes you to suffer from a severe fever, essentially, and become disoriented/unconscious. The amount of microwaves necessary to cause bleeding would probably just kill you outright.

This fits a sonic weapon. Sound is mechanical waves in the atmosphere, and has mechanical effects. At high enough intensity it can disrupt tissue, which would cause bleeding.

[Michael P]

Yes, this too. The guy's description of the effects read like a sonic weapon rather than photonic. Contrast with the symptoms of Havana syndrome, where the etiology is still unclear.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Brett, while I agree with you, I want it likely being sonic, in fairness what microwaves really do is used a rapidly reversing magnetic field to spin bent molecules, i.e. water.

The heat is from friction, but it’s also theoretically possible to produce some sort of harmonic vibration. That would make noise, that would be heard, and the harmonic vibration could cause bleeding and such. I emphasize theoretically possible.

[Dr. Ed 2]

I am more inclined to believe that it was a sonic weapon. Directional using constructive and destructive harmonics.

Prototypes have been used for riot control in the past 20 years, one would think that the best and most powerful version we tucked away from military use.

[John F. Carr]

Protective clothing. Tinfoil hats?

[Kazinski]

Any Faraday cage in a storm.

[hobie]

This kinda stuff makes you boys tumescent, doesn't it? I'll admit, it's pretty impressive.

[rswallen]

TIL a new word

[CountmontyC]

Hobie often thinks of boys being tumescent.

[Sarcastr0]

Calling someone gay as an insult in tyol 2026?

[CountmontyC]

So hobie brings up the subject and you get upset that it is turned on him? Btw this is not the first time hobie has accused others of being tumescent over bad things happening to others.

[hobie]

Yes, in 2024 for the Republican Convention, I accused all the hayseeds here of getting tumescent over Lee Greenwood (who with Kid Rock are probably the only two acts possible at the Trump Center for Performing Arts)

[Bunny495]

What about the Nuge?

[hobie]

Ol' Ted the child fucker (he unapologetically admitted as much)? Sure, why not.

[Sarcastr0]

He brought up boners.

You made it gay.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Describing being attracted to boys as "gay" in tyol 2026?

[Kazinski]

If they have a portable directional version they can deploy against the mullahs it will be a full on raging boner.

[Frank Drackman]

Probably Wagner

[hobie]

That Venezuelan security guard has an excellent vocabulary for a Venezuelan security guard.

[Krayt]

It did sound sketchy as hell. It's clearly a press release to lead people on, even if accurate.

[Bunny495]

I would bet dollars to donuts (queue the donuts now cost a dollar comments) the interview was conducted in Spanish and translated into English (would not shock me if AI was used to translate it). Lets give credit where credit is due.

[Kazinski]

You think it the translator had something to do with that?

Generally translators are pretty well educated.

[Frank Drackman]

Sounds like your run-of-the-mill Rap Concert.

[Riva]

Uh huh. The secret was skill and preparation. But state bad actors need not take the word of Venezuelan security guards. If they really want to test American forces again, all they have to do is fuck around to find out.

[Commenter_XY]

Iran is very much in the news, and POTUS Trump is making noises about 'helping' the protestors. This brings to mind a question.

What things can POTUS Trump do, short of military action, to assist the Iranian protestors in overthrowing the malicious Mullahs?

Provide Starlink?
Provide weaponry to dissenters?
Embargo Iranian oil?
Dox IGRC members?

[Michael P]

He could also provide information to dissenters about the locations and vulnerabilities is the regime forces.

I wish the protesters well, and hope that Iran quickly gets a new government that respects the rights of all its citizens, including meaningful consideration of their policy preferences. (I will be shocked if they get anything that Americans would call democracy, so I set the bar a bit lower for what I think they might achieve.) However, I fear that the IRGC and similar forces are too entrenched to be dislodged.

[Mr. Bumble]

" However, I fear that the IRGC and similar forces are too entrenched to be dislodged."
See what happens when they stop being paid.
One report says Hezbollah is being used to try to put down demonstrations.

[Frank Drackman]

Everybody got a plan until the Hypersonic Weapons punch them in dey Mouth

[Joe_dallas]

Better than Obama who was not supportive of the Iranian people while trying to assist the mullahs in becoming a regional power.

[Riva]

Notice the almost complete disinterest and silence from all the prolific trolls here on Iran. No interest whatsoever in real freedom fighters reportedly being massacred by Iranian islamic thugs. They'd rather focus on Gaza or their latest "cause" in Minnesota. As one commenter opines:

The leftists have found the distraction to make themselves feel good. They are shunning the biggest battle for human rights in decades, by either continuing to post about Palestine which is the equivalent of advocating for East Germany in the fall of the Berlin wall), or protesting for their “human right” to commit vehicular homicide against American government agents. The men and women of Iran are fighting in total darkness with no weapons against an army of Nazis. The silence from Western media, politicians, public figures and civilians tells us about the cancerous suicidal state of our once great countries. The West cannot afford to remain passive. It is already losing the financial support to grift for a regime that is on its last legs. Does the West want to go down with Khameini, or relocate its place among the free world?https://evebarlow.substack.com/p/help-is-on-the-way

I don't disagree with her general assessment, but I would add that many are getting paid to advance an anti-Trump agenda and there's no profit in it for them to actually denounce real nazis. Probably true for most of the trolls here as well.

[John F. Carr]

Tom Cooper reports that the illegal Starlink terminals in Iran are being jammed and VIPs have moved their families out of the country.
https://xxtomcooperxx.substack.com/p/iran-just-some-protesting-or-revolution

[John F. Carr]

To get protesters weapons, Trump could work with Azerbaijan and Kurdistan. Both would welcome the chance for border adjustments after the revolution.

[ducksalad]

Provide Starlink - feasible and a good idea.

Provide weaponry to dissenters - if your goal is to directly bring down the government with US military intervention, small arms to untrained people are not very useful and maybe even counterproductive. If your goal is to up the body count in order to justify military intervention later, sure.

Embargo Iranian oil - um, I think you're kind of behind on this one.

Dox IRGC members - Meh. They mostly operate openly wearing uniforms and flaunt their membership to intimidate people.

----
IMO the strategy should be:

1. Make sure through broadcasts, starlink, etc that the population believes that if the government falls, sanctions and isolation will end rapidly. Announce specific incentives in advance.

2. If the government does fall, refrain from exploiting it as a chance to "take" the oil, minerals, resources. Every single Iranian is taught from birth about the US/UK overthrowing Mossadegh and how it was about taking their resources.

3. There will be a huge number of Chalabi types trying to convince the US to support them and a huge number of gullible John McCain types over here ready to believe them. Don't fall for it. The MEK are outright bad people and should not be supported, in fact, much the opposite. The Shah's son has been away for half a century from a country where the average age is 34, and the Shah's old supporters are mostly in nursing homes and cemeteries.

Trump has actually done a halfway decent job with Syria. That should be the model for Iran if there is a new government.

[John F. Carr]

Reuters reports the Wall Street Journal reports unnamed sources report that Trump will be briefed about options on Tuesday. Weapons for dissenters is not on the list of options, which include "military strikes, deploying secretive cyber weapons against Iranian military and civilian sites, placing more sanctions on Iran's government and boosting anti-government sources online".

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-briefing-iran-options-planned-tuesday-wsj-reports-2026-01-11/

[Malika la Maize]

A lawsuit filed late last month took Chicago-based McDonald's to task over the McRib sandwich, calling its name a form of false advertising.

The lawsuit was filed Dec. 23 in U.S. District Court in Chicago. Plaintiffs Peter Le of Baldwin Park, California; Charles Lynch of Poughkeepsie, New York; Dorien Baker of Chicago; and Darrick Wilson of Washington, D.C., sought class-action status in the lawsuit.

McDonald's offers the McRib during limited windows with ad campaigns to announce their return each time, most recently starting this past November…

As CBS News has reported before, the notorious 520-calorie sandwich contains just five simple ingredients: seasoned boneless pork dipped in BBQ sauce, sliced onions, and dill pickles in a toasted homestyle bun. “When everything combines, you have BBQ pork sandwich perfection," McDonald's has said.

But the lawsuit alleged that fans of the sandwich assume they're biting into pork rib meat, but the McRib does not really contain any.

https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/lawsuit-accuses-mcdonalds-deception-mcrib-has-no-rib-meat/?fbclid=IwY2xjawPIuIZleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETFqWmRHVlQya1N1bjFTNlZ2c3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHsnpWdr23UirQpQiBR5tYVpQhEI-6YAJjsYL6-aCYHpbO9LW7iy9-gGLFkwg_aem_JHOMmOM2Kecon16vwxSm4g

[Brett Bellmore]

I'm a fan of the sandwich, and never assumed it was rib meat, just that it was mystery meat molded into the shape of ribs. But then, I'm not an idiot.

They don't call it a "rib" sandwich, they call it a "McRib" sandwich. That should be enough to dismiss the lawsuit.

[hobie]

Next lawsuit: "Where the fuck is all the ham in my burger?!"

[Krayt]

Where is the cheese in my cheeseburger, for that matter? Two layers, one slice of cheese. And the slice keeps getting thinner and thinner. And the bacon keeps getting thinner and thinner.

Even normal restaurants have this sketchy thin bacon born of fast food treating it as a flavoring, that they can get away with not giving proper bacon slices.

Check out the thickness of both ingredients.

[not guilty]

I haven't read the complaint (because it is unimportant to me), but if it is an action for damages, what is the measure of the plaintiffs' damages? The cost of the sandwiches that they would not have bought of McDonald's had disclosed that there was no rib meat?

That brings to mind something that makes me chuckle: grocery stores labeling their product boneless ribs. I understand the concept, but if the product is boneless, where are the ribs?

[ThePublius]

"if the product is boneless, where are the ribs?"

How about chicken fingers?

[Malika la Maize]

While the name may suggest otherwise, "boneless" chicken wings are not guaranteed to be free of bones, as decided Thursday by the Ohio Supreme Court.

The 4-3 verdict was decided against Michael Berkheimer, a patron who filed the suit against a restaurant and its chicken suppliers in 2017, after swallowing a bone from what was marketed as a boneless wing…

On Thursday, Ohio’s Supreme Court ruled that the restaurant and its suppliers were not liable for Berkheimer’s injury, deciding that "boneless" referred to a cooking style, rather than a true guarantee.

Writing for the Court majority, Justice Joseph T. Deters said, “A diner reading ‘boneless wings’ on a menu would no more believe that the restaurant was warranting the absence of bones in the items than believe that the items were made from chicken wings, just as a person eating ‘chicken fingers’ would know that he had not been served fingers.”

https://www.npr.org/2024/07/25/nx-s1-5052004/boneless-chicken-wings-ohio-supreme-court

[rswallen]

Buffalo wings?

[Frank Drackman]

They originated at the Anchor Bar in Buffalo NY (went there a few years back, have to admit, pretty good wings, but they do them the traditional way, sort of skimpy and "Naked" (or as we say down South, "Nekkid", same way I like my Women).
Didn't realize they'd expanded, but they have a branch in Loveland CO (had to look it up, was on the way to Denver)

Frank

[ducksalad]

My first encounter was in a restaurant in San Antonio sometime in the early 1980s. The person offering us this new dish claimed to be from New York and had the obnoxious accent that Texans instinctively associate with dishonesty. But I'd been trained against prejudice and I was extremely hungry so I ordered six.

He made it very clear that the name was because they originated in Buffalo, NY. That was not the fraud.

The rancid New-York-liar fraudulent lying liar fraud was that he brought parts of THREE wings that had been torn into pieces and called it six wings. I called him on it and he said with that punch-me-please accent "that's how we count them in New York".

More than 40 years later and I am still angry. Their big lie has stuck and now everyone plays along.

[not guilty]

"if the product is boneless, where are the ribs?"

How about chicken fingers?

That calls to mind country comedian Mike Snider's lyric, from Dominicker Chicken: "If the dominicker had a finger, she'd shoot us all a bird!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsVymGUrPfM&list=RDYsVymGUrPfM&start_radio=1

[Michael P]

You probably misunderstand the concept: "boneless [pork] ribs" are a cut from near the shoulder. They are not deboned meat from the ribs proper. But sometimes they are sold containing (non-rib) bones, in which case boneless ribs are neither.

[Brett Bellmore]

But sometimes they are sold containing (non-rib) bones"

No kidding. Back in the 70's I bit into a Sausage McMuffin, and laid my gum open on a razor sharp bone chip the size of a quarter. Bled like a stuck pig.

If that happened in today's legal environment, I'd have become wealthy. In the 70's I didn't even get a replacement McMuffin.

[Frank Drackman]

So you were a young bleeder? Blame your Mom's X Chromosome(OK,and your Dads), and while Aerosmith got to go down on a Muffin, you're sayin that Muffin went down on you?
So you're sayin.....wait a minute, what the heck are ya sayin'??
We're not a Bank, Brett

Frank

[Michael P]

Sir, this is a Wendy's.

[ThePublius]

Who are these idiots who sue over such stuff? Just gold diggers?

[Frank Drackman]

Gold Diggers of 2026, new Show on Broadway.

[Frank Drackman]

And I've heard rumors that Hot Dogs contain hardly any Canine meat.

[Krayt]

McRibs, McNuggets, none of this is Scottish cuisine! Origin, anyway. Cultural imperialism, though, gooooo USA!

[Mr. Bumble]

Would you like some McHaggis?

[ThePublius]

"What is the McRib?
The McRib is a pork patty, shaped to resemble a rack of ribs, and served on a bun with barbecue sauce, pickles and onions. So there's no rib bones involved; the McRib is made from pork, water, salt, dextrose and – this one wasn't on my bingo card – rosemary extract.

The McRib made its debut in Kansas City, Kansas in 1981 and became available nationwide the following year. McDonald's executive chef Rene Arend, who also created Chicken McNuggets in 1979, is credited with inventing the McRib, building on the developments in restructured meat for the military made by University of Nebraska professor Roger Mandigo."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/food/2025/11/11/mcrib-is-back-2025/87212889007/

[Frank Drackman]

So they're NOT Kosher????
Man, have I got a lot of atoning to do.

[Bwaaah]

God, as Frank Drackman arrives at the Pearly Gates: "Frank, there's just one thing I want to discuss with you...."

[Frank Drackman]

Oh, there'll be more than one, a lot more.

You could pretty much describe my entire Navy Career as
"Well, that'll just about cover the flybys."

Frank

[not guilty]

That calls to mind an anecdote about a priest and a rabbi, who were longtime friends, having a good natured discussion about the taboos of their respective faiths.

The priest asked the rabbi whether he had acted outside the bounds of kosher restrictions. The rabbi acknowledged having once eaten a ham and cheese sandwich, which he said he enjoyed. He then asked the priest whether he had always kept his vow of celibacy. The priest replied that once he had engaged in carnal pleasure with a nubile young woman.

The rabbi replied, "And I'll bet you enjoyed that even more than I enjoyed my sandwich!"

[Mr. Bumble]

...and now after 44 years some asshole and his lawyer think they found a way to get rich.
Suit should be dismissed and lawyer sanctioned.

[ThePublius]

My sentiment exactly. A quite frivolous suit.

[Mr. Bumble]

"...the notorious 520-calorie sandwich..."
Notorious, who knew? Leave it to CBS to make that clear.

[John F. Carr]

Only 520? The health articles used to call out 800+ calorie meals. Has shrinkflation hit McDonald's?

[Michael P]

I don't keep track of McDonald's, but french fries are also pretty calorific. They might push a McRib combo meal over 800 calories even before considering a drink.

[Mr. Bumble]

Anywhere from 110 calories for kids ff to 670 calories for a basket of fries.
https://fastfoodnutrition.org/mcdonalds/french-fries

[SRG2]

Anyone who expects to find rib meat in boneless ribs, chicken wing meat in boneless wings, or indeed, decent quality meat in any fast food meat product, deserves to be suckered - or perhaps, slimed.

[Malika la Maize]

During his first year back in office, President Trump made the fight against street fentanyl a major part of his agenda, arguing that a far more aggressive approach is needed to prevent overdose deaths.

But a growing body of research, including a new study published in the journal Science, shows that under then-President Joe Biden, the flow of fentanyl smuggled into the U.S plunged, with overdose deaths also falling at an unprecedented rate.

Drug policy experts say they're baffled that Biden's team was able to make historic gains battling fentanyl, while failing to tell that story to the American people. "I think it hurt them because they had a story of success to tell," said Keith Humphreys, a researcher at Stanford University and a co-author of the new report.

https://www.npr.org/2026/01/08/nx-s1-5661523/biden-made-big-gains-battling-street-fentanyl-lost-messaging-war-trump

[rswallen]

If they didn't say anything, perhaps they didn't know. There is also the assumption that because it fell, it must be because of actions the administration took, as opposed to actions others took.

[Malika la Maize]

You can read the study their “assumptions” were based on here:

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aea6130

[Frank Drackman]

Alzheimer's victims can hardly remember their name, much less what they've accomplished over the last 4 years.

[ThePublius]

From the New York Post,

"Nearly 30 protesters arrested, cop injured in more chaotic Minneapolis protests after Renee Nicole Good shooting."

The Post reports,

"Minneapolis saw 29 protesters arrested and one police officer injured as protests boiled over into chaos Friday night, which Mayor Jacob Frey blamed on a “far right” agitator."

Ahem. A far right agitator? This guy Frey is either delusional, or he thinks we're all idiots and will take his word. Where are the 'journalists' asking him for the evidence that there was a far right agitator attempting to rile up the crowd of protesters? And even if it was true, which one would have to be a fool to believe, it doesn't absolve the protesters from their violent, criminal acts.

Geez, what a lame jerk.

https://nypost.com/2026/01/10/us-news/minneapolis-mayor-jacob-frey-says-far-right-agitators-led-to-nearly-30-people-arrested-during-chaotic-protests/

[Michael P]

Umbrella Man must have returned to the area.

[Frank Drackman]

He looks like Georgia Senator Jon Ossof's Evil Twin on one of those Mexican "Telenovelas", love the 3 day growth of beard, and how he's a tough guy because he runs Marathons, at least he's not a prancing Queer like Tampon-Tim.
Any chance of an MMA match between Fry and Hedge-sex?? They're going to have a real one at the White House this year, Pete would take Frys head off with the edge of one of his Wingtips.
Frank

[hobie]

"Where are the 'journalists' asking hayseeds for the evidence that there was a ANTIFA attempting to rile up the crowd of hayseed insurrectionists? And even if it was true, which one would have to be a fool to believe, it doesn't absolve the hayseed insurrectionists from their violent, criminal acts."

[ThePublius]

No, it was Feds attempting to rile up the crowd on Jan. 6, and succeeding.

[hobie]

"Hey bud."
[flashes badge]
"That's a nice can of bear spray you got there."
"Thanks. Never can be too careful. A bear could show up on the Mall at any moment."
"You know what else bear spray is good for?"
"No."
"Cops."
"You're right! Thanks stranger!"
"Welcome. Well, I'm off to see if Stewart Rhodes brought that arsenal I told him to bring."

[Estragon]

If you go back to the sedition trials, there was a lot of evidence introduced about how Stewie Rhodes, adjudged terorist, and his band of weirdos were talking about how best to rile up and direct the “normies.”

[Malika la Maize]

The Supreme Court agreed Friday to decide whether the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) authority to issue massive fines violated AT&T’s and Verizon’s constitutional right to a jury trial…

The battle stems from the FCC’s assessment that AT&T and Verizon willfully violated federal law by failing to protect customers’ location data…

After the FCC makes an initial decision on fining a company, the company can decide whether to pay. If it doesn’t, the government can sue, and the company can then demand the case proceed to a jury trial.  

Or, if the company does pay, it can immediately ask a three-judge federal appeals court panel to review it. That’s the route AT&T and Verizon took.  

Both companies argue the setup violates their Seventh Amendment right to a civil jury trial. “The after-the-fact possibility of a jury trial does not comply with the Seventh Amendment,” Verizon wrote in its petition.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/5682306-supreme-court-fcc-fines-att-verizon/

[Sarcastr0]

“ Unfortunately, this is where America is headed
———-
High civilization existed for a brief flicker of a moment in Rhodesia, a few decades where the primordial darkness of the Stone Age was vanquished. But then it returned, in the name of equality, and Zimbabwe is once again a ruin

The same happened in South Africa, over a somewhat longer timeline. Centuries of hard work and immense effort are being erased so a few kleptocrats can steal and destroy all in the name of equality, and now the nation that once had a nuclear program doesn’t even have clean and reliable drinking water

The same will happen in America if we let it. The toxic brew of race communism and anarchotyranny that turned the Dark Continent back into being such after a century of civilization has taken deep root on our shores, and will destroy us as it destroyed them if we let it”
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2010262335672475835?s=20

Musk is mask off pro racial apartheid white supremacy now.

[hobie]

"Musk is mask off pro racial apartheid white supremacy now."

Is anyone surprised by this?

[Brett Bellmore]

I'd like to be able to be surprised at people describing objecting to racial apartheid as being pro- racial apartheid, but I've encountered that nonsense too many times.

Remind me, is it the right wing that keeps trying to hold officially racially segregated events?

[ThePublius]

In case anyone is fooled by your quote and hasn't clicked on the link, I'll note that Musk didn't write that, he only retweeted it with the line “Unfortunately, this is where America is headed."

Musk didn't call for apartheid. He didn't assert white supremacy. To say so is a deceitful lie.

The author of the original tweet, and Musk, are not wrong. Much of Africa has turned to shit in the last 40 years or so. It's not racist to point out that the U.S. is on a similar trajectory.

[Sarcastr0]

Haha he sure did. His quote adopts all that white supremecist shit.

And you agree.

Racist.

[Frank Drackman]

Ewwww, so original,
and you spelled "Supremercist" wrong

[Mr. Bumble]

Hahahahaha.
Once a douche, always a douche.
Long live Il Douche, safe in Whitelandia VA.

[ThePublius]

I expected such a response from you. Playing the race card before 9:00 a.m. Eastern. Ha, ha.

[Brett Bellmore]

Can you identify the white supremacist part of it?

[Frank Drackman]

Is there any of that post that's not true?
Only part that's sketchy is describing Zimbabwe as a "Ruin", they'd have to have something worth being ruined to really be a "Ruin"

Frank

[MarkJawz]

Letting 70 IQ blacks vote for a takeover, which is what happened in South Africa and Rhodesia, didn't work so well, did it? Low IQ peoples are destined to be ruled by high IQ peoples. Africans need to be treated like children with limited rights.

[Frank Drackman]

"70 IQ"
not so sure I agree with your math work there.

[MarkJawz]

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886911001322

[Joe_dallas]

Worth noting that starting around the MWP, European and Chinese civilizations advanced much more rapidly than the rest of the worlds population (and later with the north American region) . Most of the innovations, inventions, etc for the last 1,000 or so years have been in those regions of the world.

That being said, the study from science direct whish Mark linked to likely has some validity.

[Sarcastr0]

I’m aware the open white supremecist here (Mark, Bumble, Frank, Joe) are into it. And those too dumb to realize they post white supremecist stuff (ThePublius).

But Musk has fans here not of that set. Who at least pretend to be not racist MAGA. Fans who loved to share his ‘concerns’ about speech in Europe while claiming it wasn’t about race or Nazi stuff.

Welp, so much for that. Musk is what we said he is. Were you fooled or was it cover? Whatever it is, he’s not someone to defend anymore if you don’t want to be revealed.

[Mr. Bumble]

"I’m aware..."
Given your comment history that hardly seems possible.

[ThePublius]

Get lost, Sarcastr0, with that nonsense that people who disagree with you are racists or 'dumb.' It's a transparent Alinskyesque tactic.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

I don't know if this is America's future, and I still have some hope for South Africa, but as for Zimbabwe, that county needs some major fixing. If the Zimbabwe government were White you would agree.

[Sarcastr0]

as for Zimbabwe, that county needs some major fixing
I didn't say it didn't need fixing!

If the Zimbabwe government were White you would agree.
So when I wrote 'endorsing apartheid is wrong' you saw 'I don't criticize blacks.'

What a telling failure on your part.

[Malika la Maize]

Kale, Brussels sprouts, cauliflower, and carrots—they’ve all had their moments in the sun the past few years, sprouting up on seemingly every restaurant menu, taking center stage on cooking shows, and (likely) gracing your own table more often than before. Now, according to Pinterest Predicts 2026, the platform’s annual trend report, there’s a new It Vegetable in town: the humble, yet beloved cabbage. Pinterest has dubbed the trend Cabbage Crush, and the category includes red and green cabbage, Napa (frequently used in Asian cuisines), bok choy, cone-shaped cabbages like Caraflex, and gorgeous, bumpy Savoy.

Pinterest expects to see the cruciferous vegetable take off because it checks so many boxes for where society is right now, says Sydney Stanback, the brand's global trends and insights lead. “It’s budget-friendly, nutritious, and deeply nostalgic. Cabbage Crush reflects a broader return to basics in today’s economic climate, paired with a desire to make comfort foods feel new again through bold, global flavors.”

https://www.realsimple.com/cabbage-it-vegetable-2026-11879584

[Mr. Bumble]

...and of course you will see a subsequent rise in prices of formerly cheap foods as they become trendy.

[Magister]

The Trump administration was all excited about deporting Barack Obama because of his association with Tren de Aragua, until they found out it was actually trendy arugula.

[Zarniwoop]

Is there a "cabbage crush" variant of "candy crush"? or "orange crush"?

[hobie]

I’ve watched police bodycam videos religiously for four years now, and I’ve only seen one incident where an officer fired into a moving car. It was in Minnesota yet again and three officers were trying to get a young black man out of his car. Eventually he started up his car and the female officer said, ‘I’ll taze you!’. But he starts to take off anyway and the woman fires, and the guy takes off but crashes into another car about 100 yards away, dead. Just like Nicole.

The bodycams are all on the woman officer at this point who has collapsed to the ground and is sobbing and wailing, The other officers cannot understand why she is so upset. ‘I shot him!!!’. She had pulled her service revolver by accident instead of her taser and shot the guy dead. She didn’t say, ‘Fucking bitch’. Everyone was devastated. There’s the difference. This joy or glee you hayseeds have watching people be shot or blown up is not what normal people feel. A normal officer is devastated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKZ72LUqZ8Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoM9gOT8eQc

[Frank Drackman]

Hobie-stank, the Expert on Cops Innermost feelings after a Righteous Shoot,
As someone who's been shot at in a Wah(OK, it was only 4 days, the Gulf Wah was still a Wah, Peoples got killed) that Bullshit about "Real Soldiers hate Wah" is just that, Bullshit.
The Marines I served with (For the Gazillion-inth time, I'm not saying I was a Marine, I was a Navy Doctor, the Marines use the Navy for their Medical Support (and Chaplains, Dentists, They have their own Marine Lawyers, no way they're gonna let some other service fuck their own guys up the Ass)
LOVED the 4 days of Combat, only thing they were disappointed about was that it was only 4 days and almost all of the Iraqis were surrendering and begging for Cigarettes.
I say "almost all" because there were a few who fought back, hence, the "being shot at" (I'm lying? tell my Uncle Sammy, he's the one who says it was "Combat")
Of course it had only been 7 years since the Beirut Barracks bombing, so the Marines were still pissed.
Remember a few months later, this one Marine joking about how he'd cut some Towel-heads throat with his K-bar (that's a Knife, a Big one) about like I'd joke about farting in class during Junior High.

Frank

[ThePublius]

"This joy or glee you hayseeds have watching people be shot or blown up is not what normal people feel. A normal officer is devastated."

No one here expressed joy or glee at this shooting. That's a lie. And, a normal officer doesn't break down, fall to their knees and sob when they shoot someone. And, in case it's not obvious, this woman screed up royally, pulling her service pistol instead of her taser when she said stop or I'll tase you.

"Fucking bitch" was a reaction to someone trying to run the guy over. I think it's reasonable and excusable.

[Frank Drackman]

I think he was referring to Anthony Soprano Jr saying he should "Get some Lunch"
Love how it's "Body Shaming" to comment on someone's weight unless it's "45/47/(48?)" or a Cop

Frank

[ThePublius]

"I’ve watched police bodycam videos religiously...."

You mean you wear vestments and burn incense and ring bells when you watch?

[John F. Carr]

Or with body paint and piercings.

[Krayt]

This joy or glee you hayseeds have watching people be shot or blown up is not what normal people feel.

Unless the name is Ashley.

In both cases, I am reminded of the Soviet shoot down of the KAL passenger jet which had strayed into their territory. The Soviets gave the pilot a medal.

[ducksalad]

It's Ashli. Spell her name!

[Nelson]

Ashli Babbitt got what she deserved.

https://nypost.com/2021/01/07/videos-show-shooting-of-ashli-babbitt-during-capitol-siege/

[Frank Drackman]

"About nine seconds in, the cop stepped forward and fired a single shot, striking Babbitt, who, another video clearly shows, was attempting to climb through a blown-out window pane in a panel beside the door."
So she deserved to get murdered for climbing through a window??
I'd like to say I'd cut off your Dick for that opinion, but I don't have my Loupes. (For the Dingle-Dick Hairy-mans in the Peanut Gallery, "Loupes" are these magnifying Glasses Surgeons, Jewelers, or the Tranny trying to find Hair-man's Dick use to examine extremely small objects)

Frank

[Brett Bellmore]

I don't know that she got what she deserved, but she certainly got what she should have expected.

[jay.tee]

Once again, your derangement is showing.

She was not a threat to anyone.

She wasn’t armed.

She was surrounded by other LEOs.

Byrd made no attempt to restrain her before he shot her.

Byrd, given his previous reckless actions and lack of judgment, should not have been permitted to even carry a firearm.

[Bunny495]

hobie you need to get out more. Something like 7% of LEO involved shootings involve moving vehicles, between 2015 and 2020 there were 774 deaths due to LEOs shooting into moving vehicles. AI is your friend. Your bozo posts that are easily falsified with simple AI prompt makes you look foolish and there is no way to sugarcoat it. I don't dispute someone who takes a human life feels remorse, but LEOs shooting into vehicles and peeps dying as a result is far more common than you claim.

[Mr. Bumble]

Bob Weir joins the literally Grateful Dead at age 78.

[Frank Drackman]

I bet he's not grateful now.

[SRG2]

Nordics reject Trump’s claim of Chinese and Russian ships around Greenland

Nordic diplomats rejected US President Donald Trump’s claims of Russian and Chinese vessels operating near Greenland, which he has invoked to justify his desire to seize the vast Arctic island from Denmark.

Two top Nordic diplomats with access to Nato intelligence briefings said there were no signs of Russian and Chinese ships or submarines in recent years around Greenland.

“It is simply not true that the Chinese and Russians are there. I have seen the intelligence. There are no ships, no submarines,” one senior diplomat said.

Another, from a different Nordic country, added: “This idea that the waters around Greenland are crawling with Russian and Chinese ships or submarines is just not true. They are in the Arctic, yes, but on the Russian side.”

I doubt Trump has bothered to read any of the intelligence. Why would he? He wants Greenland and that's what matters. Why he is so determined to get Greenland remains something of a mystery (though why cultists support him in this is not - nor is it a surprise that they swallowed his explanation uncritically).

[hobie]

I cannot find any personal or corporate Trump Clan investments in Greenland. So the primary impetus for Trump shenanigans isn't necessarily there. The second impetus - revenge - doesn't seem likely either.

That leaves Putin. Destroying the NATO alliance and giving Russia a friendly presence on the melting Arctic Corridor...all in one fell swoop? That sounds about right.

[OpinionsVary]

It's ego. Same with all the tasteless gold decoration. He wants BIG. And Greenland is very big (at least on the standard map projections) and getting it will make him feel BIG, like the leaders who expanded US territory in times past.

[John F. Carr]

The liberal media outlets could call it "Trump's folly."

[gVOR08]

Were there really any Chinese or Russian threat to Greenland, all Trump would have to do to stop it would be to announce he'd honor our NATO obligation to defend Greenland.

[bernard11]

Anyone who didn't previously realize that Trump is insane must surely understand it now. This Greenland business is from outer space.

The man is totally irrational, yet his supporters ignore that and continue to kiss his ass.

[MarkJawz]

At its core, the "Abolish ICE" people are really saying that they think every mestizo, Somali, and other third worlder is entitled to U.S. citizenship.

They can claim otherwise, but their claims will never stand up to any logical scrutiny.

[DDHarriman]

Their playback is so old even Aristotle write about it.

[Frank Drackman]

"Aristotle write about it"??
Are you slowly transforming into a Black Version of "DDHarriman" (DDWashington??)
sort of like the Wolfman?? (The Horror Movie Character, not the DJ)

Frank

[DDHarriman]

It was never easy for me. I was born a poor black child. I remember the days, sittin' on the porch with my family, singin' and dancin' down in Mississippi.

[Frank Drackman]

And you didn't realize it until you were an Adult!

[DDHarriman]

Mother: DDH, it's your birthday, and it's time you knew. You're not our natural-born child.
DDH: I'm not? You mean I'm gonna STAY this color?

[Frank Drackman]

Stay away from the Cans!!! He hates the Cans!!!!!!!
OK anyone who can quote “The Jerk” can’t be all bad.

Frank “The new Phone Book is here!!!!!!”

[SRG2]

They're confusing how ICE currently operates - like American Brownshirts - with its function. The way it currently operates, including things like imprisoning US citizens, conducting warrantless searches, behaving as though they have all the authority of real LEOs, etc - is unacceptable. This does not mean that the solution is to disband it. Instead, wholescale top-down reform is needed, from the removal of Gestapo Barbie to testing all ICE agents for steroid use. etc.

[MarkJawz]

Because of the fact that the problem was ignored for so many decades, there are tens of millions of people here illegally.

The only way to make any dent is to employ those tactics.

If your argument is "I'm okay enforcing immigration law, but not the way they're doing it," what you're really saying is "If the choice is to let ICE employ heavy-handed tactics or let ten million illegal mestizos stay here until they eventually get citizenship, I'd take the latter."

[SRG2]

The only way to make any dent is to employ those tactics.

IOW "The only way to enforce the law is to break it."

If your argument is

It isn't - and those are not the only two choices, of course.

[MarkJawz]

Sometimes the ends do justify the means.

Without Congress' cooperation, I don't see how you can get 12 million people out.

[SRG2]

Without Congress' cooperation, I don't see how you can get 12 million people out.

Forget immigration specifically - what should a president do if Congress won't align with his policies?

[Magister]

Trump's answer was offered on January 6th, 2021.

[hobie]

12 Republicans vote against honoring Capitol police for protecting Congress

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/mar/18/republicans-vote-against-honoring-capitol-police

[MarkJawz]

There was nothing to protect Congress from.

[hobie]

Well then, it makes perfect sense to have you interpret this shooting for us as well.

[SRG2]

Why bother to lie? We know you're lying, you know you're lying.

Old story, though. I suspect many GOP House members would now vote against.

[Frank Drackman]

History doesn't repeat itself but it often rhymes Dept.
1: The Honda Pilot Ms. Good was driving? Honda? Japanese?
gotta be made in Tokyo, Nagasaki, Hiroshima? (sorry that's the extent of my knowledge of Japanese Cities)
Made in "Lincoln" Alabama (gotta be a story behind that name)
2: the Glock 19 the Officer (Righteously) "Terminated" Ms. Good's Assault with?
Glock? Austrian? gotta be made in Vienna, maybe Salzburg? a Skilled Gunsmith in Innsbruck??
Nope, try Smyrna Georgia, which is about as far away culturally from Inssbruck as you can get.
They did produce Julia Roberts, (Smyrna, not Innsbruck) so they've got that going for them.

Frank

[Michael P]

https://www.hondainamerica.com/u-s-manufacturing/ suggests a Honda Pilot was probably assembled in Lincoln, AL.

[Frank Drackman]

That's just the fuck what I said.

[John F. Carr]

The inauguration of George W. Bush started 25 years of drought in California, but it is now over. Of course the LA Times prefers to blame climate change. Climate change starts drought. Climate change ends drought. Isn't climate change fun?

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2026-01-09/california-has-no-areas-of-dryness-first-time-in-25-years

[Joe_dallas]

Southern California has a long history of dry periods going back prior the MWP. Blaming the string of several years drought on climate change shows how poorly the advocates and the believers grasp the basics of science.

[John F. Carr]

The flood of 1862 gets in the way of the climate emergency narrative. It rained for 40 days and 40 nights and an ark would have been a good investment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Flood_of_1862

[Joe_dallas]

correct - its another example how poorly the advocates masquerading as scientists actually understand science.

[bernard11]

So sayeth Joe_Dallas, universal expert. He makes no argument at all, but feels entitled to insult people who have spent their careers studying climate and related topics.

All those scientists are fools compared to Wise Joe_Dallas.

[Kazinski]

As a California native I can attest rainfall can be extremely variable from year to year. The 76-77 drought, to the Napa River Flood of 1986, which was at least 100 year flood, those are two of the most extreme events I can recall.

Its hard to talk about "California weather" at all, You can have flooding and a very wet year in the North, while you have persistent drought and fires in the south.

California weather is somewhat unique anyway, typically all of its rain comes from October-May, and nobody blinks an eye if not a drop falls from the end of April to the 1st of December.

[Joe_dallas]

Bernard's response demonstrates how poorly leftists understand the basic of even junior high level science. They attack instead of doing the necessary homework to understand the topic.

[David Nieporent]

As always, a non-substantive comment from bookkeeper_joe. He identifies no "science" of any sort, and attacks instead of doing the necessary homework to understand the topic.

[Joe_dallas]

Bernard - Just another example of a leftist failing to recognize agenda driven advocacy masquerading as science.

Facts dont sit well with pseudo scientists and believers in the pseudoscience.

Instead of an unfounded attack - why dont your explain what statement I made is incorrect. Or is that beyond your realm of knowledge.

[David Nieporent]

why dont your explain what statement I made is incorrect.

You didn't make any statement, you retard; that's the whole point. You just said, ludicrously, that you understand science and other people don't.

[Joe_dallas]

Complete Fucking asshole - I specifically made a statement - And lying your ass off.

Bernard could not refute any the statement I made - Neither can you because the statement is factually accurate.

Joe_dallas 1 day ago
Southern California has a long history of dry periods going back prior the MWP. Blaming the string of several years drought on climate change shows how poorly the advocates and the believers grasp the basics of science.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Two favored teams decided to win after teasing the underdogs.

Let's see how it goes today in American football-land.

[John F. Carr]

The EPA disapproved Colorado's 2022 "haze" plan because it included forced shutdown of coal-fired power plants. The political dispute here is obvious. The legal aspects of Clean Air Act plans are too complicated for me to have an opinion on. Are property rights of owners of coal power plants even relevant? Under a recent Supreme Court decision property rights probably wouldn't be relevant to an environmental impact statement. Environmental impact statements are governed by a different law.

https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-disapproves-colorados-regional-haze-plan-and-supports-states-coal-plants
https://www.cpr.org/2026/01/09/epa-rejects-colorado-clean-air-plan/

[Krayt]

As I've been saying ever since these idiotic climate lawsuits started, democracy is the perfect way to decide weighing the trade offs between damage to the environment and benefits of progress. Regarding the lawsuit pushers, we love democracy. Until we don't.

As for property rights, I would assume legislating multi billion dollar installations into oblivion would require compensation. If The People, in Their Wisdom, feel such is damaging, and no longer want the century of progress from it to continue, they can Pay For It according to the Constitution.

All this assumes, ludicrously, there's no waggle fingering, illegal and legal, to back off a smidge. This is why people go into power.

[John F. Carr]

The regulatory taking doctrine needs reform but it's a hard problem to solve. In the world of carbon emissions, companies get paid not to do things they had no intention of doing.

In the recently decided case American Hospital Association v. Kennedy HHS was faulted for not considering the reliance of hospitals on low up front drug prices. They didn't want a rebate, they wanted a low price up front. That was enough to overturn the rule change to a rebate system. Extend that to regulation in general and the government ends up paralyzed because all licenses and temporary rights are permanent rights.

[John F. Carr]

For 20 years Brazilian soy producers agreed not to use former Amazon rainforest that had been illegally cleared. "Launched in 2006 as a response to pressure from environmental groups and international buyers, the moratorium is a voluntary commitment rather than law." (AP) The agreement ended this month after the state of Mato Grosso withdrew tax benefits from companies participating in the agreement.

As with Colorado's Clean Air Act plan, the political issues are obvious and the legal issues too complicated for me.

https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/soy-trading-firms-abandon-amazon-protection-pact-brazil-2025-12-29/
https://apnews.com/article/brazil-amazon-soy-production-moratorium-deforestation-pact-109dee463fdcd6931a4bb01799cba577

[Michael P]

Has this PBS article been discussed previously?

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/what-we-know-so-far-about-the-ice-shooting-in-minneapolis

In particular, I wonder what kind of mental gymnastics -- or drugs -- led to this sentence:

That officer, who appears to be knocked backward but not hit, opens fire on the vehicle.

Is it even possible to steel-man the theory that someone can be "knocked backward but not hit"?

[John F. Carr]

"knocked backward but not hit"

You write that and I see Seinfeld and Kramer re-enacting the Kennedy shooting. I think that was in the double episode "The Boyfriend."

[Frank Drackman]

Any important Ish-yew (HT R. Limbo) can be reduced to a comparison with a Seinfeld Episode.
"The Revenge"??? It's the story of my life, Thanks to "Find a Grave" I've got a whole "Bucket List" of Teachers/Coaches/Scout Leaders Graves I've pissed on/I'm going to piss on.
What I've realized? It's not as great as you think it would be.
For one thing, it's a Cemetery, and "Find a Grave" isn't as helpful as you'd think they'd be (It is "Find" a Grave)
"Section 8, Plot 42"??? not like most Graveyards have detailed signposts.
and there's always these annoying Grave Diggers, Grounds Keepers, Close Family, Hey, I'm trying to Piss here!!!

Frank "Revenge is a Dish best pissed on in the Jerks Coffee Cup"

[rswallen]

Perhaps they believe the car accelerated so fast that it created a shockwave (which knocked the officer down) but turned sharply enough to avoid physically hitting the officer?

[Frank Drackman]

Don't forget (Special) Relativity, the Honda was shortened in the direction of travel, and the Time of the Agents Shot in his Reference Frame will be different from the Time in the Departed's Reference Frame.

Frank

[DDHarriman]

This is just firey but peaceful all over again.

I expect the usual suspects will along once they get their talking points.

It's too soon, and the narrative committee doesn't meet on Sundays.

[Estragon]

The Vice President suggested publicly that US citizens should thank Mr. Ross and that we “owe him a debt of gratitude.”

I thought it might be a fun exercise for the pro-shooting side to pen their thank you notes to Mr. Ross here. Please deposit them below, we can send the sub-thread off to him later. Don’t be shy:

[DDHarriman]

Thank you, Officer Ross for remaining collected in the face of a deadly weapon charging at you. You did the right thing, and I pray your hip heals from when the charging vehicle rammed into you. I have the deepest gratitude that day in and day out you put your life on the line for mine.

God is Good. (lol someone better recognize that one)

[Frank Drackman]

"Where did the other 2 Shots go? Ammunition isn't cheap!!!!"
Joking aside, that's probably one he'll actually get asked.

[Bunny495]

I am reposting this since the first post very late last night in yesterdays open thread got no responses. It deserves more analysis than it got. For all you smart guys who know about the penalties for conspiracy what say you about what seems to be a new approach by the feds to put the screws to activists.

"As I have posted before I am probably spending too much time playing around with AI. Got this answer to a prompt on Grok (I switch between Grok, Gemini, and ChatGPT) and thought it would be of interest here.

"You’ve hit on the exact intersection where modern technology meets federal law: the use of digital forensics to turn a "protest" into a "conspiracy."

In your view, both the civil rights claim (the agent's aggression) and the conspiracy claim (the activists' coordination) can be true. From a legal standpoint, you are absolutely right—they are not mutually exclusive.

1. The Fed's Updated Digital "Dragnets"
The "tools" you're referring to are primarily Geofence Warrants and Cell Tower Dumps, which the FBI has refined significantly since the 2020 unrest and January 6th.

Geofencing: The FBI can serve a warrant to Google or Apple for a "reverse location search." They draw a "fence" around the Brighton Park shooting site and demand the identity of every device that was inside that boundary during the 20 minutes leading up to the shooting.

Tower Dumps: They can see which phones "pinged" the same series of towers. If 10 cars traveled from a central activist hub in Little Village to the shooting site in a "convoy" pattern, the tower data proves they were moving together.

Fog Data Science: This is a controversial tool used by federal agencies that buys "anonymized" location data from thousands of apps (weather, games, maps). The FBI can use this to track the historical movements of "Device X" to see if it frequently visits "Activist Headquarters Y," establishing a long-term association.

2. Conspiracy vs. Civil Rights: The "Dual Truth"
You are describing a "dual truth" scenario that often plays out in federal court:

The Conspiracy Truth: If the FBI pulls Signal or Telegram logs (often by seizing the phone of one participant) and finds a message saying, "Convoy at 4:00 AM to block the transport at 5th and Main," they have a Conspiracy to Interfere with a Federal Officer (18 U.S.C. § 372). It doesn't matter if the protesters were peaceful; the agreement to block the officer is the crime.

The Civil Rights Truth: Simultaneously, if the agent yells a slur and shoots a woman who was sitting still (as the Martinez video suggests), that agent may have committed a Civil Rights Violation (18 U.S.C. § 242).

The "Legal Trap": In the government's eyes, the conspiracy often "cancels out" the civil rights claim. They argue that because the activists were part of an illegal conspiracy to block the agents, the agents were in a "high-threat, hostile environment" where their use of force was "objectively reasonable," even if it looked aggressive on tape.""

[Bunny495]

Interesting development in the never-ending Epstein saga.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/mark-epstein-claims-new-evidence-will-finally-prove-jeffrey-epstein-was-murdered/ar-AA1U09c1?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=DCTS&cvid=6963d57b5698461494c261b7e4d01a14&ei=39

[hobie]

NEW CHARGES: At least three Florida men charged in connection to the Jan. 6 Capitol riot are facing new, unrelated criminal charges, including child sex abuse and battery.
https://www.kens5.com/article/news/local/january-6-capitol-riot-history-florida-man-child-sex-abuse-charge/67-ecc6f558-c601-4890-9cfd-0f5943d07c4b

Soft on crime lib judg...er...presidents letting violent criminals back on the streets

[DDHarriman]

Oh my Collectivist Manifesto's!! THat's it, I am converting to socialist. Can you give me contact info for the handler assigned to manage by that foreign billionaire so I can be revolutionary too?!?

That's why you posted that comment right? To recruit people to your revolutionary cause in service of foreign billionaires?

[Mr. Bumble]

...meanwhile information on happenings in Iran doesn't seem to be important to the MSM.

[Bob from Ohio]

Some good news!

https://x.com/NewsHour/status/2009777061783588876

[John F. Carr]

I watch the early version on YouTube so I won't miss the late version.

[John F. Carr]

I got mixed up about which show that was about. The late Newshour was cancelled and I won't miss it. The weekend Newshour was the subject of the tweet and I will miss it.

[Frank Drackman]

Too much Sturm und Drang on the "Conspiracy" today
I know, it's Sunday, January, it's even friggin cold in Georgia, but,
Only 73 days until "Opening Day"????
That's Baseball, MLB Variety, Yankees vs Giants at San Fran Sissy-Co's (HT M. Savage) Brown Orifice Park
Or get this, only 33 days, that's THIRTY-THREE DAYS until Auburn's First Game??
So, gonna toss this against the Wall, see what sticks, (you don't want to touch it)

"Which Bangle would you most like to Bang(le)"
(See what I did there?)
OK, I mean besides Susanna Hoffs...who this can't be right...
is going to be 67 on Saturday???
My fave was Michaele Steel who is....70??
I'd choose a 3 way (my Schlong, and both hands) with the Peterson sisters, Debbi and Vicki, I'll be a gentleman and not mention their ages, They always reminded me of the Girls Tennis Team players who'd ride the Bus with the Baseball team, and bust our Balls worse than any guy could....

Frank

[DDHarriman]

A Tale of Two Police Chiefs

One a faggy NW liberal bitchboy crying that he couldn't keep lying about TdA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nddtr1oaqZk

The other, a man with integrity.

https://x.com/i/status/2010406734351769724

I couldn't even look in a mirror if I was gay like that Democratic

[Frank Drackman]

You're wound too tight, way too tight, not good for the Humours.
Here's Doc Frankies's Rx, listen to Fleetwood Mac's "Rumours" (Rumours is good for the Humours)
all 39 minutes, from Start to Finish, like Lindsay Buckingham intended, Oh, you're a tougher guy than LB?? He used more Condoms in one day than (wet) dreamt of in your Philosopy.
It's only 39 minutes? that's not even 2 Gilligan's Island Episodes.
And when you finish that, check out "Sisters of the Moon", 40+ years and I'm still trying to figure that one out.("Tusk" Warner Bros* 1979)

* Yes, I know, Jews

Frank

[John F. Carr]

The Russian invasion of Ukraine that started in 2022 has now lasted as long as the Soviet war against Germany. WW2 was about 50 times as intense, measured by body count. By 1943 it was clear Germany was going down and the question was how fast. Neither Hitler nor Roosevelt wanted a negotiated peace so the war lasted two more years. The current war still has no obvious endpoint.

[Frank Drackman]

Like the Iran-Iraq Wah of the 80’s I’d rather they just keep fighting, like that Storm on Jupiter. Every bull-wet (ht E Fudd) the Roosh-uns shoot in You-Crane is one they can’t shoot in Germany or France,
On the other hand………

Frank

[ThePublius]

They're replacing the lead water lines in my city. It's weird, because I learned that the main and the feeders to the shut-offs were all non-lead, but from the shut-off into the house, up to the meter, was lead. There are 6,00 houses to do! It costs nothing to the homeowner, probably covered by real estate taxes or federal grants or something.

Anyway, I asked the contractor if I could have the lead, as I cast my own bullets. No problem! He gave me not only the lead from my house, but that of a couple of neighbors, about 200 lb. in all. Wow. Bonanza! I'll be busy for days melting this all down and casting ingots. There will be a lot of dross due to the dirt and other impurities in and on it, but it's still really worth it. And, I've heard this stuff is pretty much pure lead, i.e., very soft. I'll have to alloy it to harden it for rifle bullets, but for pistol bullets it's fine.

It's remarkable how heavy this stuff is. I was huffing and puffing just from putting it into the basement. I'll melt it down outdoors, but I wanted to protect it from the rain and let it dry out, as any moisture is a dangerous thing when melting; the water will boil and splatter molten lead around.

BTW, 200 lb. of lead is approximately 9,000 38 special or .357 Magnum bullets!

[Frank Drackman]

It’s really not that remarkable that Lead is heavy.

[ThePublius]

Ha, ha. Yea. It's just that you're looking at this gray pipe on the ground and you go to pick it up, and it's like - OMG! This stuff is heavy! One piece I got was probably 80 lb., but didn't look that heavy.

[Mr. Bumble]

Guess drinking that lead laced water made you stupid.(sarc)
This is just another result of incompetent government (see Flint MI). Hint, nothing is free. EPA says average water service replacement cost was $4700 (Jan. 2024). depending on your part of the country, distance from the main and other factors costs were estimated to be between $1700-$12,700.
Locally my scrap yard is paying $.55/lb. for lead, so you scored twice.

[ThePublius]

The contractor told me that if I had to pay for the replacement it would be $10 to $15k.

[John F. Carr]

ThePublius has enough lead to kill 9,000 people!

[Armchair]

"There will be a lot of dross due to the dirt and other impurities in and on it, but it's still really worth it."

Is it "really worth it"?

Lead is pretty cheap. 99.9% pure lead is just $3 a pound. You start talking about your plumbing scrap lead, and that's closer to $0.50 a pound, if in good condition.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

James David Vance doing stand-up:

But as he took his leave, he couldn’t resist one more swipe at the fake news fiends: “It’s really irresponsible for you guys to go out there and imply or tell the American people that a guy who defended himself from being rammed by an automobile is guilty of murder. Be a little bit more careful. We’re going to talk about toning down the temperature, which I know the president wants to do and I certainly want to do.”

Trump. Mr. Calm.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/08/jd-vance-ice-agent-killing-minneapolis-trump

[NvEric]

Regarding events in Iran, the notion of applying the basic American system to other countries has never, ever worked. Even Europe is bogged down in the ways of old and tired, Imperialism, Lordship, Kingship, Dictatorship, etc. .

Yet, support for self-determination is important even if it will never reach the standard set forth 250 years ago. Freedom and Liberty are still not universal in meaning nor understanding. Freedom and Liberty are unique to the USA, and then to less than a solid majority of this country.

Still unique to the Americas, the USA stands alone, and in the World still more solitary. Freedom and Liberty are radical and therefore hated and despised as much as misunderstood.

The USA can not export Freedom and Liberty. It can only hope some day these terms might be found elsewhere.

Ridding the World of despotism is a local problem. Free Americans can encourage others, but the struggle is not for us to die for or supply arms for. It's for the locals to struggle and maybe die for. It's how it works best! Violence will not be the best way to solve these local problems. Non-Violent Struggle helps too. It takes planning as any campaign does. It takes more courage. And, it will be more healthful for those who partake in removing dictatorship.

With any conflict comes a unique local result. We know how violent struggle does not result in optimal outcomes, therefore, the USA must stop that standard effort. Nor, must other means of toppling countries be employed any longer, because it does not work either. Violence solves less and less because it does not think. Think through the problem because opportunities are there. Local solutions are best.

Free Americans understand these words, know them, and live by them. We accept them and the responsibility of making them work.

[bernard11]

So now Trump wants to investigate Powell over the Fed's construction project. Wonder what Wall Street will think about that.

Fortunately, Powell responded forcefully and accurately:

“The threat of criminal charges is a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the President” .
....
“This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions—or whether instead monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation.”

I suppose the usual toadies will be along to defend this investigation shortly.

[DDHarriman]

Why do you defend $1B in renovations and possible Congressional perjury?

[bernard11]

As predicted.

[Lee Moore]

It strikes me as yuuugely unwise for Powell to respond as he did. He should have restricted himself to saying that there’s no there there and he is confident that that is what will be concluded by the investigators or if necessary the courts.

What he should not have done - as an apolitical public servant - is to allege bad faith on the part of the investigators. Because although he may believe that, he can’t know that. And alleging what you can’t know makes you a player. Now he has stepped beyond merely defending himself into the political trenches.

He should have left the accusations of bad faith to the media. Doing it himself gets himself covered in the mud of politics.

He may suspect that Trump will use the investigation to fire him on grounds similar to his attempted firing of Lisa Cook, but his counter strike is premature. Cross that bridge when you come to it. I would have advised him to keep quiet apart from letting his lawyer say there’s nothing worthy of investigation.

[bernard11]

What he should not have done - as an apolitical public servant - is to allege bad faith on the part of the investigators. Because although he may believe that, he can’t know that.

I couldn't disagree more, Lee. Trump is plainly trying to bully him into doing something he thinks unwise. It's worth letting the public know what the game is. Otherwise Powell sounds like your standard issue white collar criminal professing innocence. He also needs to let the public know that Trump is playing a very dangerous game, and a very stupid one.

It's worthwhile to point out just what a destructive idiot Trump is. He wants to wreck the Fed, wreck NATO, wreck scientific research, universities, and who knows what else.

[Lee Moore]

Trump is plainly trying to bully him into doing something he thinks unwise.

There is nothing unwise about you saying so.

It's worth letting the public know what the game is.

I am confident that the NYT, WP, networks, CNN, BBC, AP, the Senate and House Dems will all be saying what you think, if they haven't dome so already. The Misses Murkowski and Collins too no doubt.

My point is simply "Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty, and the pig likes it"

Although Trump often does things that surprise me, I don't think Trump is trying to bully Powell - I don't think he's plotting to fire Powell, and I think Powell knows it. What would be the point since Powell is on the way out anyway ? I think Trump's criticisms of the Fed are intended to create a scapegoat in the public mind, if the economy goes south. "Look I told ya these dummies - these wasteful clueless dummies - were crashing the economy !"

I am doubtful that this sort of thing would work - if the economy goes south - because the voters always blame the President for southward bound economies.

He wants to wreck the Fed, wreck NATO, wreck scientific research, universities, and who knows what else

There is much in all of these that needs wrecking. We will get on to that another day.

[bernard11]

I don't think Trump is trying to bully Powell - I don't think he's plotting to fire Powell, and I think Powell knows it. What would be the point since Powell is on the way out anyway ?

Powell is on the way out as chairman. He remains on the board until Jan. 31, 2028, and will be an influential voice. Remember, Trump doesn't just want Powell out as chair, he wants to control the board. See Lisa Cook, and the dummies he tried to appoint last time.

I think Trump's criticisms of the Fed are intended to create a scapegoat in the public mind, if the economy goes south. "Look I told ya these dummies - these wasteful clueless dummies - were crashing the economy !"

I think you're right that this is part of Trump's motivation.

[ducksalad]

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/115879509461234235

[A Japanese Student]

Treasury-State minibus is out. Interesting provisions:

Division A (Treasury & General Government, including most independent agencies and the judicial branch)
- Section 128 requires report on the Bitcoin reserve, including explanation of statutory authorities, crime victim compensation, and "how Bitcoin and digital assets would appear on the Federal government's balance sheet".
- Section 510 permanently "repeals" the sunset of Universal Services Antideficiency Temporary Suspension Act, a law ensuring the Universal Services program of FCC (subsidizing some telecommunications service, see FCC v. Consumers' Research) is not impacted by government shutdowns. The provision was last extended to December 2024. Because a repeal is outside the jurisdiction of Appropriations, the law instead says the law "shall be applied" without the termination.
- FTC gets $10,000,000 for programs under TAKE IT DOWN Act, enacted last year to address deepfakes.

Division B (Department of State)
- Section 7007: direct assistance to Syria is no longer prohibited.
- Section 7034(k): FY2025 NDAA established "United States Foundation for International Conservation", a non-governmental nonprofit established by the Secretary of State. The appropriations bill renames that foundation to "United States Foundation for National Security and Counterterrorism". However... the bill does not seem to amend the foundation's purpose, to "provide grants for the responsible management of designated priority primarily protected and conserved areas in eligible countries that have a high degree of biodiversity or species and ecosystems of significant ecological value". Everything is national security these days, huh?
- Section 7057 funds the UN Population Fund.
- Section 7070 supports the establishment of nuclear energy assistance trust funds at international financial institutions.
- Section 7071 establishes (max.) $850,000,000 fund, named America First Opportunity Fund, to "furnish assistance that makes America safer, stronger, and more prosperous by responding to crises, engaging proactively with strategic partners, and countering threats from adversaries". Funds are appropriated through transfer from existing accounts.
- "United States Agency for International Development" title is renamed to "Administration of Assistance", and the bill does not mention USAID.