September 19, 2023

CBN fluff piece profile of Gov. Noem (R-SD). Count the hypocrisies

... and smell the schadenfreude. I counted 17 sanctimonies boomeranging back into her smug face. The saddest one being when she says she thinks her late father would be proud of how she's living her life. 😥

September 12, 2023

Luke Beasely is a national treasure

This young fellow is golden. And physically brave to boot

September 12, 2023

Republicans keep repeating (vaguely) what a mess the country is in

Maybe I'm wrong for just assuming they're talking about the United States. Or that they're talking about the United States of Earth One.

Seven reasons the US economy is among the strongest in the G7

Cooling inflation, continued economic growth, and a strong labor market exemplify the sustained resilience of the U.S. economy, particularly compared with other advanced economies.
_________

While some pundits were predicting a recession at the end of 2022, the U.S. economy demonstrated its strength through continued economic and job growth. In the first half of 2023, the economy remained resilient in the face of additional economic risks and uncertainties, including further interest rate hikes, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s (R-CA) seemingly politically driven debt default crisis, and a series of bank failures. This column updates prior Center for American Progress analysis to show that the U.S. economy remains better positioned than many of its counterparts in the Group of Seven (G7) across the following seven indicators: inflation, energy prices, gross domestic product (GDP), the unemployment rate, the long-term unemployment rate, the 2023 International Monetary Fund (IMF) GDP forecast, and the 2023 IMF unemployment rate forecast.

Seriously, they trippin'

.

September 11, 2023

I think about this every 9/11 in recent years. It's time to quit commemorating it

adapted from 9/11/2022

When we think about the other days we commemorate as Americans--Christmas, Thanksgiving, 4th of July, Juneteenth, Memorial Day, Veterans Day, Martin Luther King day, Easter--they're all about public celebrations or celebrating victories in American history--reasons for exultation or gratitude or upholding our highest ideals. They're about the progress we've made or the values we hold. Even Memorial and Veterans Day, which ostensibly honor those who served have their roots in VE Day and Armistice Day, the ending of the two World Wars we won last century.

But despite the few efforts to rebrand 9/11 as Remembrance Day or First Responders Day, inevitably it's about celebrating America's false sense of victimhood. The attacks that are always the central focus are remembered for the loss, for the grievance against the world with the audacity to interrupt our first world slumber with a tiny taste of the violence that these deranged fanatics brought from their troubled section of the world back to us. In wallowing in the ever-revisited shock of those attacks, we are subtly reminded of the "need" for a widely expanded national security state--one rooted in the fear of foreigners with foreign ideas. In short, it's a day for celebrating xenophobia. It's a day for the new American idolatry of perpetual grievance. It's a day for indulging the right-wing fantasy that the whole world hates us, which cultivates the maudlin sentiments intended to make you shut up and salute the flag unquestioningly. And I can't think of anything more unAmerican than saluting the flag unquestioningly.

As a high school government teacher, I note the boredom and disassociation in the faces of my teenaged students who don't understand this unexplored but always re-dredged trauma that occurred 4-5 years before their births. This love of suffering is the same sentiment that eggs on Palestinian and Israeli kids to hate and target one another, that gets Hindus and Buddhists to gang up on each other, that inspires Russian kids to hate Ukrainians, that kept Hutu and Tutsis ready to slaughter each other. There must be a thousands pairings of longstanding ethnic or religious feuds festering around the globe. But such social ethic of resentment is an insult to the most fundamental of American values. We're supposed to leave hatred at the shores. Of course that's not fully our history; but when we fail to live up to that ideal, the contrast forms the most shameful of our failures.

One of our lesser failures occurred on December 7th, 1941. But we don't celebrate December 7th as we do September 11th. Now, where it's appropriate, at the Port of Honolulu, there is a traditional wreath laying ceremony. It is local custom, but it is contextualized. This happened here; we note our loses, but we move forward. Our nation is defined by defeating fascism in Europe and the Pacific Rim. Twenty-two years after Pearl Harbor, we were celebrating the Mercury Program and building to expand Civil Rights against the stubborn vestiges of slavery--a struggle that led to a new and virtue-building national holiday, Martin Luther King Jr Day. We weren't resenting Japan anymore; we had healed and were now moving in opposition to the xenophobic enclaves in our culture that held us back. Today, across the other 49 states, Pearl Harbor is commented upon, maybe, but not the occasion for a minute of silence, not a renewed digging out at an unhealed wound.

We don't commemorate the beginning of the Confederacy or the first arrival of slaves at Jamestown or shoot off fireworks for Zimmerman Telegram Day. Losers might enjoy wallowing in their losses and their setbacks (I'm looking at you, Confederate Memorial Day); people who believe the core of our history is behind us rather that being something to build for in the future, people who want to sulk about their lost Glory Days might be attracted to lost causes and the anniversary of when things fell apart, people who define their Americanism by loss and humiliation, from terrorism to election losses. These are the sentiments that come natural to people who want to grieve, who want to resist the changes that come to our society. The morbid love of grievance is what makes them too submerged in old humiliations to get up off the floor and fix what's wrong in the world. Too submerged in pain to build a better future.

I think we should choose the future. I think we should recognize the pain of 9/11, take care of the people who suffered serving on 9/11 and in the wars that followed, but constantly revisiting and opening up an old wound doesn't do us any good. I think instead we should celebrate September 17th, Constitution Day, the day we established an imperfect but hopeful form of government that has continually expanded to include more and more people and provide more and more opportunities for everyone who wants to call our country home. We should restrict national holidays to aspirational goals, to make this country a better place. Commemorating 9/11 moves us in the wrong direction

September 7, 2023

Florida man redefines turning it up to 11

BBC News - Florida man arrested after trying to cross Atlantic in hamster wheel vessel

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-66733230

Coast Guard officials arrested a Florida man after they intercepted his unusual hamster wheel contraption that he was allegedly attempting to ‘run’ to London.

According to a criminal complaint, 44-year-old Reza Baluchi is facing federal charges after he was rescued 70 miles off Tybee Island, Georgia by coast guard officials. The marathoner was found on August 26 in his bizarre hamster wheel contraption and asked "standard questions."

"Based on the condition of the vessel – which was afloat as a result of wiring and buoys – USCG officers determined Baluchi was conducting a manifestly unsafe voyage," the criminal complaint says.

September 6, 2023

Imagine: a man Bill Maher's age can still jump over an entire shark

https://deadline.com/2023/09/bill-maher-wga-strike-1235536973/

Maher Criticizes WGA Strike, Calls Demands “Kooky”; Nobody “Owed A Living As A Writer”
Anthony D'Alessandro
September 5, 2023

"What I find objectionable about the philosophy of the strike {is} it seems to be, they have really morphed a long way from 2007’s strike, where they kind of believe that you’re owed a living as a writer, and you’re not. This is show business. This is the make-or-miss league,” said Maher about the WGA’s demands to the AMPTP in a work stoppage that’s gone on for 127 days.

"I’m not saying they don’t have points,” Maher added, agreeing that streaming platforms should be reporting viewing data

Seriously, can you imagine the audacity of a labor union demanding that their large corporate employers share some of their record-breaking profits with the people who dedicate years of their life to honing their crafts and create the work-product that generates those profits?

Better keep an eye on those bolsheviks, Bill! They'll be demanding two day weekends and healthcare next

August 30, 2023

People are made entirely by other people.

And just about any person can eventually themselves make a whole brand new person, given the right tools and circumstances

That's really weird when you think about it

August 23, 2023

wonderful signs of flippery in 2 of Trump's cases

Fake elector scheme in Georgia:

Trump attorneys guided false electors in Georgia, GOP chair says

Former Georgia Republican Party Chair David Shafer said attorneys for former President Donald Trump, his campaign and the local GOP were responsible for urging him to assemble a slate of false presidential electors that are now at the heart of a sprawling racketeering case.

Shafer is among the 18 defendants indicted in Fulton County, Georgia, alongside Trump as part of a conspiracy to subvert the 2020 election.

“Mr. Shafer and the other Republican Electors in the 2020 election acted at the direction of the incumbent President and other federal officials,” Shafer’s attorney wrote in a petition seeking to move the Fulton County case to federal court.

To bolster his proposition, Shafer provided new documents that underscore the Trump campaign’s close involvement in efforts to assemble a group of pro-Trump activists on Dec. 14, 2020 to sign documents claiming to be Georgia’s legitimate presidential electors. Those false electors were later used by Trump allies to attempt to foment a conflict on Jan. 6, 2021 and derail the transfer of power to President Joe Biden.

Classified documents case:

Prosecutors: Trump Mar-a-Lago security aide flipped after changing lawyers

A Trump employee who monitored security cameras at Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate abruptly retracted his earlier grand jury testimony and implicated Trump and others in obstruction of justice just after switching from an attorney paid for by a Trump political action committee to a lawyer from the federal defender’s office in Washington, prosecutors said in a court filing Tuesday.

The aide — described as “Trump Employee 4” in public court filings but identified elsewhere as Yuscil Taveras — held the title of director of information technology at Mar-a-Lago. He initially testified to a grand jury in Washington, D.C., that he was unaware of any effort to erase the videos, but after getting the new attorney “immediately … retracted his prior false testimony” and detailed the alleged effort to tamper with evidence related to the investigation of the handling of classified information stored at Trump’s Florida home, the new submission said.

I may need to ask around for a good home remedy to help me deal with this sudden outbreak of Schadenfreude

August 11, 2023

Thank you for posting. I looked at a couple of articles on it, but couldn't find links to it

I immediately have quibbles with their case. It starts with this bold assertion:

Third, to the extent of any conflict with prior constitutional rules, Section Three repeals, supersedes, or simply satisfies them. This includes the rules against bills of attainder or ex post facto laws, the Due Process Clause, and even the free speech principles of the First Amendment.

Ugh, no. There's no language in Amendment 14, Section 3 that says accusations & charges of insurrection repeal or supersede core principles like Due Process or Free Speech. That's a "the power of the state is more important than the principles of liberty" argument. After all, that's what the SCOTUS sustained in Korematsu v. United States, right?

Amendment 14, Section 3
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

A republic is a government bound to the rule of law. To be subject to the restrictions placed on people for rebelling against those laws, Trump would have to be found guilty first. Did he abuse the First Amendment to hide his call for an usurpation of the Congress? I sure as hell think so. I think the preponderance of the evidence shows he led a coup attempt. But state governments can't act on the assumption that "we all agree it's pretty obvious that he did." No accusation can stand alone to supersede the asshole's Due Process. He's not convicted yet.

These FedSoc boys are wanting to jump over the 5th Amendment and the Due Process clause (which applies the 5th Amendment principles to state actions) because the 2024 primary calendar doesn't give the courts time to ensure a conviction for Trump. This is clearly placing politics over law.

The core questions the authors make are these:

Does Section Three's century-and-a-half old disqualification, designed for the aftermath of the Civil War, even remain legally operative in the first place? If so, what must be done to enforce Section Three? Does it require implementing legislation or criminal trials (or impeachments) before its disqualification kicks in?

I would agree with them on the first two questions: Of course something written into the Constitution remains operative. And yes, the different states acting to remove Trump's name from the 2024 primary ballots is an appropriate action.

But they lose me at requirements for disqualification. It may not require legislation, but yes it would have to require a trial. An impeachment, which is only an indictment, does not suffice. Everybody deep in their guts just knowing that the preponderance of the evidence shows Trump is guilty does not suffice. You need a finding under law, something only a jury or a legislative action or a duly constituted tribunal of some kind can establish.

Here's how the authors answered the 3rd question: (I've added bold for emphasis, but the italics are the authors' own)

Section Three is legally self-executing. That is, Section Three's disqualification is constitutionally automatic whenever its terms are satisfied. Section Three requires no legislation or adjudication to be legally effective. It is enacted by the enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment. Its disqualification, where triggered, just is. It follows that Section Three's disqualification may and should be followed and carried out by all whose duties are affected by it. In many cases, Section Three will give rise to judiciable controversies in the courts. In others it will be enforceable by state and federal officials. But no prior judicial decision, and no implementing legislation, is required for Section Three to be carried out by officials sworn to uphold the Constitution whose duties present the occasion for applying Section Three's commands. Section Three is ready for use.

Sorry, but this is kangaroo court logic. The law in death penalty states already says you can't murder people. No need for a trial, let's just hang 'em. No.

It annoys me to defend Donald Trump's rights. I will giggle with unfettered glee when he's convicted for his actions before Jan 6th to overthrow the 2020 election. But due process under law still stands and we all have it when the Constitutionally limited governments of the US and its 50 states acts. The Federalist Society and their well dressed, well mannered goose-steppers don't get to ignore due process just because it's getting in their way of the 2024 election.

Like most legal findings from the political right--and I'm looking at you, Bush v. Gore (2000)--it's a Trojan horse applying the law to the one case where it suits them, without having any intent in holding to this precedent once their legal tactics change. This article is appealing to the Democrats by blocking the guy we hate the most, but in reality houses in its hollow belly the precedent that states don't have to feel bound by the findings of legal rulings. The same logic being applied here ("we just know he's guilty, so let's 86 him".) could be applied to the Antifa demonstrations of 2020 or participants in some future anti-war demonstrations, despite the two street actions not being even remotely comparable. After all the principle being asserted here is that "States don't have to wait around for a legal verdict before taking actions."

Do you think that if such an issue cutting against the Democrats in 2028, when comes up to the Supreme Court in the near future, that our distinguished 6 conservative judges won't rule in a way that happens to benefit the Republican candidate? The same way that they all swore to uphold Roe as settled law and then tossed it into the paper shredder the second Dobbs hit their in-boxes. One thing we know for certain about Federalist Society legal ethics is that they bend at the will of political ambition.

This paper at its heart isn't defending Amendment 14 Section 3. It's a backformed rationalization for removing the guy they think would be the weakest candidate for the Republicans. They may have figured out a new trick here, but this snake does not change its stripes.

August 11, 2023

The Federalist Society argument to ban Trump from 2024 is wrong (and full of shit)

Most of yall have heard by now that two Federalist Society society lawyers are arguing that Trump's name should be taken off the ballot in the upcoming Republican state primaries. (see Olbermann video below).

The thing is, the Federalist Society is a bullshit organization today. 50 years ago they made genuine ideologically conservative arguments. Today they make arguments that are explicitly against the law, like favoring torture at Gitmo or against honoring the principle of birthright citizenship (which is part of the 14th Amendment). They're not ideologically conservative; they're culturally reactionary for purely political reasons. They don't make legal arguments following the dictates of the law. They make backformed rationalizations of whatever political outcomes they think will benefit their wealthy benefactors.

They want Trump out as candidate not because he pushed for the January 6th insurrection, but because they're certain he'll lose if he's the nominee in 2024.

I have no doubt that Trump conspired in plotting an insurrection. But I am not a court with legal authority to punish criminals. There has been no legal trial and conviction on these charges. Trump hasn't had his day in court. The law should apply to everyone equally--even those who plot against the law. Until there's a conviction, no state election process should proceed assuming Trump's guilt. The Federalist Society duo are arguing that it's okay to proceed with sanctioning someone before there's a conviction. That's a principle that no lower case-r republican or lower case-d democrat could ever tolerate.

The fact that lawyers are arguing this tells you everything you need to know about the seriousness of the job title "Federalist Society legal expert." They don't give a damn about the law. They just want their political party to have a better shot at winning the next election. That's not constitutional governance. It's just anti-Trump fascism.