Or, alternately, we're just doing it on purpose:

https://bsky.app/profile/onestpress.bsky.social/post/3lluyzh2sdc23

That's why we elected Trump, to start a war with China.

This is on top of the fact the entire article is trying to paint 'Hamas revised the numbers down' as proving they are a bad actor, when in fact revising the numbers down is...exactly what they should do if they have gotten more information.

They're pretending Hamas did it to 'retain credibility', that Hamas was somehow forced it into it or people would stop believing them.

As opposed to 'Hamas, in the chaos of war, sometimes has wrong numbers, and has fixed those'

They don't present any evidence of their interpetation, they do not present any actual specific example of the corrected deaths to let anyone even make their own determination.

Granted, they don't even even present any evidence the number did change. In fact, they _literally do not list the numbers_ that they assert have changed. Or link to the PDFs!

It's purely 'This person said the number changed, and this other person has suggested that it was because the first number was deliberately dishonest but they felt they couldn't get away with this dishonestly anymore'. Just utter vibe-based reporting.

It cannot be emphasized how much this guy has _never_ been coherent, and how much he has fallen apart over the past decade on top of that. He's just a blathering idiot, and I don't mean he's wrong (I mean, he is), but he absolutely has no ability to sit down and produce a coherent paragraph or lay out an argument from start to end.

This is totally distinct from the fact I politically disagree with him! His brain is fricking mush. He can _mostly_ read a speech, but it's incredibly obvious when he leaves the text and start rambling.

This is the sort of person that, if you ran across him in at a party, you would immediately try to get away from because he's started rambling about how horrible windmills are or how batteries can electrocute you.

It is _absurd_ we elected someone this incoherent as president, and even more absurd we did it again.

I honestly think Canada should have justified their retaliatory tariffs not as retaliatory, but due to the fentanyl going the other way.

Which is higher. The US is a net exporter of fentanyl over the border.

Actually, the funniest possible thing would be for Canada to say 'Yes, there are things coming across the border illegally, this is a good thing Trump has set up, indeed, we demand a formal treaty that _automatically_ scales tariffs based on outlawed things smuggled over the border.'

Anything illegal. Not just drugs, but _guns_.

Which would not only put Canada far ahead, but Mexico also.

What does that have to do with the fact that the Telegraph (And thus Yahoo News) is repeating very obvious unsubstantiated propaganda about how some pro-Israel guy said he looked at some stuff and found some discrepancy that he's apparently not going to make public in any way, and then most of the article is about another pro-Israel guy talking about what those people probably found.

That cannot possible be 'news' in any sense. 'This guy said he discovered some stuff, although produced no evidence of that, and we have another guy here to guess at what he probably discovered!'

Well, we are now at the time of year where the Fed reports on how things look, and a lot of companies are required to make _legally accurate_ predictions about future revenue.

This is the things they're saying on anonymous surveys to the Fed:
https://www.dallasfed.org/research/surveys/tssos/2025/2503#tab-comments

Um...not looking so good.

Meanwhile, Trump keeps saying on Truth Social that people are fighting his tariffs on fentanyl. I would quote the entire thing, but it's an unreadable mess: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/114266599439835683

But here's the first sentence: 'Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Rand Paul, also of Kentucky, will hopefully get on the Republican bandwagon, for a change, and fight the Democrats wild and flagrant push to not penalize Canada for the sale, into our Country, of large amounts of Fentanyl, by Tariffing the value of this horrible and deadly drug in order to make it more costly to distribute and buy.'

I'm...pretty sure we haven't put tariffs on fentanyl to make it more costly to distribute and buy.

Yahoo News, wow, that sounds official. Except that's just Telegraph repost, but I guess they sound official, too. Except the story is based on reporting by this site: https://honestreporting.com/

Hmm. That...actually doesn't appear to be any sort of neutral researcher group.

You might notice the distinct lack of any, like, confirmed information in that story. It's just quoting these guys. Hell, half of them are not quotes of _them_, it's the quotes of Andrew Fox _talking about_ what those other people's research, which he has not seen at all, must have uncovered.

What the utter hell? How can anyone take this seriously?

I really like how the article talks about how hard it is to compare the lists cause they're in PDFs and they have to do it by hand. Wow, that sounds like something that _should be made available on the website_, doesn't it? They could easily reformat and show the last three lists as a table, show the changes, show the ages, show the supposedly corrected birthdates and ages, show any evidence that a person was in Hamas .

Except that's actually just Andrew Fox _guessing_ what this other group must have done, so we don't even know they did that.

Really feels like the Telegraph should have gotten that, as the story, instead of just quoting these guys about this, or quoting a guy talking about those guys talking about this.

It's worth reminding people how absurdly random the death penalty is when you actually look at the crimes committed, and that whether or not the government goes for it (When they can) is about 90% determined by the ratio of the societal power and position between the victim and the accused. The higher the ratio, the more likely it is to be demanded.

This usually is noticeable via racial disparity, but here we have an example of such a high class person that a well-educated upper-middle white person can be put to death for murdering him!

Seriously, someone should actually check if we've ever executed someone of his social status before. I'm not sure we have, and if we have, I'm sure it wasn't just for one murder. (Hell, the number of people executed for just one murder is pretty low to start with.)

Oh, just be clear: This is indeed extradition in a legal sense.

When we talk about extradition in the country, we usually think of the _specific_ legal process that is commonly used.

But extradition, under international law, is any prisoner handoff between governments that is done via some sort of transfer agreement, whether or not that includes a court proceeding at either end.

Wait, they're arguing that the prisoners in El Salvador are no longer under US control? That they are not merely holding our prisoners, but we transfer authority to them ? I assumed their defense was the exact opposite, that El Salvador was basically operating as a private prison.

I feel that has very serious legal implications that they have not thought through at all. Specifically, the United Nations Convention Against Torture:

Article 3

1. No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.

2. For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.

*ahem*
https://www.state.gov/reports/2023-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/el-salvador/

Significant human rights issues included credible reports of: unlawful or arbitrary killings; enforced disappearance; torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment by security forces; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; arbitrary arrest or detention; serious problems with the independence of the judiciary; arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy; extensive gender-based violence, including domestic and sexual violence, and femicide; substantial barriers to sexual and reproductive health services access; trafficking in persons, including forced labor; and crimes involving violence targeting lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex persons.

You see that word torture right there? The 'competent authorities', aka, the US State Department, appear to have made a very clear statement in 2023 about whether people detained by the El Salvador government are in danger of being tortured. It is the Current Official US Foreign Policy Conclusion that there are credible reports that prisoners in El Salvador are tortured. On their own website. (Guys, you might want to take down the 'things that will be used as evidence of crimes against humanity' from your website before 'Black guy that got a medal'. Just saying.)

The US government, in court, just claimed they have violated Article 3 of the UN Convention Against Torture. As a _defense_.(1)

Oopsie-doodle. Bet that's going to play well.

The UN Convention Against Torture, incidentally, was signed by the president and ratified by Congress. It is US law.

Article 3 is a restriction on the government, like a lot of the constitution, and like the constitution, there's no actual stated penalty for the government breaking it, but the courts ABSOLUTELY can force the government to follow it.

1) This is, incidentally, why when the Bush administration ferried prisoners overseas to be tortured, it pretended either it still had authority over them and just allowed them to be 'interrogated' by others, or that it never had authority over them at all. Or, sometimes, that the place did not torture. But the Bush administration actually understood laws existed.

China, Japan, and South Korea have teamed up to respond to US tariffs.

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2025-03-31/china-japan-south-korea-will-jointly-respond-to-us-tariffs-chinese-state-media-says

I repeat. China, Japan, and South Korea.

In case people are not aware of the relationships between those three countries, none of those countries really like each other that much, mostly because of historic reasons and arguments over said history and how it is understood. All three relationships have slowly been strengthening recently, but this is, frankly, a huge and somewhat unprecedented step. Absolutely no one saw this coming.

It's entirely possible we're about to lose basically all of our East Asian influence to China.