Talk about clickbait

The New Neo Posted on by

I simply had to click on this headline in the NY Post: “Skull of ‘dinosaur from Hell’ discovered with sword jutting from its head.”

Alas, not a sword. No duel with a dinosaur. The find was, “the skull of a supersized dinosaur from ‘hell’ with a swordlike horn protruding from its head … ”

There’s quite a difference between a sword and a swordlike horn. Not that I imagined there really would be a sword in a dinosaur, but I was curious to see the article anyway. This was the discovery:

According to the researcher, the primeval predator was a formidable-looking specimen, boasting a distinctive sail-finned back, and perhaps, most uniquely, a 20-inch scimitar-like bone jutting from its dome. …

In real life, this gangly creature was more akin to an oversized egret, pursuing fish and other aquatic prey, which it trapped using its long snout and rows of interlocking teeth.

In the photo, the “sword” looks something like a rhino horn to me.

Virginia gerrymandering halted – for now

The New Neo Posted on by

Here’s the story:

A Virginia judge on Thursday blocked an April 21 referendum in the state on redrawing the state’s congressional maps, marking the latest legal hurdle in a string of challenges to the Democratic-led initiative.

The Tazewell County Circuit Court ordered a halt to voting after the Republican National Committee and state GOP filed a challenge to the vote. …

It remains unclear how the referendum will proceed, though the state Supreme Court has previously declined to block the vote altogether and a separate case is expected to continue on the merits.

So the fat lady hasn’t even begun to sing on this.

The hearing appears to be scheduled for March 18; that’s why I wrote “for now.”

More here:

In his written ruling, [Judge] Hurley found the plaintiffs have an “extraordinarily high likelihood of success on the merits,” including their claim that the referendum violates the timing requirement of Article XII, Section 1 of the Virginia Constitution because early voting is set for “sooner than 90 days after” the January passage of House Joint Resolution 4.

Hurley also found the ballot language — particularly the phrase “restore fairness” — is likely misleading and violates the Constitution because it “would lead a voter to believe he or she were doing something unfair by voting against the proposed amendment.”

The order states that “the equities of this case warrant temporary relief ‘for the limited purpose of preserving the status quo between the parties pending a hearing on a motion for a preliminary injunction.’”

The referendum was scheduled for April 21, with early voting scheduled to start March 6.

Alongside California, Virginia has become one of Democrats’ best opportunities to gain U.S. House seats in the upcoming midterms through redistricting. Under the current map, Democrats hold a narrow 6-5 edge in Virginia’s congressional delegation. The proposed map would boost that advantage to 10-1.

President Donald Trump received 46% of the vote in Virginia in 2024, Republicans note, but they contend the new map would reduce GOP representation to roughly 9% of the delegation.

Is there anything gerrymandering can’t do?

SCOTUS strikes down Trump’s claim to tariff powers under the IEEPA (International Emergency Economic Powers Act)

The New Neo Posted on by

It seems a lot of people on the right who have followed this case closely are not especially surprised. I didn’t follow it closely, but I still am not especially surprised. It seems that he can still impose tariffs under other statutes – perhaps.

For example:

The power to impose duties is the power to create revenue streams, and the framers of the Constitution understood the dangers of allowing the executive as both head of state and head of government its own independent revenue. Kings had those powers before Parliament became supreme in England, and for a while afterward as well. Trump and his team had proposed at times that he could exert full authority over tariff revenue without seeking approval from Congress, which makes this a very apt concern about crossing those boundaries. Tariffs imposed by Congress create revenue streams they control, and can then appropriate as they see fit, allowing them to use the power of the purse to oversee and check executive authority.

This is the reason I have always been skeptical that Trump would succeed in a challenge to these tariffs, at least under the emergency powers of the IEEPA. However, that’s not the only way in which Trump could justify these tariffs. Jonathan Turley reminded Fox viewers that Trump has other statutes on which he can rely, although those come with restrictions, and Bruce Mehlman laid them out on Twitter as well …

The ruling was 6-3, with Alito, Thomas, and Kavanaugh dissenting and Barrett, Gorsuch, and Roberts joining the liberals to make the majority.

What are these other ways that might be used impose tariffs? You can find a list here, but I have no idea how SCOTUS would react to them.

Trump has criticized the justices who voted against him, particularly the ones who are supposedly on the right; I think that’s a bad move for many reasons, and one of them is practical: it won’t make them more inclined to vote in his favor in the future. They’re only human. Trump added:

But at the same time, Trump said the ruling allows him to take other routes, and possibly impose stronger tariffs. So I cannot tell if he is happy or mad, especially since he said he should have used these alternative routes in the first place:

“Effective immediately, all national security tariffs under Section 232 and existing Section 301 tariffs remain in place… Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff under Section 122 over and above our normal tariffs already being charged.”

See also this from Turley:

Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley called the Supreme Court’s Friday decision on tariffs a “blow to the administration” and argued justices feared a “slippery slope” when it comes to President Donald Trump’s authority. …

Turley said Trump’s team did a “terrific job” and “could not have argued the case better,” but Chief Justice John Roberts and others viewed the emergency tariffs as a tax and under the authority of Congress.

“The night is hardly over for the administration,” Turley warned, arguing there are still other statutes the president can use to impose tariffs.

The latest decision, he added though, could have sweeping effects on both the economy and the administration’s foreign policy, which has sometimes included using the threat of tariffs against other countries.

See also this from John Hinderaker:

I think it is worth noting that the financial markets did not react to today’s decision, either positively or negatively. If it were true that tariffs would devastate our economy, as liberals have claimed, today’s news should have caused the markets to skyrocket. Conversely, of course, if the tariffs were seen by sophisticated observers as a great boon to our economy, the markets should have tanked. The fact that neither happened suggests that the overall impact of tariffs, at least in the short term, was close to being a wash.

Tucker Carlson says the mean Joos detained him in Israel

The New Neo Posted on by

Taking a leaf out of Greta Thunberg’s book, Tucker Carlson made the claim that the Israelis “detained” him at the airport:

“Men who identified themselves as airport security took our passports, hauled our executive producer into a side room, and then demanded to know what we discussed with Ambassador Huckabee,” Carlson stated in his Wednesday interview with The Daily Mail.

A spokesperson for the US Embassy in Israel told The Daily Mail that Carlson’s claims were inaccurate and clarified that he only received the same passport-control questions that many visitors to Israel encounter.

Israel Airports Authority further confirmed that Carlson was “politely asked a few routine questions, in accordance with standard procedures applied to many travelers” in a late Wednesday X/Twitter post.

The questions were asked in a private, VIP lounge to protect his and his party’s privacy, the authority said, adding that “no unusual incident occurred” and it rejects any such claims.

Not the first time Carlson has lied about Israel and Jews. And I doubt it’s the last. It’s his stock in trade, his clickbait.

Oh, and then there was this:

Tucker Carlson was seen hugging and taking a photograph with a Ben-Gurion Airport employee, according to footage circulating on social media on Thursday, contradicting his claim to The Daily Mail that he was detained and hauled off by security.

In the video, he was seen smiling and hugging staff at the airport. He appeared to be unaccompanied, further contradicting his claims that he was travelling with security guards.

Sources confirmed to The Jerusalem Post that Carlson did not leave the airport during his visit and conducted the interview with US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee there. He departed Israel around 3 p.m., concluding a trip that lasted only a few hours.

An in-depth fact-finding mission for the intrepid investigative reporter.

I also came across this today:

The man formerly known as Prince Andrew has been arrested

The New Neo Posted on by

Most of the coverage says it’s because of his dealings with Epstein, and that is the case. But I would guess a lot of people who don’t bother to read the story think it’s for sex with underage women/girls. It does not appear to be, although I suppose that could change. It seems to be for giving Epstein investment tips based on insider information, otherwise known in British parlance as “misconduct in public office.”

It’s the first arrest of a British royal in 400 years, although he’s not been charged with anything and he was released pending further investigation.

Well, at least they’re not planning to behead him. The charge carries a maximum possible life sentence, however.

You could read much of that article I just linked and come away with the impression that the arrest was for something sexual. It isn’t until paragraph numbers ten and eleven that you get this tidbit:

Earlier this month, the Thames Valley Police said it was looking into a claim that the former prince, while serving as U.K. trade envoy in 2010, had shared confidential documents with Epstein.

One email in the latest U.S. release appears to show Mountbatten-Windsor forwarding Epstein a report from his special adviser about the then-prince’s visit to Southeast Asia.

Easy to miss or gloss over that, but it appears to be the subject matter involved. Here’s more about it:

The Telegraph revealed last week that the former prince appeared to have forwarded a Treasury memo in 2010 about the Icelandic economy to a banker whose firm had just bought assets from a bank there.

At the time, Britain and Iceland were engaged in a diplomatic row over British deposits lost in the 2008 banking crisis.

Mr Mountbatten-Windsor suggested the information might be useful to his friend “before you make your move”.

The Epstein files also appear to show that he forwarded official reports to the paedophile about trips to Hong Kong, Singapore, Vietnam and China in November 2010.

Mr Mountbatten-Windsor also appeared to have forwarded the paedophile a separate briefing on investment opportunities in Afghanistan’s Helmand province in December 2010.

I assume this was either classified information or at least information that Andrew was not supposed to be sharing in order to help someone make investment decisions. It also seems to me that someone – or many people – wants to make sure Andrew is punished for something. There’s little doubt in my mind that Andrew is a sleazebag in a host of ways, including sexually. But I don’t think there’s any evidence of sex with underage girls – although again, that could change.

He sure was a good friend to Epstein, though.

I can’t quite imagine what the royal family members are saying to each other behind closed doors.

See also this bit of backstory involving Starmer:

The latest document release included a number of new revelations about Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein, including more evidence of the pair’s yearslong friendship continuing after Epstein pleaded guilty to soliciting prostitution in 2008, and emails suggesting Mandelson shared sensitive government information with the financier.

Mandelson’s involvement with Epstein has more broadly threatened Starmer’s leadership—because he appointed Mandelson to be ambassador—with two of Starmer’s top aides resigning in the wake of the Epstein files’ release and the PM facing calls to resign.

I would wager it’s not so unusual for people in public office to be sharing that kind of information, but the Epstein files have allowed some prominent people to be caught. Perhaps Andrew’s arrest is meant to be a distraction from Mandelson/Starmer?

The British elites want to make the British countryside more diverse

The New Neo Posted on by

At the moment, they’re not talking about “diverse” people moving to the countryside. They’re talking about tourism:

National Landscapes, a charity mostly funded by the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra), has 46 landscapes, previously called areas of outstanding natural beauty. Management plans for each area are aiming to address the barriers faced by underrepresented and diverse groups to accessing the countryside.

What are these “barriers”? Are the Brits who live there banning “people of color”? No, they’re not. It’s the latter who don’t want to visit. But hey, that needs to change:

Reports that have been published gradually since a Defra report in 2019 reveal that many communities perceived the countryside as “being for white people and middle-class people”.

The 2019 report said: “The countryside is seen by both black, Asian and minority ethnic groups and white people as very much a ‘white’ environment. If that is true today, then the divide is only going to widen as society changes. Our countryside will end up being irrelevant to the country that actually exists.”

“The country that actually exists” is becoming less and less white – thanks to unlimited “migration” – and so the countryside must become so, too. The tourism seems to be just the beginning of a larger plan, because why else would they be caring what people do with their vacation time?

More:

The latest region to update its five-year management plan was Cranborne Chase National Landscape, which overlaps the boundaries of Dorset, Wiltshire, Hampshire and Somerset. Its plan, published last month, said that it would “develop strategies to reach people or communities with protected characteristics such as people without English as a first language” and “diversity of ethnicity”.

On Monday, National Landscapes published an update titled “Nature is for everyone”.

It read: “There are innumerable reasons why people don’t spend time in the outdoors and National Landscapes teams are committed to reducing the barriers to access.”

“Protected characteristics”? What does that mean? And again we have that phrase “barriers to access” – as though there’s some sort of de jure apartheid going on, rather than the choice of members of those “protected” ethnic and language groups.

In Luton, the Nature Calling project coordinated visits from groups from all backgrounds including people seeking asylum who had mainly been indoors since arriving in the UK. …

… [T]he management plan for Malvern Hills covering 2025-30, published in March, acknowledged that attitudes varied within ethnic minority groups.

“Many minority peoples have no connection to nature in the UK because their parents and their grandparents did not feel safe enough to take them or had other preoccupations,” the report said.

It added: “For some people with a recent history or lived experience of subsistence within the family, having come from rural areas in developing countries, nature can be associated with hardship and struggle in having to work the land.”

Nidderdale National Landscape in North Yorkshire said there were a variety of barriers stopping ethnic minorities from visiting areas of outstanding beauty. The consultation draft for its management plan, published last August, read: “These can be practical issues such as lack of transport and a lack of awareness but may also involve concerns about how they will be received when visiting an unfamiliar place.”

You will visit nature, and you will like it.

And I’m sure these programs will help the people who live in the area be even more “receptive” to the visitors.

US military buildup near Iran

The New Neo Posted on by

Show of force:

President Trump is sending the USS Gerald R. Ford, the world’s largest warship, to the Middle East, along with a huge fleet of aerial refueling tankers and F-22 and F-35 strike fighters, according to reports.

The massive buildup in military hardware is the biggest indication yet that Trump could be preparing for large-scale strikes against Iran if high-stakes negotiations over the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program and brutal crackdown on protesters fail.

This is carrying the big stick. But I refuse to even try to predict what will ultimately happen.

Mamdani to Hochul: fork over the money or the kulaks get hurt

The New Neo Posted on by

Economics 101, according to Mamdani:

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani introduced his $127 billion preliminary budget plan on Tuesday. …

Mamdani threatened to raise property taxes by 9.5% and raid the rainy day fund if Gov. Kathy Hochul does not implement a wealth tax.

“That’s their prerogative to look at that as an option,” Hochul responded. “He’s required to put options on the table; that does not mean that’s the final resolution.”

Hochul already promised NYC $1 billion for the 2025 fiscal year and $500 million for next year.

Not enough, Hochul.

And landlords – who do own a lot of the property in New York City – are constrained from raising some rents enough to cover the increase (rent stabilization and rent control, which affect over a million NYC rental properties, according to Google AI), unless something is done to change that, which would be highly unlikely under Mamdani. And there are plenty of actual home owners (as opposed to landlords) in the outer boroughs who are not extremely wealthy. But to Mamdani, all property owners are kulaks, and they must be sacrificed for the good of the underclass:

kulak, (Russian: “fist”), in Russian and Soviet history, a wealthy or prosperous peasant, generally characterized as one who owned a relatively large farm and several head of cattle and horses and who was financially capable of employing hired labour and leasing land. …

In 1927 the Soviet government began to shift its peasant policy by increasing the kulaks’ taxes and restricting their right to lease land; in 1929 it began a drive for rapid collectivization of agriculture. The kulaks vigorously opposed the efforts to force the peasants to give up their small privately owned farms and join large cooperative agricultural establishments. At the end of 1929 a campaign to “liquidate the kulaks as a class” (“dekulakization”) was launched by the government. By 1934, when approximately 75 percent of the farms in the Soviet Union had been collectivized, most kulaks—as well as millions of other peasants who had opposed collectivization—had been deported to remote regions of the Soviet Union or arrested and their land and property confiscated.

Was this the “affordability” the youth of NYC voted for? Of course, at the moment it’s just leverage on Hochul. But if Albany – and the rest of New York state, which did not vote for Mamdani – don’t do what they mayor says, he will blame Hochul and upstate rather than take any responsibility. Here’s the way Mamdani put it on X:

After years of fiscal mismanagement, we’re staring at a $5.4 billion budget gap — and two paths.

One: Albany can raise taxes on the ultra-wealthy and the most profitable corporations and address the fiscal imbalance between our city and state.

The other, a last resort: balance the budget on the backs of working people using the only tools at the City’s disposal. …

… [W]e look forward to partnering with Albany to protect working New Yorkers.

See how it goes? The NY Times adds:

The suggested 9.5 percent increase would affect more than 3 million single-family homes, co-ops and condos and over 100,000 commercial buildings, Mr. Mamdani said as he delivered his preliminary spending plan.

The mayor acknowledged that his proposal would not merely force the wealthy to pay more taxes, but would also be a “tax on working- and middle-class New Yorkers,” and stressed that this was not his first choice.

Hochul and those greedy up-staters made me do it.

And that NYC budget? Governor DeSantis of Florida points out that NYC’s $127 billion budget is higher than Florida’s budget of $117, and Florida has about three times as many people.