Midweek Meh-Ness [DOT 20/12/23]

20/12/23 MegMegMcGee 30

Happy week before X-mas from the land of no motivation.

My friend, Alexey Gorinov, is mentioned in this article. I’m so worried.

With Navalny’s whereabouts still unknown, Kremlin targets novelist Akunin
https://wapo.st/3RmVNpS [gift article]

Whoa

Trump disqualified from Colorado’s 2024 primary ballot by state Supreme Court
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/12/19/trump-off-colorado-ballot/

Sprots!

Ja Morant returns from gun-related suspension with buzzer-beater
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/12/20/ja-morant-returns-buzzer-beater-suspension/

Stonks!

Target blamed theft and violence for 9 store closures. Crime is higher at locations it kept open nearby
https://www.cnbc.com /2023/12/19/target-store-closures-theft-and-crime-higher-nearby.html

Here is a dog jumping rope:

Have a great day!

avataravataravataravataravataravataravataravataravataravataravataravataravatar

30 Comments

  1. Those are very good dogs

    The CO case doesn’t matter. It’s going to right wing SCOTUS and they will take care of their boy.

    • My dogs don’t do that.

      So serious question. Isn’t the SCOTUS all about states rights? So maybe Colorado can prevail?

      Finally, every time I see the acronym SCOTUS my brain first reads scrotum. No difference, really, interchangeable terms?

      • And supposedly the federalist group the “Conservative” Judges on the SC have already ruled Trump intelligible. “Supposedly” carrying a lot of weight.

      • The right wingers on the court are all about pushing their right wing bullshit. It doesn’t matter how much they contradict themselves or blow precedent out of the water or completely ignore the constitution. If it furthers their idiocy then that’s what they’ll do.

        • …it might scrape by on one of their bids to bank usefully even-handed-looking “checks” that cost them nothing on the balancing act they’re engaged in…it’s one state…it allows for eternal grievance at unfair & “unconstitutional” treatment of one candidate in various ways that are light on precedent & thereby open to broad abuse by judges & lawyers alike…while if they say “nobody puts baby in the corner” then they don’t get to try to pull mirror-universe bullshit by trying to have (D) candidates barred from ballots

          …probably not, granted…but I could see a bunch of that in a dissent if they go the way you imply…just as some powder to keep dry for another day…so if that swung it to a judgement that went the other way they’d still have dissents to hedge those bets with

          …depends how long a game they think they’re in, I guess?

          • No, see, that’s exactly what I’m talking about.  The minute a case hits their desk from some vengeance suit to remove a D candidate from a ballot, they will 100% jump on it, even if they clear Trump, because nothing matters except pushing their bullshit.  They’ve already contradicted themselves more than once over the past couple of years and they show no signs of slowing down.

            • …not disagreeing about that part…but from what I gather they (the CO SC) only dissented on procedural stuff relating to colorado law & even those dissents didn’t claim there wasn’t an insurrection while the majority opinion relied on quoting gorsuch for their main throughline

              …so there’s some ways it’s easier for the supreme court to not say “actually states don’t get a say in how their ballots work”

              …but…it’s about the (R) primary ballot in the first instance (iirc) & the colorado GOP made some nonsense statement about withdrawing from the primary & using a caucus model…so…they don’t exactly need anything to make sense…but more than a few places think it gives combover coup guy a leg up to be able to say he’s being persecuted in ways none of his rivals are…so they might actually think keeping the ruling plays better for them

              …more a why-not-both.gif thing than a meaningful difference of outcome…because like you say none of it has to make sense or be consistent in their application of it

              • Actually, now that you mention it, I could see it playing huge for the knuckledraggers if SCOTUS upheld the ruling.  Those fuckers would come out of the woodwork to vote for him in the general.

      • I actually see “scrotum” too.

        Okay, my assessment. Butcher is probably right. The conservative wing will line up behind Trump. I personally think that deciding Trump is “guilty” when he hasn’t been convicted is shaky. I’d love to see it, but yeah, it’s thin.

        However (you knew this was coming) SCOTUS has ruled against Trump in the past. So some possibilities:

        1. Thomas and Alito will NOT rule against Trump. They are totally in the bag, and it Thomas’ case it’s personal, since eventually they’ll be coming for his wife over her Jan. 6 bullshit.

        2. The other conservative justices *could* be swayed, particularly if the billionaire class is actually tired of Trump and wants him out of the way. They’ll take their marching orders from the people handing them checks (and don’t think they’re not on the take — they’re all just smarter than Thomas). Trump can’t win 2024 and there’s no point in continuing to support him, so a lot of the billionaires are just saving their money. This could be a convenient way to put a stake in Trump’s campaign and actually bring on somebody that has a sliver of a chance, like Haley.

        3. As you point out, states’ rights hold a LOT of sway with conservatives, That’s their justification for overturning Roe. But as Butcher notes, this court has no problem making shit up on the fly.

        4. SCOTUS is taking a lot of heat right now. They’re under tremendous scrutiny. The crooked ones would probably love to dial things back so they can go back to quietly accepting lavish “gifts.” They might think getting Trump shut down is the fastest way back to “normal,” which puts the most money in their pockets.

        5. Trump’s Nazi bullshit is starting to sink in. That puts the entire justice system at risk. Which puts their grift at risk too.

        Now I can absolutely rebut each of these points. So what I’m really saying is “there’s a chance?” But I’m not betting money on it.

        • As AWhit notes below, the 14th Amendment does not require a conviction of anything. This is absolutely constitutional as written and used. (Whether or not it’s a good idea, different topic, of course!)

          • That’s why I put “guilty” in quotes. I think most people generally feel like you need to be convicted of something before you get punished. I definitely think the right wing of SCOTUS could make that argument.

        • The Sunday NY Times deep dive on the SC overturning Roe gave a lot of details on tensions between Roberts and Alito/Thomas, and pretty strongly backed the idea that the leak of the draft was done by one of them to undercut Roberts as he tried to get a compromise.

          The sourcing is all background, so you can’t read too much into it, but the fact there is so much background seems to make the point regardless that Alito and Thomas are making enemies.

          Having said that, Roberts is so far to the right that throwing out a state’s right is nothing to him.

          I’d be curious if he uses this as a bargaining chip in Jack Smith’s move to get the SC to proactively clear the way for Trump’s trial in a few months, though.

      • I’m glad I’m not the only adult defaulting to scrotum.

    • So on the one hand, yes, the fix is in. The court is a captured property.

      On the other hand, a big part of the right-wing’s plans RE: capturing the court was to get things done relatively quietly without needing broad electoral support, and every time people look at something the court does that’s nonsense — and it’s been a lot lately — voters are increasingly clued into the problem. Of course the court will come up with some wacky nonsense, but it’s become almost impossible for them not to have to resort to wacky nonsense because they’re out of basically everything else.

      Do I think it’s enough to spur Biden to actually have the huevos to do something about it? No. But I do think the Trump years have gifted the Dems way more spine than usual and the possibilities to do something are much more available than they have been in years, honestly.

  2. Don’t think conviction applies.

  3. These should be interesting…

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/judge-orders-scott-perry-turn-cellphone-records-jan-6-probe-rcna130543

    and speaking of interesting…

    https://www.rawstory.com/jeffrey-epstein-names/

    The authoritarian plot is really not new.

    https://hartmannreport.com/p/the-gops-60-year-authoritarian-plot-76f

    • Retired USMC General Smedley Butler probably deserved a 3rd Medal of Honor for helping stopping the Wall St Coup against FDR.

      Unfortunately this time the billionaires are using “one” of their own to overthrow a democratically elected government.

    • Yeah… no.

      1) It’s too far away. How the hell is he going to fly there if there is no air traffic control? Doesn’t he think his pilots and bodyguards aren’t going to want to save their families too?

      2) It’s well known. Having it broadcast to the world means everyone in Hawaii is going to be visiting the Face Bunker. Not just to borrow a cup of sugar either. Also if it is a nuclear war, Hawaii is ground zero thanks to the various number of military bases including Pearl Harbor.

      3) Islands don’t float like styrofoam (one of the stupidest things the late unlamented asshole Rush Limbaugh has ever said.) In fact, where is his fresh water going to come from? Probably the soon to be contaminated fresh water supplies from the rising sea levels.

      4) Gotta eat. Can’t eat MREs forever. Gonna need farmland to grow food. Gonna need workers to plant/harvest it too. Gonna need guards as well. And they’re going to have to have a place for their families.

      Just like the Scam Bank Fraud kid, the Face Bunker is a stupid idea from the mind of Zuck.

  5. I’m not getting my hopes up re: Colorado.

  6. In boring adult news that has me excited:

    My annual blood work results are starting to come in and so far things are better than last year!

    With the exception being the blood sugar level, probably related to me eating a lot of candy 12 hours before the blood draw while I was reading my book. Don’t do that.

    • Good.

      So, just to recap:  Republican imbecile creates a huge roadblock over his own special brand of right wing bullshit, which has massive effects on the readiness and security of the armed forces, then…drops it after securing exactly zero concessions and managed to piss off most of his own caucus.  Solid plan, Tommy.  Looking forward to your next stupid move.

      • To be fair, that’s literally the entire Republican platform. Engage in performative nonsense and then fold.

      • He also upset the defense contractors, who do not appreciate these games. Which is why I think a lot of the Senate GOP turned on him.

        There’s still far too much denial by much of the right about how Trumpworld will turn on them if he wins, but the denial is thinner than it was in 2016.

        • I wonder if the contractors will run ads against him when he runs again.  Not sure when he runs again (and I’m too lazy to look it up), but if he was elected in a normal cycle in 2020, then he should be free and clear in 2026 assuming he doesn’t do anything else to piss them off.

    • This is exactly why I stay off all social media (and I mean all of it) and only contribute, for better or worse, to maybe three comments sections somewhat regularly (this is one of them.) If I were on Instagram or Facebook or TikTok or Reddit or the next thing I’d never get any sleep and I’d never get anything done.

      You must watch The Crown. In the final season we see Wills’s haphazard courting of Catherine, and Prince Harry’s Nazi uniform is kind of explained.

      I read recently that Harvard (this is going to occasion a drop in the rankings) has offered a class in Taylor Swift. Now other universities have followed suit. I wouldn’t want to move to Boston/Cambridge, but maybe somewhere like Columbia or NYU would offer me a visiting professorship in all things Hanoverian/Saxe Coburg-Gotha/Windsor. I can’t imagine CUNY going for it. But aside from CUNY, I could be the PhD thesis advisor to the students who took my graduate-level class(es.)

       

Leave a Reply