Surendra Ananth @surendraananth, you violated my conditional consent. I assented to unprotected intimate relations with you on the STRICT condition that you tell me if you have relations with anyone else. You failed to do so, and I became ill as a direct consequence.

You refused to reveal your own STI results to me, but claimed to others they were negative and alleged I had multiple other partners, slut-shaming me. You gaslit me saying you had told me about your other partners.

You called up @justice_sisters and @SistersinIslam to tell them I was crazy, jilted. You rebuffed attempts to organise a community mediation so we could address matters. You said I was crazy for speaking to your boss and father in an attempt to keep other women safe.

You have a PATTERN OF BEHAVIOUR of misogyny, harassment and sheer disrespect for women. This was sent to a friend of mine who has never expressed interest in you and has a partner.

You think women are playthings, notches on the bedpost. You, @surendraananth, are no human rights advocate.

How about a brief refresher on federal bail, since everyone's got opinions on it this week? Yes?

Okay, here we go. In federal criminal cases, bail is governed by the Bail Reform

/2 Under the Bail Reform Act, a defendant MUST BE RELEASED ON BAIL unless the judicial officer (usually a federal magistrate judge) finds that no condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure (1) them appearing for trial or (2) the safety of the community.

/3 It's the burden of the government -- the federal prosecutor - to PROVE by CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE that the danger element applies, and no conditions can reasonably control it, if the government wants someone detained without bail. Preponderance burden for flight risk.

/4 HOWEVER there are certain statutory categories of crimes where there is a rebuttable presumption that no conditions will prevent flight or danger -- in other words, for those crimes, the burden shifts to the defendant.

/5 The Federal Rules of Evidence don't govern detention hearings and they can and do proceed by "proffer" -- that is, the government saying what they will prove if necessary.

In late October 2020, the Edmonton Proud Boys appeared at a People Vs. Predators rally.

One member of this @splcenter-designated hate group is John-Clayton Wilson/Jay Wilson/JC Wilson/JC2theW. (1/10)

@DoxerPb @RuthlessWe @AntifaGarfield @AntiFashGordon @AntifascistF12

JCW is an artist and performer, having done trapeze work. He also operated a YouTube channel, which provides men's rights activist analysis of feminism and the LGBTQ+ community, despite being a member of that community. (2/10)

It's hard to know why JC joined the bigoted Proud Boys, but JC's history of men's rights activism and anti-feminism help the connection make sense.

Here's a sample of some video topics. The language and themes align with the far-right. (3/10)

Still, JC being a member of the LGBTQ+ community makes his decision to join a hate group puzzling for us.

Not that this is unheard of, of course, but these people are not your allies. They aren't even allies with each other and we see this play out all the time. (4/10)

We gave JC multiple chances to get in touch so we could connect him with resources and people who specialize in leaving hate groups. He got the message, but he responded by changing his name and trying to hide his accounts

It's not too late to leave. We can delete tweets. (5/10)

Listening in to the Peter Harding arraignment. (THREAD)

Magistrate Judge Jeremiah McCarthy is presiding.

Criminal complaint against Harding is from DC District Court dated 1/11/21.

Harding is charged in a 2 count complaint from DC District - violating 18 usc 1752 (a)(1) and (a)(2) unlawfully being on federal grounds.

Second count is Title 40 USC 5104(e)(2)(c) violent entry and disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds. Max for both is 1.5 years and a fine.

1/

The SNP versus the Law

The SNP is in trouble. They know it and we know it. It’s almost certain that Nicola Sturgeon will need to resign for lying to Holyrood

This explains the frantic calls for another referendum

Brexit is done and the sky didn’t fall in

2/

This removes their number one Bête Noire. A Disastrous hard Brexit

They were banking on that happening. There will be, and are, difficulties with the new trading arrangements but these will play out over years and will be sorted one way or another

3/

The Law

As it stands, the SNP cannot call another referendum without the permission of the UK Parliament

Some people dispute this, including many in the SNP

So. What’s the alternative?

The could call a non binding non legal referendum but what’s the point

Unionist will

4/

boycott it and non SNP councils will refuse to participate

Although that’s their latest plan, it’s a non starter

In the absence of a S30 order their only recourse is to test the competence to hold another referendum in the Supreme Court

This is fraught with dangers

5/

They have to balance the possibility of getting a positive SC judgement against getting a negative judgement

I’ll start with the negative judgement first

Were the Scot Gov to go to the SC they would risk not one but two massively disastrous and fatal outcomes

Of all the things that confuse me (there are easily 3k this morning) this stumps me most: When did we decide that saving an 80-year-old's life is worth sacrificing a child's? Or that the value of their lives are exactly comparable? I could've sworn we'd agreed to something else.

We have special provisions for children. In court, they're treated differently. We've agreed they shouldn't have to work. They need public school (or so I thought). They cannot consent to sex. We have a set of laws that protects them.

I thought this was understood, and enacted by the thousands of examples we can gin up of adults running into traffic to save a child - not necessarily their own - or stopping a bullet. Remember those heroic teachers in Newtown in Parkland who shielded their students? That.

And we derided adults who USED children as shields, or failed to protect them. The mother who lets her husband beat her child because otherwise he'd turn on her. Society abjures such a person. The guard who hid instead of rushing the shooter in Parkland? Hated.

But now, with Covid is is simply disallowed to claim that we should prioritize, say, a 10-year-old school child over an 84-year-old in assisted living. Where the hell did this attitude come from and why does half of my social circle seem to believe it's right?

Short thread on communication, teaching and selling ideas:

When I finished school I went to study in Israel in a "Yeshiva" - these are like HE academies where you just study Jew stuff: philosophy, bible, history, law. And, lots of talmud. 1/

The Talmud is really hard at the best of times. It's very confusing, varies in style from page to page, the content itself is very demanding and it's in a weird Aramaic-Hebrew hybrid. 2/

Everyone in the Yeshiva studied the same tractate (like a book of the talmud) but there were lots of different classes, with each rabbi having a very different style and approach. 3/

One rabbi took a highly abstract and conceptual approach. He used very complicated ideas and words and did a lot of monologuing. Everybody used to rave about how amazing his classes were. So, one day, I decided to go. 4/

I confess that I didn't understand a damn thing. It all just felt very...like...nothingness. Like things were being overcomplicated and overdramatised and ideas and lenses were being added that didn't really add much at all. It was just confusing. 5/

A Thread: The Law of One

The Law of One comes from the Ra Material, a series of conversations between Don Elkins, a physicist, pilot, and UFO investigator, and Ra, a multidimensional being who spoke through Carla Rueckert, a psychic, medium, and Don Elkins’ life partner. It was channeled in the 1980s.

1/11🚔John M. Pierce🚔
- Lawyer Accountability
- Rudy Giuliani, George Papadopoulos, Lin Wood, Tulsi Gabbard, Russian Oligarch, Marc Mukasey, Harmeet Dhillon, Robert J. Costello, Carter Page all have/had direct ties w/ JP
- JP suggested he should rep Trump
#Whistleblower

2/11🚔John M. Pierce🚔
- JP is handling matters for Wendy Rittenhouse's child.
- JP breached child support obligs
- JP could not visit kids b/c failed to comply w/ drug testing
- Did JP do a good job raising his children?
- Ask JP that question, if he lies, we can look it up.

3/11 🚔John M. Pierce🚔
- JP's had problems with cocaine and booze
- JP owed @Citibank $90K as of 11/19
- JP owed ex-wife's mom $27K as of 11/19
- JP owed over $1M in taxes as of 11/19
- JP said in 2016: "I never grew up."
- JP lost his job at @KLGates after a physical assault

4/11🚔John M. Pierce🚔
- JP repledged the same collateral several times in exchange for millions, lawsuits followed
- JP pilfered $2.5M from a payday lender
- JP has a $4M money judgment against him
- JP been subject of default judgment requests
- JP owes money all over town

5/11🚔John M. Pierce🚔
-JP been supported over yrs by
- Virage Capital Management - $65M in capital
- David L. Hecht (Hecht Partners)
- Carolynn K. Beck (Goldstein & McClintock)
- Denver G. Edwards (Bradford Edwards & Varlack)
- Christopher N. LaVigne (Withers Bergman)
- & Others

Where were we: Boaz Barak proposed a “law of nature” that if there is a physical device that can make a certain computation C, then there is a quantum circuit that computes C. 1/11

@boazbaraktcs @quantum_aram @AspectStalence @RosenblumSerge

Aram remarked that Boaz's proposed law is a variant of the strong Church Turing thesis. Correct! 2/11

I proposed a refinement of the general law. There are cases where we can analyse classes of devices (or natural processes) and can conclude that for them there is even a classical circuit that computes what they compute. 3/11

I gave a few examples 1) Computations that take place in Boaz's laptop can be carried out by a classical circuit.
4/11

2) Computations carried out by Boaz's brain can be carried out by a classical circuit. 5/11

It took decades after the passage of America's landmark antitrust laws - the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act - for trustbusting to occur in earnest, and what spurred the action wasn't mere corporate bullying, not just price hikes and labor abuses.

1/

What tipped America over into a state where a leader (FDR) who told activists "I want to do it, now make me do it" found the political will to "do it" was the corruption that attended the extreme concentration of wealth.

2/

Monopoly was never merely an issue of economics - it's fundamentally an issue about POLITICS. Yes, the monopolist bleeds workers and suppliers, sucks them dry and amasses a tremendous fortune, but that's just accumulating ammunition.

3/

What the monopolist does with that ammunition is far more consequential: when the powerful are small in number and command vast fortunes, they can come to a consensus about how to deploy their fortunes to corrupt the political process.

4/

The economic harms are just a warmup, the political harms are the real deal.

Hoover was beholden to plutes, had a cabinet full of them, turned over the nation's treasury to a sociopathic monster called Andrew Mellon whose stated ambition was to own all the world's aluminum.

5/

American Law enforcement and military appears to be fully compromised at this time. At the rate things are developing, there may not be a peaceful transition of power on the 20th. Underestimating the threat we are facing will have dire consequences. #RemoveTheTraitors

Trump may already be a military dictator, we just haven't realized it yet, because we have not seen anything like this unfold on American soil, & we think things like this can't happen here, and happens only overseas. That is exact what they want us to believe. #RemoveTheTraitors

I remain unconvinced at this time about the loyalty of some of the troops already deployed at the Capitol and being national guard being mobilized at state capitols even. I remain concerns for the safety of Democratic lawmakers at DC and elected officials at all 50 states.

Meanwhile Trump supporters are playing dumb or sounding ridiculous in the narratives, I suspect intentionally because it makes it easier for the public dismiss the actual threat faced because the public believes they are incompetent and fools. #RemoveTheTraitors

I think at this time, that is what they want us to believe. It gives then a cover, & can carry on with their nefarious plans. The longer it goes without putting a stop to this, the harder it will be for the American people to stop what they are planning to do. #RemoveTheTraitors

Tonight we have dissents from both Sotomayor and Breyer in the last instance of the Supreme Court waving the matador's cape for Trump's machinery of death without so much as a word of reasoned justification

Trump's DOJ has moved with unseemly haste in order to preempt credible legal challenges, and the Court has happily gone along

"This is not justice"

The Supreme Court did not meet the standard required to grant cert before a judgment by the lower court

The actual reason for the extraordinary haste is that the people have chosen a president who opposes the death penalty, and the 6 bloodthirsty Republican-nominated justices want the executions to happen. But this is not a *legal* reason.

I was raised as a Christian fundamentalist and used to write - in full belief - in support of basing society on the laws of the Torah (first five books) of the Bible.

I was taught that the Confederacy (the pro-slavery rebels of the southern US) were the “right” side. I remember my paternal grandfather (who was later convicted as a child molester) praising me for articles arguing as much. I remember my family flying a Confederate flag.

I once wrote supremacist, homophobic, Islamophobic, and even anti-Semitic blogs, arguing a religious nationalist ideology that was patriarchal, discriminatory, and outright offensive.

I was 17. 18. Early 20s. Back then, I wanted to join the US military. I thought every opinion I regurgitated was Gospel. I missed the part about “whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.”

I once confused hatred for love.