El Chapo Update and Open Thread

Another court today granted temporary protection to Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman-Loera. The case number is 398/2016 and the Court is the Juzgado Segundo de Distrito de Amparo en Materia Penal.

El Chapo also filed at least two other amparo requests. One is against extradition and the other is to return him to Altiplano.

El Chapo's lawyers say their extradition challenges will take between 1 and 3 years to resolve.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome. (The El Chapo news went down the rabbit hole, I just noticed it wasn't there and replaced it.)

< New Woody Allen Film Opens Cannes Festival | I'm on the bandwagon: Warren for VP >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    SITE VIOLATOR (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by ruffian on Thu May 12, 2016 at 12:00:33 PM EST
    got my shopping list

    A SpamGasm! (5.00 / 3) (#33)
    by Mr Natural on Thu May 12, 2016 at 12:38:52 PM EST
    :D (none / 0) (#32)
    by Nemi on Thu May 12, 2016 at 12:12:47 PM EST
    White House Correspondents Dinner (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2016 at 01:13:28 PM EST
    After Wilmores somewhat controversial performance with its various references to blackness then and now I came across and mildly interesting bit of trivia.  Who would you guess was the first African American to perform at the WHCD?

    Give up?

    Whoever you guessed I'm willing to bet it was not this little guy .

    Improperly and somewhat misleadingly labeled on that YouTube post as Little Richard.  It's in fact Sugar Chile Robinson.

    Frank Isacc Robinson

    Robinson was born in Detroit, Michigan. At an early age he showed unusual gifts singing the blues and accompanying himself on the piano.[2] According to contemporary newsreels, he was self-taught and managed to use techniques including slapping the keys with elbows and fists.[3] He won a talent show at the Paradise Theatre in Detroit at the age of three, and in 1945 played guest spots at the theatre with Lionel Hampton, who was prevented by child protection legislation from taking Robinson on tour with him. However, Robinson performed on radio with Hampton and Harry "The Hipster" Gibson, and also appeared as himself in the Hollywood film No Leave, No Love, starring Van Johnson and Keenan Wynn.[4]

    In 1946, he played for President Harry S. Truman at the White House Correspondents' Association Dinner, shouting out "How'm I Doin', Mr. President?" - which became his catchphrase - during his performance of "Caldonia". He was the first African American performer to appear at the annual WHCA dinner. He began touring major theaters, setting box office records in Detroit and California. In 1949 he was given special permission to join the American Federation of Musicians and record his first releases on Capitol Records, "Numbers Boogie" and "Caldonia", both reaching the Billboard R&B chart. In 1950, he toured and appeared on television with Count Basie and in a short film 'Sugar Chile' Robinson, Billie Holiday, Count Basie and His Sextet. The following year, he toured the UK, appearing at the London Palladium. He stopped recording in 1952, later explaining:[1]

    Oops wrong link (none / 0) (#40)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2016 at 01:17:09 PM EST
    Gromit rescues a Wallace (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by Mr Natural on Thu May 12, 2016 at 04:48:46 PM EST
    Actually (none / 0) (#108)
    by Nemi on Fri May 13, 2016 at 09:37:05 AM EST
    ... the picture looks more like Gromit & Friends trying to dismember Wallace. Or maybe it's just an odd-looking tennis ball? ;)

    Speaking of movies at Cannes (5.00 / 2) (#106)
    by CST on Fri May 13, 2016 at 09:11:20 AM EST
    It's moderately embarrassing how excited I am for The BFG to come out.  I'm going to drag my oldest nephew to the theater as soon as this come out.  And he will love it whether he likes it or not!

    I noticed from the ... (none / 0) (#124)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri May 13, 2016 at 10:22:42 PM EST
    ... Festival de Cannes website that Pedro Almodovar has a new film showing there, "Julieta," which is based upon three short stories by Canadian author Alice Munro. I don't know whether you a fan of his work, but he's long been one of my very favorite directors.

    I'm definitely looking forward to seeing "Julieta," although serious Almodovar aficionados like me have been forewarned that for this outing, he eschews his trademark comedic / high camp style in favor of presenting a serious drama.



    CST, I covered the (none / 0) (#150)
    by fishcamp on Sun May 15, 2016 at 08:37:48 AM EST
    Cannes Film festival twice during my career.  It was big fun and you would have loved it.  You  would have been about the age of your nephew, but I wouldn't have to drag you around .  I probably couldn't have kept up with you.

    What's it like being there (none / 0) (#154)
    by Mr Natural on Sun May 15, 2016 at 01:13:13 PM EST
    among the beautiful people?

    LOL! For the last 25+ years, ... (none / 0) (#156)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun May 15, 2016 at 06:21:46 PM EST
    ... my sister has lived with her husband and family in his small town in the Maritime Alps foothills just to the north of Antibes and Cannes, where the people tend to be much less "beautiful" and far more down to earth. While the French Mediterranean coast in Provence between Marseilles and Monaco is quite gorgeous, its cities are also urbanized, touristy and crowded. The mountainous backcountry of Provence is what has inspired countless artists such as Paul Cézanne over the many decades.

    Not to be confused with (none / 0) (#151)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun May 15, 2016 at 09:50:20 AM EST

    But hopefully leading to the sequel GFG (Gay Friendly Guant),


    LATimes endorses Hillary Clinton (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by Nemi on Sat May 14, 2016 at 07:06:06 AM EST
    And while they are mostly positive, I can't help but notice a certain 'damn with faint praise' in the endorsement and an eagerness to repeat all the often unsubstantiated 'attack-memes' that are already repeated ad nauseam on anti-Hillary social (and main stream for that matter!) media:

    For all her faults(!) they take care to mention:

    her pre-Sanders seemingly "obstacle-free coronation(!)"

    her "ties to Wall Street"

    her "support for the 2003 invasion of Iraq"

    her support for "the trade policies of her husband's administration"

    her "penchant for secrecy"

    her "willingness to modify her positions to suit the popular mood"

    her being "inauthentic" (sigh!)

    her lack of "that drink-a-beer-with-me quality that voters often look for in a candidate" (They do? Or is it just a silly media-made meme?)

    her being "by no means perfect"

    her "voting to authorize President George W. Bush's invasion of Iraq" (one more time; for good measure, I guess.)

    her email server; and although they mention that it's unlikely she'll be prosecuted, they still opine that "the fact that the FBI is investigating at all is embarrassing" (To whom exactly?)

    her "stubborn(!) refusal to release the contents of speeches"

    her altering "positions in light of shifting political winds"

    her presently leaving out "rare" when talking about abortion being "safe, legal and rare" (Maybe 8 years on, she looks at it differently and not necessarily because of "being endorsed by Planned Parenthood"?)

    her perceived(!) being "malleable has been a disadvantage"

    her "candidacy might(!) seem unexciting"

    And then this

    [Being the first woman elected president of the United States] would be a joyous, long-awaited, landmark moment in American history after centuries of discrimination and second-class status for half the population. But the real reason ...

    when they might just as well have said

    Not only would it be a joyous, long-awaited, landmark moment in American history after centuries of discrimination and second-class status for half the population, but also ...

    At least the Times Editorial Board left out her being "unlikeable" ...

    As an addendum (5.00 / 1) (#132)
    by Nemi on Sat May 14, 2016 at 07:41:57 AM EST
    to my last but one point in the above: Why Does London's Mayor Get How Historic Hillary's Candidacy Is and Not Our Own Media?

    Nicole Belle:

    Our American media have basically ignored the historic nature of Hillary's candidacy in favor of the bombastic speeches of white male candidates. It says a lot when the rest of the world is quicker to recognize what a President Hillary Clinton would signify for women and girls.

    At BNR, we intend to do everything we can to keep history front and center in the general election.

    Sadiq Khan (5.00 / 3) (#149)
    by Nemi on Sun May 15, 2016 at 07:25:28 AM EST
    to Christiane Amanpour, one trailblazer speaking about another:

    "Not only does Hillary have a fantastic track record and she's very, very experienced, and I'm a father of two daughters, a proud feminist in City Hall, just imagine the message it sends to my daughters and to girls around the world that the president of the United States of America is a woman. Not any woman, a woman with the gravitas, with the experience. Somebody who'll unify, needed in the USA, and she'll be an inspiration. She'll be an inspiration. I'm quite clear in my mind who I want to be the president of the USA."

    That's our media. (5.00 / 1) (#157)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun May 15, 2016 at 06:27:08 PM EST
    The other day, MSNBC cut away from Hillary mid-sentence during a major economic policy speech, so they could interview Grover Norquist.

    It is (5.00 / 2) (#133)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat May 14, 2016 at 07:46:35 AM EST
    what it is.

    The good thing is she has shown she does not need the media and maybe that is why they say those things.


    Even (5.00 / 3) (#135)
    by FlJoe on Sat May 14, 2016 at 08:11:46 AM EST
    while endorsing her they feel compelled to bring up every tired negative narrative they could think of, CDS is a terrible thing. Sigh indeed.

    her being "inauthentic" (sigh!) (none / 0) (#144)
    by linea on Sat May 14, 2016 at 11:45:38 AM EST
    john stewart mentioned this.  i was suprised.  

    I know (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by Militarytracy on Sun May 15, 2016 at 10:12:02 AM EST
    Because when I think about Donald Trump's political persona I immediately notice his authenticity.

    Same with Bernie's political leadership side of his personality, he's so approachable ;)

    And Kasich and Cruz, in the middle of their stumping for leader of the free world, their cookies and milk with grandchildren warmth flows over the masses and envelopes us.

    Only women competing for political leadership positions must display to the public our ability to create/acquire flat ginger ale for upset tummies.


    convictions (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by mm on Sun May 15, 2016 at 12:27:06 PM EST
    John Stewart also complained that she doesn't have the courage of her convictions, and he added he's not even sure what her convictions are.  

    I guess he hasn't been following her strong policy statements for a year now.  Talk about lazy journalism.


    John Stewart's a comedian, not a journalist. (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun May 15, 2016 at 06:32:56 PM EST
    And now that he's retired from "The Daily Show," he's also cutting a much less compelling figure, a front man who's found himself on his own and without any backup.

    Ancient Aliens... (5.00 / 1) (#148)
    by desertswine on Sat May 14, 2016 at 10:19:38 PM EST
    the Game.  Abduct primitive humans and manipulate their DNA.  OK.

    MSNBC (none / 0) (#1)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed May 11, 2016 at 04:02:11 PM EST
    Has a countdown clock to the Trump/Ryan confab

    Is there a cute name for it? (none / 0) (#2)
    by ruffian on Wed May 11, 2016 at 04:37:50 PM EST
    not exactly a 'come to Jesus' meeting....

    Will Trump tell Ryan "You're fired!!"?


    Who is Moses (none / 0) (#3)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed May 11, 2016 at 04:40:32 PM EST
    And who is the burning bush

    But no (none / 0) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed May 11, 2016 at 04:42:20 PM EST
    It's just labeled "Trump Ryan Face to Face"

    The custom graphic will probably be dramatic.


    It really is fascinating , I must admit (none / 0) (#6)
    by ruffian on Wed May 11, 2016 at 04:47:05 PM EST
    I am very interested in the outcome.

    I've been listening to a lot of the DailyKos radio Kagro in the Morning
    podcast lately now that the general election is shaping up, and the conventions are upcoming. Lots of good information there about convention rules and stuff like that. I can't believe I am actually considering watching the GOP convention. Guess I love a good train wreck.


    Honesty (none / 0) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed May 11, 2016 at 04:54:38 PM EST
    I don't thnk it will be a train wreck.  Think about it.  What does Donald do best?  Throw a party and put on a show.  It will be a freakin political Circe du Soliel with topless ushers.

    I don't think anyone will give a rats behind that the grim losers and disgraced formers stay home.


    Actually (none / 0) (#9)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed May 11, 2016 at 05:00:21 PM EST
    on the stage it probably will be Yuge and Fabulous! I just wouldn't want to be one of the ones sitting in the audience.

    Did Ben Carson (none / 0) (#5)
    by KeysDan on Wed May 11, 2016 at 04:45:38 PM EST
    grease the pathway for the Trump meeting?  Did Ryan wear a large belt-buckle for that meeting? Did Ryan ask Carson to check his hammer at the door? Is Ryan OK?  Physically that is.

    Ryan is not OK (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed May 11, 2016 at 04:56:04 PM EST
    I think this is one thing we can say without any doubt whatsoever.  He is not OK

    It's his Eddy Munster hair (none / 0) (#11)
    by Mr Natural on Wed May 11, 2016 at 06:44:45 PM EST
    dunno how you mean... (none / 0) (#13)
    by linea on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:06:14 PM EST
    do you mean that as snarc or if you are making an observation on ryan's political future... that his hubris and opposition to trump will cause him to lose his primary and will permanently affect his political career?

    is there spozed to be a cruz/ryan or ryan/cruz presidential campaign in 2020?


    Well (none / 0) (#37)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 12, 2016 at 01:05:30 PM EST
    it seems the news is Paul Ryan completely caved. I expect all of them will cave from now on.

    Yup - not a PUMA in sight (none / 0) (#53)
    by ruffian on Thu May 12, 2016 at 02:27:21 PM EST
    I guess it was a predictable outcome.  From Charlie Pierce:
    Ryan, because he is about half the politician he's given credit for being, tripped over himself by declining publicly to endorse Trump, as though his endorsement is in any way valuable to someone running the kind of campaign that He, Trump is running. This, naturally, sent the flying monkeys into orbit, and Ryan suddenly woke up and found himself staggering through the smoking ruins of Cantorland. Not that they will have any influence over the presumptive nominee, either.

    Now the fun will be tying Trump's most outrageous statements to every GOP candidate running this fall. Kind of glad they are doubling down at this casino.


    There was never a serious (none / 0) (#64)
    by KeysDan on Thu May 12, 2016 at 03:54:22 PM EST
    question that Paul Ryan would endorse/support "the nominee."   It must have been quite a meeting, two con men at work: the younger's intellect grossly inflated by all the D.C. Think Tanks; the older's hyped by himself--echoed and amplified by the media.

     But, I think we need to wait to see just who got what. My guess: Trump, the endorsement and Ryan making terrific and beautiful comments about him-- Trump's Achilles heel.  Ryan, no increase in taxes for the top, and coupons for Medicare and cuts in Social Security. Easy for Trump to give away, not a flip flop, just being the greatest negotiator. And, Ryan can give the impression that he is still mulling everything, for another day.    


    No one could have (none / 0) (#54)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2016 at 02:29:19 PM EST
    Predicted that!

    Do you read Atrios? (5.00 / 2) (#59)
    by ruffian on Thu May 12, 2016 at 02:38:50 PM EST
    I used to stop by there multiple times a day but got out of the habit. This one is gold- his response to Chait's -'how did we miss this? piece.


    ..we hippie liberals have been telling you for years that a sizeable chunk of Republican voters are absolute blithering idiots. Also, racist. This is not news. I'm even happy to accept for sake the holy grail of BothSidesism that a sizeable chunk of Democratic voters are absolute blithering idiots. The difference is that no one in power actually caters to those voters. They aren't treated as Real Americans by every mainstream news outlet. They aren't given their own response to the State of the Union address. Almost no elected officials will meet with them. Most importantly, they don't make up a third of the House of Representatives.

    Another example of why individual polls (none / 0) (#10)
    by CoralGables on Wed May 11, 2016 at 05:07:28 PM EST
    should be ignored and stick to the aggregates.


    Clinton 48
    Sanders 33

    Oregon is a closed primary which may help explain this outcome...or it's just a terrible poll

    Call The Midwife (none / 0) (#12)
    by ruffian on Wed May 11, 2016 at 07:12:10 PM EST
    Tough episode this past Sunday. Best cast on TV, IMO.

    George Zimmerman to auction off... (none / 0) (#14)
    by magster on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:17:04 PM EST
    More... (none / 0) (#15)
    by magster on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:35:58 PM EST
    ... proceeds to fight against BLM and Hillary. I'll let Kalli Joy Gray speak for me here.

    huh. well... (none / 0) (#16)
    by linea on Wed May 11, 2016 at 10:42:12 PM EST
    he was found not guilty. dunno if he needs to behave in a manner to avoid offending anyone's particular sensibilities.

    Not guilty does not equal innocent... (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by magster on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:03:00 PM EST
    and "needs to" does not equal "should". He's a disgusting person.

    ok, but... (none / 0) (#21)
    by linea on Thu May 12, 2016 at 12:41:16 AM EST
    i was under the impression that for the most part the jury agreed with the defense.  

    i didnt get the sense that the jury felt he was guilty of murder but the state failed to prove its case and they reluctantly returned a not guilty verdict.  correct me if im wrong.


    You're wrong... (none / 0) (#22)
    by magster on Thu May 12, 2016 at 12:54:51 AM EST
    He's going to hell even though it couldn't be proven in a court of law. Which is acceptable. Reasonable doubt is one of the most important protections of our country. But we know... he's a puke. And, he's using his murder (BTD's conlusion) to profit and donate against Clinton. Indefensible.

    i'm sorry {{ }} (none / 0) (#23)
    by linea on Thu May 12, 2016 at 01:15:30 AM EST
    i didnt mean to get you upset.  i was just blabbing i suppose.  it's not really an issue im much concerned with.

    who's BTD?


    "Big Tent Democrat." A phantom. (none / 0) (#83)
    by oculus on Thu May 12, 2016 at 06:49:29 PM EST
    Can't let that pass (none / 0) (#36)
    by ragebot on Thu May 12, 2016 at 12:46:17 PM EST
    Saying anyone is going to hell seems to imply there is both a God and a heaven; and the person saying someone is going to hell accepts both.

    Not to mention that while "he who will not be named" is widely viewed negatively by many folks that does not qualify a crime in any jurisdiction I know of.


    Spirituality is inherently personal. (none / 0) (#50)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu May 12, 2016 at 02:23:00 PM EST
    Therefore, any notion offered by someone that another is going to heaven or hell -- or for that matter, that there is no heaven or hell -- is strictly that person's own. Same goes for my own opinion that He Who Shall Not Be Named's karma will eventually catch up with him at some point in his lifetime, because the laws of physics dictate that nature seek balance and equilibrium.

    I believe in death after life (none / 0) (#69)
    by ragebot on Thu May 12, 2016 at 04:54:34 PM EST
    Life is a b itch and then you die.

    My postmortem plans? (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by Mr Natural on Thu May 12, 2016 at 05:54:15 PM EST
    An interstellar journey following the supernova of Sol.

    Seriously considering this (none / 0) (#82)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2016 at 06:06:40 PM EST
    Celestis Memorial Spaceflights place a symbolic portion of cremated remains into Earth orbit, onto the lunar surface, and into deep space. Missions into space that return the cremated remains to Earth are also available. Your loved one will venture into space as part of a real space mission, riding alongside a commercial or scientific satellite.

    Memorial Spaceflights are made possible through agreements with leading providers of commercial space launch services. All services include a performance assurance guarantee.* Pre-planning is available for families who wish to secure a reservation before the time of need.

    It's eithe that or have my ashes used in a cat box.


    lol; I want my ashes launched into a (none / 0) (#93)
    by Mr Natural on Thu May 12, 2016 at 09:10:18 PM EST
    BTD... (none / 0) (#18)
    by magster on Wed May 11, 2016 at 11:28:27 PM EST
    Loved his rejoinder to Charles Pierce ... (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu May 12, 2016 at 12:05:05 AM EST
    ... when the latter commented, "I am not convinced Hillary Clinton is the right candidate to take on Trump":

    "So what? She is the candidate. Get over it Charles."



    ha - that is good (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by ruffian on Thu May 12, 2016 at 02:32:07 PM EST
    To be fair to Pierce, readings whole piece, his worries are along these lines:

    Running as a serious candidate against a rodeo clown is always going to be a struggle. Running as a potential president against a guy who believes that the country can simply walk away from its financial obligations, and that he can, through his own inherent genius, get Mexico to pay for a wall, requires that you walk a fine line between being serious and appearing pedantic. If she'd ever in her life shown any gift for mockery and ridicule, I'd feel a lot better about HRC as a candidate in this election against this opponent. Sometimes, you just have to throw long.

    I think she'll do just fine.


    I guess (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 12, 2016 at 02:37:04 PM EST
    he's missed a lot then if he's never seen it. Everyday her campaign mocks and ridicules Trump. Many of the online ads they have put out make me LOL big time at Trump. They make him out to be a complete buffoon although that's not really much of a challenge I would say. He does a pretty good job of it himself.

    When you think about it (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by ruffian on Thu May 12, 2016 at 02:46:37 PM EST
    she could not have kept her sanity this long without a very good sense of humor. I'm sure it includes mockery of her enemies...hope she feels free to let it fly...in a suitably authentic way of course or she will be roundly criticized for that too.

    Not Guilty =/= useful (none / 0) (#43)
    by Repack Rider on Thu May 12, 2016 at 01:39:24 PM EST
    he was found not guilty

    Correct.  The does not mean he is a worthwhile member of society.  Anyone who paid attention knows he is a symptom of the right-wing racist cancer on the United States.

    American citizens have the right to acknowledge what scum he is, to express that opinion often, and make his life a living Hell by getting up and leaving any commercial establishment he enters.

    I hope the guy lives a long time, and hates every day of the life he lives.


    Whatever he was, is or will be (none / 0) (#49)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu May 12, 2016 at 02:21:51 PM EST
    evidence showed that Trayvon had him on the ground and in the process of beating his brains out.

    Even bad guys are allowed to protect themselves.


    The only evidence to that effect were his own self-serving statements to the police. All other evidence points to him having allowed his own racist paranoia to prompt him to instigate an unnecessary and tragic confrontation. The jury has since spoken in accordance to Florida's prevailing "Stand Your Ground" law, and we have no choice but to respect their right to render that verdict per that law.

    But to very loosely paraphrase Mr. Bumble from Charles Dickens' "Oliver Twist," if the law presumes that a pistol-packing adult has a right to: (a) stalk and pursue an innocent and unarmed teenaged boy who was seeking only to return to his father's house from the local 7-11 in time to watch the NBA All-Star Game; (b) confront that boy for no worthwhile or rational reason in defiance of a police dispatcher's expressed directive that he otherwise stand down; and (c) then shoot the boy dead because he somehow felt threatened, then the law is an ass.



    Look at his wounds (none / 0) (#72)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu May 12, 2016 at 05:03:22 PM EST
    The jury did.

    Look at the time line (none / 0) (#76)
    by ragebot on Thu May 12, 2016 at 05:11:32 PM EST
    The standard investigation process starts with creating a time line.  There are good time stamps confirming when Martin left the store and when Zimmerman called the police and to some extent when he was shot.

    There is no way Martin was "returning" from the store that does not confirm he was taking his own sweet time about it, not to mention Martin was not taking a direct route using normal paths/sidewalks.  If Martin had taken the most direct path traveling at a normal walking speed Zimmerman would never have seen him.


    Oh, for crying out loud. (5.00 / 2) (#96)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu May 12, 2016 at 09:38:32 PM EST
    The timeline does not support your contention, nor does teenaged dillydallying justify what was done to Trayvon Martin. For Christ's sake, he was an unarmed teenager who wasn't doing anything wrong.

    Let me repeat that, in case you have trouble comprehending simple English: HE WAS AN UNARMED TEENAGER WHO WASN'T DOING ANYTHING WRONG. Now, what part of "[he] wasn't doing anything wrong" don't you understand?

    Trayvon Martin committed no crime. He was pursued by George Zimmerman for no other reason than Zimmerman's own racist paranoia about black kids. That racist paranoia is front and center on the 911 audio exchanges between him and the police dispatcher.

    There would have been no confrontation, had Zimmerman simply listened to the dispatcher and remained in his car as was very strongly suggested to him. Instead, at every step in the tragic chain of events, he was the instigator. He deliberately chose to get out of the vehicle. He deliberately chose to stalk. He deliberately chose to pursue. He deliberately chose to confront. And he deliberately chose to shoot.

    That people like you continue to go out of your way to justify Zimmerman's infamous deed, whether by willfully mischaracterizing the teenaged decedent as some sort of thug, or by attempting to misrepresent facts in order to somehow blame the deceased for his killer's own demented state of mind and unjustified actions, serves only to render you an enabler who's just as big a part of this country's perpetual problem with racism as Zimmerman himself or any of his ignorant compatriots.

    Trayvon Martin was stalked and killed for no other reason than being black.

    Deal with it.


    This is what Jeralyn wrote (none / 0) (#101)
    by McBain on Thu May 12, 2016 at 10:38:22 PM EST
    Four years ago

    Zimmerman's testimony, which is supported by proof of his injuries and witnesses observing the struggle, is that Martin broke his nose and banged his head against cement. He tried to get up and couldn't. Using an objective standard, a reasonable person in that situation would fear imminent serious bodily injury if he didn't react with force.

    Clearly, Martin was doing something wrong.  The jury understood this.  Sad to see you and others still playing the race card.


    Donald, What Are You Trying to Prove? (none / 0) (#107)
    by RickyJim on Fri May 13, 2016 at 09:35:55 AM EST
    That the jury was wrong when it held that there was reasonable doubt as to Zimmerman's guilt?  Or that Zimmerman (in Donald Trump's words on Instagram) "is a bad guy."?  You have given next to no justification for the first but you seem to have a good basis for the second.  They are two different issues.

    You also ignore that homophobic paranoia on the part of Martin and his phonemate, Rachel Jeantel, seemed to have been a factor in the incident. Here is a portion of an interview she had with Piers Morgan:

    JEANTEL: No, no. Trayvon was too quiet. And why -- why Trayvon going to run if he wanted to confront him, beat him? Why would he run?

    And people need to understand, he didn't want that creepy ass cracka going to his father or girlfriend's house to go get -- mind you, his little brother was there. You know -- now, mind you, I told you -- I told Trayvon it might have been a rapist.

    Parents need to stop acting dumb. If you're going to tell your child, oh, a stranger, oh, you tell your child one thing -- run away, trying to find somebody, that's not what Trayvon was doing?

    So why -- so why the jury -- they're all parents -- well, some of them are parents. And they've been telling their -- their child that. Now, you're going to tell me you're going to tell your child to stand there (ph)? No.

    Here's some (none / 0) (#109)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri May 13, 2016 at 10:01:50 AM EST

    How long would you want to have your head bashed on the ground?


    I wouldn't know, Jim. (none / 0) (#127)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat May 14, 2016 at 02:41:45 AM EST
    How would you like to be stalked and then chased through your parents' neighborhood by some paranoid crackpot with a gun, for absolutely no legitimate reason?



    Oh well.. (none / 0) (#140)
    by jondee on Sat May 14, 2016 at 09:30:06 AM EST
    Jim and our resident NRA shills know something you don't know: people, ahem "like" Trayvon Martin never have good cause to Stand Your Ground and defend themselves because it's simply a given that they're always, by nature, perpetrators and never innocent victims..

    And the only "injuries" that matter (and that are "consistent" with our preconceived imaginings) are the ones suffered by Zimmerman; not gaping holes blown through young men of a certain'background'.


    Mark O'Mara did a good job (none / 0) (#99)
    by McBain on Thu May 12, 2016 at 10:20:06 PM EST
    of showing the jury how much time Trayvon had to evade Zimmerman if that was his intention. Clearly it wasn't his intention.  He was looking for a fight and chose someone with a gun.  

    He was looking for someone to fight (none / 0) (#141)
    by jondee on Sat May 14, 2016 at 09:43:27 AM EST
    in a residential neighborhood late at night, when no one is out and about.

    Just the first place a young man who is simply "looking for a fight" would logically go.

    Speaking of "intentions", refresh my memory. Who "intentionally" followed who with a loaded gun?


    Just another bad guy protecting hisself (none / 0) (#63)
    by Repack Rider on Thu May 12, 2016 at 03:00:27 PM EST
    Even bad guys are allowed to protect themselves.

    So you are in favor of freeing Mumia Abu-Jamal?  I didn't see that one coming.  


    I see that my sarcasm escaped you. (none / 0) (#75)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu May 12, 2016 at 05:05:00 PM EST
    Fortunately, the jury was sequestered (none / 0) (#100)
    by McBain on Thu May 12, 2016 at 10:29:50 PM EST
    and was able to reach a decision based on the evidence. It was a fairly straight forward case of self defense.  It had nothing to do with stand your ground.  Had the jury been exposed to all the media nonsense, who knows what they would have decided.  

    It was sad but funny watching the prosecution but on witnesses who changed their stories based on what they saw in the media.

    As for Zimmerman's character, I bet he was good person before this tragedy. Now, after being hated by so many, targeted by the DOJ, and being shot at by a lunatic, he seems like a mess.    


    After being unjustly hated for so long (none / 0) (#88)
    by McBain on Thu May 12, 2016 at 08:01:33 PM EST
    I don't think he's worried about offending anyone these days.  

    "He who shall not be named" (none / 0) (#27)
    by CoralGables on Thu May 12, 2016 at 03:53:51 AM EST
    is his official moniker in these parts

    At the graduation I attended over the weekend (none / 0) (#34)
    by ruffian on Thu May 12, 2016 at 12:39:44 PM EST
    the commencement speaker was the head of the National Civil Rights Museum, an African American woman named Teri Lee Freeman, about my age with a distinguished resume longer than my arm. She had a passage in her speech about adversity building character, and named Trayvon Martin's mother and her work on behalf of families of victims of excessive police violence as an example.  Oh boy....some people were still outraged about that one mention hours later.  People related to me, I am sorry to say. So much resentment of people telling the truth and refusing to take it anymore.

    If she's siding with Trayvon's mother (none / 0) (#73)
    by RCBadger on Thu May 12, 2016 at 05:03:39 PM EST
    she has no interest in the truth.  George Zimmerman is no prize, but the shooting of Trayvon was completely justified.  

    Your opinion (none / 0) (#192)
    by Yman on Fri Jul 22, 2016 at 01:20:33 PM EST
    You keep staying your opinionsite as though they're facts.

    They're far from it.


    Looks like (none / 0) (#35)
    by ragebot on Thu May 12, 2016 at 12:40:26 PM EST
    Good. (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu May 12, 2016 at 02:55:29 PM EST
    You might be old... (none / 0) (#19)
    by magster on Thu May 12, 2016 at 12:02:17 AM EST
    nope (none / 0) (#24)
    by linea on Thu May 12, 2016 at 01:19:09 AM EST
    never heard of him.

    Whoa...yes I do remember. (none / 0) (#29)
    by ruffian on Thu May 12, 2016 at 11:59:50 AM EST
    That's me in the corner...

    That's practically new school... (none / 0) (#39)
    by kdog on Thu May 12, 2016 at 01:14:32 PM EST
    R.E.M. compared to Radio Free Europe.

    And he's still a lyrical and vocal genius, even if semi-retired.  The wax lives forever!

    R.E.M. was one of my go-to teenage bands that started me on a lifelong musical appreciation journey.  I was 14 when Out of Time was released, still a phenomenal record....for awhile on the Q76 bus it was either Out of Time or Achtung Baby in the old cassette player on 2 tape rotation, loud enough the whole bus could hear the echo out my earlobes.


    Yes, you are right of course (none / 0) (#41)
    by ruffian on Thu May 12, 2016 at 01:24:02 PM EST
    Just always the first REM song that pops into my head.

    I have a great mental image now of the young kdog on the bus. Great choices. Achtung Baby is a tape I wore out myself...except I was a bit older :-)


    Both tapes... (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by kdog on Thu May 12, 2016 at 01:46:39 PM EST
    gratis,courtesy of the geniuses Columbia House;)

    Hot tip...Never give mail-order credit to a 14 year old with no source of income outside of redeeming bottles and cans...that's almost as dumb as giving Bill & Hil's son-in-law your money to gamble on the fate of Greece.

    I certainly hope this guy doesn't end up as an economic adviser in the West Wing!


    Columbia House (none / 0) (#46)
    by CST on Thu May 12, 2016 at 01:51:46 PM EST
    Greatest thing ever for children all over the country.  I'd have to question what kind of legal authority they would've had to go after any credit offered to kids anyway.

    Oh well, thanks for the free CDs/Cassettes!


    Kids today... (none / 0) (#47)
    by kdog on Thu May 12, 2016 at 01:58:45 PM EST
    going on youtube for all the free music they want instantaneously...back in my day we had to fill out (questionably) legal documents and wait 4-6 weeks for delivery!  And beat Moms to the mailbox everyday in that large window!

    Ha! Yes indeed. I don't know how many (none / 0) (#48)
    by ruffian on Thu May 12, 2016 at 02:15:52 PM EST
    accounts were started and stopped out of our house...but it was a lot!

    The 'selection of the month' was always something horrendous you would never buy.


    "the Real Reason Everybody Thought Trump (none / 0) (#25)
    by Mr Natural on Thu May 12, 2016 at 01:45:43 AM EST
    Would Lose" - New York Magazine

    Why did almost everybody fail to predict Donald Trump's victory in the Republican primaries? Nate Silver blames the news media, disorganized Republican elites, and the surprising appeal of cultural grievance. Nate Cohn lists a number of factors, from the unusually large candidate field to the friendly calendar. Jim Rutenberg thinks journalism strayed too far from good old-fashioned shoe-leather reporting. Justin Wolfers zeroes in on Condorcet's paradox.

    Here's the factor I think everybody missed: The Republican Party turns out to be filled with idiots.

    What they missed, or more to the point choose not (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by ruffian on Thu May 12, 2016 at 12:02:52 PM EST
    to see or acknowledge, is the quite large racist contingent of the GOP.  

    could be i suppose... (none / 0) (#26)
    by linea on Thu May 12, 2016 at 01:54:30 AM EST
    or maybe bernie and trump are both right and maybe nafta and moving our factories and industries overseas was a bad thing for the american middle class?

    Them jobs were going anyway (none / 0) (#42)
    by vicndabx on Thu May 12, 2016 at 01:36:10 PM EST
    cuz everyone wants stuff cheep cheep cheep.

    Debate on NAFTA (none / 0) (#45)
    by vicndabx on Thu May 12, 2016 at 01:48:19 PM EST
    NYT Link

    What We've Learned From Nafta

    If we're going to move forward in this country, we are going to need honest discussion, not feel good demagoguery and pitchfork populism.


    If you are broke (none / 0) (#52)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu May 12, 2016 at 02:25:51 PM EST
    nothing is cheap.

    Well said Sir... (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by kdog on Thu May 12, 2016 at 02:36:35 PM EST
    and when you make so little money you can't even afford the cheap plastic Chinese crap after food and rent, you're at what I'd call "the breaking point" of your nation's economy.

    Plenty of blame to go around, but what's done is done and Band-Aid time is over...time for bold aggressive action, and the one guy seriously selling that has two feet and an elbow in the political grave.  And the other guy carnival barking about it witho no conceivable or coherent plan is one Tuesday in November away from being the president.

    I need a smoke...


    Vote Trump (none / 0) (#70)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu May 12, 2016 at 04:57:20 PM EST
    At least he is promising to bring jobs back.

    Will he? I don't know.

    But I know Hillary won't.


    Yes (5.00 / 2) (#77)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 12, 2016 at 05:18:16 PM EST
    the guy who has everything made in China is going to bring back jobs to the US. LOL. If he could do it why hasn't he done it already? Nothing has been stopping him from doing it for years and years. But it's a good con isn't it?

    Be (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by FlJoe on Thu May 12, 2016 at 07:00:31 PM EST
    careful using facts, GA, some people around have an extreme allergic reaction to them.

    You must grasp reality (none / 0) (#86)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu May 12, 2016 at 07:17:05 PM EST
    There is no way Trump, or any manufacturer for that matter, can manufacture some products in the US based on the current UNfair trade practices.

    They have no choice.

    Trump is saying he wants that changed. Specifically he is referring to China devaluing their currency to keep anyone from competing with them and the various tariffs various countries place on imports to their markets.

    Does he mean it? I don't know and neither do either of you.

    One thing is for sure. Neither the Repub or Demo insiders want to rock the boat.

    And millions know that and are rejecting them.

    Come on and join the revolution!


    The (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 13, 2016 at 06:51:36 AM EST
    reason Trump manufactures things in China has nothing to do with trade practices and everything to do with cheap labor. The cheaper the labor the more money he makes. It's really that simple and he himself said that Americans make too much money. So the bottom line is he doesn't want to pay even minimum wage for people to make his expensive suits.

    Actually the cost of labor (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri May 13, 2016 at 10:30:13 AM EST
    is just one of the costs associated with manufacture.

    Years ago I was a Product Manager in one of a large corp's divisions. At that time product costs were about 15% material and 85% labor. Over time that has almost reversed. 85% parts and 15% labor.

    However, other costs....floor space...tools...fringe benefits...taxes...have all exploded.

    You can "get smart" and reduce process costs but you can't control what your competition sells its products for. And China, which Trump is calling out, has devalued its currency to keep its exports flowing.

    He's also pointing out that other countries are hitting our exports with large tariffs which makes them non competitive.

    As I said, does he mean it? We'll find out.

    And I love you complaining about labor costs.

    Do you not understand that labor is a commodity? Do you not understand that by allowing in a continual flood of people who are not supposed to be here you are allowing businesses to keep wages low? Check out what has happened in the trades and meat packing.


    Silly (none / 0) (#116)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 13, 2016 at 02:03:03 PM EST
    I'm not the one complaining about labor costs. Trump is the one complaining about labor costs and the cut and sew business that Trump is in labor is their number one cost. There's a reason those types of businesses have been going overseas since the 70's or even before. He charges enough for his suits he should be able to pay Americans to sew them for him but he chooses not to. Of course, he's not the only one. Lots of designers do the exact same thing. It's all about the con with him so I know the facts won't matter to you or to him.

    Well, well (none / 0) (#118)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri May 13, 2016 at 06:16:49 PM EST
    I had no idea you are an Industrial Engineer.

    Labor is their number one cost?? Ever been in a factory of any kind?? It might interest you to know that labor costs in China are only about 4% under the US. Of course 4% NIAT isn't all that bad for many products. Of course China is being beat down by Vietnam, Thailand, et al just as they beat Japan.

    I understand Trump scares you because he says he will fix something. He has a reputation of doing what he says.

    And if he manufactures in the US the off shore manufacturers will come in 20% under and you won't buy the product.

    See, it is the low price coming in that's the problem and that Americans won't pay more. So what you have to do is inure that the off shore product isn't dumped in the US. There are laws against that but I can't remember when they ever were enforced. I do know that Japan, back in the 90's was very sensitive about that and would walk away from business if the market was driving the price below cost.

    And another nifty way is to just devalue your currency. Which de facto lowers your cost basis...China and South Korea are playing that game.

    What's going on now is "beggar your neighbor."


    Jim (none / 0) (#119)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 13, 2016 at 06:41:37 PM EST
    I was in the retail business for many years. I know what I'm talking about here. The cut and sew business operates differently than the canning business. Everything has to be done by an individual on an industrial sewing machine after it is cut.

    If you believe that about wages in China, then you need to ask Trump why he doesn't move his operations over here. He said Americans make too much money and wages are too high.

    Trump absolutely doesn't scare me and he has no history of fixing anything unless you consider his association with the mob to be "fixing". He has a great history of bankruptcy. The only people who are obsessed with fear are conservatives.


    Being in retail provides no expertise in (none / 0) (#122)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri May 13, 2016 at 07:54:58 PM EST

    My second out of high school "public" job was in a coat factory. I watched cutters slice hundreds of pieces from stacks of material and then the  parts be distributed down "the line" where the ladies sewed them.

    If a "Bundle Boy" (or girl) misplaced a new stack of material and made the lady break rhythm you were apt to hear words previously unknown to our tender ears.

    This was in 1956 and there was quite a bit of mechanization that brought the coat up, formed it and packed it. I have to believe there is a lot more now.  

    And a 4% savings is significant.

    But the issue isn't the cost to manufacture. The issue is currency devaluation, tariffs, etc. That's what Trump is talking about. Fairness. Who cares where something is manufactured if ALL markets are open.

    Right now they aren't. What Trump is saying that if all markets are open then we will be able to build products that will be bought in other countries. That's jobs here. He isn't saying shirt manufacture will come back. Jobs will be created.

    And yes, you are scared. If you weren't you wouldn't be writing things like you have about wages without a link or two to support your claim.


    Jim (none / 0) (#123)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 13, 2016 at 08:51:21 PM EST
    you obviously have no idea how involved retail buyers are in the cut and sew operations just like you have no idea about a lot of things. I'll just leave it at that and maybe you can listen to all the stuff released today that's in the Washington Post that Trump has said.

    Ga, you still don't get it (none / 0) (#137)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat May 14, 2016 at 08:53:39 AM EST
    People don't care what Trump has said. They care about the fact that he recognizes the problems and has specified what he will do to fix them.

    Immigration - He will close the borders.

    Jobs - He will fix the UNfair trade practices.

    Foreign Policy - Time for others to either pay us or do the work themselves.

    Radical islam - Block muslim refugees from entering the country until they can be properly vetted.

    ISIS - Turn the military loose with all necessary weapons.

    And yes, I remember some buyers "visiting" the factory. They would be escorted through on the way to lunch.


    Jim (none / 0) (#139)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat May 14, 2016 at 09:21:01 AM EST
    what is wrong with a person who pretends to be his own publicist to the media? Calls them back and uses another name and pretends to be another person? No, I'm sure you don't care but it sure is funny to a lot of people.

    You some visitors one time. ROTFLMAO.


    Whats wrong with a SecState (none / 0) (#145)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat May 14, 2016 at 01:18:37 PM EST
    who lies about why four Americans were killed???

    Jim (none / 0) (#146)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat May 14, 2016 at 01:30:25 PM EST
    only the wackos still believe that conspiracy theory. We had 11 hours of testimony and did not prove any of their theories other than to make Trey Gowdy into a national laughingstock.

    Don't bother with another one of your silly cut and pastes because like I said we've had reams of testimony disproving what you're saying.


    The mother says that Hillary (none / 0) (#155)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun May 15, 2016 at 02:39:05 PM EST
    lied about the cause.

    The video shows it.

    She is a serial liar.


    one (none / 0) (#159)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun May 15, 2016 at 07:20:43 PM EST
    person says something and automatically you believe it was true? Someone who was not even there in Benghazi and then three other families completely dispute her claim. The GOP always will pay somebody to lie. They've been doing it for years and according to the fact checking organizations the only serial liar in this election is Donald Trump.

    Jim you will never face the truth that the GOP has been lying to you for decades. Deep down you know it's true and that's the reason why you are supporting Trump.


    Geez, the video has it. In her own words (none / 0) (#160)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun May 15, 2016 at 08:45:41 PM EST
    I guess I shouldn't believe what I see.

    Here's the video (none / 0) (#161)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun May 15, 2016 at 08:53:15 PM EST
    Wheres the lie? (none / 0) (#163)
    by FlJoe on Mon May 16, 2016 at 06:07:03 AM EST
    here's what she said:
    We have seen the heavy assault on post our in Benghazi.......[pause] We've seen rage and violence directed at American embassies.....
    She uses two different sentences, with different verbiage, to describe two different scenarios.

    Start at 1:50 (none / 0) (#165)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 16, 2016 at 08:16:17 AM EST
    Hillary knew that the attack was not caused by the Internet video.

    She lied because she wanted to protect her image.


    Because she had wanted Libya destabilized and the result was the attack.

    Listen to this summary of the lies of Hillary, Rice, et al.

    Obama and Hillary had almost 8 hours to get help there. THEY DID NOTHING.


    You (none / 0) (#168)
    by FlJoe on Mon May 16, 2016 at 09:30:43 AM EST
    still can not point to a lie. If you see a lie please quote it.

    Multiple investigations by the agencies involved and congress have all come to the same conclusion that nothing more could be done.


    Because she had wanted Libya destabilized and the result was the attack.
    is just poor nonsense,

    Even Gowdy's (none / 0) (#171)
    by FlJoe on Mon May 16, 2016 at 10:02:47 AM EST
    top lawyer  
    admitted at least four times in interviews with military officials that there was no more they could have done on that tragic night.
    "I think you ordered exactly the right forces to move out and to head toward a position where they could reinforce what was occurring in Benghazi or in Tripoli or elsewhere in the region,"
    "And, sir, I don't disagree with the actions you took, the recommendations you made, and the decisions you directed."
    "I would posit that from my perspective, having looked at all the materials over the last 18 months, we could not have affected the response to what occurred by 5:15 in the morning on the 12th of September in Benghazi, Libya,"
    but nothing could have affected what occurred in Benghazi
    and just in case you are still clinging to this lie
    His statements appear to confirm the general findings of the eight previous investigations into Benghazi, which found flaws in readiness and coordination but no signs of wrongdoing. Those reports also repeatedly debunked rumors that the military was ordered to stand down.

    There is audio out of (none / 0) (#176)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 16, 2016 at 12:24:23 PM EST
    a pilot saying they could have got there in time to stop the attacks that killed.... IF they had been allowed.

    Hillary and Obama are liars. Period.


    Isn't name calling a no no? (none / 0) (#177)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon May 16, 2016 at 12:26:18 PM EST
    Bold and italics more so I woul think.

    Calling (none / 0) (#185)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 16, 2016 at 04:16:19 PM EST
    Mr "You Can Keep Your Doctor" and Miz "It Was The Video" liars is a no no?

    Don't think it's no more so than calling Bush a liar.

    But thanks for dropping by. Your assistance in reaching the truth is always appreciated.



    This is where you would (none / 0) (#186)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon May 16, 2016 at 04:30:44 PM EST
    Email Jeralyn and whine you were being called names.   But I don't care that much.  Just pointing out the absurdity of a serial liar calling others serial liars.

    On second thought fire off that email.  Maybe she will delete this entire ridiculous subthread.


    I believe that is (none / 0) (#162)
    by TrevorBolder on Mon May 16, 2016 at 05:44:35 AM EST
    Fairly accepted that the Administration wanted to suppress any news of a organized uprising prior to the election as The Administration had declared that Al Qaeda was defeated.
    Madame Sec went along with the party line.
    Yes, she lied to the surviving families on the tarmac (Please , they have no reason to make this up), but that was part of the Administrations blanket denial of a insurgency.

    Trevor (none / 0) (#164)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon May 16, 2016 at 08:04:18 AM EST
    well, you've got three families that say the GOP is lying about all this. You guys also lied to Ambassador Steven's father saying you wouldn't make it political and you have.

    You know George W. Bush lied to the entire country for years and years about Iraq which ended up killing thousands of Americans but it's apparent that Republicans consider all those soldiers just trash not even mentioning. He also lied to the families of the 3,000 people who were killed in 9/11. And you only care what ONE person says and that's strictly because it's all about politics with you guys.


    So let me understand (none / 0) (#166)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 16, 2016 at 08:18:42 AM EST
    George W. Bush lied to the entire country for years and years

    Your defense is that two wrongs make a right.

    Don't look now but your values are showing.


    Slander (none / 0) (#167)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon May 16, 2016 at 08:22:36 AM EST
    is the tool of the person who has lost the debate Jim.

    So after being a Bush apologist for years and years you now admit that he did lie to everybody? And one person who accuses Hillary is the same as the thousands of lives Bush damaged? And that one person is the equivalent of the three others that say that particular mother is lying? I know conservatives incredibly easily duped but darn that's pretty thin gruel to base anything on. But I also know conservatives and Republicans will believe gossip over facts and evidence.


    I have always said that Bush's actions (none / 0) (#174)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 16, 2016 at 12:17:19 PM EST
    re the invasion of Iraq were correct based on the information he had.

    Why do you make things up??

    You are the one who claims that he lied.

    And you say that it is okay that Hillary lied.

    There is no debate.

    Your values are on full display for all the world to see.

    But props for trying to change the subject when faced with the videos.



    Left or wrong? (none / 0) (#180)
    by Repack Rider on Mon May 16, 2016 at 02:32:51 PM EST
    I have always said that Bush's actions re the invasion of Iraq were correct based on the information he had.

    I knew Bush was lying, based on the information that I had.  I don't have a security clearance.  All I know is what I read, but it didn't take too much investigation to know that the entire war was based on lies.

    How is it that millions of ordinary citizens, who marched in the streets by the hundreds of thousands and were not noticed by the media, had better information than the President of the United States?

    Because, AS YOU KNOW, the hippies were right.

    Again.  Sigh.  

    Ever since Vietnam the hippies have been right more often than the government.  About everything.

    There were no WMD. Everyone who said there were no WMD was correct, myself and my then 83-y.o. mother included.  Everyone who said there WERE WMD, was wrong.

    That statement is true, no matter what you do to it.  How do you suppose millions of people other than yourself and the paid-for politicians could see through the lies, but you couldn't?


    Wow (none / 0) (#187)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 16, 2016 at 04:31:57 PM EST
    I knew Bush was lying, based on the information that I had.

    I mean, even Hillary didn't know that.

    And hundreds of thousands?? Kinda trading up, ain't you.

    And the Vietnam protesters were self fulfilling.

    "We'll encourage the enemy to keep on fighting until they win."

    Especially since we didn't use all our resources. Deja vu all over again in the Obama's ME strategy.

    WMD's? Well the NYTimes said that they were there. Some of'em old and outdated but they didn't get there without being there.

    And Saddam's #2 air force general says that they were rushed across the border into Syria at the last minute and the UN inspector says that satellite video supports that.

    But hey! What would they know in comparison to you?

    And I do wonder where the chemical weapons Assad used on Syrian citizens came from...  Must have fell of the back off a cabbage truck.


    Nope. Saddam bought those (none / 0) (#189)
    by Mr Natural on Mon May 16, 2016 at 07:32:44 PM EST
    from us.

    You're welcome.


    Repetition does not make (none / 0) (#191)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 16, 2016 at 09:10:12 PM EST
    anything true.

    But for the same of argument, I will throw in a "so what." Wherever they came from the facts are that they were there.

    And we have two sources that say WMDs were shipped across the border at the last minute.

    Remember, Saddam was convinced that his friends in France, Germany and the UN would get the US to stand down because of the corrupt "oil for food" program.


    There is (none / 0) (#169)
    by FlJoe on Mon May 16, 2016 at 09:36:46 AM EST
    absolutely no proof that Hillary lied to anyone. From politfact
    There simply is not enough concrete information in the public domain for Rubio or anyone to claim as fact that Clinton did or did not lie to the Benghazi families.

    So you (none / 0) (#175)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 16, 2016 at 12:20:24 PM EST
    deny that she didn't tell the mother a lie?

    Okie Dokie. After all, she is The Hillary and the mother just doesn't understand that she must not say bad things about The Clintons.

    But us people who live in the real world know better and the video proves it.


    As (none / 0) (#178)
    by FlJoe on Mon May 16, 2016 at 12:56:30 PM EST
    I was not there I can not definitely know what exactly was or was not said. You on the other hand seem to know everything.

    I do find it interesting that  originally

    Patricia Smith, mother of information officer Sean Smith, told CNN on Oct. 10, 2012, that at the Joint Base Andrews meeting, National Security Adviser Susan Rice "talked to me personally, and she said this is the way it was. It was because of this film that came out."
    a definitive statement that NO administration made at any other time. Then a year later
    Smith expanded on that, saying that Clinton, President Barack Obama, Rice and others, all individually told her the attack stemmed from the video.
    she suddenly remembers Clinton, Obama and others telling her the same thing. Of course this was after a year of FNC and others shouting liar, liar, liar and putting words in the mouths of many administration officials.

    You claim that the video proves she was lying, yet you still can not actually quote the words that you consider a lie.

    Thanks for playing.


    jim. we graduated HS the same year. (none / 0) (#131)
    by fishcamp on Sat May 14, 2016 at 07:41:50 AM EST
    Fortunately I didn't work in a coat factory, but I did work at a dry cleaners, which was horrible.  I learned how to operate a large drapery Mangle.  We had a smaller one at home.  Dangerous things.

    77 going on 78? (none / 0) (#138)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat May 14, 2016 at 09:02:04 AM EST
    Time does fly.

    I had a friend that worked in the local cleaner and he was always soaked in sweat after work. Now days they wouldn't let you get near a dangerous piece of machinery. That's good on one hand, bad on the other.


    Come now Jim... (none / 0) (#105)
    by kdog on Fri May 13, 2016 at 08:17:09 AM EST
    never trust a "promise" from a glorified used car salesman...you know this!

    Agreed but in this case (none / 0) (#110)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri May 13, 2016 at 10:04:00 AM EST
    he has the only lot around.

    If that's the case... (none / 0) (#111)
    by kdog on Fri May 13, 2016 at 10:14:37 AM EST
    I'll take the bus, thank you very much! ;)

    But you can't smoke on the bus... (none / 0) (#113)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri May 13, 2016 at 10:30:56 AM EST
    Problem is ... (none / 0) (#95)
    by FreakyBeaky on Thu May 12, 2016 at 09:36:14 PM EST
    ... Manufacturing jobs started going away before NAFTA. Detroit collapsed in the late 70s. It's true this was bad for the country, but to this day I'm not sure how much NAFTA had to do with it.

    The other thing is I don't think Sanders' and Trump's appeal is at all the same. I don't think his voters are much motivated by his lip service to trade issues.


    And the game is just getting started (none / 0) (#51)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu May 12, 2016 at 02:23:57 PM EST
    and the surprising appeal of cultural grievance.

    You've (none / 0) (#56)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 12, 2016 at 02:34:08 PM EST
    made it obvious the entire time you have been posting here that you have a massive cultural bolder on your shoulder. Therefore none of us here are surprised at your support for Trump.

    Yes, born to a sharecropper (none / 0) (#71)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu May 12, 2016 at 05:01:24 PM EST
    And raised as a poor white who watched his parents work their way up into the middle class...

    I have seen what that the Demos are now blathering to be pure BS.

    So yes, I have a chip on my shoulder caused by watching the Left destroying what was so hard to get.


    Of course (none / 0) (#78)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 12, 2016 at 05:19:43 PM EST
    that has nothing to do with what i was saying other than I guess it's implying that you were owed a job because of your skin color or something?

    Your inability to misunderstand is (none / 0) (#87)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu May 12, 2016 at 07:24:03 PM EST
    unbelievable. But your bringing race into the conversation is what the Left always does.

    The "chip" on my shoulder is watching jobs disappear. The chip on my shoulder is knowing that the middle class wage earner is making thousands less now than 8 years ago....if h/she still has a job... labor force participation is at Jimmy Carter levels....40 years ago..


    Where was that particular chip (5.00 / 2) (#89)
    by ruffian on Thu May 12, 2016 at 08:02:03 PM EST
    from 2000-2008?

    Pretty gripping Americans this week (none / 0) (#90)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2016 at 08:06:48 PM EST
    I remember hiw much The Day After effected me.

    And, oh, the babysitter is a Russian spy.  


    Was glad to finally find out what the goal was (none / 0) (#91)
    by ruffian on Thu May 12, 2016 at 08:18:31 PM EST
    with the nice Korean Mary Kay lady. Well done letting that relation build and then showing us the end game. That was sad.

    Did you see the previews for next week?

    I don't think I watched The Day After. Seems like I'd remember it if I had.


    I know, hard to believe I ever did anything else (none / 0) (#92)
    by ruffian on Thu May 12, 2016 at 08:19:20 PM EST
    but watch TV all the time.

    ruffian, what is going on with Alan (none / 0) (#94)
    by caseyOR on Thu May 12, 2016 at 09:17:09 PM EST
    Grayson? I just read about his confrontation with Harry Reid where Reid told Grayson to quit the Senate race. Something about an ethics investigation?

    What do you know?


    Related to a hedge fund he manages that (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by ruffian on Fri May 13, 2016 at 06:55:00 AM EST
    is based in the Caribbean someplace...not in the actual sea, but some country :-)  I have not followed it much more than that.  The House (GOP controlled of course, so I may have underestimated how much 'there' is there) has brought up ethics charges about it.

    I think there are ideological and personality clashes between the two as well, and Reid is backing Patrick Murphy against Grayson in the upcoming  FL Senate Primary.  I'm not a Reid fan, so his opposition alone is enough to keep me on Grayson's side. On the other hand, is Grayson really electable as a Senator? Maybe Murphy is more 'presentable' to a wide electorate.


    Every political party has to have a clown (none / 0) (#98)
    by CoralGables on Thu May 12, 2016 at 09:44:00 PM EST
    Florida gave one to the Dems

    You should (none / 0) (#102)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2016 at 11:03:14 PM EST
    It must be on Netflix

    But at the time it was broadcast it was pretty serious stuff.  Cold War and all.


    Well, from March of 2000 (none / 0) (#115)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri May 13, 2016 at 01:27:24 PM EST
    to Feb 2001 it was watching the NASDAQ run of 50%.

    And watching Bush push through two tax cuts and try to survive 9/11..... A quick look at U3 puts it all in prospective.

    It only took Obama 56 months to get back to Bush's worst, 7.3% in Dec '08.

    And then there was listening to Kennedy oppose Medicare Part D...which Bush managed to push through.


    What kind of Lilly is this? (none / 0) (#65)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2016 at 04:28:15 PM EST
    this amazing thing grew out of a potted plant found in an old extended family members basement after she died

    No one knows what specific kind of flower it is.  Obviously it's some kind of Lilly but I have never seen one this big.  The flowers are enormous.  Like the size of a dinner plate.  And the color is stunning and not captured very well in that pic because of the backlighting.

    Amaryllis (5.00 / 3) (#66)
    by Mr Natural on Thu May 12, 2016 at 04:42:27 PM EST
    They're one shot bulbs in my climate.

    Thanks (none / 0) (#67)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2016 at 04:46:57 PM EST
    This one has (supposedly) been around for several years.  I've never seen it before but I wasn't particularly close to the  ole lady.

    Looks like a daylily (none / 0) (#74)
    by ragebot on Thu May 12, 2016 at 05:04:55 PM EST
    They are common in North Florida and in some places viewed as an invasive plant.  They come in various vivid colors and once you plant them and they get established (takes two or three years) you need to dig a huge hole to remove all the roots or they will return.

    Someone at my condo planted some, against the homeowners association rules, and it took about three years to remove them.


    Here is a link to multiple images that illustrates just how much the color and shape can differ.


    Pretty sure it's an Amaryllis (none / 0) (#79)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 12, 2016 at 05:47:55 PM EST
    Yes, it is an Amaryllis. (5.00 / 2) (#97)
    by vml68 on Thu May 12, 2016 at 09:43:59 PM EST
    The one in your picture is most likely an 'Apple Blossom'.
    After the blooms die, keep watering the plant and give it plenty of light. In the fall cut back on the watering and let the foliage dry/die.  After a few weeks, it will start to send out new leaves, resume watering and you will get new blooms again.

    I have Amaryllis bulbs that are 20 years old.


    ICE Plans Roust of Mothers and Children (none / 0) (#81)
    by Mr Natural on Thu May 12, 2016 at 06:03:43 PM EST
    - in a belated Homeland Christmas.  

    Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has now told field offices nationwide to launch a 30-day "surge" of arrests focused on mothers and children who have already been told to leave the United States, the document seen by Reuters said. The operation would also cover minors who have entered the country without a guardian and since turned 18 years of age, the document said. Two sources confirmed the details of the plan.

    Very disappointing. (5.00 / 4) (#85)
    by oculus on Thu May 12, 2016 at 07:03:55 PM EST
    Why did these cops use a stun gun? (none / 0) (#114)
    by McBain on Fri May 13, 2016 at 11:02:19 AM EST

    Rynazewski hit his mother in the back with the ax, knocking her to the ground. Baldwin and Hall opened fire, hitting Rynazewski and causing him to drop the ax as he fell to the ground, Garcia said.

    The suspect tried to pick up the ax, prompting one of the officers to fire a stun gun at him, Garcia said. But that didn't stop him. He managed to get hold of the ax again and swung it, striking his mother in the head, Garcia said.

    The officers fired their guns again and Rynazewski dropped the ax. He was taken into custody with multiple gunshot wounds, authorities said.

    Hard to tell from just one article, but it sounds like the decision to use a stun gun allowed this woman to be struck again.  Were these cops afraid lawsuits, losing their jobs if they fired several real bullets until the threat was contained?

    There's been criticism of other cops when they empty their clips into someone they perceive as a threat. Perhaps this case shows why they sometimes need to do it.  

    seems to me... (none / 0) (#121)
    by linea on Fri May 13, 2016 at 07:43:45 PM EST
    ...you are engaging in wild speclation at this point.  

    using the taser after he had been shot and was on the ground probably just seemed reasonable to the police at the time.

    maybe you can post the police reports they wrote? the reports may provide some insight into whether your speculation has any merit.


    Seems to me ... (none / 0) (#125)
    by McBain on Fri May 13, 2016 at 11:19:33 PM EST
    you missed the part where I said, "Hard to tell from just one article...."

    This is a blog where speculation is welcome as long as you don't state it as fact.  I clearly did not state it as fact.

    If that article is correct, the use of a stun gun didn't work very well.  I find the topic of stun gun/taser/non lethal weapons very interesting. I like the idea but I don't think the technology is there yet.  The lack of range and ability fire multiple shots quickly can lead to trouble.

    Your thoughts?


    Seems to me... (none / 0) (#129)
    by FlJoe on Sat May 14, 2016 at 06:19:11 AM EST
    your speculation always leads to the conclusion that LEO's should err on the side of homicIde.

    Do you really want police to be emptying their clips into a wounded man lying on the ground, without trying other options first?


    If he's an ax-wielding maniac (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by McBain on Sat May 14, 2016 at 11:12:47 AM EST
    who just tried to kill his mother, as the article implies, Yes, I'd want the police to continue shooting until he's no longer a threat.

    The "other options" didn't appear to work this time.  I'm curious why the cops thought a stun gun was a good idea?

    Here's another article

    Baldwin then shot Rynazewski with a Taser, but it had little effect and Rynazewski was able to hit his mother a second time, in the head, according to police. Baldwin switched back to his gun and both officers fired additional shots, finally subduing Rynazewski.

    Cops should err on the side of protecting the good guys.


    my thoughts? (none / 0) (#143)
    by linea on Sat May 14, 2016 at 11:40:42 AM EST
    on tasers?  i feel the taser should be used earlier and replace physical force and not be considered an intermediate between physical force and a deadly weapon.  i say we replace the "baton" with a caddle-prod.  i dont see how we get more women on the police force when the job description still includes muscling a drunk 22-year-old to the ground.  

    As I said, I don't think the (none / 0) (#147)
    by McBain on Sat May 14, 2016 at 02:55:12 PM EST
    technology is quite there yet.  Even if we do develop more functional/reliable non lethal options, there will still need to be a human making important decisions (until Robocop).  It would be great if all cops were great at making split second decisions but they're not.  

    I understand the Obama administrations (none / 0) (#117)
    by oculus on Fri May 13, 2016 at 04:16:32 PM EST
    rationale to provide guidance to school districts re school bathrooms and locker rooms via a vis transgender students. But it seems likely the administration's letter will get Republicans to the polls even if they despise Trump.

    to vote for whom? (none / 0) (#120)
    by linea on Fri May 13, 2016 at 07:32:24 PM EST
    donald trump was asked which restroom Jenner should use at trump tower and trump said he didnt care.

    i've heard speculation that the obama administration released this guideline to drive the republican away from trump.  

    but i'm under the impression the guideline was actually issued after a request for clarification from texas.


    I am laughing (none / 0) (#126)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 13, 2016 at 11:37:30 PM EST
    oh so much about Trump calling the media and pretending to be his own publicist. Apparently this was a well known thing among the media in NY forever. He is getting poked fun of all over twitter.  

    Armando was on the DailyKos radio (none / 0) (#128)
    by ruffian on Sat May 14, 2016 at 03:32:36 AM EST
    show podcast Friday morning laughing with Kagro about it. Cracking me up. I did not know any of that. Amazing.

    It's is funny (none / 0) (#134)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat May 14, 2016 at 08:00:49 AM EST
    Sounds like a Veep bit.  More and more of his campaign sounds like an screenplay that would never sell because the humor is completely implausible.

    That said,  it's also a little frightening how it's being covered.  Sure people are laughing.  But there is a disturbing feeling many are laughing with him and not at him.  It's amazing.  Yesterday I was listening to some pundits discussing this like "well it WAS a long time ago when he really did have to be his own publicist"
    And this was not on FOX.  When this stuff happens I can't help my default thought of what if Hillary did this.  Seriously.  Can you imagine.  


    Well (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat May 14, 2016 at 08:48:20 AM EST
    the double standard you mention seems to be coming screamingly obvious to a lot of people.

    Bahahahahaha! (none / 0) (#170)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 16, 2016 at 09:57:20 AM EST
    The President of the Banditos is on CNN feeding his ducks. Dude, feeding your ducks is no longer a sign of kindness and empathy for other beings. Tony Soprano took care of that :)

    Outside (none / 0) (#172)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon May 16, 2016 at 10:21:39 AM EST
    It is currently raining like a cow peeing on a flat rock but inside I continue to receive Internet and TV.

    Cable definitely has some upsides.

    Along with the downsides.

    The Unburnt! (none / 0) (#179)
    by ruffian on Mon May 16, 2016 at 01:55:31 PM EST
    Have you watched GoT yet?

    I have (none / 0) (#181)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon May 16, 2016 at 03:28:38 PM EST
    That's a nice ACE in the hole she has there.  

    A lot has been written about the coming "Seige of Riverrun". And I was thinking why are they seiging Riverrun?  Maybe because they kick the krap out of the Faith Militant?  I hope so.  

    Are you up on Penny Dreadful?  It's looking like a great season.  I love that Dracula is the Ice Truck Killer.  I love Patti LuPone is back.  I love the casting of Renfield.  Other interesting story lines, Frankensteins Bride (or Girlfriend or whatever).  Loved the PD version of the Red Wedding. The male "monster", the Wolfman and his female sidekick, etc.


    Zubrik v Burwell, aka Little Sisters of (none / 0) (#173)
    by KeysDan on Mon May 16, 2016 at 11:38:14 AM EST
    the Poor (a consolidated case) was remanded to the several US Appeals Courts for an alternative (compromise) to the work-around objected to on the basis that it violated the Religious Restoration Act (1993).

     The petitioners claimed that filling out the form or sending in a government form letter indicating their objections to covering birth control "was a burden on their faith."

      Because, it set in motion the process by which their employees received coverage from their insurers, although coverage was not paid for as a part of their insurance.  The preponderance (just one in favor) of the lower courts rejected the challenges.

    The decision of the Court is being described as a "punt".  However, an aerial view of the ruling seems to be a win for the government in that the directive to the lower courts is to "encourage contraceptive coverage seamlessly," and Justices Sotomayor and Ginsburg prevailed against those male justices who were attempting to craft simplistic and unworkable alternatives to the government's work around (a stand alone contraceptive policy, that did not exist and would undermine the intentions of comprehensive women's health care).

     The Little Sisters of the Poor et al., may see it as a win in that the government can not fine or tax them for not complying, but the Court did not disallow the fundamental provision. Moreover, it appears that the Court expects a compromise--which is admirable, but maybe a forced role owing to an eight-membered Court.  

    According to polling conduicted (none / 0) (#182)
    by KeysDan on Mon May 16, 2016 at 03:52:23 PM EST
    by the Atlanta Journal/Constitution, Georgia voters, when asked approval/disapproval of the conservative, Republican Gov. Nathan Deal's veto of the so-called religious liberty (anti-gay) bill, responded, overall: 45% approve, 44% disapprove, and ll% didn't know/no answer.

     When asked, would you support or oppose Georgia lawmakers attempting to pass the "religious liberty" bill again, 40% support, 51% oppose, 9% don't know/no answer. (55% of Democrats supported Deal's veto; 58% of Republicans opposed the veto).

    Deal also vetoed a "campus carry" bill. Overall, 56% supported the governor's veto; 41% opposed the veto.   And, overall, 37% would support attempting to pass the campus carry bill again; 60% would oppose another attempt to pass the bill.

    "Campus carry" (none / 0) (#183)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon May 16, 2016 at 03:58:13 PM EST

    Yes (none / 0) (#184)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon May 16, 2016 at 04:06:09 PM EST
    between campus carry and religious liberty that's about all the GA legislature has attempted this year. And there's a huge food fight going on within the GOP about all this. There's the pro-business crowd that doesn't care about anything other than what business say and the apocalyptic Christians who only care about turning Jesus into a legal scholar.

    Pretty cool (none / 0) (#188)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon May 16, 2016 at 04:52:50 PM EST
    This episode of VEEP (none / 0) (#190)
    by ruffian on Mon May 16, 2016 at 07:35:40 PM EST
    is Julia LD's Emmy reel. So great. Fantastic writing too.

    SITE VIOLATOR (none / 0) (#194)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 24, 2016 at 08:40:51 PM EST
    Hitting many threads