jakee

Ethics is tricky. He's only a Supreme Court Justice, you shouldn't expect him to be able to read a form.

Come on man. Just let the mask slip once and acknowledge the reality of the situation instead of the party line.

And then you really showed those Ukrainians who's boss, I suppose that's just a bonus.

What you've just linked references the link you originally supplied: and a cursory glance at the chapter headings of that link shows who it applies to - "PART 2635—STANDARDS OF ETHICAL CONDUCT FOR EMPLOYEES OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH" It's going to need a signficant legislative act to make that apply to Supreme Court Justices, for reasons I would hope are obvious. Even then, as shown, the link you supplied spells out a specific exemption for (Clarence Thomas would say) the exact conduct which caused the current Supreme Court ethical crisis. So is there a particular reason why a standalone code of conduct is worse than what you suggest? Either one is going to need a decent chunk of legislation explicitly targeting the Supreme Court. I don't really see why doing it one way is Congressional and doing it the other way isn't.

I thought he was despairing the stupidity of his fellow conservatives.

(b) Gifts based on a personal relationship. An employee may accept a gift given by an individual under circumstances which make it clear that the gift is motivated by a family relationship or personal friendship rather than the position of the employee. Clarence says Harlan is just his good buddy. Think maybe that's why a separate code of conduct is needed?

It is staggering the privilege they enjoy while complaining they are victims of the system. Surely they know how heavy handed the justice system can be with everyone else - in fact they actively campaign for it to be even more heavy handed for everyone else except them. Two recent examples come to mind - there's a video doing the media rounds of an utter moron calling into Zoom court on a driving with licence suspended charge... while driving. 30 seconds later his bail was revoked and he was ordered to report to jail that day - and it only took that long because the judge was in shock. Was it warranted? Maybe - but compare and contrast with DJTs contempt after contempt resulting in second chance after second chance. Then one you may be aware of - two european cycling pros turned up to race a major back country event last week and the place they usually cadged food and a shower from had been demolished and they had no plan B. So they found a deserted parking lot, tried to create a car door shield and took a wild shower. Someone called the cops and they spent the night in jail. They weren't even charged with anything but hey, This happens every damn day, to hundreds of people. And if you're not just a glorified tourist and have a shift at work to get to? Probably not going to have that job anymore when you get out. Too bad, so sad. All these so called patrotic Trump supporters crying over how poorly he and his cronies are treated don't even know the fucking country they live in.

Exactly how much time each day do you spend thinking about me? Don’t get me wrong, I’m flattered, I just never realised I was that interesting.

I seem to remember you vehemently arguing against this point when I was making it last year ; ) But now you've come around I think this is a "you're both right' situation. I think 'way too many aircraft carriers with more being built' is a problem that falls under the heading of duplication. Without looking into it I wouldn't be surprised if a single US Navy carrier group could take on the full force of any other Navy in the world with the possible exception of China and come out on top... and you've got 11 carriers with what, 5 more being built? I have no idea how many billion or trillion dollars that represents. And this isn't just a US problem - the UK has been cutting defence budgets for years and years and years while spending Billion upon Billion on two new aircraft carriers that have absolutely crippled our ability to fight a 'normal' modern conflict. We can't even afford enough planes to put on them and have to borrow a US Marine squadron or two (this is 100% a real thing BTW) instead so the flight deck doesn't look too empty and the Russians won't laugh at us. In the mean time there aren't enough 55mm rounds to keep Ukraine's guns firing. I seem to remember during the Iraq and Afghan counter-insurgencies that old WW2 storage bunkers were being raided for .50 cal ammunition because the defence industry was so focussed on the hi-tech weapons to fight WW3 with they'd stopped thinking about the everyday basics. We sure learned that lesson!

Then there's a whole socio-economic conversation about deprived neighbourhoods where people too poor to afford cars are isolated and marooned (sometimes by malicious intention) by the car only road networks that surround them... but that might be straying too far off topic.

The point is it's not just that particular line. Railways are excellent at moving things and people. They're indespensible for freight, and would be even better at metro transport than they are now if they hadn't been artificially hobbled for decades. What made you think they were antiquated? They might be a bit older than other motorised transport (significantly less than twice as old as aeroplanes, by the way) but in the absence of transporter beams what do you have that is better at the things they do well?

Hehehe yep. I think there’s a paradox at work as well - A) everyone hates traffic jams but B ) expanded road systems cannibalise so much space and resources that the alternatives to roads became more and more impractical, forcing more people into cars which take up more space on the new, expanded roads, resulting in more people sitting in even longer traffic jams than we had before. But because someone once decided that a bigger road bike as the answer, we’re stuck with an expensive, slow, dirty, physically gigantic system that no one ever asked for but that it’s very difficult to do anything about.

Wait till you find out how much they spend every year on roads. Trains move heavy things long distances. What are you going to do with it instead? Put it all on trucks? How much more are you going to spend on the road infrastructure they need? As an aside, Who Framed Roger Rabbit is actually a documentary. The dystopian 18 lane freeway hellscape that covers much of LA’s surface area is to quite some degree a result of a conglomeration of auto companies buying the city’s (and others) mass transportation system and closing it down in favour of the cars and buses they make. Wouldn’t you rather be on a train?

So Norway does really well because it socialises much more of its oil and gas revenue than other countries? I think that’s a great topic to talk about. You go first.

Only the right state’s rights though, obviously.

Not after the SC gets done with them they won’t.

Ok, but… you’d rather not encourage them to get help, regardless of whether that makes them more likely to act?

Have you forgotten that we talked about that already? You came into this thread with, in your opinion, a stupid article which you posted as a joke and you never had any desire to discuss it seriously.

So which ones are they? What proportion of all the protests are you saying are antisemitic?

But nah, brah.

So this is clearly a very bad thing. But how much of a thing? How many of these comments were made? Is it really a large widespread surge, or is it like those isolated incidents from the right that you were quite dismissive of? So this is clearly a different thing. You get that, right? I mean, you've quoted the bit where it is explicitly a criticism of Israeli government policy. That can't be out of bounds just because the Israeli government is made up of Jews. I heard an interview here a couple of years ago with a pro-Israeli representative, and in response to some of his allegations the host did try to get a recognition from him that you can disagree with the government of the state of Israel without being anti-Semitic. His response was that if you always take a side against Israel then you must be anti-Semitic. Might be a fair point - though it did make me wonder how often he'd ever agreed with the position of the Palestinian National Authority on any disagreement between the two.

Err, right. Yeah that does sound virulently racist. Straight outta the white supremacist playbook for sure. How much more evidence of rampant hatred of Jews does anyone need than a video of someone being puzzled?

I'm not 100% on the legal details, but my understanding is that the question of whether the actions were motivated by election fraud is the only somewhat questionable aspect of the case. If he'd have paid her off and hidden it regardless of politics, the business records issue would only be a misdemeanor. That's partly why the Trump/defence strategy of denying any of it ever happened was so bizarre. Arguing that he never even slept with her wasn't just non-credible, it was completely irrelevant to the case. They threw away any trust the jury might have had in them for nothing. Anyway, that all plays into just how irredeemably despicable Mike Johnson is. If the bible tells you all you need to know about Mike Johnson's position on any issue, where exactly does it talk about turning up to court to cheerlead for a guy caught secretly paying off the porstar he fucked behind his wife's back? I'll never understand these people. I do believe that Mike Johnson thinks he is a committed Christian - hopefully one day he'll have to come to terms with the fact that he prostituted his faith and morality to serve a man who represents everything Jesus would have hated.

And it’s every level of leadership of your party that is doing that dividing. So why are they your party?

But voting against him, that’s where you draw the line? You’d rather imitate Trump and invent vile lies about Biden in the hope of aiding a Trump win. You’d rather see Trump run the country via video link from prison than vote for a Democrat. Why?