How high can a mouse jump?
Average mice can jump anywhere up to about 13 inches without a running start and even higher when they’re already moving. The average 5-gallon bucket is about 12 inches tall, meaning it is not tall enough to contain a mouse. It will leap out without a lid on it. Of course, every mouse is different, and some of the worst jumpers have been recorded jumping about 10 inches high.
That is a powerful jump coming from such a small creature.
It’s no secret that I can’t stand mice. They’re okay in the wild, because they keep to themselves. But in the house? No, not on my watch. And yet it’s happened again.
The other evening I saw another one very late at night, out in the open in my living room near where I’ve seen them in the past. I have no idea how they get in, and no one has been able to figure it out. But this sort of weather, when it suddenly gets quite cold at night, is prime time. Traps are now set, and the wait begins.
But the reason I’m writing about this is that when I saw this particular mousie, I did what I usually do – made a lot of noise to scare it away. I stomped and I clapped. I must have really startled the mouse because it did what I’ve never before seen a mouse do – it leapt vertically in its fear, a jump that would do an NBA player proud pound for pound. I’d say this mouse jumped at least ten inches straight up from a non-running start. That startled me, to be sure.
NOTE: One of my very favorite poems:
Wee, sleeket, cowran, tim’rous beastie,
O, what a panic’s in thy breastie! …
Evidence that Biden received payments traced to China
He may have gotten a little bit sloppy:
The money trail begins in July 2017 when Hunter Biden demanded payment from his Chinese Communist Party (CCP) linked associate. On July 30, 2017, Hunter Biden sent a message to Raymond Zhao—a CEFC associate—demanding a $10 million dollar capital payment and claimed his father, Joe Biden, was sitting in the room. CEFC is a Chinese energy company linked to the CCP. The Bidens began working with CEFC when Joe Biden was Vice President.
On August 8, 2017, Northern International Capital, a Chinese company affiliated with CEFC, sent $5 million to Hudson West III, a joint venture established by Hunter Biden and CEFC associate Gongwen Dong. That same day, Hudson West III sent $400,000 to Owasco, P.C., an entity owned and controlled by Hunter Biden. On August 14, 2017, Hunter Biden wired $150,000 to Lion Hall Group, a company owned by President Biden’s brother James and sister-in-law Sara Biden. On August 28, 2017, Sara Biden withdrew $50,000 in cash from Lion Hall Group. Later the same day, she deposited it into her and James Biden’s personal checking account. On September 3, 2017, Sara Biden cut a check to Joe Biden for $40,000 for a “loan repayment.”
Isn’t $40K ten percent of $400K? Ten percent for the big guy? At any rate, Comer points out that even if the $40 was a loan repayment, Sara and James Biden only got the funds to repay the loan through money from China, and that’s how Joe benefited.
A question of statistics: Jewish financial contributions to the Democrats?
Commenter “huxley” wonders, as does commenter “Mike K”:
“The other day I read a number that I have trouble accepting. It was that 50% of Democrat contributions come from Jews.”
Mike K:
I saw that too and wondered. Dunno.
I do believe that 10/7 has changed the game with Americans and American Jews.
It’s too early to tell whether that last sentence is true, but I can certainly check on the first part.
It took almost no time at all to discover what I believe is its origin, in this Jerusalem Post article written in September of 2016, shortly before the 2016 Trump/Clinton election. The headline goes like this: “US Jews contribute half of all donations to the Democratic Party.” Sounds similar to what is referenced in the comment by huxley and the one by Mike K, but right off the bat I noticed one difference: not “Democrats” but “the Democratic Party.” A subtle difference but perhaps a meaningful one, because many donations are to candidates rather than the party. And does the claim mean half of the total money collected, or half of all the individuals who donate?
Right under the headline we have this startling statistic in a subheadline: “Jewish donors give 25% of the Republican National Convention’s cash.” Now, that’s interesting; it seems Jews in general donate a lot to politics (I’m pretty sure they donate a disproportionate amount to charity, as well). And then in this article I discovered that for that same election cycle:
In 2016, 22% of Democrats and Democratic leaners and 10% Republicans and Republican leaners reported making a donation, according to data from ANES. This marks the first election since at least 1992 when Democrats have been significantly more likely than Republicans to donate.
So that year there were lots more Democrat donors in general, at least by percentages. Also, higher-income and more educated people were more likely to make donations, and I’m pretty sure that Jews are somewhat over-represented among those groups.
Then there’s this rather contrary piece of information regarding the same year:
Just 158 families, along with companies they own or control, contributed $176 million in the first phase of the campaign, a New York Times investigation found. Not since before Watergate have so few people and businesses provided so much early money in a campaign, most of it through channels legalized by the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision five years ago. …
But regardless of industry, the families investing the most in presidential politics overwhelmingly lean right, contributing tens of millions of dollars to support Republican candidates …
It seems that 138 of the families gave to GOP candidates and 20 families gave to Democrats. There are no numbers for the total monetary amount given, but it’s a lot, as you can see by this:
The 158 families each contributed $250,000 or more in the campaign through June 30, according to the most recent available Federal Election Commission filings and other data, while an additional 200 families gave more than $100,000. Together, the two groups contributed well over half the money in the presidential election — the vast majority of it supporting Republicans.
It says “the presidential election” and the “Republicans” plural. Does this include the primaries? The whole thing is unclear, and it seems as though it might be separate from the other report which seems to concern DNC and RNC contributions.
Back to the text of the Jerusalem Post article:
… Jewish donors contribut[e] a whopping 50% of funds received by the Democratic Party and 25% to the Republican Party, [researcher] Troy says.
Although it’s still not clear, that may support the idea that these only involve contributions to the parties themselves, not to individual candidates. But now it’s time to go to Troy’s research itself, which can be found here. A relevant excerpt:
… Jews donate as much as 50 percent of the funds raised by Democrats and 25 percent of the funds raised by Republicans.
As much as – what on earth does that refer to? The document by Troy contains a long long history of the Jewish vote in the US, but it surprised me by being more of a history than a study. In fact, I couldn’t find the basis for remarks such as this, on which the 50% claim seems to be based:
In the 2016 presidential race the Jewish financial vote remains disproportionately important – with estimates that Jewish donors contribute 50 percent of the funds to the Democratic Party and 25 percent to the Republican Party.
“Estimates” by whom? Based on what? Donations to the parties? Or to candidates? Or to both?
I couldn’t find the answers to any of these questions. Later, on page 7, I found another reference to the supposed figure, but it added nothing:
… Jews donate as much as 50 percent of the funds raised by Democrats and 25 percent of the funds raised by Republicans.
“As much as”? What does that mean? Again, no answers, and no footnotes or source – just the bare statement. I see no reason to give it any credence, although of course it might be true. It does seem as though the Troy report is the source of the statistic that Mike K had cited and huxley mentioned. If you can find any other evidence about the ultimate source, be my guest. But in my experience it’s not unusual for these internet “truths” to be based on very little.
I also found this information about large individual donors in 2016 to Clinton or Trump:
According to the latest Federal Election Commission disclosure, American Jewish donors funneled more than $90 million into the presidential campaigns of Democratic nominee Clinton and her Republican opponent Trump. …
Making their contributions through campaign committees, joint fundraising entities and allied super-PACs, Clinton’s five biggest financial backers are Jewish, and so are Trump’s top two.
That’s close to the 2 to 1 ratio, but it involves a very small number of large donors:
The largest individual donor in this cycle has been Donald Sussman, a founding partner at the Paloma Partners hedge fund, based in Greenwich, Connecticut. Thus far, he’s given more than $20 million to Clinton’s campaign, mostly through a super PAC supporting her bid, Priorities USA Action.
Clinton’s four other top donors are JB and Mary Kathryn Pritzker, Haim and Cheryl Saban, George Soros and S. Daniel Abraham. Along with Sussman, they have collectively contributed $69.7 million to the campaign, according to an assessment by Bloomberg Politics.
No surprise that Pritzger and Soros were in there, Soros being a person of Jewish ethnicity who’s not just a secular Jews but by his own admission somewhat anti-Semitic.
Other prominent Jewish Americans who have poured money into Clinton’s bid are filmmaker Steven Spielberg, fashion designer Ralph Lauren, Facebook co-founder Dustin Moskovitz and entertainment industry executive David Geffen.
No surprise there. As for Trump donors:
Trump’s largest funder is casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, who has a propensity to donate lavishly to Republican nominees and whose donation to Trump was $10.5 million. …
The New York Times reported late last month that the Las Vegas billionaire had given up hope Trump would prevail on November 8, and decided instead to focus on down-ballot races and on trying to secure a GOP majority in Congress.
I guess he was wrong about Trump that year.
[Adelson] remains the single largest overall contributor in the country for 2016, as his family has given two super PACs supporting Senate and House Republicans $20 million each.
Trump’s second biggest donor is Bernard Marcus, the son of Russian-Jewish immigrants who co-founded Home Depot. He’s given $7 million to the former reality television star.
None of this tells us what percentage of the candidates’ donations were from Jews, nor does it tell us that for each party’s candidates in general. And this article (with the same limitations) offers a list of the top 15 contributors for the 2020 election. Five of them gave a total of about $142 million to Republicans, while the others gave about $176.4 to Democrats. That’s not as wide a disparity as one might think. But again, that’s only large individual donations (in 2020) and it doesn’t tell us what proportion of the total that is, although I’m pretty sure it’s quite significant.
However, this article contains an estimate of total spending in that 2020 election, by all parties. I have no idea if it’s correct, but the estimate falls somewhere between $11 billion and $14 billion. Those large individual donations I just discussed would be only a tiny fraction of that.
So I haven’t been able to find any substantiation for that 50% claim that makes any sense or seems based on any evidence.
Gaza/Israel roundup
(1) In researching the Constantinople/Istanbul song in this post, I came across this piece of information about the city’s fall to the Ottomans:
The Walls of Constantinople, especially the Theodosian Walls, were some of the most advanced defensive systems in the world at the time. For 800 years, the Theodosian Walls, regarded by historians as the strongest and most fortified walls in the ancient and medieval era, protected Constantinople from attack. However, these fortifications were overcome with the use of gunpowder, specifically from Ottoman cannons and bombards, heralding a change in siege warfare. The Ottoman cannons repeatedly fired massive cannon balls weighing 500 kilograms (1,100 lb) over 1.5 kilometres (0.93 mi) which created gaps in the Theodosian Walls for the Ottoman siege.
Modern-day Israel had depended on the technology of its border wall to protect it. But the Hamas attack had surprise elements, both in numbers of invaders and techniques used, that overcame Israel’s previously-successful protection. Right now it’s my impression that Netanyahu and the people in his government who were in charge of defense are detested by most of the populace. That’s what I’m hearing, anyway. I believe that the problem was much deeper than Netanyahu; I think any previous leaders would have made the same error.
(2) I also think that the October 7 massacre was more successful than its planners thought it would be. By “successful,” I mean that the IDF was more disabled, and the terrorists had more time to commit murder and mayhem and kidnap more people than even they had expected. I recall reading that the same was true of 9/11; that al Qaeda was trying to inflict a very large blow, but did not expect the buildings to topple. Here’s the basis for the claim:
Osama bin Laden said he was the most optimistic of all his colleagues about the Sept. 11 attacks but not even he dared hope they would bring down the World Trade Center towers, according to a videotape released on Thursday that Washington says seals bin Laden’s guilt.
If this is true – and I happen to think it is – then I don’t believe that either Bin Laden or Hamas thought the response from the US and Israel, respectively, would be quite as extreme as it has been. The US declared war on Afghanistan and invaded the country. Israel has done the same in Gaza. I think that both al Qaeda and Hamas expected responses more in line with those countries’ responses to terrorism in the recent past prior to the attacks.
(3) No one on earth should be surprised by this:
As Israeli ground troops fight their way to the terrorist stronghold of Gaza city, Hamas is using the Biden administration-backed ‘humanitarian corridor’ to sneak terrorists to Egypt. “Hamas tried to smuggle out its people among wounded to Egypt,” the Jerusalem Post reported Saturday, citing an unnamed senior Biden White House official. …
The admission comes as Israeli military exposed that Hamas was using Gaza medical services to move terrorist and weapons across the battlefield. Israeli news website Ynet reported Saturday that “the IDF has information suggesting that the terrorist organization utilized the ambulance for transporting terrorists and weaponry.”
There would be no reason to think otherwise. Biden is placating his left flank while sacrificing Israel’s security.
See also this.
(4) Sinema vs. Tlaib on “the river to the sea.” She counters Tlaib’s ridiculous claim that using the phrase – as Tlaib did – means supporting “freedom, human rights, and peaceful coexistence.”
(5) Here are a bunch of videos to watch.
Say what you will about Ben Shapiro, he’s excellent on the topic of Israel
Ishmael and Isaac and a lot more:
The Nakba’s actual history:
Here’s a brave woman:
Open thread 11/4/23
As expected, Biden and company want a “pause” by Israel: politics and psychological warfare
Biden call it a “humanitarian pause,” of course. And indeed, it would be very kind to Hamas. But remember that old saying, “Whoever is kind to the cruel will end up being cruel to the kind.” An actual humanitarian pause would involve Hamas removing its arms and terrorists from close proximity to its citizenry, as well as returning the hostages. The sort of “pause” Biden and company are suggesting allows Hamas to regroup as well as to steal whatever humanitarian aid is supplied, as is its wont.
Netanyahu has responded to the call by saying no to a pause or to fuel delivery. Neither would even be considered till the hostages are freed. Meanwhile the MSM keeps the “poor Gazans” news coming, printing as truth the numbers of civilians killed issued by none other than Hamas. And – as Ace points out here:
No American news channel reported Hamas’s declaration that they would conduct 10/7 slaughters forever — “10/7, 10/10, 10/one million,” Hamas’s spokesterrorist promised — until Israel was “annihilated.”
Except for NBC, unbelievably, which made a fleeting reference to it.
Without that all-important context, they can be more successful at making the Israelis look intransigent and Biden look magnanimous.
To add to the absurdity, Blinken called for the now completely discredited “two-state solution.” Are they that foolish, or perhaps that knavish? It’s hard to choose, so let’s not and just say “both.” And it’s fairly clear that what motivates them is internal politics. Biden and his advisors are well aware that his support for Israel has lost him prospective votes from the anti-Israel and anti-Semitic wing of his own party, which is rather large.
And by the way, the right definitely has such a wing as well, although its arguments and motives are somewhat different and it has less support from actual politicians on the right. It’s smaller than that of the left and less of a political force. But the anti-Israel and/or anti-Semitic right is described in some detail here, and I can attest to its existence from comments I’ve seen all around the blogosphere.
Israel has long had a public relations information war problem. As I’ve written before, that is the topic of the work of Richard Landes, the man who invented the term “Pallywood” and exposed the al Durah hoax, as well as coining the phrase “lethal journalism” for much of the MSM coverage of Israel. Yesterday I happened across a video with another expert on the subject, an Israeli named Ron Schleifer who studies psychological warfare. I found his talk fascinating and illuminating, although depressing (again, I suggest you watch the video speeded up to at least 1.5 time, which you can do by going to the video settings):
That information war is at the heart of so much that is happening today, and not just in Israel and Gaza. It is a big part of the psychological battle between left and right, a war that so far the left has been winning.
And then there’s Bukele of El Salvador
Until now, President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador hasn’t appeared on my radar screen. Seeing that photo at the link, my first thought was how very young he looks.
It sounds as though, on the whole, his presidency has been good for El Salvador; at least, the Salvadorans appear to think so because he’s wildly popular and will probably be re-elected. The Biden administration doesn’t like him:
In his four years in office, President Nayib Bukele has turned El Salvador from a dangerous place filled with corruption, crime, and MS-13 gang members to a tropical paradise. Now, with his signing up for a historic re-election bid, he’s transforming El Salvador’s election system so he can do more.
This last week, Bukele officially registered to run for a second term, which hasn’t happened in El Salvador’s history due to a law that prevented any president who served from applying for office again. El Salvador’s Supreme Court changed the law in 2021, ruling that Bukele would be eligible to run for re-election. With almost every other democratic nation allowing for a president to serve a second term, the law seemed absurd, and with Bukele posting a 90% approval rating among Salvadorans, he faced little opposition to the constitutional change. However, it hasn’t stopped the foreign media, particularly in the United States, from criticizing Bukele and comparing him to authoritarian dictators in Central America’s past.
In addition to his youth (he’s 42), another thing that caught my eye is his name. It’s not Hispanic. I wondered whether he was an Arab, or even Palestinian, and although that seemed unlikely it turns out to be true:
Bukele’s paternal grandparents were Palestinian Christians from Jerusalem and Bethlehem while his maternal grandmother was Catholic and his maternal grandfather was Greek Orthodox. …
Bukele studied law at the Central American University, but later ended his studies and founded his first company at age 18.
… Bukele was born [in El Salvador] into a Christian household, although his father converted to Islam later in life. As the son of a Muslim father and a Christian mother, Bukele’s religious beliefs were a controversial subject in the 2019 election, with an image surfacing showing Bukele praying at the mosque in Mexico City. In February 2018, The Times of Israel published an image of Bukele “in deep reflection at the Western Wall in Jerusalem’s Old City.” …
Bukele has publicly stated he considers himself a believer in God first rather than religion. In a 2015 interview he said that “I am not a person who believes much in the liturgy of religions. However, I believe in God, in Jesus Christ. I believe in his word, I believe in his word revealed in the Holy Bible. And I know that God does not reject anyone because of their origins.”
His wife is apparently part Sephardic-Jewish.
Interesting guy. In that Wiki link, you can read of the many differing opinions and controversies his tenure has raised. He even sounds in some ways like a Trumpish figure.
Another video roundup
More heroes:
A summary of the history of Jews in the Arab countries – facts that most people don’t know:
Caroline Glick addresses the left:
Sam Bankman-Fried has been convicted on all counts
And the jury didn’t deliberate very long to return the verdicts:
Bankman-Fried was charged with seven counts of fraud, conspiracy and money laundering in what federal prosecutors have described as “one of the biggest financial frauds in American history.”
He was accused of using customer deposits on the crypto trading platform FTX to cover losses at his hedge fund, pay off loans and buy lavish real estate, among other personal expenses. …
U.S. Attorney Damian Williams said the verdict sends a message “to every single fraudster out there who thinks that they’re untouchable.”
He could be sentenced to up to 110 years, and he faces additional charges in another trial. His defense in this one amounted to claiming he didn’t know the significance of what he was doing. However, others testified against him in order to get plea deals:
Caroline Ellison, the former co-chief executive of Alameda and Bankman-Fried’s ex-girlfriend, previously pleaded guilty to criminal charges and testified under a cooperation agreement with prosecutors. She has testified that she committed fraud with Bankman-Fried and at his direction.
Ellison additionally testified that Bankman-Fried believed in utilitarianism and thought rules against lying or stealing inhibited his ability to maximize the greatest benefit for the most people.
I have to say first that although I followed Bankman-Fried’s original arrest, I haven’t followed his trial. But I’ll add that in general I don’t like it when the entirety of the evidence against a defendant is the result of confederates trading testimony for plea deals. I know it’s done all the time as a very basic prosecutorial tool – and I think it’s highly likely that in this case the ex is telling the truth, because Bankman-Fried’s claim of ignorance just doesn’t seem plausible. And perhaps there’s plenty of other evidence to corroborate what the ex and the other plea-dealers are saying.
Assuming Ellison’s story is the truth, it’s a fascinating glimpse into the way Bankman-Fried reasoned and rationalized his behavior: utilitarianism. That’s a topic I’ve discussed in before, this post (first in a series of three) from 2015.
Open thread 11/3/23
YouTube keeps recommending these acrobatic gymnastics videos, and I keep being gobsmacked by them:
Roundup
Here we go again – so much news!
(1) The UN is a travesty, and not a funny one:
In the worst decision by an international body since the League of Nations looked at the rise of Adolf Hitler and said, “I’m sure everything will turn out fine,” the United Nations has handed the chairmanship of the UN Human Rights Council Social Forum to Iran.
(2) An editor of the Harvard Law Review, Ibraham Bharmal, is apparently one of several people who recently assaulted a Jewish man on campus. Bharmal is an activist and a member of CAIR, which is an organization that has been linked with Hamas, although the group denies it.
Another Harvard student associated with the assault is Elom Tettey-Tamaklo, a divinity school student who lives with university undergraduates as a sort of advisor.
Divinity school.
(3) Biden wants a ceasefire. I hope Israel doesn’t listen to him; it depends how hard he and/or his aides push and threaten. Perhaps he wants to level the playing field between Israel and what he has called “the other team.” Quite a sports metaphor. Or perhaps he’s not serious and is merely trying to appease the Democrats’ very large anti-Israel Left flank.
(4) The American Ornithological Society is eliminating misogynist and racist names from birds. WTF? For example, Audubon was a slave holder, so out with him!
(5) Trump says his children are being persecuted in the NY fraud trial. I think that is obviously the case; his entire family is in the Left’s crosshairs and has been since the beginning. To the Left, persecution of the family is a feature and not a bug.