The Frankish Reich

Umm, isn't that kind of on Trump? I mean, if I'm ever on trial for falsifying financial records, I can assure you that a porn star (and I generally refuse to use that term - I will call her what she is, a sex worker; no one is a "star" if only porn addicts know their name) will not be involved in any way.

One semester in law school I did an internship. One of my fellow interns was a Stanford Law student. He was also a full-time commercial pilot for a major airline, and had been for years. How did he ever get through law school? He told me pilots have a lot of down time so he'd study then. What about class? He said he'd go on the first day and then fix his schedule so he was free for exams. And they gave out A grades like candy. So, yeah, you do have a point. But they still rule the world (if they want to).

At this point, it doesn't make sense to focus on individual polls. I'm more interested in looking at aggregate trends. And this Trump v. Biden race seems to be accelerating some of the political realignment trends we've seen starting to bubble up over the last eight years. From fivethirtyeight: - Overall, Trump +1.1. But there's a whopping 18 percent still "undecided" or supporting third party (mostly RFK Jr) candidates. That's kind of crazy when we have two candidates about as perfectly well known as anyone could be in national politics. I don't think anyone knows how that will resolve. - The generic ballot: Dems +0.7. Not so good for them, but still (despite Biden dragging it down) essentially tied. - Favorability/Approval: Biden - 18 percent, Trump -11. It really is true that we have a race with the two most unpopular candidates ever. That introduces even more uncertainty since we haven't seen this before. As noted here, the realignment by age group seems real. There's a significant move of older people to Democrats, younger people to Republicans. (at least in the polls). Step back a minute and it kind of makes sense - older people tend to be "conservative" in a non-American politics sense, meaning they don't want to see radical change. They're at a stage in life where they value continuity (even stasis) over sharp change. And which party is the one that wants more radical change now? Republicans of the Trump variety. It is exactly the opposite of what I've seen in most of my adult life. The realignment by sex also appears to have accelerated, and the issues that are most salient with men vs. women (particularly abortion rights) probably have a lot to do with this. As always (and as always disappoints me), it'll be turnout, turnout, turnout in November. Which side can energize it's somewhat altered base. Which side can get that 18 percent to swing to its side (and to actually turn out). I really don't think Trump's legal woes will have much impact, since that's already baked into the cake. Barring some kind of obvious health crisis, so is Biden's age. I hate the choice the parties have given us, and I'm hardly alone. But I will vote, and a lot of people won't.

We'll have to wait for Barron's graduation for our tea-leaf readings. Unless Trump dodges it to do a campaign event in Minnesota (despite what he told the judge). Maybe she'll swat his attempt at hand-holding again. Unless the renegotiated pre-nup requires her to engage in minor PDA.

https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1748-elements-perjury-materiality#:~:text=1748.-,Elements Of Perjury -- Materiality,was addressed." Kungys v.

No it isn't. The law has always treated false statements under oath differently when testimony involves things that go to the heart of the claim as opposed to collateral matters.

It wasn't me that gave that comment an "awesome." But it isn't an unfair comparison. Republicans back then (very different from Republicans now) took the position that lying under oath by denying a sexual encounter was a "high crime or misdemeanor" that made a man unfit to serve as President. I would say that this is more similar than it is different ...

Brief. And it was shorter than normal. Things did get a bit hairy though. At least it didn't have time to mushroom into something bigger.

But what about St Bonaventure?

Turn off Fox News and the Pizzagate Jack twitter feed! Bad day for Trump all along. The Florida trial judge was going to find any excuse to kick it past the election. We already knew that. But the Trump trial testimony will stick. Silk pajamas. Trump in boxers and a wife beater, Old Spice in the bathroom. Melania in a different bedroom. Sex worker reminds him of his daughter. Those are the takeaways.

Isn't Tara Reade seeking refuge in that bastion of freedom, the Russian Federation? (nothing more predictable: bad news day for Trump = Tarheel reviving old anti-Biden rumors. Next up: stupid Trump the Hero memes) https://www.newsweek.com/biden-accuser-tara-reade-angry-shes-being-ignored-republicans-1883078 (caution: she fills up the whole screen, and I mean the whole screen)

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/07/politics/mar-a-lago-trump-nauta-classified-documents/ tl;dr Walt Nauta flipped. Told the grand jury that Trump said to just return random boxes in response the the National Archives request for specific records. Then Trump’s attorneys got him to flip back. Loyalty. Yeah loyalty. Trump over country.

The bigger problem: lack of competition in the credit card/processing business. Swipe fees are miraculously sticky even as the ability to process transactions becomes easier and easier with new technology. Why wouldn't an industry disrupter come in and gain huge market share by offering a lower swipe fee, or even a set (not percent) fee? There shouldn't be huge barriers to entry here. But there are, and its the power of Visa/Mastercard/Amex and their immense lobbying/political contributions practices.

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/visa-inc/summary?id=D000029689 I think you might find this provides some answers.

I'll beat Billstime to the punch: In related news, I hear the Roman Catholic Church is changing its name to Churching America.

Right. They had a Trump Org employee authenticate the actual checks. Whether she was paid is not seriously disputed. It's "what did Trump know (or direct) and when did he know it"

Before all the cosmetic surgery?

Not a problem. I just think of Trump in those boxers and T shirt and let's just say any excitement immediately dissipates. Unfortunately we don't have an actual photo, but I think this is close enough. The best people, I say. Only the best people.

Yeah, stop trying to quell my admittedly "prurient interest" (as the Supreme Court put it many years ago) in today's developments. I'm almost as excited as a Tarheel getting a glimpse of Ray Epps on a security cam! Just another "not my type" (E. Jean Carroll, who Trump mistook for his wife) where he was able to perform only because he fantasized that it was Ivanka.

And your answer is yes, you do read them. Thank you, too! Now do the #1 poster here this week, this month, this year ... second only all-time to the poster he honored by taking the name DR's Ghost.

Husband of the Year is also Father of the Year. https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-attend-fundraiser-day-barrons-graduation-1897759

Says the person reading them

This is simply not true. It is not hard at all to get into college. Many (most?) colleges are essentially open admissions. The problem is staying on task and sticking with something. And men are failing in that. It's not just college, it's also putting in the time and work to learn a valuable skill. I just had an electrician do some work on my house - he told me what a journeyman makes these days, and it's about 3 times what my job hires college educated legal assistants at.

Short response: Hanson is a good writer. He used to write for National Review if I remember correctly. He expanded some articles into a book, Mexifornia. It focused on the negative impacts of uncontrolled immigration into the CA Central Valley that he grew up in and still loves. It is a good book, (well, at least the articles were good articles; I never read them republished in book form) foretelling some of the problems of mass immigration before many others. This kind of stuff made him a darling of the anti-immigration right. Then like many others, he started to feed those people what they wanted to hear. His writing became more polemic, less insightful. And now he's reduced himself to a clickbait tweeter.

The first "encounter" - that's on her. She's a grown up and should have known what Trump wanted. Trump's continued attempts to contact her to get some more, while dangling the false hope of getting her a role on The Apprentice? That's the stuff of Harvey Weinstein.