The Frankish Reich

May I recommend ...

Long ago and oh so far away ...

Why was she horrible? Too right wing? Too "weird" (we haven't heard that one for a while) How can someone be a rising star and yet such a bad candidate? Asking those who live in the region and watched it unfold.

Trump with 5% of the money. That's crazy given that he's ineligible. Of course the theory is that he won't be the titular nominee ... he'll get in through some shenanigans (like the VP resigning, etc)

I remember when Republicans (especially right here) were talking about Winsome as the future of the Republican Party. A true rising star. From what I saw she was a poor candidate. And candidate quality still matters.

I dunno, the NJ Governor race seems like kind of a big one to me. Not even close. And telling that Citarelli avoided campaigning with Trump.

"The devotees of the party in power are smug and arrogant. The devotees of the party out of power are insane" And again, Jane's Law (courtesy of Megan McArdle) holds. All the Trumpies who thought there was a new wave of MAGA sentiment, that the Democrats were dead in the water, now discover that being smug and arrogant is not the ticket to retaining power. The loonies won in NYC, but the regular Dems won everywhere else.

I scrolled through these comments, and most seem to agree with that imam who said the US is filthy and sick. And that's just the MAGAs.

I had no idea this creepy elf was still alive. But since he is: Yes. You and your lot destroyed any hope that Obamacare would work in a fiscal sense by eliminating the personal insurance mandate and fine ("tax" according to Justice Roberts). So congratulations. Oh, and you are a creepy little elf.

Thank you for counting. And categorizing. Not sure what we'd do without you. Wow, Narrative Control is brainwashing me! If we had mods here, they'd no doubt tell us that 90% of these threads could be subsumed under 2 master threads: "Someone on Twitter said something good about Trump" "Someone on Twitter said something bad about Trump" Seems like that's a good idea ...

Stable Genius Update: Late last week: we would release funds to pay SNAP benefits but we don't have the legal authority to do that. If I have that authority, I would do so right away. Two federal court judges: You not only have that authority, you are in fact duty-bound to release those funds to pay benefits immediately. Trump in the wee hours today: I don't care, I'm not gonna do it unless the Senate Dems pass a continuing resolution. Trump by lunchtime (probably after talking to his lawyers): I am releasing those funds, but I'm gonna take my time doing so. And then only half benefits.

Or it could be that Trump's crypto supporters (including now his 3 sons) just admire the entrepreneurs who have figured out how to exploit crypto to allow people to buy all the fentanyl and heroin their buyers desire. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz7e0jve875o The pardon of the Silk Road founder, a truly inexplicable one for a guy who's ready to Blame Canada for drug trafficking while he pardons a real live knowing drug trafficker.

Kind of true, but of course that was an off-season free agent signing. I'm talking more about that trade deadline move that other playoff bound teams seem to make every year.

I don't think this is the Colts year. So I don't think this is a good deal. But ... doesn't anyone here think this is the ballsy kind of move that we never do? The kind of deal that could actually confirm that management finally believes that this IS the year?

I think Prince (now King) Charles called such things "a carbuncle on the landscape."

Damn good question.

Well, the fact that Biden's DOJ didn't seek a lengthier sentence kind of pales in comparison to Trump's pardon? And remember: Trump ostensibly doesn't even know who he is. Yet he pardoned him. President Autosharpie.

Give Ozempic Gal a sandwich before she goes off again!

Person Experiencing Homelessness Seriously, there's a pattern here worldwide, and it's a pattern of mentally ill homeless (or near homeless) people doing horrific things. Our laws reacted to the prior lifetime institutionalization of mentally ill people (often if horrible conditions) by creating a presumption that such people should be free from restraint. And so the pendulum needs to swing back. It is, but very slowly, partly because the law and the courts still make it hard to institutionalize someone, and largely because it costs a lot of money to do so.

Well, my explanation was that CZ's Binance showed a reckless disregard for where all that crypto he was handling came from. That's different than saying he was a cartel member/illegal arms broker, etc., attempting to lauder his own money through crypto. So the penalty reflects the offense. We learn in law school that there are different bases for criminal law and criminal prosecutions. There's punishment: you did a bad thing and you deserve it. There's incapacitation or specific deterrence: if you're in jail, or if you're barred from ever acting as a moneyman again, you personally can't do it again. There's general deterrence: other people will see what happens if you play fast and loose with the law This one was mostly about general deterrence, with a good dose of specific deterrence. And the pardon totally kills the latter and greatly weakens the former.

Train stabber: "no fixed abode." a/k/a homeless.

We apparently can stand by: https://time.com/7330421/sudan-el-fasher-rsf-darfur/

Well, his legacy is certainly ... complicated. If you'd asked me in 2002, I would have said he would go down as the greatest VP in history. His presence, mostly behind the scenes, was critical in our response to 9/11. And I think we forget how successful that immediate response was. I have no doubt that our domestic law enforcement response thwarted other (probably several other) terrorist attacks. And obviously the international response was to eliminate the most dangerous terrorist training base the world has ever seen: Afghanistan. But then came the completely unnecessary and counterproductive Iraq ...

2029-30? 4-5 years? The answer: Josh Allen, unless he starts demanding to go elsewhere. No one else on this team is likely to still be here. There is no one else on this team who we really should be invested in for that length of time.

I'm not sure I would have said it as colorfully. But you do have a point. And yeah, let the buyer beware, Mr. Beane.