Gromnir

... wtf. ... so it turns out this "misstep" as a fed judge generously described, were purposeful directed by the deputy attorney general, and from the admonition about active body cams, those who carried out the illegitimate directive were aware that what they were doing was wrong. ... am not genuine surprised save for how brazen is the efforts by this administration. the true tragedy is we expect, at best, limited and partisan outrage with the vast majority o' americans shrugging this revelation off with indifference, 'cause they are all bad, right? maga folks will see nothing wrong with the todd blanche intervention or cop behavior save that the ice folks were forced to pretend to follow due process as they arrested the enemies within. a f'ing circle jerk of masked thugs carried out violence they knew to be wrong at the direction o' the deputy attorney general of the US, and am doubtful anybody but pod save america and meidas touch folks is gonna still be talking 'bout this by next wednesday. wtf.

am sorry to say that am thinking you are identifying the perhaps singular aspect o' the embarrassing totalitarian jamboree hosted by trump and hegseth most o' the command officers approved. wanna take bets on the % o' generals and admirals who agree with the notion that accusations o' toxic command from often anonymous sources is a real and genuine problem for today's US military? the fact those generals and admirals feel as if they could only anonymously express their own views on such matters is likely, in their minds, proof o' the problem. the trump portion o' the pep rally were disquieting on multiple levels, and the ridiculous nature o' the event itself no doubt bothered near everybody in the auditorium at quantico, but am thinking is no accident that pete spoke first. yeah, the military brass did not find pete's fafo bit funny and am doubtful most generals is on board with the secdef's new (racist) beard guidelines, but am disappointing confident that a large % (and like the majority) o' the hostage audience was in fact supportive o' the aspect you are calling out in your post. pete's promise to put an end to anonymous accusations o' toxic command were the proverbial fresh meat. those anonymous accusations, particular claims related to misogyny and racism, have been a sore spot for many o' those older men in uniform held hostage for more than an hour in quantico today. getting the collected generals and admirals buy into the idea o' using the US military against americans on american soil were (and thankful still is, ) a tough sell, but trump is always the salesman, even when he is slurring words and garbling sentences. aside, and hopeful more significant... is also a good time to re-read judge wilkinson's blistering condemnation of the trump administration's efforts to send US residents to cecot w/o due process. https://time.com/7278774/judge-harvie-wilkinson-opinion-read-full-text-trump-abrego-garcia/ IF we manage to get through the next +3 years w/o a full embrace o' franco style authoritarianism, am thinking we are gonna owe a great deal to a handful o' so-called conservative judges who not only has held firm to Constitutional norms, but have been willing to speak truth to power at a time when courage has been complete absent from republican Congressman. HA! Good Fun!

@Elerondyeah, we specific identified the tech bros feeling left out o' the decision making regarding government regulation o' ai as a motivation for choosing trump over harris, but the problem is they get everything else trump along with deregulation. trump is mercurial and is simultaneous trying to take control of the US economy. in 2024, the potential downside o' a trump Presidency for tech bros as he talked up tariffs, mass deportations and suggested he would overhaul the fed, shoulda' been enough to discourage people who were collective making more money under biden than any group o' people had ever made during a similar span o' time in the history o' the US. take him seriously but not literally. people have been saying that bit o' pith since 2015 and time and again trump shows us how it is a mistake to not take him literal even if he frequent tacos. so is 2025 and the tariffs were never gonna happen for reals is now happening and so too is mass deportations. contrary to trump claims, nobody in their right mind is making major US manufacturing investments 'cause o' endemic uncertainty caused by trump and we finally got a rate cut that trump wanted, but we got it 'cause signs is showing a serious weakening o' the economy. any foreign government which is willing to make a billion dollar investment in trump's sh!t coin gets favorable deals, which leads more uncertainty, and certainty was kinda the reason the dollar has been an effective reserve currency which is partial why we got market multipliers in the US which has been considerable better than europe or asian. yeah, the tech guys is building ai data centers at a break neck pace, data centers which create almost no new jobs for american workers, and certainty not for those rust belt folks who voted for trump, but simultaneous trump has cut federal investment in all kinda energy projects 'cause he hates windmills and solar, and is not as if by doing so trump made the fossil fuel guys happy 'cause trump is simultaneous working overtime to keep fuel prices low while also making energy production more expensive via his tariff shenanigans and mass deportations. the tech bros need vast new energy production and trump actions is making energy production more difficult and less lucrative, so... etc. yeah, the tech bros got deregulation o' ai and they exorcised lina khan, but on balance, are they more uncertain today compared to september o' 2024? am understanding why bankers and investors is ok with uncertainty 'cause they is making buckets o' money whether there is a massive shift up or down in the markets. am disappointed by the myopia o' the investor class, but we get it. converse, if during the biden years you were a tech bro who made more money than were previously imagined, why would the reality o' 2025 look like a win? HA! Good Fun!

am agreeing the US is embracing fascism with disappointing vigor and speed, but am simply noting that all too often people use "fascist" and "authoritarian" interchangeable... save that fascist feels worse, so is more pejorative? most o' us rolled our eyes when vol identified every group or action he disagreed with as nazi. all too often, people do something similar with the fascit label. dunno. regardless, am agreeing that the US is pretty deep into fascism at the moment. the following is kinda silly, but also illustrative valhalla? the commander in chief dodged the draft for chrissakes, but somehow we got this weird quasi-comic warrior culture being perpetuated by pete hegseth and... kash patel, the trump administration's living embodiment o' peter pettigrew. serious? add contempt/fear o' science, demonization o' trans people and minority groups, a s'posed "invasion" at the southern border, exploitation of outrage and grievance, as well as the deep state nonsense. etc. but again, is not difficult to make a fascist argument for almost any government organization or action... if you don't like 'em. am simply pointing out that identifying generic authoritarian behaviors and practices by a government doesn't genuine push the needle toward a result of fascism in any meaningful way. as for tech company's following the lure o' profit, we agree... mostly. during the biden years the tech companies were doing extreme well. profits were historic good. the US economy were the "envy of the world" and all that. sure, ordinary americans had struggles with inflation and cost of living concerns, but the tech bros were unaffected by such minutiae. one reason why bernie sanders and elizabeth warren were always outraged during the biden term is 'cause never had so few made so much money in such a short a period o' time, and those tech bro billionaires were paying proportional less in taxes than rich people had been required to pay for +80 years. converse, trump is an ignorant buffoon who doesn't care what happens to the economy as long as he personal gets rich. the tech guys knew before the election that tariffs were problematic and trump's current assault on the fed is not helping with investor confidence. mass deportations is necessarily gonna result in further inflation as well as a shrinking of the consumer and tax-paying base as well as creating severe impacts on specific industries such as agriculture and construction. the tech guys know that if the economy tanks, they will also suffer, but they nevertheless supported (and continue to support) erratic and ignorant as 'posed to the status quo, a status quo which were making them all fabulously rich. so, if profits were your most pressing concern, which bet made more sense, harris or trump? am gonna suggest that even more than profit, the tech guys is blinded by their need for control. there is a belief amongst the tech bros that if they have control, they will keep making money no matter what, so control and profit is necessarily intertwined, but if if they gotta make a choice 'tween the two, control wins. biden frequently cut the tech oligarchs outta the decision making 'round government regulation of ai and lina khan was kinda their nightmares given flesh. converse, the tech guys can get trump to respond to their phone calls and a shiny bauble and a performative genuflection is, they believe, gonna get them the results they desire. kleptorcacy and oligarchy ain't the same thing, but the tech oligarchs is betting that they are able to convince trump to enrich them too even if the recent conflict 'tween elon musk and donald trump should prove that they don't have legit control. regardless, if profits were genuine your most pressing concern, why would you f with the status quo o' the previous administration? HA! Good Fun! ps our biggest concern regarding the endemic misunderstanding o' fascism is that the only reason most maga folks, not to mention a considerable % o' the remaining general population, reflexive balk at being called fascist is 'cause they don't know what is fascism. w/o mention o' fascism, describe the kinda vague ideology being promoted by tucker carlson, bennie johnson and yeah, charlie kirk using the framework o' umberto eco's fourteen features. describe in glowing terms how tucker, unlike the mainstream media, recognizes the threat of trans people and immigrants, or how bennie johnson embraces a return o' masculinity. without mention o' fascism, use the fourteen features to describe the increasingly typical right-wing pundit and then see how many americans see such as problematic v. positive. when the el paso walmart shooting happened, we read the shooter's manifesto. in 2009, the manifesto woulda' sounded like the ranting o' a lunatic. in 2019, the manifesto's main points were familiar to anybody who followed tucker carlson. @Pidescois no doubt certain that fascism is unhealthy for a society, and history supports that conclusion, but am increasing of the opinion that fascism is only seen as pejorative by most maga types because they don't know what fascism is. pps am also gonna observe how most o' the media companies, law firms and universities who has capitulated were similar going mask off in the name of profits. as noted, the law firms who rolled over for tump were the firms who has big merger and acquisition portfolios. the current kerfuffle regarding jimmy kimmel happened 'cause the head o' the fcc intimated that he would kill a prospective merger deal 'tween sinclair and nexstar. earlier when cbs and abc caved to trump whims, it were also likely due to the fact they got big deals in the works which require fed approval to happen. universities caved as soon as trump went after their grants. etc. this trump administration has had difficulty avoiding tripping over their own feet even as the rough beast, its hour come at last, slouches toward bethlehem. even so, you gotta hand it to the project 2025 folks as they appeared to bet that all the big talk from lawyers, universities and others regarding rights and justice was just so much air and that if tested, people with the power to make a difference would choose their third vacation house as 'posed to remaining true to their espoused convictions. trump, is a psycopath, but am s'posing that is the source o' much o' his success. trump can smell weakness?

you are describing authoritarianism more than fascism, but such confusion ain't your fault as the definition o' fascism is a gestalt o' somewhat related qualities and factors which exist to greater or lesser degrees in various real world examples of fascism. given the admitted fuzzy descriptor o' fascism, you end up with kinda a dual problem as 1) almost nobody genuine knows what fascism means, and 2) it is not difficult to legitimize pounding any square peg you don't like into the fascist round hole. if you don't like cops, the catholic church or no-smoking areas, then is all too common you will see those entities, organizations and regulations as fascist. authoritarian + more-than-just-bad = fascist? am not suggesting @Pidescois doing such, but am sure you have noticed such behavior. that said, the current US embrace of authoritarianism is bordering on axiomatic. for crying out loud, even the trump campaign distanced itself from project 2025 during the run up to the election in part because even the folks at fox recognized the proposed blueprint was overtly embracing authoritarian methodology to achieve extreme goals... were a franco christmas list for chrissakes. the pushback against project 2025 complaints from the right was not that project 2025 were a legit approach to government reform but rather that libs were using the mad scribblings o' a fringe group to unjust paint trump as a wannabee dictator. we are eight months into this Presidency and something like 47% o' project 2025 goals has been implemented. fascism? if you were attempting to plot where the US is on a fascist graph or spectrum, am willing to concede that due to the challenging nature o' the fascist definition, there is uncertainty in definitive identifying nascent fascist regimes sans equivocation. nevertheless, 2025 US has gotta be worse than 1930s and charles lindbergh, yes? ... am disappointed by the tech companies, media organizations and even universities as they capitulate at the first sign o' trump displeasure. few law firms have fought back against trump, although every one who has done so won in court. those firms with any kinda mergers and acquisitions portfolio has too often displayed humiliating, if predictable, cowardice. am not at all shocked by the craven servility o' Congressional republicans. also, we fully anticipated that +1/3 o' the country would cheer on trump as he indulged his most salient personality attributes: greed, vanity, pettiness, ignorance, cruelty. most o' this freaking mess is what we has warned 'bout all too often, although am gonna admit we were genuine dumbfounded by the blatant grift of the proposed tik tok deal... and cecot caught us complete off guard. is september 2025 and we keep waiting for some kinda pushback from ordinary americans. trump loyalists will stick with the President no matter what, but the majority o' americans ain't hardcore maga. there is some encouraging signs that the mass deportations and ending protected status for venezuelan asylum seekers is having an impact on those admitted diverse latino voters who flipped from democrat to republican in the recent election, but the problem is that while they no longer trust trump, am doubtful they are more enamored with "godless" democrats in 2025 than they was in 2024. still, if all those latinos just don't vote, it would help democrats in the midterms. will it take some unspecific level o' inflation/stagflation to finally motivate americans to protest en masse, 'cause masked ice agents mistaken brutalizing american citizens hasn't. sending the national guard to american cities? meh. trump and elon's colossal failed promise of $2 trillion in dodge savings? tax cuts for billionaires leading to rural hospital shutdowns? trump's sh!t coin shennanigans? the epstein files? what? joe manchin is doing a book tour. kamala harris also released a book. what we learned via reporting o' the books (is no way in hell we read either offering) is that the only thing democrats and republicans can agree on in 2025 is that democrats suck. anywho, we bring up manchin specific 'cause we saw him recent on a podcast (to sell his book) and among other topics, he explained why west virginians keep voting republican in spite o' the fact republicans has now controlled the state for years and the economic situation in west virginia has gotten noticeable worse-- what would it take for a demcorat to win in west virgina? manchin conceded that the democrat brand is too toxic in west virginia for any democrat to win, regardless o' economic policies or promises. is tribal/social/community which has west virginians reject democrats, and it ain't so much democrat economic policies which is the problem. the people of west virginia won't vote democrat 'cause they see democrats as habitual "mainstreaming" behaviors west virginains don't approve. democrat values is repugnant, so west virginians will vote against democrats regardless o' economic interests. let that sink in when trying to predict future election outcomes. HA! Good Fun!

the ruling in the birthright citizenship case, which did not address in anyway what constitutes US citizenship, will have almost no impact on the birthright citizenship case, which am gonna guess has already been refiled to get around the arcane procedural issue scotus identified. however, for a large number o' other trump administration actions, this is a game changer. am pressed for time, so can't give it the time it deserves, but the point is that today's 6-3 birthright citizenship decision should have no meaningful practical effect on the birthright citizenship issue. HA! Good Fun! ps: (quick addition) J Amy Coney Barrett messed this up whether you agree with the outcome or not. the ruling offers little in the way o' practical guidance and am predicting a multitude o' new litigation which will need to lurch back to scotus before we get answers to the numerous new questions this decision spawned.

am having heard that this dlc is uncharacteristically stable and relative bug-free for an owlcat release. however, am expecting an inevitable rebalancing patch to drop soonish, a patch which based on past experience has a noteworthy possibility of breaking existing saves. as such, to reduce frustration, am gonna wait to restart a new game and play beyond character creation until after the next patch. HA! Good Fun!

Senate parliamentarian deals blow to Republicans over Medicaid provisions in Trump's megabill The ruling is a major setback for Republican leadership, who are under pressure to expeditiously move it to the Senate floor to meet the July deadline. This ruling will require potentially major reworks of the bill with relatively little time to accomplish them. And no matter how they change it, leaders are likely to frustrate some faction of the Republican conference, which could imperil the bill's passage. ... not accurate, but it might be true. by a majority vote, the senate could overrule the parliamentarian, but that almost never happens. 'course a whole lotta almost never happens has been happening under trump, yes? also, the scotus procedural ruling on deportations to third country is disappointing and has the Court fully embracing its ordinary three wise monkey attitude. "Instead, at least five of the same justices who, as recently as April, were especially adamant that alleged alien enemies have a right to notice and an opportunity to be heard before they can be removed under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 were willing to sign off on a ruling that effectively allows for countless other migrants to be removed to third countries where they have credible arguments that they’ll be mistreated—for no other reason than because they’ve already been held to be removable to some other country. Due process apparently matters to these justices on the initial removability question, but not beyond that." the Court, back in april, recognized that the government were intentional misleading in their efforts to rush plaintiffs outta jurisdictions just ahead of judge rulings being delivered in addition to the fed's embrace of deceitful shell games such as ceding authority of deportees to the department of defense while claiming that judge orders specified only homeland security and ice... not to mention sh!te like the doj is serious arguing that abrego garcia should not be released from criminal custody 'cause then he would be deported, resulting in the State losing the opportunity to criminal prosecute a bad guy. oh, and emil bove HA! Good Fun!

a few o' those go considerable past the last decade, so am not sure what the temporal range is if we are including x-files and firefly, which both had their final episodes over twenty years past, yes? example: pushing dasies and wonderfalls were broadcast after firefly and x-files, but they is a bit remote. fleabag, better call saul, hannibal, atlanta, true detective (season 1) and a few seasons of fargo all are near the top o' our favorite tv series from the last ~decade. a couple other notables: mr robot had loads o' great performances, but... am curious ambivalent. not sure why we didn't like it more. the bear. wth? how the heck is the bear categorized as a comedy? great show that makes us feel terrible. we watched the bear and thought it were fantastic, but maybe something resonated too much, 'cause we frequent were made uncomfortable on a physical level when watching the bear. chernobyl, shogun and watchmen is miniseries we enjoyed. kinda surprised by shogun-- maybe we liked it more 'cause we were expecting so little? keep in mind, am old enough to have seen the original nbc shogun miniseries when it were first televised. regardless, can't stress how much we approve of fleabag. HA! Good Fun! ps the 80s was a good time for broadcast miniseries, and only about half of them starred richard chamberlain. in fact, richard chamberlain was jason bourne back in the late 80s. 'bout a year after nbc's shogun, masada, with peter o'toole (we kid you not) and peter strauss were released by abc... think it were abc. am realizing that with times being what they are, there is 0% chance o' a masada remake, which is too bad. 1989, at the end o' the decade, we got lonesome dove. was a whole lotta not good miniseries, but following rich man, poor man and roots, they became expected annual occurrences for the networks, and a few o' those miniseries were justifiably memorable even when they weren't fantastic.

fixed maga politicians is positively giddy that the democrat clown car operation is likely gonna make a thirty-three year old with extreme limited policy making experience, who seeming wants to throw money at every problem in a city where they already waste too much money and who is okie dokie with globalize the intafada, one o' the more visible democrats in the country. mayor of nyc is so not a learn-on-the-job office. and maga has been holding up bernie sanders as an extinction level threat to scare independents and moderates on both side of the aisle to instead choose republican candidates? mamdami is the politician maga has been praying to baphomet to send 'em... although gozer the gozerian might be the more appropriate dark god given we are talking 'bout nyc. there were other democrat candidates, but democrat leadership somehow let this become a binary mamdani v. cuomo situation as you accurate observe. As Donors Work Against Mamdani, Top Democrats Stop Short of Backing Him the democrat establishment coulda' gotten behind zellnor myrie or brad lander (and brad lander is also a progressive, but his policy positions are far more realistic and he had a much better chance o' being a successful progressive mayor,) but instead they went with andrew cuomo? the accused sex offender who had to take his limo five blocks to vote in the primary? maga politicians is loving this, and their wet dreams has democrats doing similar in places where the margins is six points or less instead of +50 democrat. edit: the thing to keep in mind when attempting to translate trump's gibberish is that he is a deeply stupid person. HA! Good Fun!

the people who selective edit trump and convince themselves that the President is less corrupt, vain, greedy and petty than his actions reveal him to be never ceases to amaze us. first term, when trump announced that he were gonna fire comey 'cause o' the russia investigation, people were shocked. when the President announced that the g-7 would be held at one of his golf resorts, people laughed, until they realized he were serious. "slow the testing down," were trump's demand and his solution for reducing the USA's high covid numbers, which were a manifest insane position to take, right? ... right? oh, and muslim ban? were literal hundreds o' such in the first term. during trump's campaign for 2.0, he announced a whole lotta illegal, immoral and seeming impossible. we learned that the bestest word in the dictionary is tariffs and that as future President he would tariff anybody with whom we had a trade deficit, in spite o' the fact near every economist observed that such a plan were not only nonsensical but trump's method o' dealing with trade deficits amounted top a kinda self immolation for the US. mass deportations? 'course it were ludicrous that 20 million undocumented, a number vast inflated and implausible, not only were impractical to deport, but that any significant effort to do so would gut punch numerous industries, so of course what trump really meant was he were gonna deport criminal undocumented aliens. doge would get rid o' so much waste fraud and abuse that concerns about the big beautiful bill debt would be a non factor... oh, and please reflect on january f'ing 6, for those who keep trying to memory hole that one. we gotta once again show receipts? how many here and elsewhere shrugged off trump suggestions that he would contest the election months before the election took place 'cause even trump knew he couldn't get away with that. honest, what about the past ten years of trump social media, interviews and campaign stumps has convinced people that it is safe to ignore the insane, stoopid and overt illegal plans trump announces? HA! Good Fun!

the only positive we see from trump's predictable premature declaration that the iran sites were, “completely and totally obliterated,” is that trump never admits he were wrong; he always doubles down. now that trump has declared mission accomplished, how does he justify additional strikes w/o being confronted by the same people who triggered him with TACO and two weeks? update: predictable double-down. so now what happens when there is increasing evidence that, "one of the most successful military strikes in history," failed to achieve the complete and total obliteration described? future bombing by the US or israel undermines trump's narrative, but the whole justification for the President authorizing an attack requires an imminent threat to the US and if the situation today is little different than before midnight hammer... if only trump had taken our usual advice to be patient and wait for reliable info before making claims which could result in humiliation. on the other hand, ~70% o' trump voters believe everything trump says, even when trump contradicts himself. HA! Good Fun!

not to let trump off the hook, (am not) but israel has gutted iran command & control. chaos. am suspecting there is a whole lotta people in the iranian military who are acting independent during a time o' crisis, and unlike in the US, iranian military commanders has far less experience acting solo. any sorta expectation that iran is even capable of adhering to a ceasefire w/o at least some kinda delay is suspect given what israel has been doing to the military command structure o' iran for the past week. unlike others, Gromnir hesitates before opining in these situations, particular given trump's habitual mendacity. however, am admitting that even if iran did agree to a ceasefire, there would be some kinda initial period o' time during which they would have difficulty communicating that fact meaningful to the people capable o' sending missiles to israel... and both trump and israel should be aware o' that reality. HA! Good Fun! ps we spoke with somebody yesterday and it occurred to us that at least a few people don't know what is an Iranian centrifuge. the person we spoke with were under the impression a centrifuge is an enormous and complex device, and that person were not dumb. most iranian centrifuges is smallish-- 'bout 2 m high and 30 cm wide, with the older models being a bit more boxy. the newest iranian centrifuges is more than 4 m in height and 40 cm wide, but they had very few o' those. an individual iranian centrifuge, even the good ones, is incapable o' enriching much uranium over the course o' a year, so iran needs a whole lotta them if they wish to make more enriched uranium. the thing is, as noted, the centrifuges individually ain't that big and they ain't that difficult for iran to manufacture. you don't need an enormous facility to house and maintain the centrifuges, particular if you are making an effort to hide 'em. regardless, there ain't no way to prevent replacement centrifuges from being constructed, and it wouldn't be impossible to hide a whole bunch o' working centrifuges if that were your goal.

more significant is the fact oil dropped after the news that iran's response were symbolic. ... am also gonna observe just how tepid has been the arab world's reaction to the israeli and US attacks. sure, there has been a performative UN theatre, but am certain iran noticed just how meek and measured has been the outrage from other nations in the region. heck, a nyc candidate for mayor were more vocal supportive o' global intafada than has the arab world post 13 june. again, am so not in favor o' what increasing looks like an israeli effort to bring about regime change, but am suspecting they see @HoonDingrecent post and are barely able to suppress an evil grin o' agreement, if for complete different motives. these attacks were never about ending the iranian breakout capability. as such, it is looking like bush's mission accomplished is almost having been achieved by israel. the history o' regime change in the region does not suggest a more stable and safe outcome. hamas, syria and hezbollah has already been knee-capped and while the US may have blundered in its efforts to neuter the houthis, by our admitted inexpert estimation, iran on 12 june were weaker and less a threat than at any time in recent decades. so seeing as how the iranian nuclear threat has most certain not been eliminated, mission accomplished, where the real goal is to get vengeance on iran for its involvement in october 7, is maybe close to having been achieved? am suspecting israel is satisfied with mission accomplished, but the potential for regional chaos is more or less than were the case before the israeli attacks? HA! Good Fun!

warning: ordinary rogan sweary the nuts part is that Gromnir is not surprised at all that clowns like rogan is shocked by the utter predictable outcomes we are seeing. this were the likely outcome when trump said he were gonna do mass deportations amounting to millions o' undocumented. math made the outcome inevitable. there were never that many criminals, so... even so, if you only get your news from national conservative outlets, you would think la were under siege. HA! Good Fun!

from the nyt article linked above: "But there was also evidence, according to two Israeli officials with knowledge of the intelligence, that Iran had moved equipment and uranium from the site in recent days. And there was growing evidence that the Iranians, attuned to Mr. Trump’s repeated threats to take military action, had removed 400 kilograms, or roughly 880 pounds, of uranium enriched to 60 percent purity. That is just below the 90 percent that is usually used in nuclear weapons." from the cnn article linked: But unlike the other two Iranian facilities targeted in the operation, B-2 bombers did not drop massive “bunker-buster” bombs on the Isfahan facility, multiple sources told CNN. The damage to the facility appears to be restricted to aboveground structures, according to Jeffrey Lewis, a weapons expert and professor at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies who has closely reviewed commercial satellite imagery of the strike sites. Even if the US was successful in destroying Iran’s facility at Fordow — another underground site that housed centrifuges needed to enrich uranium, which the US hit with 12 bunker busters — the obvious survival of Isfahan has raised questions about whether Trump achieved his stated goal of “a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world’s No. 1 state sponsor of terror.” “This is an incomplete strike,” Lewis said. “If this is all there is, here’s what left: the entire stockpile of 60% uranium, which was stored at Isfahan in tunnels that are untouched.” and as already mentioned, bushehr is functionally untargetable via military air strikes. on june 13, israel's espoused goal of eliminating iran's nuclear breakout capability as the goal o' attacks were unconvincing. less convincing today. HA! Good Fun!

unrelated to iran, so am posting separate... "In her 51-page order, Judge Holmes said the government failed to prove there is a "serious risk" that Abrego Garcia will flee or that he will obstruct justice in the case. Holmes also said the government's evidence that Abrego Garcia is a member of MS-13 "consists of general statements, all double hearsay" from cooperating witnesses." however, please keep in mind that while the judge ordered mr. garcia's release, he were being held on criminal charges. am suspecting nothing functional changes for abrego garcia as he is gonna need endure continued ice detention. however, the point is that the judge observed that the criminal case the fed slapped together is weak. contrary to the expectations o' many hereabouts, the fed (pre 2025) don't manufacture cases or use sleight o' had nonsense to get indictments and convictions. the thing we liked most about working for the fed were the hours-- as close to 9-5 as any attorney job is ever gonna be. why? you got unlimited resources and time, and the line prosecutors (ordinarily) is insulated from politics. so not like tv or the movies. regardless, the point is judge holmes declared bs on fed prosecutors, but with everything else going on, few will notice or care. HA! Good Fun!

so... btw, and Early assessments raise questions over whether US destroyed bulk of enriched Iranian nuclear material but even if the attacks were intelligent planned and successful, iran's capability to construct a nuclear weapon would not have been ended, so what possible alternative were there for israel's attack? am seeming to recall we posited an alternative theory explaining israel's motivations back on 13 june. as for US involvement, as ridiculous as it sounds, am suspecting the most significant factor which led to the US bombing/striking fordow, natanz and isfahan were neither ending iran's nuclear breakout threat nor regime change. am gonna guess @Malcador and most obsidian boardies do not watch fox news, but israel were getting a whole lotta positive coverage on that netwok over the past week. as far as we can tell, given the reality that the ending iran's nuclear threat argument is implausible, and that even just the news o' possible regime change is gonna push up oil prices, the most obvious explanation for why the US would insert itself into this mess is 'cause trump were jealous o' the press israel were getting on fox and he didn't wanna look like he were impotent, irrelevant or TACOing. god help us all. edit: the following link includes updated info HA! Good Fun!

am not sure how the result can be anything but a waste. for years iran has been aware israel wanted to attack their nuclear sites. for years iran has been stockpiling the material needed to build a weapon-- feel free to review the purposefully recycled decade-old conclusions o' rand, us intelligence, isis and iaea that am having shared ad nauseum at this point. as such, why wouldn't iran develop their version o' a reverse GECK, and bury a rudimentary facility under a hospital or mosque in tehran, beneath seemingly untargetable bushehr, or anywhere in the vast and remote mountains which make up a considerable portion o' iran... or multiple such locations. again, iaea has recent said that iran has enough 60% enriched uranium that it could further enrich quick and make more than six weapons. why wouldn't iran squirrel away some portion o' their, "very, very specific ingredients to build a nuke," in remote or functional untargetable locations. the notion it were possible for the US and/or israel to military strike iran's nuclear weapon potential out of existence looks flawed on its face. the recent attacks of iran may have extended the nuclear breakout timeline a bit, but the one thing holding iran back from nuclear breakout for two decades has been their lack of political will to cross the nuclear red line. now? HA! Good Fun!

as childish as it may appear, am wondering how much the mockery trump endured for his reflexive "two weeks" announcement led to him moving quickly to end diplomatic efforts and instead resort to an overt display of military force. first, netanyahu maneuvers trump into helping him with attacks on iran that israel couldn't manage itself; donald didn't wanna look weak by admitting that israel had not only successful attacked numerous iranian sites, but that israel purposeful kept the US in the dark about the attacks. and trump, like a child, were jealous of the positive attention israel was getting on fox? then we get the "two week" jokes, which reveal just how often trump goes limp after making a bold pronouncement. trump didn't like that very much. am suspecting what the US needs most is a competent kindergarten teacher, somebody with experience keeping little kids in line, to handle trump. HA! Good Fun!

*eye roll* yeah, lexx who also imagined into existence a Gromnir position is an appropriate role model for you. is not as if he admitted his error neither. am not sure how you see lexx as having come out o' the situation looking anything but embarrassed, but am not surprised. so, birds of a feather? malc didn't exactly quietly ignore us either, but if this becomes a curious binary option, malc's approach were a far better way to handle. he initial defended what we see as mistakes, but he didn't fight and die on a pointless hill. am agreeing, you could learn from malc. unlikely. in any event, am still not seeing the point to all of this effort by israel if the goal were to neuter iran's capability to build a nuclear weapon. iran is facing more than a bit of political disarray, but it is hard to imagine they never considered the possibility of israeli or US attacks on their nuclear sites. for decades, the main thing holding iran back from building a weapon was the lack of political will to do so. bombing these sites surely didn't destroy all of iran's supplies of enriched uranium, and the knowledge o' how to build a weapon weren't vaporized by the fordow attack. iran is a big country with an enormous population and a whole lotta geography which is inhospitable and ideal for hiding some kinda stealth weapon development operation. iran could even secret a facility in the middle of a densely populated area. before the attack, it didn't look as if iran was actively pursuing the development of a nuclear weapon, even if they were enhancing their breakout capability. having been attacked, who here is confident that iran is less willing to build a bomb? regime change as the real goal looks far more likely, but am gonna see what happens from this point. (edit) am also not seeing any US or israeli solution for bushehr. even before the first attack, we woulda assumed israel would have devised a plan for dealing with busher if they were serious about at least temporarily halting iran breakout progress. am gonna admit to some cold sweat when israel announced that they finally had attacked bushehr. thankfully, that news were a mistake. HA! Good Fun!

rhetorical? what rhetorical effect are you seeking to achieve seeing as how we already explicit answered? is a kinda sad sympathy for zor the effect you were aiming for? if so, congrats? and again, using ten year old data were kinda essential if am showing that the threat today is not in fact any more imminent than it has been the case for thirteen years, or more. etc. in spite o' your memento cosplay, we did over and over and over again make clear that the israeli excuse for starting a war with iran in 2025 appears unjustified. however, beyond all reason, your intransigence led to, "the past few pages o' the belligerent, misleading, strawmaning you has engaged in where you argue against positions Gromnir didn't make and selective quote to support your wholly baseless positions, all the while seeming oblivious to the fact that Gromnir, since the godfather baptism post, has been stating unequivocal our opinion that israel's accusations lack merit and surely do not rise to the level o' potential starting a war with a country of ninety million people, a country that had chosen not to construct a nuclear weapon since 2003." am genuine not concerned as to why you were so triggered that you would indulge in deceptive efforts to refute a position you couldn't recognize were largely aligned with yours. we know exactly why you would do such a thing even if we don't care about the motivation. however, am gonna admit that your reflexive self-immolation efforts is, up to a point, entertaining... even if they become exhausting and we eventual regret indulging your unhealthy needs. HA! Good Fun!

... for gawd's sake, what is wrong with you? honest? how many times do we need repeat that am having been arguing that israel's stated justification for attacking iran is contrived? have been saying for many posts and pages that israel's efforts don't match their excuse and that this operation looks far more like regime change than any kinda effort at neutering iran's nuclear breakout capability. more immediate relevant, am having been repeating, over and over and over again, 'cause somebody is so complete impervious to reason, that the nuclear threat iran poses today, based on assessments from iaea, US intelligence, rand, isis, etc. is little more significant today than it was thirteen years ago, or any day since then. we made kinda a deal about words... that israel's attack were most clear preventative as 'posed to preemptive, the difference being that preemptive can create legal legitimacy, while preventative, does not. based on iaea and recent US intelligence assessments, there was no imminent threat from iran, so calling the attack preemptive were inappropriate. again, am having been arguing that the data offered did not create a justification for attacking iran, so telling us that iaea agrees with us is nice and all, but may not quite have the relevance you believe it does. this is one o' the only accurate observations you has made over the past few pages o' the belligerent, misleading, strawmaning you has engaged in where you argue against positions Gromnir didn't make and selective quote to support your wholly baseless positions, all the while seeming oblivious to the fact that Gromnir, since the godfather baptism post, has been stating unequivocal our opinion that israel's accusations lack merit and surely do not rise to the level o' potential starting a war with a country of ninety million people, a country that had chosen not to construct a nuclear weapon since 2003. HA! Good Fun!

exhausted, but am needing address the "liar" accusation as a point o' personal privilege... typical accusation from zor being manifest untrue and a kind disappointing projection. the full quote and context o' the partial quoting you call a lie. "aside, even though am arguing with our self, iran did not end it's weapons program 22 years ago. the ieae report am having linked were a wakeup call for the west, but the rand and isis links from a decade past we provided also argue, via considerable evidentiary support, that iran were maintaining a weapons program, but were not active developing a weapon. am not sure why that concept is so difficult for zor to grasp. the nuclear sites operated by iran were not sole for the purpose o' developing civilian electricity production and other iran excuses. iran did and still does have a weapons program, but they are not active pursuing the development of such weapons and they have not been doing so for over a decade. iran were close to breakout ten years ago. iran is negligible closer to breakout today. before, during and after the iran deal, no effort was made by iran to develop a weapon. as such, israel's justification for attacking at this time rings hollow." zor only quotes the bold part and calls it a lie? kinda like the three years quote, eh? left out the part where the conclusion were that a weapon could actual be completed in months, but that a delivery system would require up to three years. your selective and dishonest quoting is not accidental or limited. is your mo. we will further note that in previous posts to the one you called a lie, we stated unequivocal that we agreed with the assessment that iran had no nuclear weapon program, 'cause as counter-intuitive as it may be, us intelligence and iaea could simultaneous find that iran had no weapon program while also determining that iran were moving forward towards breakout capability. "again, duh. is the same silliness as we heard from zor in 2015 btw. the fact iran doesn't have a nuclear weapon in no way diminishes the possibility that they could achieve such in a realtive short period o' time. "yeah, since 2003, iran had not been active working on developing a nuclear weapon, but rand, iaea, isis (institute for science and international security as 'posed to the terror group... or the egyptian goddess) and others were in agreement iran had progressed very close to the threshold stage. iran had virtual all the ingredients and the infrastructure, and at one point estimates were that iran were within one month of breakout, IF iran put forth the effort to achieve such... which they did not and had not... although am gonna admit the one month estimate were kinda an outlier." we recognized as a fact that iran doesn't have a nuclear weapon program in a post made only a short time previous to the partial quote you highlight as a lie. also, "does anybody who knows zor personal wanna go over and make sure he is all right... ensure that he and elon ain't sharing a ketamine moment or something? he does get that Gromnir has been criticizing israel, right? we pointed out that israel went way too far in gaza and is now using a recycled excuse from 2011 to legitimize their attack which looks unconvincing unless you reimagine the motive as regime change. is not as if picking a side means anything to the strength o' the analysis, but the fact am using +ten year old documents is kinda essential to our claim that israel, who hadn't attacked iran for +ten years, sudden decided to do so in spite o' the relevant facts not having changed at all in those + ten years: iran is not current developing a weapon, but their current technical knowledge and resources mean they could create a weapon in six to nineteen months. if such facts weren't a legit excuse to attack +ten years ago, then why would iran continuing to not develop nuclear weapons sudden legitimize such an attack?" so we got multiple instances o' Gromnir making the observation that iran is not developing a nuclear weapon and that they don't have a weapon program from just previous to your your strategic partial quote lie accusation? liar, willful obtuse, or perhaps we were more right about ketamine/stroke than we believed. furthermore, https://news.un.org/en/story/2025/06/1164291 Following Thursday’s resolution vote by the IAEA’s board of governors – which passed by a vote of 19 for, three against and 11 abstentions - Iran’s atomic energy body reportedly announced plans to open a new uranium enrichment plant and increase production of enriched fissile material. The draft for Thursday’s resolution highlights serious and growing concerns since at least 2019 that Iran had failed to cooperate fully with the UN agency’s inspectors. Tehran has “repeatedly” been unable to explain and demonstrate that its nuclear material was not being diverted for further enrichment for military use, the draft text maintains. Iran has also failed to provide the UN agency with “technically credible explanations for the presence of [man-made] uranium particles” at undeclared locations in Varamin, Marivan and Turquzabad, it continues. “Unfortunately, Iran has repeatedly either not answered, or not provided technically credible answers to, the agency’s questions,” IAEA chief Grossi said on Monday. “It has also sought to sanitize the locations, which has impeded Agency verification activities.” According to Mr. Grossi, Tehran has stockpiled 400 kilogrammes of highly enriched uranium. and https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/irans-stock-near-bomb-grade-uranium-grows-sharply-iaea-report-shows-2025-02-26/ The stock of uranium refined to up to 60% in the form of uranium hexafluoride grew by 92.5 kg in the past quarter to 274.8 kg, one of two confidential IAEA reports said. That is enough in principle, if enriched further, for six nuclear bombs, according to an IAEA yardstick. There is enough for more weapons at lower enrichment levels. Where before its latest acceleration Iran was producing between 6 and 9 kilograms (13 and 20 pounds) of uranium enriched to up to 60% per month, now that figure is between 35 and 40 kg, a senior diplomat said. This is just short of the 42 kg that is enough in principle for one bomb, if refined further. ... uranium refined to 60% in those quantities don't have believable applications other than breakout capability or actual weapon manufacture. so, what exact is the position o' the iaea? what would any ordinary follower o' these issues, one unfamiliar with the narrow definitions used by iaea, us intelligence, isis and others, conclude that iran's efforts at increasing their stockpiles o' enriched uranium mean in terms o' efforts to construct a nuclear weapon? enhancing breakout capability v. a weapons program? again, am having stated multiple times that we agree with the observation that iaea, isis, rand, us intelligence and others have consistently assessed that iran has no weapons program and we agree that iran has not been making efforts to weaponize. that said, try and explain to any reasonable and ordinary person that iran, having abandoned their nuke program in 2003, is now closer to breakout capability than when they had a weapon program. and you continue to display your diminished capacity to understand logic by mocking yourself with mcveigh and nichols v. our neighbor phd. the logic fail is you mistaking noncompletion o' a working device as being proof of lack of capacity. we used an example where there would be no 'question as to know-how, infrastructure and materials to show that not completing a device fails as evidence o' a lack o' capacity. am finding it difficult to believe you honest don't get it, but... and so maybe you are just that obtuse. and final, hopeful final, the ten year old argument were intentional based on old data and conclusions; how can you possible still be missing that point? am criticizing israel's 2025 justification by pointing out that their conclusions is hardly more persuasive today than they were in 2011 and 2012 when us intelligence, isis, rand and iaea all agreed that iran was somewhere between six and nineteen months from reaching breakout capability. dude. serious. but what do we expect from the logic challenged guy who offers little in the way o' evidence to support his positions save to intentional misquote sources, a guy who has been arguing with a strawman mor a few pages and like so many redditt warriors, doesn't believe anybody will go through the effort to fact check him. and so here we are, once again, eh? turin horse HA! Good Fun! ps am having been warned by mods, years past, that calling posters "liar" is frowned 'pon. if such remains verboten, am recognizing we overstepped a line or broke custom. our excuse is that we were responding in kind, but perhaps such is insufficient or immaterial. regardless, if we posted in error, am apologizing in advance and bear no ill will if the thread is pruned.

and second video is from 2017 btw. two weeks is parody. two weeks is a tell that trump hasn't even thought deep enough to come up with a lie. HA! Good Fun! ps (edit) for those not paying attention, it ain't just health care which didn't happen in two weeks. obviously the initial 24 hour and day 1 boasts for ukraine and bringing down inflation were anomalous, as two weeks is the reflexive rejoinder when trump is questioned. infrastructure never occurred during trumps first term in spite of perpetual two week estimates. wire tapping bombshell? nope.