The Frankish Reich

I thought I saw on the, umm, football portion of this, umm, football fan forum that Ol' Tarheel is in London for the Bills game. What marvelous company for those other Bills fans. Not to mention the fine people of Ol' England, hosting our favorite misanthrope, spending his time in what just might be the greatest city in the world by posting nonsense here. Keep calm and carry on the idiocy across the pond!

Good Lord. In what way is this "fake news?" A couple years ago we had an off the record comment, presumably from Kelly, that Trump had said this. Kelly now confirms it: Yes. He said it. He really did say that the men and women who served this country in combat were suckers and losers for doing so. If that's not a big deal for you, well, perhaps you need to take a step back and examine your own commitment to this country.

Gaetz is overplaying his hand. McCarthy? He has no political future. He is a California representative. A Republican cannot win any state-wide office in California. So no Governor, no Senator, no nothing. Speaker of the House is the best he can ever do. Lobbyist after that. He's a man with nothing to lose. So will he cut a deal with Democrats? Yeah, he did it once, he may do it again, just to actually govern a bit and to stick it to the Gaetz-MTG-Boebert idiots. Really, if McCarthy is pushed out, what alternative Speaker candidate could be elected by a majority of the House - a House with a 4 seat Republican majority? Hakim Jeffries?

I realize the article is paywalled. Quick summary: some of the people interviewed adopt this view. "Hey, I'm not gonna ever be able to afford a down payment on a million dollar house (e.g., living in an expensive city), so why not eat, drink, and be merry now?" (They're about 30 years old) Others? More of the "we deserved this $10,000 family vacation to Maui even though it'll make it that much harder to accumulate the savings we want for the future." So it's both. But the general point: if you are afraid of not having a job, not being able to support yourself or even more so, your family, I think you don't do these types of things. Conclusion: a lot, lot, lot of people aren't scared of that scenario. Maybe they should be. Maybe we won't really have spending-driven inflation under control until they do.

If not asking for a jury trial really was on account of his lawyers simply forgetting to do so ... wow. Those are some lawyers. Since it's not a criminal case, the remedy (should the Trump Org be assessed big damages) is really just to sue the lawyers, not to get a do-over. I'm not sold on that "simple error" theory though. I haven't seen that the Trump lawyers have filed a late motion for a jury trial. Did they do that? You'd at least want to preserve that for appeal although the judge clearly isn't having it.

Oh, I think we are headed for a recession (not depression). But it seems like most people disagree. You're not familiar with the "nest egg" principle?

That was the old London. If you're willing to try foods from all over the world it's fantastic now!

Revealed preferences. If you are scared about losing your job, about not being able to make ends meet, you don't splurge on vacations and Taylor Swift tickets. Watch what people do, not what they say. https://www.wsj.com/economy/consumers/americans-are-still-spending-like-theres-no-tomorrow-6a1d307?mod=hp_lead_pos2 Interest rates are up. Inflation remains high. Pandemic savings have shrunk. And the labor market is cooling. Yet household spending, the primary driver of the nation’s economic growth, remains robust. Americans spent 5.8% more in August than a year earlier, well outstripping less than 4% inflation. And the experience economy boomed this summer, with Delta Air Lines reporting record revenue in the second quarter and Ticketmaster selling over 295 million event tickets in the first six months of 2023, up nearly 18% year-over-year. Economists and financial advisers say consumers putting short-term needs and goals above long-term ones is normal. Still, this moment is different, they say. A tough housing market has more consumers writing off something they’d historically save for, while the pandemic showed the instability of any long-term plans related to health, work or day-to-day life. So, they are spending on once-in-a-lifetime experiences because they worry they may not be able to do them later.

The all-time stupid, ignorant comment. Has Trump ever been in a forest in the West? I mean, other than flying over it? Water, water, it's everywhere! It's free!!! Water the forest floor, no fires!!! Why didn't we think of that before? And this is the guy who says his opponent is senile. Very interesting, the Thomas recusal!

Welcome back, to that same old place that you laughed about. ***t hole country deserves the clown shows it continues to vote for. I can no longer take part in the blatantly obvious distractions and low info discussions about ***t no one cares about as you continue to leave this country worse off to the kids we’re only going to have significantly less of because we can’t afford anything and, you aren’t allowed to say anything sane. Like there are 2 genders and grooming trans kids being pushed by Ds is evil. Good luck y’all. Hey, that's no way to say goodbye. Just four days ago you were so depressed about Ronnie's failure to get any traction whatsoever that you symbolically excited the arena, only to return to carry on a conversation with yourself. Welcome back, Blitzie.

Depends what the foreign country is! Thankfully London has some world class distractions. Jags, get out there tonight and every night until the wee hours to experience all of it!

😁 An artful CB getting burned is still so much better than a clumsy CB falling down.

I thought this was an unnecessary detail. But no, it was "getting a late night slice of pizza" from his fridge. A cautionary tale. Seriously though, I think I was in the minority here I thinking that Tre had finally made in at all the way back. He took some flak here for supposedly taking his time in recover, but in retrospect he probably pushed it a little too hard last year. This season? I thought he was excellent. He obviously has the dedication to do it again if that's what he wants to do.

OJ is a man of action, not of words.

Yeah, nothing on it. We can hope ....

Apparently a suspicious man identified as Hay Repps was seen egging him on to do it, such that Bowman cannot be held responsible for his actions. I demand an investigation into Repps! He must be some kind of government-funded provocateur ...

Blitzie, is that you? I thought you stormed out of the room after the pathetic debate, never to return? That was so 48 hours ago. Welcome back. I saw the Bill Maher interview. He did well! Coming into the lion's den suits him. Maher is more than a little sympathetic to the anti-woke cause too. I also saw a bit of Newsom with Hannity. Same thing! Relaxed, confident, looked much better than when preaching to his own choir. Is this a new thing, talking to people who don't necessarily agree with you? What is America coming to?

That's some list. And we thought we had it bad in Buffalo. The Jets are just cursed. I'd forgotten they went down this path a few times before, bringing in the aging QB. They bring in Favre, it doesn't work. Then it kind of does work the following season for the Vikings, at least for a while. They brought in Boomer Esiason (Bruce Smith gave him a concussion and it didn't work). They brought in Neil O'Donnell who was pretty good for a while with the Steelers, and he was terrible and then ripped up his shoulder. They brought in Vinny Testaverde and it briefly was magic, and then HE blew out his Achilles. Why did I ever think this Aaron Rodgers thing would work? 😁

Now that's some good memory ...

Gavin is now in an identity politics pickle! Ordinarily you'd just appoint some boring career politician (often a white guy) to serve out the term and not get in the way of the primary contest. But no matter what he does, today's Democratic party will find fault with it for not ticking the right diversity box(es)

Good luck. It's a political talking point for both parties. Republicans aren't proposing any serious fixes ("the wall" is not addressing what is really happening, and Title 42 was a public health authority) because I suspect they like the video of the caravans entering. Democrats aren't proposing any serious fixes ("comprehensive immigration reform" for them means an amnesty for people who've been here a few years, and that won't do anything to stop new arrivals; in fact, it would likely encourage them) because they like to harp on how cruel Republican policies were. You are right: I think the clear majority of Americans see room for compromise and a coherent policy. The candidates we get don't, or it's not in their selfish partisan interests to propose it. I guess I should say "what a mess."

Well we can agree on that. it was basically the working principle of Obama’s first term, and Bill Clinton’s first term before that.

Andrew Tate. Russell Brand. Look it up. This is the insanity (or lack of good faith) of a lot of right wingers these days. Teacher assigns a book that includes a same sex teen romance? Groomer! Meanwhile, pervy adults who actually recruit teenagers into the commercial sex trade (Tate) or hit on 16 year olds when they're 30 (Brand) are just apparently guys with different lifestyles who not only should escape criminal consequences, but who should also in no way have their careers and money making impacted. Not "groomers" to you! Just like Humpty Dumpty. The word means precisely what you choose it to mean, nothing more or less.

First, I disagree with the notion that you can limit birthright citizenship. Vivek was correct (for me, his best moment) when he cited the exact language of the 14th Amendment. And there have been prominent legal scholars who have agreed with that take. But I think the plain language - born in the USA and subject to the jurisdiction thereof - applies to everyone born on US soil. Are you "subject to the jurisdiction" of the USA if you enter illegally? Well, in almost all cases, yes. You commit a crime, you can be prosecuted for it. You are expected to abide by the laws of this country even though you didn't come here legally. Vivek talked about diplomats, but they have that famous diplomatic immunity, which does exempt them from lots of laws of general applicability. Tim Scott jumped in and put it in historical context, as the 14th Amendment was clearly a post-Civil War Amendment about black Americans. But ... that's a tough argument for conservative legal scholars to make, as they always focus on the words of the text and not on things like the historical circumstances surrounding the adoption of an Article/Amendment. See the whole 2nd Amendment thing, in which the "well regulated militia" clause was basically brushed aside ...

And many litigants chose a trial before a judge ("bench trial") instead of before a jury. Particularly with this type of thing - financial crimes - if you think you have a strong case you want a trained lawyer/judge to be assessing the evidence rather than a bunch of unknown/wildcard jurors. So it's often a tactical choice even if you do have the right to a jury trial. (Note that the federal constitution gives you that right in a civil case in federal court, but that doesn't apply to states unless their individual constitutions have a similar right. I don't know about NY)