The Political Thread - Browncoat edition... down with the Alliance!

[Guard Dog]

Here is a little good news for a change. You'd think it would be a no brainier that the 8th Amendment applies to the states as well as the federal government. I'm certain that is exactly what the supremacy clause is all about. Well, Indiana didn't think so. They figured once someone was arrested and convicted of a crime they can just help themselves to anything of his they wanted (It's call civil asset forfeiture, AKA legalized theft). Well, the Supreme Court  told them they can't f----g do that 9-0. That is a big win against CAF. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-says-constitutional-protection-against-excessive-fines-applies-to-state-actions/2019/02/20/204ce0d4-3522-11e9-af5b-b51b7ff322e9_story.html?utm_term=.d4da80bfa914

 

 

If you have spent even 30 seconds reading my posts over the years you'd know that IMO Kelo vs New London ranks right up there with Dred Scott vs Sanford as the WORST SCOTUS decisions ever.  CAF & Eminent Domain if worth fighting another civil war over IMO. Because what is yours is only yours until Big Brother wants it. Well it was a pretty good day for us on the Eminent Domain front too: http://reason.com/blog/2019/02/20/new-jersey-cant-seize-atlantic-city-home

 

Not as complete a victory in that the court did not find fault with the seizure per se rather with the plans the state of new jersey had for it. 

[Gromnir]

Here is a little good news for a change. You'd think it would be a no brainier that the 8th Amendment applies to the states as well as the federal government. I'm certain that is exactly what the supremacy clause is all about. Well, Indiana didn't think so. They figured once someone was arrested and convicted of a crime they can just help themselves to anything of his they wanted (It's call civil asset forfeiture, AKA legalized theft). Well, the Supreme Court  told them they can't f----g do that 9-0. That is a big win against CAF. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-says-constitutional-protection-against-excessive-fines-applies-to-state-actions/2019/02/20/204ce0d4-3522-11e9-af5b-b51b7ff322e9_story.html?utm_term=.d4da80bfa914

 

 

If you have spent even 30 seconds reading my posts over the years you'd know that IMO Kelo vs New London ranks right up there with Dred Scott vs Sanford as the WORST SCOTUS decisions ever.  CAF & Eminent Domain if worth fighting another civil war over IMO. Because what is yours is only yours until Big Brother wants it. Well it was a pretty good day for us on the Eminent Domain front too: http://reason.com/blog/2019/02/20/new-jersey-cant-seize-atlantic-city-home

 

Not as complete a victory in that the court did not find fault with the seizure per se rather with the plans the state of new jersey had for it. 

 

 

am not posting to be an annoying know-it-all, but rather 'cause am suspecting gd is actual interested in incorporation, whether he knew it were called incorporation or not. 

 

SCOTUS decisions reveal most o' the bill o' rights is applicable to states.  the mechanic for such findings is in sec 1. o' the 14th amendment. incorporation.  supremacy clause is different. 

 

"all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

 

am hopeful we quoted correct.  would be kinda embarrassing if we missed something. regardless, due process clause has carried most o' the incorporation weight over the years. 

 

discovered in the last couple minutes there is many terrible articles 'bout incorporation online.

 

*sigh*

 

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/incorp.htm

 

provides general info which is, for the most part, accurate and simple to understand.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps is of note to ConLaw pundits (nobody else) that in Timbs, gorsuch and thomas wrote separate conferences which invoked privileges and immunities clause instead o' due process to be expanding incorporation o' the 8th amendment.  this seeming minor difference could be important as it telegraphs discontent o' a couple o' Justices with the current state o' due process clause jurisprudence. 

Edited February 20, 2019 by Gromnir

[smjjames]

Word is that Mueller could be giving his report to the AG as early as next week. https://www.vox.com/2019/2/20/18233483/mueller-report-trump-russia-next-week CNN has a somewhat deeper detail into it: https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/20/politics/special-counsel-conclusion-announcement/index.html

 

I thought it would maybe have a few more months in it, but we're going to have to cross the bridge of the Mueller investigation concluding at some point anyways. Hopefully the report comes out publicly with minimal redactions.

[Guard Dog]

Like these things usually are I expect Mueller's report will be underwhelming with no clear "smoking gun". But the devil is, as always, in the details. 

[Pidesco]

This could go here on in the funny things thread. Watch out for the language, and enjoy Carlson make a fool of himself:

 

[Guard Dog]

As I'm sure you all now know the Jussie Smolett "hate crime" attack by two white supremacists (or something) was all fiction. A hoax that he orchestrated with two associates. He has been arrested and is facing charges: https://abc7chicago.com/jussie-smollett-in-custody-after-being-charged-with-disorderly-conduct/5148577/

 

According to the Chicago PD his motivation was dissatisfaction with his salary on the CBS TV show he was on. I really don't see how this would have gotten him a raise if had gotten away with it. So that doesn't make much sense. If his motivation was to make a political statement I'd have an easier time swallowing that. But you can't get into another person's head.

 

It IS very interesting how many media outlets and politicians have discredited themselves rushing to advance the narrative they apparently wanted so much to be true. Especially having just done so with the whole Covington HS debacle (The WaPo is now dealing with a $250M libel suit over that). 

 

I wonder. Suppose the Chicago PD did find two white guys and pinned this on them. Would he have come forward if two people he KNEW were innocent were facing 25+ years in prison? Hard to say. I'm guessing probably not. 

 

What do you guys think of this mess?

[Malcador]

What do you guys think of this mess?

 

Undoubtedly proof that all hate crimes are bogus.

 

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47306022

 

British Parliament is being interesting this year, 8 Labour and 3 Tory MPs left their party.

[smjjames]

Maybe he was going to use it as pretext to demand a raise, but even that is no guarantee.

 

'

What do you guys think of this mess?'

 

It's a terrible sad mess.

[ShadySands]

 

What do you guys think of this mess?

 

Undoubtedly proof that all hate crimes are bogus.

If true then he's a selfish shortsighted fool who will have just made it easier to dismiss claims of hate crime in the future. 

[HoonDing]

First world problems.

[213374U]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47306022

 

British Parliament is being interesting this year, 8 Labour and 3 Tory MPs left their party.

 

Bought and paid for self-styled "centrists" switching sides and suggesting that the no-deal bogeyman is the cause of all woes of the "most vulnerable" in Britain... despite them not giving a toss about them before and their doom and gloom predictions being so far false?

 

Well, it's interesting in the sense that their "pro-business" talk strains credibility in regard to who they actually represent vs who they claim to serve. Since they keep cranking the hysterics up to 11, I guess it's just a matter of time before they start pushing for a law that allows Unilever and HSBC to appear in the ballots directly -- so that the interests of the truly most vulnerable can be properly safeguarded.

 

Vote NOW! and get .6% on your mortgage or student loan. Terms and conditions apply.

Edited February 21, 2019 by 213374U

[smjjames]

The only reason why their doom and gloom predictions are 'so far false' is because Brexit hasn't happened yet, the doom and gloom they predicted is stuff as a result of Brexit, not stuff that would happen before Brexit.

 

After Brexit, we'll see how much of their doom and gloom is accurate.

[Gromnir]

first o' all, thank you very much for screwing up our effort to insulate our self from this silliness.  other than headlines and pictures o' smolett posted at various news sites, we had almost 0 idea what were the central issue to the story. 

 

*grumble*

 

in any event, the boy who cried wolf is attributed to aesop, and he (maybe she, who knows) were ~600 bc?  am doubting aesop invented the situation.

 

warning: a little sweary.  ok, alot o' sweary.

 

 

the following kinda story gets considerable press when such is made public:

 

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may/25/local/la-me-rape-dismiss-20120525

 

am thinking the most common variation is the blackmail threat to cry rather than the actual crying o' wolf.  derek threatens peter, says he will go to the cops if peter doesn't sign over the filburn riverfront property. threat works 'cause o' situation or 'cause peter has a history o' violence or drug use or crime or whatnot. 

 

while we do not know smolett, if accusations is true, then he is stoopid and a d-bag.  hoping he would have moment o' clarity and/or conscience to admit his mistake requires us ignore the stoopidity and d-bagness we have necessarily already assumed. 

 

however, as with the linked false rape case, this story is gonna get resurrected every time there is an accusation by a minority celebrity who claims they were targeted by racist or homophobic ne'er-do-wells. w/o definitive video proof, or depositions from the dozen or so nuns who happened to witness the event, this uncommon silliness is gonna be held up as evidence that certain kinds o' people cannot be trusted. "you can't claim it never happens because jussie smolett already did it." unfortunate.  

 

am now gonna thurough undercut everything we already stated by observing how the vast majority o' professional actors we has met are seeming a bit touched.  we lament hasty generalization, then we go ahead and observe how am tending to assume there is more than a fair share o' odd folks in the entertainment biz?  actors do stuff which is unreasonable or stoopid and am having a tendency to deem results as plausible. am not suggesting we believe actors is going out and faking crimes all the time or even frequent.  however, if an actor gets caught doing something abject stoopid or extreme quixotic, we do not have same level o' surprise as when a random forklift operator or pharmacist does same. oh well.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Malcador]

Probably won't be that bad, anyway.  Also isn't going to lead to the UK becoming some mythical great nation either.

[213374U]

The only reason why their doom and gloom predictions are 'so far false' is because Brexit hasn't happened yet, the doom and gloom they predicted is stuff as a result of Brexit, not stuff that would happen before Brexit.

 

After Brexit, we'll see how much of their doom and gloom is accurate.

 

Wrong.

[smjjames]

 

The only reason why their doom and gloom predictions are 'so far false' is because Brexit hasn't happened yet, the doom and gloom they predicted is stuff as a result of Brexit, not stuff that would happen before Brexit.

 

After Brexit, we'll see how much of their doom and gloom is accurate.

 

Wrong.

 

 

To be honest, I didn't know which predictions you were talking about. I thought you were talking about the gloom and doom over the effects of a hard crash through Brexit. Number 5 there is being partially self-fulfilling at the moment, but it's extremely unlikely it'll spread much further. As for the recession and job loss stuff, while I guess those were warning of the pre-brexit proccess, we'll see what happens after Brexit crashes through.

 

Myself though, I think they're being a bit TOO doom and gloom about the effects of Brexit. There will be problems, yes, but riots and stuff?

Edited February 21, 2019 by smjjames

[Gromnir]

Probably won't be that bad, anyway.  Also isn't going to lead to the UK becoming some mythical great nation either.

am thinking brexit will be worse than many imagine, but not nearly as dramatic.  bad timing o' the chinese economic slowdown is gonna exacerbate impact o' brexit on world economy.  is not gonna be road warrior apocalypse, but we wouldn't be surprised by increasing levels o' violence at border o' northern ireland, violence which will only get worse if the economic situation on either/both side(s) o' the border becomes bleak. while limited violence will be dramatic and newsworthy, the real problems is gonna be economic which is gonna take many months (maybe a year) to be noticed by most folks in britain and the eu... and the rest o' the world. 

 

am not gonna be hoarding mre and gold in preparation for brexit, but would be shocked if there weren't a real and noticeable global impact if brexit actual happens.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[smjjames]

Months? From what I've read, the real economic problems are going to start appearing within 24 hours. We're talking hard Brexit crash through, not some agreement that eases things through.

 

Ripple effects would definetly be expected though, given the shock that it gives to the global economy.

[Gromnir]

Months? From what I've read, the real economic problems are going to start appearing within 24 hours. We're talking hard Brexit crash through, not some agreement that eases things through.

 

Ripple effects would definetly be expected though, given the shock that it gives to the global economy.

 

customs issues holding up produce and perishables at ports is gonna be felt by shipping companies immediate, but the average consumer won't notice.  there will be travel issues for many people, but again, is gonna take time more marked and noticeable impact to be felt nationwide.

 

some folks will be hurt painful and immediate, and for those select folks the change will be dramatic, but overall...

 

also helps that we have never seen a british person voluntarily eat a fresh vegetable and only rare eat fresh fruit, so some immediate concerns will be marginalized by curious culinary and dietary preferences o' those most direct impacted by brexit.

 

am kidding... if only slight. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[smjjames]

I've seen reports saying that there will be food shortages within days, if not hours, but regardless of the speculation, we'll see what actually does happen as Brexit is not much more than a month away and theres no sign of any sort of last second deal going through.

 

I've read that there is a slim chance of the EU postponing the cutoff date by a couple months because EU elections, so.... who knows.

Edited February 21, 2019 by smjjames

[HoonDing]

I wish we could detach the isle from the continent and blow it across the pond.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

This could go here on in the funny things thread. Watch out for the language, and enjoy Carlson make a fool of himself:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_nFI2Zb7qE

And here I thought I couldn't think less of Tucker.

[HoonDing]

lol at the smugness of that Dutchman.

[Zoraptor]

I've seen reports saying that there will be food shortages within days, if not hours..

 

Welcome to Project Fear 2.0: this time all the bad stuff will happen for real, promise!

 

Trade defaults to WTO standards in the event of a hard brexit, and plenty of countries trade on exactly that basis. For food, medicine etc imports it's in no one's interests- including the EU if they're exports from there to the UK- for them not to get in. Assuming some basic competence from the Brit authorities, which may not be in evidence practically, as the UK does trade with non EU countries and has inspections and paperwork for them applying that to EU imports should be easy enough. Exports from Britain to the EU are a lot more vulnerable, as at that point once all the attempts to end run the referendum have failed the EU will be looking to stick the boot in any way they can as a lesson to others who may look to leave.

 

British Parliament is being interesting this year, 8 Labour and 3 Tory MPs left their party.

 

 

Good riddance to the war criminal worshiping Bliarite scum. Should have been purged a decade ago and Tony shipped off to the Hague where he belongs. The Tories are better off with a few less wobbly blancmanges as well.

 

That none of them have resigned their seat to allow their constituents a choice illustrates perfectly what a bunch of utter unrestrained hypocrites they are even if trying to invalidate a binding referendum didn't, and the Tory defectors claiming May is further right than the Cameron/ Osborne austerity junta is laughable.

[Malcador]

Maybe will be less foreigners in the EPL, that'd be fun to see.