90 thoughts on “Ten Second News Links and Open Thread for the week of 11/21/2022”

  1. Oh, went past the house for sale on my jog again yesterday. Still for sale. Checked the webpage and the price dropped another $5k (well, $4,999). The price is back to a number that ends in 000 instead of 999. It “only” dropped ~$5k so I’m thinking that this is the bare minimum the guy is willing to sell it for and still think that he turned a profit/broke even.

    Steeled myself and looked at our house. We’ve lost about 20% since the peak of the insanity last year.

    Ah, well. Those “gains” were never real.Report

    1. We haven’t paid a lot of attention to the value of our house, as after much deliberation we’ve elected to stay after the kids have moved out (No mortgage or rent? Yes, please.). At one point, though, the value was listed as more than double what we paid for it, which is absolutely ridiculous.Report

    2. Talked to a realtor friend about the situation. She told me that, like, a year ago, you’d guess that your house was worth $400k, put it on the market for $440k, and you’d probably end up getting somewhere around that if you didn’t inspire a bidding war (which was uncommon, but happened… a bidding war resulted in another 5-10%).

      HOWEVER. Ain’t no more bidding wars anymore.

      She told me that the people who guess that their house is worth around $400k still want to put it on the market for $440k and she has to explain to them that it’s not going to sell for $440. Like, it’s not going to have people show up at the open house. So a week later people say “okay, lower the price to $420k” and then, a week or two after that, $400k. And now you’ve got people showing up at the open house but they assume that the price could be talked down to $380k and the guy would have been better off just keeping it at $400k from the beginning.

      Anyway, the house is still for sale for the same price as last week.Report

    1. For the same reason that every white man confronted by a police officer figures that all those other guys were just jerks who mouthed off and got slapped back but that he will just calmly and reasonably explain the situation and will definitely get out of this without a summons…Report

        1. I would assume the real target is alumni, not that college kids can’t get caught up in it. Of course to Kazzy’s point I recall hearing stories of gambling disasters back in my undergrad days, when there was a fad for legal-grey-area online texas holdem.

          Sports betting just went live in Maryland this week (I was bombarded with notifications the second it happened). Curious to see what my alma mater does with it.Report

            1. I have become a lot more ambivalent about the subject, after previously being much more in favor of legalizing. Years ago there was an incident in the DC area where a successful optometrist ended up being investigated by a detective for small time sports betting among a group of friends that frequented a bar. The detective goaded them into betting enough money that it became a felony and they sent a SWAT team to arrest the guy. Of course one of the dumbasses killed him with a negligent discharge. I’m comfortable saying that should never happen, but if gambling is illegal things like it inevitably will.

              At the same time I haven’t been exactly thrilled about fully unleashing it into the realm of consumer capitalism. A lot of people are going to be straight up hosed by big business with plenty of collateral damage. It seems to me that the optimal answer is to keep big commercial gambling tightly contained but turn a blind eye the small time stuff. Just not sure how to get there from a policy perspective. Now that the cat is out of the bag I doubt it can be walked back.Report

          2. I would assume the real target is alumni…

            I wouldn’t. In terms of profit maximization, get them hooked young and then they’ll stay with you basically forever. College kids are experimenting and are way more malleable than the alumni.Report

        2. I don’t disagree, but also, this has been going on since at least the early 90s when credit cards went mainstream, and aggressively advertising in the student newspapers and direct mail was likely the thing that launched their trajectory towards ubiquity.Report

  5. LA Magazine decided to paint a sympathetic “cancel culture” profile on a woman named Rebecca Grossman. The only problem here is that Rebecca Grossman is on trial for murder after drinking, driving and killing two kids: https://www.lamag.com/article/exclusive-rebecca-grossman-speaks-out-ahead-of-murder-trial/

    “This past September, a Superior Court judge rejected the Grossman defense team’s motion to have the murder charges against her reduced to vehicular manslaughter. Judge Joseph Brandolino found that there was probable cause to determine that Grossman acted with implied malice rather than merely gross negligence. If convicted as charged, Grossman could face as many as 34 years in prison.”

    I wonder what PR firm as behind this.Report

    1. https://www.lamag.com/citythinkblog/rebecca-grossman-arrest-accident/

      Not sure we have enough info to make judgements here and/or I’m not sure we can trust the info we have. The early reports strongly suggested DUI but she passed several alcohol tests. She fled the scene and the cops tested her for alcohol (at the scene)?

      I think we’re in the “community is outraged and making stuff up” phase of the incident. That doesn’t change that we have two dead kids and she ran them over, but it does call into question everything else. One of the things which delayed the case is her lawyer died. Somehow I doubt that’s a lawyerly tactic.

      There’s still room for her to be pretty heinous, or it could just be a normal accident.Report

        1. It wouldn’t be back to the donors, which I assume was FTX and its principals. It would be to FTX investors, who are the victims of FTX. Not sure on Pinky’s question but it would be more complicated than the usual scenario.Report

          1. Obvs has to go back to FTX (if they decide to return – which I doubt) and then the bankruptcy courts would determine where residual assets would go. Depending on who owes whom what, it’s highly unlikely anything goes back to individual investors.

            Basically creditors are always prioritized over investors… so whoever loaned them money or provided goods/services would be paid. Investors? Technically they would own whatever was left after all debts were paid.Report

            1. Yea, but there’s also going to be a criminal component to this which could ultimately involve restitution as part of a sentence. If the reporting on the books being a total mess to non-existent is true it’s going to be a nightmare to unwind whose money is whose. Not sure how that interacts with the bankruptcy code. My guess is this is going to be in the courts for years.Report

            2. “(if they decide to return – which I doubt)”

              The equitable solution would be the Campaign Finance Cryptocurrency Exchange (more words here) Act, a very specifically created and worded bill that would cover this one situation. They could permit or mandate the return of all company donations to a special reimbursement fund. The biggest reason this won’t happen is if it’s compulsory, then what about the campaigns that don’t have a war chest, and if it’s not, then isn’t this just for show?Report

              1. Maybe? I’m not entirely sure they can legislate at that sort of micro-targeted level – i.e. one company has to abide by this law which is extra-judicial contra existing bankruptcy laws.

                They could of course, just donate the funds to an organization that reimburses investors – but absent the corporate unwinding and forensic accounting… how would you adjudicate competing claims for $XXXXXX vs. $YYYY when there’s only $AA in the pot?

                Plus, to Dark’s comment below, the big losses are to ‘sophisticated’ investors who have different category of laws pertaining to risk associated with them as a class.

                At the end of the day, the money was spent. A symbolic return of $2k here or there from an individual campaign isn’t where the big $120M figure spent on politics came from, I don’t think.Report

          2. “Investors” are mostly VC companies who aren’t in any pain because they didn’t lose a lot as a percentage of their fund (yes, really).

            The people I have the most sympathy for are depositors who didn’t (couldn’t) know their money was at risk.

            When politicians want to return money without returning the money to “him”, they give the money to charity.Report

    2. What’s this, a list of names that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping policy in the State Department?

      (PS did he do the Democrats, too, or just the Republicans?)Report

    1. (republicans say nothing about what Trump does) “clearly they’re too scared to speak about this!”

      (republicans say something about what Trump does) “clearly Republicans are still slavishly devoted to Trump, hanging on his every word and deed…”Report

      1. So when Republican politicians do speak out about Trump’s behavior, it is at best to say they are “Concerned” as outgoing Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson did about this over the weekend. The only other prominent Republican to do so regularly was and is Liz Cheney, and she’s been run out of office for it.

        So while i know it may be tough for you to grok – both of these things can be true and both are very very bad for the country.Report

        2. Having anyone “speak out about Trump’s behavior” is a bad idea. That’s how he ended up in the White House. Personally and professionally, Trump thrives on attention. Good attention, bad attention, it doesn’t really matter.

          Now that he’s out of office, it’s possible to ignore him, which means he should be ignored.Report

          2. Is trump going away, living a quiet retirement putting away. No, he is gonna be the 24 GOP nom. His actions and the lack of action by most R’s is useful info. He ended up in the WH because people voted for him. Granted a minority of people but EC will EC.Report

            1. The problem with Trump is there is a damned if you do, damned if you don’t component to dealing with him. For better or worse (or really just worse) he remains a major political figure. Because of that there are times where it is necessary to respond to him. At the same time, too much attention to his authoritarian inclinations and in particular his boorishness can end up backfiring by illustrating various hypocrisies and shortcomings of his critics, not to mention can turn out to just be free PR. The upshot is that criticism of him needs to come out when its warranted but you don’t want to lay it on too thick or make every single thing about him. We all already know how that plays out.Report

              2. “Backfire”, how?

                Ahem. “by illustrating various hypocrisies and shortcomings of his critics, not to mention can turn out to just be free PR”

                (I copied and pasted the words that followed his use of the term “backfiring”.)Report

              3. It isn’t. But it does invite a conversation about various other scandals, personal shortcomings, and petty corruption that can be spun as Trump being different in degree rather than kind. That hurts on the margins, especially when as in 2016 its amplified by endless press coverage and an ability of Trump to hammer opponents on some actual establishment policy disaster like the Iraq war, or ongoing issues around immigration and globalization that normal politicians have failed to solve. That is just a fact whether we want it to be or not.

                So while I would hope that after 4 years of him actually being president more people can see through that sort of thing more clearly than they could before, I see no reason to take it for granted. If we actually take the threat he poses seriously then I think it behooves us to not be so defensive when talking about how to deal with him.Report

              4. Lets try this:
                In any conversation about Trumpists, white supremacists, Naz.is or Klansmen, replace those words with “pedophile” and see how the argument works.

                Such as:
                “I have never wanted to abuse a child. But seeing the hypocrisy and shortcomings of the anti-pedophiles, I am thinking that perhaps abusing a child isn’t so bad.”

                We’re constantly being told that Trumpism, white supremacy, bigotry is some sort of open question, something which reasonable people of good will can gravitate towards.

                So therefore the anti-bigot forces must be sharp on their game, they mustn’t make any errors, lest the goodhearted simple folk be swung over by means of clever arguments and debate tactics, to the other side and shave their heads and get swastika tattoos.

                Anyone looking favorably upon Trump in 2022 already has a swastika tattoo, figuratively or literally.Report

              7. That’s an abstraction that I don’t think can be quantified. Certainly not without a lot of stipulation of what we mean and what success would actually look like. We can certainly quantify who wins elections though, and who advances desired public policy.Report

              8. We can easily quantify which words or ideas are forbidden by various apps and websites can’t we?

                Compare and contrast:
                Statement 1: “Adults having sex with children is an idea which must be debated in civil discussion.”

                Statement 2:”Extermination of Jewish people is an idea which must be debated in civil discussion.”

                Which one is acceptable on Twitter? This website? Reddit? Stormfront?

                We can quantify this, and score which is acceptable or taboo.Report

              9. Which one is acceptable on Twitter? This website? Reddit? Stormfront? We can quantify this, and score which is acceptable or taboo.

                My expectation is it will be hard to avoid simply “proving” whatever you want to see.

                “Quantify” it by measuring the number of people willing to make one remark you disapprove of and you’re instantly there.

                Measured by victims, in the US we have a larger problem with sex than we do with genocide.Report

              10. I take Chip’s point that Nick Fuentes appears to be beyond the pale. Again, I had never heard of him prior to this, but I think it is fair to criticize a prospective future president for giving a person with those sorts of beliefs the time of day.

                However I still think there’s some missing of forest for trees going on with this. As I said below, the legacy media has made itself an express actor in our ongoing Trump saga, often to its detriment. Like it or not that means all decisions on Trump reporting need to be assessed against its own credibility problems, and whether or not certain angles aren’t in fact counterproductive. There’s still a belief out there that Trump is vulnerable to bad PR despite that being proven over and over to be false.Report

              12. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/02/majorie-taylor-greene-nick-fuentes-speech

                As you’ve no doubt heard by now, over the weekend, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene appeared as a guest speaker at a conference organized by a white nationalist, where attendees praised Vladimir Putin and Adolf Hitler and dubbed the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol “awesome.” Held as counterprogramming to the Conservative Political Action Conference—which, what with its attempts to not be completely overt about its racism and anti-Semitism is apparently way too mainstream for the fascist-inclined—the America First Political Action Conference was put on by far-right figure Nick Fuentes, whom the Anti-Defamation League has labeled a “prominent white supremacist pundit.”

                Report

              13. https://abcnews.go.com/US/gop-congressman-headlines-conference-organizers-push-white-nationalist/story?id=76152780

                GOP Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona was the surprise keynote speaker at a conference Friday night in Orlando, Florida, where speakers spread white nationalist rhetoric, organizers railed about the U.S. losing its “white demographic core,” and some called for further engagement like the ire that drove the Capitol attack on Jan. 6.

                Gosar, who skipped Friday’s House votes — including the vote on the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief package — spoke Friday night at the America First Political Action Conference (AFPAC), where he blamed former President Donald Trump’s election loss on “big business, big tech, and the swamp,” and pushed anti-immigration arguments to the crowd of “Groypers,” a loose coalition of mostly young alt-right extremists led by organizer Nick Fuentes.

                Report

              15. Philip, respectfully, it’s impossible to follow every accusation of some ism or another. So many of them are in obvious bad faith or define bigotry so broadly as to be impossible to take seriously that the real stuff gets lost.

                I think you should think about that, and how it reflects on the larger issue of reporting on Trump. If I, as a very online follower of politics haven’t heard of this guy, what do you think the case is out in Normieland? Especially in an environment where everything under the sun no matter how banal is now characterized in the same media that reported on this as white supremacy?

                So I grant that they seem to have gotten this one right. But next time you find yourself nodding along to some inane piece about how the SAT or enforcing laws against shoplifting is white supremacy consider whether it isn’t actually hurting the cause against this crap where it does still exist.Report

              17. We’re constantly being told that Trumpism, white supremacy, bigotry is some sort of open question, something which reasonable people of good will can gravitate towards.

                The problem is when you also want to apply the one drop rule. If you don’t virtue signal in this specific way, then you’re every bit as bad as the mass murderers.

                “This specific way” often comes down to “vote for the guy I want”.

                This line of logic ends up claiming that 40% of the country are mass murdering Na.zis when Team Blue loses.Report

              18. If the 2024 Republican nominee is a guy who tolerates mass murder, wouldn’t it logically mean that 40% of the country are in fact accepting of mass murdering Naz,is?Report

              19. What does “tolerates mass murder” mean here?

                The two big examples that come to mind are Bill Clinton refusing to stop the Rwanda genocide and Obama refusing to enforce his own red line in Syria.

                Or can “tolerates mass murder” only be applied against Team Red and the evidence bar will be lowered until it applies (even if the body count is zero)?Report

              20. Enabling mass murder includes covering up for the Ukranians murdering their own civilians. There’s satellite imagery that needs to be erased in order for a “massacre” that occurs days after the Russians have left…

                “Tolerate Mass Murder” is such a stupidly low bar. “Enable mass murder” is a good bar, in that you can demonstrate intent and actions.Report

              21. Nick Fuentes wants to exterminate the Jewish people.

                Literally, that’s exactly what his words mean. Tolerating Naz.is means tolerating people who plan to conduct mass murder.

                A lot of the conversations today echo those of the 1930s where major media figures would sniff and primly talk about that little Austrian man with the funny mustache, but were convinced if only we ignored him he would fade away irrelevancy.

                When the white supremacists talk about their hatreds, they aren’t kidding. This isn’t loose careless rhetoric or hyperbole.

                They mean it. They really do mean exactly what they say. We need to take them seriously.Report

              22. RE: Nick Fuentes
                Serious hate speech guy and white supremist. Strongly backs Kanye West’s bid for West becoming President and has joined West’s team.

                West (who is mentally ill) said Trump was impressed with Fuentues.

                Trump says “West showed up with three of his friends, whom I knew nothing about…”, and they had an uneventful dinner.

                This is what you’re taking as evidence that 40% of American supports genocide and is ethically compromised if they don’t support Team Blue… even though Team Blue has actually tolerated mass murder within living memory?

                “Mass murder” as in hundreds of thousands of people dying and not just some Blue fantasy about what Red would do if people don’t vote Blue?Report

              25. Saul, it was *CHIP’S* example.

                He said that something would happen. I’m saying “No, I don’t think it would.”

                I can appreciate you wishing that I hadn’t responded to his poor point but the fact that it was a bad example on his part isn’t *MY* fault and me responding to the example that *HE* gave is not me “both sidesing” this.Report

              26. He is a major figure so covering him is what any news org has to do.

                Noting his authoritarian bs is also pertinent. That his supporters like that is the problem with his supporters. They dodge and ignore any crap he does. How to thread that needle? Well screw that needle. Trying to precisely calibrate the exact level of pointing vs. not to much pointing is a giant waste of time. That exact level of reporting does not exist nor could it. Sure he gets free pub, that is one of the many reasons the entire RW crap about the MSM being liberal is silly. There is plenty of hypocrisy going around and tfg/supporters are often at the forefront.

                If anything the MSM has been easy on him. I’ve mentioned his cheating charities out of money to the point he lost in court and had to pay them back as one of his many sins. Only with tfg is something like that forgotten. If Fox had that kind of red meat they wouldn’t need exposes on the dangers of gypsies or rainbow fentanyl.Report

              27. I think that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. The nature of our system gives the two parties a certain level of parity, and to use a terrible
                and probably not great sports metaphor, even 10-2 football teams gameplan for teams that are 2-10. It’s strange to me that saying what seems so obvious and anodyne is so provocative around here.Report

              28. Not sure of your argument. What insanity? The MSM is made up of individual businesses that make business choices. They want money so they go with “if it bleeds, it leads”. That saying in decades old. MSM goes for what will gin up ratings.

                Pointing out trumps corruption backfires??? JFC no. That is his tactic to project what he does or is accused of on others. I’m not playing that. Those are tfg rules. That is part of the problem. We shouldn’t point out when he chats with nazi’s cause it might be used by the RW news bubble to attack D’s?! Well best never criticize any R ever. TBF then nobody can ever crit good ol Hillary since i could just point out the hypocrisy.

                If tfg does his typical sleazy bs then report it just like everybody else.Report

              29. I certainly don’t believe Trump should get any special treatment. The problem is that the legacy media officially inserted itself as an actor in rather than a mere documenter of our national psychodrama with Trump back in 2016 by taking his bait. Then it doubled down on that path in 2020. Any take that doesn’t account for that, and the way all such reporting now weighs into the ongoing threat in light of that decision, just isn’t credible.Report

              30. Your main point is correct. My only question is, is Trump a major political figure? If it’s possible to be a president and not be one, it’s Trump. He’s a major celebrity, which is something that the press could turn on or off. All they have to do is go over to the spigot pouring money, and…oh, yeah, that’s right. The question becomes, will the press stop when the money reservoir runs dry?Report

              31. RE: My only question is, is Trump a major political figure?

                He used to be.

                He doesn’t hold office, he almost certainly can’t win elections. He doesn’t represent anything other than himself and his platform is his previous loss was because of theft.

                We should be ignoring him just like we ignored Bush #1 when he started harassing people from his wheelchair.Report

              32. We’ll see. My hope and hunch is that he gets nowhere in the next year. That may still leave him room to mount a third party campaign, though. But Greg and Philip have bet on him, with the latter expecting Trump to have lined up endorsements by the end of this year, IIRC.Report

              33. Bet on him. Nope i’d be fine with him going away forever. Please R’s please please make me suffer by making him go away forever. I’ll be so so owned if i never hear from him again.Report

              35. It’s my prediction. I’ve seen various polls that still show him with high support and lord knows few R’s have shown any spine over his dinner with nick. It’s not like i’m the only person making that prediction, it’s a pretty common prediction.

                Again please make that crapsack go away. All for it. That would mean conservatives not voting for him and also not kowtowing to him. Not seeing much of that so far.Report

              36. Going back to InMD’s point, if I told you that I could definitely make him go away, but it would require us all to not talk about him or support any media that do, would you go along with it?Report

              37. So that means not supporting Fox or OAN or Newsmax right? And not just itch what you believe is the left leaning MSM?

                Because until EVERYONE walks away, we can’t get there from here. Which you know. Nice red herring though.Report

              38. Not a red herring. I don’t support any of those. I have no intention of sitting through a Trump segment on any medium for the next year or doing anything that would boost ad revenue.Report

              40. Conservative Bat Signal! Calling all conservatives!

                Anyone to the center or right of center, please comment how often you watch FNC and if you’ve ever viewed Newsmax or OAN.Report

              41. I only use my television for my PS5. I have only seen clips of FNC on twitter (more likely someone hatewatching than saying “yeah, buddy!”), I don’t know that I’ve ever seen a non-hatewatch clip from Newsmax or OAN on the twitters.Report

              42. While the categories are kinda fuzzy and the dividing lines are blurry, I think that the guy who was president 3 years ago meets the bare minimum of “major political figure”.

                30 years ago? Yeah, we can treat him the way we think about Bill Clinton.Report

              43. He is still the presumptive GOP nominee for president. Maybe that will change. If he loses the primary then we could start to look at him a little differently.Report

              45. There are two things that could keep him from being the presumptive nominee – conviction on any of the state or federal charges he currently faces, or loosing the Primaries. As we learned in 2016, all he needs is a plurality to win the nod again, and with even two challengers he’s still, today, the odds on favorite. If he is merely indicted but not tried before the primaries, that may boost his stock in that he can claim persecution.Report

              47. I mean I kind of get it. A Trump without wealth and power is a blowhard in a bar. One that never shuts up and makes it uncomfortable and not fun for most patrons. It would be nice if we could treat him as a blowhard in a bar. Unfortunately, he was the President of the United States for a term and is the presumptive GOP nominee in 2024.

                As such, I think it is important to highlight that he likes to have dinner with anti-Semites

                ETA: This wordpress is way too sensitive.Report

              48. To be clear I do not have a problem with reporting on this particular incident. I had never heard of Nick Fuentes before but his views sound disturbing and insane.

                My comments are more to the larger issue of Trump reporting, where I think less is more.Report

              49. I mean I kind of get it. A Trump without wealth and power is a blowhard in a bar. One that never shuts up and makes it uncomfortable and not fun for most patrons.

                Which is why so many of his supporters do, in fact, support him. He gets to blowhard for them on the national stage. They won’t give that up easily.Report

  9. Credit where credit is due. Brian Kemp clears the lowest possible bar:
    Kemp slams Trump’s ‘un-American’ white supremacist dinner guest; Walker is silent

    Herself Walker of course, is struggling to dress himself and formulate a coherent thought.Report

    1. Actually, this is unkind.

      Herschel Walker is a victim of some sort of brain injury and demands our compassion.
      Any criticism should be of the sociopaths propping him up for their own malign ends.Report

Comments are closed.

Related Stories

SCOTUS Temporarily Halts Trump Administration Removal of Venezuelans

OT Editors April 19, 2025

From Marginal Revolution: o3 and AGI, is April 16th AGI day?

Jaybird April 16, 2025 9

Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro’s Residence Attacked, Suspect Arrested

Andrew Donaldson April 14, 2025 29

You may have missed

treasure

Danny Dreamer Dreams of Treasure

Clare Briggs April 20, 2025
wm41

Saturday Morning Gaming: Are you ready for Wrestlemania?

Jaybird April 19, 2025 4
2025-04-18 TDoRS C5111 (04.22.17)

Good Use of an Old Barn

Clare Briggs April 18, 2025
Canadian Leaders Debate

Canadian Leaders Debate Amongst Themselves

Andrew Donaldson April 18, 2025 4