Donald Trump who originally created the concept of lawfare in American politics with his calls to “lock her up” in 2016.
Ignoring that the term was invented in 1975 and used centuries before that, W Bush had to deal with "legal" efforts to prevent his "illegal" acts in Afghanistan. Like blowing up the occasional US citizen.
Then Obama took over and showcased that there really was no alternative because it's a battlefield where we can't use the police to arrest people.
Further the US has always refused to join the ICC because we've expected lawfare.
Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/ FASH-iz-əm) is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy (wiki)
RE: unforced errors.
Is she running on "four more years" or is it "change"? She claimed the later but can't say what she'd change.
Same issue with is she running on "supreme advisor of Biden" or "out of the room when that was decided against her will"? Either way she should be able to claim some successes from Biden or point to failures and say it wasn't her fault.
With her being accused of being an empty suit, using word salad to avoid answering questions looks really bad. Note "unforced error" is the best possible spin, the worst is she really is an empty suit who doesn't know basic things.
She's refusing to define herself but she did the opposite in 2020 when she was running as far Left. The strong implication is she's still far left and knows her views are amazingly unpopular. If that's not correct then it's an unforced error and if it is correct then she had no businesses trying to be the lead candidate.
When she has clearly changed from 2020 (example: fracking) she should be very open about why. Presumably open doesn't mean "there is a swing state that uses this as a core to their economy" but rather "the war with Russia has changed her mind on the effects of being dependent on Russian gas".
What she did instead was this song and dance where she tried to pretend she hadn't changed her mind which got her the worst of both worlds. This assumes she actually had changed her mind and wasn't planning on banning fracking her first day in office.
"Unforced errors" is the best possible spin on all this. "Empty suit" is worse. Still worse would be "unelectable if even slightly truthful and knows it".
I have a problem with looking at a weak, inexperienced candidate making unforced errors and then concluding none of that mattered as we also insist it was a close election.
This was a political statement, i.e. "we the world doesn't like the war" trying to masquerade as a legal one.
They're going to try to arrest two Jews and a dead man for war crimes when Israel is fighting an openly genocidal terror group. The dead man is in there for balance so it doesn't look like they're only going after Jews.
The entire point of having the court is to provide law where there is none. Israel has functional courts, Gaza does not. If they're going to lower the bar far enough that they can arrest Bibi then they should have long ago tried to arrest Hamas leadership and not just dead men.
Russia Withdraws Ratification of Nuclear Test Ban Treaty
In an unprecedented move, Russian President Vladimir Putin officially rescinded Russia’s ratification of the treaty banning nuclear test explosions anywhere in the world Nov. 2.
That was Nov 2, 2023. That was saber rattling because we're backing Ukraine. So there's no reason to not test a nuke and every reason to do so.
Unless of course, he can't test a nuke because all of his went stale a few years after they stole the maintenance needed to keep them functional.
We spend $10B a year keeping ours functional.
They don't have the ability to upgrade their flagship aircraft carrier which has been openly sitting in dry dock for years. They don't have the ability to get military grade tires for their military trucks. They don't have the ability to do basic maintenance on anything.
On a system that broken and corrupt, they really spent Billions on nukes they'd never use and never test? Someone pocketed the money and lied about how functional their nukes are.
If they really wanted to prove they still had nukes they should test one.
They could test as many as they wanted until one of them worked and then they could claim they only tested one.
That they haven't done so STRONGLY suggests they don't have them anymore. The budget for their maintenance was stolen and they've gone bad.
Nuke maintenance is very expensive, they're never tested, and no one would notice if it's not done. They can't even do maintenance on things that are very high profile.
The trans athlete setting records wasn't high end before they converted. We've seen multiple other examples of vast improvement.
Of course the "female during the contest" coach who is trolling is another problem.
We separate the genders in sports for good reason.
Serena Williams, the best female tennis player in history, wouldn't be in the top 200 if she were a man (we tested this and it wasn't pretty). So if any of the top 10 male tennis players transition they're going to be invincible.
Our current situation is the gov is creating massive market distortions.
My suggestion is for the gov to not do that rather than to introduce more gov created massive distortions.
RE: "protection".
How does this work exactly? The gov will somehow decide what is a "fair" value for your house, and if the market decides otherwise the gov will step in and compensate you?
Over what range will this happen? If we create massive amounts of new housing then the value of existing housing will fall, by a lot.
The current value of all US housing is $47 Trillion dollars. Ergo any reasonable compensation program needs to start with a price tag in Trillions of dollars.
In addition, there will be tremendous political pressure to hand out this bribe to everyone and shield everyone from the market.
Worse, that's still not going to convince anyone that they should allow low income housing in their neighborhood because no one likes the social problems that come with that. Ergo the tools will still be misused.
We managed to get a constitutional amendment to prevent alcohol in the face of the bulk of the nation being drinkers.
A lot of the NIMBYs are in favor of building housing in general, they're just opposed to [this specific project].
Having a larger number of voters involved on the zoning of projects in general should prevent very narrow NIMBYs being shut out. If they want to end that project they need to talk to the state gov rather than their local gov.
BTW we should also get some state laws which outlaw defined benefit pensions for pretty much the same reason. The gov can't be trusted to manage them correctly. All the incentives are backward.
This is rewarding something that needs to be punished. Do this and there will be huge games played on the system (what is the "correct" price for houses) and the NIMBY won't stop because people like large backyards or just dislike living next to [low income housing / whatever]
The solution is to take away (or at least brutally limit) the tools the NIMBYs use.
The escalation of Ukraine was because of fears over Ukraine joining NATO.
This is propaganda. Russia needed to go to war with Ukraine because it needs territorial choke points.
Russia "needs" those choke points because it's so big and it's land is so poor that it can't possibly defend it's borders if it doesn't have them. There's nothing to stop an invasion and the lack of transportation prevents their army from easily responding.
A good example is how the Ukraine was able to invade Russia just recently even though both sides are at war so in theory the Russian army is prepared. The borders are just too big.
Fighting for those choke points explains the 9(?) wars that Russia has had since the USSR fell. Many of them with non-Nato countries. This issue predates Putin. Demographics also plays a role. If they were going to invade then it needed to be soon because of their falling population.
She just lost to a demented 78 year old after we proved the electorate cares about age. Trump had a truck load of other baggage to the point where I couldn't vote for him. So he was a very weak candidate and she still lost.
As VP she... "had less experience than any modern vice president since Spiro Agnew." She was an AG for 6 years and a Senator for 4.
Harris engaging in word salad during a CNN interview: https://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/us-politics/word-salad-kamala-harris-roasted-over-garbled-answers-at-town-hall-event/news-story/d63e706d48e37831524c67378d921520
There was a reason why she didn't do much interviewing.
Asked what she'd do on day one she said she'd "prioritize the middle class". Asked what she'd change from Biden she had no answer (she was running on "change"). Asked what she'd do about inflation she said she'd "punish price-gougers".
Her political position on Immigration is she's running as tougher than Trump (from her wiki)... however we also have her on video chanting "end deportation" with Protesters and as border czar she never visited the border.
A lot of her basic views are unclear to the point of creating problems.
She's pro-trans... but also filed to block gender-affirming medical care for inmates as AG.
She has been against free trade multiple times but wasn't running for Prez on protectionism.
That link I put up went over some of her lack of coherence over her middle Eastern stances.
Na.zi/death-camp accusations are the "go to" argument if you don't have a case, and it's not convincing. Nor does it win elections.
Your prison hc argument would be stronger without them.
David: ‘Maybe trans people should stay out of sports’ …you’re the Germans in 1934
It's a bad idea to insist that females-by-identity should be setting sports records that born-females can't hope to match. Attempting to make this argument shatters creditability.
On “Making Lawfare Great Again”
Donald Trump who originally created the concept of lawfare in American politics with his calls to “lock her up” in 2016.
Ignoring that the term was invented in 1975 and used centuries before that, W Bush had to deal with "legal" efforts to prevent his "illegal" acts in Afghanistan. Like blowing up the occasional US citizen.
Then Obama took over and showcased that there really was no alternative because it's a battlefield where we can't use the police to arrest people.
Further the US has always refused to join the ICC because we've expected lawfare.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawfare#Examples
On “Joe Biden Pardons Local Man”
which pretty much almost ever lead to indictments in the first place
The lesson to learn is if you're going to commit crimes, then don't write a tell-all book about you committing those crimes.
On “I Told You So”
You oppose it by insisting on good government.
However huge parts of the "liberal" agenda are opposed to good government.
Government unions hit the radar as corrupt out of the box. Ditto insisting that equality of outcome is a thing the gov should be enforcing.
Big parts of the country view Trump as less corrupt, or only as corrupt, as Team Blue.
"
DavidTC: Why do you think that Trump will not be able to find people competent enough to create and empower death squads this time?
My strong expectation is we will make it through the Trump presidency without any attempts to create death squads (like last time).
My other strong expectation is whoever the GOP picks to run as his replacement will face similar accusations.
"
Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/ FASH-iz-əm) is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy (wiki)
On “Huffpo reports that Harris internals *NEVER* had her ahead.”
RE: unforced errors.
Is she running on "four more years" or is it "change"? She claimed the later but can't say what she'd change.
Same issue with is she running on "supreme advisor of Biden" or "out of the room when that was decided against her will"? Either way she should be able to claim some successes from Biden or point to failures and say it wasn't her fault.
With her being accused of being an empty suit, using word salad to avoid answering questions looks really bad. Note "unforced error" is the best possible spin, the worst is she really is an empty suit who doesn't know basic things.
She's refusing to define herself but she did the opposite in 2020 when she was running as far Left. The strong implication is she's still far left and knows her views are amazingly unpopular. If that's not correct then it's an unforced error and if it is correct then she had no businesses trying to be the lead candidate.
When she has clearly changed from 2020 (example: fracking) she should be very open about why. Presumably open doesn't mean "there is a swing state that uses this as a core to their economy" but rather "the war with Russia has changed her mind on the effects of being dependent on Russian gas".
What she did instead was this song and dance where she tried to pretend she hadn't changed her mind which got her the worst of both worlds. This assumes she actually had changed her mind and wasn't planning on banning fracking her first day in office.
"Unforced errors" is the best possible spin on all this. "Empty suit" is worse. Still worse would be "unelectable if even slightly truthful and knows it".
"
I have a problem with looking at a weak, inexperienced candidate making unforced errors and then concluding none of that mattered as we also insist it was a close election.
On “Open Mic for the week of 11/18/2024”
Every day that goes past without a mushroom cloud showing they're serious makes the gamble less of a gamble.
They would lose nothing by a test and gain a lot. Far as I can tell, the only reason to not test is if they can't.
On “ICC Follows Through on Arrest Warrants for Israeli PM Netanyahu & Others”
This was a political statement, i.e. "we the world doesn't like the war" trying to masquerade as a legal one.
They're going to try to arrest two Jews and a dead man for war crimes when Israel is fighting an openly genocidal terror group. The dead man is in there for balance so it doesn't look like they're only going after Jews.
The entire point of having the court is to provide law where there is none. Israel has functional courts, Gaza does not. If they're going to lower the bar far enough that they can arrest Bibi then they should have long ago tried to arrest Hamas leadership and not just dead men.
On “Open Mic for the week of 11/18/2024”
Russia Withdraws Ratification of Nuclear Test Ban Treaty
In an unprecedented move, Russian President Vladimir Putin officially rescinded Russia’s ratification of the treaty banning nuclear test explosions anywhere in the world Nov. 2.
https://www.armscontrol.org/blog/2023-11/nuclear-disarmament-monitor
That was Nov 2, 2023. That was saber rattling because we're backing Ukraine. So there's no reason to not test a nuke and every reason to do so.
Unless of course, he can't test a nuke because all of his went stale a few years after they stole the maintenance needed to keep them functional.
We spend $10B a year keeping ours functional.
They don't have the ability to upgrade their flagship aircraft carrier which has been openly sitting in dry dock for years. They don't have the ability to get military grade tires for their military trucks. They don't have the ability to do basic maintenance on anything.
On a system that broken and corrupt, they really spent Billions on nukes they'd never use and never test? Someone pocketed the money and lied about how functional their nukes are.
"
Yep. Paying for sex with escorts probably only scratches the surface.
"
Then show me the mushroom cloud. Russia has lots of open space. They've pulled out of the test-ban treaty. They have lots of reasons to saber rattle.
All they'd have to do is have one test and every earth quake sensor in the world would confirm that they still have nukes and aren't bluffing.
They have no reason to not test and every reason to test...
...unless they can't.
"
If they really wanted to prove they still had nukes they should test one.
They could test as many as they wanted until one of them worked and then they could claim they only tested one.
That they haven't done so STRONGLY suggests they don't have them anymore. The budget for their maintenance was stolen and they've gone bad.
Nuke maintenance is very expensive, they're never tested, and no one would notice if it's not done. They can't even do maintenance on things that are very high profile.
On “Ordinary Times Needs Your Help”
Donated.
On “The Four Stages of Post-election Cruelty”
Because they are not infiltrating the popular press.
https://nypost.com/2023/03/30/male-powerlifter-enters-womens-event-breaks-record/
The trans athlete setting records wasn't high end before they converted. We've seen multiple other examples of vast improvement.
Of course the "female during the contest" coach who is trolling is another problem.
We separate the genders in sports for good reason.
Serena Williams, the best female tennis player in history, wouldn't be in the top 200 if she were a man (we tested this and it wasn't pretty). So if any of the top 10 male tennis players transition they're going to be invincible.
On “Open Mic for the week of 11/11/2024”
Our current situation is the gov is creating massive market distortions.
My suggestion is for the gov to not do that rather than to introduce more gov created massive distortions.
RE: "protection".
How does this work exactly? The gov will somehow decide what is a "fair" value for your house, and if the market decides otherwise the gov will step in and compensate you?
Over what range will this happen? If we create massive amounts of new housing then the value of existing housing will fall, by a lot.
The current value of all US housing is $47 Trillion dollars. Ergo any reasonable compensation program needs to start with a price tag in Trillions of dollars.
In addition, there will be tremendous political pressure to hand out this bribe to everyone and shield everyone from the market.
Worse, that's still not going to convince anyone that they should allow low income housing in their neighborhood because no one likes the social problems that come with that. Ergo the tools will still be misused.
"
We managed to get a constitutional amendment to prevent alcohol in the face of the bulk of the nation being drinkers.
A lot of the NIMBYs are in favor of building housing in general, they're just opposed to [this specific project].
Having a larger number of voters involved on the zoning of projects in general should prevent very narrow NIMBYs being shut out. If they want to end that project they need to talk to the state gov rather than their local gov.
BTW we should also get some state laws which outlaw defined benefit pensions for pretty much the same reason. The gov can't be trusted to manage them correctly. All the incentives are backward.
"
There is no reason why home/zoning regs needs to be set at a local level rather than a state level.
These tools have been misused so often and so consistently that something of that nature needs to happen.
"
This is rewarding something that needs to be punished. Do this and there will be huge games played on the system (what is the "correct" price for houses) and the NIMBY won't stop because people like large backyards or just dislike living next to [low income housing / whatever]
The solution is to take away (or at least brutally limit) the tools the NIMBYs use.
"
The escalation of Ukraine was because of fears over Ukraine joining NATO.
This is propaganda. Russia needed to go to war with Ukraine because it needs territorial choke points.
Russia "needs" those choke points because it's so big and it's land is so poor that it can't possibly defend it's borders if it doesn't have them. There's nothing to stop an invasion and the lack of transportation prevents their army from easily responding.
A good example is how the Ukraine was able to invade Russia just recently even though both sides are at war so in theory the Russian army is prepared. The borders are just too big.
Fighting for those choke points explains the 9(?) wars that Russia has had since the USSR fell. Many of them with non-Nato countries. This issue predates Putin. Demographics also plays a role. If they were going to invade then it needed to be soon because of their falling population.
On “The Four Stages of Post-election Cruelty”
Reading her wiki I can't figure out her actual stance on all sorts of things.
If you're going to run as an empty suit with undefined policies then we're not going to be able to figure out what you support.
"
...Are you able to make a case with evidence
She just lost to a demented 78 year old after we proved the electorate cares about age. Trump had a truck load of other baggage to the point where I couldn't vote for him. So he was a very weak candidate and she still lost.
As VP she... "had less experience than any modern vice president since Spiro Agnew." She was an AG for 6 years and a Senator for 4.
Harris engaging in word salad during a CNN interview: https://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/us-politics/word-salad-kamala-harris-roasted-over-garbled-answers-at-town-hall-event/news-story/d63e706d48e37831524c67378d921520
There was a reason why she didn't do much interviewing.
Asked what she'd do on day one she said she'd "prioritize the middle class". Asked what she'd change from Biden she had no answer (she was running on "change"). Asked what she'd do about inflation she said she'd "punish price-gougers".
Her political position on Immigration is she's running as tougher than Trump (from her wiki)... however we also have her on video chanting "end deportation" with Protesters and as border czar she never visited the border.
A lot of her basic views are unclear to the point of creating problems.
She's pro-trans... but also filed to block gender-affirming medical care for inmates as AG.
She has been against free trade multiple times but wasn't running for Prez on protectionism.
That link I put up went over some of her lack of coherence over her middle Eastern stances.
"
Na.zi/death-camp accusations are the "go to" argument if you don't have a case, and it's not convincing. Nor does it win elections.
Your prison hc argument would be stronger without them.
David: ‘Maybe trans people should stay out of sports’ …you’re the Germans in 1934
It's a bad idea to insist that females-by-identity should be setting sports records that born-females can't hope to match. Attempting to make this argument shatters creditability.
On “Open Mic for the week of 11/11/2024”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Gaetz#Child_sex_trafficking_investigation,_other_legal_issues_and_controversies
On “The Four Stages of Post-election Cruelty”
Yes, I'm not. However one assumes she's still pro-trans and is personally affected by the trans issue.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.