Saturday Morning Coffee (June 15, 2024)
Aargh, estimated tax day. Hand me the whiskey. I need to fortify this cup.
So what is this really about?
So there was some hoopla after the whole hush money trial was over late last week. I wanted to see what people smarter than I had to say about it, so I didn’t include it. But it’s a curious little moment.
Newsmax had it wrong. Juan Merchan was the one who actually informed both the prosecutors and the defense.
Don’t get excited. I doubt this will result in anything significant, at least directly or immediately. “Mark Anderson” describes himself as a “sh-tposter.” They’re not going to throw the case out simply because of the comment. Now, if they find out he really does have a cousin who was on the jury and there was communication between him and the cousin . . . that’s a whole different barrel of rotten fish.
But the question is why did Merchan “inform” everyone? From what I could gather, his move was unusual.
Viva Frei had some thoughts, starting about two minutes in . . .
Viva is right in that the Ds got their headlines and the ability to call Trump a “convicted felon.” He’s also right that the headlines are not having the desired effect. So could it be an attempt to wiggle out of the verdict? Or does Merchan think this is the one thing that might make his case look bad? Or is this just the circus circus-ing?
Baby steps in getting justice for COVID vaccine injuries
In 1905, the Supreme Court in a case called Jacobsen v Massachusetts decided that a state could enact compulsory vaccinations. From Wikipedia,
[T]he Court held that mandatory vaccinations are neither arbitrary nor oppressive so long as they do not "go so far beyond what was reasonably required for the safety of the public".
That last part is important.
A lower court agreed with lawyers for the Los Angelos County School District that a lawsuit by parents against them for mandating the COVID vaccine could be thrown out on that basis.
But . . . the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (one of the most liberal circuits in the country from what I gather) sent it back. Why? Because since the “clot shot” never really stopped transmission, there was some question as to whether it was a “vaccine” rather than just “medical treatment.” You cannot mandate medical treatment as medical treatment is an individual choice and not a matter of community safety.
It’s not as big a ruling as some people would make out, but it is a crack in the dam.
Interesting, and, as I said, a break in the dam.
So . . . are the knives out, or are they just trying to win back their audience?
As long as we’re on the subject of breaking dams, can you imagine this article coming out of the New Republic six months ago?
I love the “logic” here . . .
On May 29, as jurors in Donald Trump’s hush-money case began their deliberations, Biden campaign senior adviser T.J. Ducklo took to Twitter to plead with news organizations: Please stop covering the trial of Biden’s main political rival—a trial that reveals him to be a liar and a fraud, and one in which he has repeatedly attacked the presiding judge and his family—so much.
“The President just spoke to approx 1,000 mostly black voters in Philly about the massive stakes in this election,” Ducklo tweeted. “MSNBC, CNN, and others did not show it. Instead, more coverage about a trial that impacts one person: Trump. Then they’ll ask, why isn’t your message getting out?”
Considering that Biden’s only message is, “I’m not Trump” . . . I think that he should be happy the focus is off him and onto the “convicted felon.”
Most of the Biden administration’s criticism of the media feels like blaming the press for the president’s own messaging failures. For months, the administration has been in a petty feud with The New York Times over what it sees as unfair criticism of the president’s age. Biden has refused to grant an interview with the paper—even though it could help ease concerns about his mental faculties and push his message—in retaliation for its supposedly negative coverage of him. While emotions are undoubtedly very high, it’s not entirely clear what exactly Biden and his team want from the Times or the media more broadly, beyond jubilant headlines about every minor success the administration trumpets. Indeed, Biden’s recent decision to grant a lengthy interview with Time magazine could be seen as a shot at the Times, which has been seeking a sitdown for months—the president snubbing the country’s most prominent print news outlet for a glossy alternative.
I love watching these people eat each other.
The weirdest part of the administration’s obsession with coverage of the president’s age is that the Times—like other mainstream outlets—largely left the president’s advanced age undercovered until relatively recently, even though voters have long been concerned about it. Voters do not think that Biden is old because the media started covering concerns over his age over the last six months. They think he’s old because he is, at 81, by far the oldest person to ever occupy the White House and because he, unsurprisingly, moves and speaks like an 81-year-old.
So the New Republic admits that the media has been deliberately ignoring what everyone else notices.
So is this an attempt to push Biden out, or an attempt to appear like less of a propaganda machine?
Israel, Oh, Israel . . .
I’m pretty worn out by people anymore. There’s in denial, there’s delusional, there’s cultish, and then there are supporters of Israel.
Gad Saad’s reaction (he of The Parasitic Mind fame) . . .
Jason Rantz’s reaction (he of documenting Seattle CHOP zone fame) . . .
So this is Joy Gray’s fault. Well, let’s examine this conclusion, shall we?
It’s important to know exactly what the “Hannibal Directive” is.
I’ll let the Jerusalem Post (notice the source, pretty much the horse’s, um, mouth) explain:
The Hannibal Directive was reportedly developed in 1996 following the release of terrorists in return for the corpses of two IDF soldiers. The goal is to prevent the torment of captivity, as well as the heated public debate regarding the extent to which the government must go to “bring home its boys.” Some initial proponents declared, “Better a dead soldier than a captured soldier.” According to this logic, one might even fire directly at the soldier if no other means are possible to save him. More moderately, it would allow taking high-level risks, such as aiming at the tires of a getaway car or ordering distant snipers to fire on the terrorists, with the risk of unintentionally killing the hostage.
Alternatively, one might order encircled soldiers to drop a grenade to kill themselves and their captors. Reportedly, in the past, some IDF commanders told their soldiers to drop a grenade rather than be captured, but this does not appear to be official IDF protocol.
The UN’s accusation is that Israel not only implemented the Hannibal Directive (at least in places), but they implemented it with regard to civilians, Israeli civilians.
I’m including this tweet because it has a great screenshot of what the UN said, and it’s a perfect encapsulation of some next-level denial.
Actually, that is exactly what the UN report says and what it says in the screenshot if you know what the “Hannibal Directive” is.
Joy Gray is not lying.
So try to reconcile this: Briahna Joy Gray is a soulless creature and a vile person when she points out that the UN found Israel may have employed the Hannibal Directive on October 7th.
Not the government of Israel, mind, which may have actually killed their own because they didn’t want them in the hands of Hamas to be used as bargaining chips.
But Briahna Joy Gray who points out what the UN found.
This kind of “thinking” . . .
Thomas Massie, Donald Trump, and America First
Thomas Massie did a two-hour interview with Tucker Carlson. If you want to watch the whole thing, it is on YouTube here.
I’ve not always agreed with Thomas Massie, but I will tentatively claim that he is one of the few sincere people in Congress.
Anyway, the segment where he talks about butting heads with Donald Trump, is one for the ages.
But what really caught fire on Twitter and among the more independent talking heads was his comments about AIPAC. Just a note, I suspect this is also true among most Democrats.
I have noticed since October 7th that America First only holds, for most Republicans, until it comes to Israel. And I really think it comes down to three things: (1) large chunks of the Christian community and Republican voters believe that the US must stand by Israel going into the end times (I’ve seen non-Israel supporting Jews call this Jesus baiting), (2) we have a lot of people in high and or visible places sympathetic to Israel if not holding dual citizenship (now there’s a conversation), and (3) they have a lobby that makes every other lobby in this country green with envy. The last I think is probably the most important. A lot of money is poured into purchasing politicians for the Israeli cause.
If it were any other country, there would be general agreement among the America First right that such a thing is bad, but when it comes to Israel, Massie is one of very few holdouts.
Now, if you ever wonder why Dave Smith makes the comment above, you might start here.
I know the above is a random clip from some random place, but Trump expressed similar sentiments on Sean Hannity’s show.
If you support Trump and you vote for Trump, I understand why. I do. And I’m not even going to try to argue you out of it.
But the one problem we have in this country is we tend to shut our eyes. And we can’t do that.
So with your eyes wide open, even if you plan to vote for him, do you believe Trump is really for an America-centric policy and for giving the rights back to the people, or is he only mostly so? And maybe it doesn’t really matter. Maybe only “mostly so” is the best we can hope for.
Road slide in Grand Tetons causes an “epiphany”
Closing the Teton Pass for even a few weeks means cutting off a vital artery for people who live in Idaho but work in Jackson, a mountain and ski haven that has become a playground for Hollywood celebrities, tech tycoons and billionaires looking to get away from city life.
“The landslide really shines a ton of light on how unsustainable our community is,” said Jacob Gore, a Wyoming native who lives in Idaho because of rising costs. “I just accepted that I will never own a home in Jackson unless I win the lottery.”
Many of those workers face 12-hour shifts and cannot accommodate an additional four to six hours a day of driving time, Connelly told Teton County commissioners this week during a hearing.
On average, more than 2,500 people commute daily from Idaho to Jackson, which is in the wealthiest county in the United States, per capita, the county housing authority said. It has a median income of more than $108,000, compared to Teton County, Idaho, where the median income is $89,000, according to U.S. Census data.
This has been a problem for decades. People were literally forced out of Jackson because the property taxes became too high, not just because they couldn’t buy a home.
Jackson isn’t the only place this is a problem. They bus people from Bozeman up to Big Sky to work at the resort there, because as expensive as Bozeman is to live, it’s infinitely more affordable than Big Sky.
I don’t know what the solution to this is really, but I find it funny that it took getting all the shiny, useless people cut off from those who get their hands dirty taking care of them for the media to notice.
Elon Musk threatens to ban Apple from his companies. Should we take a hint?
In a post to X Monday, the Tesla (TSLA) chief executive said he would ban Apple (AAPL) devices at his companies — which include SpaceX and X, among others — if the iPhone maker went ahead with its AI plans announced Monday.
If Apple “integrates OpenAI at the (operating system) level,” Musk said that would constitute “an unacceptable security violation.”
He added that visitors “will have to check their Apple devices at the door, where they will be stored in a Faraday cage,” referring to an enclosure that blocks electromagnetic waves crucial to communications, including cellular, wireless internet and Bluetooth signals.
“Apple has no clue what’s actually going on once they hand your data over to OpenAI,” Musk said in a separate post. “They’re selling you down the river.”
But other people seem pretty excited.
Driving the news: Apple’s approach, dubbed Apple Intelligence, envisions a future in which a ubiquitous AI system that knows all about you can use that knowledge to surface the right information and take action on your behalf.
In contrast to the current chatbots — which know about the world, but little about you beyond what you tell them — Apple is building a context engine that understands each customer and the information and people that matter most to them.
How embedded and pervasive is the AI programming in the phone?
Similarly, when someone asks, “What time does my mom's flight land?” Siri will know who you are referring to and where to find that information.
Okay, let’s be honest for a second. If you think that running in the background of every Apple and Android system is not a nascent version of this, you’re crazy.
But still . . .
What they’re saying: “Understanding this kind of personal context is essential for delivering truly helpful intelligence,” Apple software executive Craig Federighi said Monday.
“But it has to be done right. You should not have to hand over all the details of your life to be warehoused and analyzed in someone's AI cloud.”
As part of its privacy push, Apple is trying to do as much work as possible on the device itself.
When Apple needs more processing power, its programs will pass the work over to a remote server in its data center.
Between the lines: Apple promises it will perform the handoff without letting itself or any other entity have access to the query.
When an Apple query is handed to ChatGPT, information passes to OpenAI, but Apple will ask the user's permission each time. It also says OpenAI won't be able to store the information or train its systems on the data.
Apple “promises.”
*wink wink*
But I have a more burning question . . .
So . . . anyone else getting really uncomfortable with how much they want AI to do for us? In my lifetime, people have lost the ability to use card catalogs and periodical indexes. I don’t know many people who know how to use a map. I can’t remember the last time they issued a new phonebook. People can’t count change or remember phone numbers.
Pretty soon they won’t be able to write their own emails or work their way through a web search.
I can’t help but think of Jeff Goldblum in Jurassic Park:
I’m not worried that AI will take over. I’m worried the electricity will go out and humans will starve because we forgot not just how to make fire but that we need fire.
Wall Street may soon have competition, but is that really good news?
The TXSE Group on Wednesday announced it has raised $120 million for a new electronic trading platform dubbed the Texas Stock Exchange (TXSE).
Why is this supposedly a good thing?
For years public companies and brokers have complained about high fees at Nasdaq and the NYSE, but they’ve paid up for access to America’s deep capital markets. Even so, the duopoly’s fees have helped drive some 40% of trading volume off the two exchanges, resulting in less liquidity and worse pricing on the exchanges.
Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Gary Gensler’s solution? Force brokers like Robinhood to funnel small retail orders into public auctions operated by the exchanges, where market-makers like Citadel would compete for the best price with institutional investors. His proposed regulation, like other SEC rules, would strengthen the duopoly.
Before you get all excited and think “help is here.”
Its investors, including BlackRock and Citadel Securities, “represent a significant portion of the equity volume on U.S. lit exchanges and together comprise a majority of all U.S. listed retail volume,” the group said. (A lit exchange is an open and public one, in contrast to a so-called dark pool of capital.)
Uh, Blackrock. Why do I think this isn’t really about creating competition but instead about reducing it in a different way? But perhaps I’m missing something. I just don’t think that anything BlackRock is investing in is really good for the rest of us.
Escapism
I didn’t finish a book this week. I’ve been reading Erik Larsen’s The Demon of Unrest. So even if I had gotten done, I don’t know if I would count reading about the lead-up to the shots fired at Fort Sumter that started the Civil War “escapism,” but there you are.
But I did watch a very horrid movie this week. I like B-grade horror films. I don’t know why. They’re like watching a fake car crash. So the other half and I watched Wrath of Becky on Paramount I think. Okay, I’ll be more specific. I decided to watch it. He decided to sit down and add a running commentary.
It is so horrid and so preachy, just don’t. (Although Sean William Scott, who played Stifler in American Pie is the villain, which is kind of interesting. It took me a moment to recognize him.)
But at the end, the other half and I got to talking.
Who can Hollywood really cast as “bad guys” anymore? I mean, they are very limited. You can’t cast any minority, and Muslims are definitely out (never mind that a chunk of Hollywood has no problem casting all of Palestine in that role). Really you’re left with only one group.
Another week gone.
So have I missed anything? I had limited time this week and I am so behind on my reading. So feel free to fill me in.
I hope imprisoning Bannon works out for the Dems the same way imprisoning Mahatma worked out for the Brits.
This was in my YouTube feed this morning. It's one of the best legal criticisms of the Trump conviction that I've heard yet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpdi7GEkQwI