Wednesday Open Thread

Here's a new open thread, all topics welcome.

< Donald Trump to Give Immigration Speech | Donald and Rudy: Two Peas in a Pod >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Houston, The Ego has landed. (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 03:00:05 PM EST
    Given the appalling things that Trump has said repeatedly about their country and its people, it's perfectly understandable that Mexicans from across the political spectrum would be: (a) Dumbfounded that President Enrique Peña Nieto would invite the thoroughly despised GOP nominee to Mexico City for a chat; and (b) Royally pi$$ed off at Peña Nieto for doing so.

    The mans approval numbers (none / 0) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 03:07:19 PM EST
    We're in the 20s.  So he hardly had anything to lose.  It would be wonderful if he intends to raise his numbers by humiliating Trump.

    The podiums await.


    You didn't have to wait long. (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 06:37:50 PM EST
    "Al incinio de la conversación con Donald Trump dejé claro de México no pagará por el muro."
    Translation: "At the beginning of the conversation with Donald Trump I made it quite clear that Mexico would not pay for the wall."
    - President Enrique Peña Nieto, Mexico City (August 31, 2016)

    So basically, President Peña Nieto has now called out Trump publicly as a liar, by personally contradicting Trump's claim to the media that they didn't discuss the proposed wall.

    Mrs. Clinton need only sit back today, while her opponent screws himself.



    Just put this in the other thread (none / 0) (#11)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 06:41:46 PM EST
    No doubt the source of at least one of the WTF expressions.

    Pena Nieto (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by MKS on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 08:56:38 AM EST
    finished the PRI yesterday.

    Vicente Fox and the PAN are looking pretty good.  Fox had previously told Trump what to do with his wall.

    The Mexican people are not going to tolerate this humiliation.


    Wait, what (none / 0) (#3)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 03:14:10 PM EST
    He agrees with Trump that NAFTA has been very good for out countries?   Did he just say that?

    The facial reactions (none / 0) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 03:26:55 PM EST
    Of the Mexican president while Trump is speaking is great.

    A meme is born.


    Were you listening to the MSNBC translator? (none / 0) (#7)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 06:08:29 PM EST
    That guy at times reminded me of President Obama's sign language interpreter at Nelson Mandela's funeral.

    Krappy translator krappy sound (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 06:39:33 PM EST
    This is from a WaPo transcript

    So I had a very open and constructive discussion with Mr. Donald Trump. The objective of this meeting was to meet each other and to know about the bilateral relations. As far as commercial issues, I shared with Mr. Trump my conviction that the free trade of North America has done a lot of good to both the U.S. as well as Mexico. U.S. exports to Mexico are close to $200 billion a year. And according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, more than six million jobs in the U.S. rely on the exports to Mexico.

    I heard HE shared blah blah .....


    It was terrible (none / 0) (#8)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 06:17:17 PM EST
    That's why my comment was a question.   I would love to know if that's what he said.  

    I couldn't tell. (none / 0) (#12)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 06:44:18 PM EST
    I was trying really hard to listen directly to President Peña Nieto, but the MSNBC translator was talking right over him. His translation was just this side of gibberish.

    Honestly, where'd MSNBC find this guy? I think they just asked their people on the ground in Mexico City if someone spoke Spanish, he held up his hand and said that he took two years of it in high school, and they responded, "Cool, you're the man."



    The translator was indeed horrid (none / 0) (#21)
    by MKS on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 08:54:15 AM EST
    Much delayed and halting.

    I wish he had not talked over Pena Nieto, who did speak in a dignified and I thought melodious way.  His enunciation was really crisp.


    North Carolina's new voter suppression law (5.00 / 5) (#25)
    by Peter G on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 09:12:56 AM EST
    will not be in effect for this fall's election. The Supreme Court yesterday could muster only four votes, where five would have been needed, to overturn the stay granted by the Fourth Circuit. The court's bar on enforcement is based on findings of a racially discriminatory motive by the legislature to impose strict voter ID rules, limit early voting, etc.

    I don't want to dance on Scalia's grave (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Repack Rider on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 11:42:24 AM EST
    ...but his death was the gift that keeps on giving.  Had he been voting, the voter ID law would be back in place, but this (non) decision puts NC in play to a degree that must be frightening to the local GOPers.

    We share similar feelings (none / 0) (#37)
    by KeysDan on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 01:59:49 PM EST
    about Scalia.  For decades I have wanted him to go away.  He did not need to go so far, but he did need to go away.

    Scalia's jurisprudence is a complicated legacy (none / 0) (#42)
    by Peter G on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 02:59:35 PM EST
    He was a strict constructionist of statutes, with no respect for Congress's unexpressed intentions, if the Legislature did not say (write) clearly and unambiguously what it meant. This was often good for criminal defendants. He also had a strict view of enforcing most aspect of Sixth Amendment rights -- particularly the right to jury trial, and the right to confront witnesses. These views, also, were often very good for criminal defendants. He likewise could go for a strict enforcement of First Amendment freedom of speech (he voted to strike down a law against flag burning on this basis). But he was terrible on civil rights, especially sexual privacy, gender, and race, and many other issues. Not a simple picture.

    Scalia repeatedly mangled the text of the Federal Arbitration Act to lock consumers out of court and into arbitration. He was just as much an instrumentalist in statutory construction cases as in constitutional cases.  Yes, he got the confrontation clause right, but I'm sure you can find something redeeming in Trump's life too. In the overall picture, Scalia was a disaster.

    Appreciate your (none / 0) (#43)
    by BackFromOhio on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 03:52:18 PM EST

    but I keep coming back to

    Bush v Gore


    True, not a simple (none / 0) (#52)
    by KeysDan on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 05:03:22 PM EST
    picture.  But, for me, an uncomplicated assessment: among the worst.    Not even tempered by a shared love of opera.

    A new Christopher Guest film... (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by desertswine on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 01:36:20 PM EST
    "Mascots," will be coming to Netflix in October. If you liked "Waiting for Guffman" etc, it looks much the same;  meaning funny.

    Looks good (none / 0) (#39)
    by McBain on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 02:21:01 PM EST
    I was hoping for a second season of Family Tree... I loved the woman with the hand puppet... maybe this will be even better.

    Could the MSM's scandalmongering coverage ... (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 04:21:30 PM EST
    ... of the Clintons possibly get any worse? Sure, it can (forehead / top of desk):

    Politico (aka Tiger Beat on the Potomac) | September 1, 2016
    Bill Clinton aides used tax dollars to subsidize foundation, private email support - "Bill Clinton's staff used a decades-old federal government program, originally created to keep former presidents out of the poorhouse, to subsidize his family's foundation and an associated business, and to support his wife's private email server, a POLITICO investigation has found. Taxpayer cash was used to buy IT equipment -- including servers -- housed at the Clinton Foundation, and also to supplement the pay and benefits of several aides now at the center of the email and cash-for-access scandals dogging Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign."

    That "decades-old federal government program" is, of course, also known as a federal pension, as authorized and allocated in this instance under the Retired Presidents Act, which was enacted in 1958 to fund the living and operating expenses of the country's former chief executives. Politico's findings breathlessly describe what the program was literally designed to do.

    To the extent that all of the various public employee retirement systems in this country are funded by taxpayer dollars, then a number of my own relatives are equally guilty of sticking taxpayers with the tab for trips to Europe, Caribbean cruises and remodeled kitchens. Do we really want to go there? Because that's exactly where Politico's logic ultimately takes us.

    For all of the smoke being blown here by Politico, it should be noted that the reporters themselves admit that none of the expenses itemized in the article were impermissible or unauthorized. So why, then, is this even news?

    Rather, what we're seeing here is Exhibit A for the Clinton Rules at work. Use FOIA to access publicly available government documents, investigate for malfeasance and when none is found, publish the benign findings anyway under a misleading headline that gives the entire enterprise an aura of breaking scandal.

    Truly, we're living in a Golden Age of Misinformation and Pseudo-scandal. Next up, the Associated Press catches Meryl Streep and Helen Mirren engaging in some really hot thespian action in front of enthralled audiences, some of whom are children under 18 years of age!


    That really is the worst (none / 0) (#48)
    by ruffian on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 04:29:52 PM EST
    Taxpayer supplied cash - aka his pensions, and her salary.

    Exactly...I've been known to work a federal program or two myself...thanks for all my IT, taxpayers! Scandal!


    I'm vested in the State ERS out here, ... (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 04:56:07 PM EST
    ... by virtue of my many years as a full-time employee at the state legislature. What exactly am I supposed to do with that money, if not spend it as I please?

    Of all the dumb articles written and published about the Clintons of late, this has to be one of the dumbest. And the MSM wonders why its own approval ratings are in the tank.



    Only bright light (none / 0) (#160)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 12:46:51 PM EST
    was Maddow's long segment last night on Bossy's hiring in an official capacity by Trump campaign and details of his scurrilous activities during the 1992 campaign that were publicly condemned by G.H.W. Bush and thereafter for the Republican congress - resulting in his firing. She goes through the long history of attempts to discredit both Clintons that never stuck.  I'd like to see more of this from her.

    CNN's Dylan Byers explains why ... (5.00 / 2) (#72)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 08:12:25 PM EST
    ... Mrs. Clinton's press conference at the National Association of Black Journalists a few weeks ago really wasn't a press conference:

    "Kaine correctly noted that Clinton had taken questions after an address to the National Association of Black Journalists and the National Association of Hispanic Journalists, but that is different from addressing the national press corps that knows her positions better than anyone, including other reporters, and is therefore better equipped to ask probing questions."

    Glad he cleared that up for us -- and with heaping helpings of arrogance and condescension, too. Would it be trés gauche for me to note that the national press corps is also overwhelmingly white, and prone to doing stuff like THIS?

    In the meantime, in pointed recognition of the job they've done this election cycle, here's to Dylan Byers and the entire national press corps.


    Re press conferences or not (5.00 / 2) (#85)
    by Nemi on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 07:20:16 AM EST
    At the NABJ-NAHJ press conference (yes it was!) these (yes, that many!) were the questions asked of her, to which, every single one of them, Hillary Clinton gave lenghty, thorough answers:

    ... How will you get immigration reform, something that President Obama was not able to do, so that Latinos can believe that something is going to happen, that their vote, again, is not being taken for granted considering that the House, at least the House, will remain under Republican control? [...]

    ... How do you walk back the deportations, comply with the law, and not inherit the title of deporter-in-chief, and at the same time, all these steps to help mobilize the Latino community to the polls, many who still believe that their vote is taken for granted in 2008 and 2012, and then we have the e-mails[!] from WikiLeaks that say that are the loyalty brand of the party? [...]

    ... your poll numbers went way up this week, and yet, the e-mail[!] controversy was still in the headlines. So, I wanted to give you the opportunity to respond [...] are you mischaracterizing Director Comey testimony? And is this not undercutting your efforts to rebuild trust with the American people? [...]

    ... you said you never sent or received classified material, and he did say there were three e-mails, that were marked classified at the time. Is that an inconsistency? [...]

    ... today you are endorsed by former CIA Director Michael Morell who says it's Trump who can't be trusted, and he went so far as to indicate that he's been termed (ph) by Putin. Do you agree with that assessment? [...]

    ... you've accused(!) Donald Trump of using racist and sexist language. What does it say about the electorate that so many Americans are supporting him? [...]

    ... I think on behalf of all of us, we encourage you to do this more often(!) with reporters across the country. Especially those news organizations that travel the country with you everywhere you go(!).

    A majority of voters consistently say frankly they don't like you(!) and they don't trust you(!). And they say pretty much the same thing about Donald Trump.

    Either you or Mr. Trump will be elected president. How would you lead a nation where a majority of Americans mistrust you? And what extra responsibility might you have to show that you're up to the task? [...]

    What is the most meaningful conversation you've had with an African-American friend?

    Does the Democratic Party, does your campaign, take Latino voters seriously, or are you taking them for granted that they will automatically vote Democrat?

    Is it any wonder Hillary Clinton doesn't eagerly embrace press conferences!?

    And don't forget (5.00 / 2) (#86)
    by Nemi on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 07:32:12 AM EST
    what happened next: Among many other stupid reactions to what she'd said, she was endlessly mocked and ridiculed, led by the mocker-in-chief, Donald Trump, loyally(!) followed by the media, for her "I may have short circuited it" -- conveniently leaving out the last word.  

    Lions and tigers and TACO TRUCKS, oh my!! (5.00 / 5) (#87)
    by Chuck0 on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 07:43:32 AM EST
    Taco Trucks on every corner. One could only hope! Please, more taco trucks. This part of PA is dearth of decent, good Mexican food. As a former San Diegan who practically lived off Roberto's, Alberto's and all their copycats, send us some taco trucks.

    Word on social media on this (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by Towanda on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 01:23:22 PM EST
    is that #ATacoTruckonEveryCorner is trending so hot that it guarantees a landslide for Clinton.



    Ha (none / 0) (#90)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 09:16:05 AM EST
    I saw that too.  And thought "how is this a bad thing?"

    Here too, please! (none / 0) (#93)
    by ruffian on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 10:31:46 AM EST
    I've been waiting a year for even the Wa-Wa's to get built at the nearest corner where I live. A taco truck would be most welcome - and would get tons of business.

    The candidate that promises a taco truck on (none / 0) (#101)
    by vml68 on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 01:15:39 PM EST
    every corner would get my vote!
    Made carnitas tacos for dinner yesterday.. A taco truck on the corner would have saved me some time and effort  :-)

    Carnitas tacos! (5.00 / 1) (#114)
    by Chuck0 on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 03:57:31 PM EST
    muy bueno.

    Can't say there's one on every corner (none / 0) (#163)
    by FreakyBeaky on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 02:11:31 PM EST
    Can say there are enough to make thing really OK. :)

    I, for one, welcome our new taco truck overlords.


    Another (5.00 / 3) (#88)
    by FlJoe on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 08:07:42 AM EST
    nail in the coffin of Journalism. the only question is it a nail in our county's coffin? Dear FSM please make it stop.

    Seriously, NYT is appalling on this (5.00 / 4) (#91)
    by Towanda on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 09:55:30 AM EST
    as are Boston Globe and others questioning Bill Clinton's rescue mission of journalists caught in North Korea, for cripes sake.

    Remember when Bill Clinton went to ... (5.00 / 5) (#146)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 09:48:03 PM EST
    ... North Korea to rescue those two American journalists, Laura Ling and Euna Lee, who had been seized along the Chinese border in March 2009 and were being held captive by Dear Leader?

    Turns out that was a bad, bad thing.

    No, not the fact that Ms. Ling and Ms. Lee were held prisoner by the most repressive and reactionary regime on the face of the earth. Who cares about them any more, right?

    Rather, it's that the Clinton Foundation was involved in making the arrangements, which of course casts a dark and unseemly cloud that overshadows Hillary Clinton's State Dept., because -- because, uh, you know, the Clintons.

    Let this be a lesson to everyone that no good deed goes unpunished. Oh, and all that fulsome praise the New York Times had for the former president's mission seven years ago? Well, never mind. They must've had their fingers crossed at the time.

    Boo. Hiss.

    Even if I doubted (5.00 / 3) (#169)
    by Nemi on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 04:51:34 PM EST
    there wouldn't be something incriminating in the FBI report, which I didn't, this would certainly convince me that there really is no there there, 14 Excerpts From the FBI's Report on Hillary Clinton's Email.

    Kevin Drum writes:

    Have you read the entire FBI report on their investigation into Hillary Clinton's email practices? No? Well, I have, because that's the kind of professional I am. And I'm going to provide you with all the most interesting excerpts.

    Then he cites and comments, convincingly, on 14 excerpts, concluding:

    That said, this report is pretty much an almost complete exoneration of Hillary Clinton. She wasn't prohibited from using a personal device or a personal email account, and others at state did it routinely. She's told the truth all along about why she did it. Colin Powell did indeed advise her about using personal email shortly after she took office, but she chose to follow the rules rather than skirt them, as Powell did. She didn't take her BlackBerry into her office. She communicated with only a very select group of 13 people. She took no part in deciding which emails were personal before handing them over to State. She had nothing to do with erasing information on the PRN server. That was a screw-up on PRN's end. She and her staff all believed at the time that they were careful not to conduct sensitive conversations over unclassified email systems. And there's no evidence that her server was ever hacked.

    There's remarkably little here. If you nonetheless believe that it's enough to disqualify Hillary from the presidency, that's fine. I have no quarrel with you. But if the FBI is to be believed, it's all pretty small beer.

    Yet, as comments to the piece -- actually comments most everywhere -- reveal, to some it doesn't change preconceived perceptions that Hillary Clinton is a criminal. And nothing, as in nothing, will ever make them change that opinion. I admire those who never the less try to talk reason ... even though they are not only fighting an uphill battle but a losing battle at that.

    As with Kevin Drum, (5.00 / 1) (#176)
    by KeysDan on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 06:03:08 PM EST
    I, too, read the FBI reports, at and between airports.   And, I agree with Drum's assessment. If anything, I believe that James Comey's comments were unnecessarily and undeservedly harsh and, now appear to be just an attempt to pacify the Republicans and blunt the arrows to be slung at the Bureau. The record is there to be read; even the wingers that can read will never find anything but crimes after page one, and, even some of those Trumpettes will not be satisfied unless Mrs. Clinton is put up against a firing squad.  

     The FBI's record does not support anything other than (1) there was nothing there that would have any chance that a serious prosecutor would touch, let alone any charge that a jury would uphold; (2) Mrs. Clinton, as is likely for many CEO's, is not a computer geek. A user, not a computer wiz. Of that she is probably guilty.

     A sentence structure ambiguity of the report does a disservice: Mrs. Clinton did not recall all the security briefings in her early days at State. The reason she stated was that she was only showing up on a part-time basis.  The grammatical construction permitted the reason for the part-time attendance (head injury/blood clot which was widely reported)to be interpreted as  the reason for not recalling the briefings, when it was the reason for the attendance.


    Ah, so that last part (5.00 / 1) (#180)
    by Nemi on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 06:42:08 PM EST
    is the reason why the 'lock her up'-crowd is now busy denigrating her for memory loss (and worse of course!) and therefore unfit to be president. Figures. Sigh, with that crowd, and unfortunately with many in the media, everything that in any way possible can be misinterpreted will be.

    And yet, all I have heard from (5.00 / 3) (#182)
    by caseyOR on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 06:55:47 PM EST
    the news media is how damning this report is for Clinton. They are twisting themselves into pretzels to find anything with which to condemn her. I have not find a single accurate news story on the FBI report.

    My father was a journalist, as was I at one time. The current crop of what passes for journalists these days makes my heart hurt. They do such a disservice to the country.


    On Wisconsin! 16-14 and the real losers (5.00 / 1) (#178)
    by Towanda on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 06:11:03 PM EST
    are LSU and SEC, with dirty play that gets a serious smackdown, as we don't do football that way in Wisconsin.

    Cute factoid:  Badgers QB Bart Houston was named for Bart Starr, his day's favorite player -- so seeing his son play at Lambeau Field was special.

    (This is historic, the first time ever that the UW Badgers played at Lambeau -- and another excited QB there was Aaron Rodgers, who also showed his flair for hilarious pregame commentary.)

    Another loser, though, was ABC, which cut away to commercial at the pivotal moment in Badger ball: the Jump Around.  But at least ABC had the good sense to show the Badger players having fun with a Packers tradition: post-game Lambeau Leaps, practiced by every little boy in Wisconsin and well beyond.

    That was a blatant cheap shot ... (5.00 / 1) (#186)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 08:31:43 PM EST
    ... delivered by LSU's Josh Boutte on Badger LB D'Cota Dixon. I don't care if he's frustrated, there's no place for that in sports. If LSU doesn't suspend Boutte, then the conference and NCAA should. It reminded me of the time when Oregon RB LaGarrett Blount coldcocked Boise State's Byron Hout in the waning moments of the Ducks' 19-8 loss to the Broncos in 2009. Blount subsequently served a ten-game suspension.

    Secretary Clinton Should Stop Playing Defense (5.00 / 5) (#183)
    by Michael Masinter on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 07:25:07 PM EST
    I fear Secretary Clinton is playing defense, content to win the presidency even by a 51-49 margin. But what will she win? A republican house and senate will kill every progressive program she proposes and will produce two more years of gridlock before the next off-year republican wave. Instead, she should campaign publicly, attack Trump every place and every chance she gets, and stop playing defense; she needs a landslide win, with control of Congress, to get anything done. This is not just about the presidency; it's about governing!

    Very true (none / 0) (#184)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 08:00:15 PM EST
    Instead, she should campaign publicly, attack Trump every place and every chance she gets, and stop playing defense; she needs a landslide win, with control of Congress, to get anything done.

    So what is the reason for her very light schedule, and that mostly being fundraisers with the rich and famous.

    That light schedule, avoiding impromptu events and reporters, adds to the conspiracy rumors surrounding her health and vitality as well keeping her from getting any sort of message out.

    Especially in comparison with The Donald, that old geezer is all over the place, accepting invitations to Mexico on a moments notice, kicking it in Detroit. The difference in the energy in both campaigns is very noticeable, perhaps waiting for The Donald to implode might not be the best strategy, although I thought it was, until the last 2 weeks. The polls have tightened.


    Trump buys himself ... (5.00 / 6) (#192)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 11:57:13 PM EST
    ... a Florida attorney general for a mere $25,000 in funds from his own charitable foundation, and columnist Fred Grimm of the Miami Herald is none too happy about it.

    THIS is pay for play. And I'm waiting for that New York Times editorial calling on Trump to shut his foundation down.


    I (5.00 / 4) (#195)
    by FlJoe on Sun Sep 04, 2016 at 06:52:56 AM EST
    don't understand why this is not front page news....wait a minute, I do understand and it is terrifying.

    I can no longer chalk up the abject failure of journalism to incompetence, it is becoming downright malevolent.


    But that (none / 0) (#197)
    by TrevorBolder on Sun Sep 04, 2016 at 07:04:46 AM EST
    Is normal for America.
    Americas politicians have always been bought off,

    But when foreign governments start to buy off our politicians,

    Then enough is enough.

    Only Americans can buy off American politicians!!!


    I (5.00 / 1) (#198)
    by FlJoe on Sun Sep 04, 2016 at 07:10:58 AM EST
    hope you are being sarcastic.

    Listening to Trump.. (none / 0) (#5)
    by desertswine on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 03:28:26 PM EST
    is like listening to a 15 year old bully.

    At least he didn't call the Mexican president... (none / 0) (#6)
    by desertswine on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 03:44:16 PM EST
    Little Pablo or anything like that.

    I got to see Hell or High Water today (none / 0) (#13)
    by McBain on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 08:21:12 PM EST
    A very solid film with good performances from everyone.  

    One of the previews was for the sci fi movie Arrival.  Of course I'll need to see that but, based on the trailer, it looks like a movie I've already seen several versions of...
    Aliens show up in mysterious hovering spaceships and one super smart scientist will figure out how to talk to them or kill them or whatever is needed. A tried and true Hollywood formula I can't resist.

    The Arrval looks great (none / 0) (#14)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 08:32:47 PM EST
    Not a huge western fan but I want to see Hellor High Water mostly because I really like Dale Dickey (Elsie).   She has done so much great stuff.

    It's a modern western (none / 0) (#15)
    by McBain on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 09:09:57 PM EST
    kinda like No Country for Old Men, which is one of the few Coen Bros films I liked.  

    I also finished Stranger Things last week. Any other good sci fi/ suspense dramas out there?  I couldn't get into Mr. Robot.



    I think No Country (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by jondee on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 12:14:34 PM EST
    is close to a masterpiece.

    Aside from the scene everyone remembers when Josh Bolin is being chased by the dog with the dawn just breaking and the heat lightening flashing in the distance, to me the most effecting scenes are the quieter, masterfully put together vignettes such as when Tommy Lee Jones is visiting his grizzled brother in his trailer with his "outlaw" cats and the last scene at the breakfast table when Jones tells his wife about the dream he had about his father.


    Cormac McCarthy (none / 0) (#56)
    by MKS on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 06:52:18 PM EST
    wrote NCFOM as a screeplay before turning it into  a novel. His Blood Meridian which Harold Bloom likened to Moby Dick is considered his masterpiece. A very bloody mess but exquisite writing.

    I ultimately got off the Cormackian bus because he is too much the retro and somewhat reactionary writer for me.


    I love him (none / 0) (#57)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 06:58:18 PM EST
    I think Blood Meridian is a masterpiece.  As is The Road.

    Apparently Blood Meridian (none / 0) (#60)
    by jondee on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 07:08:11 PM EST
    has been optioned as a possible film for years, but nobody's been able to figure out hiw to make it without coming up with something that makes Clockwork Orange look like the Sound of Music.

    McCarthy originally got the idea for the book after reading the memoir of real life scalp hunter Samuel Chamberlin, who rode with the outlaw John Joel Glanton.


    You would think (none / 0) (#61)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 07:12:03 PM EST
    That would be a small problem in the age of Tarantino and The Walking Dead.

    The Road was a good bit darker than the film.


    Blood Meridian emits no light at all (none / 0) (#62)
    by jondee on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 07:33:36 PM EST
    Tarantino at least intersperses little moments of levity even amidst the brutality..

    And the ending of Blood Meridian..I don't think it could be done for the same reason that Polanski says he wouldn't be able to make Chinatown with the same ending today.


    If you believe the reporting (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 07:46:57 PM EST
    That's not the problem.  This is CINEMABLEND from a couple of months ago-

    James Franco's attempt to adapt Cormac McCarthy's novel Blood Meridian has been scuppered, and the reason sounds a little silly. While James Franco, who was due to both co-star and direct in the film, had already assembled an all-star ensemble for the film, which included Russell Crowe, it's now been shelved because they had in fact failed to secure the rights to the novel. An issue that you'd assume would have been sorted at the very beginning of the project.

    Rather embarrassingly, the revelation that Blood Meridian had been put on the back-burner came shortly after news of the proposed film had first been announced. Deadline had originally reported that Blood Meridian was going to be shopped around the Cannes Film Festival market, where it was thought that it would be one of the most appealing films available.


    Ever since the success of the Coen Brothers' No Country For Old Men, another Cormac McCarthy book, studios have been looking to adapt the writer's other novels. Blood Meridian has been in development for years. Which is why it's a shame that, considering the talent attached and just how close it was to becoming a reality, this incarnation has now been shelved for such a ridiculous reason. Fingers crossed a solution can soon be found. Because everything about this proposed version of Blood Meridian seems perfect.

    Btw (none / 0) (#67)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 08:01:04 PM EST
    I have heard Franco dissed.  I DISagree.  I think anyone who thinks he is not up to this should watch 127 HOURS.  

    I don't see the Franco kid directing (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by jondee on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 08:42:33 PM EST
    get Harvey Weinstein on the phone.

    "The Franco kid"? (none / 0) (#118)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 04:39:32 PM EST
    James Franco is 38 years old now. I know it doesn't seem like he could be, given how audiences have watched him onscreen as a young man over the years, but he's actually on the cusp of (gasp!) middle age.

    Now, if your talking about his (marginally less) talented younger brother Dave Franco, who's 31 and still content on playing the fratboy in movies such as "Neighbors" and "Neighbors 2," yeah, I don't see him directing, either.



    Oh my (none / 0) (#108)
    by MKS on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 01:38:25 PM EST
    Did not get the rights to the novel?

    McCarthy has been more than amenable to having his novels made into movies, even though he has otherwise often shunned the limelight and press.


    Right.. (none / 0) (#110)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 01:50:10 PM EST
    that's usually the first thing you're supposed to do, isn't it?

    Maybe Cormac just doesn't want those particular people making the movie.

    Also, not to overstate the obvious but, people really gone on the booze get overly irrascible and have a lot trouble thinking clearly about things.


    Right.. (none / 0) (#111)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 01:59:49 PM EST
    that's usually the first thing you're supposed to do, isn't it?

    Maybe Cormac just doesn't want those particular people making the movie.

    Also, not to overstate the obvious but, people really gone on the booze get overly irrascible and have a lot trouble thinking clearly about things.

    I'm not judging but I would think too much alcohol would do nothing but exacerbate those overly-dark, pessimistic tendencies Cormac seems to harbor..

    At least he didn't turn into David Mamet. What's his excuse?


    That was the director's cut (none / 0) (#112)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 02:20:58 PM EST
    His big New Orleans book (none / 0) (#70)
    by MKS on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 08:11:22 PM EST
    has been in the offing for more than a decade.  It was supposed to be a bookend to his Blood Meridian.

    He has started drinking again--his interviewers noted how he got blottoed during his more recent interviews.  He did at least the Border Trilogy while sober.


    My favorite (none / 0) (#68)
    by MKS on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 08:05:59 PM EST
    is the Crossing, the middle volume of the Border Trilogy.  Perhaps my favorite novel overall.  The true aficionados say it is too meandering  but I love it.

    Not done those yet (none / 0) (#73)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 08:14:43 PM EST
    Hopefully I will live long enough.  I'm a bit of a slow reader.

    All the Pretty Horses (none / 0) (#80)
    by MKS on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 09:35:11 PM EST
    made him popular.

    I am probably one of the few people who actually liked the movie version.   Matt Damon said how the movie was edited and produced was a searing experience.   Apparently Harvey Weinstein settled on old score with director Billy Bob Thornton by cutting the hell of the movie in the editing room.  The original apparently still  exists.  


    I liked All The Pretty Horses (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 11:45:57 AM EST
    or do I just like Penelope Cruz that much? I'm still trying to untangle that..

    No, I think it's a good movie. The characters and the script were very believable and worlds above most of the other Hollywood crapola you see.

    I especially appreciated Bruce Dern's judge character and his scenes/relationship with Matt Damon's character..


    Cruz gets better with age (none / 0) (#106)
    by MKS on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 01:32:59 PM EST
    She was rather annoying early on imo.

    I really liked the dance hall scene in All the Pretty Horses where Damon first meets up with Cruz.   With Raul Malo singing Por Que.  Great underappreciated singer.


    No Country For Old Men (none / 0) (#59)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 07:03:03 PM EST
    Features our home town celebrity.  Tess Harper.  Her parents live and she was born in my home town.   She has a house here but m not sure how much time she spends here.  I have seen her in Fred's Fish House a couple of times.

    She has been kicking it in recent years.  That movie, Jessie's mother in Breaking Bad and a small role in True Dectective.


    She was great (none / 0) (#65)
    by jondee on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 07:51:46 PM EST
    and I couldn't believe the woman who played Josh Brolin's wife. She sounded like every Texas girl I ever met and it turns out she's Scottish.

    That last scene (none / 0) (#66)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 07:58:36 PM EST
    With her and the killer is so hard to watch.  It made me feel like I needed a shower.   And there is no gore or violence.  

    Oscar for Javier (none / 0) (#69)
    by MKS on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 08:07:36 PM EST
    I knew you was crazy the minute I saw you (none / 0) (#74)
    by jondee on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 08:27:06 PM EST
    SPOILER ALERT: So, did Anton Chigurh spare her life, or did he kill her? "No Country" refuses to be conventional by making it easy for us, one way or the other. Rather, we're simply left to wonder, and ponder the depressing fact that the good guys don't always win.

    That's an interesting take (none / 0) (#81)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 09:35:39 PM EST
    It honestly never occurred to me to doubt what happened to her.  IMO we were only thankfully spared from witnessing it.

    I totally agree with what you said about both films below.

    One funny thing many people actually never get around to noticing about No Country For Old Men.  And this is most especially interesting when you consider all the Coen films,  there was no music.  There was a grand total of less than 10 minutes of musical soundtrack, mostly all scratchy minimalist strings, in the 2 hours.  Including the Mariachi band when he wakes up in Mexico.

    The film is so freakin intense most people come through it with out ever noticing that.   I have told people this who literally didn't believe it and had to go back and watch it again.

    The Coens whos films are so often defined by the musical content make a movie with no music.   Amazing.


    I think Chigurh wipes his feet (none / 0) (#82)
    by jondee on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 10:17:00 PM EST
    as he leaves the house, which leads one to believe he killed her.

    It might lead one to believe that. (none / 0) (#100)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 12:58:18 PM EST
    And it might not. Given that, unlike Chigurh's other homicidal acts in the film, we really didn't see anything happen here, we really don't know, do we? It's been left to our own imaginations.

    Good movies do that.. (none / 0) (#102)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 01:15:48 PM EST
    they make you work and wonder and figure things out on your own a little bit.

    Howdy made a great point too about the minimalist track. One of my pet peeves is these overly-obtrusive soundtracks that remind you what to feel in every scene of the movie. I'm looking at you, Speilberg..

    A soundtrack imo, can often make or break a movie. We watched Little Big Man the other night, and I thought the wild idea of having John Hammond Jr do all the music was a stroke of genius on Arthur Penn's part.


    Yep (none / 0) (#107)
    by MKS on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 01:36:44 PM EST
    Anton  Chigurh was a man of principle and Josh Brolin did not bring back the cash...., so Anton had to make good on his promise to kill his wife.

    Strange, evil world of Anton Chigurh.


    It is remarkable how well (none / 0) (#71)
    by MKS on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 08:12:08 PM EST
    the Brits and Aussies can speak "American" English so well.

    Excellent movie (none / 0) (#76)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 08:41:21 PM EST
    But left me cold ,

    Don't think I want to see it again


    "No Country" is a cold and creepy film. (none / 0) (#78)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 09:18:00 PM EST
    It deserved all the accolades it received, including the Oscar for Best Picture. But it definitely cuts its own path and makes no apologies for where it goes. And who said art had to be pleasing?

    In that regard, "No Country" reminds me of David Lynch's brilliant 1986 film noir "Blue Velvet," which also left a lot of people similarly alienated emotionally. It could be because in both films, the antagonists / villains are exceptionally bone-chilling in their respective sociopathies, to the point where we felt our own comfort zones being grossly violated by them.

    (Ironically, the very same year "Blue Velvet" was released, Dennis Hopper received an Oscar nomination as best supporting actor for his role as the redeemed town drunk in "Hoosiers," which was the feel-good movie of the decade. IMHO, the Academy really should have honored him instead for scaring the living daylights out of everyone in "Blue Velvet," which was honored with its own Oscar nomination for Best Picture that year.)



    I think Hopper said he improvised (none / 0) (#99)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 12:28:09 PM EST
    through most of that movie and that it wasn't even much of a stretch for him..

    Dean Stockwell's character, even though he's in the movie for ten minutes, is indelibly etched in my memory..

    The candy-colored clown they call the sandman..

    Classic high weirdness from David Lynch.


    When I first saw "Blue Velvet" ... (none / 0) (#105)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 01:27:10 PM EST
    ... in the theatre in '86, and Hopper's Frank Booth finally got what was coming to him, the audience applauded, that's how deeply Hopper's performance affected viewers. Yeah, Booth is very weird, as are his friends, and that's what renders him one of cinema's most compelling and frightening villains.

    I find Hopper's performance as the psychopathic Booth comparable to Henry Fonda's as Frank, the soulless gun-for-hire employed by the railroad barons in Sergio Leone's masterful 1968 western "Once Upon a Time in the West." One also experiences a deep sense of relief and satisfaction when Fonda's character ultimately gets his comeuppance in that film, too.

    (That's the only bad guy Fonda ever played in his long and storied career, and Leone's decision to cast him against type resulted in one of his greatest performances. He really deserved an Oscar nomination for it.)



    I've often wondered what Lynch (none / 0) (#145)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 09:42:36 PM EST
    was thinking (probably a dangerous thing to do) with that last scene in Blue Velvet when Laura Dern says "Oh look! a robin!" and the camera pans to a close-up of an obvious toy-mechanical bird outside the window..

    The Strain (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 09:14:11 PM EST
    Started a new season Sunday.  Thank god since The Night Of is over, Ray Donavon is taking the holiday weekend off and the new seasons of The Walkimg Dead shows have not started yet.

    Her role is a rather small one, ... (none / 0) (#17)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Aug 31, 2016 at 10:02:29 PM EST
    ... yet it's also pivotal to "Hell or High Water" because her scene sets the stage for what follows.

    Hurricane Madeline has turned SW ... (none / 0) (#18)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 02:12:32 AM EST
    ... and away from the Big Island. Public and private schools were all closed at 11:00 a.m. today, as was UH-Hilo. We're getting torrential downpours, and civil defense officials are urging everyone to stay home tonight and tomorrow, but it looks like the prospect of Madeline's heavy winds is greatly diminished. Next up, Hurricane Lester, which is expected to arrive in our vicinity by these weekend.

    Glad you at least got spared the winds. (none / 0) (#19)
    by ruffian on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 08:28:06 AM EST
    We are getting to get hit with at least some of  Hermine here in the next couple of days. Hard to tell how bad it will end up being, but the radar sure looks like buckets of rain heading right for me!

    Good thing I like staying home and watching rain.


    We'll be spared Lester's wrath. (none / 0) (#127)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 06:18:02 PM EST
    That hurricane, now a Category 2, is passing to the north of us. But it's going to come perilously close to the islands of Oahu and Kauai this weekend. If its trajectory shifts just a couple degrees to the south in the next 24 hours, Honolulu will likely be broadsided.

    Meanwhile, we're cleaning up from Madeline, which left us a great big mess in its wake. Liliuokalani Park and Gardens, down by Hilo Bay near the hotels, was completely flooded by the rain and storm surge, and is full of mud, debris and dead fish. Up here at the house, I'm definitely having our mango trees trimmed back in the next couple of weeks. The number of broken limbs and branches littering the yard is rather astonishing -- and the trees still look full!



    Climate change? (none / 0) (#150)
    by Michael Masinter on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 09:57:30 AM EST
    No hurricane approaching from the east has ever made landfall on any of the islands; Iniki came from the south. Historically the sea surface temperatures to the east were too cool to sustain tropical cyclones that developed west of Mexico and approached from the eastern Pacific, and wind shear took care of their remains.  But sea surface temperatures in the central Pacific to your east  have warmed in recent years and are approaching and occasionally surpassing the 26 degree centigrade threshold for tropical cyclones. That's still a long way from the 30 degree seas that sustain hurricanes in Florida and the eastern and western Pacific, but it should be reason for concern. I wish you well; I've been through half a dozen hurricanes in south Miami-Dade, including Andrew, and wouldn't wish the experience on anyone. Paradoxically, we seem to have benefited from changing weather patterns, with dry midlevel air, increased Saharan dust, and persistent wind shear (along with Hispaniola and Cuba) protecting the southeast coast from major storms even as the danger to the midatlantic coast has grown.  Even Hermine was unable to develop from a circulation that was evident 500 miles east of the Leeward Islands until it entered the Gulf of Mexico despite following the path of all the great hurricanes to strike southeast Florida and the keys. In the end, we're still doomed here by rising sea levels, so it's pick your poison.

    ... cyclones are our large volcanoes of Mauna Loa, Mauna Kea and Haleakala (on Maui), which rise abruptly from sea level at the ocean's surface to nearly 14,000 feet in elevation.

    The sheer size and bulk of these mountains tend to create their own countervailing weather patterns which produce significant wind shears that disrupt the circular motions of cyclones as they approach our islands from due east, deflecting them to the south and north, as was the case this week with Hurricanes Madeline and Lester.

    These three aerial photos, No. 1, No. 2 and No. 3, which I took a couple years ago while flying from Honolulu to Hilo one early morning, offer you a good perspective of just how imposing and massive Mauna Loa and Mauna Kea really are.

    Florida and the Gulf Coast, with its relatively flat topography, obviously has nothing like this to impede and deflect the movement of cyclones, which renders the region highly vulnerable to such storms. Thus, Hurricane Hermine moved right across the center of Florida without really missing a beat.



    Troughs and Ridges Turned Both Storms (none / 0) (#174)
    by Michael Masinter on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 06:00:34 PM EST
    Mountains do not deflect hurricanes.  If they did, Hispaniola, with its 9,000 and 10,000 foot peaks would not be the regular target for landfalling storms. Hawai'i is protected by the typical position of the high to your northeast and the cool waters to your east.

    Mountains will disrupt a storm if its core passes over them, but it won't keep them away.  Were it not for the mountains of Hispaniola, Florida's east coast probably would have the same frequency of storms as the east coast of Luzon; we both have +30 degree waters to our east and south during the summer.  Be glad you don't.


    Two explosions at Cape Canaveral reported (none / 0) (#20)
    by ruffian on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 08:41:09 AM EST
    this morning, at SpaceX launch site.  No details yet, but pictures look horrifying. This is bad.

    Falcon 9 (none / 0) (#22)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 08:54:55 AM EST
    SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket apparently blew up during a test firing Thursday
    The test was part of the run-up to a planned launch for Saturday of a satellite.



    Not good for SpaceX (none / 0) (#24)
    by CoralGables on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 09:03:26 AM EST
    or the Israeli satellite it would have been carrying, but doesn't appear to be any worse than that.  

    I know they have their protocls such (none / 0) (#26)
    by ruffian on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 09:42:04 AM EST
    that people are kept far away from the site, for just this reason, but it still seems amazing that no one gets hurt with a fireball like that. Hope that is the case.

    i feel (none / 0) (#75)
    by linea on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 08:36:47 PM EST
    it's dumb to have a private business do this. im just not a fan of this "privatization" sillyness. nasa's goal was to do science and the space project. a business has the goal of profit. for a business, making a profit not sending rockets into space is valid as making profits from doing it.

    Geez Ruffian (none / 0) (#27)
    by fishcamp on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 11:27:35 AM EST
    You've got buckets of rain and fireballs to contend with...good thing you're planning to stay home.  Be safe.

    At least the rain will put out the fires! (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by ruffian on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 12:37:40 PM EST
    Now we just have to wait for the gators to take over.

    gators.. (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by jondee on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 01:12:11 PM EST
    I was just reading an article written by a wildlife  biologist dealing with the question of whether reptiles "play", and the answer, based on observations of alligator and crocodile behavior seemes to be a definitive yes..

    Gators and crocs have been observed sliding down steep, muddy embankments over-and-over, giving each other back-rides in the water, and repitively tossing objects in the air and catching them..

    And as one might imagine, their more repressed human cousins might learn a thing or two from observing some of their courtship and gator-love making escapades.

    "I think I could turn and live with the animals; they are so placid and self-contained.."


    The Gators play this weekend :) (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by CoralGables on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 02:42:54 PM EST
    We have been getting buckets of rain since (none / 0) (#40)
    by vml68 on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 02:27:48 PM EST
    Monday. It feels like we have our own personal rain cloud parked right over our house.
    Sometimes, when I walk the dogs really late at night, I see all kinds of creatures come out of the conservation that is all around. The first time I see a gator, I am outta here. I suspect there is one in the lake in the middle of the community, but I usually give that area a wide berth!

    Good idea, especially at night (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by ruffian on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 04:07:18 PM EST
    If it is a body of water in FL, you have to assume it has a gator! When I first moved here it freaked me out to know they were in the big retention pond/small lake right behind my house - 40 feet from my bed!  After I got used to seeing them though, I started to find them fascinating. A link to the primordial ooze!

    I won't be so fascinated if they eat my dog though, so I did put up a fence!


    The only thing we have remotely (none / 0) (#45)
    by jondee on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 04:20:31 PM EST
    like that is some large snapping turtles.

    I once saw a big female let a small painted try to mount her on the surface of the water. He couldn't get any purchase, and just kept spinning her slowly around and around. Or who knows? maybe they were just playing..

    And me without my camera, of course.


    And some alligators ... (none / 0) (#50)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 04:51:45 PM EST
    ... can get really, really big.

    Honestly, though, having grown up in SoCal at the foot of the San Gabriel Mountains in L.A. County, one accepts the fact that there's wildlife in the vicinity, and some of them are big predators such as mountain lions and black bears.

    You co-exist with area wildlife by being aware of your surroundings, keeping a respectful distance, and taking appropriate measures to avoid attracting wild animals to your house and yard, as you did by putting up a fence to discourage your reptilian neighbors. In the San Gabriel foothills, a dog penned up in the backyard can be easy pickings for a mountain lion or coyote. It's up to you to know the area in which you choose to live.



    A few rattlesnakes around there too (none / 0) (#53)
    by jondee on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 05:18:31 PM EST
    I'd imagine. They're a little more problematic, being relatively small and well camouflaged.

    There are more than a few, actually. (none / 0) (#63)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 07:43:46 PM EST
    But rattlesnakes are found all over the country. In fact, the largest subspecies of rattlesnake is the eastern diamondback, which ranges over the southeastern United States and can grow up to 7 feet in length.

    My mother recently had to call vector control to remove a 3-ft. western diamondback that had taken up residence behind the garage. They caught it and relocated it in the mountains.

    Western diamondbacks are a lot smaller than their eastern cousins and are pretty skittish around people, and so they tend to avoid human encounters on their own. In urban neighborhoods, they tend to hang out under piles of rocks or stacks of lumber, the kind of stuff you find stored behind garages after remodeling.

    Most rattlesnake bites occur when they're surprised and react defensively. Their preferred prey is rodents, so if you've got a rattlesnake on your property, it's a pretty good indication that there's also likely a ready source of rodents nearby.

    My mother's neighborhood also has California kingsnakes, a nonvenomous constrictor which hunts and preys upon rattlesnakes. Their immune system is resistant to rattlesnake venom. For people who are into that sort of thing, kingsnakes apparently also make great pets.



    our front step 8 years ago.

    It's now a strong, healthy, 36" one-eyed king snake and lives happily in an aquarium on our kitchen counter.

    Beautiful and fascinating critters.


    I was a amateur (none / 0) (#115)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 04:18:23 PM EST
    Herpetologist through my high school years, much to moms chagrin.
    Always wanted , but never did get a King snake. They seem quite popular as pets today, from what I understand many bred in captivity king snakes are sold as pets.

    Had over the course of time as pets, milk snake, garter snakes, ring necked snake, hog nose snake, caiman.

    In the summer I would build a outdoor  park for baby painted turtles and snapping turtles I would catch, along with the caiman. Fencing surrounding a small childs wading pool dug into the ground.


    As a kid in NJ we found and briefly kept (none / 0) (#120)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 05:02:54 PM EST
    garters and ring-necked snakes, until my mom got wind of them.

    The ring necked is a beautiful animal. iirc, we'd find them under rocks and leaves and stuff.

    The snake we have now is a Mountain Kingsnake - red, black, and cream colored. It likes nothing better than wrapping itself around a warm and friendly arm and simply hanging out enjoying the warmth.


    Sounds like me as a kid.. (none / 0) (#121)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 05:34:17 PM EST
    we used to catch those big black racers. I haven't seen one of those in years.

    Hognose snakes are interesting: they're completely harmless, but if you corner one, they puff themselves up and put on such an intimidating display of hissing and snapping you'd think they were the most dangerous viper on the planet.


    And finally (none / 0) (#122)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 05:56:52 PM EST
    If you refuse to be intimidated by their impressive imitation of a rattlesnake,
    And just touch them, they will roll over and play dead,



    Ah (none / 0) (#124)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 06:01:20 PM EST
    Red to black...Venom lack
    Red to yellow...Kill a fellow
    Words to know if snake hunting in Southern regions

    I always wanted the Eastern Chain King Snake

    I was actually pricing them online recently, everyone stating bred in captivity, and gentle nature.

    The snakes I caught in the wild did not usually possess that gentle nature, lol

    Yours sound likes a real pet,  nice

    And what does he eat for dinner?


    fence lizards the kids catch out back.

    My husband played at that golf course (none / 0) (#58)
    by vml68 on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 07:01:47 PM EST
    before that video came out. Another time, he was walking to one of the holes at another course and found the groundskeeper? getting ready to dispose off a freshly dispatched copperhead. That freaked him out a bit.

    We have a black racer that hangs out by our patio. It does not bother me but my husband will not step out if I tell him the snake is out there.
    He is not fond of snakes :-)!


    I have a new-found respect for (none / 0) (#98)
    by jondee on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 11:55:36 AM EST
    poisonous snakes after reading that 40,000 people a year die from snake bites in India..

    And not a pleasant way to go either, from what I hear.


    When we were in southern Africa ... (none / 0) (#109)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 01:47:34 PM EST
    ... and on safari in Swaziland, we were specifically warned about the black mamba, a rather large snake which is highly venomous and quite deadly, and very prevalent throughout Swaziland and KwaZulu-Natal in eastern South Africa. So of course, we didn't see a single one the entire time we were there.

    And ironically, on our final day in Africa (Cape Town), I was bitten by a button spider, which is an African cousin of the black widow that's about the size of a quarter. I required medical treatment, and I suffered from nausea and some serious nosebleeds over the next few days. The 26-hour trip back to L.A. from Cape Town was miserable.



    Before we moved down here we got plenty (none / 0) (#55)
    by vml68 on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 06:51:22 PM EST
    of warnings about the danger of walking dogs near bodies of water/retention ponds/lakes. So, I told our realtor that I would not consider any place that backed up to a pond.
    After being here awhile and seeing some very nice houses backed up to ponds, I changed my mind, figuring that I could always put up a fence. Then, I saw a video of a gator climbing a fence. Not cool!

    I have held a baby gator and find them cute. But, when they get to dog eating size, not so much!


    No excitement yet (none / 0) (#54)
    by ruffian on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 06:33:53 PM EST
    Heavy cloud, no rain. h/t Sting

    Mornin' Joe today (none / 0) (#30)
    by BackFromOhio on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 12:24:49 PM EST
    was a disaster for the Democrats; first presented Trump's meeting with Mex. Pres as though it was all appropriate diplomatifc; Mika finally was able to read the statements by the Pres to the effect he had stated Mex would not pay for the wall, but DT got away with not being called a liar and the fact of a simultaneous statement before the press entirely lost.
    Then Tim Kaine came on and was wholly unprepared; he had almost no comeback to questions about emails or the Foundation.  Someone, i.e., Shrum, Conason, or Carville should have prepped Kaine before he agreed to appear.
    And is it no wonder that the polls are tightening? When is someone going to call out the talking heads in a major way?

    Trump's visit (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Repack Rider on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 01:18:20 PM EST
    ...to Mexico got him a "participation trophy" from the lickspittle press.  

    Twenty minutes of "looking presidential" clearly cancels 50 years of looking like an arrogant, friendless, megalomania, entitled, moronic jerk (not the noun I wanted to use, but it's a family-friendly site).


    Yes, he is (none / 0) (#38)
    by KeysDan on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 02:10:33 PM EST
    either incompetent or he is a choke artist--to borrow his description of Little Marco when he stressed out.  He saved his tough talk, even in private, until he got to Arizona, comfortable with his alt right--Mexico will pay for that wall, they just don't know it yet.

    Yep (none / 0) (#47)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 04:25:02 PM EST
    This past year he has lowered the bar

    .to Mexico got him a "participation trophy"

    And now intends to jump over it.

    If he wasn't so impulsive and idiotic. I would have said it was his plan


    Not to mention the low bar for (none / 0) (#83)
    by ruffian on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 05:44:13 AM EST
    'Looking presidential'. He stood at a podium next to a real chief of state. Is that all it takes? He spoke gibberish about the huuuuge number of Mexicans he employs....2nd generation, 3rd generation....aka Americans.



    Trump "looked presidential", (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by KeysDan on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 10:22:04 AM EST
    and attempted to improve his standing by making an allied country's president look un-presidential. Trump tried to look huuge; and, could only do so, by making the Mexican president look diminished.

    As Low energy Jeb, Little Marco the choke artist, Ly'n Ted, Child Molester Ben Carson, too ugly Fiorina, and the rest of that motley crowd experienced so as to propel Trump.


    Really good point (none / 0) (#94)
    by ruffian on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 10:33:59 AM EST
    A born diplomat, that one. Sees everyone as competition, not an ally.

    I'm reminded a bit (none / 0) (#89)
    by CST on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 09:04:58 AM EST
    Of when Palin went to the UN.

    Now they know that either one (none / 0) (#32)
    by ruffian on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 12:39:37 PM EST
    of them is going to get asked about the all important emails and foundation over and above anything else. Media neutrality, you know!

    what's more (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by BackFromOhio on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 01:13:38 PM EST
    is Kaine did not seem to have listened to the Trump/Mex Prez press conference; if he had, given he speaks Spanish, he would have caught the lie and could have called Trump out on this.

    Read, instead, Armando's tweet storm (none / 0) (#104)
    by Towanda on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 01:25:44 PM EST
    analyzing the FBI report on the Clinton emails.

    Comey looks the fool.


    Missed that (5.00 / 3) (#126)
    by Nemi on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 06:10:41 PM EST
    -- I simply can't keep up with Armandos productivity, heh :) -- so fortunately Greg Dworkin has storyfied the 'storm'.

    I absolutely agree with the following which I always found had to be considered completely out of line:

    Comey's actions are much more troublesome than anything Clinton did. He held a press conference to express his personal opinion - on matter beyond his duties and expertise. His job was to submit his recommendations to the DOJ. That was all. No one sought nor should he have provided his opinion on Clinton.

    ... and something that seems to have hurt Hillary Clinton the most post-FBI investigation: Every 'foe' of hers can -- and does ad infinitum! -- now cite his "extremely careless" and "reckless". Shame on him.

    Among the many interesting other tweetstorms, that Greg Dworkin is doing a terrific job of storyfying, the one by an amazing young man, Matthew Chapman, 'on media handling of Clinton and Trump', is also great and worth a read.


    • The Director's very public remarks, which understandably received widespread airplay and coverage in the national media; and
    • The information that's actually contained in the FBI report;
    One has to question whether the guy had even bothered to read the report himself before offering his personal take on the subject, or instead relied upon one or more of his aides to brief him about it.

    If anyone behaved in a "reckless" manner here, it appears to have been Comey with his irresponsible editorializing, in which he now looks to have offered us a rather remarkable misinformed opinion.



    I don't think that (none / 0) (#116)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 04:22:45 PM EST
    Report bodes well for Madame Sec.

    She did not come across too well, especially for being the SOS.

    Actual reports   http://tinyurl.com/jgybo7t


    Madame President is fine (5.00 / 6) (#117)
    by CoralGables on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 04:25:31 PM EST
    She'll be fine. (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 05:56:55 PM EST
    The FBI report basically confirms what she said about the emails. Surprisingly, the person who does NOT come off so well in the report is former Sec. Colin Powell, who recently took such public umbrage at Mrs. Clinton's suggestion that the two had talked about the use of a private server.

    It turns out that despite his statements to the contrary, Powell did indeed have communication with Mrs. Clinton on the subject in Jan. 2009 prior to her taking office, just as she said -- and via email no less. He warned her that if she wasn't careful, any work-related email sent via her Blackberry cold become part of the public record. "I got around it all by not saying much and not using systems that captured the data," Powell said, per the FBI summary.

    What further surprised me is that the FBI really didn't examine the clear failure of Mrs. Clinton and her predecessors to comply with the requirements of the Federal Records Act. She came closest of all of them to compliance when belatedly prompted by the State Dept. well over a year after she had already stepped down, turning over 30,000 pages of work-related emails. To this date, neither Powell nor Condi Rice has complied.

    But as noted in the State Dept. IG's report from a few months ago, there is no indication that Mrs. Clinton or her aides were ever properly briefed by agency officials regarding their obligations under the FRA, which is ridiculous. One can't just assume that people are going to know FRA law. And if they weren't briefed, it's certainly not a stretch to assume that Powell or Rice were probably not briefed, as well.

    The State Department really needs to do a much better job at preserving and filing its employees' work products. When I worked for House leadership at the state legislature, we were fully briefed by the State Archivist every two years about what was considered part of the public record and what was not, and what we were required under state law to save and file with the State Archives.

    There is no reason why a federal agency of such historical importance as the Department of State should engage in such sloppy and careless record-keeping.



    Well (none / 0) (#125)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 06:05:13 PM EST
    There is no reason why a federal agency of such historical importance as the Department of State should engage in such sloppy and careless record-keeping.

    I can start in this particular instance with several reasons, all prompted by Madame Sec's actions.

    Just watch , the press will feed off of this for quite a while.

    There are numerous failings listed in this FBI report.

    Reporters are already tweeting out the highlights, or lowlights.


    Knock yourself out (5.00 / 5) (#131)
    by ruffian on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 06:46:19 PM EST
    I mean, really, please.

    Some less than stellar moments (none / 0) (#137)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 07:19:34 PM EST
    According to pages 26-7 of the first part of the 302, Hillary told agents e-mails containing information that investigators had verified had been classified at the time of transmission, including Top Secret/SAP -- that she believed that the information wasn't classified, and was not a problem even if the data had gotten into the hands of foreign governments:
    3 weeks after NYT publish Clinton email server story, there was a big wipe of her emails conducted. Ouch!

    Clinton told FBI agents she could not remember ever receiving any training for how to preserve federal records or treat classified material.

    "Clinton could not give an example of how classification of a document was determined," the FBI wrote in its notes.

    "Clinton did not recall receiving any emails she thought should not be on an unclassified system," the FBI wrote.

    "Clinton stated deliberation over a future drone strike did not give her cause for concern regarding classification," the notes said.

    Clinton thought the "C" denoted classified information had something to do with alphabetical order
    Hillary served on the Senate Armed Services Committee from 2003-9, a panel that routinely handles classified information of practically every level. So Hillary never got briefed on the meanings of classified markings and the procedures required to protect classified information during that entire time?

    I know this won't matter to any readers here, but to the outside world, it has been taking its toll.
    The Donald has not seen his numbers rise, his ceiling may very well be 40%, but Madame Sec has been dropping steadily.
    Mr Assange has promised a steady drip of more e mails throughout October, Madame Sec cannot get any semblance of a message out. Her only recourse to hold onto her lead is to keep pounding The Donald as unacceptable and incapable of being President.  The emails have, and will continue to drown out any other message she attempts.


    What our scandalmongering press ... (none / 0) (#128)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 06:30:19 PM EST
    ... "feeds off of," and what's actually contained in the FBI report, will likely be two entirely different things. It doesn't help that the report was released as pat of a Friday document dump, and just prior to a three-day weekend.

    Yes (none / 0) (#129)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 06:33:40 PM EST
    It doesn't help that the report was released as pat of a Friday document dump, and just prior to a three-day weekend.

    Why was the FBI trying to bury this report, I found that odd.
    The Friday before a 3 day weekend is when Government agencies want to bury "bad news", so it doesn't see the light of day.
    But this reflects poorly on Madame Sec, so who in the FBI  (or just plain who) ordered the release this afternoon. Someone trying to minimize he damage


    The FBI (5.00 / 2) (#132)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 06:48:00 PM EST
    and the house would love to bury the report because it makes both of them look bad. Hillary has wanted the full interview released.

    I don't think the FBI looks bad at all. (5.00 / 2) (#139)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 07:29:45 PM EST
    The agency was tasked to investigate the matter, and did so quite thoroughly, per this report. The agents assigned to the investigation did their job.

    Rather, the one with the egg on his face is their boss, FBI Director James Comey, who offered some rather egregious public insinuations about Mrs. Clinton's conduct at his press conference which simply aren't supported by the actual evidence. As BTD noted on Twitter, "there is nothing remotely criminal in Clinton's actions."



    Yes (5.00 / 3) (#141)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 07:42:39 PM EST
    I would agree that Comey looks like a big time fool and a hack. There is a theory that he said what he said to cover for his own incompetence in the Pulse mass murder.

    No, it reflects badly on the FBI (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by ruffian on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 06:49:54 PM EST
    Namely Comey, whose statement a few weeks ago implied there was serious wrongdoing that he'd like to prosecute  but was advised against it.  that is just not true. He's the one that wants this buried.

    You know, Trevor, you really ought to ... (5.00 / 3) (#135)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 07:16:18 PM EST
    ... first read the FBI report, before recklessly concluding that it "reflects poorly upon Madame Sec." Honestly, you're just as bad as your buddy Paul Ryan, because you're playing a cheesy political game with a national security issue. Simply put, the report itself does not support your contentions. Rather, it confirms that:

    • Former Sec. Colin Powell clearly dissembled when recently questioned by the media about his discussions with Mrs. Clinton about the use of personal email accounts for work, because the FBI is in possession of their email exchange;

    • There was "no restriction on the use of personal email accounts" for the conduct of State Dept. business;

    • Only 3 emails marked "C" were found in Mrs. Clinton's emails, later determined to have been improperly marked, and were sent to, and not from, her by senior staff; and

    • If such information was supposed to have been classified, then they were compromised by the actions of career State officials, and not by Mrs. Clinton herself.

    Stop parroting what you hear from right-wing media, and read the report yourself.



    Huh? (1.00 / 1) (#149)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 09:51:23 AM EST
    Only 3 emails marked "C" were found in Mrs. Clinton's emails, later determined to have been improperly marked, and were sent to, and not from, her by senior staff; and

    Does not compute.

    ...110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were "up-classified" to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent.



    Comey (5.00 / 3) (#151)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 10:48:03 AM EST
    was wrong and retracted that the next day in the hearing with him. His own statement doesn't jive with what the actual FBI report says. Read the report.

    After this it seems apparent that Comey has become enamored of the alt right. I don't know how he can lead the FBI with any sort of trust any longer. How can the majority of Americans rely on him to do his job when he botched his statement and treat all Americans fairly not giving special privileges to the alt right?


    Ga, provide some proof (1.00 / 1) (#152)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 11:06:06 AM EST
    Your turn.

    Here you go: (none / 0) (#155)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 11:15:47 AM EST
    Thank you. Now the rest of the story. (none / 0) (#162)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 01:46:55 PM EST
    Really now??

    What he said was:

    ..110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information,which is the lowest level of classification.

    And you want to talk about 3  that she wasn't smart enough to know were Classified?

    Wow. Plus, he didn't retract. He said that it could be inferred that some could miss the "C" because of a lack of a header.

    First, if she was too stupid to now know what the C meant then you are saying that her memory was so poor she didn't remember what she was told in her briefing before she signed the paperwork...

    Secondly you are saying that her lack of intellectual curiosity allowed her to read the email and not ask anyone what the "C" meant.

    Thirdly you are saying that her intelligence is so low that she can't recognize information that is classified. That she is like a child that must be spoon fed or else she will throw the food in her bowl on the floor for all to see.

    This is a person you want as President?

    So if that is what you believe....Comey is right. There was no intent. She's just so dumb she can't be trusted to do the right thing.

    Finally, what you hang your hat on is 3 emails as if that excuses the 107 that were marked correctly at the time they were sent.

    Lemme see.... I have read 107 emails that these "C's" in the text and they were all marked classified. Yet this one has a "C" in the text but isn't marked classified....Hmmmmm Oh well, no matter...

    Ga, when presidents miss things people die.

    When presidents don't ask questions people die.

    Face it. The private server was employed because she did not want the "pay for play" relationships between her, as Secof State, and donors to be seen. It, by itself, proves the intent to do an illegal act just as surely as a person concealing the purchase of a gun proves intent.

    She doesn't need to be Prez. She needs 10 to 20 in a federal pen.


    I've never seen someone churn up (5.00 / 4) (#164)
    by jondee on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 02:15:47 PM EST
    the surface of the water so much on their way down..

    Rage rage against the dying of the light, Jim.


    Jim, you got your facts wrong (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 06:00:41 PM EST
    Only three emails had the "c" on them.  None others bore any classification markings.

    Okay, if you insist and I don't think you are (none / 0) (#189)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 09:39:10 PM EST

    But if you are that means that she read:

    110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information,which is the lowest level of classification.

    and she was not capable of recognizing that 8 Top Secret, 36  Secret and 8 Confidential emails were not properly marked and called it to attention?

    So your folks's defense of her is that she is stupid? Has a poor memory?

    That would be a great commercial...for the Trumpster.


    No (5.00 / 1) (#190)
    by Yman on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 10:09:56 PM EST
    Our defense is that these types of ridiculous claims and kindergartner logic are stupid.

    Actually, ... that's not really fair.

    To kindergartners.


    Okay (none / 0) (#200)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Sep 04, 2016 at 08:48:07 AM EST
    Our defense is that these types of ridiculous claims and kindergartner logic are stupid.

    What you are saying is that she is smart enough to recognize that these contained classified information and just ignored that and proceeded.....

    That's gross negligence.

    Jail time for Hillary.


    Please read the FBI report, Jim, ... (none / 0) (#191)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 11:44:11 PM EST
    ... and stop parroting the spin and misinformation you heard elsewhere.

    Donald, the link is to a transcript to Comey's (none / 0) (#199)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Sep 04, 2016 at 08:42:53 AM EST

    If you want to say he lied that is your right.


    Lol (none / 0) (#153)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 11:09:17 AM EST
    That is one of the funniest things I have ever read. Loosen the tin foil

    After this it seems apparent that Comey has become enamored of the alt right.

    You tell (none / 0) (#154)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 11:14:26 AM EST
    me then why was he attempting to help the alt right with his statement? His statement does not give with what was said in the report. Explain that?

    When he made his statement in July Trump was already the nominee. Right?


    Hmmm (none / 0) (#138)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 07:24:04 PM EST
    There was "no restriction on the use of personal email accounts" for the conduct of State Dept. business;

    Madame Sec had someone fired for using personal e mail in 2011, and she sent out memos to staff telling them it was unacceptable

    Only 3 emails marked "C" were found in Mrs. Clinton's emails, later determined to have been improperly marked, and were sent to, and not from, her by senior staff; and

    She did not know what the c stood for, besides that , how many e mails were found to be classified? Hundreds.

    This will not sway Talk Left readers, but read the news reports, they will not be kind


    The whole discussion (5.00 / 5) (#142)
    by FlJoe on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 08:39:06 PM EST
    about the (C)'s is ludicrous, we are talking about a total of nine, out of context characters, out of fkgn millions.  

    The fkgn (C) designation is only valid when the document designates it as such in the fkng header, the fkgn headers which never, ever existed.

    The SD has already determined that these fkng (C)s were wrongly included in the first place, which shows the nit picking Comey was throwing out to smear Hillary.

    If anyone doesn't understand that, they are either.
    (A) Blinded by Hillary hate
    (B) Stupid
    (C)All of the above(much of the press fall here)
    (D) Rant over


    Be kind (none / 0) (#156)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 11:53:54 AM EST
    It's all they have, bless their hearts.

    ... you don't know what you're talking about. Most all of those emails were part of email chains, and were designated in response to Judicial Watch's FOIA request to the State Dept., which was over two years after she stepped down as Secretary of State.

    Further, both the Intelligence Community IG and the State Dept. IG have publicly disagreed about the necessity of their ex post facto classification, given that most all of these emails have been post of the State Dept. website for months.

    Read. The. Report. I linked to it above.


    Intesting sequence (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by FlJoe on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 01:31:41 PM EST
    starting on page 23 section D. Where the FBI describes the wide swath of government officials(even DoD!) that were for the most part responsible for originating these chains, including many career bureaucrats whose job it was to make the secure/unsecured decisions. This pretty much tracks with what Hillary has been saying all along.

    It's obvious from the interviews they had with some of the functionaries that originated most of these chains that they were just doing their job in good faith, trying to quickly disseminate information up the chain without crossing the line. In other words it was the mid level professionals who made the decisions and testimony   showed absolutely no-one along the line believed they had reason to question those decisions.  


    Here's the bottom line: (5.00 / 1) (#173)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 05:56:38 PM EST
    This FBI report stands as an almost complete exoneration of Hillary Clinton. As investigators noted and confirmed, she wasn't prohibited by either federal law or departmental rules from using a personal device or a personal email account, and others at the State Department also did so on a routine basis. She was consistently truthful in offering her reasons why she did it.

    Contrary to his recent assertions, former Sec. of State Colin Powell did indeed advise Mrs. Clinton about using personal email shortly after she took office. Just as she said, this occurred in Jan. 2009, and not one year later as Powell had insisted to the media. Further, she chose to follow the rules rather than skirt them, as Powell admittedly did.

    Mrs. Clinton complied with departmental guidelines and didn't take her BlackBerry into her office. She communicated with only a very select group of 13 people.

    She took no part in reviewing her emails and deciding which were personal and which were work-related before handing them over to the State Department, and instead had others do that for her.

    Mrs. Clinton had nothing to do with the erasure of information and data on the PRN server, because as the FBI concluded it to be inadvertent, and due to a staffer's screw-up on PRN's end.

    Mrs. Clinton and her staff all believed at the time that they were being careful to not conduct sensitive conversations over unclassified email systems.

    Save for three, all emails subsequently deemed  classified by the Intelligence Community were designated as such long after she had already stepped down as Secretary of State, in direct response to Judicial Watch's FOIA request.

    Finally, and contrary to what Director James Comey had strongly alluded in his press conference, FBI investigators found absolutely no evidence whatsoever to support the boss's contention that the Clinton Foundation's server was likely hacked.



    Towanda (none / 0) (#157)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 12:20:22 PM EST
    do you have a link to Armando's tweets? Thanks!

    Not (none / 0) (#179)
    by Nemi on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 06:24:51 PM EST
    Towanda -- obviously :) -- still here you go: Armando Twitter.

    But be forewarned that it's seriously time-consuming following him; I really don't get how he manages.


    Thanks! (none / 0) (#181)
    by BackFromOhio on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 06:51:03 PM EST
    this is media fodder (none / 0) (#49)
    by pitachips on Thu Sep 01, 2016 at 04:36:51 PM EST
    This is all entertainment. It's another excuse for CNN/MSNBC/FOXNEWS to shout "Breaking News."

    No one for whom it is important that a candidate appear "presidential" is going to believe that one trip to Mexico overrides everything else Trump has said/done over the past 2 years, let alone the last 40 years.

    Trump's favorable/unfavorables have been 35/65 for as long as I can remember. It is simply impossible to win an election when 2/3 of the country does not like you.  


    Well I guess this is one way to change the topic (none / 0) (#84)
    by ruffian on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 06:49:02 AM EST
    Melania Trump is suing the Daily Mail over a story that implied she was an escort in the 90`s.

    Want to volunteer for Donald? (none / 0) (#113)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 03:28:20 PM EST
    You better be ready to keep your mouth SHUT.

    I love this

    Sign up to volunteer for Donald Trump's campaign, and you might be giving up more than you bargained for.

    Earlier this week, reporters began poring over the 2,271-word nondisclosure agreement that Trump's campaign requires its volunteers sign. The forms are extraordinarily broad, virtually prohibiting any volunteers from criticizing Trump or his family for the rest of their lifetimes, according to Rachel Sklar, a lawyer and CNN contributor.

    On Twitter, Sklar noted that the forms also bar volunteers from criticizing Trump's brands, disclosing anything personal about Trump (including his taxes), or from even employing people who work for Hillary Clinton's campaign. (That last one's illegal, Sklar says.)



    In addition to your soul? (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by ruffian on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 06:43:07 PM EST
    Thats (none / 0) (#136)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 07:19:26 PM EST
    A given.

    i feel (none / 0) (#143)
    by linea on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 09:18:04 PM EST
    it's wrong to even mention that especially in print. it's an attack on women's choices and little more than slut-shaming a woman who worked as a model.

    She could have ignored it as ludicrous and moved (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by ruffian on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 12:23:14 PM EST
    on. I had never heard of it until she decided to sue. Now she is starting an argument over whether or not she was an escort in the middle of her husband's presidential campaign. Tells me they know they are going to lose anyway and need to milk every last dime out of everyone they can.

    Nonsense. It's about anyone (none / 0) (#171)
    by Towanda on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 05:49:41 PM EST
    working illegally, according to a lot of evidence -- that she has not countered -- while being part of the anti-immigrant campaign.

    If the Trumps had this to hide, they ought to have thought through (a) his running for high office, and (b) especially on an anti-immigrant platform.

    That she also chose to model nude, in sexual positions, also is another level of modeling that might have given pause to anyone less arrogant or at least more knowledgeable about politics.


    Kdog, this one's for you (none / 0) (#97)
    by jbindc on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 11:54:47 AM EST
    This post is about the daughter of an acquaintance / Facebook friend of mine's 2 year old.

    Right in your wheelhouse.  😀

    "We got the bubbleheaded bleach-blond, comes on at five."
    - Don Henley, "Dirty Laundry" (1982)

    ... and absolutely fabulously so. Meet Milo Yannopolous, Donald Trump's political boy toy and right-wing Scream Queen, whose shtick got royally blown up today by ABC News' Terry Moran during a TV interview.

    Seems that Moran didn't have much patience for our poor li'l Milo's nasty attitude or modus operandi. I bet the end of the interview got cut by network editors -- you know, the part where Moran takes a dollar out of his wallet, throws it in Milo's face and says, "Miss Thing, buy yourself a fckn clue."


    I saw that interview on... (none / 0) (#147)
    by desertswine on Fri Sep 02, 2016 at 10:42:16 PM EST
    Nightline.  That Milo character is one pathetic case.

    Seeing on a daily basis (none / 0) (#148)
    by Nemi on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 08:16:18 AM EST
    just how much horrendous, inflammatory, insulting, sexist language is still permitted, it must have been a lot worse -- still hard to imagine! -- what was coming from this repugnant person, Milo Yiannopoulos, for him to be permanently banned from Twitter.

    Though, it probably wasn't so much his language that got him banned, as it was his harassment of Leslie Jones getting a little too much public notice = bad publicity for Twitter; aka CYA!


    Interesting take (none / 0) (#159)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 12:33:36 PM EST
    By Frank Bruni.  Might have some validity


    Did Democrats cry wolf so many times before Trump that no one hears or heeds them now?

    "There's enough truth to it to compel some self-reflection," Wolfson, who was the communications director for Hillary Clinton's presidential bid in 2008, told me this week.

    "And I'm quite confident I employed language that, in retrospect, was hyperbolic and inaccurate, language that cheapened my ability -- our ability -- to talk about this moment with accuracy and credibility."

    That's a question being asked with increasing frequency, though mostly in conservative circles and publications.
    In Commentary, Noah Rothman has repeatedly examined this subject. He wrote back in March that when "honorable and decent men" like McCain and Romney "are reflexively dubbed racists simply for opposing Democratic policies, the result is a G.O.P. electorate that doesn't listen to admonitions when the genuine article is in their midst."

    Crying wolf when there is actually a wolf is not (5.00 / 1) (#170)
    by ruffian on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 05:08:36 PM EST
    a bad thing. If people had listened, the bigger wolf would not have come along.

    I think the point was (none / 0) (#172)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 05:51:24 PM EST
    That after all the hyperbole cast at decent men,  McCain and Romney,
    People ignore the same rhetoric when cast at trump, and say , we have heard it all before from you.
    Obama in 2016   "This is different than just having policy differences. I recognize that they profoundly disagree with myself or Hillary Clinton on tax policy or certain elements of foreign policy, but there have been Republican presidents with whom I disagreed with but I didn't have a doubt that they could function as president. I think I was right and Mitt Romney and John McCain were wrong on certain policy issues, but I never thought that they couldn't do the job."

    But the vitriol was already cast at both McCain and Romney (especially Romney) , so words in 2016 cannot change what people remember


    Jonathan (none / 0) (#177)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 06:08:50 PM EST
    Chait takes that argument down completely in the link Donald has below.

    The real argument should be against the GOP and the conspiracy theories that they have been shopping and also the problem is that it wasn't liberals that were warning about Trump. There certainly were a lot of Republicans warning against him too to no avail. The real problem is conservative media and voters that listen to nothing else. Trump speaks their language even though the rest of the country thinks he's nuts. Nobody made those people lease of all liberals get out of their beds and go the polls. It's also ignores the fact that the GOP has been bed with the alt right for a long, long time. Liberals had nothing to do with that.


    It doesn't register anymore (none / 0) (#185)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 08:03:17 PM EST
    In 2012 the entire Obama strategy was to rip apart Mitt Romney, make him totally unacceptable, as a person.
    Romney is a good man, the differences were in policy.
    So after the 2012 all out destruction of the nominee, what is being done to the Donald is just same old, same old.
    Even though the character of the 2 men are miles apart

    What you are (5.00 / 2) (#187)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 08:32:06 PM EST
    complaining about has been going on for 16 years. Obama reran Bush's 2000 campaign in 2008 and reran Bush's 2004 campaign in 2012. The 2004/2012 campaigns were all about the other guy. Obama is not a policy person. He's all about personality politics much like Bush was though Bush made it about personality simply because he knew nobody likes conservative issue stances. The media who you love to quote is all about personality politics too not about issues.

    As far as Trump goes, he does it to himself. If there was no media in this country all people would have to do is view his tweets and see what his views are.


    Thank you (none / 0) (#188)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 09:32:45 PM EST
    Proved Frank Bruni's point.
    After the destruction of Mitt Romney, a good man, the same arguments are once again thrown against The Donald.
    But those tactics have grown old, and have less bite to them.
    Once used against a gentleman like Romney, you try the same things against the vulgarian...
    well, it doesn't have the same effect as before...a tired act.
    Even though the 2 men are vastly different, and the argument may actually be valid this time.
    As Wolfson claimed

    how do Republicans who are publicly (none / 0) (#193)
    by ding7777 on Sun Sep 04, 2016 at 01:01:26 AM EST
    denouncing Trump as a racist fit into Wolfson's claim?

    The general public (none / 0) (#196)
    by TrevorBolder on Sun Sep 04, 2016 at 07:02:36 AM EST
    Has become inoculated to over the top political insults and claims against any political opponent.

    In the case of Republican candidates, they have always been "borderline racist", well, just because they are republican. Or so it has been said.

    So whether it is Republicans or Democrats calling Trump racist, that term has lost much of its meaning because of it being used so broadly against Republican candidates such as McCain and Romney


    No acutally (none / 0) (#194)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Sep 04, 2016 at 05:47:32 AM EST
    you completely missed the point and if you read Chait's takedown of Bruni's article you will notice that Bruni stops at 2008. Bruni can't admit that he was part of the media that enabled Bush so he's looking elsewhere for blame. Bruni is also the one that brought just what you are talking about to the forefront. Read Chait's article but I guess you aren't because I've asked twice and you continue along these same lines that are not even responding to what I am saying. You're just screaming and moving the goal posts.

    ... JAonathan Chait takes direct issue with Frank Bruni's contentions:

    "Liberals may be accused of many sins, but enabling Trump is not one them. Liberals have spent a quarter-century warning that the Republican Party was descending into unhinged, knee-jerk, anti-intellectual reaction. What Trump reveals is not that liberal warnings about the growing ignorance and derangement of the Republican Party were taken too seriously, but that they weren't taken seriously enough."

    Suffice to say that there's a good reason why the New York Times relegated him to the role of food critic, and Judith Miller no longer works there. Perhaps they can soon hustle Maureen Dowd into early retirement, too.



    Final: Houston 33, No. 3 Oklahoma 23. (none / 0) (#168)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 03, 2016 at 04:21:38 PM EST
    The Cougars once again announce their presence to America's football punditry, with a systematic dismantling of the highly touted Sooners in a game that really could've been much worse for Coach Bob Stoopes & Co. than the final score would otherwise indicate. They're lucky that they only lost by 10.

    Look for Houston to replace Oklahoma in next week's Top Ten.

    Nope - sorry, Jim (none / 0) (#201)
    by Yman on Sun Sep 04, 2016 at 03:41:26 PM EST
    What you are saying is that she is smart enough to recognize that these contained classified information and just ignored that and proceeded.....

    That's gross negligence.

    Jail time for Hillary.

    Apart from sophomoric logic, you haven't the slightest clue what you're talking about.  You can't even cite a statute that you - in all your ridiculous logic - think she's broken, yet you claim as a fact that she's engaged in some kind of criminal conduct.

    You're a joke ... and not even a good one.