Israel attacks Iran: Overnight, Israeli forces attacked near Isfahan, Iran, in retribution for the barrage of Iranian drones and missiles that hit Israel about a week ago.
This round of fighting began with an Israeli attack in Syria on April 1 that hit an Iranian consular compound and killed three senior commanders and four officers reportedly responsible for dictating Iran’s military strategy. But Iran and Israel have long been engaged in a shadow war; the recent strikes do nothing but bring tensions into the open.
Iranian air defense systems reportedly intercepted most of the drones. Some flights over Iranian airspace were diverted, while others were cancelled. The damage was minimal.
Isfahan is where many of Iran’s nuclear sites are located, as well as the uranium enrichment program needed to develop nuclear capabilities. Some of the attacks appeared designed to target a major military base in the area; but just as Iran’s attack just damaged Israel, the same seems to be true here too.
Opinion was divided within Israel. Some launched into saber strikes, while others said the attack looked “weak.”
“Iran must understand that when it acts against us, we have the ability to strike at any time and we can cause serious damage,” Eyal Hulata, a former national security adviser, told Galei Tzahal (Army Radio). “We have a highly capable Air Force and the United States is on our side.”
Iranian officials also expressed mixed views. Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi had warned that “the smallest act of aggression” on his nation’s soil would provoke a massive response and that “nothing would be left of the Zionist regime.” But many noted that Iran’s attack on Israel – as well as the broad warning given – did not appear to have been designed to cause much damage. In other words: Both nations have seen escalation, yes, but they have also shown some restraint and justified trepidation, despite the contrary posture.
Biden’s predicament: “Democratic donors have covered more than $1 million in legal fees racked up by lawyers representing President Joe Biden in a yearlong legal investigation into his handling of classified documents,” the Associated Press reports. “The use of party funds to cover Biden’s legal bills is not unprecedented and within the bounds of campaign finance law, but it could tarnish Biden’s ability to continue to hammer former President Donald Trump for the his much broader use of donor funds to cover his legal bills.”
Of course, this is unlikely to actually happen because that would require an adversarial mainstream media that is interested in actually holding Biden accountable for his duplicity.
“Every time you donate to the campaign, we’ll talk directly to voters… we’re not spending money on legal bills or selling gold sneakers,” She said Rufus Gifford, Biden’s campaign finance chairman, on MSNBC earlier this month, in a quote he was certainly proud of. It turns out that this is simply false!
Scenes from New York: At JFK Airport, a regular flight from San Juan, Port Rico, arrives at a seemingly telling time: about 15 minutes after midnight, meanwhile, tax lawyers tell stories of clients idling in their luxury SUVs near the New Jersey entrance to the George Washington Bridge just before midnight. , waiting for the clock to turn before crossing the state line into New York.”
In the wonderful world of rich people who make sure their residency histories line up in case they get verified, courtesy of Bloomberg. Each of these people? Heroes, in my book.
QUICK SHOTS
- The appeal published a database of prison commissary prices. Some items available for purchase by inmates are marked up by up to 600%.
- Yesterday, 108 Columbia students were arrested after the school called police to try to empty a 50-tent encampment that had been set up, called the “Gaza Solidarity Camp.” Video footage here.
- Non-iPhone users are apparently being excluded from group chats. Don’t worry, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) is coming to the rescue. Her plan? Smashing Apple.
- Challenges related to collecting data on the attendance of religious services over time, from Marginal revolution.
- Interesting case study on the use of artificial intelligence in documentaries:
If this were true, and it appears to be, this would be a serious ethical violation.
I say this as someone in favor of using effects, including artificial intelligence, in documentaries.
Many elements of the documentary, as in all films, operate at the viewer’s subconscious level. These items should generate a… https://t.co/DdsNlu6u19
— Zach Weissmueller (@TheAbridgedZach) April 19, 2024