Res ipsa locutus of borg

Yeah, like i said I'm open to that idea. We just can't pretend court packing takes us back to 2000 or something. And Rs are unlikely to agree to any deal bc any neutral court would in effect be pro-Dem. We see that in states with successful neutral appointment systems (e.g. Kansas).

I mean we have some, not enough. The current Court is fine with Rs tilting the scales but in 2020 showed it wasn't willing to overturn a clear election win. And it won't, I think, let him run for a third term or get rid of birthright citizenship.

If we could get Rs to agree to some kind of mutual disarmament where the Court does less for both sides' political projects that would be a good outcome. But probably unlikely.

Maybe that risk is worth it bc there's so much we have to do in 2 years if we get a trifecta. I'm open to that idea. I just think the cost is meaningful judicial review.

I think where we maybe disagree(?) is that I think a future Rs president would probably not defy a 9-justice court even if it was more lefty than the current one (say Roberts resigns and another dies in 2028 and Dems replace them) but certainly would if the court was 13 justices bc of court packing.

It's probably going to be a lot easier for Republican's to get than Dems for the rest of my lifetime because of the Senate. And even without a trifecta, we're not far from a Republican president openly defying the court (arguably has already in some cases). Vance has said they should.

The current GOP actively opposes democratic elections determining the leadership of the country. The Court is happy to put a thumb on the scale for Rs but it's not on board with full fascism. Trump unemcumbered by the judicial system is vastly worse than the current one.

"Let's just exercise as much power as we can" is a totally valid strategy--maybe one I would choose if i was a Dem president in 2029. But you can't ignore the costs--it's the end of the Court as a check on a determined executive.

I mean maybe nobody. But if you want to pack the courts you have to accept the certainty that Rs will do the same with Aileen Cannon types as soon as they have the opportunity. And the current court is extremely bad but it could be so so much worse too.

Yeah, I think something like this or a deal with Rs for a constitutional amendment to establish a 5-5-5 court (with each party picking five who pick another 5 together) would be much better.

I do think some effort that includes court packing but doesn't just have the Dems appoint a bunch of the people Dems would normally appoint has more promise, frustrating as it would be.

Extremism of the Trump years, I mean.

If you appointed a bunch of normie Biden-type appellate justices after court packing the next Republican president is not going to be like "ah yes, a normal fair court, I too reject the extremism of the Bush years." He's gonna either pack it himself with 5th Cir. justices or just ignore it.

My preference would be some kind of 5-5-5 deal agreed to by both parties, or a supreme court comprised of panels of judges from the court of appeals.

I don't disagree with you about that. But the fact remains that the courts are still a pretty important obstacle to him being a dictator, an obstacle that won't exist post court-packing. You can't empower the executive at the expense of the courts just for one party.

The thing I worry about is that Rs currently do actually obey when this court says no. If we pack the court, I very much doubt a future Trump would. Is that worth letting this court curb another Dem president? Idk. Ideally we'd do some kind of deal under threat of court packing...

The Songs of the Coquí Frog The soothing sounds of home or a sonic menace? How you feel about the coquí's call depends on context, but when coquí frogs call in L.A. County, NHM's Herpetology Curator Dr. Greg Pauly answers.

It's a symbol of puerto rico: nhm.org/coqui-frog-c...

I guess I'm thinking of fictional ones that actually are competent. Reminds me of that Epstein email about the zodiac society which sounds sprung right out of Alex Jones' fever dreams (100+ years old, 12 ultrawealthy nyers, members for life) but actually 1) isn't very secret and 2) just has dinners

100 percent it's something 20-30 percent of the population believes. This guy seems to think they literally vote legally but the more common belief I think is that they for some reason do voter fraud.

Same goes for the "secret society is leaving their coded messages everywhere" trope. Why would they do that? They're secret! Even if they don't expect people to decode them, why!?

I feel like it's gotta either be ai/photo editing or he peed into a container -- nobody has that kind of control.

They're also provably at least 5-10 times safer than human-driven cars so who cares if they get some human intervention every now and then. People are letting their dislike of chatbots negatively polarize them against literally life-saving technology. www.theargumentmag.com/p/we-absolut...

This stuff is such misleading cope. "The car occasionally asks a human for advice" is not "they're just remote controlled" no matter how many times people on here pretend it is.

a shopping mall emo/indie kid who is somehow also an ICE thug

Death Camp For Cutie over here

Mike Waltz Has Somehow Gotten Even Worse at Using Signal A photo taken this week showed Mike Waltz using an app that looks like—but is not—Signal to communicate with top officials. "I don't even know where to start with this," says one expert.

Actually they now use or did for a while something even worse: www.wired.com/story/mike-w...

This pro-Trump nostalgia absolutely was confirmed over and over again by the Dems' own internal polling, in a truly horrifying way:

newrepublic.com/article/1882...

I've asked bitcoin people about that and the response was always that if it happened miners would change the rules (50%+1 can do anything as I understand it). But I'm no expert.

I think part of it is fear that Strategy will have to start liquidating its massive holdings if the price falls more. And more generally the collapse of the treasury model.

Striking from new Quinnipiac poll:

*Voters prefer path to legalization over deportations for most undocs by 59-34. Among independents it's 61-33

*Majority says Trump on immigration is making America less safe

Again, there's broad rejection of the whole project, not just ICE tactics (see below)