[subego]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

every single word we write here is completely wasted effort.

I kept on trying to tell you that.

It’s the Supreme Court that has framed the militia clause to be irrelevant to the 2nd Amendment. I don’t agree with the interpretation, but I’m not a Supreme Court justice, so my opinion is academic.

[Waragainstsleep]

How does it work with extradition between US states?
I gather Trump could end up being convicted under state laws in both NY (is it the one where he's already been convicted? or one of the upcoming trials?) and GA, is that right? And in those instances, he would be unable to pardon himself if he gets elected POTUS again correct?
So if that happens and let's say he is promptly convicted and sentenced to jail in both those states after being elected, does the POTUS then have to avoid those states?
Would any or all other states extradite him? Would it be down to individual governors or even cops potentially? Even if it's the law that they should arrest him and extradite him?
If that were the case, he's going to be too terrified to travel anywhere. Even flying over a state he perceives as hostile would be a risk if there was engine trouble to force a landing.
Could local law enforcement end up in a shoot-out with his Secret Service detail?

He'd end up holed up in Mar-A-Largo with a private army of Proud Boys wouldn't he? Making it like a drug cartel's villa.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by subego 

I kept on trying to tell you that.

It’s the Supreme Court that has framed the militia clause to be irrelevant to the 2nd Amendment. I don’t agree with the interpretation, but I’m not a Supreme Court justice, so my opinion is academic.

I appreciate that your academic points are somehow more valid than my academic points

[subego]

My academic point is I’m in agreement with you the militia clause isn’t severable from the rest of the 2nd Amendment the way the Supreme Court has decided it to be..

I weigh these points equally because they’re the same.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

How does it work with extradition between US states?

The way it works on TV is a pair of cops from the appropriate jurisdiction get authorized by the other state to arrest the perp in their territory.

I’ve never heard of this being denied. If someone tried it, I imagine that would immediately go to federal court.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by subego 

The way it works on TV is a pair of cops from the appropriate jurisdiction get authorized by the other state to arrest the perp in their territory.

I’ve never heard of this being denied. If someone tried it, I imagine that would immediately go to federal court.

I thought this was just a “mechanical” thing where you have to go through the motions.

[subego]

I get the feeling they’re “rubber stamped”. You also see this on TV in high speed pursuits, where when they get near the border they’ll radio ahead to get permission to continue pursuit, though on TV I feel friction between the involved departments gets milked for drama.

For reference, the last time I saw an actual extradition on TV was when Jerry Orbach (dead) on Law & Order went to Baltimore to pick up a perp from Richard Belzer (dead) on Homicide.

[andi*pandi]

Seems like that was several episodes of justified, getting people to their out of state court date and getting hijacked along the way?

[subego]

I haven’t seen it. It’s on my list. I’ve only heard good things about it and I absolutely love both Olyphant and Goggins.

[Waragainstsleep]

So the siege of Mar-A-Lago could be on then. Interesting times.

[Thorzdad]

Huh?

[christ]

Originally Posted by subego 

The way it works on TV is a pair of cops from the appropriate jurisdiction get authorized by the other state to arrest the perp in their territory.

Like Coogan's Bluff.

[Thorzdad]

TIL the first graders who survived Sandy Hook will be voting in their first presidential election this year.

[Spheric Harlot]

So, in case anybody was wondering what the hell self-described "pro-white nationalist" and "proud Islamophobe" Laura Loomer is doing in Tr*mp's team:

They're fucking, apparently.

The Evangelists' Chosen One is openly cheating on his wife while on the campaign trail.

[subego]

Presumably evangelists vote the policy, not the person.

[reader50]

When I was a kid, it was thought that religious people were a cut above average. They made moral decisions ahead of expedient ones. And set the example by their actions, of how people should live.

Today, they endorse the sinner, ignoring his persistent lies. I suppose the message is to "do as I say" rather than as they do.

Perhaps it's not a surprise that thousands of churches close in the USA each year. Part of a trend that's been running the last few decades. But my impression is it's dramatically accelerated since 2016, when Trump hit the scene.

Churches aren't supposed to be political. But evangelicals endorse Trump anyway, and all the non-Republican parishioners leave the church. Many don't bother to find another church. Young people don't like the hypocrisy of preaching morals without practicing them, and quit too. Modern churches are filled with old folks. Or at least, have a few benches of old folks, with the rest of the sanctuary empty.

They're killing their own organized religion, across the entire country. Only the unaffiliated and agnostic/atheist camps are growing, with healthy, sustained growth.

Perhaps evangelicals should leave politics to the public and politicians. And go back to setting moral examples. Like not supporting guys who cheat on their wedding vows.

[subego]

Originally Posted by reader50 

When I was a kid, it was thought that religious people were a cut above average.

Why?

[reader50]

Originally Posted by subego 

Why?

Not sure, I was just a kid at the time. No influence on church advertising or national trends.

Perhaps it was a self-appointed thing "We are the faithful, the better half"? There's probably something in the Bible about living better than the average sinners.

[subego]

I mean, that’s the idea, but the reality is a spread.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by reader50 

When I was a kid, it was thought that religious people were a cut above average. They made moral decisions ahead of expedient ones. And set the example by their actions, of how people should live.

Today, they endorse the sinner, ignoring his persistent lies. I suppose the message is to "do as I say" rather than as they do.

That drove me batty in the US. Got quite a bit of condescension from some in the late 1990s, because I was (and still am) an atheist. I've always been a live-and-let-live guy, so I wasn't forcing my opinion on others nor told them “How stupid it is to believe in God.” (I saw the same mechanism at work after 9/11 when e. g. opponents of the Iraq invasion were called unpatriotic and un-American.)

It is very telling that some of the folk who e. g. decried Bill Clinton and insisted that character matters more than short-term policies (such as Eric Metaxa) are now staunch Trumpers.

Originally Posted by reader50 

Perhaps it's not a surprise that thousands of churches close in the USA each year. Part of a trend that's been running the last few decades. But my impression is it's dramatically accelerated since 2016, when Trump hit the scene.

I can't say whether it has accelerated since 2016, but I think this is a global phenomenon in first-world countries, and the wave has hit the US a few decades later than the rest of the world. In Germany a lot of the social activities centered around churches, but those have been replaced by sports clubs and other things. You see some vestiges where day cares and kindergartens are affiliated to one of the two big churches (mostly in Western Germany). Ditto for hospitals. It usually does not matter in practice, so people don't care, but there have been a few cases where e. g. kindergarten teacher were fired, because they were homosexual and got married.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by reader50 

Churches aren't supposed to be political. But evangelicals endorse Trump anyway

Perhaps evangelicals should leave politics to the public and politicians. And go back to setting moral examples.

Evangelicals were traditionally apolitical, until conservative political strategists chose to capitalize on school desegregation to activate Evangelicals. They used that momentum to shift the focus to abortion, years after Roe was already in place and plenty of Evangelicals, Baptists, and others came out in support of it.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/st...rigins-107133/

Today's Evangelical movement can be traced directly to those political strategies, and even further back into the New Deal era where conservative strategists created and pushed narratives tying fiscal conservatism to Biblical values.

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

It is very telling that some of the folk who e. g. decried Bill Clinton and insisted that character matters more than short-term policies (such as Eric Metaxa) are now staunch Trumpers.

^My parents. Huge Bill Clinton critics. "The morals of the President set the standard for the morals of the nation."

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by subego 

Presumably evangelists vote the policy, not the person.

Again, you need to spend more time around conservatives/evangelicals/republicans. Thinking that they know and understand policy is a willllld assumption. They care about what the conservative media machine tells them to care about. There is no consistency or thru-line to their reasoning, only continued "scandals" and culture war to keep them engaged in bullshit, distracted from the reality around them, and prevent them from taking a beat and gathering perspective.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

I can't say whether it has accelerated since 2016, but I think this is a global phenomenon in first-world countries, and the wave has hit the US a few decades later than the rest of the world. In Germany a lot of the social activities centered around churches, but those have been replaced by sports clubs and other things.

These are the Church membership numbers for Germany (for non-Germans: Church affiliation is a matter of public record, since there is a "Church tax" that is collected through the tax bureau according to your Church membership status and passed on to the official churches):

(red: Catholic, blue: Protestant, magenta curve: total)

Delta change in membership by %, year-over-year:

(red: Catholic, blue: Protestant, purple curve: total)

Source:
https://fowid.de/meldung/entwicklung...eder-1992-2023

[subego]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Again, you need to spend more time around conservatives/evangelicals/republicans. Thinking that they know and understand policy is a willllld assumption. They care about what the conservative media machine tells them to care about. There is no consistency or thru-line to their reasoning, only continued "scandals" and culture war to keep them engaged in bullshit, distracted from the reality around them, and prevent them from taking a beat and gathering perspective.

They’re not aware Trump nominates conservatives to the Supreme Court? I feel that was hard to miss.

[reader50]

Originally Posted by subego 

They’re not aware Trump nominates conservatives to the Supreme Court? I feel that was hard to miss.

That wasn't missed - it's the expedient part. Making expedient choices for political power today, at the expense of moral standards and the future of organized faith.

SCOTUS justices will pass. Thomas and Alito are among the oldest, and they've gone stupid with scandals. The balance will shift back within the next decade or two. But the loss of congregation is permanent - the old folks are dying off. And once they're gone, who's going to convince young people to join? The recruiting generation is vanishing.

It's getting harder to even find a church. There's still quite a few, but that will continue to change over the next decade or two. Shooting themselves in the foot for temporary gains is an ongoing process.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by subego 

They’re not aware Trump nominates conservatives to the Supreme Court? I feel that was hard to miss.

They're not aware that the entire reason they think they want a certain bent to their supreme court nominees is a manufactured crisis designed by political strategists to activate voters. It is not rooted in history, it is not rooted in theology, it is not rooted in morality, it is not rooted in reality.