AsotERIC

The transgressive Left and their sheep follow the Marxist playbook for changing society 1. Redefinition 2. Normalization 3. Celebration 4. Demonization of those who don't follow Once you see it you can't unsee it!

Ran the kicker numbers and Trey Smack is the anti-Anders Carlson acmepackingcompany.com/green-bay-pack…

@yougoodmuench You've got to get this all the time. But I just realized it and can't unsee it.

@McShay13 Just saw it can't unsee it

The great delusion is here. Ever wonder why gays are embracing Islam? Makes zero sense. Josh here nails it.

@conservmillen @MikeWingerii @megbasham Yea but his answer "feels" more right to him. So it's his truth.

@MikeWingerii @megbasham This is a much better (and truer) answer

David French says he is furious at the Republican Party and claims abortions went up under Trump. I asked, “What did he do that caused abortions to rise?” French: “What I'm saying is, as I said earlier, this is a man who contributed to extraordinary growth in libertinism, especially on the right.” “Okay, do we have data that shows us that it's more people on the right that were getting abortions under Donald Trump?” French: “We don't have data.”

A woman was legally required to kill her baby in the third trimester because the “commissioning parents” for the surrogacy demanded it, and threatened a lawsuit. The baby was missing two fingers, so the people purchasing this precious child demanded it be aborted, per their contract. This is eugenics. It’s murder. It’s a baby trade, and it needs to be criminalized.

Illegal immigration is not just a border problem. It is an incentives problem. As long as illegal aliens can easily bank here, work here, and send money home, the system is still tilted toward lawbreaking. That's why my bill to 15x the remittance tax matters. Let's get it done.

@JuMosq @AndyHermanNFL Ok, so Dexter Lawrence for Wyatt, this years 5th, next year's 3rd Then what does his contract look like that he's going to want and do we have the space to do that, who else are we losing out signing because of it

🚨 Oh hey, @SecRubio, another professor FROM IRAN with a big mouth. And WHAT A SHOCKER, his brother, Ahmadreza Mohammadi Doostdar, is a convicted Iranian spy who was arrested in 2018. Professor Alireza Doostdar teaches Islamic Studies at the University of Chicago (pffft). Our Dept of Education handed this campus $530 MILLION in federal funding last year. "The only hope for peace is the power and durability of Iranian missiles."

@SpencerGuard @EYakoby Wait until they hear about Sherman’s March to the Sea. That was against fellow Americans. War is hell because it is fought to win. Not to satisfy people who confuse moral posturing with strategy and pay no price for being wrong.

Yes, despite all the Xperts on the law of armed conflict, targeting bridges, power plants, oil and gas facilities, airfields, and other dual-use infrastructure like factories, communications nodes, and rail lines that serve both civilian and military needs may be lawful. The law does not decide targets just by calling something civilian infrastructure. It looks at what the object actually does. An object counts as a military objective when by its nature, location, purpose, or use makes an effective contribution to military action and its total or partial destruction, capture, or disabling offers a definite military advantage in the circumstances at the time. 🧵1/6

If the media accurately reported the scale of damage to the regime’s war-making capacity and repression apparatus—instead of marketing it as an Iran “victory”—odds of a deal would rise. But by laundering defeat into triumph, you prolong the war. So I guess—thanks.

Is it Tuesday yet?! I need my pack a day fix with @AndyHermanNFL and @JuMosq Love these conversations

Kennedy tried to block senators from getting paid during a shutdown, Democrats said no

This is why evangelicals are the target of all of the ire of the left. We’re the lone bulwark against complete degradation

Vargas: "You said that you are confident that the world is better after the death of Iran's Supreme Leader" Fetterman: "100%. Yeah, k*ll every last member of their leadership." Vargas: "Well, his son is now in charge" Fetterman: "K*ll him too"

A look at some potential cap casualties down the line: acmepackingcompany.com/green-bay-pack…

Retired Army JAG here. And former infantry soldier & officer. And current law professor. And YOU are full of shit. No quarter ORDERS do violate #LOAC. Giving that order is a war crime even if it's not carried out. But that is NOT an order @SecWar @PeteHegseth gave. And that is why you are full of shit. See, I've also trained hundreds of soldiers on LOAC in the applied context. Thousands, actually. And I've advised commanders & decision makers on LOAC in combat, in Afghanistan as Chief of International & Operational Law for CJTF-101/RC-E (OEF XIV). That's why I know the difference between what SECWAR said in a press briefing yesterday & a war crime. Apparently you don't - so I'll do you a favor & spell it out for you step by step, in simple language that you'll hopefully understand. Let's start off with what Hegseth ACTUALLY said: "It's a mess for them. Who's in charge? Iran may not even know. With every passing hour, we know and we know they know, that the military capabilities of their evil regime are crumbling. They can barely communicate, let alone coordinate; they're confused and we know it. Our response? We will keep pressing. We will keep pushing, keep advancing, no quarter, no mercy for our enemies." (war.gov/News/Transcrip…) Alright, if we consider this "no quarter" observation in context, we see Hegseth's intent is to convey that @DeptofWar is going to exert max pressure on our adversary. We know their military capabilities "are crumbling" & we're not going to back off. Keep pushing, keep advancing. "No quarter. No mercy." See, content & intent are important. This is how we differentiate political rhetoric from war crime. Reality from...bullshit. If we go all the way back to Hague, II (1899) & Hague, IV (1907), the Regulations annexed to both Conventions make it forbidden, "To declare that no quarter will be given" (pic 1, from Hague, IV). Seems legit, right? Isn't that what SECWAR just "declared"? Well, if LOAC development stopped at 1907, maybe you could make that argument. But, it didn't. In negotiations for later treaties, delegates decided to be more clear about what exactly that prohibition should entail. So, next we'll consider 2 later treaties 🇺🇸 hasn't ratified but we were deeply involved in shaping - Additional Protocol I (1977) to 1949 Geneva Conventions & Rome Statute @IntlCrimCourt (1998). As we'll see below, these sources confirm Hegseth's political rhetoric is NOT a LOAC violation or war crime...and US DoW doctrine is consistent with relevant text of these treaties. Let's start with AP I. As we see from art. 40, this treaty clarifies (7 decades after Hague IV), "It is prohibited to ORDER that there shall be no survivors, to THREATEN an adversary therewith or to CONDUCT hostilities on this basis" (pic 2). So, 3 specific verbs to highlight + 1 condition. No ordering, threatening, or conducting (verbs) armed hostilities under condition(s) of NO SURVIVORS. Now, reach all the way back in your memory - like 2 minutes ago - when you read actual text of Hegseth's remarks. Do you genuinely believe SECWAR just ordered or threatened there will be no survivors, even if an enemy IRGC member tries to surrender - or that we are now as a result conducting hostilities on that basis? Be honest. Of course not. And no one in the military is going to hear/read his remarks and think, "SECWAR just ordered me to take no prisoners." Seriously. Moving on from AP I, art. 8(2)(b)(xii) of Rome Statute essentially copies text of Hague IV, art. 23(d) to make "declaring no quarter will be given" a war crime (not pictured). BUT the elements of crimes follows AP I (pic 3), as does DoD Law of War Manual (pic 4). Yes, actual no quarter ORDERS do violate LOAC. Just the order alone is a war crime. But max pressure political rhetoric is not the same as an ORDER "that there shall be no survivors." Which means Sec Hegseth's comments are neither LOAC violation nor war crime. Which also means Rep Vindman is full of 💩.

This is why Democrats and fake Republicans are fighting so hard against the SAVE Act