If This Is True...

Last night I saw that a special council reported that current US president Joe Biden was unable to remember things like when he was VP, the date of his son's death and perhaps other things.  The decided that they could not prosecute because a jury would be sympathetic to Biden't frailties and perhaps the prosecution would not be able to show criminal intent.

There are a few things about this. Disregarding the actual alleged crime, the report means one of three things must be the case:

1) Biden's legal team purposely went about having their client appear as demented as possible in order to give the DOJ a good reason to decline to prosecute. In other words, they are using a form of the insanity plea that some lawyers will use to get their client off while knowing full well their client is fine.

2) The Special Council made all of this up in order to, once again, provide cover for not prosecuting Biden. This would be like what happened with Clinton where the facts as known by the DOJ were enough to prosecute but they declined based on some made up "intent" explanation.

3) Biden is in fact that far gone.

That Biden was, that same day put out in front of the press, suggests that item one is a strong likelihood.  I've already pointed out that Biden is, at minimum in the early stages of Alzheimer's. I didn't think he'd get past year one because I thought Dems had more decency than that. So here we are in 2024. That Biden mixed up two leaders and colors is not a big deal. Seriously. The image painted by the prosecutor would have us expecting far worse a performance.

Item three brings many important questions to mind, first of which is, who exactly is running the country. Clearly Biden would be a figurehead who does what he is told by whoever is wielding the actual power. This is, how do they say it? Undemocratic. Whoever would be wielding actual power was not elected by the people to do so. Nor were they elevated to such a position through constitutional means.

Secondly, If Biden is that far gone, there should be calls and moves to invoke the 25th Amendment. We know that such a move was considered for Trump. Those responsible and empowered to do this would be shirking their constitutional duty by allowing Biden to continue as president. 

If item one is the case, then Biden's own performance and claims to the contrary would and should be enough for the prosecutor to reverse his decision (assuming that is possible), I don't see how that triggers double jeopardy since Biden was never charged with a crime to begin with. Of course that would presume that item two is not true (as well).

However it turns out, the report would provide cover for the DNC should they decide to replace Biden on the ballot for 2024.

Undocumented Americans?

Sen. Chris Murphy: Congress “has failed to deliver for the people we care about most, the undocumented Americans in this country.” pic.twitter.com/UJjehYiFr1

— Immigration Reform Law Institute (@IRLILaw) February 8, 2024

I don't know which is worse. That he called illegal aliens "Undocumented Americans" or that he /Dems care about them "the most".

I mean, we know Republican Inc. have members that feel the same way but GOT DAMN, they know better than to say this kind of bullshit.

Watch African-Americans still vote for these folks 90+ percent. 

Yes The President Is Not Immune...

 But that's not actually the point.

Lets get this out of the way. The president of the United States can be tried for the same crimes you or I can be. That includes if he is in office. This is obvious on it's face. What a president has is, like police officers, qualified immunity. There is a higher bar of presumed innocence given to the police given the very nature of the job. Even then, police can, and are, held to account.

Similarly POTUS has wide latitude when exercising his duties. That latitude is not immunity.  An obvious example is that if a president decided to break into a person's home and kill them. That is breaking and entry and murder. Whether he is POTUS at the time is irrelevant.

Since this is all very obvious, why are his lawyers going through this? There are two answers I can think of:

1) The usual delay tactics: Lawyers will make motions, etc. in order to buy their client time. This time could result in the charges being dropped or any other number of circumstances that are favorable to their client. If your client is guilty of the crime they are accused of, these tactics buy time before the inevitable trip to jail.

2) They are setting up other officials, Democrat officials in particular. See, if the court rules that government officials are not immune from prosecution of crimes while they are in office or acting in an official capacity, There are a LOT of officials that would be in legal jeopardy. As I mentioned in my last post, all these sanctuary cities are in clear violation of federal law. If they try to argue that they were acting in their official capacities, well precedent would say "too bad". Not that Republicans actually have the balls to put this to the test, but the possibility would be there.

All that aside, what I'm bothered by is the accepting of the terms. The legal team seems to be accepting the framing of the prosecution:

Their argument in that regard has three main planks: First, that Trump’s actions amount to “official acts” in his role as president and are therefore not prosecutable. Second, that any prosecution of Trump would excessively constrain future presidents and invite partisan prosecutions once they left office. And third, that a president cannot be convicted by the criminal courts if he or she has been acquitted by Congress in impeachment proceedings regarding the same conduct.

The actual issue is WHAT Trump is being charged with, not whether he can be charged with anything. Perhaps I don't understand lawyering, but my contention is that the charges themselves are bogus and should never have been brought because they criminalize constitutionally protected behavior by trying to criminalize legal speech of THIS person.  Further they criminalize the stated constitutional right to petition the government. This right to petition includes the president. Lastly it attempts to use the heckler's veto in the form of alleged "insurrectionists" threat that Trump should have known about and thus not spoken.

These are ridiculous charges and THAT is what SCOTUS should rule unanimously about should it reach them.

As for the immunity argument, I think those thinking Trump should have such immunity should step back and think of what they are saying. Do you really want a president to not have to consider the law when going about his duties? I sure don't.  As far as I'm concerned executive disregard of the law IS a large part of the problem!

We Don't Need New Laws

 Various Dem legislators and media mouth pieces spent the day yesterday talking about how they have a "bipartisan" bill to secure the border and send money to Ukraine and Israel. It was the biggest show of nonsense we have witnessed possibly since the response to COVID.

One of the things that Dems do is "never let a crisis go to waste". Create a crisis and when the people say "do something", government agents then go about expanding their power. It's an old trick and it continues to work. This bill was nothing more than  Democrats taking yet another inch on their quest for the metaphorical mile.

Lets get this out of the way first: There is no need for any laws. Period. We have all the laws already on the books. The problem isn't the law, it is the non-enforcement thereof. The "crisis" is not the numbers. The crisis is the unwillingness to do what the law demands. It is the unwillingness of those in charge to do their jobs. It is a crisis of voters not holding their represantives to account. It is a crisis of parts of America holding the other in such contempt that they literally do not care what happens to them if it gets in the way of their showing how "good" they are. 

Lastly, it is a crisis on communist agents to destroy America. Period.

It is already within the power of the president of the United States to declare "no entry" to any class of people. It is not subject to judicial review. This is why when SCOUTS interfered with Trump's power to do what has been called the Muslim ban, they should have been ignored just as Texas is currently defying the Feds.

It is already the law of the land that aiding persons to enter or stay illegally in the US is a crime. Yet there are actual government agencies along with multiple private parties engaging in this clearly illegal behavior. None of them have faced prosecution even though they have put their name to paper. Trump had the opportunity to go after these people but failed to do so. Now they are doing to him (RICO charges) what he should have done to them on year one of his presidency.

All these jurisdictions providing shelter and money to illegal aliens are in violation of the law. Period. Each of them should be seeing prosecutions. Perp walk entire city councils if need be. 

Right now Democrats are arguing in court that Trump committed crimes while in office and that him holding office doesn't provide him with immunity. Fine. That then applies down to the members of NY and Chicago city councils. Let's go and arrest these people and put them on trial.

If Trump is guilty of insurrection because he vigorously made claims that the election was stolen from him and made a speech, then how can these sanctuary city leaders who have openly stated their defiance of law any less guilty?

Enough letting these Dems get away with that which they would do to Republicans or any other party that gets in their way. Knuckle up and defy their unlawful acts and put them on the dock when the opportunity arises or sit down and let strong spine people do the job.

Lastly, the idea that security of the US Border is somehow connected to sending money the US doesn't have to Ukraine, who, I remind the reader, broke it's treaty with Russia. Not to mention the US instigated removal of it's [Russia friendly] president, OR the US's continued eastward push via NATO even though there were promises not to do that.

And why is any money going to Israel? It's a relatively wealthy country that can defend itself (as we've seen via the rubble that is currently vast parts of Gaza).

It's pretty clear that to Democrats and a large portion of Republicans,  the American citizen is just a sucker to be squeezed for money to send to someone else. Too many citizens are fine with that though. If they weren't the last few elections (and this primary) would have gone much differently.

RTO and Unpaid Time

Fortune.com has a piece out about how much RTO costs employees. They found that employees are resentful over the RTO. They should be.

2020 was an eye opening year for a lot of people. We found out that our so called legal protections against government overreach had an "emergency" loophole that apparently allowed gave the state ownership over your body. 50% of left leaning citizens revealed themselves to be willing to jail people who asserted such things as "my body my choice". Some willing to advocate for firing squads to enforce vaccine injections.

But also, with the lockdowns many people actually noticed just how much they spend going TO and FROM work. They realized how much actual unpaid time went into goign to the office, And it wasn't small change. 

Consider this. Say you have a 1hr commute by car. You don't wake up and jump in the car and head to work. No. You wake up and get dressed and then get in the car. So that hour commute is ACTUALLY 2 hours. If you eat in the morning, then there's time for that as well. And all of that is unpaid AND is NOT your leisure personal time it is time spent preparing to work which you cannot avoid. You don't get paid for that.

Then at the end of the day you commute BACK home. Often that drive is longer than the one coming in because EVERYBODY is leaving at the same time unlike the morning commute which you can decide to come in earlier or later than the main crowd. So there's another say 1.5 hours gone. Get home and change clothes and that's 2 hours. So just in preparation to go to work, go to work, leave work, change out of work clothes, you have nearly 4 hours of unpaid time. Fully one half of your "on the clock" time and if ADDED to "on the clock" time, is nearly 12 hours in "job related activities" in which you only get paid for 8.

Any company offering a 50% raise to RTO?

So employees having done this analysis rightfully are objecting to that.

In addition, now that employees are freed from the commute, they can actually get 8 hours of sleep without changing their bed time to 9PM. That has massive health benefits.

Those who have school age children are able to see them off or maybe even TAKE their children to school (a place that is quickly becoming a groomer infested nest of vipers) rather than do the latch-key thing. Children can come home from school to a parent rather than an empty house.

This is a great psychological benefit to children AND parents.

People, freed of time spend commuting can use that time to get healthy. Instead of commuting they can run, bike, walk, weight train or whatever else.

Healthier employees cost less.

Then there is food. I "brown bag". I have been for decades. There was a time I paid for lunch. Total money waste. Yeah, tasted good and I gained weight. A  lot of weight but it was a financial disaster. Staying home makes less of a difference for me but for those buying expensive cafeteria food or from delis, the savings can be quite large.

Then there is the clothes situation. Rather than a wardrobe of dress clothes that often has to be dry cleaned, all you need is two shirts or blouses, a blazer and tie. Zoom calls only require "professionalism" from the chest up.  The savings on clothes is also HUGE.

So overall, RTO demands are companies asking for employees to once again pay their employers in order to come to work. If these companies were serious, they would at a minimum compensate their employees for all the time required to RTO. Even then that doesn't compensate for the activities one can partake of when at home (or whatever location).

You Get What You Voted For

 So this morning I see that Governor Hochul announced that she secured reparations for victims of the Holocaust and their descendants. 

 

Now I don't know if "secured" means they got private organizations to put up money or something like that. In such a case the state of NY would be merely facilitating the funds (which I have issues with as well).  It could also mean that taxpayer money was "secured". Which would be faar worse.

Either way, why is the state of NY "securing" compensation for Jews in America for an act committed by a sovereign state, Germany, some near 80 years ago?

Of course some black folk on X were annoyed because black folks in NY got a "commission" to study compensation for slavery and Jim Crow. The partner argument being that these were things done by the US to US citizens (now if not then) which would be far more relevant than the actions of Germans.

To them I say, you get exactly what you voted for.

Hochul beat Republican Lee Zeldin by way of 90% black votes.

 

While Zeldin’s law and order campaign made inroads with once blue-leaning Asian, Jewish and Latino voters, black voters were Hochul’s firewall in southeast Queens, central Brooklyn, Harlem and parts of the Bronx, the analysis done by The Post found

Hochul garnered a staggering 90% or more votes in many of the city’s predominantly Afro-American and Afro-Caribbean districts — the same working and middle class voters who propelled Mayor Eric Adams last year.

So, by this reading, just about every other demographic split their vote, Hence making them parties worth courting, except blacks who then are largely responsible for putting this woman in office, who then gets compensation money for...

Checks notes...

Jews.

Y'all deserve that smack in the face and knife in the back.

"

“Oh, absolutely. Oh, definitely the black community elected Kathy Hochul governor,” said state Assemblywoman Inez Dickens. In Dickens’ 70th Assembly District, residents delivered 27,968 votes for Hochul, and just 2,287 for Zeldin.

According to Dickens, Zeldin is too closely associated with former President Donald Trump for black voters — and isn’t seen as a moderate in the mold of former three-term GOP Gov. George Pataki. Trump endorsed Zeldin just weeks before the Nov. 8 election.

“If Zeldin was a Pataki Republican, he would have done better,” the Harlem political veteran said. “He was considered a Trumper by black voters. That was a very, very big part of it.”"

Orange man bad. And anyone who is in same party. Where's my reparations money? 

Meanwhile, speed cameras supposedly intended to protect school children and only to be active during school hours, pop up like weeds after a rainstorm all over Queens and Brooklyn taxing black folks for driving on streets they lived on for decades.

You know they don't have those things in Nassau and Suffolk county. You know they don't have those in Westchester or other northern counties.

They are taxing YOUR black behind to drive in YOUR neighborhood on some "think of the children" nonsense.

That's what you voted for. Enjoy the taxing. Enjoy watching others "get theirs" and watch the "migrants" get theirs....out of your pocket.

Lets Stop The Racist Running Articles

A recent phenomenon I noticed, starting sometime about the time of the Floyd riots were articles about long distance running talking about making running accessible to people of color". The way I see it, that's like looking at the NBA and wondering why black folks are underrepresented on the court. The most recent of this racist tripe is Outside.com "women's running" article about the upcoming US trials.

That sentiment is reflected by Erika Kemp, 29, who became the fastest U.S.-born Black female marathoner with her debut effort of 2:33:57 at the 2023 Boston Marathon. She’s been inspired to see more women of color racing on the roads since she entered the pro ranks following her All-American collegiate career at North Carolina State.

There is nobody stopping any "person of color" from running. If you can afford sneakers and a pair of shorts, you can run.

I also do not understand why you would need to speak to a black person about running.

Every top runner in the Marathon distance for decades has been a black person. 

Every top running in the short races (under 400 meters) is a black person.

How do you know this and write articles about "the most diverse Olympic field" for the Marathon as if somehow black people are excluded from such competition? 

The fact is that west African genotypes do extremely well at short distances and East African genotypes do extremely well at long distances.  The reason you don't see American blacks (I'm not referring to recent immigrants) at the top of the Marathon field is because they simply do not appear to have what it takes.  Anyone who follows the distance knows that the non-blacks who enter the Marathon can't even see the Kenyans and Ethiopians by the time the half way mark is crossed.

Not to insult non-East African runners, but the fact is that all current US marathoners are  not competitive. Period.

Instead of talking about how "diverse" the US qualifiers are, how about we get a long term training plan to get US runners qualified to compete with the Kiptums, Kipichoges and Bekeles of the sport?

What good is all the diversity when you finish 10 min behind the winner?

Iowa: Where The Merit Argument Went To Die

 As expected, Trump took the lions share of the delegates in Iowa. It actually would have been news if that had NOT happened. But what I think Iowa showed, at least for Iowa itself, is that the claims of merit and qualification based employment (and POTUS is a job) made by those on the right, aren't necessarily genuine.

Trump has some good qualities but overall he is a manager. His success and failure is largely dependent upon who he assigns to his team. We saw in his first term that, well, it's not a strong suit for him as a political office holder. His instincts may be good in the private sector where "your fired" can keep many people in line, but in DC, well, that didn't do much for him.

Then we have the unkept promises that keep on giving: The wall and not prosecuting Clinton. I won't go on about his failures as I did that back in 2021:

https://garveys-ghost.blogspot.com/2021/01/the-trump-presidency-rise.html

https://garveys-ghost.blogspot.com/2021/01/the-trump-presidency-nepotism.html

https://garveys-ghost.blogspot.com/2021/01/the-trump-presidency-schumer-prophesy.html

In contrast we have DeSantis. DeSantis won by a narrow margin just like Trump did. DeSantis ran Florida like an absolute champ. He had gone along with the lockdowns and then re-evaluated and changed course. This one act impressed me because it is RARE for a person, much less a politician to admit error and change course into media head winds. He was called all kinds of names, including "Death Santis" and even Trump went after him.

Yes, rather than use DeSantis as a model to get rid of Fauci and Birx, he demonized him along with Dems. DeSantis was mostly right once he changed course and largely on the back of that, turned Florida into the premiere "Freedom state". He went from a Governor that barely won his election, to an epic re-election bid.

So here you had a model of winning that Republicans could use. Trump policies, which are very popular with the base AND with a large percent of independents, without the known baggage (see above links).

Next we have Ramaswamy who came out of nowhere and whether you think he's fake or not, is the most articulate candidate since Obama and intellectually leaves Obama in the dust. And, unfortunate I have to say it, he being non-white would completely nuke racism arguments that would inevitably come from the left. You can't make plantation, slavery and Hitler arguments against a Hindu.

So you have two candidates that either have far more successful governing experience and probably has a team ready to go on day one. And you have a candidate that is...was the brightest one in the field, Democrat OR Republican.

Neither of them come even close to Trump.

Tell me again how you vote for Trump AND believe in merit.

Sure, the deep state nonsense that has targeted trump is total anarcho-tyrany. I get that. A DeSantis-Ramaswamy presidency can tackle that (they cannot pardon Trump for state level prosecutions). Yes, we can walk (elect a younger less damaged president) and chew gum (be against the deep state) at the same time. But that's beyond the scope of this post.

Ultimately I understand what is driving Trump's numbers and it has little to do with qualifications.

Perjury to Convict Oathkeepers

🚨EXCLUSIVE J6 INVESTIGATION🚨

- Thanks to new House Speaker Mike Johnson, We now have permission to release Capitol CCTV footage proving that a member of Nancy Pelosi's security detail, Special Agent David Lazarus, perjured himself on the stand during the Oath Keepers trial.… pic.twitter.com/lEJxcHlKmX

— TheBlaze (@theblaze) January 15, 2024

Colorado Injustice

 Rumble:

Bitchute

Claudine Gay: Not An AA Case

I was listening to Radio Derb over the weekend where he said that Harvard president Gay was clearly an Affirmative Action case because she's not the best and brightest. This is similar to many of the online comments I've seen.

it's incorrect and I'm going to tell you why.

First, let's get the plagiarism out of the way. That is an entirely different subject and to be entirely honest, much of lefty "academia" is nonsense to begin with. Much of it is not reproducible and much of the assumptions underlying them are unfalsifiable. That one of them would plagiarize on top of all that doesn't surprise me in the least bit. But even IF that is the case, she would STILL not be an AA case.

The best and brightest are rarely the best able to manage large organizations. The best and brightest are usually very, VERY skilled in a particular field and are poor managers.

What does a president of a university really have to do? 

Are they actually scholars?

No.

Are they rocket scientists or those finding cures for cancer?

No.

Therefore, being the "best and brightest" is NOT the qualification for president of a university. A university president is the big picture person. 

When Trump ran for office, my support of him was not because I thought he was the best and brightest or most experienced. Clearly if that was the criteria, I would have supported Clinton. No, Trump had the right ideas and I thought he was bright enough to surround himself with the people with the expertise (best and brightest) to advise him and execute the vision. He failed on that front on many issues except SCOTUS.

Similarly Gay's job was to provide or execute the Harvard Vision. What is the current Harvard Mission?

WOKE nonsense.

Gay was and is supremely qualified to direct that vision. As a matter of fact, as far as I have read she has executed on that front quite well. When the challenge came, Gay was supported by the board AND faculty 100%. As someone who has been in education for over 2 decades, I can tell you that you rarely get faculty on board to that extent on "controversial" issues.

This means that the problem is not Gay. The focus on Gay is a distraction from the cesspool that Harvard and other institutions of higher propagandizing have become. Gay would not have her job if Harvard had an actual academic vision.

So no, Gay is not an Affirmative Action case. She is supremely qualified for the job that Harvard advertised. So are the other presidents similarly situated. It is a mistake to concentrate on her just so a "scalp" can be had. The entire organization is the problem. Until then, even if Gay is removed, the real issue will persist.

This Bad...

 Ran across this today:

If this continues long term NY is in trouble. I don't know how much of the exodus is from upstate NY, which is already in trouble, but still.  Expect to see more money grabs (congestion pricing increases soon after it starts as some people stop driving into NY. See speed traps across the state, in the name of safety of course. Don't you know the ticket you get days after endangering a highway worker saved his life?

More pushes for the end of work from home as the need for commuting revenue for the MTA and costs ancillary to commuting can "fill the coffers".

Eric Adams already said he's open to increasing city taxes. 

Keep it up, NY. Keep it up.

Garvey's Ghost TV 12-11-2023: The Maskholes are At It Again

 Rumble

Bitchute

Two topics today
The Obvious Double Standard of Campus Speech
23:00: COVID JN1: The Maskholes Are Big Mad Again.

Make 'Em Unwelcome

 

He did it. Governor DeSantis actually convinced one of the libs to move to Canada. A mark of distinction. pic.twitter.com/Gg3zoV7P9Y

— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) December 4, 2023

In one of my Garvey's Ghost TV episodes recently, I can't remember which, I mentioned that what sane people need to do, particularly with the child groomers in the schools is to make them feel *very* unwelcome.

They should be denied any and every service they can be legally denied. They should be subject to dirty looks and the like. I'm actually for far more "aggressive" things but I wouldn't want to be liable for incitement.

That said, I think what Chris Rufo posted is proof that making them unwelcome is a winning strategy. Thankfully it is the state doing it, one of the things they *should* be doing, rather than the locals having to do it.

Once these pedophiles, groomers and their enablers understand that their behavior is not going to be tolerated and their careers dead ended in YOUR town, they will pick up and leave. Just like any other evil person, when they meet real resistance they move along to easier targets.

I worked in higher ed for 20+ years and the bad thing is that there are a LOT of these types in the pipeline. Schools with sane policies and sane students will need to push out more students to fill the gap. And remember that these folks will leave Florida and come to YOUR state and your town. You check the internet for these folks so they don't end up messing with your children's heads and doing irreparable damage.

No. Not The Government's Job

 

One thing that has become very clear since The Covid Happening is the extent to which the US state is essentially a form of soft socialism. Government agents declared they had rights to tell you where you could go, and when. They could tell you what to put on your face and then what they could put into your body. So called "emergencies" were the ever present loopholes by which the state could just up and decide what the market does.

Climate emergency, No more gasoline powered cars. Who gave the government such power?

Bloomberg decided that you shouldn't be able to get a soda.

Murphy and Cuomo decided you couldn't get a plastic or paper bag when you go buy your food.

Now come the 15 min cities, congestion pricing being the gateway drug for that.

But that's not the topic. No, the topic is that some genius thinks it is the job of NYC to end diabetes.

The report calls for the opening more diabetes treatment centers in hospitals in poor neighborhoods, overhauling Medicaid reimbursement to cover more diabetes monitoring and prevention programs, expanding healthier food options in underserved communities and sponsoring public health campaigns

As is usual with Democrats, everybody has an angle on how to get paid off the taxpayer dime.

Here's the deal, Type II diabetes is almost 100% the cause of lifestyle choices of the person so afflicted. They literally ate and sat their way into the disease. It was their choice. Neither the city nor the state of NY (or the feds) need to do anything for persons so situated.

There is plenty of advice out there on how to eat (and live) to prevent Type II diabetes.  If you have a smartphone with Rumble or YouTube, you can find this stuff out easily. 

Your health is YOUR job. Too many people want to hand that responsibility to daddy state and then have daddy state expropriate money from the rest of us to enforce dumb and intrusive programs in order for the "do gooders" to feel like they are "doing something".

Also, this is a sneaky means of getting the state to promote vegan and vegetarianism. I'm glad Mayor "Bull Connor" Adams found his results in a plant based diet but that is not the only means of dealing with Type II diabetes.  The reason it worked for him (and other diets for others) is because these diets severely limit the amount of added sugar and carbs a person intakes. That is the no. 1 key.

See. Solid advice with nary a taxpayer dime spent.

Garvey's Ghost TV: 11-25-2023: In Time

Rumble:

BitChute

4:00 Congestion Pricing Comparison with the movie In Time.

21:00: From The River To The Sea...

33:00: You DO Realize CO2 is plant food...?

43:00: London Plague! Africans Most Affected.

50:00: I Thought Race Was A Social Construct

 

Veganist "Ideology" On a Whole Other Level

Vegan Final Boss!! pic.twitter.com/2PYJJtbMjo

— Dr Shawn Baker 🥩 (@SBakerMD) November 26, 2023

It Was Only A Matter Of Time

NYS is now using the speed cameras on interstates. 

For your safety of course.

"Many New York drivers are unaware that automated speeding tickets are even legal on highways, but a law legalizing the process was quietly passed in 2021 and is now being implemented in the Hudson Valley and other areas around the state."

I'm sure it was silent. 

The New York State Department of Transportation says that these infractions will not result in points on your license and information will not be sent to insurance companies. Because the automated speeding infraction is a civil offense, there are no criminal implications.

No points and nothing sent to insurance companies. Sounds like a money grab to me. I mean if speeding is so dangerous then speeders should be arrested on the spot. You know and I know that the speeding thing is a scam to raise revenue for local municipalities. It is not that there aren't people who  reckless, but this does nothing to address that.  If you're on 87, a three lane wide highway in most parts, with no one around you, doing 80,90 MPH you are not a danger to anyone, including yourself. 

Doing such a speed in a school zone IS dangerous. It's not the speed, it's the conditions and they know it. Now, you, being a danger to nobody will get a ticket [tax] for simply going about your business because some busybody who got elected to office, thinks it's a great idea.

NY residents will vote these people back into office though.

It sure is interesting that as cars gain more and more safety features, that speed limits don't go up but fines do (or are created).

Meanwhile, I saw a guy yesterday with tires is such bad shape that the rubber was peeling away from the steel cords. No police officer will be stopping him. No auto-fine will send him a ticket, and most certainly he is a danger to himself AND those around him. 

Just another example of the government clearly just taxing citizens with false claims of safety.

Gotta pay for those illegal aliens somehow I suppose.

Trumpenomics Vs. Bidenomics

 

Any questions?

So It's Like That?

In the United States, you have a right to stomp on and burn the national flag. You have the absolute right to advocate for ending the US as a sovereign state. I recall back in the day, after the Rodney King verdict, participating in a a number of protests that included many calls to end the US and involved aforementioned flag burning. This all happened on the campus of a private university.  No one in the administration dared even peep about consequences of such actions.

My how times have changed.

"A Massachusetts-based private university has banned a student chapter of the National Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) on its campus amid the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict, becoming the first U.S.-based private university to do so. "

Banning a student organization based on political stands is discrimination. But this is a private university so it can do so, within limits.  But that's not really the interesting part.

 

“SJP has called on its chapters to engage in conduct that supports Hamas in its call for the elimination of the only Jewish state in the world and its people,” the school’s spokesperson said in its statement to The Hill. “Such expression is not protected by Brandeis’ principles of free speech.”

“Students are welcome to express their support for Palestinians in a manner that complies with our rights and responsibilities,” the spokesperson concluded.

This wording is interesting because the university claims that the organization engages in conduct that supports Hamas in it's call for the elimination of the only Jewish state. Note that they did NOT say that said organization supported the  means by which Hamas goes about it's "call". No, they said that the conduct supports the aim. The university has decided that any speech that does not support the state of Israel is  "not protected".

That is mighty strange for a US university. I will remind the reader that it has been standard practice to protect all manner of anti-American speech on university campuses. Why is it that being anti not America, is somehow afforded less "protection"? If anything speech that is anti-American ought to be the "not protected" speech.

Lest you think I protest too much, note that the university goes on to state that THEY are the arbiter of what proper "support for Palestinians" entails.

Ahhh the university as speech police.

It's very interesting to see where alumni and administrations have drawn the line on speech, given they have coddled and even supported speech in it's DEI departments that call for the elimination of "whiteness" (wink, wink).

It would be nice if universities went back to the entire "so long as it is legal" standard when it comes to speech.