June CE thread: I told her I was eating a bag of Dick's

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Internet VFW > June CE thread: I told her I was eating a bag of Dick's

«‹›23 »

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

Probably a good time to watch the very final seconds of "Spotlight" again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zilj4Y0VBGI

# ? Jun 25, 2024 18:29

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Oct 5, 2024 13:05

Arrath: Apr 14, 2011

Duzzy Funlop posted:

His sentence was 18 months...

...on probation

Should we bring back burnings at the stake for offenders like these? And the officials covering for them/enabling them?

# ? Jun 25, 2024 18:42

Hyrax Attack!: Jan 13, 2009; We demand to be taken seriously

Arrath posted:

Should we bring back burnings at the stake for offenders like these? And the officials covering for them/enabling them?

Yes. They absolutely do not care & will not fix anything until massive fines start being handed down, then it�s time for strategic bankruptcies.

# ? Jun 25, 2024 18:54

ThisIsJohnWayne: Feb 23, 2007; Ooo! Look at me! NO DON'T LOOK AT ME!

Hyrax Attack! posted:

Yes. They absolutely do not care & will not fix anything until massive fines start being handed down, then it’s time for strategic bankruptcies.

And if you have trouble motivating your leaders, simply point out how much money the fines can make and that they will get to keep it. Then you can make more money writing history books about the 30 year wars

# ? Jun 25, 2024 19:10

Coasterphreak: May 29, 2007; I like cookies.

Zamujasa posted:

you could even say it was a bit nutty

More loose nuts than Capitol Hill

# ? Jun 25, 2024 19:16

Don Dongington: Sep 27, 2005; #ideasboom; College Slice

ThisIsJohnWayne posted:

And if you have trouble motivating your leaders, simply point out how much money the fines can make and that they will get to keep it. Then you can make more money writing history books about the 30 year wars

This is assuming that your leaders aren't flag waving member's of said Church.

With the general collapse of organised labour, fraternities such as trade associations and grassroots political movements outside of the fringe, church groups are now the single best opportunity to organise within a political movement. Once motivated, aspirational movers and shakers worked out they could use church groups to stack local branches of conservative-leaning political parties, they effectively had control over who won preselection/primary races. I bet you could count the number of GOP candidates and sitting members who don't belong to a megachurch or are extremely active in a conservative baptist/catholic parish group on one hand.

It's arguably worse here in Aus - to vote in a preselection (our version of a Primary race), you have to be a paid-up financial member of the party in question, not just a "registered voter" for that party. This additional barrier for entry makes the impact of Branch Stacking more pronounced. It got so bad in my state that as of about 5 years ago, in order to get pre-selected as a candidate in the centre-right "Liberal" party, you effectively HAD to have the local evangelical church behind you. Before bad optics during COVID had them effectively wiped out at federal and state levels, something like 90-95% of party room members from my state belonged to a prosperity-gospel preaching evangelical church, as well as the Prime Minister (Sydney is well on the way to having the same issue).

We had a huge Royal Commission (kinda like a Grand Jury I guess) into systemic sexual abuse in religious institutions about a decade back - our Prime Minister at the time was a former Catholic seminary alumni, who was close personal friends with Cardinal George Pell - the Vatican's man in Australia who was both accused and convicted of child sexual abuse, and identified as being pivotal to covering up systemic abuse within the Church. The PM openly supported Pell and spoke out against the judicial processes in play.

Separating Church and State is a solid idea - but they're onto it, and doing their very best to stack the halls of government and defend their income streams.

Edit: Not to mention the fact that Evangelical churches are rich as gently caress, and are likely big campaign donors.

# ? Jun 26, 2024 02:41

Milo and POTUS: Sep 3, 2017; I will not shut up about the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers. I talk about them all the time and work them into every conversation I have. I built a shrine in my room for the yellow one who died because sadly no one noticed because she died around 9/11. Wanna see it?

Duzzy Funlop posted:

His sentence was 18 months...

...on probation

Oh thank god thought you were about to say Sunday School

# ? Jun 26, 2024 12:12

Nick Soapdish: Apr 27, 2008

Some good news, surprised this was not done earlier

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-lgbtq-military-pardon/

quote:

President Biden is pardoning LGBTQ+ service members who were convicted of a crime under military law based on their sexual orientation, he is expected to announce Wednesday. The Biden administration estimates the move will affect "thousands" of service members convicted over the six decades that military law formally banned consensual homosexual conduct, senior administration officials told reporters on a call Tuesday.

"Today, I am righting an historic wrong by using my clemency authority to pardon many former service members who were convicted simply for being themselves," the president said in a statement. "Our nation's service members stand on the frontlines of freedom, and risk their lives in order to defend our country. Despite their courage and great sacrifice, thousands of LGBTQI+ service members were forced out of the military because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. Some of these patriotic Americans were subject to court-martial, and have carried the burden of this great injustice for decades."

Beginning in 1951, the Uniform Code of Military Justice Article 125 explicitly criminalized consensual "sodomy," until Congress and President Barack Obama decriminalized same-sex relationships through the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2014. But the effects of those convictions have lingered for those veterans, leaving criminal records and the stain of a dishonorable discharge, as CBS News has recently reported.

The military code is separate from, but related to, the infamous "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy adopted during the Clinton years and repealed during the Obama years. That policy banned openly gay and lesbian Americans from serving in the military.

The announcement doesn't automatically change these veterans' records; they will still have to apply for and complete a process, senior administration officials said. Eligible service members and veterans must apply for a certificate of pardon, which they can use to get their discharge status changed. That change of status will unlock veterans benefits that many of them have been denied. Officials aren't sure how long the process could take, or whether those who qualify will be eligible for back pay.

It's unclear why the president is only now pardoning LGBTQ+ service members, since he's had the opportunity to do so for nearly three and a half years. Senior administration officials struggled to respond to that discrepancy.

"The president is committed to righting historic wrongs when he has the opportunity to do so," one senior administration official told reporters.

The president's pardon comes on one of the final days of Pride Month.

"We have a sacred obligation to all of our service members � including our brave LGBTQ+ service members: to properly prepare and equip them when they are sent into harm's way, and to care for them and their families when they return home," the president said in his statement. "Today, we are making progress in that pursuit."

LGBTQ service members and their families have had to fight for benefits from their discharges. A federal judge in San Francisco last week refused to dismiss a lawsuit claiming the military violated the constitutional rights of tens of thousands of LGBTQ veterans by failing to grant them honorable discharges when they were barred from serving over their sexual orientation.

# ? Jun 26, 2024 15:19

Elviscat: Jan 1, 2008; Well don't you know I'm caught in a trap?

Holy poo poo, I just assumed that was done when they repealed DADT.

# ? Jun 26, 2024 15:59

facialimpediment: Feb 11, 2005; as the world turns

Nick Soapdish posted:

Some good news, surprised this was not done earlier

I think the timing is a three-parter. One because it's pride month, two because of that federal lawsuit that survived the motion to dismiss, and three because of the debate tomorrow.

I can see Donnie yelling about how Biden's going to pardon his son and etc, while Biden pulls a "I use my pardon power to right society's wrongs, you pardon your friends and cronies" kind of thing.

Or, it's a classic thing where Biden / the Admin didn't know it was a thing until the lawsuit.

# ? Jun 26, 2024 16:02

shame on an IGA: Apr 8, 2005

Tipping discourse about to get real spicy thanks to SCOTUS

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2023/23-108

# ? Jun 26, 2024 16:46

Tiny Timbs: Sep 6, 2008

hail Satan

# ? Jun 26, 2024 16:46

That Works: Jul 22, 2006; Every revolution evaporates and leaves behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy

shame on an IGA posted:

Tipping discourse about to get real spicy thanks to SCOTUS

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2023/23-108

Are servers "state or local officials" though? Or would a ruling just go beyond that anyway?

# ? Jun 26, 2024 17:03

shame on an IGA: Apr 8, 2005

Oh they ruled on that 6-3 today, bribery is good and cool now as long as there�s no explicit agreement beforehand

# ? Jun 26, 2024 17:09

OddObserver: Apr 3, 2009

shame on an IGA posted:

Oh they ruled on that 6-3 today, bribery is good and cool now as long as there�s no explicit agreement beforehand

Thomas really ought to have recused from that one.

# ? Jun 26, 2024 17:11

facialimpediment: Feb 11, 2005; as the world turns

I'm still trying to wrap my head around it really.

https://x.com/mjs_DC/status/1805967724868206771?t=OzFfVZbN8k-k1wGi1GT1Uw&s=19

quote:

The Government asks this Court to adopt an
interpretation of §666 that would radically upend gratuities
rules and turn §666 into a vague and unfair trap for 19
million state and local officials. We decline to do so. Section 666 is a vital statute, but its focus is targeted: Section 666 proscribes bribes to state and local officials, while allowing state and local governments to regulate gratuities to state
and local officials. Within constitutional bounds, Congress
can always change the law if it wishes to do so. But since 1986, it has not, presumably because Congress understands that state and local governments may and often do regulate
gratuities to state and local officials. We reverse the judgment of the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh
Circuit and remand the case for further proceedings
consistent with this opinion.

Sure sounds to me like the Supreme Court is once again saying that bribes are legal, so long as there is sufficient winking and nudging involved. Then it's just a sparkling gratuity! That's consistent with basically any anti-bribery statute that comes before the court - it gets murdered. A difference this time is that the liberals dissented, making me think my interpretation is more accurate than Kavanaugh's.

# ? Jun 26, 2024 17:14

bird food bathtub: Aug 9, 2003; College Slice

facialimpediment posted:

I'm still trying to wrap my head around it really.

https://x.com/mjs_DC/status/1805967724868206771?t=OzFfVZbN8k-k1wGi1GT1Uw&s=19

Sure sounds to me like the Supreme Court is once again saying that bribes are legal, so long as there is sufficient winking and nudging involved. Then it's just a sparkling gratuity! That's consistent with basically any anti-bribery statute that comes before the court - it gets murdered. A difference this time is that the liberals dissented, making me think my interpretation is more accurate than Kavanaugh's.

I mean if you expected anything related to any of this to go any other way I have no idea what to tell you. Donald was a walking pile of bribery in a suit with the emoluments stuff and foreign governments just feeding him endless millions and millions of dollars with blatantly obvious stuff like hotel rentals of entire floors that sat empty. And that's the publicly known stuff. Under the table it probably was as bad as signing checks with "For: Not Bribes" and burlap sacks of cash with dollar signs on them without even bothering with the barest wisp of an attempt at separation via "campaign finances".

Nobody needs to even hide it anymore. Nobody cares. Nothing will be done. It's how things work.

# ? Jun 26, 2024 17:31

facialimpediment: Feb 11, 2005; as the world turns

Sounding like Supreme Court staff might've done a fucky wucky:

https://x.com/AmandaBecker/status/1806008313986810300?t=ahh9_tRk8jKWoFFmY-u3jg&s=19

The decision definitely isn't out yet and Idaho's 100% total abortion ban is still live, so someone hosed up.

Edit for analysis:

https://x.com/joshchafetz/status/1806011791282999501?t=JITT0Yt6c9swHBZ1AwMY8w&s=19

facialimpediment fucked around with this message at 18:26 on Jun 26, 2024

# ? Jun 26, 2024 18:00

Crab Dad: Dec 28, 2002; behold i have tempered and refined thee, but not as silver; as CRAB

So bribery is allowed as long as it�s a gentleman�s agreement and not recorded?

# ? Jun 26, 2024 19:27

facialimpediment: Feb 11, 2005; as the world turns

Crab Dad posted:

So bribery is allowed as long as it’s a gentleman’s agreement and not recorded?

Pretty much. Based on the case, it has to be an after-action tip or else it violates federal law (though state/local anti-bribery laws can still apply). Here's the quick case recap as an example:

quote:

In 2013, while Snyder was mayor, Portage awarded two contracts to a local truck company, Great Lakes Peterbilt, and
ultimately purchased five trash trucks from the company for about $1.1 million. In 2014, Peterbilt cut a $13,000 check to Snyder. The FBI and federal prosecutors suspected that the payment was a
gratuity for the City’s trash truck contracts. But Snyder said that the payment was for his consulting services as a contractor for Peterbilt. A federal jury ultimately convicted Snyder of accepting an illegal
gratuity in violation of §666(a)(1)(B). The District Court sentenced Snyder to 1 year and 9 months in prison. On appeal, Snyder argued that §666 criminalizes only bribes, not gratuities. The Seventh Circuit affirmed Snyder’s conviction.

Held: Section 666 proscribes bribes to state and local officials but does
not make it a crime for those officials to accept gratuities for their past
acts.

So by the supreme court's dumbass logic, that $13k obvious bribe isn't a bribe because it was given after the act was taken, with only an undocumented gentleman's agreement. It's a classic case where the supreme court, turbocharged by conservative idiocy, found a FEDERALISM! loophole that excuses corrupt officials. And thus the dissent points out the dumbass logic:

quote:

Today’s case involves one such person. James Snyder, a former Indiana mayor, was convicted by a jury of violating §666 after he steered more than $1 million in city contracts to a local truck dealership, which turned around and cut him a $13,000 check. He asks us to decide whether the language of §666 criminalizes both bribes and gratuities, or just bribes. And he says the answer matters because bribes require an upfront agreement to take official actions for payment, and he never agreed beforehand to be paid the $13,000 from the dealership.

Snyder’s absurd and atextual reading of the statute is one only today’s Court could love. Ignoring the plain text of §666—which, again, expressly targets officials who “corruptly” solicit, accept, or agree to accept payments “intending to be influenced or rewarded”—the Court concludes that the statute does not criminalize gratuities at all. This is so, apparently, because “[s]tate and local governments often
regulate the gifts that state and local officials may accept,” ante, at 1, which, according to the majority, means that
§666 cannot.

So bribes, which are up-front payments, are bad. Gratuities, which are payments after the fact, are federalism and therefore delegated to the states.

# ? Jun 26, 2024 19:42

Itchy_Grundle: Feb 22, 2003

Elviscat posted:

Holy poo poo, I just assumed that was done when they repealed DADT.

Me too.

# ? Jun 26, 2024 19:46

Crab Dad: Dec 28, 2002; behold i have tempered and refined thee, but not as silver; as CRAB

facialimpediment posted:

Pretty much. Based on the case, it has to be an after-action tip or else it violates federal law (though state/local anti-bribery laws can still apply). Here's the quick case recap as an example:

So by the supreme court's dumbass logic, that $13k obvious bribe isn't a bribe because it was given after the act was taken, with only an undocumented gentleman's agreement. It's a classic case where the supreme court, turbocharged by conservative idiocy, found a FEDERALISM! loophole that excuses corrupt officials. And thus the dissent points out the dumbass logic:

So bribes, which are up-front payments, are bad. Gratuities, which are payments after the fact, are federalism and therefore delegated to the states.

Oh so now it�s up to the state to define bribery.

Now if it�s done on federal business is it cool?
Say like if me, a thoughtful and honest grocer, was to tip my customer ,the Navy, after the purchase of $$$$$ of nearly spoiled food?

# ? Jun 26, 2024 20:17

LongDarkNight: Oct 25, 2010; It's like watching the collapse of Western civilization in fast forward.; Oven Wrangler

Free Fat Leonard!

# ? Jun 26, 2024 20:37

facialimpediment: Feb 11, 2005; as the world turns

Crab Dad posted:

Now if it’s done on federal business is it cool?
Say like if me, a thoughtful and honest grocer, was to tip my customer ,the Navy, after the purchase of $$$$$ of nearly spoiled food?

Are you, the thoughtful and honest grocer, rich?

I keep thinking about or trying to parse the yes/nos of legal/illegal, but then I stopped when I saw this framing:

Say you're a federal judge. You're given $50k by a billionaire friend to rule in favor of someone currently in front of your court and you do. Hooray, you're guilty of bribery.

Say you're a federal judge. You've been ruling in favor of a billionaire's interests in case after case and he's been giving you lots of stuff after the decisions. Discounted mortgages, motorhomes, free travel, etc. Congratulations on your extremely legal gratuities Clarence Alito!

# ? Jun 26, 2024 20:43

Nick Soapdish: Apr 27, 2008

I assume the solution to this is Congress passing a law clarifying and closing this dumb loophole but lol on that happening

# ? Jun 26, 2024 20:49

SerthVarnee: Mar 13, 2011; It has been ~~two~~ zero days since last incident.; Big Super Slapstick Hunk

Sounds unconstitutional.

# ? Jun 26, 2024 20:51

Mr. Nice!: Oct 13, 2005; bone shaking.
soul baking.

Note that the guy that paid the mayor $13k explicitly said that it was done as a kickback for the mayor rigging the bidding process in his favor. Since the payment was after the fact, though, it's a gratuity and a-ok. If the $13k had been paid before the bid rigging, it would have been an unlawful bribe.

# ? Jun 26, 2024 21:18

Pine Cone Jones: Dec 6, 2009; You throw me the acorn, I throw you the whip!

So, what's up with Bolivia?

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/bolivian-president-warns-irregular-movement-troops-capital-raising-111454199

Could very well just be nothing, but who knows

# ? Jun 26, 2024 21:23

Platystemon: Feb 13, 2012; BREADS

Finally, a SCOTUS decision I can agree with.

# ? Jun 26, 2024 22:00

ded: Oct 27, 2005; Kooler than Jesus

Elviscat posted:

Holy poo poo, I just assumed that was done when they repealed DADT.

dadt wasnt the rule that outlawed them, it was originally the rule that allowed them in if they just "didn't talk about it". clinton got a lot of poo poo because of allowing gays into the military

# ? Jun 26, 2024 22:05

Milo and POTUS: Sep 3, 2017; I will not shut up about the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers. I talk about them all the time and work them into every conversation I have. I built a shrine in my room for the yellow one who died because sadly no one noticed because she died around 9/11. Wanna see it?

Platystemon posted:

Finally, a SCOTUS decision I can agree with.

Hahaha

# ? Jun 26, 2024 22:15

hobbesmaster: Jan 28, 2008

Nick Soapdish posted:

I assume the solution to this is Congress passing a law clarifying and closing this dumb loophole but lol on that happening

At this point congress is more likely to explicitly allow FCPA style �facilitating payments�

# ? Jun 26, 2024 22:34

Platystemon: Feb 13, 2012; BREADS

lol remember when congresspersons profited massively by trading on inside knowledge of the �Wuhan coronavirus� as it was then known?

# ? Jun 26, 2024 22:36

Qtotonibudinibudet: Nov 7, 2011; Omich poluyobok, skazhi ty narkoman? ya prosto tozhe gde to tam zhivu, mogli by vmeste uyobyvat' narkotiki

the goal of our nation is to design new and interesting sorts of corruption, and then justify why we think it's good, actually

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LuBstLZINco

evergreen movie bit

# ? Jun 26, 2024 23:19

Comrade Blyatlov: Aug 4, 2007; should have picked four fingers

Qtotonibudinibudet posted:

the goal of our nation is to design new and interesting sorts of corruption, and then justify why we think it's good, actually

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LuBstLZINco

evergreen movie bit

i always thought the best scene from that movie was the dude asking how much he'd get for his other son

# ? Jun 26, 2024 23:38

Elviscat: Jan 1, 2008; Well don't you know I'm caught in a trap?

ded posted:

dadt wasnt the rule that outlawed them, it was originally the rule that allowed them in if they just "didn't talk about it". clinton got a lot of poo poo because of allowing gays into the military

Yeah, but the repeal coincided with the changes to the UCMJ and policy allowing gay servicemembers to serve openly.

I was at NNPTC between when the policy was changed and when it took effect, and the command took two dudes in my class to NJP for cuddling while watching the vampire diaries, it made the national news, and Navy PR had to make statements that it was because cuddling of any type was banned, not because gay cuddling was banned.

I was still in when SECNAV tried to roll out gender affirming care to sailors, and the fat orange turd nuked the whole plan with a tweet.

# ? Jun 27, 2024 00:09

ded: Oct 27, 2005; Kooler than Jesus

Elviscat posted:

Yeah, but the repeal coincided with the changes to the UCMJ and policy allowing gay servicemembers to serve openly.

I was at NNPTC between when the policy was changed and when it took effect, and the command took two dudes in my class to NJP for cuddling while watching the vampire diaries, it made the national news, and Navy PR had to make statements that it was because cuddling of any type was banned, not because gay cuddling was banned.

I was still in when SECNAV tried to roll out gender affirming care to sailors, and the fat orange turd nuked the whole plan with a tweet.

so it was once again the fault of leadership. it shouldn't have taken the president to do this.

back when i did my enlistment dadt was brand new and the paperwork had the question "are you a homosexual" whited out, but the recruiter was all "but this doesn't matter for you anyway right *wink*.

the question about being a commie was still there tho

# ? Jun 27, 2024 00:22

Milo and POTUS: Sep 3, 2017; I will not shut up about the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers. I talk about them all the time and work them into every conversation I have. I built a shrine in my room for the yellow one who died because sadly no one noticed because she died around 9/11. Wanna see it?

Platystemon posted:

lol remember when congresspersons profited massively by trading on inside knowledge of the �Wuhan coronavirus� as it was then known?

March 2020 was insane but it might actually have been late Feb. I do know the fed dumped 1.5 trillion into the markets to stabilize them for 15 minutes

# ? Jun 27, 2024 01:07

Platystemon: Feb 13, 2012; BREADS

Milo and POTUS posted:

March 2020 was insane but it might actually have been late Feb. I do know the fed dumped 1.5 trillion into the markets to stabilize them for 15 minutes

They sold stock in January.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/488593-four-senators-sold-stocks-before-coronavirus-threat-crashed-market/

I actually believe these last lines though.

quote:

Feinstein, one the longest-tenured Senate Democrats, sold at least $500,000 in shares of Allogene Therapeutics, a California biotechnology company, on Jan. 31 and at least $1 million in Allogene stock on Feb. 18, according to Senate records.

A spokesman for Feinstein told The New York Times that she had nothing to do with the decisions to sell her stocks.

�All of Senator Feinstein�s assets are in a blind trust,� Tom Mentzer said in a statement. �She has no involvement in her husband�s financial decisions.�

# ? Jun 27, 2024 01:28

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Oct 5, 2024 13:05

facialimpediment: Feb 11, 2005; as the world turns

Pine Cone Jones posted:

So, what's up with Bolivia?

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/bolivian-president-warns-irregular-movement-troops-capital-raising-111454199

What's up is that it appears we can learn lessons from them :v:

https://x.com/spectatorindex/status/1806113779316609140?t=0jf9X-CgZpSrzCZBe20X6w&s=19

# ? Jun 27, 2024 01:44

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Internet VFW > June CE thread: I told her I was eating a bag of Dick's

«‹›23 »