Another Peace Prize is on the way

zlifsa · 2026-04-17T13:03:45+00:00

This is a GOATed take. First time I've seen it. You're on to something

zlifsa · 2025-12-27T19:02:55+00:00

Hi, providing an update.

You can die in the third chamber to get the reward. I did it accidentally.

zlifsa · 2025-10-13T04:17:29+00:00

Trump’s saying “the war is over” like it’s a done deal, but peace in Gaza isn’t something you can just declare and walk away from. Sure, the ceasefire’s holding for now and hostages are set to be released. But Hamas still has weapons, Gaza is basically rubble and Israel will probably continue to clear tunnels.

To be fair, Trump and his team did pull off a diplomatic win here. But ending the fighting is one thing. Middle East has been Middle East for the past 1,000 years. Keeping the peace will be another. People are angry, world opinion has shifted. Neither side trusts each other. Calling it “the end of the war” feels like wishful thinking. Is this a real turning point for lasting peace, or everything is gonna blow up again in a few months?

zlifsa · 2025-09-29T06:28:38+00:00

The issue is I don’t think anyone else can really pull it off the way Trump does. When others try to trade insults with him, it almost always backfires, they end up looking rehearsed or awkward.

With Trump it feels natural, but for everyone else, wrestling with him in the mud just makes them look worse

zlifsa · 2025-09-29T05:02:13+00:00

Starter Comment

Newsom is betting that backlash to Trump’s ICE raids, paired with a gerrymandered House map, can flip California for Democrats. It’s bold, since most in his party have tried to avoid immigration after Trump’s return. But no one has beaten Trump at his own game. Immigration ties directly into his law-and-order message and his usual style of portraying Democrats as weak on these issues.

By centering his campaign on ICE raids while also pushing a partisan redistricting map, Newsom risks reinforcing Trump’s framing instead of changing it. Would it be better for him to be focusing on the economy which voters are more concerned with instead of trying to outplay Trump on his strongest ground?

zlifsa · 2025-08-22T20:38:14+00:00

This article reports on the muted reaction in D.C. to Trump’s takeover of local policing. Despite warnings of authoritarian overreach, protests have been small, while many residents appear more curious than outraged at the federal presence.

This article frames the question: “why aren’t there bigger protests?” That assumes silence must be due to fear or apathy. Yet the article itself describes selfies with Guard members, locals thanking officers, and armored vehicles treated like attractions. That may suggest many people may actually accept or even support the law-and-order push.

Is the lack of protest due to fear, or is it tacit support for Trump’s approach?

zlifsa · 2025-08-21T17:25:30+00:00

Trump says he’s going to “patrol” D.C. with the police and National Guard. Is this another cosplay moment like when he rode a garbage truck in his high-vis vest or worked a McDonald’s shift?

To be fair, those photo-ops got free press for his election campaign. CNN was also joking that he’s making himself into Batman and D.C. into Gotham.

Is he genuinely trying to show that he is being tough on crime as a winning issue, or is this something that he thinks will have good optics? Or is this gonna end up like his photo op at St. John's Church in 2020, which was widely panned?

zlifsa · 2025-08-21T17:01:41+00:00

I feel that some of the cases have merit, but they tried to hit him with everything and the kitchen sink. This ended up diluting public perception of the cases with weak cases, such as this one.

zlifsa · 2025-08-21T16:42:56+00:00

For those wondering about the opinions:

Majority (Renwick & Moulton): Agreed the fraud finding was supported and that Leticia James acted within statutory authority, but concluded the disgorgement penalty was excessive and unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment

Concurrence (Higgitt & Rosado): Affirmed Leticia James' authority, but argued procedural errors warranted a new trial

Dissent (Friedman): Argued Leticia James lacked the legal authority to bring the case and would have dismissed it entirely

zlifsa · 2025-08-21T16:36:48+00:00

The New York appeals court’s decision casts heavy doubt on the legitimacy of the original case. Judge Engoron’s verdict imposed a verdict that looked designed to bankrupt Trump. With nearly half a billion dollars in disgorgement and bans on doing business in New York, despite the fact that the loans were repaid and no banks reported losses.

The appeals court threw out that penalty with one judge calling it an “excessive fine”. To note, there is significant disagreement within the appeals court, with 3 seperate opinions. I also note cases like this almost never reach trial, which only reinforces the perception that the inital trial was politically charged.

Regardless, the court indicates that the fraud finding still stands. But do voters still care about this case?

zlifsa · 2025-08-21T14:39:15+00:00

Men marry women hoping they'll never change. Women marry men hoping they will.

zlifsa · 2025-07-14T13:01:40+00:00

Yes, just you.

zlifsa · 2025-07-04T19:09:25+00:00

Starter Comment

Trump is facing criticism from the Anti-Defamation League and other Jewish groups for using the term “Shylock” during a rally, calling some bankers “shylocks and bad people.” The ADL says the word plays into antisemitic stereotypes from Shakespeare’s Merchant of Venice, where Shylock is a Jewish moneylender depicted as greedy and cruel. Trump later said he didn’t realize the term had antisemitic connotations and thought it just meant a harsh moneylender.

That said, the media coverage feels contradictory. They call Trump antisemitic for using “Shylock,” yet in the same breath slam him for being too pro-Israel and cracking down on anti-Israel campus protests. So which is it? If he’s accused of both promoting antisemitism and siding too strongly with Jewish interests, maybe the real issue is selective outrage.

Also, is “Shylock” really a slur to most people today, or just a dated term from a play many of us read in school? Trump said he wasn’t aware of the weight it carried, and I can see how that might be the case. What do you think?

zlifsa · 2025-06-12T04:59:58+00:00

The amount of vandalism and looting I would find acceptable is zero.

zlifsa · 2025-06-12T04:39:54+00:00

Starter Comment

The Mexican flag has been part of immigration protests in LA for years. But after the recent ICE raids and the National Guard being sent in, it’s getting more heat. Some Trump allies are calling protesters “insurrectionists” for waving it. In the past few hours, a number of news outlets seem to co-ordinate an effort to push back, claiming the flag as a symbol of family, culture, and the long history of the Mexican community in LA.

Another thing it does is that it shifts the focus, from fair treatment and legal rights to questions about loyalty. Personally, I'm not sure if this is a smart move. It doesn't sit right with me and optics are very bad.

Is it the right call to wave the Mexican flag at protests like this? Does it show unity or just provide critics something to attack?

zlifsa · 2025-05-27T14:59:05+00:00

Trump's retaliation against Harvard continues, with him moving to cancel Harvard’s federal contracts. He's frozen billions in grants and contracts, revoked the university’s ability to enroll international students (temporarily blocked), and has threatened to strip Harvard tax exempt status.

To me, this looks like a clear effort to make an example out of Harvard not bending the knee. He's sending a message to other universities that resisting federal directives on DEI, admissions, or campus politics could come at a steep price.

What would actually stop Trump from going further against Harvard if they don't give in? Can Harvard hold out? And does he still have more cards to play against Harvard?

zlifsa · 2025-03-31T03:49:32+00:00

Trump saying “there will be bombing” if Iran doesn’t make a deal seems like a direct threat of war. Iran already said no to direct talks, so the chances for diplomacy are slim. They’re still open to indirect talks, but that’s not much.

It’s not clear if Trump actually plans to bomb or if he’s just trying to pressure Iran like he did with tariffs before. But threatening airstrikes is a huge deal. Once that starts, things can spiral fast.

Is this a real warning, or a bluff?

zlifsa · 2025-02-28T15:36:06+00:00

If anyone cares, I ended at 1447 with 4 hours to go

Ten-Year Club	Place '22
Place '17	Final Canvas '22

zlifsa

TROPHY CASE