The term “flashpoint” has nothing to do with assigning blame. It just defines an event/place where things kicked off into something way bigger. If WW3 started due to a strike on Taiwan it would be accurate to refer to Taiwan as a flashpoint, because the conflict in Taiwan would be the origin. I don’t see how any of that takes away from China being the aggressor, or why the conflict would happen.

I get wanting to make it clear China is the problem here, I agree, but we have terms that refer to things objectively for a reason. You don’t have to say everything at once with every sentence.

I argued with family about this more than once since the debate, and it’s endlessly frustrating. I work in the medical field. I’ve worked mother/baby. Still takes way to long to impress on them that this not only isn’t happening, but any remotely similar story they hear is someone twisting the worst day of hopeful parents’ lives around to support their political bias. Real people having their tragedy flagrantly lied about, and being painted as baby killers, for no good reason. It’s disgusting.

Still no idea if I’ve gotten through, but they seem to have stopped bringing it up for now.

Then called her (I think NPR said it was a her) crazy afterwards, implying she was having a mental health episode. Then they’ve gone on to release photos, showing they were blatantly violating federal law after being clearly told they were doing so. Not to mentioned , they allegedly assaulted an Arlington cemetery staff member in furtherance of that violation (I know you mentioned this but I feel it’s worth repeating, there should be multiple people charged for this).

I don’t think it would prompt some kind of vindictive vote. That side of it is only going to energize those who were vehemently republican anyway. Republicans would hammer on any and all sympathy they can eke from having their candidate assassinated (regardless of the truth they will say it was the left, and at best people will think the guy was just crazy), and the average person only half paying attention will eat it up. Dems would be even more hamstrung in their rhetoric against the GOP considering the gravity of an event like that. Even with that aside, they’re now running Joe Biden against whichever face the GOP tells their voters to line up behind – who you can bet will be all in on the kind of stuff that will do even more lasting damage to our country. Biden is not a strong candidate, and without the uniquely unlikable personality and character of Trump I’m not sure there’s enough motivation amongst voters to carry him to another term.

But all of that was a lot to type, so I just said it would give them a massive boost

I tentatively agree. The man himself I have no sympathy for, but an assassination of presidential nominee would have made everything even worse. GOP would get a huge boost, and could replace Trump with someone that is actually competent enough to fully implement their 2025 treason-esque bullshit. Not to mention how much that would have inflamed an already looney tunes level of political discourse.

It’s also just not how we should do things in America. Call me a hopeless patriot, but we should try to live up to the ideals we espouse.

There are over a hundred million working adults in the US, and all of them with their own opinions and needs. Many of them completely out of touch with the world outside of their bubble, and some who even approve of the current trajectory. The idea of organizing a generalized strike is a complete pipe dream. I’d love to see it, but we are nowhere even close to that. We must work with reasonable, attainable solutions.

They’re terrified of seeming political, or making a mistake that will let him walk. Republicans have stacked the courts with people who barely grasp US law, and certainly have no respect for it, and the Democrats have put up glorified bureaucrats. We need a judge willing to force the issue and say “if you were anyone else this behavior would land you jail awaiting trial, so that’s where you’re going.”, Or I dunno, maybe stop giving breaks with fines. Let the morons whine and cry about being biased, or an activist judge; make the USSS have to coordinate with corrections to maintain protection while being held. Show this isn’t a game. Prove that you have some conviction when it comes to the rule of law in the US. History would look kindly on the person who chose the make the right call when it wasn’t easy.

I feel like a broken record with how much I’ve said this in the last handful of years, but: someone needs to be the fucking adult in the room.

I agree with pretty much everything you said. I do feel the need to add that your owl story reminds me of Joe Pesci firing off rounds in My Cousin Vinny the first time he hears an owl. Thanks for that!

I’m pretty sure “did we have a moment?” got me out of a minor ticket once.

I don’t get this. I was raised by a cop, and I’m very comfortable with firearms. Flashing your concealed weapon in public is immature at best. I can think of zero reason to flash a concealed weapon in public (unless you intend to defend yourself with it, right there in that moment), even if someone is asking to see it the answer is, “It’s not a toy”. It’s an object designed to kill, the threat is inherent in revealing it.

Not calling out you specifically, but the irreverent attitude of the loud pro-gun group has pushed me way further left on gun control than I used to be. Actions like OP tell me the leaders advocating for it do not have a healthy or mature view of firearms.

They didn’t specify it would be floating in the water…

Interestingly enough, 2/3 of those are subs I dropped within the last year or so based on a lack of quality/content for what they cost (never bothered with ESPN, NHL games are easy to find). Seems like streaming is starting to collapse a lot quicker than TV did.

Silicon Valley. Great show, gotta love Mike Judge.

That’s been the GOP M.O. for a while, but according to the info presented in the article the Dem appointed judges have actually been slightly more lenient (sentenced less than what prosecution sought 92% of cases, against the Trump appointed 90%).

I’m sure there’s more nuance to it if you look at it case by case, but it seems like across the board judges are handing out lenient sentences for Jan 6.

Ridiculous. Human Ted Cruz is only one being, and not several.

I think it was the Logan Act I was thinking of! Thanks!

Disappointing that it’s never been enforced. While this scenario is not the makings of an diplomatic crisis, it seems a pretty cut and dry example of what the Logan Act seeks to block. It’s a U.S. rep blatantly pushing acting against US diplomatic interests.

I think it would be utter chaos, but I’d love just a single solid year of throwing the book at obvious illegal behavior no matter how trivial. Put the fear of God in some of these morons.

Walberg explicitly encouraged Uganda’s leaders to resist opposition to the law from the U.S.

Can US representative just blatantly undermine US foreign policy, or is this one of those things where it’s wrong but won’t be pursued in any official way?

It’s a skill issue. It’s takes intelligence to conceptualize an issue or idea without accepting it. Seems many people talking about Israel/Palestine (in terms of everyday people) just aren’t bright enough to break it down for themselves.

The whole thing is a legit clusterfuck. Israel has been commiting war crimes against Palestinians for as long as I’ve been alive, and Palestine’s de facto government is a legit terrorist organization who has done some unforgivable things. In the middle you have everyday people suffering for no reason beyond being born in the “wrong” place, and being further radicalized by unconscionable IDF actions. There’s no good guy on either side (in terms of those capable of taking action on a collective scale), and that breaks the brains of some. People ignorantly want a cut and dry solution, and a bad side to rail against, much more than they want to actually understand the issue and it’s causes.

I’m not sure the comment calling for regulation is a corporate shill. It’s a pretty level-headed look at things imo, because the truth is YT cannot afford to operate for free. We live in a system that just doesn’t allow that, for better or worse. Unfortunately, the way we went about funding things on the internet (outside of ridiculous amounts of capital flowing to startups for years, which doesn’t really apply to YT/Google) was ads, and they have gotten wildly out of hand. This is on top of an insane amount of data harvesting. We have to face the reality that any major, data-heavy platform like YT is going to need significant revenue.

We need a solution to either lower the cost of (opening things up for individuals to host), or more efficiently fund, services we like if they’re going to stick around in the current state of the world. Even if we say “google can eat the cost” we’re still putting all our faith in the goodwill of an entity that is designed to do the opposite of what we’re asking. That’s begging for issues.

Peer-to-peer stuff is the best solution I’ve seen, or self-hosting. I’m far from an expert, but from what I understand the tech just isnt there yet for it to become the norm. All that data has to go somewhere, and storage is prohibitively expensive at a certain point.

Coequal branches of government, that’s well below an 8th grade civics understanding. Crazy that people genuinely believe the Supreme Court is untouchable by congress and the executive, who do they think appoints them?