zeke5123
2yr ago
People frequently bring up “peace in our time” as if it was the only lesson learned from history when it comes to aggressive policy.
Alfred the Great fought the Danes roughly to a draw and paid them in part to leave. He then fortified Wessex so that when the Danes broke the peace Wessex was in a much better situation to repel the Danes.
That is, suing for peace can be the right play if it permits you to change the calculus of war. If you can delay war to a time when you are relatively better prepared, then do so. Perhaps it encourages more aggression (the lesson of Chamberlain) but if the time is used well it also increases the odds of success (the lesson of Alfred).
zeke5123
2yr ago
I might be the wrong audience here (not a big fan of the pride concept in general) but it seems to me the most pro pride people tend to be straight females…
zeke5123
2yr ago
It is pretty crazy how much the democrats were able to capture legacy media. It would be interesting to understand why.
zeke5123
2yr ago
Yep and the crazy thing is it isn’t that complicated to use the better model.
zeke5123
2yr ago
And my point is OP will (if he isn’t lying about the whole thing m) get caught and fucked.
Basically all you need is (1) cash flow (so income) and (2) negative credit history. That’s it. Wouldn’t be a huge financial analysis.
Edit: you also what to value the asset you are loaning on + make sure you understand if there are ballooning other payments.
zeke5123
2yr ago
The weird thing is credit scores are not really how banks make major decisions on lending (that has more to do with cash flow)
zeke5123
2yr ago
The reason that is audited is because it is often just straight up easily proved fraud. Rich people frequently take gray positions which means (1) the field agent auditing has to be smart enough to understand the issue, (2) the Service has to agree that the tax position is against the law, (3) the Service has to believe pretty strongly they won’t lose in court (because if they do, then it opens the flood gates) and (4) the time and effort is worth the funds.
zeke5123
2yr ago
That was the flip side for my family. I did get to spend more time with my kids but my kids were also isolated etc
zeke5123
2yr ago
It seemed even worse to me. it seemed to pose an inordinate cost on kids (using “their resilient” excuse) to create an at best marginal benefit for the old. It’s like burning your seed corn because it was dark and the flashlight was in an inconvenient location.
zeke5123
2yr ago
There is a mountain of evidence masks did nothing.
Also Sweden looks great as well.
Maybe the solution to doing well with covid is “don’t have a bunch of fat old people”
zeke5123
2yr ago
I think it was dreadful. I have small kids. The toll it took on them was immense. We were in the process of moving to Florida when basically the US said “this is BS.”
We are still seeing (and will see) years of damage.
zeke5123
2yr ago
I don’t think so. He attacked Trump in the few situations where Trump was bellicose and that was interesting since most people on the right and left praises Trump for it. Tucker also has fervently said he was wrong about Iraq, something you don’t see a lot. I do think he was a neocon but had a road to Damascus moment so to speak.
zeke5123
2yr ago
Most of the target of IRS activity is EITC fraud.
It isn’t so much that the IRS goes after big dollars but easy dollars.
zeke5123
2yr ago
I’m sorry but this is just absolute horse shit.
First, it is true that generally speaking later in time or the specific controls BUT great pains are taken to read the rules as not conflicting where possible.
Second, constitutional law is a different matter from statutory law. The constitution is small. The USC is massive. It is likely that in the latter there will be truly irreconcilable differences. But the idea that in a relatively small legal document the latter in time drafters would silently abrogate literally the seminal amendment in American constitutional history is laughable.
So no, we need to read the 1st and the 14th in unison; not to create conflict. That is, if speech isn’t strong to be criminal it sure isn’t an insurrection (especially since the latter is graver compared to most speech crimes).
Baude beclowned himself. Funny enough he is also losing on the officer argument. Baude is now a laughing stock.
zeke5123
2yr ago
Do you think the issue will be settled as a matter of law? That is, it would be easy to agree with the holding without addressing the issue.
zeke5123
2yr ago
He hasn’t been found to have committed sexual assault (the juror returned a really weird verdict), the fraud claim was a judge citing property tax value as real value which shows the absurdity of the holding, and another judge “found” he committed an insurrection despite that being entirely dicta (ie the judge could have found that Trump was literally satan but it would be irrelevant).
zeke5123
2yr ago
Hey you can “own” your property but we the government get its fruits and we decide what you do with the property. But that isn’t communism since you know you own the property.
zeke5123
2yr ago
That isn’t a factual finding; it is a legal conclusion and that is reviewed de novo. The “problem” is the circuit or scotus probably don’t need to address that interim conclusion to decide the issue.
So basically people who want to claim “Trump is an insurrectionist” can point to this case “that even the Republican SCoTUS” didn’t dispute while ignoring that disputing it isn’t relevant.
Depends a bit on the make up of panel (a lot of Biden and Obama judges on the tenth — I generally have little respect for Biden and Obama judges though there are exceptions such as Kagan). If it goes to SCOTUS I expect a strong bitch slap.
Would add this might stand on the premise that what you quoted is effectively dicta
zeke5123
2yr ago
District court judge making a grand political conclusion antithetical to the law isn’t exactly uncommon. See for example the Republican judge in Texas and the abortion in the mail ruling.
It is and remains a joke of an opinion.
I didn’t apply to all T14 but applied to 12/14. Was accepted at one; waitlisted at pretty much all of them. It is to a certain extent yield protection. I focused on the Chicago - Columbia - NYU tier (or at least the tier at the time — I understand USN heavily changed their rankings recently) to get off the waitlist as those appeared to be reasonably the most likely schools I could get into given my grades / LSAT. You generally have a good shot of getting off waitlists if you show you are really interested in that school and ultimately I had success with that.
More options
Context Copy link