Generational Dynamics Forum - New Site

https://abc7ny.com/post/judge-declares- ... /18307326/

Judge declares mistrial in corruption case against Linda Sun, former aide to Gov. Hochul

BROOKLYN, New York (WABC) -- A federal judge in Brooklyn declared a mistrial in the corruption case against Linda Sun, a former aide to governors Kathy Hochul and Andrew Cuomo charged with illegally serving as an agent of China.

U.S. District Judge Brian Cogan declared a mistrial after the jury sent a note saying, "Your honor, after extensive deliberations and re-deliberations the jury remains unable to reach a unanimous verdict. The jurors positions are firmly held."

Judge Cogan called in the jury and asked the foreman whether jurors had reached a decision on any count. The foreman replied that they were deadlocked on all 19 counts.

Prosecutor Alexander Solomon told the judge that the government wants to retry the case "as soon as possible." A status conference is scheduled for January 26.

The government called 41 witnesses; the defense called eight witnesses, and the government called one rebuttal witness.

Deliberations began on Friday, December 12.

Federal prosecutors accused Sun of acting to benefit China. They said, in one instance, she blocked representatives of the Taiwanese government from meeting with high-ranking New York State government officials, including the governor and forged Governor Hochul's signature on letters to invite Chinese government officials to visit New York.

"This is a case about betrayal," prosecutor Amanda Shami said at the outset of the trial. "Public servants are meant to serve the public, not themselves, but that is exactly what Linda Sun did. Her loyalty was for sale, and the Chinese government, who wanted to influence the New York State government, was willing to pay Sun to carry out their bidding."

Defense attorney Jarrod Schaeffer called the case "nonsense."

"In plain English, the government is accusing Linda of failing to file paperwork that says she was doing China's bidding," Schaeffer said. "Linda never had to register as a foreign agent because she wasn't one."

tim wrote: Thu Dec 18, 2025 9:57 am Whenever I hear the Christmas song "Do you Hear What I Hear?" I can't help but think of the original intent from the writer. It makes me think of the perspective of the WWII generation and how they saw a third World War wherever they looked - the Cold War, Korea, Vietnam.

They are gone now and we have nobody left with personal memories of total war.

I wonder what the WWII generation would think of the events happening in the world today.

Not so sure. Nukes were invented at the end of WW II. Since then, we are deliberately stopping short of total war. I see this as a result of greed. Power can't be increased any more by total war. Absolute control of ashes isn't so hot. Thus, even shooting wars are limited to one area... Korea, Vietnam, the Middle East, Ukraine.

Today? Ukraine is a war of greed. Gaza is a war of prejudice, where Israel has a thing about Arabs. I'd like to think that in a Crisis people learn that a particular flavor of conflict is considered ugly and the cultures involved squish that form of conflict. Optimistic, I know. It is easy to see Russia leaning not to try military expansion. I am somewhat less optimistic about the Arabs and Jews forgetting prejudice.

tim wrote: Thu Dec 18, 2025 9:57 amMerry Christmas everyone, “Pray for peace, people everywhere"

Amen.

I wonder what the WWII generation would think of the events happening in the world today.

Both of my granddaughters contributed during the War.
When Clinton had his sex scandal in the White House it was considered a big deal. He was an Epstein client even then apparently. A captured and controlled President but nobody knew anything about that. Probably wouldn't have believed it. Now that we know what's been going on, it's so much closer to social acceptability. They've all been part of something that a normal person simply can't fathom. Like the scamdemic, most people simply won't allow themselves to believe the evidence. Because it's too uncomfortable.

Whenever I hear the Christmas song "Do you Hear What I Hear?" I can't help but think of the original intent from the writer. It makes me think of the perspective of the WWII generation and how they saw a third World War wherever they looked - the Cold War, Korea, Vietnam.

They are gone now and we have nobody left with personal memories of total war.

I wonder what the WWII generation would think of the events happening in the world today.

Merry Christmas everyone, “Pray for peace, people everywhere"

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm ... story.html

A pianist whose forte was popular music, Baker usually wrote the lyrics and Regney composed the music for their collaborations. But the roles were reversed for the Christmas tune they wrote in October 1962 during the Cuban missile crisis, when the U.S. and Soviet Union were locked in a confrontation over the Soviets’ placement of ballistic missiles in Cuba.

Inspired by the sight of infants in strollers on the streets of New York City, Regney opened the song with the words, “Said the night wind to the little lamb, ‘Do you see what I see?’ ” and included the line, “Pray for peace, people everywhere.”

“Noel wrote a beautiful song,” Baker told an interviewer years later, “and I wrote the music. We couldn’t sing it, though. . . . Our little song broke us up. You must realize there was a threat of nuclear war at the time.”

The song was first recorded by the Harry Simeone Chorale and sold more than a quarter-million copies upon its release just after Thanksgiving 1962. The next year Bing Crosby made it an international hit. The song has been recorded hundreds of times since then in nearly every conceivable musical style.

Guest wrote: Fri Dec 12, 2025 11:39 pm On the hypersonic missile problem. I have seen videos of them in action and I don't think we have anything land based that can stop them or on surface ships. I was thinking of something we could use to counter the Chinese in battle even if they have hypersonic missiles and I thought about using submarines and sub drones. they would be much harder to target and and could also bring a lot of power to bare in a battle against China. What do you guys think of this idea?

My first response would be that there's probably plenty of ways we could be improving. Our EXISTENTIAL battles are in the sea because they're not on our homeland.
But apparently land battle is popular and perhaps gets too much money. I've seen that the Navy actually might be underfunded. AND that our ship building ability is 1/250 in favor of the PRC. No wonder the rapid withdrawal...

By the way, the last 2 posts were by me Thinker, for some reason they are showing up as "guest". Might be something with the website or most likely something I did wrong.

On the hypersonic missile problem. I have seen videos of them in action and I don't think we have anything land based that can stop them or on surface ships. I was thinking of something we could use to counter the Chinese in battle even if they have hypersonic missiles and I thought about using submarines and sub drones. they would be much harder to target and and could also bring a lot of power to bare in a battle against China. What do you guys think of this idea?

on Nick Fuentes, Trevor says he doesn't care about what legitimate points he has. This a stunning lack of understanding on this subject. You guys think Nick is the disease when he is actually the symptom. Trevor talks about misogyny as if men outside of his scope or the scope of most on this forum care about that. I am a sexist, and a proud one at that. I am not a misogynist as that is someone who actually hates women and I actually love women, they are a lot of fun when they are not being insufferable. What makes me a sexist is that I actually understand women and how they think and what drives them. A misogynist may think that you can understand women or you can love them but you can't do both. I being a sexist understand that you actually can understand women and also love them. Before anyone calls me a butthurt incel who can't get women as is usually the insult thrown at any man who thinks that women are not perfect beings that can't do any wrong, I have never had a problem getting women and the girlfriends and wives that I have had have been high value smokin hot babes, the kind of women that everyone notices when they walk into a room. One of the reasons I have been able to do this even when I have been so broke that I was almost homeless is because I understand women and for example I do not let them get away with any BS. I am not a Nick Fuentes fan boy but I understand his appeal. Meanwhile Nicks critics are insulting him and his supporters with useless things like calling them Nazis, racists, antisemites, misogynists and other useless terms that all the people in their dinner parties think are so effective but everyone else is just laughing their asses off at them.
Here is a much better strategy for countering people like Nick. How about we listen to the regular everyday men and women of this country. How about we deport every single illegal and stop all immigration into the US for 10 to 15 years so that regular people don't have their wages destroyed by cheap illegal labor, their taxes stop being spent on illegals , crime by illegals can be stopped and give time for the legal immigrants to assimilate into American culture. And this also means no more H1B visas or other work visas. Guess what India does, they give money to H1b visa winners to use to buy houses in this country, that along with mortgage programs that our government allows them to use makes it difficult for regular Americans to buy houses. Speaking of houses, how about we stop hedge funds and large corporations from buying homes. They outcompete regular people for these homes and then turn around and rent the homes to the same people that they just beat in the buying game. These and other things that should be done are never done because the moment anyone dares to suggest anything that might hurt the large corporations or the thieves in both political powers the system starts calling them Nazis, communists , racist and other retarded names that have lost their bite.

This would include the USN and probably the Japanese Navy as well.

They've got a smoldering ember of hatred for the Japanese. Events of the past weeks have shown a flaring up. Taiwan is just a choke point and popular topic of discussion.
Newly updated defense priorities show that a controlling our own hemisphere is the best path forward for national survival. Globalists would love to make their fortunes whilst simultaneously destroying our nation states.
They will lead us to our deaths and we'll be tricked into thinking that we're doing something "good". How do we know this will happen? Because it's happened every time like this. Some may think consider themselves wiser than a Major General of the Marines, but his counsel spoke of ALL wars as being part of the racket.

Trevor wrote: Sun Dec 07, 2025 6:02 pm This doesn't necessarily have to play out the way the two previous world wars did. It'd depend on the circumstances. If China launches a Pearl-Harbor style attack, then yes, we'd be out for blood with China falling into nationalistic fervor.

Trevor wrote: Sun Dec 07, 2025 6:02 pm If things break out in the South China Sea over miscalculation, rather than a mass assault that galvinzes both sides, our public isn't likely to have much enthusiasm for the war. Yes, we'd mobilize and build up to some degree, but we're spending far more on a social safety net than was the case in 1940 and certainly 1914. Unless the conflict is seen as a matter of survival, people won't tolerate it being dismantled, and to fight a total war, this would be a necessity. Europe's found mobilization impossible for this reason and if we fight China for unclear reasons... people might sign up to fight regardless because they have no other way to support themselves, but this is a poor long-term motivation. This is also a dynamic that could lead to civil war.

If Japan had started their attacks in the Pacific by just going after the Dutch East Indies and Malaya/Singapore, there would indeed have been little enthusiasm in the US for WW2. You could maybe add the Philippines to the list, and I am not sure if it would have made a big difference, though Americans would have died as a result. But then we grabbed the Philippines from the Spanish less than 50 years earlier.

The thing is that in the vast majority of cases, wars are started using military logic, not a more sensible reading of the big picture. So the Japanese felt that they needed to secure the Philippines to secure their supply lines to the oil they needed from Java/Brunei/Borneo, and that they couldn't secure the Philippines if the USN was intact to make a counter-stroke.

I believe the Chinese will also fall prey to just focusing on military logic as they plan to attack/invade Taiwan. They most probably will feel that they need to eliminate as many military assets as possible that could come to Taiwan's aid. This would include the USN and probably the Japanese Navy as well. On top of that, they will activate their sleeper cells in the US to conduct infrastructure attacks on the US homeland, in order to cause us to have to focus on the home front. They will attack the electrical grid, important bridges, and probably the water supplies for major cities.

But, agreeing with your point, if they were to just go after Taiwan, and Taiwan only, any kind of war enthusiasm on our part would be pretty small.

We will shortly see which option they do with.