POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Probably what *this* should be called.
User avatar
seathesee
Sentient Keyboard
Sentient Keyboard
Posts: 5459
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by seathesee » Wed Aug 10, 2022 9:02 pm

Rylinks wrote: Wed Aug 10, 2022 8:51 pm there are principles specific to marriage that the government could hypothetically drop--absent a marriage the government is not going to say that a salary paid to an individual is a product of the boyfriend/girlfriend relationship and subject to division.
not necessarily. like i discussed above, there is common law marriage or the toned down "committed intimate relationship" in washington law. these are creatures of common law, not statute. there is also the possibility of marriage like relationships constituting a business partnership of sorts, and certain courts finding property acquired during the relationship subject to division in the same manner property owned by a disbanding partnership is.

were this hypothetical event to take the form of the legislature passing a law specifically prohibiting common law, marriage, comitted intimate relationships, etc., i dont think property accumulated prior to the ban/event would lose its characterization as community property or property acquired during a marriage subject to judicial division--that seems inequitable, contrary to reasonable expectation, and likely to cause people to engage in self help, all of which runs counter the purpose of law at large.
with love, your good friend, seathesee

User avatar
Rylinks
her skirt got quite a lot smaller,
but her heart is still the same
size it was before
Forum Elf
Posts: 12359
Joined: Jun 13, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Rylinks » Wed Aug 10, 2022 9:59 pm

seathesee wrote: Wed Aug 10, 2022 9:02 pm
Rylinks wrote: Wed Aug 10, 2022 8:51 pm there are principles specific to marriage that the government could hypothetically drop--absent a marriage the government is not going to say that a salary paid to an individual is a product of the boyfriend/girlfriend relationship and subject to division.
not necessarily. like i discussed above, there is common law marriage or the toned down "committed intimate relationship" in washington law. these are creatures of common law, not statute. there is also the possibility of marriage like relationships constituting a business partnership of sorts, and certain courts finding property acquired during the relationship subject to division in the same manner property owned by a disbanding partnership is.

were this hypothetical event to take the form of the legislature passing a law specifically prohibiting common law, marriage, comitted intimate relationships, etc., i dont think property accumulated prior to the ban/event would lose its characterization as community property or property acquired during a marriage subject to judicial division--that seems inequitable, contrary to reasonable expectation, and likely to cause people to engage in self help, all of which runs counter the purpose of law at large.
common law marriage has been abolished by most states. Even where it still exists, it requires intent to be married or holding oneself out to the public as married, and so does not apply to most long-term relationships

in addition, NY courts have said that implied contracts are disfavored, and i suspect the same would apply to implied business partnerships.
Historically, we have required the explicit and structured understanding of an express contract and have declined to recognize a contract which is implied from the rendition and acceptance of services. The major difficulty with implying a contract from the rendition of services for one another by persons living together is that it is not reasonable to infer an agreement to pay for the services rendered when the relationship of the parties makes it natural that the services were rendered gratuitously. As a matter of human experience personal services will frequently be rendered by two people living together because they value each other's company or because they find it a convenient or rewarding thing to do. For courts to attempt through hindsight to sort out the intentions of the parties and affix jural significance to conduct carried out within an essentially private and generally noncontractual relationship runs too great a risk of error. Absent an express agreement, there is no frame of reference against which to compare the testimony presented and the character of the evidence that can be presented becomes more evanescent. There is, therefore, substantially greater risk of emotion-laden afterthought, not to mention fraud, in attempting to ascertain by implication what services, if any, were rendered gratuitously and what compensation, if any, the parties intended to be paid.

Similar considerations were involved in the Legislature's abolition by chapter 606 of the Laws of 1933 of common-law marriages in our State. Writing in support of that bill, Surrogate Foley informed Governor Lehman that it was the unanimous opinion of the members of the Commission to Investigate Defects in the Law of Estates that the concept of common-law marriage should be abolished because attempts to collect funds from decedents' estates were a fruitful source of litigation. Senate Minority Leader Fearon, who had introduced the bill, also informed the Governor that its purpose was to prevent fraudulent claims against estates and recommended its approval. The consensus was that while the doctrine of common-law marriage could work substantial justice in certain cases, there was no built-in method for distinguishing between valid and specious claims and, thus, that the doctrine served the State poorly.

The notion of an implied contract between an unmarried couple living together is, thus, contrary to both New York decisional law and the implication arising from our Legislature's abolition of common-law marriage. The same conclusion has been reached by a significant number of States other than our own which have refused to allow recovery in implied contract. Until the Legislature determines otherwise, therefore, we decline to recognize an action based upon an implied contract for personal services between unmarried persons living together.
an express contract is a different story, of course. There aren't zero principles that protect unmarried couples, but a legislature refusing to recognize marriage and disestablishing marital property law would be a drastic change, and in the absence of an express contract there would be no parallel to the concept of marital property as it currently exists.

i agree on property acquired prior to the ban. I am thinking of marriages after the change, where two people go to a church or whatever and someone says "I now pronounce you man and wife", but the government has decided that this religious ceremony is not recognized by the law.

User avatar
Rylinks
her skirt got quite a lot smaller,
but her heart is still the same
size it was before
Forum Elf
Posts: 12359
Joined: Jun 13, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Rylinks » Wed Aug 10, 2022 10:10 pm

Rylinks wrote: an express contract is a different story, of course. There aren't zero principles that protect unmarried couples, but a legislature refusing to recognize marriage and disestablishing marital property law would be a drastic change, and in the absence of an express contract there would be no parallel to the concept of marital property as it currently exists.
one example of this is when gay marriage was still illegal. Faced with a gay couple who had a civil union in vermont and later married in canada, the court declined to recognize any marital property arising out of the civil union and said "There is no general common law of equity that is equivalent to the statutory creation of an equitable distribution power in the Domestic Relations Law. Equitable distribution of property from a titled party to a non-titled party is only permitted in New York if the parties are married, either under the laws of New York, or other states or nations".

User avatar
seathesee
Sentient Keyboard
Sentient Keyboard
Posts: 5459
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by seathesee » Wed Aug 10, 2022 10:40 pm

common law marriage is abolished in washington, and we still have "committed intimate relationships" which act more or less like a common law marriage (without the belief you are married thing). i cant speak to other jurisdictions, but here the legislature would need to make a statute prohibiting courts from enforcing committed intimate relationships in order to destroy the concept of quasi-community property in the state. i would be surpised if other states do not have similar common law principles enforced by the courts.
with love, your good friend, seathesee

User avatar
Rylinks
her skirt got quite a lot smaller,
but her heart is still the same
size it was before
Forum Elf
Posts: 12359
Joined: Jun 13, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Rylinks » Thu Aug 11, 2022 1:35 am

seathesee wrote:common law marriage is abolished in washington, and we still have "committed intimate relationships" which act more or less like a common law marriage (without the belief you are married thing). i cant speak to other jurisdictions, but here the legislature would need to make a statute prohibiting courts from enforcing committed intimate relationships in order to destroy the concept of quasi-community property in the state. i would be surpised if other states do not have similar common law principles enforced by the courts.
i think oregon looks to the usually-implied intent of the parties, although before like 50 years ago oregon courts refused to apply equity in these cases because an "unlawful and meretricious cohabitation" means the parties didn't come to court with clean hands

User avatar
Doug
Has anybody seen my parrot
Forum Elf
Posts: 20548
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Doug » Thu Aug 11, 2022 1:02 pm

Book review
In what may be her most damning remark about the entire U.S. response to COVID, Birx tells us that she’d always known “two weeks to slow the spread” was a lie and knew in advance that she wanted the timeframe extended, despite having no data to support why such a step was scientifically sensible:
No sooner had we convinced the Trump administration to implement our version of a two-week shutdown than I was trying to figure out how to extend it. Fifteen Days to Slow the Spread was a start, but I knew it would be just that. I didn’t have the numbers in front of me yet to make the case for extending it longer, but I had two weeks to get them. However hard it had been to get the fifteen-day shutdown approved, getting another one would be more difficult by many orders of magnitude.
This is one of several quotes in which Birx refers to “our version” of a lockdown, though she never makes it clear what the original “version” of a lockdown was (read: China’s). In fact, though Birx spends hundreds of pages boasting about her crusade for lockdowns across America, she never once explains why she wanted them or why she felt they were a good idea, other than the aforementioned brief asides about China’s supposed success using social distancing to combat SARS-1.

Birx then says that she had a regular system for surreptitiously revising and hiding information from her bosses (whom she calls “gatekeepers”) after they reviewed her guidance to the states, in order to keep lockdown measures in place for as long as possible against the wishes of the White House:
After the heavily edited documents were returned to me, I’d reinsert what they had objected to, but place it in those different locations. I’d also reorder and restructure the bullet points so the most salient—the points the administration objected to most—no longer fell at the start of the bullet points. I shared these strategies with the three members of the data team also writing these reports. Our Saturday and Sunday report-writing routine soon became: write, submit, revise, hide, resubmit.

Fortunately, this strategic sleight-of-hand worked. That they never seemed to catch this subterfuge left me to conclude that, either they read the finished reports too quickly or they neglected to do the word search that would have revealed the language to which they objected. In slipping these changes past the gatekeepers and continuing to inform the governors of the need for the big-three mitigations—masks, sentinel testing, and limits on indoor social gatherings—I felt confident I was giving the states permission to escalate public health mitigation with the fall and winter coming.
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news ... ng-america
It's your turn in Cthulhu Wars
It's your turn in Squirrel Wars
It's your turn in Demon Wars
It's your turn in Wall Street Wars

http://devilsbiscuit.com/

User avatar
Doug
Has anybody seen my parrot
Forum Elf
Posts: 20548
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Doug » Thu Aug 11, 2022 2:16 pm

Image
It's your turn in Cthulhu Wars
It's your turn in Squirrel Wars
It's your turn in Demon Wars
It's your turn in Wall Street Wars

http://devilsbiscuit.com/

User avatar
Khaos
They should have sent a poet.
Forum Elf
Posts: 16862
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Khaos » Thu Aug 11, 2022 2:26 pm

sounds like that state law only applies to people who got a permit over a decade ago

User avatar
Khaos
They should have sent a poet.
Forum Elf
Posts: 16862
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Khaos » Thu Aug 11, 2022 2:27 pm

also how does it work when a state law contradicts federal law

User avatar
Doug
Has anybody seen my parrot
Forum Elf
Posts: 20548
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Doug » Thu Aug 11, 2022 2:37 pm

Khaos wrote: Thu Aug 11, 2022 2:27 pm also how does it work when a state law contradicts federal law
Normally federal law has superiority, that's probably not the right word for it but you know what I mean. However, if said federal law is unconstitutional, the state in question will assert as much
It's your turn in Cthulhu Wars
It's your turn in Squirrel Wars
It's your turn in Demon Wars
It's your turn in Wall Street Wars

http://devilsbiscuit.com/

User avatar
Rylinks
her skirt got quite a lot smaller,
but her heart is still the same
size it was before
Forum Elf
Posts: 12359
Joined: Jun 13, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Rylinks » Thu Aug 11, 2022 2:57 pm

Khaos wrote: Thu Aug 11, 2022 2:27 pm also how does it work when a state law contradicts federal law
in this case states are free to withhold information from the federal government

User avatar
Rylinks
her skirt got quite a lot smaller,
but her heart is still the same
size it was before
Forum Elf
Posts: 12359
Joined: Jun 13, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Rylinks » Thu Aug 11, 2022 3:21 pm

many blue states withold e.g. drivers license information from feds trying to enforce immigration law

User avatar
Doug
Has anybody seen my parrot
Forum Elf
Posts: 20548
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Doug » Thu Aug 11, 2022 9:03 pm

Minnesota Rep. Dean Phillips urges fellow Democrats, independents in Wyoming to back Liz Cheney in primary
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... r-AA10xqOc
It's your turn in Cthulhu Wars
It's your turn in Squirrel Wars
It's your turn in Demon Wars
It's your turn in Wall Street Wars

http://devilsbiscuit.com/

User avatar
seathesee
Sentient Keyboard
Sentient Keyboard
Posts: 5459
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by seathesee » Fri Aug 12, 2022 2:05 am

can someone explain to me what “nuclear documents” are?
with love, your good friend, seathesee

User avatar
Rylinks
her skirt got quite a lot smaller,
but her heart is still the same
size it was before
Forum Elf
Posts: 12359
Joined: Jun 13, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Rylinks » Fri Aug 12, 2022 2:06 am

presumably like, documents about the operation and control of nuclear weapons

User avatar
seathesee
Sentient Keyboard
Sentient Keyboard
Posts: 5459
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by seathesee » Fri Aug 12, 2022 4:08 am

well thats a start
with love, your good friend, seathesee

User avatar
Doug
Has anybody seen my parrot
Forum Elf
Posts: 20548
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Doug » Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:43 pm

Could be lots of things. Capabilities of enemies, instructions for authorization, recommendations for when to use

Epstein's client list
It's your turn in Cthulhu Wars
It's your turn in Squirrel Wars
It's your turn in Demon Wars
It's your turn in Wall Street Wars

http://devilsbiscuit.com/

User avatar
Dantes
Typewriter Monkey
Typewriter Monkey
Posts: 8064
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Dantes » Fri Aug 12, 2022 1:21 pm

Doug wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:43 pm Could be lots of things. Capabilities of enemies, instructions for authorization, recommendations for when to use
Context dependent.

Doug wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:43 pm Epstein's client list
But probably this.
Pour like Hemingway's last call.

User avatar
Dantes
Typewriter Monkey
Typewriter Monkey
Posts: 8064
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Dantes » Fri Aug 12, 2022 4:57 pm

Salmon Rushdie was stabbed this morning. Details not really forthcoming yet.


He's been under a fatwa for 33 years now. That being said, is it weird that my first assumption did not include the fatwa as a possible motive?
Pour like Hemingway's last call.

User avatar
Doug
Has anybody seen my parrot
Forum Elf
Posts: 20548
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Doug » Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:04 pm

The media are amazing, as soon as the government told them that the FBI was looking for "nuclear papers," they started speculating wildly how bad "nuclear papers" could be in a way that totally makes it seem like there are no "nuclear papers"

Antipersuasion
It's your turn in Cthulhu Wars
It's your turn in Squirrel Wars
It's your turn in Demon Wars
It's your turn in Wall Street Wars

http://devilsbiscuit.com/

User avatar
Dantes
Typewriter Monkey
Typewriter Monkey
Posts: 8064
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Dantes » Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:44 pm

Doug wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:04 pm The media are amazing, as soon as the government told them that the FBI was looking for "nuclear papers," they started speculating wildly how bad "nuclear papers" could be in a way that totally makes it seem like there are no "nuclear papers"

Antipersuasion
So here is something to consider.

Trump is demanding that Merrick Garland release the warrant. Trump can do that himself though. His lawyers were provided a copy of the warrant on execution.
Pour like Hemingway's last call.

User avatar
Doug
Has anybody seen my parrot
Forum Elf
Posts: 20548
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Doug » Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:45 pm

Dantes wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:44 pm
Doug wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:04 pm The media are amazing, as soon as the government told them that the FBI was looking for "nuclear papers," they started speculating wildly how bad "nuclear papers" could be in a way that totally makes it seem like there are no "nuclear papers"

Antipersuasion
So here is something to consider.

Trump is demanding that Merrick Garland release the warrant. Trump can do that himself though. His lawyers were provided a copy of the warrant on execution.
That won't mean he can release it if it was sealed by a court
It's your turn in Cthulhu Wars
It's your turn in Squirrel Wars
It's your turn in Demon Wars
It's your turn in Wall Street Wars

http://devilsbiscuit.com/

User avatar
Dantes
Typewriter Monkey
Typewriter Monkey
Posts: 8064
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Dantes » Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:51 pm

From a super Machiavellian perspective, the only person who has benefited from this is Trump.

Garland and the DoJ are on the defensive, Ron Desantis has been knocked out of the emerging spotlight, the mainstream media are suddenly writing strained pieces about how surely there was something there and explaining how this was nothing like Hillary or Hunter, the Democrats are facing down the specter of a fully weaponized DoJ the next time they're out of power (powered by precedent!), the Republican usual suspects all have a great soap box to stand on, and Trump is both the center of attention and is having a rally around the leader moment.

I try to apply Hanlon's Razor when I analyze these types of things, and this could just be the general incompetence found in government work. That being said, you'd be hard pressed to engineer a better scenario for Trump's needs.
Pour like Hemingway's last call.

User avatar
Dantes
Typewriter Monkey
Typewriter Monkey
Posts: 8064
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Dantes » Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:52 pm

Doug wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:45 pm
Dantes wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:44 pm
Doug wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:04 pm The media are amazing, as soon as the government told them that the FBI was looking for "nuclear papers," they started speculating wildly how bad "nuclear papers" could be in a way that totally makes it seem like there are no "nuclear papers"

Antipersuasion
So here is something to consider.

Trump is demanding that Merrick Garland release the warrant. Trump can do that himself though. His lawyers were provided a copy of the warrant on execution.
That won't mean he can release it if it was sealed by a court
The legal analysts I read think he can do it with no issues.
Pour like Hemingway's last call.

User avatar
Doug
Has anybody seen my parrot
Forum Elf
Posts: 20548
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Doug » Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:54 pm

Dantes wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:51 pm From a super Machiavellian perspective, the only person who has benefited from this is Trump.
Certainly the American people haven't
It's your turn in Cthulhu Wars
It's your turn in Squirrel Wars
It's your turn in Demon Wars
It's your turn in Wall Street Wars

http://devilsbiscuit.com/

User avatar
seathesee
Sentient Keyboard
Sentient Keyboard
Posts: 5459
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by seathesee » Fri Aug 12, 2022 8:59 pm

Doug wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:54 pm
Dantes wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:51 pm From a super Machiavellian perspective, the only person who has benefited from this is Trump.
Certainly the American people haven't
yeah. i mean unless trump actually did a very bad thing, but yeah.
with love, your good friend, seathesee

User avatar
Doug
Has anybody seen my parrot
Forum Elf
Posts: 20548
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Doug » Mon Aug 15, 2022 6:00 pm

Fined $6,000 for not downloading ArriveCan…
What a time we live in
It's your turn in Cthulhu Wars
It's your turn in Squirrel Wars
It's your turn in Demon Wars
It's your turn in Wall Street Wars

http://devilsbiscuit.com/

User avatar
Dantes
Typewriter Monkey
Typewriter Monkey
Posts: 8064
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Dantes » Mon Aug 15, 2022 6:21 pm

Doug wrote: Mon Aug 15, 2022 6:00 pm
Fined $6,000 for not downloading ArriveCan…
What a time we live in
This is your reminder that Canada, appearances to the contrary, has a strong tendency towards the authoritarian.
Pour like Hemingway's last call.

User avatar
Luna
...but history refused to change
...but history refused to change
Posts: 2000
Joined: Feb 28, 2020

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Luna » Mon Aug 15, 2022 7:07 pm

just the left in general, i think

User avatar
Dantes
Typewriter Monkey
Typewriter Monkey
Posts: 8064
Joined: Aug 23, 2018

Re: POLITICS MOTHERFUCKER

Post by Dantes » Mon Aug 15, 2022 7:40 pm

Luna wrote: Mon Aug 15, 2022 7:07 pm just the left in general, i think
True.
Pour like Hemingway's last call.

Post Reply