The Frankish Reich

Correct. The jury found, after a full civil trial, that Trump digitally penetrated Carroll. This is, therefore, an established finding of fact unless overturned on appeal.

The immediate factor in the French farmer revolt: agricultural use diesel fuel was taxed at a lower level than regular transport diesel. The French government wanted to equalize this. Farmers revolted, the plan was withdrawn. OK, fair to say that the French government proposal was to "raise taxes" on farmers. But that's not the whole story. The whole story is the EU/French subsidies paid to farmers, and EU protectionism keeping out imported agricultural products: https://www.arc2020.eu/agriculture-atlas-biggest-beneficiary/ The agricultural sector in France would be significantly smaller if subsidies were ended. In other words, the French government and the EU prop up French farmers through a complex web of subsidies and import restrictions. The farmer rebellion is mostly about "how dare you propose to stop subsidizing my business," not about ending some kind of socialism. "Don't end socialism; it helps me" is the real rallying cry here.

Right. And this —

Our friends the Saudis.

Maybe we should give Mormons some extra votes since they tend to have a lot of kids? Or how about counting the votes of the childless by some fractional amount. 3/5 maybe?

Then we take Berlin!

I don't get Trump's problem. He's got Kanye on his side. Doesn't that even things out?

True. It does vary by state. California is still much higher, many other states considerably higher.

You need to understand the upshot of your half-baked "argument." Let's make it easy. You are Jewish. Someone, somewhere - let's say in Harvard Yard - carries a sign saying "From the River to the Sea" and "Eliminate All Jews." You live far away - let's say in Buffalo. Has this person "harassed" you? "Threatened" you personally? No. Let's say that person comes to your house at night with a bullhorn and starts chanting the same thing that's on the sign. Has that person "harassed" you? I'd say yes. Has that person "threatened" you? I'd say yes. The Harvard President said "it depends on the context." See? It does depend on the context. People who called on the Harvard President to resign imputed a different statement to her. A statement that was something like, "Should Harvard ban its students and faculty from calling for the elimination of the State of Israel?" Were the statements offensive? Yes. Should they be banned? Let's have that argument. Irv here wants to nuke Gaza. Should that be banned? Let's have that argument. But it's a different question than the one posed by Elise Stefanik. Yes, I'm answering like a lawyer. Because it was a hearing and at hearings people are advised by lawyers to answer only the specific question that is posed.

Haha. I'll check Gas Buddy and tell you what it is today. You need to learn about arguments by analogy.

We just lost to KC because KC averaged 7.7 yards per play. Yes, it would be great to improve the offense too, but ...

Very clever. But maybe you failed to consider the full universe of alternatives. Prices are unlikely to fall, but they may rise at about 2% a year, which, after all, is the Fed's target.

$2.28 at Costco yesterday.

Guy with turban blocks guy with Dodgers ballcap from entering. News at 11.

No wonder Trump doesn't like to be photographed next to him.

One way to settle a lawsuit ...

Is Flynn just batshit crazy? Playing people so he can make money giving speeches to QAnon nuts? Whichever one: ladies and gentlemen, I bring you Trump's National Security Adviser (first term), and Defense Secretary (second), or Why I Am an Anyone But Trumper.

Oh, I'll be glad to go on at greater length about the cultural phenomenon that is The Rise of the Horny Made-Over Conservative Mom if you'd like more. MTG, Boebert, Noem, that Moms for Liberty Threesome Mom ... just getting started.

Not sure if you consider me one of those "lefties," but I am an equal opportunity commenter on the appearance of political candidates. Here's one for Biden: wear glasses. Not just the sunglasses. Glasses. They help to hide those squinty eyes and may actually make him look smarter (not a high bar); more like an elder statesman than an old fart.

I see that the AZ Republican Party chairman who was urging her not to run was previously a Trump campaign guy who was then appointed by Trump to a cushy job at NASA. Who knows what he promised or was promised in exchange for that gig. So maybe it's time to get over all that "insider/outsider Trump vs. The Party Establishment" nonsense. All politicians, Trump and Lake included, are in it for themselves ... And remember: this is a weird race. Kyrsten Sinema is the incumbent, and no longer a Democrat. I don't think she's officially announced if she's running again as an independent. Ruben Gallego is the apparent Dem nominee - a House representative who's generally liberal but a bit unorthodox himself. So the Republican has to have more general appeal (at least that's what the pundits outside and, apparently, inside) the Party think.

You mean that's all? Back to our regularly schedule programming - the media. Matt Yglesias (paywalled; h/t Marginal Revolution) hits the nail on the head on what's going on with media: Conservatives find it annoying that American journalists are so left-wing. But in practice, this generates a much more complicated partisan landscape than you might think. The conservative audience is alienated by the values of mainstream journalism and spends a lot of time consuming propaganda news that is optimized for partisan purposes. The progressive audience finds mainstream journalism congenial enough that it’s hard to compete with, and yet, mainstream journalism produces a steady stream of negativity and ultra-specific focus on the idiosyncratic problems of young urban professionals.

Republicans want to win back the Senate. Their power brokers believe - with good reason - that a Kari Lake candidacy makes it less likely that they will succeed in that mission. I imagine this kind of gentle "persuasion" goes on in pretty much every race without an incumbent.

For what it's worth, PFF agrees with what I saw with my own eyes. Miller was terrible in the regular season: 45.4 on their rating scale, which is sub-replacement level player. But in the (small sample) of two playoff games, they rated him at 86.8, which is almost an elite level, and basically the same as he was in 2021-2022 pre-injury. My takeaway: I have no idea whether he'll be able to handle his pre-injury workload. But I think at a minimum he'll be an effective situational pass rusher next year. In other words, he'll be what Leonard Floyd was for us this year. And maybe, just maybe, quite a bit better. He's a special player, and like all HOF level players, has a special kind of drive to be among the best. Based on what I saw this year - including trying to come back too early - I'm guessing he has more than a little something left in the tank.

Odd to pair that with the lesbian haircut.

One thing I know for sure: the 9/11 hijackers didn't show their cards. Why should Pegula?