Friday Open Thread and Downtime

TalkLeft is moving to a different server tonight. The site should only be inaccessible a few minutes while the DNS changes over. You can always check our backup site and I'll put something there when the site has finished moving.

Busy work day, this is an open thread, all topics welcome.

Update: Winter storm is here, 6 to 12 inches of snow expected.

< Restaurant in Trump SoHo to Close, Low Patronage Since Election | Congress Agrees on Funding Bill Through September >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Downtime is good. (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Apr 28, 2017 at 04:21:31 PM EST
    It's a rather quiet day at the office here in Hilo, and after a pretty manic last two weeks which included three separate trips to the state legislature over in Honolulu, I'm rather enjoying just catching up on correspondence.

    Elder Daughter and her husband are both in a wedding party on Kauai this weekend, so I'm returning to Honolulu later this afternoon with The Spouse to babysit The Grandson, who's now 18 months old and firing away on all cylinders. Should be fun, although I'm still in my walking boot with my broken toes on my right foot and can't exactly move very quickly myself. We'll arrive at 4:45 p.m. HST, just in time for Friday afternoon rush hour, which always serves to remind us why we now reside on the Big Island. We'll return home on Sunday night.

    Anyway, I hope that everybody has an enjoyable weekend, doing whatever it is that you want to do.


    We also will be minding my first grandchild (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by Towanda on Fri Apr 28, 2017 at 10:18:55 PM EST
    almost a year younger than yours . . . but my gosh, he already is growing up so fast.  He's all cylinders in his walker, and he's getting ready to crawl.  I keep warning my daughter that life as they know it will change forever, when he does.

    And how grandparenting has changed, with the new technologies!  As my daughter is a teacher, and the tech whiz in her district, she makes sure that all four grandparents get almost daily photos and videos on Facebook.  

    And even with my reduced mobility, Donald, I still can move fast when we get a Facetime call to see that marvelous little face on the screen.  And when he sees us, he recognizes us, with a great smile and giggles.  

    There is no greater feeling.  I'm loving this grandparenting gig -- even though it means that we have returned to the decor of earlier decades, with our house full of the furnishings and equipment and supplies for his visits here.  And as this old house, unlike his own, has wood floors everywhere, he really enjoys treating it as a racetrack to do laps around it in his walker.  

    And, of course, my daughter carts in more supplies, along with the baby carrier.  I was heard to say, upon his first visit here, that her report of his birth weight was incorrect.  He was not eight pounds, fifteen ounces.  He was one hundred and eight pounds, fifteen ounces -- because babies come with one hundred pounds of stuff.  


    ... keep an eye out, but when they're walking, that's when they try to get into anything they can reach. As I'm certain you've since realized, grandkids can sure keep you on your toes! How soon we recall our own experiences and challenges at parenting during these times.

    That's the stage we're at right now, where the little guy tries to open cupboards and drawers. Fortunately, my son-in-law and I toddler-proofed the place with latches while he was an infant, and his attention is also easily diverted with toys. If the weather ever clears up enough, we're going to take him to the zoo. But it started really storming here last night and has yet to let up, so we're effectively housebound at the moment.

    I wonder how it is over on Kauai (100 miles WNW of Honolulu), where Elder Daughter and her husband are? The wedding they're attending is supposed to be outdoors. That's certainly not going to happen, if the weather's anything like it is over here. Hope the wedding party has a backup plan.



    Awww, what a good grandpa you are (5.00 / 4) (#17)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 10:13:31 AM EST
    We are packing and preparing our home for sale. Headed to DC, my long deep South exile is over.

    Miss (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 11:26:21 AM EST
    our being able to have lunch once a year or so but I know you will be happier there.

    MT, I am so happy for you. (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by caseyOR on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 11:51:26 AM EST
    You survived Alabama, kiddo. That is no small feat. You will have a great time in D.C.

    Happy Moving!!


    Congratulations! (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 02:03:11 PM EST
    I really don't know how you put up with it for so long. My mother sure didn't back in the late 1950s, when my father was stationed with the 1st Marine Reconnaissance Battalion at Camp LeJeune, NC. She still calls that period the longest two years of her life. And she was so horrified at the way African Americans were segregated and mistreated in North Carolina (pre-Civil Rights Act), her entire experience down there left her with a very deep personal disdain for white Southerners that persists to this day.

    The state senator I used to work for out here was, like you, a career Army spouse. She first met her husband when he was a cadet at West Point and her own father was an instructor there. Over the course of her husband's various deployments, she lived at both Fort Bragg, NC and Fort Benning, GA for extended periods and by her own account, she really didn't like the South either. Upon his retirement, they settled in Hawaii.

    When I first introduced my boss to my mother, who was visiting us at the time, at a political event in Honolulu, the two very quickly hit it off and were soon engrossed in deep conversation for over an hour. Later, I asked my boss's husband what they were talking about for so long, and he just grinned and said, "They're swapping war stories about how awful it was living in the South."

    Enjoy your new home near DC. Where's your husband going to be posted -- at the Pentagon? Or is he retiring?



    Everyone must come see us! (none / 0) (#31)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 03:58:19 PM EST
    I don't know if this will be his last assignment, there is another possible after this one. But it will also be in DC.

    So happy to be moving there. Josh is on the cusp of needing some surgical procedures but Eggleston in Atlanta is really overloaded right now. It is a two month wait to get into see anyone. The deep South's available healthcare for special needs persons is so taxed, and there is little to keep it going.

    Have spoken to a military family in DC with a very disabled family member and they said live in Maryland. Zorba also gives information that Maryland had its Healthcare system sorted out even before the ACA so there is more of a net in the face of what is occurring. And military counselors advise spouses moving to DC and seeking employment in the healthcare industry to start their job search on the Maryland side. Better pay and jobs available.

    So I have stopped house hunting in Virginia.


    ... in terms of social issues such as health care. When I was a toddler, we lived in Springfield, VA while my father was at the Pentagon. My mother loved living in the D.C. area, while I was too young to remember.

    When I worked there for Congresswoman Patsy Mink for a time in the mid-'90s, I shared an apartment in Alexandria with co-workers. But commuting twice monthly between D.C. and Honolulu, where my family still lived, proved quite problematic for me, which is why I ultimately quit what was otherwise a very good gig. The girls were still very young at the time, and my wife was really resistant to the idea of relocating to D.C., so I returned to the state legislature in Honolulu.

    For house hunting, check out the areas around Silver Spring, Takoma Park, Cillum and College Park, which are north of the district. From people I know who live in D.C., those appear to be much more pleasant places to live, than is the area southeast of the city near Andrews AFB.

    Anyway, good luck. I'm happy that you finally got a posting you wanted.



    I also agree about Maryland (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by Peter G on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 08:35:36 PM EST
    And check out the specialists at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore or Nemours/DuPont Children's in Wilmington DE for Josh, if you have the choice.

    Thank you Peter (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 10:26:27 PM EST
    Thank you very much. He's on the cusp between Nemours and Johns Hopkins. I have to argue continuity of care with our insurer. Your knowledge places me several steps ahead. Sadly when we arrived in Alabama many residents led us to UAB and Josh did have a surgery there. It was very unsuccessful, and only then did I begin to investigate the foundations of UAB. The surgeon who preformed the surgery had numerous malpractice complaints against him that had real teeth. I then argued with Tricare Humana that Josh have major procedures preformed at Eggleston in Atlanta, a branch of Emory...and a teaching hospital.

    I have no complaints about Eggleston..none. And more fragile children are getting care now there, absolutely necessary. Glad to vote for it, imperative to support it. But also grateful to get him to a less taxed region.


    It does seem that which hospital (and which doc) (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Peter G on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 10:59:52 AM EST
    you use can make a big difference. At least as much (if not more) with pediatric subspecialties as in other medical situations. Or so we have learned from our friends' many experiences, and from having a brother-in-law who is a retired pediatric anaesthesiologist. One couple of friends, whose middle-school-aged son has a particular variety of cerebral palsy, were very dissatisfied with the supposed specialist at the nationally-renowned Children's Hospital of Philadelphia ("CHOP"), while they are delighted with his care at Nemours/DuPont, just 45 miles south of us in Wilmington.

    Tracy, (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by KeysDan on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 11:04:17 AM EST
    Good wishes for your move--never a fun thing traversing across the country.  Washington is a fascinating city, small town (it is often called "this town") in some ways, but, being the nation's capitol, is cosmopolitan.   I am only familiar with DC, and, somewhat, Alexandria, VA, but have friends in Maryland suburbs--all of whom enjoy it and the environs.

    As for Josh's care, sorry to learn that Eggeston/Emory was so taxed. Emory University is among the very best; as Peter points out, however, you will be in good hands at Johns Hopkins. Again, all the best to you and your husband as he assumes his new responsibilities. And, of course, to Josh.


    I can't wait to enjoy that town (none / 0) (#47)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 02:17:54 PM EST
    Even though we don't know exactly where we are landing yet we are hosting our extended family at Christmas.

    I was going to recommend (none / 0) (#60)
    by Chuck0 on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 06:39:50 PM EST
    Johns Hopkins myself. Excellent teaching hospital. I have been happy with Penn State Hershey Med Center myself over the last year. Had three surgeries there this past year. Plus a partial finger amputation. My experience with teaching hospials is they take time to listen. The local private hospital nearly killed me due to poor aftercare. Bit far for you from the DC area. I have a cousin in Greenbelt, MD who I see often. She is retired civil servant who worked at the Supreme Court.

    Great food to be had in Baltimore as well. You must try the crabcakes at G&M in Linthicum. It's very near BWI, so on the southside Baltimore. Not so far from DC.


    My brother, a physician and med school dean (5.00 / 4) (#68)
    by Towanda on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 08:24:16 PM EST
    advised me to always have our family treated in teaching hospitals.

    Why? The med school physician/profs affiliated have to be up to date on the most recent med journals and conferences and more about the latest discoveries of diseases, conditions, treatments, and and more.  And, of course, they often are the ones doing that research that leads to the latest.

    I will say, as one who as a girl was hospitalized for months, I would want to be quite firm about ways that teaching hospitals can go too far.  I was subjected, as a preteen, to dozens of med students looking at me disrobed, discussing me . . . it was traumatic.  

    So, when my children were hospitalized, I was that parent who is always there and asks a lot of questions and is quite assertive -- thankfully, as my teenaged daughter was going to be subjected to something similar.  I caught a hospital admin taping my teenaged daughter  for an ad, without parental permission.  An ad that would run in our tv market, where all of her classmates would see her in treatment, know her condition, etc.   I know the ad industry rules and regs and raised h@ll.  

    So, no place is perfect, but assertive patients -- and assertive parents of patients -- can get the best at teaching hospitals . . . as my daughter knows.  I raised her to be an assertive patient, involved in her health care -- and now I have witnessed her using those skills as the parent of a patient, too.


    It has been where Josh, a complicated medical (none / 0) (#128)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 01, 2017 at 10:28:11 PM EST
    "Case", has received the very best care. And for me, the least stress.

    Denver Children's and Eggleston are on the sharpest cutting edge, and MRSA infections not being created in their hospitals.

    Josh has really been something. I know students observe his surgeries, but when they ask if students can be present at his pre and post op he's so kind and giving. Knows these people will go help others.

    And he taxes an anesthesiologist like no other. Two teaching anesthesiologists attend him at Eggleston. One that demonstrates procedures for the most difficult intubations, and one who devised the mix so that Josh does not vomit afterwards and risk aspiration. He sadly still developed restrictive lung disease. The tiniest aspiration can kill him.


    Good luck, MT. I hope you will be (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 06:18:23 PM EST
    happy in the DC area.

    What's not to like? (none / 0) (#48)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 02:21:24 PM EST
    So much to see and do. Fabulous food.

    I just run better when I live in a more urban setting. Traffic really doesn't bother me. I'm wired more city than country.


    That's been obvious (none / 0) (#54)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 05:18:28 PM EST

    Back in my day the only good duty station was the one before the one you are at....and the one you were going to.

    But do enjoy.


    I don't live on post usually (none / 0) (#58)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 06:13:52 PM EST
    So I don't have a "duty station" experience. Most active duty don't live on post or base, the government does not have the housing for us. We are on the list for Belvoir, most enjoy living there, but I don't anticipate they will have housing for us available in time.

    "duty station" (none / 0) (#62)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 06:58:38 PM EST
    just defines where the outfit your assigned to is located. e.g. When I was with a patrol squadron that was located at NAS Norfolk, Norfolk was my "duty station."

    And I understand the lack of base housing. It was never available, in time,  for us either.

    But the real point is that a good sailor, or army guy, always remembers where they have been with favor and with great anticipation where they are going.

    Anyway, good luck. The DC area is expensive.


    Sales tax here is almost 10% (none / 0) (#79)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 10:15:13 PM EST
    It won't be more expensive for us. Our housing allowance covers housing increase. But much better wages are available in DC than where we live now. Food is very expensive too where I live right now. Everyone is really struggling here.

    FYI (5.00 / 1) (#114)
    by Chuck0 on Mon May 01, 2017 at 05:12:17 PM EST
    There is no sales tax on clothing in PA.

    When I go (none / 0) (#86)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon May 01, 2017 at 07:01:38 AM EST
    visit family in SC I am shocked at how expensive their food is. The price they pay "on sale" is what things cost here every day with of course being "on sale" even cheaper. And their utilities are very high. We deregulated gas here in GA so we pay more for gas and less for electric.

    The cost difference for us (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 01, 2017 at 07:43:00 AM EST
    Will be a wash. And Healthcare is so difficult for Josh here too. Time is money, and stress is its own tax when you have a medically fragile child.

    It is difficult (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon May 01, 2017 at 10:06:42 AM EST
    unfortunately for a lot of people. When I lived in Macon neighbors were driving up to see their child in Eggleston. One of my friends from church has a nephew with a condition that they have to drive up here far too often for and they live in Albany. At least they have family in the area where most do not. My family that lives in SC well, if you have something serious it cannot be treated in SC. They go to whichever is closer Atlanta or the Raleigh Durham area for care.

    Maybe we can squeeze a lunch in (none / 0) (#90)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 01, 2017 at 09:06:59 AM EST
    Before we leave. I'm going to miss you.

    Have fun... (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by desertswine on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 12:52:41 PM EST
    If it ain't fun, it ain't nothin'.

    Same to you Donald (none / 0) (#2)
    by Jeralyn on Fri Apr 28, 2017 at 05:09:48 PM EST
    Thanks for sharing that. I always enjoy reading about the real lives of our readers.

    You and I work in somewhat similar professions, in that we often see humanity at its less than optimal state of being. Then, I also have my political activities, which can sometimes be a whole 'nother exercise in treading water. Oh, well -- as Lily Tomlin once quipped, "No matter how cynical you get, it's impossible to keep up."

    My late boss in the state legislature used to regularly remind me that graveyards are full of people who once considered both themselves and their work as "indispensable." From her, I learned how really important it is to turn off the outrage meter on regular occasions and recharge your batteries.

    Now that our daughters are grown and we've moved to Hilo, I've even taken up my old hobby of outdoor and nature photography again. Here's the view from the top floor balcony of my office building overlooking Hilo Bay, the County Building and state courthouse. We're surrounded by tropical rainforest and only 45 minutes from Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, so we've purchased an annual pass from the USNPS so we can go exploring. (And with Kilauea in its present perpetual state of active eruption, there's certainly a lot to see.) In June, we'll spend several days at Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge on the vast slopes on Mauna Kea, assisting for the first time in the annual count of native birds.

    Well, anyway, that's what's going on with us. I imagine you'll soon be getting ready for your son's wedding. (Has he and his fiancée set a date yet?) It would be great to hear what others here at TL are doing, if only to remind ourselves that we're all real people with real lives outside of the intertubes, and not just another gathering of online political malcontents.



    For the wedding, we will require (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Towanda on Fri Apr 28, 2017 at 10:21:58 PM EST
    of course, a traditional TalkLeft red-carpet treatment, with lots of photos of lovelies, like the mother of the groom, in wondrous dresses.  

    But we will have to settle for ex post facto photos, I suppose, as we ought not expect the mother of the groom to live-blog it for us.


    Weekends are usually quiet for me (none / 0) (#3)
    by McBain on Fri Apr 28, 2017 at 06:54:48 PM EST
    Tomorrow I'm going to have lunch with my parents and maybe see a movie.  Sunday I play vintage baseball... modified rules, uniforms and equipment of 1886.
    This is our league....
    When played well, I prefer this style of play to modern ball.  

    Enjoy your time off as well.


    RULE 16: No booze allowed. LOL! (none / 0) (#11)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Apr 28, 2017 at 08:20:05 PM EST
    "RULE 16. No Club shall sell or allow to be sold on its grounds, nor in any building owned and occupied by it, any spirituous, vinous or malt liquors."

    Do you guys actually uphold that standard? Then again, Rule 16 says absolutely nothing about the players themselves being prohibited from consuming "any spirituous, vinous or malt liquors" in any qualities either before, during or after the game.

    Sounds like a lot of fun. I'm off to the airport. Aloha.


    Weather (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Lora on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 09:29:33 AM EST
    I appreciate it more these days when it is lovely outside.  Life gets complicated and grueling, and yesterday, just to see the blue sky, feel the mild breezes and hear the birds twittering, watch them flitting among the new leaves and flowers of the trees, and smell the heady scent of the maple tree blossoms --- it put life's troubles back in their place. I'm in Northeast PA; we don't get a lot of sunshine.  I feel for those expecting the winter storm.  We are in for rain and cold next week.

    It turns out that the British government ... (5.00 / 3) (#32)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 04:12:43 PM EST
    ... was handed possession of Christopher Steele's dossier in December of last year by the former MI6 operative himself.

    This is according to court documents filed by Steele relative to a defamation lawsuit brought against Orbis Business Intelligence, Steele's private investigative firm, in London's high court of justice by Russian businessman Aleksej Gubarev, a Russian venture capitalist and owner of a global computer technology company, XBT, and a Dallas-based subsidiary Webzilla. Gubarev is also suing media outlet Buzzfeed, which first broke the story about the Steele dossier's existence in January.

    Also, keep an eye out over the coming weeks for the name Boris Ephsteyn, the GOP campaign operative who recently left the Trump White House to join the Sinclair Broadcasting Group as its chief political analyst. His rather abrupt departure may be linked to the recent arrest of Pyotr Levashov, a Russian hacker who was indicted nine days ago in U.S. District Court in Connecticut, where an FBI counterintelligence division is based.

    Levashov was first detained by Spanish authorities in Barcelona on April 7 at the request of DOJ officials, based on a warrant issued two weeks prior by that Court. The federal charges pending against him are regarding his alleged operation of the malware Kehlios botnet, "to facilitate malicious activities including harvesting login credentials, distributing bulk spam e-mails, and installing ransomware and other malicious software[,]" per the DOJ release linked above.

    More importantly, it's also been alleged that Levashov was recruited for the DNC hacking effort by Mr. Epshteyn personally, and that this effort was further funded by the Russian FSB with funds laundered through Russia's Alfa Bank. And Alfa Bank owns Cambridge Analytica, the firm that's alleged to have disseminated anti-Clinton propaganda on behalf of the Trump campaign.

    If true, Ephsteyn may be the first Trump campaign official directly implicated in any alleged efforts at collusion between the campaign itself and Russian government operatives.


    oh my god! (none / 0) (#33)
    by linea on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 04:40:45 PM EST
    it's like a badly written 007 movie!

    ... much more convoluted than what we see in the movies, and such vast and multi-layered stories often defy even the best efforts of even the finest screenwriters.

    Look at director Alan J. Pakula's 1976 film "All the President's Men," which tackled the Washington Post's investigation into the Watergate scandal. As good as that movie is, it could really only provide nothing more than a cursory treatment of an otherwise very complex tale of Machiavellian political intrigue.

    This Trump-Russia scandal will very likely turn out to be an extraordinarily complicated story, in terms of its various levels and interconnections.


    If true, (none / 0) (#46)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 02:02:51 PM EST
    What if it is not true?

    Time will tell. (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 03:15:03 PM EST
    At this point, there are too many separate pieces coming together for this story to simply be dismissed as a totally amazing series of coincidences. Christopher Steele is not some left-wing crackpot; his work as an operative and Russia specialist has long been eminently respected by officials on both sides of the Atlantic.

    Something was clearly going on here between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin, well beyond anything that can be characterized as mere curiosity about the candidate on the part of the Russians. And given the Trump family's purported business ties to Moscow-based Alfa Bank and Russia's interference in the 2016 election, determining exactly what that was is really in everyone's best interest -- including Republicans, though many of you have yet to realize and accept it for obvious and understandable reasons.

    Have a nice day.


    More & more (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by christinep on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 04:13:19 PM EST
    It really is "follow the money" ... especially the movement of rubles for real estate and whatnot to NY/Fl after Trump's last bankruptcy.  The cast of characters is more than fascinating.

    The rats are starting to leave (none / 0) (#56)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 05:43:46 PM EST
    Christopher Steele, the former British spy who wrote the infamous anti-Donald Trump dossier, acknowledges that a sensational charge his sources made about a tech company CEO and Democratic Party hacking is unverified.


    Barristers for Mr. Steele and his Orbis Business Intelligence firm filed their first defense against a defamation lawsuit brought by Aleksej Gubarev, chief executive of the network solutions firm XBT Holdings.

    Mr. Steele acknowledges that the part of the 35-page dossier that identified Mr. Gubarev as a rogue hacker came from "unsolicited intelligence" and "raw intelligence" that "needed to be analyzed and further investigated/verified.


    In his final December dossier memo -- his 16th -- Mr. Steele accused Mr. Gubarev and his web-hosting companies of hacking the Democratic Party computer networks with pornography and bugging devices. Mr. Gubarev calls the charge fiction and filed a lawsuit in February.

    Mr. Steele's court filing portrays him as a victim of Fusion GPS -- the Washington firm that hired him with money from a Hillary Clinton backer.



    While the allegations against Mr. Gubarev ... (none / 0) (#67)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 08:18:23 PM EST
    ... in particular may or may not be misplaced, but the charges of hacking itself in general is likely not, hence the arrest of Pyotr Levashov.

    Another name to track here is Pyotr Chayanov, owner of Hostkey, the company from which WikiLeaks had acquired two servers to transfer, house and maintain its database, a transaction which coincidentally occurred one week before the initial release of DNC emails. If Gubarev was initially misidentified by Steele as the primary source of hacking, it's likely that the actual source is either Chayanov himself or someone close to him.

    (It is also now strongly suspected that the Russians have acquired Wikileaks' SSL keys, which likely means that the FSB and GRU likely have full access to the IP addresses of everyone who's ever visited the WikiLeaks site or viewed data posted there.)

    Further, Russian and other eastern European hackers have long been known to use adult-oriented entertainment websites and pages as a conduit for the dissemination of malware. which can track a user online from Site A to Sites B and C using ad tech cookies. Nobody likes to admit that they visit such sites, which makes them perfect targets for this stuff.

    For example, and I'm not making this up, a Russian-derived and adult-oriented malware called SHEMALE_MOVIE_83.MPEG.EXE was found on Trump Hotel Collection's PSMTP server, which likely accounts for why that company ultimately made the C2 list as a known trafficker of malicious malware. Investigators now suspect that this particular malware was the likely conduit for the massive data breaches of customer information that were incurred by Trump Hotels and other hotel chains in 2014-15.

    Have a nice evening.


    The point was and will remain (none / 0) (#74)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 09:23:44 PM EST
    every article always has qualifiers and Steele admits that the info was not vetted.

    What else wasn't?

    In the meantime Trump has indicated a desire to prosecute Assange.

    Donald, give it up. All you are doing is making Democrats look bad.


    Keys portions of the Steele dossier ... (none / 0) (#81)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 11:14:46 PM EST
    ... has since been verified by U.S. intelligence officials, including the role of now-departed Russian diplomat Mikhail Kalugin in facilitating the espionage and election interference. Steele reported that Kalugin was recalled to Moscow on short notice in August 2016 due to his superiors' fear that he was about to be exposed. FBI sources have confirmed on background that he was indeed a spy.

    Federal investigators have further confirmed that about a dozen conversations between Kremlin officials and unspecified persons as reported by Steele did in fact occur on the dates and at the times specified in the dossier.

    Christopher Steele has always maintained that the information he provided in the dossier was in fact raw intelligence and that due to the urgency of the situation, he was passing his reports on to British and U.S. intelligence officials as soon as he received the information, according to Mother Jones' David Corn, who first broke the story last October 31 but kept Steele's identity secret at the time for obvious reasons:

    "This was, the former spy remarks, 'an extraordinary situation.' He regularly consults with US government agencies on Russian matters, and near the start of July on his own initiative--without the permission of the US company that hired him--he sent a report he had written for that firm to a contact at the FBI, according to the former intelligence officer and his American associates, who asked not to be identified. (He declines to identify the FBI contact.) The former spy says he concluded that the information he had collected on Trump was 'sufficiently serious' to share with the FBI."

    Personally, Jim, I don't care whether you believe it or not, and I further doubt that many others around here care about what you think, either. That's because you obviously live in a right-wing cocoon, you regularly attempt to misdirect by trafficking in misinformation and innuendo, and facts and truth tend to bounce right off you like water off a duck's back.

    Have a nice evening.


    And turns out they did vet Flynn (5.00 / 4) (#84)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 01, 2017 at 12:04:44 AM EST
    Knew he an agent for a foreign nation, hired him anyway.

    But oh, no, it's actually Obama's fault! (5.00 / 3) (#85)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon May 01, 2017 at 03:35:39 AM EST
    Amazing, isn't it? The self-styled adults in the room can't take personal responsibility for anything. There's always an excuse and somebody else to blame.

    Ah, if giving speeches that are paid for (1.00 / 1) (#93)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 01, 2017 at 09:51:02 AM EST
    makes one an agent of some group...

    Clinton and Clinton are employed by Wall Street.

    So is Obama.

    And then we have:

    The foundation has also taken between $1 million and $5 million each from United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Oman. As The Wall Street Journal reported, several of these donations came in 2014, after Clinton's tenure at the State Department.


    So if doing so is unacceptable.....why isn't that unacceptable? Is that the sickening smell of hypocrisy wafting through your comment?

    And if Flynn was in the clutches of the Russians:

    Flynn took command of the DIA in July 2012.
    Hmmmm, now who was Prez????

    Now, what did Flynn do?

    On December 10, 2015, Flynn attended a gala dinner in Moscow in honor of RT (formerly "Russia Today"), a Russian government-owned English-language media outlet on which he made semi-regular appearances as an analyst after he retired from U.S. government service. Before the gala, Flynn gave a paid talk on world affairs


    AP has reported that he was paid $67,000 before the election...

    Wow. If he was a crook then he was a cheap one.

    Of course he wasn't an ex President, Sec of State or married to one.


    Now now Jim... (5.00 / 2) (#102)
    by kdog on Mon May 01, 2017 at 01:29:48 PM EST
    Wall St. is bad news trying to nefariously influence our elections, but they're domestic bad news...nothing like the foreign Russian hackers who almost crashed the entire economy in 2007-2008 with their schemes and frauds ;)

    Dear God (5.00 / 5) (#104)
    by Yman on Mon May 01, 2017 at 01:48:23 PM EST
    Obama was "Prez" when Flynn was named to the DIA in 2012, then when he was FIRED in 2013.  It was AFTER he was fired that Flynn began acting as a foreign agent, accepting payments from th he Russians, started campaigning for Trump and was chosen by Trump to head the NSC, failed to register as a foreign agent, apparently failed to get approval as required by the law to receive those payments, them lied about it.

    Lock HIM up.

    Heh, heh, heh ...


    As I said, ... (none / 0) (#110)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon May 01, 2017 at 03:41:18 PM EST
    ... TL's resident curmudgeonly and misinformed mis-director lives cocooned in his own private Idaho. His are the homespun political fantasies craved by the U.S. right, which apparently also craves Russian-sponsored adult entertainment fantasies as well. It would be breathtakingly hilarious, were its potential consequences not so sad and frightening. Because reality has a rather nasty temper when it's ignored, and is prone to biting us in the a$$ really hard when we refuse to acknowledge and heed it.

    Which is the opposite of leadership (none / 0) (#88)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 01, 2017 at 07:44:20 AM EST
    More and more we find (none / 0) (#55)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 05:26:31 PM EST
    that all the claims have qualifiers.

    Of course we know that every day the cock crows in the morning  so that proves that the sunrises because of cock's crowing.



    In my lifetime probably (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 10:09:36 PM EST
    The most important and meaningful Correspondents Dinner I will watch. More telling and preserving of our democracy than W Bush laughing and looking under tables for WMDs.

    Samantha Bee also did a special edition ... (5.00 / 4) (#41)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 06:09:40 AM EST
    ... of her weekly comedy news review "Full Frontal," which she called "Not the White House Correspondents Dinner," as a benefit fundraiser for the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) which ultimately raised $200,000 for them last night. As always, she was really funny, but with a serious undertone. It's already up on YouTube. I think you'll like it, too:

    Cold Open: Allison Janney Press Conference
    Part 1: Peaches and Opening Monologue
    Part 2: Roast of CNN's Jeff Zucker
    Part 3: "What Is Facts?"
    Part 4: Roast of Donald Trump
    Part 5: "In Memoriam - Roger Ailes and Bill O'Reilly"
    Part 6: Jake Tapper Grills Samantha Bee
    Part 7: Special Guest George W. Bush (Will Ferrell)
    Part 8: Woman in the High Castle
    Part 9: Show Closing, CPJ, Peaches Reprise
    Part 10 (Extra): 100 Years of Roasting Presidents



    thank you for the link(s) (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by leap on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 04:27:15 PM EST
    I forgot Sam Bee was hosting this shindig. Some of those segments are hilarious, but the last one is really funny. I just love her and the people she has around her. There are, and have been, a few people that make me laugh just thinking about them, and she is one. Lily Tomlin, Gilda Radner, George Carlin...

    Trump is not amused. (5.00 / 3) (#101)
    by KeysDan on Mon May 01, 2017 at 01:13:42 PM EST
    Need to change the rules so it is illegal to say things that bring him sadness and irateness. In an ABC interview, Reince Priebus was asked about Trump's tweet: "the failing NYTimes has disgraced the media world, gotten me wrong for two solid years.  Change libel laws?"

    Q. (ABC), that would require a Constitutional Amendment. Is that something he (Trump) wants to pursue?
    A. (Priebus), I think it's something that we've looked at.
    Pressed by ABC, A.(Priebus), I said this is something that is being looked at.

    This is really serious and astounding, Trump wants to change or abolish the First Amendment (the failing First Amendment because of things like the failing NYTimes, that provides its readers with a weekly column of how Trump is becoming presidential, and all that free media coverage during the campaign).

    Easy to scoff at something as harebrained, but remember, this is Trump, he ran his businesses with threats and actual suits; it surely appeals to him to be able to sue people who say things he does not like, or do not say things he would like them to say.

    And, then here are the Republicans. No hurdle is too much to try to overcome. Do we have great confidence that McConnell and Ryan will effectively oppose such a move.   Not so long as they get their tax cuts, abortion, religious liberty and the rest of their agenda in return, the First Amendment is vulnerable to Trump's whims--no matter how damaging.


    ... to focus a similar amount of attention on the political alignment of state legislatures, as we do with the alignment of Congress. An amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires three-quarters approval, meaning that 38 state legislatures would have to ratify that amendment as written for it to take effect. That's a pretty high threshold, but certainly not an insurmountable one for the GOP if the DNC's obsession with Congress remains relentlessly myopic.

    I wish that I could give this a 10, Donald (none / 0) (#126)
    by Towanda on Mon May 01, 2017 at 09:47:34 PM EST
    as I am in Wisconsin, ground zero for what a governor and legislature can wreak overnight.

    But yeah, try to get the DNC to do anything for the state party -- other than see it as something from which all funding is to be drained.

    For that reason, we in Wisconsin are in the throes of attempting to get a good candidate to run for governor against Walker.  But it is clear that, one after another, potential candidates are not getting any good answers from the DNC . . . and, one after another, they decline.

    So, when amendments to the Constitution come our way, we will be in Walker's third term.

    Fortunately, there is a referendum requirement here for Constitutional amendments -- but, of course, Walker's voter suppression has been so effective that may not work.  Or by then, he and his legislature will have killed off that requirement, anyway.  


    We watched your links last night (none / 0) (#89)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 01, 2017 at 07:46:42 AM EST
    In bed and laughed and laughed. It was just what we needed.

    From our "Nazi This Coming?" file: (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 11:27:10 PM EST
    Multiple news sources are reporting that Trump White House advisor Sebastian Gorka is out, due to the controversy surrounding his ties to a Nazi-aligned far-right extremist Hungarian organization.

    Trump will meet with (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by KeysDan on Mon May 01, 2017 at 02:08:55 PM EST
    that "smart cookie," Kim Jung Un.  "If it would be appropriate for me to meet with him, I would absolutely, I would be honored to do it."

    Also, Trump invited Rodrigo Duterte, president of the Philippines to the White House.  On US business, I assume not on his Manilla skyscraper licensing project.

    Adam Schiff tweeted (none / 0) (#108)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 01, 2017 at 02:43:15 PM EST
    There was a time when the U.S. condemned extrajudicial killings, not rewarded them with WH visit. That time was 103 days ago.

    I assume you also condemned (none / 0) (#132)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 02, 2017 at 08:31:56 AM EST
    Obama's offer to meet with leaders, including N Korea, at any time.

    I did. Because of Kennedy's disastrous meeting with Khrushchev who judged Kennedy as weak. This erroneous reading of Kennedy is widely thought to have led Khrushchev to decide to give missiles to Cuba which almost got us in a nuclear war.

    It has been speculated that Kennedy felt he had to show that he was tough and that led to his increasing our support for South Vietnam and expanding the war. Another disaster.

    Obama settled for his apology tour and removed all doubts.

    Trump should be very careful about who he meets with. The law of unintended consequences does apply.


    Widely thought.. (none / 0) (#134)
    by jondee on Tue May 02, 2017 at 11:11:06 AM EST
    I suspect the Russians giving missiles to Cuba had less to do with Kennedy's perceived "weakness", and more to do with the U.S's ongoing threats to invade Cuba.

    In other words, belligerence and sabre rattling engendering the same from the folks on the other side of the table.

    As is so often the case.


    You make my point (none / 0) (#140)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 02, 2017 at 12:05:42 PM EST
    The US threatened.

    Kennedy was seen as weak.

    The Soviets, not the Russians, decided that they could place missiles in Cuba and this neuter the US.


    I don't follow.. (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by jondee on Tue May 02, 2017 at 12:16:45 PM EST
    Kennedy and the U.S hard-right exuded your kind of idealized sabre rattling "stength" and the Russians responded by putting missiles in Cuba.

    Because they wanted to show Their people that they couldn't be intimidated, and because they didn't want to be accused by some of Their idiotic citizens of going on "apology tours" etc

    "Neuter" is an odd metaphor, btw. Courtesy, I suppose, of the Viagra-2nd Amendment generation of right wing hawks..


    I understand you not understanding. (none / 0) (#183)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed May 03, 2017 at 07:37:51 AM EST
    It is typical for a Leftie to deny they don't know who started the Cold War.

    Strangely, they now hate Putin.


    Yes, and I understand you've said (none / 0) (#191)
    by jondee on Wed May 03, 2017 at 11:27:49 AM EST
    1962 was the good old days, when America was last "great."

    When schoolchildren here were cowering under their desks waiting for the bomb to drop.

    Your sickness truly is deep.


    Now you are playing silly word games. (5.00 / 2) (#144)
    by Chuck0 on Tue May 02, 2017 at 12:22:48 PM EST
    In the 60s, "Russian" and "Soviet" were synonymous.

    I like his other synonym.. (none / 0) (#146)
    by jondee on Tue May 02, 2017 at 12:36:04 PM EST
    "Strength" = bomb 'em back to the Stone Age and start WWIII.

    As soon as the subject of the Cold War comes up, his inner General Jack D Ripper comes to the fore.


    Not among people who (none / 0) (#182)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed May 03, 2017 at 07:34:14 AM EST
    were actually informed as to who the Soviet Union was composed off.

    A lot of your right-christian (none / 0) (#195)
    by jondee on Wed May 03, 2017 at 01:09:58 PM EST
    pals think the Russians are the "Gog" in the Final Battle of Gog and Magog.

    Maybe you should call them that.


    Syria Missle Strike was Mar-a-Lago Floor Show (5.00 / 1) (#135)
    by Mr Natural on Tue May 02, 2017 at 11:15:37 AM EST
    Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross Says the Syria Missile Strike Was `After-Dinner Entertainment' at Mar-a-Lago

    Speaking at the Milken Institute Global Conference on Monday, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross recalled the scene at Mar-a-Lago on April 6, when the summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping was interrupted by the strike on Syria.

    "Just as dessert was being served, the president explained to Mr. Xi he had something he wanted to tell him, which was the launching of 59 missiles into Syria," Ross said. "It was in lieu of after-dinner entertainment."

    As the crowd laughed, Ross added: "The thing was, it didn't cost the president anything to have that entertainment."

    Timing is Everything.

    Good God... (none / 0) (#136)
    by kdog on Tue May 02, 2017 at 11:36:07 AM EST
    if that's the entertainment for Jinping, imagine what he'd do to try and impress Bai Ling or Lucy Liu.

    Probably (none / 0) (#138)
    by FlJoe on Tue May 02, 2017 at 11:39:09 AM EST
    pop a tic-tac and try a little P grabbing.

    I am horrified to report that I can top that: (none / 0) (#164)
    by Mr Natural on Tue May 02, 2017 at 04:57:16 PM EST
    Historian Timothy Snyder: "It's pretty much inevitable" that Trump will try to stage a coup and overthrow democracy

    The election of Donald Trump is a crisis for American democracy. How did this happen?

    We asked for it by saying that history was over in 1989 [with the end of the Cold War]. By saying that nothing bad could [ever] happen again, we were basically inviting something bad to happen.

    Our story about how nothing could [ever] go wrong was a story about how human nature is the free market and the free market brings democracy, so everything is hunky-dory -- and of course every part of that story is nonsense. The Greeks understood that democracy is likely to produce oligarchy because if you don't have some mechanism to get inequality under control then people with the most money will likely take full control.

    With Trump, one sees the new variant of this where a candidate can run by saying, "Look, we all know -- wink, wink, nudge, nudge -- that this isn't really a democracy anymore." He doesn't use the words but basically says, "We all know this is really an oligarchy, so let me be your oligarch." Although it's nonsense and of course he's a con man and will betray everyone, it makes sense only in this climate of inequality.

    this is dumb (3.00 / 3) (#177)
    by linea on Tue May 02, 2017 at 07:50:59 PM EST
    your first clue is the absurdly hysterical "TOPICS: ADOLF HITLER" at the top of article. there is no crisis of american democracy. president trump won the electoral college and he isnt going to stage a coup and overthrow democracy.

    Any good read of history (5.00 / 1) (#196)
    by Towanda on Wed May 03, 2017 at 01:27:59 PM EST
    and including of history of this country would determine that "this is dumb" applies to your statement.

    I'll stick with the historian.


    No crisis in American democracy, huh? (3.67 / 3) (#200)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed May 03, 2017 at 04:01:37 PM EST
    linea: "there is no crisis of american democracy. president trump won the electoral college and he isnt going to stage a coup and overthrow democracy."

    What, then, to make of Louis J. Marinelli, longtime right-wing gadfly, erstwhile "chairman" of the Californian National Party (not to be confused with the California National Party), and co-founder of the divisive "Yes, California" campaign which purportedly seeks to separate that state from the union.

    Exposed as a Russian-paid operative -- and a not very bright one at that -- the 30-year-old Marinelli is now living in a self-imposed exile in Yekaterinburg, RU as the self-anointed California "ambassador" to Russia, and has most recently announced his intent to renounce his U.S. citizenship. To be sure, this guy's clearly a nutball who actually only lived in California from 2011 to 2016, before taking off to Russia.

    But the public rise of seditious movements in this country like "Yes, California" and the California / Californian National Parties, whether Russian-funded or otherwise, and the massive and still-growing public resistance to the GOP agenda, very strongly suggests that we are likely heading toward a very real constitutional crisis under this president's so-called "leadership."

    Yes, on the surface it all sounds totally outlandish. But frankly speaking, after enduring an election in which apparently extensive Russian interference (and perhaps collusion) likely helped a vainglorious trust fund baby and reality TV star with no practical political experience to gain the White House itself, nothing seems all that implausible to me any more.

    So perhaps, as someone who is not originally from the United States, you really ought to first take it upon yourself to more closely examine what's really going here right now, and refrain from publicly making such value judgments without first knowing and understanding all the relevant facts.



    yes (none / 0) (#202)
    by linea on Wed May 03, 2017 at 07:38:58 PM EST
    Yes, on the surface it all sounds totally outlandish.

    because it is outlandish.

    that author, and those TLers with hitler rants, are behaving like children having a tantrum. president trump is never going to declare himself dictator and eliminate democracy in america. that sort of crazy stupid nonsense is your version of pizza-gate.

    • the article never mentions russia. not once. i was discussing the article.
    • according to wiki, the Yes, California movement is for california independance and requires an amendment to the United States Constitution. sounds silly. sounds like what texas does every year. it is not mentioned in the article either.

    "Hitler rants" Really? (none / 0) (#204)
    by jondee on Wed May 03, 2017 at 08:46:41 PM EST
    Who's been doing that?

    I feel that it would be ridiculous if anyone had actually been doing that, but I don't think anyone has.


    A billion here, a billion there, (5.00 / 1) (#155)
    by KeysDan on Tue May 02, 2017 at 03:08:42 PM EST
    pretty soon it starts to add up to real money  (the late Everett Dirksen, R. IL):

    Son-in-law, and assistant in charge of everything, Jared Kushner, failed to disclose his ownership in a real estate venture, called Cadre, associated with Goldman Sachs, George Soros, and Peter Thiel. Jared did not disclose at least $1 Billion in loans.

    Jared's attorney's assured us that all will be taken care of, and it is "normal" to have financial disclosures revised.

    Victims get justice (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by Repack Rider on Tue May 02, 2017 at 04:03:09 PM EST
    A couple of topics here generated considerable defense from certain quarters for obvious abusers of authority.

    In two of these cases the victims' complaints were upheld, and I want to see the comments from those who blamed them for not being perfect enough to avoid abuse.

    First, Michael Slager has pleaded guilty in federal court to charges arising from his shooting in the back of unarmed Black motorist Walter Scott who was fleeing a traffic citation.  Slager was unaware of the existence of a video of the event, so he lied about what took place.

    A police officer's testimony is enough to secure a conviction, but if a crime is committed by a police officer, you will need multiple videos to prove it, because the system is absolutely fair.

    In the second event, Dr. Dao, who was dragged off an airplane, was blamed by some here for being part of the problem.  The United CEO does not agree and says everyone working for United screwed the pooch, but probably the guy here knows stuff about United that the CEO does not.

    Slager was facing a lot of charges (none / 0) (#165)
    by McBain on Tue May 02, 2017 at 04:58:17 PM EST
    both state and federal.   His plea is expected to get him off the hook for the murder charge in South Carolina.
    After a hung jury last year, state prosecutors had planned to retry him for murder. The deal drops that charge as well as two remaining federal charges...

    ... prosecutors are proposing a sentence based on federal guidelines for a second-degree murder conviction, which recommend more than 20 years.

    In my opinion there should have never been federal charges and the first trial should have focused on manslaughter. Everyone looks bad here.  


    Opinions are easy (5.00 / 1) (#170)
    by Yman on Tue May 02, 2017 at 06:13:03 PM EST
    IMO, state AND federal charges were entirely appropriate, and the only ones that look bad are Slager and those trying to minimize his actions.

    Good thing... (5.00 / 2) (#172)
    by Repack Rider on Tue May 02, 2017 at 06:34:13 PM EST
    ...that your opinion is as worthless in a court of law as it is here.

    In my opinion there should have never been federal charges and the first trial should have focused on manslaughter.

    When you presented this opinion to the court and the prosecutors, how did they receive it?  Did you show them your credentials?  And they STILL didn't believe you?  The fix was in.

    Let's review.

    Slager was unaware of the existence of a video, since the videographer was in legitimate fear of his or her personal safety.  So he lied.  The video showed that he lied, and no one came to his defense.

    Slager was fired from the force.

    His own union refused to defend him.

    The department paid Scott's family a settlement without even being sued.  They volunteered it.

    Slager will serve a lengthy federal sentence equivalent to punishment for a crime far more serious than Manslaughter.

    As part of the plea deal, which will put Slager away for decades, the state agreed to forgo the second murder trial, which was rendered moot by the federal sentence.

    Slager pleaded guilty.  When the defendant pleads guilty to the crime, the argument is over.  Okay, you're the exception.

    But hey, anybody can shoot a guy five times in the back, retrieve a stun gun from another location and place it near the victim and lie about everything that took place.  Stuff happens and we shouldn't be so harsh on the people we pay to protect us but who kill us instead.

    What do you think about Jordan Edwards, 15 y.o., unarmed, Black, honor student (How can cops be expected to know that a Black kid was a good student?), attempting to leave a party that looked like trouble, a passenger in a vehicle moving away from a cop who was not aware of any crime, but who shot him dead?  In a surprising twist, the cop lied and said the vehicle was being driven toward him.  In an even more surprising twist, his Chief backed up the story until the video made liars out of both of them.

    Guess which liar will be fired.

    Do you believe an officer should open fire on the passenger in a vehicle, who could not be accountable for how it is driven, and in the absence of information suggesting that a crime was taking place or had taken place?

    I know that in your opinion Jordan was at least partially responsible for being shot from behind with no warning, and I am looking forward to your justification here.


    If my opinion was worthless here you wouldn't (none / 0) (#173)
    by McBain on Tue May 02, 2017 at 07:13:28 PM EST
    bother responding but since you do, it obviously means a lot.  

    I don't believe Slager should have been tried for murder. Although somewhat unconventional, this is another case of a defendant being overcharged and feeling forced to plea.  

    I haven't followed much of the Edwards shooting yet but will look forward to discussing it with you if you can keep it civil.  Can you do that?


    Since Slager has apparently admitted ... (5.00 / 1) (#180)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue May 02, 2017 at 09:59:12 PM EST
    McBain: "I don't believe Slager should have been tried for murder."

    ... in federal court to everything the State contended during his murder trial, his guilty plea likely renders your belief moot.


    The jurors in the criminal case (none / 0) (#187)
    by McBain on Wed May 03, 2017 at 10:34:12 AM EST
    did not want to convict Slager for murder but some wanted manslaughter.  

    Impossible to know how his federal trial and second state trial would have turned out but, typically, defendants don't do well the second time around.

    It will be interesting to see what kind of sentence he receives.  


    He pleaded guilty, McBain. (5.00 / 4) (#192)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed May 03, 2017 at 12:09:33 PM EST
    It therefore doesn't matter what you think a jury might or might not have done. Such speculation is irrelevant. The now-convicted defendant knows what he did and has admitted his guilt. Are you going to claim to know better than him, too?

    Let it go, already.


    I'm assuming he had good lawyers (none / 0) (#197)
    by McBain on Wed May 03, 2017 at 01:39:21 PM EST
    who explained the risks he was facing with two trials.  I am not assuming what he admitted to was actually what he did.  That's not how the plea process always works.

    Now you're being willfully obtuse. (5.00 / 1) (#201)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed May 03, 2017 at 05:04:10 PM EST
    C'mon, guy! Look, former police officer Michael Slager pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court to violating the late Walter Scott's civil rights by deliberately shooting him in the back and killing him, and further attempting to frame Scott posthumously by filing a false police report about the incident which claimed self-defense on his own part.

    Slager further stipulated that the actions he took that fateful day were in fact not in self-defense, as was previously claimed by him during his murder trial in South Carolina state court, in exchange for the State dropping its charges and forgoing a second trial.

    Finally, the federal civil rights offense to which Slager pleaded guilty carries a potential life sentence. His plea agreement accedes to the prosecutor's request at sentencing that the court apply its guidelines for second degree murder, which would subject him to up to 25 years in federal prison. The deceased's family has expressed satisfaction that justice was done here.

    In short, McBain, you're clearly second-guessing Slager's decision to own up to his murder of Walter Scott and plead guilty, and you're further doing so for your own purposes. Seriously, give it up. It's over, and you were wrong.

    Please be an adult here and admit that, rather than continue to double down on stupid by further indulging your own authority fetish, which serves only to call into question whether the respective race of both the killer and his victim matters more to you, than do the actual facts of the case.

    Have a nice day.


    Second degree murder, in federal law (none / 0) (#203)
    by Peter G on Wed May 03, 2017 at 08:31:15 PM EST
    is a killing that results from the use of deadly force, with malice (i.e., in cold blood, with reckless disregard for the value of human life, or worse) but without the specific intent to kill.

    Donald, I believe Slager is doing (none / 0) (#205)
    by McBain on Wed May 03, 2017 at 08:58:42 PM EST
    what he (and his lawyers) think is in his best interest. I have not second guessed them. They might anticipate a light sentence.  I don't know what was agreed upon.

    I don't believe Slager admitted "to everything the State contended during his murder trial" as you claimed. Rather he said his use of force was unreasonable. I think that's much closer to what actually happened.  

    When have I ever given up on speaking about about over prosecutions, witch hunts or rushes to judgement?

    Do you have an opinion as to what his sentence should be?  It doesn't sound like you followed this case closely... there's a lot more to it than one video.      


    No. Why would I have an opinion on that? (none / 0) (#206)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri May 05, 2017 at 01:22:47 PM EST
    Michael Slager's sentencing is entirely at the discretion of the federal judge presiding over this case. What's the point of weighing in with a personal opinion when I have no legal standing to do so. The deceased's family members have stated their satisfaction that justice was done, and that's good enough for me.

    I've simply laid out the facts of Michael Slager's plea agreement as I understand them. He pleaded guilty to having violated Walter Scott's civil rights by killing him. And to forgo a second murder trial in South Carolina court, he further stipulated in federal court that his killing of Scott was not in self-defense, and has accepted the prosecutor's request that he agree to be sentenced per federal guidelines for second degree murder.

    What truly blows me away here, McBain, is both your general unwillingness to accept any of that, and your further insistence that Slager should not have faced any federal charges at all. Admittedly, I don't follow these cases to the point of personal obsession as you apparently do, but that doesn't therefore mean I'm entirely ignorant in these matters.

    And quite frankly, you call your own motives into question here whenever you prolong these discussions beyond all reason with your continued insistence that you're right and by extension, your accompanying implication that the rest of us are somehow wrong.

    Have a nice day.


    The reason I'm usually right and you and (none / 0) (#207)
    by McBain on Sun May 07, 2017 at 08:49:31 PM EST
    many others are often wrong is I don't just jump to conclusions easily based on first reporting.  The media is terrible at covering these kinds of cases.  like to wait until more information is available.  

    The Edwards shooting (5.00 / 3) (#189)
    by Repack Rider on Wed May 03, 2017 at 11:05:41 AM EST
    After firing the officer who shot Jordan Edwards, Police Chief Jonathan Haber says he "misspoke" when he told reporters that the car Edwards was riding in had reversed aggressively toward the officer.  Not that this would justify killing the passenger of course.

    He corrected himself. The car was going in the opposite direction from what he had originally stated. Forward, backward, mere details, and the difference between self-defense and murder, for the purists who insist on such distinctions.

    The obvious question, which was clearly not asked, is why he would make a statement exonerating the officer before knowing the facts.  It seems that once again, police are guilty of a "rush to exoneration."  It complicated the matter when they couldn't accuse the kid postmortem of being some kind of thug or drug user, i.e. personal failings on the part of the victim which are used to justify a police shooting even if the officer doesn't know about them.

    So Chief Haber had to admit that he lied, which is a synonym for "misspoke."  He fired the officer.  No one, not even the most racist, gun cuddling moron, seems to find any reason that justifies the shooting.

    But I know from reading these threads that we should hear one soon.


    The chief was likely speaking to ... (none / 0) (#193)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed May 03, 2017 at 12:13:48 PM EST
    ... the officer's report, which proved false. Since you wrote this, the department has terminated the officer.

    Only a fool makes up his mind with limited (none / 0) (#198)
    by McBain on Wed May 03, 2017 at 01:57:15 PM EST
    information.  I'm not ready to give an opinion as whether or not charges should be filed in this case.

    A couple things I find interesting are the alleged use of a rifle by the police
    and this quote

    Neighbors said they heard three or four shots from what sounded like a pistol or small gun. There was a pause before another two or three shots, they said, and then a "bam bam bam" that sounded like it was coming from a large gun, possibly a rifle.  The neighbors said they didn't see who fired the shots. Daniels said she saw an officer run toward the gunfire after the first round.

    Do you agree then (none / 0) (#199)
    by Repack Rider on Wed May 03, 2017 at 02:36:47 PM EST
    Only a fool makes up his mind with limited information.

    ...that the police chief is a fool?

    He still has his job.  In your opinion should someone you consider a "fool" be a police chief?


    Show your work (none / 0) (#174)
    by Repack Rider on Tue May 02, 2017 at 07:40:04 PM EST
    I don't believe Slager should have been tried for murder.

    There is no argument about these facts.  

    He shot an unarmed, retreating man in the back five times.  He missed with three other rounds fired in a residential neighborhood.  He could not have been in fear of his life.

    What, in your opinion, justifies shooting a fleeing man in the back, when the only known infraction was a minor vehicle code violation?  What justifies emptying the magazine in a residential neighborhood over a traffic violation?

    (As you know, I have a friend who was shot under similar circumstances, but who lived and collected hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars.  The deputy was fired but did not face charges.)

    Slager moved evidence from one location to another, thinking he was not being observed.

    What in your opinion justifies a police officer tampering with evidence?  What in your opinion justifies an officer lying about the events that left a harmless individual dead?


    As I have explained here before.... (none / 0) (#175)
    by McBain on Tue May 02, 2017 at 07:47:46 PM EST
    There was a traffic stop.... a chase... and a physical confrontation including Scott's DNA was found  Slager's taser.  All this happened before Scott was shot.  In my opinion Scott was extremely dangerous.  

    What I'm not clear about was exactly when Slager made the decision to shoot and exactly when should he have realized Scott was no longer a deadly threat?  This is why I don't believe it was murder.  Manslaughter, maybe.


    The "physical confrontation" ... (5.00 / 1) (#178)
    by Yman on Tue May 02, 2017 at 08:06:43 PM EST
    ... was simply Scott trying to get away.  The only evidence that he was "dangerous" and trying to take Slager's taser was Slager's self-serving testimony.  The same Slager who picked up and object and dropped it at Scott's feet after he shot him.  The same Slager who lied about Scott running toward him with the taser.

    Dang it! (none / 0) (#4)
    by desertswine on Fri Apr 28, 2017 at 07:11:10 PM EST
    Snow and freezing forecast here in Central NM - there go the fruit trees.

    Central NM? (none / 0) (#6)
    by MKS on Fri Apr 28, 2017 at 07:34:49 PM EST
    My dad's family comes from Silver City Near your?  

    T or


    T or C? (none / 0) (#7)
    by MKS on Fri Apr 28, 2017 at 07:35:11 PM EST
    I'm in Albuquerque aka the Duke City. (none / 0) (#8)
    by desertswine on Fri Apr 28, 2017 at 07:43:59 PM EST
    There are lots of retirees in Silver City.  I've done some hiking down there in the Gila, its very beautiful.  Billy the Kid's mother is buried in Silver City, as I discovered on a "Billy the Kid Weekend."

    massive rain here for the next week (none / 0) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Apr 28, 2017 at 08:13:07 PM EST
    rivers are already overflowimg their banks, we are several inches over our agerage rainfall totals, and there is 8-9 more inches coming thru monday

    glad i live on a hill.

    on the upside the brook running thru my new backyard should get very lively


    it seems (none / 0) (#12)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Apr 28, 2017 at 08:23:07 PM EST
    this area is quite literally becoming sub tropical

    "I just want to say one word to you," (none / 0) (#57)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 05:48:53 PM EST
    " Just one word"
    "Yes, sir."
    "Are you listening?"
    "Yes, I am."

    Avos (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by MKS on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 07:06:18 PM EST
    Definitely, MKS (none / 0) (#66)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 08:12:46 PM EST
    Rain and wind and then more rain (none / 0) (#24)
    by caseyOR on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 12:48:19 PM EST
    and wind is the forecast for the next couple of days. Chance of a tornado tomorrow, just to make it interesting.

    Rivers are flooding. The Illinois River, which is the river I see everytime I look out my windows, will be above flood stage from Chicago to the Mississippi River all week.


    We had negligible snowfall this year. (none / 0) (#25)
    by caseyOR on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 12:51:03 PM EST
    And, while that is problematic all on its own, I dread to think how much worse the flooding would be if massive snowmelt was added to the unceasing rain.

    I think California perhaps took your share. (none / 0) (#30)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 02:50:06 PM EST
    The snowpack in the Sierra Nevada Mountains, which runs north-south over two-thirds the state's length and where about one-third of its fresh water comes from, has been estimated at nearly 250% of normal in many places this winter. And after five years of relentless drought, that's a most welcome statistic.

    It's like full summer (none / 0) (#26)
    by Peter G on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 01:10:13 PM EST
    in Philadelphia. Sunny, a bit breezy, temps in the mid-80s.

    Anything you can do? (none / 0) (#18)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 11:15:01 AM EST
    Cover them in plastic?

    Funny... (none / 0) (#23)
    by desertswine on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 12:29:44 PM EST
    It was in the 80's last week, and today it's snowing.  

    I'm so sorry (none / 0) (#29)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 02:43:56 PM EST
    highly recommend (none / 0) (#5)
    by linea on Fri Apr 28, 2017 at 07:33:44 PM EST
    bbc tv series - one season - five episodes.
    included with amazon prime.

    What's it about linea? (none / 0) (#19)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 11:17:42 AM EST
    Give me a brief glimpse. Imma BBC fan. Since preparing to move have not kept up with the release of new season Peaky Blinders. Must go look now.

    about (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by linea on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 12:15:25 PM EST
    a fictionalized story about a girl who escapes her kidnapper after thirteen years of captivity and the difficulty she has in starting her life again.  some parts reminded me of the (true) natascha kampusch story.  

    At the end of April? Yikes! (none / 0) (#15)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 12:07:52 AM EST
    Jeralyn: "Winter storm is here, 6 to 12 inches of snow expected."

    But then, it's also not uncommon for Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa to receive a blanket of the white stuff at their upper elevations well into May, and even occasionally in June. Stay warm and dry.

    We just flew around a very large storm system this afternoon, and what's normally a 40-min. flight between Hilo and Honolulu became a very bumpy 1 hour and 15 minute trip, during which the flight attendants were ordered to remain seated the entire time. We immediately took off due east from Hilo Airport to get out in front of the storm, then due north to skirt around its edge, then due west well north of Maui, before turning on approach to HNL as though we were coming from Seattle. The pilot said upon our late arrival that we actually flew a little over 400 miles on what's otherwise a 220-mile leg.

    'Tis the month for strange weather, I suppose.

    We are enjoying some down time (none / 0) (#38)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Apr 29, 2017 at 09:52:59 PM EST
    Watching the Correspondents Dinner. Hasan said that journalists covered Obama ,someone who could speak English, but Trump is President now. They must take it to a whole new level. They are like stripper cops trying to solve a real life murder.

    Ouch (none / 0) (#42)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 08:21:58 AM EST
    Depending on whose Ox is being gored...

    MacCallum then asked Trump to clarify what he'd like to see changed, to which Trump replied, "Well, you look at the voting, you look at the filibuster system. It used to be--you know, I always thought a filibuster, where you stand up and talk all day and somebody else gets up there."

    "You don't do that anymore," MacCallum said.

    "No, you don't have to do it anymore," Trump said. "Today, you say `filibuster' and guys sit home and watch television or whatever they do. I think the filibuster concept is not a good concept to start off with, but if you're going to have a filibuster, let someday stand up for 20 hours and talk and do what they have to do, even if they're reading comic books to everybody."


    I don't want the filibuster eliminated, but I agree that if you want to do it then you should have to actually do it. No more government by threat.

    I agree with you about this (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 02:23:59 PM EST
    Amazingly, Jim, I agree with you (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by caseyOR on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 04:02:37 PM EST
    on the filibuster.

    Kind of hysterical (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 08:42:36 PM EST
    that he's reminding me of Strom Thurmond reading the Betty Crocker cookbook out loud with that statement.

    Hey, did you know that the Civil War (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 01, 2017 at 09:22:35 AM EST
    Made Andrew Jackson sad? President Trump focuses today on Jackson's sadness and analysis that the Civil War didn't need to happen :)

    Even though Andrew Jackson was dead 16 yrs before the Civil War?


    Tracy, I just read the transcript (5.00 / 4) (#97)
    by Towanda on Mon May 01, 2017 at 12:20:43 PM EST
    of that interview this weekend with Trump, about his hero Andrew Jackson and the Civil War and more.  This line by the large orange lout just won't get out of my head:

    "The Civil War, if you think about it, why?"

    I swear that I have seen that transparent rhetorical device as the first line in awful essays from some of the strangest students that I have encountered, of thousands of students in decades of teaching.

    So, Spouse Towanda (also a retired college prof) and I discussed what, then, would be the next line, based on such essays that we have seen.

    I won, with this other age-old device for padding a paper by students who have not done a bit of preparation, have not read a whit of the work:

    "Many people have tried to answer that question, since the beginning of time. . . ."

    I guess we can be grateful that the lout with a brain that arcs like tinfoil in a microwave got distracted, again, and did not use that line but went on to more mindless prattle on another topic.


    Sadly my own father-in-law watches Fox (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 01, 2017 at 01:01:31 PM EST
    Tried to tell my husband that the Civil War was about State's Rights, not slavery. The head of history at West Point ended up making a YouTube instruction because this alternative fact was sweeping through the military too. Son had to send father a link to the YouTube instruction.

    I'm reading "Co Aytch" (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by jondee on Mon May 01, 2017 at 09:47:34 PM EST
    the memoir of confederate soldier Sam Watkins, and it's clear that the confederate soldiers themselves were arguing over whether the war was about slavery or "states rights" even while that brutal war was raging.

    Of course the question of states rights never would have come up if slavery hadn't existed, but people back then were just as susceptible to spin doctors and propagandists as they are today.


    After living in Alabama I have come to understand (none / 0) (#127)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 01, 2017 at 10:15:35 PM EST
    That only the elite owned slaves. The majority of those who fought for the Confederacy were not slave owners, but a culture had formed around slavery. And no matter how poor and impoverished a "white" person became you are still not as bad off as someone who is black.

    It created a hideous social paradigm for poor voting white and slaves. The social construct echoes throughout some Southern culture to this day. Dehumanization and a sense of false pride.

    I understand how Confederate soldiers might have that discussion or disagreement. I really do know how a plebe can parse :) Have a plebe in your fam get snarled in the Iraq War and plebe parsing can run wild at Thanksgiving. Everyone is a drunk Uncle.

    Those who had the lion's share of the Southern power and prosperity needed to be and felt they could afford to be very legally clear. And they were in the documents KeysDan linked to. In a legal sense there can be no doubt.


    Watkins talks about the majority of soldiers (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by jondee on Tue May 02, 2017 at 11:44:30 AM EST
    from his home of state Tennesse being completely fed up with the war as early as 1862 and 63..

    The South resorted to forstalling the threat of mass desertions by summary executions and desertions continued anyway.

    The young soldiers had been fed the line continuously by the slave-owner-run newspapers, slave-owner politicians, and even slave-owner clergy about defending their homes and states against mass invasion.

    So the vulnerabilities and goodwill of the common folk were exploited and twisted by those with a stake in maintaining the staus quo just as they are today.


    The Confederacy was compelled to ... (none / 0) (#148)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue May 02, 2017 at 01:25:26 PM EST
    ... resort to the practice of conscription in 1862 to fill out the ranks, and the Union did likewise in 1863. That policy wasn't popular on either side, and in New York City it prompted the bloody draft riots a few weeks after Gettysburg, which were forcibly suppressed by Union Army units only recently arrived from that battle. The conflict was often characterized by soldiers on both sides as "a rich man's war and a poor man's fight."

    And if course they had the twenty slave (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by jondee on Tue May 02, 2017 at 02:48:44 PM EST
    law in effect in the South. If you owned twenty or more slaves, you were exempt from military service.

    Of course, if the WSJ and Fox News had been around then, the slave-owners would've been called "job creators" and their critics accused of waging "class warfare."


    So similar, practically identical to Trumpism (none / 0) (#181)
    by Militarytracy on Tue May 02, 2017 at 11:53:38 PM EST
    It cannot be a fluke how the red Southern states continue to be entranced by Trump linguistics and jingoisms. Anything otherwise to this embracing of the mental mind f$ck means some great grand somethings were FUBAR.

    That FUBAR grand somethings reality is unacceptable. We are all about to turn our DNA profile over to corporations so we can wear kilts instead. If my kilt was really all phucked up. I can't deal with that. I was supposed to get a beer stein out of this.

     We must work the social equation again with something Trumpish, something  similar to the regular participants in my DNA profile. It must come out better this time. America must become great again or the Confedercy could die :) I might be standing here in a kilt and no fruit of the loom to catch me.


    Chelsea does a great job (none / 0) (#103)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 01, 2017 at 01:35:56 PM EST
    What she said.

    I'm with her.


    A definite look (5.00 / 3) (#105)
    by KeysDan on Mon May 01, 2017 at 01:55:24 PM EST
    at slavery as the institutional cause--Declaration of Causes of Seceding States.

    A great link (none / 0) (#106)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 01, 2017 at 02:06:47 PM EST
    Thank you KeysDan. No alternative facts there.

    Ah, yes. (none / 0) (#112)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon May 01, 2017 at 03:54:53 PM EST
    I can just envision the CNN special now:

    "The Civil War: A Heroic Defense of Southern Liberty -- or an Unconscionable Act of Northern Aggression?"



    Trump (none / 0) (#96)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon May 01, 2017 at 10:10:16 AM EST
    better watch out or Old Hickory is going to show up at his bedside while he's sleeping and rap him on his head and his tiny hands.

    And, then there (none / 0) (#99)
    by KeysDan on Mon May 01, 2017 at 12:31:29 PM EST
    is the input Trump has received from Fred Douglas, who, he says, has done amazing things, and is getting recognized more and more.

    Ha ha ha (none / 0) (#91)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 01, 2017 at 09:13:48 AM EST
    Filibuster used to inform constituents/voters about the real legislative disagreements. It sure seems like many on the hill would like to keep those they represent in the dark now. And they don't want a lot of historical record finding them on the wrong side of history either.

    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon May 01, 2017 at 10:08:27 AM EST
    one told me the other day that the GOP was responsible for civil rights legislation. I about spit out my coffee with such astounding ignorance.

    im fine (none / 0) (#59)
    by linea on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 06:39:06 PM EST
    with a "gentleman's filibuster" rather than a talking filibuster.

    In 1917, at the behest of President Wilson, the Senate adopted a procedure known as the cloture vote, which could end a filibuster. If a cloture vote is called for, a super-majority of senators can force an end to debate and bring the question under consideration to an up-or-down vote. Initially, achieving cloture required a vote from two thirds of all elected senators; the number was later changed to three fifths of all elected senators.

    I don't know when (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 07:09:49 PM EST
    a filibuster could just be declared became part of the rules. But it seems to me that it is just too easy.

    If they want to filibuster let them take to the floor and speak and explain why they oppose the bill.


    That particular change took place in 1975. (none / 0) (#113)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon May 01, 2017 at 04:24:40 PM EST
    In the legislative process, the only way to move a bill or resolution forward is through a formal motion on the floor of the respective chamber.

    Thus prior to 1975, whenever a particular senator or group of senators held the floor in a filibuster, ALL Senate business and proceedings would grind to a complete halt.

    This compromise through the Senate's rules, which was adopted that year as part of a package of overall procedural reforms, provided that body with the means to continue conducting its other business while a filibuster on a nomination or piece of legislation was simultaneously taking place.

    In other words, in exchange for formally giving up the floor as a means to halt a bill or nomination, senators were then allowed to place a hold on that specific bill or nomination, and conduct a "virtual filibuster" in absentia.

    Essentially, the Senate floor will remain open to debate on that item for an indeterminate length of time, until three-fifths of the members vote for cloture and closed debate, which if approved then subjects the bill or nomination in question to a floor motion to pass Third or Final Reading.



    Thanks, Donald (none / 0) (#117)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 01, 2017 at 08:27:03 PM EST
    You saved me some Google time.

    You don't seem to take a position either way.

    My point remains. We are now governed by threat.


    I don't like the filibuster. (none / 0) (#122)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon May 01, 2017 at 09:25:26 PM EST
    Most state legislatures have long since dispensed with that archaic procedural anachronism, and the world hasn't come crashing down around everyone's ears due to its absence. This constant requiring of a supermajority of 60 in the U.S. Senate on even the most mundane of nominations or bills tends to favor and promote a tyranny of the minority, regardless of who's holding power.

    The filibuster once served a purpose -- back in the 19th century. It really doesn't any more. And over the last 40 years, it's been increasingly abused as an instrument of mindless partisan obstruction. Because of that, the Senate can't even debate and pass a friggin' biennial budget anymore, and has instead become perfectly content to keep government operations funded through a series of continuing short-term resolutions. Get rid of the filibuster, and maybe the majority will actually have to do some real work. Do that, and in less than a decade most people won't even notice that it's missing.

    Have a nice evening.


    "They now know exactly why Clinton lost" (none / 0) (#61)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 06:43:38 PM EST
    WASHINGTON -- A group of top Democratic Party strategists have used new data about last year's presidential election to reach a startling conclusion about why Hillary Clinton lost. Now they just need to persuade the rest of the party they're right.

    Many Democrats have a shorthand explanation for Clinton's defeat: Her base didn't turn out, Donald Trump's did and the difference was too much to overcome.

    But new information shows that Clinton had a much bigger problem with voters who had supported President Barack Obama in 2012 but backed Trump four years later.

    Those Obama-Trump voters effectively accounted for more than two-thirds of the reason Clinton lost, according to Matt Canter, a senior vice president of the Democratic political firm Global Strategy Group. In his group's analysis, about 70 percent of Clinton's failure to reach Obama's vote total in 2012 was because she lost these voters.

    That points (5.00 / 6) (#70)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 08:44:40 PM EST
    to part of the problem with voters who have a problem with women in leadership roles.

    That is probably a big (5.00 / 4) (#72)
    by MKS on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 08:57:55 PM EST
    reason Cheeto won (the EC.)

    Tweety today on MTP said Cheeto won because of "atytude."  And, he clarified, cultural reasons were the main motivator.  And what  is that?  Dislike of an urban lifestyle....too many minorities, too many immigrants.....and too many educated, uppity women.   Those poor WWC males.  


    Cheeto's affinity for (5.00 / 2) (#116)
    by MKS on Mon May 01, 2017 at 08:01:03 PM EST
    dictators has a corollary:  Which leaders he dislikes.

    Angela Merkel.  He was so frosty to her.   She just didn't back down to his bluster.  By all accounts, a GOP President should like Merkel--she is conservative, especially on financial issues.  Prudent. Cautious. And the Germans really like her.

    But, no, Trump, does not like her.  Because imo she is a her.  And she either corrects or ignores his stupidity.


    Absolutely (5.00 / 2) (#130)
    by Nemi on Tue May 02, 2017 at 06:17:12 AM EST
    And maybe this: Angela Merkel reportedly had to explain the 'fundamentals' of EU trade to Trump 11 times, was part of the reason smoke was coming out his ears at the Oval Office-Photo op with "die Kanzlerin"? And maybe why he couldn't "hear" her asking if they should shake hands. ;)

    Actually..... (none / 0) (#76)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 09:34:42 PM EST
    Donald Trump employs more women than men at the upper echelons of his real estate empire, and in many cases pays them more, according to the Republican presidential candidate's attorney.

    Appearing on "CNN's New Day" with Chris Cuomo, Michael Cohen, Trump's general counsel and an executive vice president at Trump Organization, said that while the billionaire's companies employ 57 percent men and 43 percent women, "there are more female executives at the Trump Organization than there are male."

    "And women who are similarly situated in positions similar to that of their male counterparts, are actually paid more," Cohen said.



    Hahahahahahaha .... (5.00 / 4) (#78)
    by Yman on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 10:08:56 PM EST
    Did you really just cite a fact-free, evidence-free claim made by Trump's attorney???

    so... (none / 0) (#65)
    by linea on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 07:09:56 PM EST
    Much of the debate over how to proceed has centered on whether the party should try to win back working-class white voters...

    they need more "Get Out The Vote!" volunteers at every Whole Foods Market and if that doesnt work they can always blame college students for being apathetic. that what THEY usually do.


    Is it? (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by Yman on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 08:58:41 PM EST
    Your link didn't provide any evidence for "what they usually do", but no doubt the low participation rate among younger voters is one problem.  Another one is bitter primary losers who keep trying to point the finger at the choice of the majority of Democrats.

    Actual Democrats.


    Also, no discussion of voter (5.00 / 4) (#75)
    by caseyOR on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 09:29:29 PM EST
    Disenfranchisement . Repressive and discriminatory voter ID laws kept hundreds of thousands of voters from casting a ballot. And, since more than one Republican politician in more than one state has been quite open about the fact that these laws are designed to deny the vote to citizens who vote for Democrats, it seems they were successful.

    Less than 50,00-100,000 votes in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania made the difference. Maybe Dems should invest more energy in overcoming these obstacles their supporters in voting.


    About 74,000 per the final tallies. (none / 0) (#83)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 11:35:11 PM EST
    The difference was about 20,000 in Wisconsin, 10,000 in Michigan, and 44,000 in Pennsylvania. In all, over 13 million votes were cast in those states. That's a difference of a tad more than one-half of one percent.

    This. I can attest, from Wisconsin (none / 0) (#98)
    by Towanda on Mon May 01, 2017 at 12:29:06 PM EST
    where Perp Walker's voter-suppression tactics are extreme, and especially target college students, that the impact was immense.  My polling place is a block from the second-largest campus in the state.  I witnessed the impact.

    And the impact of voter suppression on the "youth vote" has not been reported in the historical context of Wisconsin's longtime record as one of the top states for "youth vote" turnout -- second only to Minnesota . . . until 2016.  It has been reported that "youth vote" turnout dropped here.

    (That said, it need be said that as much or more of a problem were the mad Bernie-or-Bust sorts, especially in Madtown aka Madison, with the largest campus in the state -- where the vote for Stein was heaviest.  And the votes for Stein alone, had they gone to Clinton, would have won Wisconsin.

    (And that said, it also need be said that the focus on Wisconsin as well as Michigan and Pennsylvania really is owing only to the timing of the reporting of their results on election night, which made them look like the states that turned it for Trump.  Wisconsin's few electoral votes did not do it.  Michigan has more, but even so . . . the wiser election analysts say that Pennsylvania's far-larger electoral-college delegation did it -- and that the turn really came earlier, with the loss of Florida.)  


    College (none / 0) (#71)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 08:46:31 PM EST
    students and young people are the most elusive vote out there. They are so unreliable that I don't know why people spend so much time on them when there are a lot of very reliable to occasional voters that are much easier to reach.

    im obviously (none / 0) (#77)
    by linea on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 09:59:51 PM EST
    really bad at this.

    I was TRYING to be snarky. i was trying to point out that the pro-business corporate centrists are so fundamentally opposed to working-class interests that their own report WONDERS whether they should BOTHER to consider the needs of working-class folk.

    p.s. i dont feel im a bad writer. i worry when people are unclear of the meaning or intent of my posts more than i worry about being dissagreed with. that makes me feel like im not communicating well.


    It's not "their" report (5.00 / 2) (#80)
    by Yman on Sun Apr 30, 2017 at 11:05:57 PM EST
    This is simply the opinions and conclusions of some Democratic strategists, not the New Democrats and not Hillary Clinton, who is NOT "fundamentally opposed to working class interests."  Don't pretend to lecture real Democrats about what real Democrats believe.

    That's No True Scotsman B/S, YMan (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by Mr Natural on Tue May 02, 2017 at 10:56:19 AM EST
    You have zero credibility when it comes to deciding who is and who is not a true anything around here.

    That's nice you think so (none / 0) (#137)
    by Yman on Tue May 02, 2017 at 11:37:46 AM EST
    OTOH, she's not a Democrat and neither is her candidate.  Sorry if those facts bother you.  

    As for your assessment of my credibility, tell someone who cares about your opinion.


    You get a 5 rating for self revelation, (none / 0) (#176)
    by Mr Natural on Tue May 02, 2017 at 07:49:46 PM EST
    almost as revelatory as the troll rating you delivered to an earlier and legitimate criticism of someone else's specious reasoning and bullying.

    Actulally,a "troll" rating ... (none / 0) (#179)
    by Yman on Tue May 02, 2017 at 08:13:14 PM EST
    ... is a 1 rating, and I gave you a 2 rating for that silly attack on Donald.  But, hey ... why should this claim be any more accurate than any of your others?

    I don't think GA6 misunderstood your intent (5.00 / 3) (#109)
    by Peter G on Mon May 01, 2017 at 03:38:10 PM EST
    or your meaning, Linea. However, when intelligent, fairminded people do misunderstand your written communications, then there is good reason to believe that you are not being clear in what you are trying to say. How you "feel" about whether you are a good writer is pretty much irrelevant. I am quite sure, however, that the inability to take constructive criticism will prevent you from becoming a better writer. An example is your adamant disregard for repeated suggestions, coming from several different individuals, that you make your writing less persuasive and undermine your efforts to be taken seriously by misusing and overusing the verb "feel."

    If this is indeed the last season for ... (none / 0) (#115)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon May 01, 2017 at 06:19:36 PM EST
    ... for ABC's "American Crime," then the tautly written and incredibly well-acted series certainly went out with a bang in its third season finale.

    Its intense eight-episode meditation on the hidden and mostly ignored socio-economic and personal costs of human trafficking and labor exploitation -- set in rural North Carolina -- was probably the best dramatization I've ever seen on those often-interrelated problems.

    Kudos to the show's writers, directors and cast for keeping the various storylines on an important subject both grounded and real at all times, and not allowing any of it to devolve into tawdry caricature and cheesy melodrama.

    "American Crime" shows us what television can be.

    Watching this season based on your rec (none / 0) (#124)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 01, 2017 at 09:45:34 PM EST
    Its failure is it is too real. You have to prepare yourself to watch the next episode. And we are not prepared to grasp that our kids grappling with opioid addiction can easily be used to replace slave wages laborers Donald. It is too real.

    Worth reading (none / 0) (#118)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 01, 2017 at 08:38:31 PM EST
    Let me put it another way. Claiming total certainty about the science traduces the spirit of science and creates openings for doubt whenever a climate claim proves wrong. Demanding abrupt and expensive changes in public policy raises fair questions about ideological intentions. Censoriously asserting one's moral superiority and treating skeptics as imbeciles and deplorables wins few converts.

    New York Times

    Definitely worth considering.

    That op-ed was total CYA. (5.00 / 3) (#120)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon May 01, 2017 at 09:07:24 PM EST
    The New York Times is simply trying to defend its hiring of Bret Stephens as a columnist, which sparked a lot of criticism and apparently prompted a fair amount of online subscription cancellations.

    I just saw Stephens the other night (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by jondee on Mon May 01, 2017 at 09:22:10 PM EST
    on a program hosted by Cato libertarian Johan Norberg and being presented as some sort of ultimate go-to expert on U.S government policy.

    The Koch-funded Cato Institute. Talk about questionable ideological intentions.


    Armando has been quite serious on (5.00 / 3) (#123)
    by Militarytracy on Mon May 01, 2017 at 09:37:22 PM EST
    Twitter that we all need to stop paying for and reading the NYTimes until they return to the practice of journalism. This does it for me.

    They were not awarded at the WH Correspondents Dinner either. Two journalists from WAPO and one from Politico were awarded. I paid attention to the specific journalists, but I also noted the publications and editors who had their backs and support, inspire, and publish awarded journalism.


    You know who else disagreed with you ... (5.00 / 2) (#129)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue May 02, 2017 at 04:58:16 AM EST
    ... about climate change? The late British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, who prior to entering politics majored in chemistry as an Oxford undergraduate, spoke to the U.N. General Assembly on November 8, 1989 about the urgencies of addressing climate change by curbing carbon emissions and the plundering of tropical forests:

    "We are seeing a vast increase in the amount of carbon dioxide reaching the atmosphere. The annual increase is three billion tonnes: and half the carbon emitted since the Industrial Revolution still remains in the atmosphere.

    "At the same time as this is happening, we are seeing the destruction on a vast scale of tropical forests which are uniquely able to remove carbon dioxide from the air. Every year an area of forest equal to the whole surface of the United Kingdom is destroyed. At present rates of clearance we shall, by the year 2000, have removed 65 per cent of forests in the humid tropical zones. The consequences of this become clearer when one remembers that tropical forests fix more than ten times as much carbon as do forests in the temperate zones.

    "We now know, too, that great damage is being done to the Ozone Layer by the production of halons and chlorofluorocarbons. But at least we have recognised that reducing and eventually stopping the emission of CFCs is one positive thing we can do about the menacing accumulation of greenhouse gases.

    "It is of course true that none of us would be here but for the greenhouse effect. It gives us the moist atmosphere which sustains life on earth. We need the greenhouse effect -- but only in the right proportions.

    "More than anything, our environment is threatened by the sheer numbers of people and the plants and animals which go with them. When I was born the world's population was some 2 billion people. My [ Michael Thatcher] grandson will grow up in a world of more than 6 billion people.

    "Put in its bluntest form: the main threat to our environment is more and more people, and their activities: The land they cultivate ever more intensively; the forests they cut down and burn; the mountain sides they lay bare; the fossil fuels they burn; the rivers and the seas they pollute.

    "The result is that change in future is likely to be more fundamental and more widespread than anything we have known hitherto. Change to the sea around us, change to the atmosphere above, leading in turn to change in the world's climate, which could alter the way we live in the most fundamental way of all.

    "That prospect is a new factor in human affairs. It is comparable in its implications to the discovery of how to split the atom. Indeed, its results could be even more far-reaching."

    If Margaret Thatcher understood, accepted and embraced climate science, why can't you guys?

    Have a nice day.


    Uh, Donald, for a start...... (none / 0) (#142)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 02, 2017 at 12:12:44 PM EST
    I know you worship at the feet of politicians and the Iron Lady was a good one...

    ...but she wasn't a scientist.

    How's that for a start?


    That's pure and unadulterated nonsense, Jim. (5.00 / 1) (#149)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue May 02, 2017 at 01:46:32 PM EST
    As I noted above, Margaret Thatcher's academic background was in chemistry -- organic chemistry, to be specific, a subject in which she excelled and further graduated with honors from Oxford. Her decision to not continue professionally in that field didn't subsequently render her scientifically illiterate. In crafting Her Majesty's government's initial policies on climate change, Mrs. Thatcher actually consulted with and listened to scientists and scholars, not right-wing media jockeys and pulp science fiction writers.

    Well, that was her problem (none / 0) (#150)
    by jondee on Tue May 02, 2017 at 02:06:20 PM EST
    right there.

    She should've consulted with Robert Heinlein, John W Campbell, and Dr Michael Savage before she spouted off pretending that she knew something about science.


    Exactly. (5.00 / 3) (#152)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue May 02, 2017 at 02:44:56 PM EST
    In Jim's white wingbat world, science is one vast conspiracy theory, part of a prolonged effort by liberals and other do-gooders to deny the rightful white male rulers of earth their just due.

    One can say a great many things about Baroness Thatcher, much of which is not necessarily flattering or good. But calling her ignorant or a fool on the subject of our planet's environment is most certainly not one of them. Her speech to the United Nations 28 years ago was a worldwide call to arms, and she should be heeded.



    Silly is as silly writes (none / 0) (#160)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 02, 2017 at 04:00:42 PM EST
    jondee, for the zillionth time, call me up when the theory that climate change is caused by man's use of carbon fuels meets the requirement to be a Scientific Theory.

    That is can it be tested?

    That is can it predict?

    As you know, it cannot be tested.

    And as you know it has failed every prediction.

    So brace up. Step forward with those two requirements. In the meantime, consider these:

    "CNSNews.com) - Ten years after former Vice President Al Gore warned in his 2006 Oscar-winning film, An Inconvenient Truth, that if nothing was done to stop man-made global warming, melting Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets could raise sea levels by up to 20 feet, four peer-reviewed scientific studies found "no observable sea-level effect of anthropogenic global warming."


    Roger Pielke Jr recently made the remarkable discovery that, in addition to his university salary from George Mason University (reported by Pielke as $250,000), Jagadish Shukla, the leader of the #RICO20, together with his wife, had received a further $500,000 more in 2014 alone from federal climate grants funnelled through a Shukla-controlled "non-profit" (Institute for Global Environment and Security, Inc.), yielding total income in 2014 of approximately $750,000.
    Actually, the numbers are even worse than Pielke thought.

    Pielke had quoted Shukla's 2013 university salary, but his university salary had increased more than 25% between 2013 and 2014: from $250,816 in 2013 to $314,000 in 2014.

    In addition, the "non-profit" organization had also employed one of Shukla's children (not reported, but say $90,000); and,
    IGES transferred $100,000 from its climate grants to a second corporation controlled by the Shukla family (the Institute for Global Education Equality of Opportunity and Prosperity, Inc.), which in turn transferred $100,000 to an educational charity in Shukla's home town in India, doubtless a worthy charity, but one that Shukla could have supported from his own already generous stipend.

    Over a million dollars in total in 2014 alone.
    In addition, Shukla's long-time associate, James Kinter, participated in the same double dip, though on a less grandiose scale. Kinter, also a Professor at George Mason, doubled his 2014 university salary of $180,038 with $171,320 from IGES, for a total 2014 income of $351,358.

    Try following the money.


    What an incredibly stupid point (none / 0) (#167)
    by jondee on Tue May 02, 2017 at 05:51:20 PM EST
    even by your subterranean non-standards.

    If being paid for one's work automatically impugned one's integrity and motives, than it holds equally true for the fossil fuel industry, professional deniers, and probably some internet trolls, as well.

    Follow the money lol. Yes, by all means genius, follow the money.


    And how long was she out of her field?? (none / 0) (#154)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 02, 2017 at 03:08:25 PM EST
    Are you up to date in yours?

    And I wonder if she spoke with Dr Phil Jones, head of the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia U. If she did I'm sure he didn't tell her this:

    This is from an Australian at BMRC (not Neville Nicholls). It began from the attached article. What an idiot. The scientific community would come down on me in no uncertain terms if I said the world had cooled from 1998. OK it has but it is only7 years of data and it isn't statistically significant.


    As you know, I'm not political. If anything, I would like to see the climate change happen, so the science could be proved right, regardless of the consequences. This isn't being political, it is being selfish.

    The above taken from emails that a Russian hacked.

    Donald, let me emphasize the obvious. If Dr Jones would like to see it to prove the science that means it hasn't happened.

    Damn those Ruskies! Always outing things the author thought private.....and embarrassing the writer(s).

    Donald, science is not about consensus. And you know that. To summarize Popper, science is about testability and predictability of theories.

    The Man made global warming theory fails. You cannot test it and all the predictions have failed.

    This summarizes my feelings.

    First, your facts. If you stuck simply to the modest contention that the world has warmed very slightly in the last 130 years, and you theorized -- and admitted it was a theory -- that humans have contributed to it in some small way, I wouldn't take much of an issue with you. The problem is that you lie so much. You lie when you refuse to confess that the climate prediction models you use are extremely flawed. You lie when you scream about the "97 percent consensus" that doesn't exist. You lie when you act like the real scientists who doubt man-caused global warming are all kooks and lunatics.

    Most of all, your overblown, hysterical doomsday prophecies are lies. The world is supposed to already be over by now, according to you. At the very least, New York City should be under water. We should have all been dead from global warming or global cooling or overpopulation dozens of times over. Around the time of the first Earth Day, we were told that hundreds of millions would be starving to death per year within ten years of that date. Human civilization should have crumbled into dust and the few remaining survivors should be floating through a vast water world, locked in a struggle of survival against Dennis Hopper. Yet, here we are, standing on dry land. How many times are you allowed to be wrong about the end of the world before we are justified in not taking you seriously anymore? I'd say that threshold, whatever it is, has long since been reached.


    Second, your sincerity. Here's the real issue I have with you. Even if you've been wrong about the Environmental Apocalypse 100 times, you still insist that this 101st prediction will surely pan out. ........This is all quite traumatizing, so it's good for your emotional well being that you don't really believe any of it.

    I can only assume that you don't believe it because your actions do not at all resemble what one would expect from someone who does believe this sort of thing. With very rare exceptions, you continue living just like the rest of us..... You think the world is about to end, for God's sake. What are you doing sitting at Starbucks like the rest of us? Why haven't you renounced all modern technology? Why haven't you fled to the mountains before the sea engulfs your family? Why aren't you doing... anything?



    The same wingnut (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by Yman on Tue May 02, 2017 at 03:20:01 PM EST
    ... conspiracy theory about Jones/East Anglia that's been debunked by numerous fact checkers and two, separate, scientific inquires, followed by a wingnut opinion piece from the Blaze.

    Sorry.  Our facts and thousands of peer-reviewed scientific studies beat your debunked, false claims and "feelings" every time.


    He can say be didn't mean it (none / 0) (#163)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 02, 2017 at 04:51:07 PM EST
    But he said what he said.

    He did indeed (none / 0) (#168)
    by Yman on Tue May 02, 2017 at 05:55:35 PM EST
    He didn't say what you claim he said.

    As usual.


    The quite is from an email (none / 0) (#184)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed May 03, 2017 at 07:40:28 AM EST
    He wrote what he wrote.

    He said what he said.


    And you must have missed this (none / 0) (#186)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed May 03, 2017 at 08:37:40 AM EST
    But the panel also rebuked the scientists for several aspects of their behavior, especially their reluctance to release computer files supporting their scientific work. And it declared that a chart they produced in 1999 about past climate was "misleading."

    "I won't show my work and I will mislead you with the results."

    What could be wrong with that?


    Nothing (none / 0) (#188)
    by Yman on Wed May 03, 2017 at 10:37:58 AM EST
    Because the wingnuts will attempt to distort, mislead and falsely characterize both the data and the science, all of which has been peer reviewed, unlike your wingnut opinion pieces.

    In fact, you provide the perfect example with your fake/false "quote" above, which is something he never said:

    "I won't show my work and I will mislead you with the results".

    Are you ignorant about the use of quotation marks or was your misuse of them a deliberate to deceive?


    How about just providing a link (5.00 / 2) (#157)
    by jondee on Tue May 02, 2017 at 03:36:23 PM EST
    instead of posting a bandwidth-eating skid mark transmission from Planet Wingnut?

    You've posted that same Dr Jones nonsense fifty times here, if you've posted it once.

    A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, Jimbo.


    Love the Emerson quote (none / 0) (#158)
    by MKS on Tue May 02, 2017 at 03:45:19 PM EST
    Howdy has an interesting point about ignoring Jimbo.

    Yeah he does (none / 0) (#159)
    by jondee on Tue May 02, 2017 at 03:52:56 PM EST
    Guilty as charged.

    Maybe anyone who responds should automatically get a bunch of 1s no matter what they say.

    He'd probably dry up and blow away fairly quickly.


    As Galileo (none / 0) (#162)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 02, 2017 at 04:07:18 PM EST

    "And yet it moves."

    You guys cannot debate the point.


    A rare concession (none / 0) (#166)
    by Repack Rider on Tue May 02, 2017 at 04:59:04 PM EST
    "And yet it moves."

    You don't usually concede even the most obvious point here, but congratulations are in order for the fact that you recognized science as being more important than religion.

    Unfortunately, the climate-deniers only have religion to work with, so you won't get far with them using fact, logic or science.  But don't stop trying.

    Clearly the point of science is that while it is fallible, it has the means to correct itself. Religion has no means of identifying error, and corrections are unthinkable.  

    Science can be used to make predictions, e.g. Darwin's prediction of DNA 90 years before its discovery, and then the predictions can be tested.  Darwin's correct prediction of DNA shows that his thinking was accurate in that regard.

    That religious prediction of the Second Coming has failed hundreds of times, so there is no reason to accept it as fact.

    As you so succinctly point out above.


    I thought you were educated (none / 0) (#185)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed May 03, 2017 at 07:57:41 AM EST
    The matter was investigated by the Roman Inquisition in 1615, which concluded that heliocentrism was "foolish and absurd in philosophy, and formally heretical since it explicitly contradicts in many places the sense of Holy Scripture."


    It was the consensus of "scientists" of that day who attacked Galileo much like we find the "Popes of Global Warming" attacking the nonbelievers....even to wanting to prosecute them using RICO.

    And yes, science can correct itself. But to do that the "believers" of a theory must be willing to change.

    In MMGW we find that the "believers" claim "consensus," a most unscientific term. In addition they keep failing at predicting and deny that their theory is not testable.

    You are the Pope, Donald. I'm on the side of Galileo.

    Like then you are on the wrong side if history.


    More sheer, unadulterated ignorance (none / 0) (#194)
    by jondee on Wed May 03, 2017 at 12:17:12 PM EST
    with bells on.

    The all-powerful "consensus" in Galileo's time was ecclesiastical; the Christian conservatives of the day --not the infinitesimally small number of people who would qualify as scientists today.

    It was an ecclesiastical consensus that would've wholeheartedly approved of your crackbrained 6 Days of Creation cosmology, and your claim that Darwinian evolution ain't nothin' but a dang hoax, put out there by more 'a them hoaxers.


    Every bit as much raising questions (none / 0) (#119)
    by jondee on Mon May 01, 2017 at 09:03:08 PM EST
    about "ideological intentions" is viewing as a personal slight the conclusions of the overwhelming majority of the worlds trained scientists, and acting and speaking as if "science" were just some secret code word for a gang of political operatives.

    For the zillionth time (none / 0) (#141)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 02, 2017 at 12:09:40 PM EST
    Science is not about consensus.

    Go ask Galileo's pope.

    Go ask the "scientists" that rejected the fact that germs existed.

    etc., etc.


    And for the zillionth time, Jim, ... (5.00 / 3) (#151)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue May 02, 2017 at 02:30:03 PM EST
    ... we don't live in Galileo's time during the 16th and 17th centuries.

    Science constitutes both an ongoing body of work and a process. It is a systematic enterprise by which mankind develops and organizes evidence-based factual knowledge in the form of readily testable theories and postulates.

    That scientific knowledge grants us both the ability and the opportunity to reasonably understand and explain the various components which comprise our universe, and further predict the likelihood and frequency of events which occur within that universe. And this universe, of course, includes weather and climate.

    You're punching way too far above your weight class here.


    Anti-science Does seem to be about (none / 0) (#145)
    by jondee on Tue May 02, 2017 at 12:29:22 PM EST
    consensus though..

    A consensus of theologian/free market conservatives pretty much All question the human influence on climate change.


    Go ask (none / 0) (#147)
    by jondee on Tue May 02, 2017 at 12:50:14 PM EST
    theologically-inclined conservatives, who say evolution doesn't produce new species.

    Another police shooting (none / 0) (#131)
    by Yman on Tue May 02, 2017 at 07:56:07 AM EST
    An unarmed, black teen was shot in a Dallas suburb as the vehicle he was riding in was fired upon by police.  The police chief is now backing away from his initial claim that the vehicle was backing toward police in an aggressive manner.  He now says the shooting does not "meet our core values," whatever that means.

    Federal Gas Tax Increase. (none / 0) (#169)
    by KeysDan on Tue May 02, 2017 at 05:58:10 PM EST
    Trump says he is considering an increase in the gas tax.  Spicer explains, well, yes, considering, as a gesture to the Truckers Association, apparently, the last people he spoke with. But, who knows?

    Trump, the Great Negociator (none / 0) (#171)
    by RickyJim on Tue May 02, 2017 at 06:31:34 PM EST
    Very interesting interview of Jeff Zucker who when at NBC green lighted "The Apprentice."  What struck me the most was that Trump wanted $1 million per episode but settled for $60,000.

    A new big ally (none / 0) (#190)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed May 03, 2017 at 11:23:43 AM EST