John Mearsheimer hits a foul ball on Trump and Russia; The Dissident gets some things right

NOTE: I have expanded and reframed this piece, including talking about all of the "sides" on Russia-Ukraine issues, at Substack. 

Note 2: Both here and at Substack, before posting that, I forgot to check Simplicius. Sadly, but not surprisingly, he, unlike the Dissident and people like me, ignores that Trump wants to establish an American imperium, just like the Nat-Sec Nutsacks™. It's a different one, and a nakedly transactional one, but it's still an American imperium. Simplicius may, or may not, have good battlefield analysis, but on the geopolitics of Russia-Ukraine, he seems content to, if not outrightly desireous of, nothing other than triangulating off Trump.

Yes, John Mearsheimer, in his latest, as of Friday, interview with Napolitano, is right about NATO expansion and Ukraine.

He’s half-right about EU expansion, at best, since the US is not a member of the EU and has conflicts with it, and will again the next four years over agriculture and other items.  

And, yes, the Nat-Sec Nutsacks™ were and are indeed wrong, and so is Zelensky for playing to them. Speaking of? Zelensky is of course wrong to have cancelled Ukraine's presidential election. Hold the vote in the part of the country you still possess. (And, per a commenter on Substack? Zelensky's never "undeclared" martial law and asked the Rada to confirm that. When you do that, you can indeed still hold an election. Whether it's wise to do so, or not, is another issue, including whether doing this, like actually trying to enforce Minsk, would put a price on his head. That said, otherwise? We in America held a presidential election in 1864 despite Southern states still in rebellion; also, Lincoln never considered a nationwide suspension of habeus corpus and nationwide declaration of martial law earlier in the war, Sept. 25, 1862 as suspending elections. Later, upon the Habeas Corpus Suspension Act of 1863, he did both the habeas suspension and martial law declaration in Kentucky on July 4, 1864; the presidential and lesser elections were still contested in Kentucky that fall. Also, we held midterm elections in 1814, shortly after the British burned Washington and while the country faced other invasion threats. Per Wiki, with no uniform election date then, elections ran from April 26, 1814 to August 10, 1815. Eight states were between Aug. 29 and Oct. 11, 1814. Finally, more than once, and most recently this weekend, Zelensky has promised to resign — with new elections following — in exchange for Ukraine getting into NATO.)

He’s all wet for not mentioning Trump’s shakedown of Zelensky even though he has a clip embedded in his video of Trump talking about the shakedown. Neocon fellow traveler Bret Stephens got that right.

If Roosevelt had told Churchill to sue for peace on any terms with Adolf Hitler and to fork over Britain’s coal reserves to the United States in exchange for no American security guarantees, it might have approximated what Trump did to Zelensky. Whatever one might say about how Zelensky played his cards poorly — either by failing to behave with the degree of all-fours sycophancy that Trump demands or to maintain his composure in the face of JD Vance’s disingenuous provocations — this was a day of American infamy.

I don't totally agree with the framing; FDR hadn't been egging Churchill on, for example. But, Bret's framing isn't all wrong, and it's better than Mearsheimer simply ignoring this issue.

And, right as of the moment John’s Substack went live, he was behind the curve because Zelensky just told Trump and Vance to fuck off.  More here.

It's typical Trump transactionalism, that he's done for 50 years, since his 1970s Mob dealings in his early construction projects. It, to riff on a 2020 hashtag on Shitter, and an old Trump book, is "The Art of the Steal."

Mondoweiss gets it totally right here, in talking about Trump and direct negotiations with Hamas, which have some in Israel worried.

Donald Trump is very difficult to predict. His mercurial, transactional, and self-centered approach to policy is often ill-defined and is subject to change on a whim as he fancies himself more king than president.

Well put. If only Mearsheimer would put that on an equal footing with his desire to own the neocons.

Speaking of Dum Fuqs? Beyond both Trump and Zelensky being headstrong, it looks like Bagger Vance was a key fuck-up yesterday. And, no, Zelensky didn't campaign for Harris. Per Bagger Vance flapping his mouth, he wants Zelensky, under the guise of "accept(ing) there are disagreement" to "accept a cave-in." I mean, the WSJ editorial board, in an official editorial, said Vance massively screwed the pooch.

Finally, no, John, not all of Russia is Caesaropapist Orthodox worshipers with traditional values, no more than the US is. Look at all of Pussy Riot’s fandom. Gack. Do you really believe that? If so, you may be a great geopolitical strategerist, but a cultural sociologist you are not.

It doesn't make Trump right, contra either you or Noam Chomsky. God, what a Dum Fuq he was, and even more than Mearsheimer, in a position and of a mindset to know better. I still have no idea why Chomsky thought that. With Mearsheimer, I do. It's his idea of "owning the neocons."

I'm with The Dissident. This is clearly a both sides at fault issue. Zelensky has played to the Nat-Sec Nutsacks™ but at the same time, Trump did rip off the mask of empire. (Actually, he did that with the rare earth minerals etc. shakedown itself; this was a doubling down on that.) 

The Dissident is also right on the neo-Nazis in Ukraine putting Zelensky in a bind. If he did accept this, per the likes of Ivan Katchanovski, he'd be a walking dead man without something like UN peacekeepers.

The background to all this? The person to blame more than anybody else is Uncle Joe Stalin as Lenin's Commissar of Nationalities. No, really.

And, not a Dum Fuq but a Cock Whore? I thought Bret Baier's post-explosion interview of Zelensky would be better than him asking if he should apologize to Trump.

A lesser Dum Fuq? Danny Davis, who hosted Mearsheimer Friday afternoon. Their exchange starting here, followed by a clip of Zelensky talking to either the people of Ukraine or its government a day or two before coming here, reads things into what Zelensky said, at least then.

Then there's Mearsheimer taking off his own mask:

"What Trump wants is what's best for Ukraine."

WHAT? As I commented on his YouTube:

A real non neocon president who's ALSO not a shakedown artist wouldn't be offering Zelensky a take it or leave it holdup at gunpoint. As The Dissident said on Substack, Trump is just practicing a new version of the American Empire, different angles of play. And if you, and Danny Davis, Napolitano and others refuse to accept THAT, and to talk about THAT, you're part of the problem yourselves.

And, I stopped watching at that point. (That comment is at about the 11-minute mark.)

If we take Mearsheimer as a third side, there's at least four sides on the Russia-Ukraine issue. Actually, there's at least five. 

1. Nat-Sec Nutsacks™ shading into neocons

2. Zelensky, et al, who probably still represents a plurality of Ukrainians vis a vis the shakedown, without a lot of concrete guarantees, being offered for peace

3. Trump and his sheeple. (On Substack, I thought that would cut more than "MAGAts")

4. Mearsheimer-types who, while not Trumpian sheeple, have as their ultimate desire on this issue the desire of owning the neocons to the point that they can't condemn Trump. (A LOT of people on his YouTube said, too bad he and Bagger Vance won't talk to Bibi that way. Mearsheimer wishes that were so, and the Trumpian sheeple do not.)

So, I'm on the same side as, say, Ivan Katchanovski.

That said, about everybody of all stripes are right is that this meeting shouldn't have happened at this time in general and certainly not in public. Also, Zelensky should have brought an interpreter.

Update: It's interesting that Trump's advisors have spent the 48 hours since the meeting in massive spinning. Presuming the Guardian, AP, Beeb, NYT etc. asked him and them for comment, Zelensky and advisors are presumbly, albeit a bit too late, maintaining radio silence.

The Resistance 2.0's "buy nothing" is supposed to do what?

First of all, the likes of Adbusters was promoting a "Buy Nothing Day," on Black Friday, the day after US Thanksgiving Day, 25 or more years ago. So, what the "24 hour economic blackout" today from this People's Union USA will accomplish, I don't know. And, what do you do after the 24 hours is up? And, do you address other issues besides people buying too much shit? And, this John Schwartz, interviewed here, know about this? Does he know any of this past history?

But, The Resistance™ wants to resist something.

It also wants to grift, or John Schwartz does.

Look at this merch page! More than $15 for a coffee mug. Nearly $30 for a T-shirt. WOW.

And? I clicked one of the T-shirts. I then clicked "Product Details."

The product details did NOT include company of manufacture. If you can't guarantee American-made, as hard as it might be to get that, per "Making It in America," then aren't you at least somewhat part of the problem, not part of the solution?

Update, March 5?

The People's Union, or "People's" Union until he has more transparency, is doing more grifting:

Starting in the second week of March, I will be releasing exclusive member only video blogs right here on The People’s Union USA website! These will be powerful, inspiring, and detailed video messages covering:

• How we can organize more effectively
  

• Upcoming events & strategic actions
  

• Updates on the movement, website, and progress
  

• Real discussions on where we go from here
  

This is just the beginning of something bigger. Together, we are building a movement that cannot be ignored. Stay tuned, stay engaged, and let’s keep making history.

And, how much will a membership cost? I will give Schwartz credit on the FAQ page for talking about legal organizational issues and also mentioning further boycotts.

On the T-shirts, he says he has a new maker, but I presume that only means for the screen printing and it's still made in China or wherever actual shirts.

That said, re Adbusters? They're generally butthurt graphic artists who think they should be working for slick fashion magazines in New York. They were the grifters who called for Occupy Wall Street, while engaging in that butt-hurt fashionista mindset, straight from Kalle Lasn himself.

OWS itself? 

• Run by leadership, despite their lies;
• Young, White, overeducated and probably latte-sippers;
• Sellouts to banksters. 

People selling $30 T-shirts might be a junior division of the same general idea. 

And also? Schwartz has no board of directors, advisors, or anybody else on his "about" page.

Hard pass, dude. 

And, per an Axios story about the org (about Schwartz, really, per above), it's got no political affiliation. Oh, you do, even if you don't want to admit it. Or, it will be pinned on you. So, is he that naive? Or is this part of his branding to go with the grifting? I'll take option 2.

Auntie Tranny Dannie vs Tea-Sipper Libruls

Kuffner's type of people are why Democraps are still behind the curve on culture war battles. Kuff's friend "Ginger in Dallas" does a weekly blog spot for Kuff. Last week, she had this to say at the end:

Last, but not least, a story that made me laugh: somebody put up stickers in the stalls at DFW about so-called electronic genital verification by our only Lt. Governor, Dan Patrick, notorious worrier about trans folks. Reddit has a photo. The phone number to call on the sticker is Dan Patrick’s office. This is not a nice prank, but Dan Patrick’s war on trans kids isn’t nice either.

Setting aside the fact that I don't know — and that Dan Patrick aka Danny Goeb and Ginger both don't and won't make clear — whether we're talking about transgender or transsexual kids, in part because both of the two sides of a non-twosider issue have a vested interest in obscuring fuzzing that, that's why Democrats are behind the curve on the culture wars battle. "This is not a nice prank" is such a boo-hoo, pinky lifted from cup, Libruls from Tea-Sipper Land statement.

Back to the issue at real hand. This non-twosider knows sex is not gender — as does the Biden-era National Institutes of Health — and on would-be sexually transitioning juveniles, knows what the Mayo Clinic says. More here. I doubt Ginger does. 

Note: This is not to say that both transgender and transsexual people don't have certain legal and civil rights. They do. That said, they may not always be the same.

Edit: I'm not alone by any means. Read the thoughts of dual-PhD Massimo Pigliucci (evolutionary biology and philosophy) on this issue, on Part 1 and Part 2 of his Substack.

Per Part 1, I noted:

Big kudos to Massimo for wading into this issue — JUST biological sex, as an “eliminative” position on this issue leads to other issues, like sex-gender entanglement, and that’s the right phraseology as I see it. On the issue of how sex is not gender, I’m very much in agreement with the likes of him and the late Frans de Waal. I’m also in agreement with him that this does not preclude civil or legal rights for transgendering or transsexual individuals. (I presume Massimo separates the two.)

With a follow-up:

Indeed. And, on this issue, I’ve read what the Mayo Clinic says about when Lupron and generic equivalent is indicated AND contraindicated for minors, and other issues. Like possible overuse of antidepressants (cue old friend John Horgan!), we have real medical issues involved. On the political side, as a third-party voter, I’ve seen this cause even more turmoil in the Green Party than with Democrats.

There's that.

Part 2 has some philosophers doubling down on wrongness. On it, I noted:

Cloning does NOT eliminate biological sex! Per Massimo, philosophers who think or claim it does need to stop writing about evolutionary biology. (I’ve seen New Mexico whiptails and other lizards that — at TIMES — reproduce clonally. It’s a selective, evolutionary driven reproductive strategy that, as i know Massimo knows, isn’t always used.)

Indeed. (Cloning, while more commonly used either in the laboratory or to reference plants, is an acceptable definition for "asexual reproduction." On the "selective" issue? Within the various classes of animals, it's only in reptiles, and I presume, amphibians, and birds.)

Massimo deals further with that, in detail of his Part 2:

Last time we began a discussion of a recent paper in the philosophy of biology, authored by Aja Watkins and Marina DiMarco, suggesting that it would be better for biologists to do away with the notion of sex.

Part of their argument was that there are exceptions in the biological world, species for which the concept of sex seems problematic. For instance: “In some shark species, many reptiles, and some birds, egg-producing individuals can reproduce asexually via parthenogenesis. New Mexico whiptail lizards (Aspidoscelis neomexicanus) now only reproduce this way; there are no remaining ‘males.’” (p. 5)

The implication seems to be that these cases are somehow problematic for the gametic view of sex. They aren’t. There are species of birds who have lost the ability to fly (e.g., penguins), which doesn’t negate the broad generalization that birds, usually, are flying vertebrates. Again, in biology exceptions are understood from an evolutionary perspective, within general frameworks provided by concepts like “sex,” “species,” “flying vertebrates,” and so forth.

It paywalls shortly after that, but all of Part 1 is open to the public. 

The idea is that we should take an "eliminative" view of what sex is, and Massimo is showing in detail that's wrong.

Texas Progressives talk measles, Southwest, more

SocraticGadfly talked about the layoffs at Southwest.

Off the Kuff had an interview with two founding members of the Houston Progressive Caucus.

The measles outbreak in far west Texas continues to spread and may be getting undercounted. That said, per the Skeptical Raptor, no, vaccinated adults don't need a booster.

Robert Roberson has officially filed a new appeal.

Still unbelievable that, soon, there will be no Nieman Marcus in downtown Dallas.

I do not think that office buildings outside of downtown corridors (that's the key) should be allowed to convert to apartments without going through rezoning. You're wrong, Hughes.

Texas' abortion ban has caused a surge in sepsis.

Could renewable energy in Tex-ass be in danger since state Senatecritter Lois Kolkhorst (R-Cockwhore, thanks Brains) reintroduces a bill requiring permitting that failed in the House two years ago? Russell Gold looks at that and related.

Texas home insurance premium costs look to more and more mirror California's and the Lege doesn't have and isn't proposing answers.

Jim Davis' first move as interim UT head could be the start of a meataxe.

KFC is moving from Kentucky to Plano.

The Observer busts ICE's assistant chief counsel as a white supremacist.

Charles Perry's vision for Texas' water future is underpriced vs reality, anti-environmentalist and in denial of the realities of climate change. I'm surprised he talked to the Observer and saddened the Observer didn't push him more.

Facebook stands to make money off of removing fact checking; even more, so do liars.

Neil at the Houston Democracy Project went to the well-attended and strongly-organized President’s Day 50501 protest against our national move towards autocratic government. We must show up for ourselves. 

Your Local Epidemiologist adds up the costs of "efficiency". 

Bayou City Sludge keeps us updated on Bitcoin, woke insurance companies, and (sigh) Sid Miller.  

Raise Your Hand Texas stumps for fully funded pre-K. 

In the Pink Texas goes full rom-com in trying to understand the Trump/Elon dynamic.

Where the Texas Lege is on vouchers and related

In Lege news, the House's proposed version of school vouchers has some differences with the Senate's already-passed bills, including tying voucher funding explicitly to public school funding levels. 

Under HB 3, most participating students would receive an amount equal to 85% of what public schools get for each student through state and local funding. That feature is a key difference from the Senate plan, which would provide a set amount of $10,000 to most participating students.

Under the assumption that some sort of voucher bill will pass, I think this is not only good fiscal stewardship but smart management in general. The Senate will officially wear the "anti-public schools" collar if it rejects this. Odds that happens, though? I would still put it at 50-50.

That said, state Rep. Brad Buckley, who authored the House's vouchers bill, could have made the increase in aid to public schools more than the $200 per student he actually did. That's just 3 percent, far below total inflation of the past two years and compounded by the old level itself being inadequate.

This:

Rep. James Talarico of Austin, who is leading House Democrats’ efforts to stop the voucher bill, said the school finance proposal is “wholly inadequate” and does not bring state funding back to the levels of a landmark 2019 education bill when adjusting for inflation. That year, lawmakers increased schools’ base state funding by $1,020 compared to this year’s proposal which would increase it by $220.

Is totally correct.

Can Salado and his jefe, Speaker Dustin Burrows, carry a vouchers bill that doesn't increase public school money more, or will more rural Republicans join 2023 special session flip-floppers like David Spiller?

Buckley also dropped HB 4, calling for an overhaul of STAAR. It's noteworthy that the Texas Senate has passed no such bill.

Calling out the Greenwald tankies at Substack for their horseshoe-theory Gnosticism

The Dissident, often spot-on, had a semi-fail recently in his attack on Eoin Higgins’ new book about Glenn Greewald and Matt Taibbi. Per the header, and per my comments there, I’m focused on Glennwa.d

First, I'd already read Ken Silverstein's take on the book. (Sidebar: Ken and I very much agree in our takes on Glennwald.)

My biggest critique on Higgins' take on Glennwald in particular is that he thinks Glenn was once a leftist. Oh, uh, wrong! Very wrong. Otherwise, Glenn has a history of sexism that goes back to before he was famous and other things. And, that’s what stirred up the tankies. And yes, tankies you are.

So far, we have one horseshoe-theory type New Age lite who reads a Canadian alt-right alt-white MAGAt parallel, one alt-right who reads Chris. Rufo and Bari Weiss as well as Glennwald and is a bit horseshoey but not as much, a non-skeptical leftist or “leftist” who follows Tara Reade (barf), two COVID antivaxxers or just general antivaxxers, and a general “fiscal conservative.” Multiple readers also follow Aaron Maté, whom Ken has taken down before. Aaron's about 50 cents on the dollar. Another, with a comment that has nothing to do with Dissident's comment, reads a Shakespeare authorship Substack (conspiracy theory) and another devoted to American Values 2024 fellating Brainworm Bobby. Another? Reads include Robert Malone (yes, him) and Tulsi Gabbard as well as Tracey. Another follows "Angry Christian Patriot," clearly a Christian nationalist type site, as well as Erick Erickson, and a wingnut State of Jefferson type Oregon blog. Another follows Paul Thacker, conspiracy theorist, antivaxxer, and general pseudoscience peddler, as I have noted.

Another day, more notes. A Michael Shellenberger follower who also follows Leighton Woodhouse, Abigail Shrier and Stacks about Brainworm Bobby, Thomas Massie, a Rand Paul fellator site, an anti-"woke" one and others. (Shrier is half wrong, but not fully, on transsexual and transgender issues. She's also a full-on Zionist.)  A second Shellenberger reader who's also another Rufo and Weiss reader.

Another day? A possible actual leftist — one nutty enough to read the nutbar Rainer Shea. A Taibbi toady who reads all four (hope there's not more!) of Matt's Stacks. A Tracy & Shellenberger reader, who also reads a gun nut Substack and one that rocks a Confederate flag for their logo. Another Shellenberger reader plus reading the Rand Paul fellator site.

It's also, I'm guessing, per responses I've seen to Ken as well, fairly indicative of Glennwald tankies.  In the worse, you have a Michael Tracey follower and someone who looks like a cheap Putin shill at times and is also a bit on the COVID wingnut spectrum. Another of Ken's commenters reads a 9/11 truther triangulationist (yes, the Bill Clinton type triangulation, with said person presenting their own Gnosis about 9/11 "truth"), Joe Mercola and others.  And Ken also mentions "hate mail."

Again, this is why I identify as a SKEPTICAL leftist.

Contra the Glennwald Tankies.

That said, the receipts?

The biggie, to the facts of the matter of the reality of Glennwald and his relationship with the likes of Pierre Omidyar? That’s the total ass-kicking Mark Ames and Yasha Levine gave him back in 2013.

An extraction from that:

Greenwald’s leftist and anarchist fans have always had an almost cult-like faith in his judgment, seeing him as little less than a digital-age Noam Chomsky. But now they’re reeling from cognitive dissonance …

And another:

After we published Mark's piece, I was concerned, based on past experience, that some of Greenwald's supporters might try to divert from the key points raised in our coverage by trying to smear Pando, Mark or others who work here.

Which mirror something in Ken Silverstein’s piece. His words, interviewing Higgins:

Taibbi and Greenwald both insist, preposterously at this point, that they didn’t change, their critics have.

Beyond that?

First, I said Greenwald lied about his support for the Iraq War. Contra the tankie who brushed that off? Per this piece, he then attacked those who called out his lying and then doubled down on his lies. #fact

While I’m here scattershooting, let’s call out Glennwald’s other hypocrisies. Like his hypocrisy about the ACLU when it was censoring its own board of directors.

Or how he can strawman when it serves his libertarian interests. Don’t forget — he’s a libertarian and always has been. He’s not a librul let alone a leftist, and Green types who have made that claim make me barf.

More on him not being a librul let alone a leftist? He and his late husband, David Miranda, in Brazilian terms were not just 1 percenters but 0.1 percenters. Now, yes, rich people can be leftist, but it’s pretty damned uncommon.

Greenwald has also told lies related to the Edward Snowden book. And since I mentioned Matthew Hale at the Dissident for the tankies, he committed grossly unethical behavior related to that. (While I’m here, Snowden’s book is not all that.)

Regarding the various pull quotes? Yeah, the commenters at The Dissident and at Ken’s piece, as far as the Glennwald tankies, are pretty much like that. My experience at the former, in response to me, was a mix of whataboutism, handwaving, and burden-shifting.

Finally? This is why, at least in a modified form, horseshoe theory is true. The left-liberal at best Noah Berlatsky is wrong in claiming it’s not. Of course, since he’s also written for Reason, he has reason to say that.

Not only many of the commenters, but many of the Stacks they follow, illustrate horseshoe theory.

And, yes, I think many of these people, with many of the Stacks they follow, illustrate well my contention that conspiracy theory is a new form of Gnosticism. (Conspiracy theory is also where the tips of the horseshoe theory shoe often meet.)

Let's have real real judicial change, David Schenck

David Schenck, the presiding judge on the Court of Criminal Appeals, and elected there with the help of Kenny Boy Paxton, wants real, actual campaign finance reform in judicial races. Contra Kuff, and with the likes of former Texas Supreme Court chief justice Tom Phillips, I think that these reforms, if enacted, would perhaps be more than a nothingburger but not much more. With Phillips, we need nonpartisan retention elections. Having grown up in New Mexico and spent a slice of journalism time there, I know how these work. 

For those who don't?

When there's a mid-term or post-retention election judicial vacancy, the governor fills the seat with a replacement. Next regular general election cycle, there is, IIRC, partisan primaries in the duopoly parties, and third parties nominating by convention should they want to contest. I know there's a partisan general election.

Every four (district), six (appeals) or eight (NM supreme court) election cycle after that, there's a retention election. The judge runs against their record, with major issues compiled by the state commission on judicial conduct. A four-sevenths majority, or 57 percent and change, is required to remain in office.

This, contra Schenck's ideas, would of course require constitutional amendment, not just run of the mill legislation. Nonetheless, if one wants real change, there it is. (None of this excludes Schenck's campaign finance ideas for judges, of course.)

The Resistance 2.0 gears up for Trump 2.0

And looks about as stupid. Take this Political Atheist dude on both Fuckbook and Shitter. The load for their Hucksterman page said "political independent" but they still self-identify as Berniecrat on Shitter. As in, Democrat. And, his (has to be a dood) pinned post on Shitter indicates they're Camelot-based politically illiterate about JFK.

And, follow you on Threads? Hucksterman already kissed Trump's ass. And, helped Cambridge Analytica two election cycles ago. Why would you join a second Hucksterman outlet?

Blue Sky? Perhaps better than at startup, but started by Twitter's old boss, Ice Bath Balls Jack Dorsey.

As for the idea that atheism is political? There's plenty of wingnut atheists out there. Two of the three worst mass-murderer dictators of the 20th century were clear atheists, and Hitler was a Samuel Huntington type cultural Christianist, if that.

And, pre-Nov. 5, 2024, dude has not one word about the genocide in Gaza on his Shitter feed. None.

So, we have The Resistance 2.0. (Pussy hats optional.)

Trump 2.0.

And Tribalism 2.0.

Even Rodney Latstetter, who should know better, appears to buy into bits of a revived Russiagate on Shitter.

Shitter in particular, and social media in general, in the US will be a cesspool of duopoly tribalism for at least 3 years and 11 months.