Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Dr. Strangelove]

Trump's proposed 10% tariff plan would shake up every asset class: Strategist (cnbc.com)

[Mike]

It's gonna be a blast. Can't wait!

[Jeff Buchanan]

The western press, mainly the main news outlets in the US, are reporting a peace deal between Israel and Hamas is near. Biden has said, we could have a peace deal by Monday.

This is non-sense. Israeli and Arab news outlets are calling Biden's announcement of a peace is premature. Hamas has not stepped back from their demand for a post war presence both politically and militarily in Gaza. I cannot imagine Netanyahu conceding this. The Israeli news is saying no way.

I read an article yesterday about the birth of the typical non-state actors use of kidnapping, hostage holding and human shields to prevent Israeli attacks on specific sites. It goes back to an early (1980s) Hamas militant who first used the tactic by placing civilians on the roof of a weapons storage facility to prevent an announced IDF attack on the facility. It worked. The IDF, at that time sensitive to the killing of civilians in an attack, did not bomb the facility as it had announced it would. Score one for Hamas. The originating Hamas militant later was killed along with his wife and children in an Israeli attack targeting him. Karma.

Over the next 30 years, Israel became less sensitive to civilian deaths caused by their attacks as it was apparent that it's enemies were fine with the collateral damage they caused by putting civilians within and on top of legitimate military targets - a war-crime - such as schools, mosques and hospitals. What you're seeing today in the current conflict is mass collateral civilian casualties caused by Hamas who have stated that their belief system justifies this human collateral damage in pursuit of their final objective - the elimination of the state of Israel that is occupying Palestinian lands.

You don't deal with or negotiate with these groups. You eliminate their leadership and blow up their weapons storage facilities and command and control centers. This isn't hard to understand yet the terrorist's propaganda organs have created an alternate reality where Israel is the bad guy. Nonsense. There needs to be more reporting of the nature of Hamas' strategy and tactics on the ground. They don't give a shit about the lives of the Palestinian people they governed pre-war and that isn't going to change post war if they are allowed to have a political and military presence in Gaza and the West Bank.

[crashcourse]

hard to believe we are going from a safe secure border per all the current administration to a border crisis caused by the republicans as will be explained in the state of the union and in a border pressor this thursday. Starting to see a lot more tent villages around Tucson. I talk to a lot of ICE/borderpatrol and they do noting except process and release anymore. Tucson airport is filled with various groups up to 50 At a time boarding planes for destinations all over.

[Dr. Strangelove]

There’s a lot of speculation out there that Candace is TRYING to get Ben Shapiro to fire her so she can cash in her remaining contract and go start her own gig.

It’s also another demonstration that the far right and far left are basically the same people.

[iam416]

I got around to reading the transcripts from the Supreme Court's oral argumens re the Texas/Florida laws on social media platforms and, I gotta say, it'll be way closer than I imagined. First, there's this notion of "censorship" as speech -- that these forums that host speech engage in speech when censoring certain viewpoints. Second, there's the interplay with 230 safe harbor provisions which view internet platfroms as conduits and shield them from liability. Obvious tension there. Third, there's the posture -- a facial challenge is way different than an as-applied challenge.

Sotomayor and Jackson, e.g., viewed this as an overbreadth case (it's so broad you don't know what's covered, etc). But that's not the posture. The posture is that these laws can have no conceivable constitutional "sweep" -- which is very different. For example, the social media attorney posited that Gmail can selectively delete person-to-person messages it doesn't like.

Anyway, it's why I really enjoy reading those things -- it really helps me understand what the issues are and primary source knowledge is always gad fucking better than secondary or tertiary or, ffs, strangelovery.

[Dr. Strangelove]

It gets a lot more complicated when the topic turns to email and "common carriers" and that kind of thing.

I still don't think there's going to be declared a constitutional right to post on Twitter or Facebook and those services cannot moderate or "censor" ANYTHING beyond illegal content. I cannot fathom calling Twitter a crucial "utilty" no different than the water company. Social media is not a necessity of life.

I think the laws will mostly be struck down except for the email stuff. But even there it's hairy. Gmail has spam filters set up; so does Microsoft Outlook. Hell any modern email system does. Are those unconstitutional???

[Dr. Strangelove]

The war is about to widen and he's coming for Moldova now too

Transnistria: Moldova's Breakaway Region Asks Russia For Help - Bloomberg

[Hannibal]

If Google and Facebook want to argue that they are practicing speech by taking down people’s posts, then fine. They are copping to being editors and not platforms. Strip away their lawsuit protections.

[iam416]

DSL:

Hannibal sort of gets to the issue. They have immunity from what people post as of now because they are simply viewed as conduits. If, as Hannibal says, their censorship actually amounts to speech then they're making conscious decisions and the immunity is gone. Or should be.

I mean, honestly I don't see this as a speech issue at all. I do not really believe that Twitter deleting an account amounts to speech. And the challenge to this case is entirely First Amendment-based, so if you don't think that's speech then the states can regulate. And, as noted, it's a facial challenge -- that is to say, the law could NEVER be Constitutional as-applied. And that seems like it's not true.

Anyway, I was surprised that once I really thought about it the case seemed way closer than I intuited.

[iam416]

I still don't think there's going to be declared a constitutional right to post on Twitter or Facebook and those services cannot moderate or "censor" ANYTHING beyond illegal content.

Well, I definitely agree with the former because it's actually Twitter/FB/etc that are seeking an absolute constitutional right to manage their content as they see fit. It's the states seeking to offer up some sort of regulations that, I believe, go toward viewpoint neutrality. So, let's be clear -- the Constitutional "right" at issue is w/ the social media platform and their so-called speech when they remove content. I mean, that's what it is -- whether removing content is speech.

[Dr. Strangelove]

What sort of liability does a newspaper have for printing a letter to the editor full of inaccurate info in its opinion section?

[iam416]

Well, I mean you have a freedom of press issue there.

The better question is what sort of liability would you face if you took a pack of lies that weren't yours and disseminated those lies to millions.. And the answer is -- a lot.

[iam416]

And, IMO, once you start down the road of editing for "misinformation" then you're coming really close to getting outside of 230. I mean, you've established that you can and will edit for misinformation, so why not THIS misinformation?

It's an interesting question.

[iam416]

I should also note that I don't think the 230 issue is of too much concern for the bulk of the justices, but some definitely see and it could be an issue down the road.

The real issue is the facial challenge (as opposed to overbreadth).

The posture is also of interest in that it's a preliminary injunction. It's quite possible the Court allows the PI to stay in place and punts on the decision until the record is more fully-developed. It would be a little surprising given that they granted cert, but it's certainly an option.