[johnu]

shyams, on 2026-April-04, 02:26, said:

The Dow is over 50,000 right now.

Yes, Bondi did gloat about the Dow being 50,000 in a Congressional hearing in a canned non-response to a question from a Democrat about Convicted Felon Trump's best friend for 15+ years and fellow sex predator Jeffrey Epstein.

And while in the abstract the Dow reaching a record 50,000 sounds great, in fact, the percentage increase in the Dow ranked only 21 out of 23 developed markets being tracked at the time. The Dow would have had to have reached 60,000 to be comparable to the average of the other 22 developed markets

[barmar]

I asked ChatGPT to write a complaint about Trump's actions in the style of the Declaration of Independence.

Quote

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for the people to voice their grievances against a leader whose conduct has betrayed the trust bestowed upon him, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation of confidence.

We hold these truths to be self-evident: that leadership demands integrity, that truth should not be twisted for personal gain, and that public office is a sacred trust, not a platform for vanity. Yet time and again, these principles have been cast aside in favor of spectacle, division, and self-interest.

He has shown a persistent disregard for the norms and institutions that sustain a free society, treating them not as pillars to uphold but as obstacles to overcome. He has sown discord among the people, setting citizen against citizen, neighbor against neighbor, for the sake of his own ambition. He has wielded words not to unite, but to inflame; not to clarify, but to confuse.

He has demonstrated a troubling indifference to truth, making claims unmoored from fact and dismissing accountability as though it were an inconvenience rather than a duty. In doing so, he has eroded public trust, leaving many uncertain of what to believe and whom to trust.

He has placed personal loyalty above the common good, valuing allegiance over competence, and praise over principle. Such conduct weakens the very foundation of governance, which depends upon reason, responsibility, and respect for the rule of law.

In every stage of these actions, the people have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms. Their concerns have been met not with reflection, but with deflection; not with unity, but with further division.

Therefore, let it be known: a nation cannot thrive when its leadership thrives on conflict. A republic cannot endure when truth is treated as optional. And a people cannot remain united when they are constantly pulled apart.

With firm reliance on the principles of liberty and justice, the people must continue to demand better—from their leaders, from their institutions, and from themselves.

[barmar]

I also asked how he would rewrite the Constitution, and got this amusing result.

Quote

If Donald Trump were to rhetorically “rewrite” the United States Constitution in his characteristic style, it might sound something like this:

---

A Tremendous Constitution—Maybe the Best Ever

We the People—great people, the best people—of the United States, in order to make America stronger than ever before (and everyone agrees it’s already very strong, but we’re making it stronger), establish this Constitution. Nobody’s done more for unity, prosperity, and winning than we have, believe me.

Article I – Congress (They Talk a Lot, Frankly)
All legislative powers are vested in a Congress, which—let’s be honest—sometimes does a terrible job, lots of gridlock, very sad. But when it works with strong leadership, incredible things happen, historic things.

Article II – The President (Very Important, Very Powerful)
The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States. A very important job—probably the most important job anywhere in the world. The President must be strong, decisive, and able to make great deals. Weakness is not an option, folks.

Article III – The Courts (Big Decisions, Huge)
The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court—great justices, many very smart people—and such inferior courts as may be established. They make big decisions, sometimes controversial, but very important.

On Rights (People Love Their Rights)
The people shall enjoy freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the right to bear arms—very popular rights, tremendous support. We love our freedoms, and we’re going to protect them, absolutely.

On Amendments (We Can Fix Things, It’s Fine)
Whenever something isn’t working—and sometimes things don’t work, it happens—we can amend this Constitution. We’ll make it better, smarter, more efficient. Nobody improves things like we do.

Closing Statement
This Constitution will ensure safety, prosperity, and success. America will win like never before. It’ll be incredible—people are already saying it.

---

This kind of rewrite leans into his recognizable speaking patterns: repetition, emphasis on strength and success, informal tone, and frequent self-referential confidence.

[thepossum]

Hope everyone had their oil positions right yesterday

[WasWinM]

You would think the future's markets would be immune to TACO by now.

[thepossum]

WasWinM, on 2026-April-08, 12:34, said:

You would think the future's markets would be immune to TACO by now.

Depends which ones. Some people are still gambling on spot

[WasWinM]

thepossum, on 2026-April-10, 02:50, said:

Depends which ones. Some people are still gambling on spot

Those with the best inside information, I bet.

[Zelandakh]

WasWinM, on 2026-April-10, 17:07, said:

Those with the best inside information, I bet.

Has there been in this administration any major announcement (one that made the markets go wild) that was not preceded with a large investment on the winning side about 30 minutes beforehand?

[a_user]

Zelandakh, on 2026-April-11, 05:19, said:

Has there been in this administration any major announcement (one that made the markets go wild) that was not preceded with a large investment on the winning side about 30 minutes beforehand?

As very nicely detailed here.

[WasWinM]

Now that the US is blockading Iran's blockade if we could get China to Blockade our blockade of Iran's blockade we could play maritime Jenga.

[WasWinM]

Settle in with a cup of coffee or tea, it takes a while to read but it is worth it.
https://www.dailykos...n-in-the-world/

[thepossum]

I was shocked to hear that Pope Leo has been cheering on nuclear escalation

[jillybean]

WasWinM, on 2026-April-16, 10:51, said:

Settle in with a cup of coffee or tea, it takes a while to read but it is worth it.
https://www.dailykos...n-in-the-world/

This makes for a shocking and sobering read, thanks for posting. What a flippin mess.

[WasWinM]

So many curious things about this supposed "shots fired" at the White House Correspondents Dinner: That Trumps had decided to be there was weird in itself. Then Carolyn Leavitt let loose a "shots fires" moments before the shots were fired. A desperate Trump could well have stage managed a little pseudo shooting to make himself look heroic again for wanting to "go on with his speech." The whole episode has an odd smell to it.

[a_user]

WasWinM, on 2026-April-25, 20:44, said:

So many curious things about this supposed "shots fired" at the White House Correspondents Dinner: That Trumps had decided to be there was weird in itself. Then Carolyn Leavitt let loose a "shots fires" moments before the shots were fired. A desperate Trump could well have stage managed a little pseudo shooting to make himself look heroic again for wanting to "go on with his speech." The whole episode has an odd smell to it.

And here I was wondering when the first conspiracy theory would emerge.
A for effort.

On a lighter note,
I just saw a newspaper headline "BREAKING: Trump evacuated"

Which suggests it might be a bad idea to use a lighter...

[WasWinM]

a_user, on 2026-April-25, 23:45, said:

And here I was wondering when the first conspiracy theory would emerge.
A for effort.

On a lighter note,
I just saw a newspaper headline "BREAKING: Trump evacuated"

Which suggests it might be a bad idea to use a lighter...

Yes, a stretch of the imagination. At the same time, Trump appears so desperate these days that to give him the benefit of normality is equally far-fetched, same as the judges are finding out about dealing with his DOJ.

[WasWinM]

Isn't it odd that the party who screams about free speech just indicted James Comey a second time for exercising his free speech rights. Shades of Putin there. Actually, it's Trump's wanna-be Putin but he can't get the American Justice system to convict anyone one Trumped-up charges.

[barmar]

WasWinM, on 2026-April-28, 16:18, said:

Isn't it odd that the party who screams about free speech just indicted James Comey a second time for exercising his free speech rights. Shades of Putin there. Actually, it's Trump's wanna-be Putin but he can't get the American Justice system to convict anyone one Trumped-up charges.

Free speech doesn't include threatening or inciting violence.

You can reasonably argue whether what Comey did actually does that, but it's what they indicted him for doing. It will be up to the jury to decide whether he's actually guilty of it.

[johnu]

barmar, on 2026-April-29, 12:31, said:

Free speech doesn't include threatening or inciting violence.

You can reasonably argue whether what Comey did actually does that

No, I don't think anybody who's not Convicted Felon Trump, one of his cult members, or his stooges in DOJ can reasonably argue that posting a photo of seashells, arranged by somebody else, threatens or incites violence. In fact, ask anybody what 86 means and they will understand that it means to throw out, discard, or remove, in the context of removing somebody, usually drunk or disruptive from a establishment that serves drinks. Any constitutional lawyer would tell you that this is constitutionally protected speech under the 1st Amendment.

I also don't think this will come close to trial, as my best guess says that a judge will throw this ridiculous malicious prosecution will be thrown out.

I also expect that the DOJ lawyers involved in this malicious prosecution will have disbarment hearings in their future.

[barmar]

johnu, on 2026-April-29, 18:07, said:

No, I don't think anybody who's not Convicted Felon Trump, one of his cult members, or his stooges in DOJ can reasonably argue that posting a photo of seashells, arranged by somebody else, threatens or incites violence.

Was it really arranged by someone else? I assumed Comey did it.

Quote

In fact, ask anybody what 86 means and they will understand that it means to throw out, discard, or remove, in the context of removing somebody, usually drunk or disruptive from a establishment that serves drinks. Any constitutional lawyer would tell you that this is constitutionally protected speech under the 1st Amendment.

If a gang leader said "86 that guy", referring to someone in a rival gang, would you still think that?

I know it doesn't mean much, as a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich, but they did manage to convince a majority of that jury that "86" implied violence.

I do expect this to either be thrown out or fail, but they clearly made a credible enough case to get an indictment.