So confused by the use of “liberal economics” here. Was Brexit liberalism? Is privatizing NHS liberalism? In the US, that would be the conservative wing, not liberal.
The author is British. Liberalism in its theoretical aspects autonomy, equality of opportunity, freedom of choice, protection of individual rights is a wonderful promise. But the author argue that in our unchecked capitalist environment it’s just a pipe dream which leaves individual vulnerable and exposed to exploitation.
Liberalism is not what people in the USA understand by the word (i.e. anything left of pretty far right). If you hang out with socialists you’ll find they’re not fond of liberals, because liberals are capitalists. This meaning of the word is why the most damaging, ultra-capitalist, right-wing economic policies of the past 50 years are known as neoliberalism.
They want the housing to be built around it and the tree preserved. A perfectly reasonable compromise at a time when we need both more housing and more green space/canopy cover.
And anyway, having that tree there will increase those property values.
Trump Lawyer Sydney Powell directed people to sieze and then break into a voting machine for its data. Trump asked Georgia’s secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, to “find” 11,780 votes and threatened repercussions if he didn’t.
…audio from Trump advisor, Steve Bannon, surfaced from October 31st, 2020, just a few days before the Presidential election.
Let’s listen. [Begin Videotape]
STEVE BANNON: And what Trump’s going to do is declare victory, right? He’s going to declare victory, but that doesn’t mean he’s a winner. He’s just gonna say he’s a winner. The Democrats — more of our people vote early that count. Theirs vote in mail. And so they’re going to have a natural disadvantage and Trump’s going to take advantage — that’s our strategy.
He’s gonna declare himself a winner. So when you wake up Wednesday morning, it’s going to be a firestorm. Also — also if Trump is — if Trump is losing by 10 or 11:00 at night, it’s going to be even crazier. Because he’s gonna sit right there and say they stole it. If Biden’s wining, Trump is going to do some crazy shit.
On the Lawfare podcast, Ben Whittes, who has been very critical of Trump for years, seemed perplexed by DOJs position that the case isn’t complex given the number of classified documents and there being separate charges for each document. They noted that when asked the Justice Department couldn’t identify a similar case that went to trial in under a year, but here DOJ is asking for trial in less than six months.
Cannon is a hack who has already been rebuked by a conservative appeals court. Her reputation is in the shitter. It will be interesting to see what she does here, try to revive her reputation in the legal community somewhat, or continue to be a partisan hack. I don’t think it would be surprising or even unreasonable if she sets trial sometime in the spring of 2024. If she wants to be a complete hack she’ll set it for after the 2024 election in November, giving Trump the opportunity to quash it by pardon or his control over the Justice Department if he wins.
Even if she sets a reasonable trial date, I’m sure she will have plenty of other opportunities to decide motions on a partisan political basis. Will she be an outright hack like she was when she appointed a special master? Or will she softly tip the scales in Trumps direction while preserving some plausible deniability as reputational cover? Those are the only two realistic scenarios going forward.
it was a “military organization”, he said, that will be used for “aiding law enforcement with riots and illegal immigration”.
The whole time I was reading this, I was wondering how the fuck any of this is legal, and this passage answers my question perfectly: it's not. The constitution explicitly says that the military is never to be used for policing purposes, because the founding fathers were terrified of this exact kind of overreach happening as a result. This is the same as if the Third Amendment somehow became relevant again in modern times. That's why they branded the militia as "disaster relief," for the same reason as Fox News is branded as "entertainment" and not news media; they know this would never hold up against the law.
theguardian.com
Newest