Just for laughs, I gave the Claude AI a copy of my Daily over at PJ Media, and asked for it’s opinion on my writing style. I must say, I was plased to find it approves of me for the most part. Herein, is it’s response:
Writing Style Analysis: Eric Florack, PJ Media
Voice & Persona
Florack writes in a warm, conversational first-person voice — the opening reads like a letter to regulars (“Glad you’re here… you’ve made a difference already”). He positions himself as a trusted, knowledgeable friend rather than a formal journalist. The tone is avuncular and self-aware (“It’s what I get for trying to cram all those details into one column”).
Tone
Opinionated but measured — he shares clear conclusions (“that seems wise to me”) without being strident
Dry wit surfaces occasionally (“the ironically named Virgin Islands”)
Self-deprecating — he openly acknowledges when a previous column was unclear, which builds credibility with readers
Mildly combative toward critics (“those on social media trying to get anti-Trump mileage out of this”) but doesn’t dwell on it
Structure & Organization
Follows a newsletter format: date, history trivia, birthdays, then the main piece — a deliberate ritual that creates reader habit
Uses signposting phrases heavily: “First… Secondly… That point is why… Either way…” — keeps readers oriented through complex material
Moves from correction → context → evidence → legal analysis → conclusion, a logical prosecutorial structure
Ends with a standalone “Thought of the Day” quote — a signature sign-off that softens the exit
Sentence Style
Varied sentence length — punchy one-liners (“No matter what happens, Andrew’s not getting out of this.”) alternate with longer explanatory sentences
Favors em-dashes for asides and qualifications, giving the prose a spoken, mid-thought quality
Uses colloquial metaphors to introduce dense passages: “let’s get the scuba gear on, because this will be a deep dive”
Occasional parenthetical asides add personality without derailing the argument
Sourcing & Credibility Strategy
Leans on named external authorities (ABC News, Andy McCarthy at NRO) to anchor factual and legal claims — a deliberate trust-building device
Uses block quotes generously, letting sources speak at length rather than over-paraphrasing
Frames his own analysis as synthesis and judgment, not original reporting — honest about his role as a commentator
Target Audience Assumptions
Assumes readers are politically conservative and already broadly familiar with the Epstein saga and UK politics
Does not explain who Epstein is, who Andrew is, or what RICO means — expects a knowledgeable readership
References to King Edward VIII and the Nazis are deployed without full context, implying a historically literate audience
Weaknesses & Habits
Dense information-packing — he admits this himself; the piece covers legal jurisdiction, extradition, statutes of limitation, and British common law in quick succession, which can overwhelm
Occasionally editorializes where he could report (“I’m sure this will disappoint some”) — blurs analysis and snark
The history/birthday preamble is entirely disconnected from the article’s substance — a newsletter convention that may frustrate readers looking for straight analysis
Overall Character
Florack writes like a well-read political hobbyist who has done his homework — not a lawyer, not a foreign correspondent, but someone who reads widely, synthesizes credibly, and explains complex matters in plain language for a like-minded audience. The style prioritizes accessibility, trust, and reader relationship over journalistic neutrality or stylistic elegance.
- * *
I must say I’m pleased with the response because that’s exactly the style I’ve been aiming at.
A boat in international waters that is not running a national flag is categorized in international law the same way a pirate is. Such boats have absolutely no national or international protections, and you cannot commit a war crime against them.
A vessel in international waters is required under UNCLOS to sail under the flag of a specific nation. If it does not, it is legally considered a stateless vessel. A stateless vessel has no right to the protections normally afforded to ships under a national flag, including immunity from interference by other states.
UNCLOS Articles 92, 94, 110, and customary maritime law spell out the consequences clearly:
1. Stateless vessels have no sovereign protection. A flagged ship is an extension of its flag-state’s sovereignty. A stateless vessel is not. This matters because “war crimes” presuppose protected persons or protected property. A stateless vessel is legally unprotected.
2. Any state may stop, board, search, seize, or disable, a stateless vessel. UNCLOS Article 110 explicitly authorizes boarding and seizure. The law does not require states to risk their own personnel or assets while doing so. Disabling a vessel that refuses inspection, including firing on it, is legally permitted under both UNCLOS and long-established state practice.
3. War crimes require an armed conflict. You cannot commit a “war crime” outside an armed conflict. War crimes occur only within the context of international humanitarian law (IHL). Enforcing maritime law against a stateless vessel is a law enforcement action, not an IHL situation.
No armed conflict = no war crime possible.
4. Lethal force may be used when a vessel refuses lawful orders. The International Maritime Organization’s “Use of Force” guidance for maritime interdiction recognizes that disabling fire, even lethal force, is lawful when a vessel refuses lawful boarding, attempts to flee, poses a threat, or engages in illicit activities such as piracy or narcotics trafficking.
Once again: law enforcement rules apply, not IHL.
5. Sinking a stateless vessel is not prohibited by UNCLOS. UNCLOS permits seizure of a stateless vessel and leaves the means entirely to the enforcing state so long as necessity and proportionality are respected. If the vessel flees, attacks, or refuses lawful commands, sinking it is legally permissible. Many states routinely do this to drug-smuggling vessels (e.g., semi-submersibles) without it ever being treated as a war crime.
6. No flag = no jurisdictional shield. The entire reason international law requires ships to fly a flag is to prevent this exact situation. Flagless vessels are legally vulnerable by design.
Because a stateless vessel has no protected status, because UNCLOS authorizes interdiction of such vessels, because lethal force may be used in maritime law enforcement when necessary, and because war crimes require an armed conflict that is not present here, sinking an unflagged ship in international waters is not a war crime.
# There is no such thing as civilized warfare. War is, by definition the lack of civility, the lack of rules. The rules and the definition of civility are invariably decided by the victor.
# When speaking the truth becomes objectionable, be very suspicious about those who object.
# Remember whatever Adolph Hitler did, everything that Joseph Stalin did, everything Mao did, up to and including the millions of dead, was absolutely legal by the laws in their respective countries. Law, therefore, is not the final arbiter what is and is not moral.
# Donald Trump did not bring division to this country. He was elected because division was already here, brought on by Decades of the establishment of both parties moving in precisely the wrong direction.
# Heaven has walls, and gates and a very specific set of rules for anyone wishing to enter. You must be of a specific mindset. Hell, meanwhile, has an open borders policy and will take anyone regardless of their mindset.
# The biggest single mistake that we have ever made as a country, a culture, a people… Was to turn the education of our young over to the government. Ultimately, if we don’t reverse that and soon, that choice will destroy us.
# People who are not taught the value of individual freedom, and its relationship with prosperity and morality and limited government, will never believe in it, and will eventually work to destroy it.
# Socialism and globalism have historically and eventually being rejected by the people who are subjected to them every time it’s been tried. There’s a reason for that. Neither one actually works to the advantage of the people.
# Because a concept like Socialism or global warming has been disproven several times over does not by any means suggest that its backers will stop pushing those ideas. It’s all they’ve got to go with.
# If you want to know who runs your life, look directly at those who you may not criticize.
# Today’s feminism, isn’t. For proof of this one need look no further than the large number of self-proclaimed feminists who spend a great deal of time trying to look like men.
The reason most feminists claim to hate men is because they surround themselves with liberal men who in the final analysis are not men at all, really.
# There are two Sexes. Male and female. You can have all the operations you want, but it won’t matter… your DNA is not going to change. The surgical blade is not a means by which one can run away from the reality of ones self. It’s interesting how the left refuses to follow the science on this one.
# Claims to the contrary not withstanding, because one is of the Republican Party does not make one a conservative. Consider the number of establishment Republicans that have been fighting Donald Trump on every point. Remember, also the establishment GOP wasn’t too happy about Reagan winning elections either, and have subsequently gone well out of their way to erase his legacy.
# At the same time, John F Kennedy wouldn’t want anything to do with the Democratic party of today. Indeed it’s a wonder is that the Democrats hold Kennedy to be an icon of the party at all. Think: When’s the last time you saw a Democrat mention the man?
# The proximate cause of most of our problems is the establishment of both parties, who have come to love the power of government too much. ..more than is good for the upkeep of the principles put forward in the American Revolution… Principles we desperately need to return to if we are to survive as a nation, a culture, a people.
# Indeed, the most glaring lesson taught us by the election of Donald Trump was that both parties rank-and-file are rejecting their own establishment. The rank-and-file voters recognize the dangerous situation we are in with both parties
# The rank-and-file of both political parties in this country come down to the right of anything that either party has coughed up in national elections for many years.
# The cause of World Peace would be best served by the removal of the United Nations from the planet.
# Anyone who waves the gun-control banner in the name of “safety” deserves watching, and should be treated as such, including the “I love me” vest, and the rubber wallpaper.
# 90% of what gets passed off as racial issues are actually cultural in nature.
# A nation without borders ceases to be a nation, almost immediately. That is in fact the goal of pushing for open borders.
Luigi’s One Night In Bangcok.
I’m not sure, but I think Luigi Mangione just confirmed a suspicion I’ve had about him.
Mangione, a former Ivy Leaguer, is mentioned in a Fox article dated 10/22:
The 27-year-old Mangione is being held without bail in New York City while awaiting trials at the state and federal level in connection with Thompson’s pre-dawn ambush shooting on Dec. 4, 2024, outside a hotel where he was supposed to attend a shareholder conference later that morning.
In the year before the assassination, Mangione traveled to Asia, climbing a mountain in Japan and drinking with expat Americans in Thailand, according to The New York Times.
It was in the latter country where he was reportedly shocked to learn how little an MRI could cost outside the United States — and where he told a friend over WhatsApp he was beaten up by a group of seven “ladyboys,” or transgender women, in Bangkok in March.
The article goes on from there to describe his travels subsequent to the incident. Japan, India, etc., and how he was expressing his disdain for the healthcare industry here in the US.
Well, OK, fine. Personally though, I’d have been interested in what got him into the brawl in Bankok. Much has been written about the link between high profile shootings and transexuals of late, and I can’t help but consider the possibility this is one more such link. I suppose we’ll have to wait for the discovery phase of the trial.
Murray Head was unavailable for comment.
Here’s mugshots of Antifa members. Now, we understand why they wear masks.
It should be noted, that the two people most responsible for the government shutdown come from the deepest of deep blue areas… New York City. Jeffries, and Schumer.
I’ve been watching this story develop. Bob Zimmerman at Behind The Black is doing a good job with it:
The madness from the left continues: A rooftop sniper who had engraved “anti-ICE” messages on his ammunition today killed on one and injured two in Dallas before killing himself.
The now-deceased shooter who targeted a Dallas, Texas ICE facility wrote “anti-ICE” messages on his rounds, according to the FBI.
Three people at an ICE facility were shot by a gunman on the roof of an adjacent building on Wednesday morning. The victims were reportedly detainees, though law enforcement did not confirm this on Wednesday. Authorities did confirm, however, that no officers were injured in the shooting. One of the victims died at the scene, and the shooter died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound.
At this same Dallas ICE facility last month a man was arrested when he claimed he had a bomb in his backpack.
If we can take the act of suicide (which so often happens, as an an indicator, there does seem a common thread, between apparent mental issues and these attackers. The rhetoric spread by the left vis’avie’ ICE (Such as where Zimmerman points up such from Gavin Newsom…) is absorbed and taken as a driving force by these people. As Zimmerman himself says:
As the meme to the right correctly notes, the violence isn’t coming from both sides. The Democratic Party is encouraging it, and its insane minions are doing it
So much going on it’s hard to know where to start.
- Amusing it is, to watch the left trying to cancel Disney, after complaining about people trying to shut down Disney just a couple years ago.
- Amusing, also to see the loud complaints about using the FCC for political purposes, from the same people who just a short while ago were using the FCC to fast-track the illegal takeover of US radio stations by George Soros.
- So, the Westboro Baptist church showed up in Boston violently trying to shut down a memorial for Charlie Kirk. Oh… wait. I got that wrong. It was Antifa. Never mind.
- Back in 2002 the Biden administration did nada when Antifa attacked Charlie Kirk on campus. Two years later, a self-described anti-fascist killed Charlie, thus proving you always get more of what you tolerate.
- Interesting and revealing that the left is agitated about Kimmel getting canned, more than they are about Kirk getting killed.
- Mark Cuban is pitching the idea of a left-wing comedy network. Leaving aside for the moment we already had four of them, running Over the Air… and he thinks another one is going to make financial headway? Maybe someone should explain to him about Err America, and the Mario Cuomo show, as well as MSNBC and how well tilting left worked out for CNN?
A busy week this week…. Posting stuff for Pajamas Media these days, in long form, which I enjoy doing. Time consuming but enjoyable. Still, there.s shorter ideas I need to capture and here are some of them:
- One thing that the murder of Charlie Kirk has shown us, is that it’s not Trump that the left so despises, but the ideas he represents ideas that threaten the left and it’s hold on political power. Charlie held those values as well, and so also became a target.
- The left, almost before the echo from the shot died, tried to twist the reality… saying Robinson was MAGA. When that failed, they tried to claim that both sides do it. However this was proven false as well… because they never raised any serious complaints about leftist violence.
- Ben Scallan correctly notes: …”There’s not one prominent Leftist anywhere in the West doing what Charlie Kirk did, i.e. issuing an open debate challenge to all comers and saying “Here’s my view, I invite you to try and prove me wrong”. None of them are willing to subject their views to that scrutiny.”
- The left didn’t hate Charlie because as they claimed he was homophobic and Transphobic. How do I know? Because they LOVE Hamas, who will quite willing to throw people off rooftops or burn them alove for being Homosexual or Transsexual.
- Just because the left hates some speech, doesn’t make it hate speech.
- Colbert winning an Emmy for a show that’s being canceled? Like Obama winning a Nobel Peace prize without any actions on his part, It shows us how questionable the value of the award itself is.
My latest at PJ Media is here.
Losing your business, your job, etc., in reaction to what you say or write, so long as a government action doesn’t cause that reaction, is part and parcel of the concept of free speech
I am proudly pleased to announce my return to writing columns for PJ Media.
My writings for them can be found HERE.
Meanwhile, life here at BitsBlog will continue as it has been for 24 years.
Yes, In know… I’m writing rather a lot on this topic. Let’s just say I’ve been thinking rather heavily on the topic, and I want to capture these thoughts.
Think;
The very reason Charlie’s murder is of that same weight as the other events-such as 9/11, the JFK murder, etc…. is because Charlie himself was also of that weight. I doubt any of us consciously understood that he carried that weight, that level of attachment in the society at large, until it happened. (Was it just a few days ago?) We knew it, we understood it as a subconscious thing… but didn’t give it much fore-brained thought.
I suggest the passing of Limbaugh was pretty much the same way and for the same important reasons. They both gave voice to our values and our ideas and ideals. The sheer weight of their personalities and their devotion to America, those ideas were something that most of us carried around inside ourselves….which is precisely why they were and are so popular, so loved even now.
Both their passing, therefore, was a huge loss because of the shared values they gave voice to. OUR values… expressed in a way that far exceeded our own abilities for the most part.
The difference, of course was in the way they left us. Rush’s passing was a sad event, but beyond human control and thereby (sorry, but this is not as disrespectful as it sounds…) somewhat easier to bear. We knew for a year he was on the way out. We were not happy about it, but we were prepared. When we lost Rush it was simply a matter of God calling him home.
OTOH, Charlie’s murder is harder to deal with because of how he left us… suddenly and violently…. and therefore, his murder was felt to be a violent attack on US, as well… in much the same was a 9/11 was a violent attack on all of us, on our shared values.
And that accounts for the sadness and anger we’re feeling ourselves, and seeing in others.
We promised we’d not forget 9/11. Problem is around half the people alive here in the states now, were not even born as yet when the planes took out the towers. With that in mind, the serious question before us is “What can we do to not forget, this time?”
