Bird flu is affecting egg prices for sure. I don't think we've had serious numbers of cows infected by bird flu yet, but we likely will. And protecting the cows from it might be affecting prices?
Cows can be quarantined. They often get better. Once a bird in a flock of chickens comes down with it, the whole flock is destroyed.
Bird flu is affecting egg prices for sure. I don't think we've had serious numbers of cows infected by bird flu yet, but we likely will. And protecting the cows from it might be affecting prices?
The Conspirasphere has it that it's a Leftist plot to depopulate the planet by making basic foods too expensive.
I heard that he will confuse people if he persists in this Gulf of America idea because all impartial observers know that the real Gulf of America is between his ears.
It has been suggested that he carry around a pot plant in order to make up for the oxygen he's wasting.
It's those who support him that worry me. If they each had one or two functioning brain cells (per person), they'd probably qualify as pot plants, and would be far more useful and decorative.
I heard that he will confuse people if he persists in this Gulf of America idea because all impartial observers know that the real Gulf of America is between his ears.
There's a lot of competition for the position of 'Spokesperson for the Regime':
Seriously, though, it does seem as though the price increases can't be attributed directly to the Trump regime.
And yet during the campaign we were assured that there was a "lower prices" button somewhere in the Oval Office that Biden was stubbornly refusing to press. Still, if someone makes the promise to "immediately bring prices down, starting on day one", it's not unreasonable to judge them by how they're doing.
On a broader level, one of the supposed advantages of a presidential system is that the president is given a wide array of powers to deal with emergency situations. We usually don't judge the Hoover administration by leaving aside that whole Great Depression thing or give the Buchanan presidency a pass because the Secession Crisis couldn't be attributed directly to Buchanan's government. Presidents are judged by how they react to emergent situations even if they're things that can't be directly attributed to their policies.
I guess the governments of many countries find it hard sometimes to battle against outside factors (wars, famine, bad weather etc.) over which they have little or no control.
They may say they can do (or would like to do) things to improve matters, but actions - or the lack thereof! - are often stronger than words.
Another issue with elections is that in the US, they are very predictable. Most of the country votes very reliably, so if you want to lean on any particular election, you just get a pack of wonks to study the map really hard and figure out which areas are going to be decisive. You then pour targeted advertising into those areas to persuade relatively low-information voters to vote your way according to whatever is trending for them at that moment.
It's kind of scary how you don't have to steal the entire country, you just have to figure out a critical mass of states you can swing and swing them.
I also suspect there's something about the central focus of a president that gives him more raw power than any fractious congressional body. And that might be a problem as old as the republic as a model of government. It's easier to control the presidency. And through that, the nation.
4 years time, new President new situation. For us this side of the Pond it's largely an inconvenience, prayers for those more directly affected - those living in the States, with friends and family in the States, and it looks like the people of Palestine and Ukraine who have now been thrown under a bus.
Not really. If it looks like the U.S. will be an unreliable partner every time a Republican wins the presidency its allies will have to factor that into their security calculations. I think we're well past the point where Donald Trump and George W. Bush can be dismissed as one-off flukes inflicted on the world through the archaism of the electoral college.
Characterising the last couple of days. Hegseth, right hook, Vance, punch to gut. Trump next? Look for a low blow followed by a head butting. The bullying of Europe is under way.
Not really. If it looks like the U.S. will be an unreliable partner every time a Republican wins the presidency its allies will have to factor that into their security calculations.
Well quite, if anything can be revised every four years, what's the basis for any permanent agreement with the US?
Conversely the Democrats should be stating which measures taken by the current administration they will reverse, to spoil the effects of those policies, as the danger is that they are going to end up with not a lot of state to run.
Two years time, assuming there will be a major turnover in Congress. American people tend to vote their pocket book. The proposed tariffs will not slow inflation. could cost more than $800 per year on average. Moreover, the extensive layoffs of federal workers will create downward pressures on the economy. Throw in a pandemic like the bird flu crossing over the human barrier and it is off to the races.
My dream is he will be impeached a third time which will be sustained in the Senate. Vance might also find himself out of a job too, and then we would find the new speaker of the house which would be Jeffries, assuming the presidency. That would be in two hears time.
My dream is he will be impeached a third which will be sustained in the Senate.
We can dream, but I can’t imagine it’s anything more than a dream.
Vance might also find himself out of a job too, and then we would find the new speaker of the house which would be Jeffries, assuming the presidency. That would be in two hears time.
Characterising the last couple of days. Hegseth, right hook, Vance, punch to gut. Trump next? Look for a low blow followed by a head butting. The bullying of Europe is under way.
I'm amused by the spectacle of Vance lecturing Europe on democracy. The man wouldn't recognize democracy if it bit him in the ass.
The fact that he's a free speech absolutist of the sort that is popular on the nasty US right (he's basically the school bully that claims the freedom to mock and humiliate the less popular kids as some kind of positive virtue) is not a surprise, but his defense of free speech is about as good as his theology (cf. his adolescent misunderstanding of ordo amoris).
My dream is he will be impeached a third which will be sustained in the Senate.
We can dream, but I can’t imagine it’s anything more than a dream.
Vance might also find himself out of a job too, and then we would find the new speaker of the house which would be Jeffries, assuming the presidency. That would be in two hears time.
I assume you mean Johnson, not Vance.
Notice I said in two years time. Johnson will be out of a job. Jefferies will be the new speaker. Vance can be asked to resign by the Orange One or he can also be impeached or something else might happen.
My dream is he will be impeached a third which will be sustained in the Senate.
We can dream, but I can’t imagine it’s anything more than a dream.
Vance might also find himself out of a job too, and then we would find the new speaker of the house which would be Jeffries, assuming the presidency. That would be in two hears time.
I assume you mean Johnson, not Vance.
Notice I said in two years time. Johnson will be out of a job. Jefferies will be the new speaker. Vance can be asked to resign by the Orange One or he can also be impeached or something else might happen.
Sorry. I took the way you worded it—“Vance might also find himself out of a job too, and then we would find the new speaker of the house”—as saying that a new speaker would be needed because Vance would find himself out of a job. That’s why I thought you meant Johnson instead of Vance. I failed to register how “assuming the presidency” fit into the sentence.
Yeah, unfortunately I think this is in pipe dream territory.
I'm not sure if anyone else has been following what's been dubbed the Thursday Afternoon Massacre, but here's a bit of background. Back in the fifteenth century September 2024 New York City Mayor Eric Adams was indicted on federal charges of bribery, conspiracy, fraud, and soliciting illegal foreign campaign donations, all of which related to favors the Adams administration had allegedly done for the Turkish government, or funds allegedly received therefrom. At the time most of the commentary was surprise that this was the first time a sitting mayor of New York City had been indicted for some form of corruption.
Fast forward a few centuries months and suddenly the Trump Justice Department wants to dismiss the case against Adams (a Democrat). The catch, apparently, was that newly appointed U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York (which is one of the most prestigious posts in the Justice Department) Danielle Sassoon refused to play along. In her letter explaining her refusal (which you really should read) she alleges that acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove struck a deal with Adams to dismiss the charges in exchange for Adams using his powers as mayor to aid the Trump administration's deportation policies. Under Bove's plan the charges would be dismissed without prejudice, meaning that they could be brought again any time Adams' performance wasn't to the Trump administration's liking. This footnote from Sassoon's letter certainly sounds suspicious, if true.
I attended a meeting on January 31, 2025, with Mr. Bove, Adams's counsel, and members of my office. Adams's attorneys repeatedly urged what amounted to a quid pro quo, indicating that Adams would be in a position to assist with the Department's enforcement priorities only if the indictment were dismissed. Mr. Bove admonished a member of my team who took notes during that meeting and directed the collection of those notes at the meeting's conclusion.
At any rate, Ms. Sassoon was fired/forced to resign for not following orders. It should be noted that she was appointed to her former position by Trump last month. She had impeccable Federalist Society credentials and clerked for Scalia, so this isn't an example of some Biden administration holdover going out in a blaze of glory. Her firing/resignation was followed by a spate of similar firings/resignations in the same office (six the last time I checked) as the Justice Department searches for someone to dismiss the case. The latest alleged move is:
Harry Litman
Strong rumor with credible sourcing: DOJ has put all of public integrity line attorneys in a room and told them they have an hour for someone to choose who will sign motion to dismiss and if nobody does, they will all be fired. The nastiest strong-arming in DOJ history by a long shot.
Mr. Litman is former U.S. Attorney himself so he probably still has sources within the Justice Department. As a purely academic matter this is probably a good test of job suitability. Anyone who accepts this offer isn't qualified to be a public integrity line attorney. On a philosophical level it shows that Trump's Justice Department doesn't understand the prisoner's dilemma. You don't put the prisoners together so they can decide collectively whether or not to defect. On a more pragmatic level this is pretty clear evidence that the Trump administration is willing to use the Justice Department to blackmail and/or extort elected officials to do their bidding.
Yep, seven top justice attorneys have now resigned over the Eric Adams case. As I understand the process, since the case has already been filed in the courts, the only one that can legally dismiss the case is the judge to which it has been assigned. I also understand--cannot verify--the judge may have the option of calling Ms Bondii into court to determine if this is not a quid pro quo deal. If she denies it, she could be charged with perjury.
And she is such a "lovely" lady--the type Frump admires.
A U.S. federal prosecutor agreed on Friday to file a motion to dismiss criminal corruption charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams to spare other career staff from potentially being fired for refusing to do so, sources briefed on the matter told Reuters.
Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove told the department's career public integrity prosecutors in a meeting on Friday that they had an hour to decide among themselves who would file the motion, the sources said.
The volunteer was Ed Sullivan, a veteran career prosecutor, who agreed to alleviate pressure on his colleagues in the department's public integrity section, two sources said.
"This is not a capitulation - this is a coercion," one of the people briefed on the meeting later told Reuters. "That person, in my mind, is a hero."
Sullivan's decision came after the attorneys in the meeting contemplated resigning en masse, rather than filing the motion to dismiss, another source briefed on the matter told Reuters. There are approximately 30 attorneys in the Public Integrity Section.
My guess is that unlike the late Robert Bork, "Ed Sullivan" doesn't have to worry about floating to the top of any Google search of his name. And yes, cowardly anonymous "one of the people briefed on the meeting", this actually is a capitulation.
I've .bought some eggs. 6 large free range ones in the market. For £2 There doesn't seem to be a shortage AFAICT so it' may well be an American thing. I think possibly it might be due to avian flu?
I've .bought some eggs. 6 large free range ones in the market. For £2 There doesn't seem to be a shortage AFAICT so it' may well be an American thing. I think possibly it might be due to avian flu?
That is the current explanation. A lot of commercial chicken flocks have had to be culled. Eggs are a lot less of globalized commodity than something like petroleum.
I've .bought some eggs. 6 large free range ones in the market. For £2 There doesn't seem to be a shortage AFAICT so it' may well be an American thing. I think possibly it might be due to avian flu?
That is the current explanation. A lot of commercial chicken flocks have had to be culled. Eggs are a lot less of globalized commodity than something like petroleum.
And there are sporadic labour shortages due to people with irregular immigration status staying away from work in fear of being deported.
Thousands of federal probationary workers were fired today. As many as 200,000 probationary workers can be fired before it is all over. There is very little right of appeal for these workers. This will affect federal services throughout the country, from the large cities to rural areas. There is a lot of information coming out about this. Take your pick.
When Trump was campaigning, he promised he would take care of the veterans. Well, the one group that is most impacted by these firings is the veterans. 30% of the federal work force are veterans compared to 2% of the civilian work force are veterans.
Now his DOGE people want to access the IRS and the FAA.
When Trump was campaigning, he promised he would take care of the veterans. Well, the one group that is most impacted by these firings is the veterans. 30% of the federal work force are veterans compared to 2% of the civilian work force are veterans.
Well, about 65% of veterans were stupid enough to vote for him, so...
Thousands of federal probationary workers were fired today. As many as 200,000 probationary workers can be fired before it is all over. There is very little right of appeal for these workers.
As an aside; there are some branches of federal government which for various budgetary and other reasons find it hard to move on permanent employment (ironically the VA is one), so it's not unusual for people to spend one or two years on 'probation' before the bureaucratic wheels turn to make them permanent. So this is basically equivalent to firing your last two years cohort (so all sorts of knock on impacts on staff shortages years into the future).
the hand of kinship is always extended to the Lost Provinces. All that is necessary is for them to apologize to HM Charles III for their gratuitous rudeness to the late George III, of happy memory and pay for that tea (with interest) which wound up floating in Boston Harbour.
And then we can be one big British North America again.
You will be disappointed to hear that the recent round of anti-Trump protests in the US was called No Kings Day.
The blessings of constitutional monarchy have always fallen on deaf ears in the Lost Provinces
OTOH, arbitrary and indefinite rule by a German-Scottish Presbyterian with extensive land holdings isn't too far off the mark. Doesn't seem too big on the "constitutional" part, though.
Many of the Americans I know treat the British royalty as something quaint that they admire about Britain, something to come and see (or, rather, to see their palaces and stuff). But, definitely not something they want in their own nation. I know a few who many years ago when it was suggested that Michelle Obama should stand declared that she wouldn't have a chance because many Americans have a distrust of dynasties (it would also make it difficult for a Kennedy to return to the White House, even if they weren't bat-shit crazy), though whether that ever was the case or just what a couple of friends said I'll happily be corrected on (but, even if it's a minority view present in some States given the current political situation that can be more than enough to be the difference between winning the Presidential election and losing it).
Many of the Americans I know treat the British royalty as something quaint that they admire about Britain, something to come and see (or, rather, to see their palaces and stuff). But, definitely not something they want in their own nation. I know a few who many years ago when it was suggested that Michelle Obama should stand declared that she wouldn't have a chance because many Americans have a distrust of dynasties (it would also make it difficult for a Kennedy to return to the White House, even if they weren't bat-shit crazy), though whether that ever was the case or just what a couple of friends said I'll happily be corrected on (but, even if it's a minority view present in some States given the current political situation that can be more than enough to be the difference between winning the Presidential election and losing it).
Supposed distrust of dynasties didn't prevent the election of Bush Unræd, nor does it appear to have been a significant factor in HRC's defeat.
Comments
Cows can be quarantined. They often get better. Once a bird in a flock of chickens comes down with it, the whole flock is destroyed.
Here is [urlhttps://www.newsweek.com/gas-prices-soaring-trump-2029770#:~:text=Climbing oil prices has led to gas prices,fragile Israel-Hamas ceasefire starts showing signs "]Newsweek's story[/url on why gas is going up/
The Conspirasphere has it that it's a Leftist plot to depopulate the planet by making basic foods too expensive.
I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
Seriously, though, it does seem as though the price increases can't be attributed directly to the Trump regime.
ION he seems to be channelling 1938 Munich in his dealiings with Putin.
Needs a still-growing giant sequoia at minimum.
It's those who support him that worry me. If they each had one or two functioning brain cells (per person), they'd probably qualify as pot plants, and would be far more useful and decorative.
There's a lot of competition for the position of 'Spokesperson for the Regime':
https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lhytrfr3l62p
Well at least in 1938 Chamberlain was opposed to Hitler, he just didn't know what to do about it. I think Trump prefers a Putin victory.
And yet during the campaign we were assured that there was a "lower prices" button somewhere in the Oval Office that Biden was stubbornly refusing to press. Still, if someone makes the promise to "immediately bring prices down, starting on day one", it's not unreasonable to judge them by how they're doing.
On a broader level, one of the supposed advantages of a presidential system is that the president is given a wide array of powers to deal with emergency situations. We usually don't judge the Hoover administration by leaving aside that whole Great Depression thing or give the Buchanan presidency a pass because the Secession Crisis couldn't be attributed directly to Buchanan's government. Presidents are judged by how they react to emergent situations even if they're things that can't be directly attributed to their policies.
They may say they can do (or would like to do) things to improve matters, but actions - or the lack thereof! - are often stronger than words.
"Make it look like an accident, 007". 😈
It's kind of scary how you don't have to steal the entire country, you just have to figure out a critical mass of states you can swing and swing them.
I also suspect there's something about the central focus of a president that gives him more raw power than any fractious congressional body. And that might be a problem as old as the republic as a model of government. It's easier to control the presidency. And through that, the nation.
For now. Everything is temporary.
AFF
Not really. If it looks like the U.S. will be an unreliable partner every time a Republican wins the presidency its allies will have to factor that into their security calculations. I think we're well past the point where Donald Trump and George W. Bush can be dismissed as one-off flukes inflicted on the world through the archaism of the electoral college.
Well quite, if anything can be revised every four years, what's the basis for any permanent agreement with the US?
Conversely the Democrats should be stating which measures taken by the current administration they will reverse, to spoil the effects of those policies, as the danger is that they are going to end up with not a lot of state to run.
My dream is he will be impeached a third time which will be sustained in the Senate. Vance might also find himself out of a job too, and then we would find the new speaker of the house which would be Jeffries, assuming the presidency. That would be in two hears time.
I assume you mean Johnson, not Vance.
I'm amused by the spectacle of Vance lecturing Europe on democracy. The man wouldn't recognize democracy if it bit him in the ass.
The fact that he's a free speech absolutist of the sort that is popular on the nasty US right (he's basically the school bully that claims the freedom to mock and humiliate the less popular kids as some kind of positive virtue) is not a surprise, but his defense of free speech is about as good as his theology (cf. his adolescent misunderstanding of ordo amoris).
Notice I said in two years time. Johnson will be out of a job. Jefferies will be the new speaker. Vance can be asked to resign by the Orange One or he can also be impeached or something else might happen.
Yes, it is a dream.
Yeah, unfortunately I think this is in pipe dream territory.
Fast forward a few centuries months and suddenly the Trump Justice Department wants to dismiss the case against Adams (a Democrat). The catch, apparently, was that newly appointed U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York (which is one of the most prestigious posts in the Justice Department) Danielle Sassoon refused to play along. In her letter explaining her refusal (which you really should read) she alleges that acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove struck a deal with Adams to dismiss the charges in exchange for Adams using his powers as mayor to aid the Trump administration's deportation policies. Under Bove's plan the charges would be dismissed without prejudice, meaning that they could be brought again any time Adams' performance wasn't to the Trump administration's liking. This footnote from Sassoon's letter certainly sounds suspicious, if true.
I'm imagining a scene something like this, but with a lot less melanin.
At any rate, Ms. Sassoon was fired/forced to resign for not following orders. It should be noted that she was appointed to her former position by Trump last month. She had impeccable Federalist Society credentials and clerked for Scalia, so this isn't an example of some Biden administration holdover going out in a blaze of glory. Her firing/resignation was followed by a spate of similar firings/resignations in the same office (six the last time I checked) as the Justice Department searches for someone to dismiss the case. The latest alleged move is:
Mr. Litman is former U.S. Attorney himself so he probably still has sources within the Justice Department. As a purely academic matter this is probably a good test of job suitability. Anyone who accepts this offer isn't qualified to be a public integrity line attorney. On a philosophical level it shows that Trump's Justice Department doesn't understand the prisoner's dilemma. You don't put the prisoners together so they can decide collectively whether or not to defect. On a more pragmatic level this is pretty clear evidence that the Trump administration is willing to use the Justice Department to blackmail and/or extort elected officials to do their bidding.
And she is such a "lovely" lady--the type Frump admires.
My guess is that unlike the late Robert Bork, "Ed Sullivan" doesn't have to worry about floating to the top of any Google search of his name. And yes, cowardly anonymous "one of the people briefed on the meeting", this actually is a capitulation.
That is the current explanation. A lot of commercial chicken flocks have had to be culled. Eggs are a lot less of globalized commodity than something like petroleum.
And there are sporadic labour shortages due to people with irregular immigration status staying away from work in fear of being deported.
Now his DOGE people want to access the IRS and the FAA.
Terrible.
Well, about 65% of veterans were stupid enough to vote for him, so...
How many more people/groups can these evil lunatics piss off?
As an aside; there are some branches of federal government which for various budgetary and other reasons find it hard to move on permanent employment (ironically the VA is one), so it's not unusual for people to spend one or two years on 'probation' before the bureaucratic wheels turn to make them permanent. So this is basically equivalent to firing your last two years cohort (so all sorts of knock on impacts on staff shortages years into the future).
You will be disappointed to hear that the recent round of anti-Trump protests in the US was called No Kings Day.
OTOH, arbitrary and indefinite rule by a German-Scottish Presbyterian with extensive land holdings isn't too far off the mark. Doesn't seem too big on the "constitutional" part, though.
Supposed distrust of dynasties didn't prevent the election of Bush Unræd, nor does it appear to have been a significant factor in HRC's defeat.