Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Zapf Dingbat
Jan 9, 2001


FlamingLiberal posted:

The Daily Beast got a hold of emails that purport to show that Hershel Walker (former GOP Sen candidate in GA) may have done a bunch of crimes during the last campaign and possible wire fraud when either he or someone in the campaign got a donor to transfer money directly into Walker's private funds

https://twitter.com/SollenbergerRC/status/1653912796688531458?s=20

Flashes his Party City badge as investigators knock on his door.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

single-mode fiber
Dec 30, 2012

FlamingLiberal posted:

To me, the Fed is ignoring the fact that they don't have control over the parts of the global economy anymore that are causing these inflationary issues. Those at this point seem to be things like the global supply chain mess, Covid, the Ukrainian War, and housing/apartment prices. If anything they are going to make things worse regarding new home construction by raising rates. When I hear about the biggest issues with people in the US's financial issues, in general the biggest problem is that it's not affordable for most people to pay the rent or mortgage prices that are being demanded. I do think there is some slowdown in the rising rent rates in some areas, but it's going to take awhile and there's no guarantee that they go back to being affordable again.

I don't think they're ignoring it, they've repeatedly called attention to the fact that what they have the power to do (modify interest rates, amount of money held in reserve, etc.) is either insufficient, or too broadly targeted, against the main components of inflation. An example component is top earners going on a revenge spending spree from stimulus + financial market gains, while low earners largely used stimulus to offset existing debt. The Fed often points out that congressional legislation is required to better tackle the problem (e.g. increase the tax rate on top earners to quench demand), but of course we all know that legislation like this often magically fails to materialize.

There's been this mantra in financial markets for many years, "don't fight the Fed," mostly applied to telling people not to expect the market to break down for as long as the Fed was remaining so accommodating in its policies. Ironically, fighting (or ignoring) the Fed is exactly what's happened in the opposite direction, either through taking no action to sufficiently hedge interest rate risk (all the regional banks that have died so far), or otherwise managing their portfolio in such a way that expect the Fed to start cutting rates any day now, even when the Fed has repeatedly insisted that they are absolutely not cutting rates anytime soon. I'm just some guy on the computer, but I don't think the Fed will cut rates even a little bit before they're completely certain inflation is dead and buried, unless the unemployment rate begins to exceed one or both of interest rates and inflation rates.

VideoGameVet
May 14, 2005

It is by caffeine alone I set my bike in motion. It is by the juice of Java that pedaling acquires speed, the teeth acquire stains, stains become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my bike in motion.

rscott posted:

My favorite Bitcoin origin theory is that Satoshi was actually Steve Jobs and that's why no one's ever touched the wallet

This I like.

haveblue
Aug 15, 2005



Toilet Rascal
Unless Steve was running a long con for most of his life, he didn't have the low-level technical and theoretical chops to come up with something like that

VideoGameVet
May 14, 2005

It is by caffeine alone I set my bike in motion. It is by the juice of Java that pedaling acquires speed, the teeth acquire stains, stains become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my bike in motion.

haveblue posted:

Unless Steve was running a long con for most of his life, he didn't have the low-level technical and theoretical chops to come up with something like that

YES, that is true.

Seriously, my thinking is that this (BTC) was motivated by the 2008 banking mess, particularly in Greece where localities started to create their own currencies for trade etc.

And before the speculation drove up the prices, you had vending machines and stores accepting BTC. Proof of Work eventually made it less than useful for exchanging value.

Twincityhacker
Feb 18, 2011

Young Freud posted:

There's a dozen ways to get rid of a Supreme Court Justice but half of them are illegal (and will not be discussed) and the other half would require a President with more backbone to pursue them because they'd be pushing it.

Like, if Thomas committed a severe crime like murdering his wife or began threatening other Justices, he'd still would need to be arrested regardless of an impeachment hearing? Congresspeople have been arrested and convicted of crimes and impeached after the fact before, why not a Supreme Court Justice?

Thomas would have to be arrested and impeached as they are different mechanisims thay target different things.

And if Thomas, or any other supreme court justice, did commit murder they probably *would* be arrested and impeached. But Thomas hasn't commited murder, just semi-ofuscated bribery.

EDIT: There's even been an impeachment of a justice! It was only the once, they were aquitted, and it happenes in 1805 tho. There was a more recent case in 1969 but the justice resigned first.

Beast Pussy
Nov 30, 2006

You are dark inside

Young Freud posted:

half of them are illegal (and will not be discussed)

For how long? When does discussion start about what the people can do as our government slowly becomes more and more corrupt more and more transparently? The page you posted this on is talking about the death of a man living in the street being murdered in public for mental health issues, why shouldn't a man who's enjoying an dangerous power he's choosing to use for corrupt purposes be living his life in fear?
Arent things starting to surface about Roberts, too? This is looking like a growing problem, and one that an equally corrupt Congress has no urge to address.

I'll eat a sixer to say that violence isn't really off the table, look at January 6. Choosing not to acknowledge a tool just means that you're giving yourself a disadvantage, especially if you've already seen others using it.

Jaxyon
Mar 7, 2016
I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

Fister Roboto posted:

Guarantee that this will result in more cis women being reported than trans.

100%. I have a friend with a beard, she's cis and goes by she/her.

She constantly gets poo poo for being in the women's restroom.

Ethics_Gradient posted:

USCE Spring - people think — wrongly — that they understand the coin

Make it so

Blue Footed Booby
Oct 4, 2006

got those happy feet

Beast Pussy posted:

For how long? When does discussion start about what the people can do as our government slowly becomes more and more corrupt more and more transparently? The page you posted this on is talking about the death of a man living in the street being murdered in public for mental health issues, why shouldn't a man who's enjoying an dangerous power he's choosing to use for corrupt purposes be living his life in fear?
Arent things starting to surface about Roberts, too? This is looking like a growing problem, and one that an equally corrupt Congress has no urge to address.

I'll eat a sixer to say that violence isn't really off the table, look at January 6. Choosing not to acknowledge a tool just means that you're giving yourself a disadvantage, especially if you've already seen others using it.

The refusal of Jeffrey of Yospos to allow goons to discuss the measures necessary to save this nation has doomed us all.

A hundred years from now people hunkering in the burned out husks of 21st century civilization will cast their eyes to the sky and cry out "if only the pig balls website had found the courage to plan the great proletariat revolution!"

Rappaport
Oct 2, 2013

If pig balls can't save civilization, is it worth saving?

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the balls of a pig."

- Thomas "of Yospos" Jefferson.

Jaxyon
Mar 7, 2016
I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

bird food bathtub posted:

I mean why not? Not like it would hurt them. Plus, the amounts they're getting are just laughable. $150,000 across years for a kid's private schooling? You're making rulings worth billions, possibly tens or hundreds of billions, to these people. Have some respect for the power you wield and the country that has foolishly given it to you within its system of government. Get some real money in exchange for selling out the future of 300 million people. Make it seem like there's something of value you're trading away, not just a country club membership or something.

The thing is, and I'll see if I can dig up the research on this, the more open corruption is the less it costs. In nations where there are real consequences for corruption, it costs a lot more for the risk.

But it's basically legal here, which is why you can buy yourself a congressman or justice for a discount price.

Inferior Third Season
Jan 15, 2005

Beast Pussy posted:

For how long? When does discussion start about what the people can do as our government slowly becomes more and more corrupt more and more transparently? The page you posted this on is talking about the death of a man living in the street being murdered in public for mental health issues, why shouldn't a man who's enjoying an dangerous power he's choosing to use for corrupt purposes be living his life in fear?
Arent things starting to surface about Roberts, too? This is looking like a growing problem, and one that an equally corrupt Congress has no urge to address.

I'll eat a sixer to say that violence isn't really off the table, look at January 6. Choosing not to acknowledge a tool just means that you're giving yourself a disadvantage, especially if you've already seen others using it.
Discussing the morality or efficacy of political violence in the abstract is generally okay, though realize you are playing with fire and don't be surprised if you eat a probe, anyway. What is definitely not okay is discussing political violence against particular politicians or public figures.

Rule III.B of the D&D rules:

quote:

Do not attempt to incite violence in a way that's illegal in the US. Philosophical arguments in favor of violence are permitted if they do not violate the law. Posts which do talk about the desirability of any violence should have an interesting point about what it would achieve, to avoid being uninteresting expressions of personal bloodlust.

Hieronymous Alloy
Jan 30, 2009


Why! Why!! Why must you refuse to accept that Dr. Hieronymous Alloy's Genetically Enhanced Cream Corn Is Superior to the Leading Brand on the Market!?!




Morbid Hound

Inferior Third Season posted:

Discussing the morality or efficacy of political violence in the abstract is generally okay, though realize you are playing with fire and don't be surprised if you eat a probe, anyway. What is definitely not okay is discussing political violence against particular politicians or public figures.

Rule III.B of the D&D rules:

It's not just a matter of forum rules.

That kind of talk has been permabannable around here ever since the Secret Service showed up on Lowtax's doorstep. See, e.g., https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/373

Kith
Sep 17, 2009

You never learn anything
by doing it right.


Hieronymous Alloy posted:

ever since the Secret Service showed up on Lowtax's doorstep

wasn't that confirmed to be a bunch of bullshit that richie made up for ???????? reasons

Jaxyon
Mar 7, 2016
I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

Kith posted:

wasn't that confirmed to be a bunch of bullshit that richie made up for ???????? reasons

What I heard as well.

Judgy Fucker
Mar 24, 2006

I have also heard Lowtax lied about that as well but there was some pretty interesting things being posted in LF back in the day

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster

Kith posted:

wasn't that confirmed to be a bunch of bullshit that richie made up for ???????? reasons

No. The Secret Service actually did show up and they still have an account registered with a .gov email address and everything. It was only logged into once according to Jeff and hasn't been active for about 13 years.

Jeff himself confirmed it. I believe he has posted it publicly as well.

This is the Secret Service Account:

https://forums.somethingawful.com/member.php?action=getinfo&userid=170309

Edit: He did say it publicly. I found the post:

Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:

*ignores whatever this is*

Okay I have 100% proof the secret service thing happened - privately I thought it was kinda dumb that people concluded it was a lie so readily, but now I have documentation. I have emails to radium from lowtax saying they visited the office to drop off a federal subpoena that day, and making them the account. This is the account https://forums.somethingawful.com/member.php?action=getinfo&userid=170309 and it's complete with a secret service email address. It hasn't been logged into since 2010 which is the year this all went down.

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 19:24 on May 4, 2023

Sir Kodiak
May 14, 2007


In the abstract, it would be fascinating to watch the Democratic Party try to nominate a replacement for a conservative justice that was specifically assassinated in an attempt to rebalance the court. I'd expect you'd see a whole lot of them not want to reward the shooter, but also not want to nominate a conservative. I honestly don't know what they'd do.

Acebuckeye13
Nov 2, 2010
Ultra Carp

Kith posted:

wasn't that confirmed to be a bunch of bullshit that richie made up for ???????? reasons

Someone submitted a FOIA request and it didn't turn up anything, but that didn't really prove anything either way since FOIA requests are extremely finicky.

Kith
Sep 17, 2009

You never learn anything
by doing it right.


Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Jeff himself confirmed it. I believe he has posted it publicly as well.

today i learned an incredible fact: the secret service has an SA account.

IPlayVideoGames
Nov 28, 2004

I unironically like Anders as a character.

Kith posted:

today i learned an incredible fact: the secret service has an SA account.

I’m very disappointed it’s not a prolific poster.

Failboattootoot
Feb 6, 2011

Enough of this nonsense. You are an important mayor and this absurd contraption has wasted enough of your time.

Sir Kodiak posted:

In the abstract, it would be fascinating to watch the Democratic Party try to nominate a replacement for a conservative justice that was specifically assassinated in an attempt to rebalance the court. I'd expect you'd see a whole lot of them not want to reward the shooter, but also not want to nominate a conservative. I honestly don't know what they'd do.

Yeah, the current senate is probably decorum-brained enough to appoint a conservative should one of them meet a violent end.

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster
They are playing video of Trump's deposition at the E. Jean Carrol rape trial right now and it is pretty wild. Some of this was reported on last year when partial transcripts were released.

It's typical Trump in that it is amazingly horrible, unbelievable, and unapologetic at the same time.

quote:

Trump is shown the "Access Hollywood" tape in his deposition.

Trump appears to be expressionless as the video is played in the deposition.

Q: That's you on the video, correct?
A: Yes.

Trump says he was "just stating a fact" and not admitting to anything with the "they let you do it" line in the Access Hollywood tape:

"Historically, that's true, with stars."

He adds "if you look over the last million years I guess that's been largely true, not always, but largely true, unfortunately or fortunately."

quote:

Trump to Carroll's lawyer Roberta Kaplan, in the video deposition:

"You wouldn't be a choice of mine, either, to be honest. I hope you’re not insulted.”

“I wouldn’t, in any circumstances, have any interest in you,” Trump added.

quote:

A: I will sue her after this is over, and that's the thing I really look forward to doing. And I'll sue you too because this is -- how many cases do you have? Many, many cases, and I know the statements that were made -- that you made. Keep Trump busy because this is the way you defeat him, to keep him busy with litigation. So I will be suing you also, but I'll be suing her very strongly as soon as this case ends. But I'll be suing you also.

Q: Are you done?

A: Yeah.

https://twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1654171451480473607

For bonus points, the lawyer Trump said that to is a famously out lesbian as well:

https://twitter.com/lawofruby/status/1654182288505155584

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 19:44 on May 4, 2023

Angry_Ed
Mar 30, 2010




Grimey Drawer

Young Freud posted:

There's a dozen ways to get rid of a Supreme Court Justice but half of them are illegal (and will not be discussed) and the other half would require a President with more backbone to pursue them because they'd be pushing it.

So what are these six legal ways then? Only one I can think of is impeachment which is impossible given that the Republicans will not ever vote to impeach a conservative justice.

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster

Angry_Ed posted:

So what are these six legal ways then? Only one I can think of is impeachment which is impossible given that the Republicans will not ever vote to impeach a conservative justice.

- Constitutional amendment to abolish the Supreme Court.
- Impeachment and conviction with a 2/3 vote in the Senate.
- Criminal conviction.
- Resignation.
- Natural death.
- Wager on a game of darts where the loser has to renounce their U.S. citizenship and leave the country.

Jaxyon
Mar 7, 2016
I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

IPlayVideoGames posted:

I’m very disappointed it’s not a prolific poster.

I figure the CIA has probably already infiltrated the moderation staff.

PeterWeller
Apr 21, 2003

I told you that story so I could tell you this one.

Jaxyon posted:

I figure the CIA has probably already infiltrated the moderation staff.

In years to come, nerds will accuse SA of being a CIA op the way we accuse the Iowa Writers' Workshop of being a CIA op.

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster

Jaxyon posted:

I figure the CIA has probably already infiltrated the moderation staff.

Nobody on the current moderation staff. One of the admins is sort of affiliated with the FBI, but no there's no CIA as far as I know.

haveblue
Aug 15, 2005



Toilet Rascal
Isn't it explicitly not allowed to sue a lawyer over their conduct in court? Or is that only judges?

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster
E: Double posted

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster

haveblue posted:

Isn't it explicitly not allowed to sue a lawyer over their conduct in court? Or is that only judges?

No, you can definitely sue a lawyer over conduct in court. That is the entire reason malpractice suits exist.

Twincityhacker
Feb 18, 2011

It's illegal to arrest a judge due to rulings they made in court, or something very similar to that effect.

Beast Pussy
Nov 30, 2006

You are dark inside

Inferior Third Season posted:

Discussing the morality or efficacy of political violence in the abstract is generally okay, though realize you are playing with fire and don't be surprised if you eat a probe, anyway. What is definitely not okay is discussing political violence against particular politicians or public figures.

Rule III.B of the D&D rules:

Ok, fair. I'll be general, then. I do think that there is an imbalance of power of violence in the states. No one is showing up to Daddy-daughter proms or at youth groups armed to yell about grooming.
Also, remember when someone broke into Nancy Pelosi's house and hospitalized her husband with a hammer? Who do you think slept better that night, Republican or Democratic congresspeople? People would be a lot less likely to be the face of hateful legislation, or the interpretation thereof, if they thought they might wake up to the claw side of a hammer.

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster
E: Phone is loving to double post today.

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster

Twincityhacker posted:

It's illegal to arrest a judge due to rulings they made in court, or something very similar to that effect.

Not sure what you are referencing here. There is no situation where a ruling would be in and of itself an arrestable offense.

Maybe you mean that judges can't be held in contempt in their own courtrooms?

Killer robot
Sep 6, 2010

I was having the most wonderful dream. I think you were in it!
Pillbug

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

- Constitutional amendment to abolish the Supreme Court.
- Impeachment and conviction with a 2/3 vote in the Senate.
- Criminal conviction.
- Resignation.
- Natural death.
- Wager on a game of darts where the loser has to renounce their U.S. citizenship and leave the country.

Also, short of getting rid of a problem justice, Congress has a lot of leeway to pass laws that strongarm the Supreme Court with funding controls and various other restrictions or changes. It won't happen with a Republican House and a razor-thin Democratic lead in the Senate and probably a lot of existing minds need to be changed on the need for it, but changing that is way more likely than a rebellion targeting SCOTUS and no number of sarcastic "vOtE!" memes will make it otherwise.

haveblue
Aug 15, 2005



Toilet Rascal

Killer robot posted:

Also, short of getting rid of a problem justice, Congress has a lot of leeway to pass laws that strongarm the Supreme Court with funding controls and various other restrictions or changes. It won't happen with a Republican House and a razor-thin Democratic lead in the Senate and probably a lot of existing minds need to be changed on the need for it, but changing that is way more likely than a rebellion targeting SCOTUS and no number of sarcastic "vOtE!" memes will make it otherwise.

Congress is allowed to pass a law that straight up says "SCOTUS cannot rule on the following topics:" but they haven't done it since the Reconstruction

James Garfield
May 5, 2012
Am I a manipulative abuser in real life, or do I just roleplay one on the Internet for fun? You decide!

Beast Pussy posted:

Also, remember when someone broke into Nancy Pelosi's house and hospitalized her husband with a hammer? Who do you think slept better that night, Republican or Democratic congresspeople? People would be a lot less likely to be the face of hateful legislation, or the interpretation thereof, if they thought they might wake up to the claw side of a hammer.

Did Steve Scalise get any more moderate after a guy shot him? Do you think he would have moderated even more if the shooter had announced that he was shooting Steve Scalise to punish him for being a Republican?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Dull Fork
Mar 22, 2009

Beast Pussy posted:

For how long? When does discussion start about what the people can do as our government slowly becomes more and more corrupt more and more transparently? The page you posted this on is talking about the death of a man living in the street being murdered in public for mental health issues, why shouldn't a man who's enjoying an dangerous power he's choosing to use for corrupt purposes be living his life in fear?
Arent things starting to surface about Roberts, too? This is looking like a growing problem, and one that an equally corrupt Congress has no urge to address.

I'll eat a sixer to say that violence isn't really off the table, look at January 6. Choosing not to acknowledge a tool just means that you're giving yourself a disadvantage, especially if you've already seen others using it.

To add to this, violence has never been off the table for those in power, and it is being actively used by Republicans today. All of these anti-trans laws are violence, you break those laws (or any other laws)? Guys with guns are coming for you and are allowed to kill you with zero consequences if you don't do what they say. The rhetoric spewed by conservatives surrounding cultural wedge issues is designed to dehumanize, and make it easier to conceive of doing violence on 'the other', or at the least, sitting back and doing nothing while others do the dirty work for you.

While I do believe you can deradicalize fascists/bigots/etc, it takes vastly more time and effort, than it does to use threats, and force of violence. Time that many people do not have when facing the violence of everyday existence in this hell country. Time that our world does not have as climate change continues to go ignored. Some of y'all need to go see/read How to Blow Up a Pipeline.

To those who disagree with using violence as a tool, how do you reconcile your belief with how world history has shown humans behave? If violence isn't the answer why has every country that has risen to world prominence been willing to use it to achieve their goals, internally and externally?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply