[Winstonm]

On a brighter side, there is this:

Quote

Following worldwide concerns about its safety and effectiveness, the Food and Drug Administration on Monday ended its emergency-use authorization for hydroxychloroquine in treating severe COVID-19 patients.

Fortunately, the FDA did not say anything about gargling Clorox or swallowing UV lights.

[shyams]

Winstonm, on 2020-June-15, 13:12, said:

No, it's not tat. It's that Bolton had his change to be a genuine American hero by speaking up and testifying during the impeachment and trial but chose not to do so. Whatever Bolton has to say at this point is done just to promote his books sales. We ain't buying.

It's possible for Bolton to have approached it from an alternative angle as well.

He might have sensed that, regardless of how many skeletons his impeachment testimony revealed, the Senate was always likely to acquit Trump. The bar for conviction (2/3rd of all Senators) is simply too high for such a result to have ever materialised.

So instead he chose on making money for himself by not testifying; instead relying on book sales + associated paid events to make a few million dollars.

[PassedOut]

shyams, on 2020-June-15, 13:18, said:

It's possible for Bolton to have approached it from an alternative angle as well.

He might have sensed that, regardless of how many skeletons his impeachment testimony revealed, the Senate was always likely to acquit Trump. The bar for conviction (2/3rd of all Senators) is simply too high for such a result to have ever materialised.

So instead he chose on making money for himself by not testifying; instead relying on book sales + associated paid events to make a few million dollars.

Or, he expected to be 'forced' to testify before the senate and miscalculated: John Bolton made a tragic mistake. It’s not the one you might think.

Quote

The only way to make sense of Bolton’s behavior is to recognize that he actually did intend and expect to testify. He wanted to testify, but wanted to appear to be forced to do it. Perhaps he thought that, as a reluctant witness, he’d be less open to being caricatured as a disgruntled, discharged adviser, and his credibility would have been enhanced. So he insisted on a court order to appear before the House.

When that didn’t happen, Bolton began virtually begging to testify: He announced before the Senate trial commenced that “if the Senate issues a subpoena for my testimony, I am prepared to testify” without any court order at all. During the trial, perhaps not serendipitously, word leaked about how Bolton’s book would establish a quid pro quo linking Ukraine security assistance to Ukraine helping to smear former vice president Joe Biden — and about how Bolton hoped to testify.

But Bolton made one fateful misjudgment. He overestimated the character, honor and patriotism of Senate Republicans. It would have taken just four, joining with Democrats, for the Senate to have issued a subpoena. But only two voted to hear Bolton testify. A Yale-educated lawyer, Bolton perhaps calculated that Senate Republicans would live up to their oaths of office, and to the separate impeachment-trial oath they took to do “impartial justice.” He assumed they would uphold the Constitution. Sadly, he was wrong.

And too clever by half.

[johnu]

The COVID-19 cases in the US can be reduced to zero with the stroke of a pen eraser.

Trump Suggests Stopping COVID-19 Tests Would Result In Fewer Cases

Quote

During a roundtable on “Fighting for America’s Seniors,” the president suggested that not testing for the coronavirus could be one way of reducing reported cases.

“If we stop testing right now, we’d have very few cases, if any,” the president said.

As a beneficial side effect, the number of deaths from COVID-19 would drop to zero if nobody was tested for COVID-19.

This guy is smarter than a whole school district of 5th graders. Where is Chas_Troll to heap accolades on the Genius in Chief?

[Trinidad]

If we don't keep score, we all win at bridge!

Rik

[Cyberyeti]

Winstonm, on 2020-June-15, 07:45, said:

There's a lot riding on this coming election:

I showed this to a friend who's a Hungary expert (had a job involving investing there for years) and he said the following:

Horribly biased.

Has some points, the populist nationalistic policies for example.

But in aspects is directly wrong. For instance Orban has increased the state and power of the state. Trump has reduced the state. That's a pretty fundamental difference

Also Trump simply can't do an Orban given the totally different political system. One might notice the house of reps is democratic, so are many states. No such situation in Hungary. The comparison is stupid.

Also Orban has now won I think 4 elections running, almost all local elections etc. The government is in fact popular. Trump could hardly say the same

[Winstonm]

Cyberyeti, on 2020-June-16, 07:06, said:

I showed this to a friend who's a Hungary expert (had a job involving investing there for years) and he said the following:

Horribly biased.

Has some points, the populist nationalistic policies for example.

But in aspects is directly wrong. For instance Orban has increased the state and power of the state. Trump has reduced the state. That's a pretty fundamental difference

Also Trump simply can't do an Orban given the totally different political system. One might notice the house of reps is democratic, so are many states. No such situation in Hungary. The comparison is stupid.

Also Orban has now won I think 4 elections running, almost all local elections etc. The government is in fact popular. Trump could hardly say the same

Did he read it or glance through it? No one claimed a line-by-line perfect comparison. The idea is that populist like Orban and Trump are on the rise and threaten liberal democracies. Those are pretty significant in their own rights.

[Cyberyeti]

Winstonm, on 2020-June-16, 13:37, said:

Did he read it or glance through it? No one claimed a line-by-line perfect comparison. The idea is that populist like Orban and Trump are on the rise and threaten liberal democracies. Those are pretty significant in their own rights.

I think he thinks somebody went in to write that article with a set of conclusions already decided, then twisted the evidence beyond breaking point to fit. A big difference is that while Trump can screw up democracy, it's quite difficult for him to do it for much more than 2 terms unless it happens to work out that he gets to appoint a LOT of supreme court judges. Orban I think can be elected indefinitely.

[johnu]

Cyberyeti, on 2020-June-16, 15:24, said:

I think he thinks somebody went in to write that article with a set of conclusions already decided, then twisted the evidence beyond breaking point to fit. A big difference is that while Trump can screw up democracy, it's quite difficult for him to do it for much more than 2 terms unless it happens to work out that he gets to appoint a LOT of supreme court judges. Orban I think can be elected indefinitely.

You only need a 5 justice majority to radically change the landscape of the US. Even if the composition of the court subsequently changes, it can be decades or more (if ever) before previous cases are overturned. (see stare decisis). There were already 5 conservative members of the court when the Manchurian President was inaugurated but his appointees Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are radically right wing conservatives. The decisions of the latest court may last for generations and longer.

True that most of the Grifter's executive orders and departmental rulings can and will be overturned by the next Democratic president, but a lot of damage will have been done, some of it unrepairable.

As an example, his deplorable leadership on COVID-19 may lead to 150,000+ additional deaths (and huge additional numbers of people with long term ongoing health problems). Those lives will be lost forever.

[barmar]

johnu, on 2020-June-16, 16:30, said:

You only need a 5 justice majority to radically change the landscape of the US. Even if the composition of the court subsequently changes, it can be decades or more (if ever) before previous cases are overturned. (see stare decisis). There were already 5 conservative members of the court when the Manchurian President was inaugurated but his appointees Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are radically right wing conservatives. The decisions of the latest court may last for generations and longer.

Yesterday's Supreme Court decision regarding gay and transgender rights gives me hope that the justices will not allow their personal preferences to bias their decisions, and they'll rule based on the Constitution and laws. The decision was written by Trump appointee Neil Gorsuch

[shyams]

johnu, on 2020-June-16, 16:30, said:

You only need a 5 justice majority to radically change the landscape of the US. Even if the composition of the court subsequently changes, it can be decades or more (if ever) before previous cases are overturned. (see stare decisis). There were already 5 conservative members of the court when the Manchurian President was inaugurated but his appointees Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are radically right wing conservatives. The decisions of the latest court may last for generations and longer.

The two justices may have been appointed by Trump. However, so far their rulings from the SC bench do not suggest them to be "radical right wing". If anything, Kavanaugh seems to be less right-wing than Gorsuch and definitely nowhere as right wing as Justice Clarence Thomas (for whose appointment one must credit, at least in part, the next President -- one Joe Biden!! )

[johnu]

barmar, on 2020-June-16, 16:49, said:

Yesterday's Supreme Court decision regarding gay and transgender rights gives me hope that the justices will not allow their personal preferences to bias their decisions, and they'll rule based on the Constitution and laws. The decision was written by Trump appointee Neil Gorsuch

One decision out of several years of decisions doesn't define where a justice stands. The fact is that this was so out of character for Gorsuch that basically every analyst and commentator was surprised/flabbergasted. I will say that some justices do change after years on the bench so anybody can hope.

[johnu]

shyams, on 2020-June-16, 16:54, said:

The two justices may have been appointed by Trump. However, so far their rulings from the SC bench do not suggest them to be "radical right wing". If anything, Kavanaugh seems to be less right-wing than Gorsuch and definitely nowhere as right wing as Justice Clarence Thomas (for whose appointment one must credit, at least in part, the next President -- one Joe Biden!! )

I roll my eyes at Biden's vote on Thomas, but he wasn't alone. And IIRC I don't think anyone predicted Thomas would become the radical right justice he has become.

Kennedy and O'Connor were conservative justices. The fact that Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are not further to the right than Thomas (or Scalia) is because it is almost impossible for that to be the case because Thomas is off the charts on the right fringe. That does not mean they aren't radical right wing justices.

[cherdano]

Trinidad, on 2020-June-16, 00:29, said:

If we don't keep score, we all win at bridge!

Rik

No, I win at bridge!

[Winstonm]

As of today, 2.1 million Americans have been infected by a Democratic hoax and over 117,000 fake funerals have been held.

[johnu]

Gov.: 'No reason to be alarmed' as Texas sets records for new cases, hospitalizations

Quote

Texas set new records for daily COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations on Tuesday as the governor looked to downplay concerns about the latest numbers.

Quote

"We are here today to let Texans know about the abundant hospital capacity that exists to treat Texans who may test positive for COVID-19," Abbott said, adding that the state has slowed the spread of COVID-19 "to prevent hospitals from being overrun. That goal has been achieved."

I am reassured that Texas has excess hospital capacity even though COVID-19 is surging. In more good news, as the largest state in the lower 48, Texas has enough excess grave spaces to bury every person in the state if that should be necessary.

[kenberg]

I often get a quiet kick out of Alexandra Petri's column but this one I decided to post:

https://www.washingt...-by-mike-pence/

[y66]

Covid washes its hands after it meets someone from Texas.

[Winstonm]

Quote

John Bolton claims in his new bombshell book, “The Room Where It Happened.”

my emphasis

I don't know if Trump has a good lawsuit, but I'm pretty sure Lin-Manuel Miranda has a case.

[Winstonm]

Couldn't agree any more strongly with Brian Klaas at the WaPo:

Quote

Unfortunately, Trump losing is not enough. Yes, for the United States and the world, a narrow victory for Biden would be exponentially better than a narrow victory for Trump. But we don't need a narrow victory. We need a landslide that sends Trumpism to the dustbin of history — and forces the Republican Party to change....


....America desperately needs two functioning political parties that are rooted in reality and firmly believe in an inclusive democracy. The only way to force the Republican Party to exorcise its demons of racism, authoritarianism and conspiracism is wholesale destruction at the ballot box.