home

Thursday Open Thread

Judge to the sleepy El Chapo jury yesterday (via Emily Palmer at NY Times):

Today the judge admonished the jury in El Chapo’s case. “I know there is a lot of testimony to listen to,” he said. “Without singling anyone out, sometimes I look over and wonder if you’re as focused as you should be.”

Palmer also says there are problems with the translation:

The translation in El Chapo’s trial has been faulty. Large shipments of cocaine have been described as small, cocaine has been delivered to coasts it actually came from, people with the same first name have been credited with things they did not do.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Mueller Recommends No Incarceration for Michael Flynn | Gov't Sentencing Memo on Cohen: Mostly Bluster >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Greetings and blessings to all TLers (5.00 / 3) (#36)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 08, 2018 at 09:45:07 AM EST
    The former TL thread crawler Dadler wishes you all well. I browse now, almost never comment, perhaps that will change. Working on the mellower, less raging version of the self. Also, on the topic of raging, I have a blistering book of poetry, adlerpoems, coming out on New Year's Day courtesy of Dr. Cicero Books, a great little indy publisher. No cover photo yet, still being finalized. Available through that portal, Small Press Distribution in Berkeley, or evil Amazon (sigh...) on 1/1/19. Peace & Love to all.

    Good to hear from you Dadler! (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 08, 2018 at 11:38:48 AM EST
    Same your way, Sarc (none / 0) (#47)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 08, 2018 at 05:11:31 PM EST
    Glad you survived the fires. Blessings to you and the Sarc fam.

    Parent
    Dadler! Congratulations re your book (none / 0) (#37)
    by oculus on Sat Dec 08, 2018 at 10:13:16 AM EST
    of poems *

    Please update re your trombonist son.

    *. Are these poems mellow?

    Parent

    Poems not mellow at all (none / 0) (#40)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 08, 2018 at 10:46:30 AM EST
    Short, intense. The two review quotes kind of say it perfectly at the bottom of the SPD page for the book. Son is moving out next week, getting apartment down the hill with two friends. Had a bad experience with high school (though posted a brilliant SAT score when he took it as a sophomore), left HS two years early, tried college early,hopefully will go back at some point soon, worked at a bank for two years in a cubicle, now trying manual labor at In-n-Out. Although for about five times as much of a wage as I was making at his age in the early and mid-80s. I told him, I would have had to work almost an entire day to make what you are making per hour. But with the ridiculous cost of rent, please, it doesn't matter, we still have to help.

    Parent
    Thanks for the update. (none / 0) (#42)
    by oculus on Sat Dec 08, 2018 at 12:42:20 PM EST
    The blurbs are intriguing. (none / 0) (#43)
    by oculus on Sat Dec 08, 2018 at 12:44:47 PM EST
    I should have added about Eli (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 08, 2018 at 05:17:42 PM EST
    I know what the cover is going to be, it features my profile prominently, and Eli took the pic and will get "cover photo by" in his old man's first book, which is pretty cool. If I were more vain, I'd show you the cover, but having been convinced by my two editors to change the title (my original title was TOCQUEVILLE GOES BOWLING IN WICHITA) it's weird for me to see my mug on the cover AND my name as part of the title. Soon enough everyone will be able to tho. Oy. P.S.) Best thing about getting a book of poetry published by a real publisher? You get paid in quills and a complimentary ruffled shirt semi-annually. Ahem.  

    Parent
    Love the rejected title and the (5.00 / 2) (#51)
    by oculus on Sat Dec 08, 2018 at 08:15:26 PM EST
    photo attribution.

    Parent
    My LTE published today (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by Repack Rider on Sat Dec 08, 2018 at 10:14:58 AM EST
    Here it is:

    Lying under oath is now a `process crime'?

    Twenty years ago, when Bill Clinton lied under oath about a matter that was not itself illegal, a Republican Congress considered the lie to be a "high crime and misdemeanor" serious enough to warrant impeachment and removal of the president from office.

    Now that a number of Mr. Trump's associates have pleaded guilty to lying to Congress and to the FBI about matters that have national security implications, we are told by the president's spokespersons and surrogates that lying under oath and under penalty of perjury is a mere "process crime," unworthy of public attention.



    This could be yuge (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 10, 2018 at 11:18:13 AM EST
    Accused Russian spy Maria Butina appears to reach plea deal

    This could have implications not just for the NRA but untold numbers of dirty republicans.

    connect (none / 0) (#76)
    by FlJoe on Mon Dec 10, 2018 at 01:19:27 PM EST
    that to this
    Paul Erickson, a longtime Republican politico whose Russian girlfriend is in jail on charges she acted as a covert foreign agent, has been informed that he may face similar accusations.
    and this
    Donald Trump's presidential campaign may have illegally coordinated with the National Rifle Association in the final weeks of the 2016 presidential election, two watchdog groups said in a complaint filed Friday with the Federal Election Commission.
    and we have quite the conspiracy.

    Parent
    Sure, it was a publicity stunt (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 10, 2018 at 08:36:43 PM EST
    ... a vote of no confidence in her leadership that was taken tonight amongst her fellow Conservative MPs, 200-117. But the political impasse in Parliament over her controversial Brexit plan is still fixed firmly in place. And because the sun has long since set on the British Empire, the European Union in Brussels is equally unlikely to budge over hardline Tory demands that just-concluded negotiations over Brexit be reconvened.

    Because Brexit from its very inception has been such an ill-defined concept, it's really no surprise that its arch-conservative proponents have been unable to agree on either the stated intent, corresponding logistics or desired outcomes of an actual proposal. The devil was always going to be in Brexit's details, which has exposed its nascent appeal to the British public -- mostly in England -- as superficial at best. And the more that general public learns about Brexit's potential consequences, the less people tend to like it.

    Much like Trump's proposed wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, Brexit has never really been anything more than a political temper tantrum masquerading as a public policy. And as id the case for our Republican Party, it will be to the Tories' eternal discredit that the far right's irresponsible kabuki was ever allowed to enter mainstream consciousness and public discussion, where it eventually metastasized as a major government crisis of the first rank.

    The May government has now been substantially weakened by the Tories' very public spat over Brexit, as well as the resounding rejections of her government's Brexit proposal by the respective national assemblies of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Westminster's relations with the neighboring Republic of Ireland are also at their lowest ebb since both countries ratified the Good Friday peace accords in 1998. With the now-looming Article 50 deadline for British withdrawal from the European Union set to take effect on March 29, 2019, the only practical escape route from this mess is likely a second public referendum on Brexit.

    When the story of Brexit is finally examined in full, future historians will likely conclude that it was an avoidable self-inflicted wound that otherwise should never have occurred. And it probably wouldn't have, were it not for the most extraordinarily myopic and incompetent political leadership seen in London since Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain first embarked on his ill-fated Sept. 1938 pilgrimmage to Der Führer's Alpine retreat in Berchtesgaden, where the fate of Czechoslovakia was ultimately sealed in exchange for a vague promise of "peace in our time."

    Aloha.


    Looks Like Fed-State Double Jeopardy Will Remain (none / 0) (#1)
    by RickyJim on Thu Dec 06, 2018 at 04:31:24 PM EST
    Yeah, from reading the transcript of (none / 0) (#5)
    by Peter G on Thu Dec 06, 2018 at 05:01:35 PM EST
    today's oral argument at the Supreme Court, I think the defendant will probably lose 7-2 or maybe 6-3 at best. I thought the fancy conservative law firm lawyer who argued for the defendant was technically adept, but his strategy (assuming a Scalia approach to interpreting the Constitution) was terrible. (He's a former Scalia clerk.)

    Parent
    Golden Globes (none / 0) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 06, 2018 at 04:35:52 PM EST
    are out.

    Lots of nominations for Bohemian Rapsody, Favorite and a Star is Born.

    I hope Rami and Gaga win at least.

    Also several for Vice.  Looking forward to seeing that.

    The TV nominations are good too (none / 0) (#3)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 06, 2018 at 04:40:18 PM EST
    All my favorites.  Alienist, Killing Eve, Americans and Kidding.

    Parent
    This (none / 0) (#6)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 06, 2018 at 05:35:40 PM EST
    Patricia Arquette, "Escape at Dannemora"

    Is really excellent.  Doesn't sound particularly interesting, a couple of convicts escaping from prison, but it really is great.

    It got other nominations including best limited series.  It's running right now on SHO.

    Parent

    Awsum (none / 0) (#8)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 06, 2018 at 06:57:51 PM EST
    Sacha Baron Cohen never quite delivered on punking Sarah Palin on his Showtime series "Who Is America?" but we might get super awkward red carpet interviews if she accepts his invitation to attend the Golden Globes with him next month.

    The comedian invited the former vice presidential candidate to attend the ceremony with him Thursday while thanking the Hollywood Foreign Press Association for nominating him for best actor in a comedy series, competing against Jim Carrey ("Kidding"), Michael Douglas ("The Kominsky Method"), Donald Glover ("Atlanta") and Bill Hader ("Barry").



    Parent
    I wonder whether, if the defense can establish (none / 0) (#4)
    by Peter G on Thu Dec 06, 2018 at 04:50:33 PM EST
    that the official court translation has been significantly flawed, that would be grounds for a mistrial.

    Wonder how the defense is making a record of (none / 0) (#7)
    by oculus on Thu Dec 06, 2018 at 06:26:55 PM EST
    the translation errors, though.  In a case I tried the judge, who was fluent in Spanish, corrected the translator.

    Parent
    I see that frequently in transcripts of trials (none / 0) (#9)
    by Peter G on Thu Dec 06, 2018 at 07:29:08 PM EST
    from the District of Puerto Rico, on appeal to the First Circuit. I wonder, in the Chapo case, whether the official interpreters for E.D.N.Y. are mostly Puerto Rican, and perhaps having trouble with the nuances of Mexican Spanish.

    Parent
    Old Sparky (none / 0) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 06, 2018 at 07:36:50 PM EST
    NASHVILLE, Tenn. (WZTV) --
    The state of Tennessee executed a death row inmate by electrocution Thursday night.

    David Miller, 61, was set to die at 7 p.m. at the Riverbend Maximum Security Institution in Nashville, but was pronounced dead at 7:25 p.m. Miller spent 36 years on death row.



    pathetic (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by leap on Thu Dec 06, 2018 at 10:12:48 PM EST
    36 years on death row. That is so sad. I thought frying people to death had gone the way of the [fill in the blank]. I hope the people of Tennessee can rest easy, now. </s>

    What was the point of doing that. What is the point of state-sanctioned murder.

    Parent

    He requested it (none / 0) (#12)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 07:08:54 AM EST
    The death row inmate opted for the electric chair following a number of legal battles. His attorneys argued that Tennessee's lethal injection method causes a torturous death.

    Miller's death is the second Tennessee execution in recent months to use the electric chair. Edmund Zagorski was executed by electrocution on Nov. 1.

    I was surprised he was not the first.  Recently.

    Poor old man thought having Drano injected or whatever they are using now would be worse than this-

    At around 7:15 p.m., the first jolt of current flowed through Miller's body. Witnesses reported that the death row inmate's muscles clenched up and his body stiffened then raised from the electric chair, all while his pinky fingers were curled on the arm rest.

    His body looked pale as the second jolt of electricity was delivered. The blinds to the execution chamber were lowered and the microphone near Miller was shut off. Time of death was announced at 7:25 p.m.

    I'm guessing that was a long 10 minutes.

    Parent

    I once had a nerve conductivity test (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by leap on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 09:20:34 AM EST
    to pinpoint carpel tunnel problems. Those short bursts of electricity running through my fingers was really painful. But they were very brief. I cannot imagine being fried to death with electrical current.

    But then, I cannot imagine being intentionally and mindfully put to death by any means, while being in cognizant good health. Or why this is still done to people because...why?

    Parent

    Reports are (none / 0) (#14)
    by CST on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 10:38:40 AM EST
    That Kelly will resign soon.  Of course they've been reporting that pretty much since he got appointed so who knows.

    John Kelly to me has always been the walking, talking example of the worst kind of old-school Bostonian, and I for one, can't wait until he falls into obscurity and we can continue to make people like him less and less relevant.  Good riddance to bad rubbish.

    I've spent my entire adult life voting against people like him for the city council, statehouse, etc...  I can't wait until they are no longer options on my ballot.

    I guess (none / 0) (#15)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 02:32:29 PM EST
    for whatever reason getting older never changes the way they are. They decided to be a certain way at some point in their lives and despite any evidence or the fact that the world had changed around them they continued to do thing and think the way they always had. Plenty of stunted people in this world and they really amaze me at their ability to stay stunted.

    Parent
    Breaking news per WaPo is that Mueller (none / 0) (#16)
    by Peter G on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 03:53:24 PM EST
    has requested "substantial" prison time for Michael Cohen. When I was an Assistant Federal Public Defender, many decades ago, that was code for "five years or more." I'm not sure what it is code for in federal court in New York these days.

    cnn (none / 0) (#17)
    by FlJoe on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 04:20:21 PM EST
    reporting that the guidelines are 51-62 months and the memo called for some "mild" reduction.

    Mueller's memo looks to treat Cohen kinder and it seems to indicate Cohen spilled the beans on tRump.

    Parent

    Yes (none / 0) (#20)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 04:25:07 PM EST
    There are bad things in there for Donald.  Explicitly


    Parent
    Bad (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by FlJoe on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 04:42:30 PM EST
    things indeed
    The defendant's assistance has been useful in four significant respects.
        First, the defendant  provided information about his own contacts with Russian interests during the campaign and discussions with others in the course of making those contacts...
        Second, Cohen provided the SCO with useful information concerning certain discrete Russia-related matters core to its investigation that he obtained by virtue of his regular contact with Company executives during the campaign.
        Third, Cohen provided relevant and useful information concerning his contacts with  persons connected to the White House during the 2017-2018 time period.
        Fourth, Cohen described the circumstances of preparing and circulating his response to the congressional inquiries, while continuing to accept responsibility for the false statements contained within it


    Parent
    "And (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 04:48:59 PM EST
    spoke with a Russian national ... a "trusted person" in the Russian federation who could offer the campaign 'political synergy' and 'synergy' on a government level"

    Sounds like collusion to me.

    Parent

    After (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by FlJoe on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 05:02:23 PM EST
    the relative disappointment of the Flynn memo, this feels like an early Christmas.

    Mueller is brilliantly laying out his case before the American public through his filings. IMO the only reason he charged Cohen with lying to congress was to give him a reason to write this.

    Parent

    I was just thinking (none / 0) (#26)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 05:05:26 PM EST
    The same thing.  It's all here.  Collusion, obstruction, finance laws.

    The Trumpsters have their work cut out for them minimising and rationalizing this weekend.

    Thank god we hot H.W. planted the Sunday shows will be good.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 04:22:56 PM EST
    The way I hear it is the SDNY is the one wanting a pound of flesh.  Mueller is not so much.

    It was just described as I'd he gets 4 years from SDNY and 2 months for lying to congress (Mueller) he should serve the time concurrent'

    They are basically reading it on air.

    Parent

    Damn (none / 0) (#19)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 04:24:10 PM EST
    "If he gets 4 years.....

    Parent
    My (none / 0) (#27)
    by FlJoe on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 05:06:50 PM EST
    early take is that he zipped his lips regarding his local buddies(mob?) while throwing tRump under the bus.

    More afraid of the locals than Moscow?

    Parent

    Vendetta (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 05:09:00 PM EST
    Trump dumped on the wrong guy

    Parent
    "Totally clears the President... (none / 0) (#33)
    by desertswine on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 10:04:28 PM EST
    Thank you!"   says President D. Lusional.


    Parent
    If Tr*mp were not so careless with his words (none / 0) (#45)
    by Peter G on Sat Dec 08, 2018 at 04:05:24 PM EST
    and so reckless with regard to telling the truth, I might almost think he was parsing that statement carefully, suggesting that Cohen "clears the President" by incriminating Tr*mp only when he was a candidate, before he was (ugh) "the President."

    Parent
    Mueller requested concurrent. (none / 0) (#39)
    by oculus on Sat Dec 08, 2018 at 10:15:12 AM EST
    They also say (none / 0) (#21)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 04:28:55 PM EST
    It's clear the government wants more information from Cohen and if he delivers he can still reduce the sentence.

    He is said to not have cooperated fully with SDNY.

    They also just said most of the Manafort filing will be under seal.

    Parent

    The headline may be (none / 0) (#22)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 04:38:46 PM EST
    SDNY explicitly says Trump violated campaign finance laws.

    Parent
    Boom (none / 0) (#31)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 05:35:56 PM EST
    ..as Cohen himself has now admitted, with respect to both payments, he acted in coordination with and at the direction of Individual-1


    Parent
    Part 2 (none / 0) (#32)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 05:42:08 PM EST
    The agreements principal purpose was to suppress this woman's story so as to prevent this story from influencing the election.

    Removing the John Edwards defense that it was to protect his private life.

    Parent

    Reading (none / 0) (#29)
    by FlJoe on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 05:09:20 PM EST
    the Manafort memo now... lies about contacts with WH among others....I'm having a sugar rush.

    Parent
    Ha (none / 0) (#30)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 05:12:54 PM EST
    No kidding.  Is is like Christmas came early

    Chuck Terd just said this will cause Senate republicans peeling off.

    He may be a dooshe but he knows republicans.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#35)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Dec 08, 2018 at 05:52:18 AM EST
    I hope Todd is right but so far I'm not seeing it. Maybe it will take a few days to sink in with the GOP but it seems no matter what kind of thing Trump does the GOP continues to cling.

    Parent
    Marvelous Mrs. Maizel. Season 2. (none / 0) (#34)
    by Chuck0 on Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 11:08:15 PM EST
    Alex Borstein is hilarious.

    Oh great (none / 0) (#44)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Dec 08, 2018 at 03:13:21 PM EST
    Stupid f-ing Bernie supporters prepare to scru us again.

    Progressives, some frustrated with O'Rourke's policy stances and what they see as an alarming rush to coalesce support for O'Rourke from establishment Democrats, have voiced those concerns over the last several days on Twitter, including under a #NeverBeto hashtag.

    God forbid we should unite around a candidate who could win

    One of Sen. Elizabeth Warren's (D-Mass.) closest advisers is reportedly planning to meet with Rep. Beto O'Rourke (D-Texas) as the rising Democratic star mulls a possible 2020 presidential run, The Washington Post reported Friday.

    Mindy Myers, who ran Warren's successful 2012 U.S. Senate campaign before becoming the senator's chief of staff, is expected to meet with O'Rourke "soon," according to The Post.

    News of the possible meeting comes as both prominent Democrats are reportedly considering campaigns for the White House against President Trump in 2020.



    I've been (none / 0) (#49)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Dec 08, 2018 at 06:51:37 PM EST
    battling these jokers on twitter. Why not Stacey Abrams or Andrew Gillum? They came closer to winning than Beto. My point of contention with them has been that you have to win your state to even be considered. There are people who have won in states redder than Texas and nobody is talking about them.

    Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren are getting the full "Hillary Treatment". The only pleasure I get out of that is the fact that it can finally be pointed out that it was not just Hillary.

    This whole Great White Hope thing with Beto and the bros and beckies screaming and attacking him has become really ugly. Of course, the bros and beckies only want Bernie and they also have gone after Harris calling her a "cop" and Booker calling him a "neoliberal corporate shill". Yeah, they are attempting to find a way to screw us again. I just say cut them loose. They did not see the danger with Trump and still have not learned anything.

    Parent

    IMO (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Dec 08, 2018 at 09:34:54 PM EST
    It's about more than winning your state.

    Actually I think Beto would be an excellent candidate.  As would some of the others you mention.  

    But my choice, right now, might be Beto.

    My problem with the idiotic Berniebots is the idea of a #NeverBeto.  What complete slavering stupidity.

    Bernie Sanders will not be the 2020 nominee.  It might not be Beto but it damn sure will not the and 80 yo crank.

    I can't believe there are even enough of them to really be a problem but after what we have been through and will go through if they become a problem again I worry for their physical safety.

    But not a lot.

    Parent

    Of course (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 05:15:07 AM EST
    they are going to have a #never fill the blank to whomever wins. I agree that it is not going to be Bernie and if he runs again I agree that he will lose. They are attacking Beto right now because they believe he is taking Bernie's voting base. However IMO Bernie has no voting base outside of people who normally vote for the Green party. This particular group of people are not capable of learning from their mistakes. It has been this way for years going back to 2000.

    Parent
    This (none / 0) (#46)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Dec 08, 2018 at 05:02:47 PM EST
    Scribd Has The Comey Interview Transcript (none / 0) (#50)
    by RickyJim on Sat Dec 08, 2018 at 07:44:43 PM EST
    From Friday's closed hearing by the House Judiciary and Government Reform and Oversight Committees.  All 235 pages.  

    LOL! "But Her Emails," Part MMCMXLIV. (none / 0) (#53)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 03:22:17 AM EST
    Former FBI Director James Comey, who was the subject of the GOP's subpoena, derided the entire exercise as a waste of everyone's time, and further observed that yesterday's effort by House Republicans "wasn't a search for truth, but a desperate attempt to find anything to attack the institutions of justice investigating the president."

    Between the Trumpengruppengraft and the unyielding right-wing ideology, Republicans right now are so lost inside their own house of mirrors that they've become a distorted caricature of themselves. Pandering to white resentment as a matter of political policy is a big loser anywhere outside the Old Confederacy and the Great Plains.

    And yet Republicans appear utterly incapable of pivoting off that point. Instead, they're once again doubling down on stupid, and proving themselves to be as Lord Talleyrand once described the reinstated Bourbon monarchy in France after the fall of Napoleon. They've learned nothing and forgotten nothing.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Slogging through the Sunday shows (none / 0) (#55)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 10:14:16 AM EST
    I think I am, after listening to mealy mouthed dems and Indies and pathetic republicans, beginning to warm to the idea that impeachment mat not be the best solution.

    That this is something best "left to the voters".

    Yeah

    Maybe, not definitely but maybe, house democrats should fill their time exposing all the crime and graft of Trump world while allowing the Muller report to sink in and leave it to the voters in 2020.

    Because I think it's possible if they do that we will not only have the executive but the legislative branches of government.

    Plus (none / 0) (#56)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 10:24:16 AM EST
    I think maybe Trump needs to be beaten.  Not impeached (and/or not) removed and made a martyr

    Parent
    Sure (none / 0) (#57)
    by FlJoe on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 10:59:57 AM EST
    take impeachment off the table, that's always worked so well in the past.

    For months we have been told that the President can't be indicted and that impeachment is the only method to sanction a sitting president...now we get never mind?

    F that, IMO that would put the final bullet into the system of checks and balances.

    Parent

    Didn't say off the table (none / 0) (#58)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 11:15:16 AM EST
    Spend the next two years making the case for it.

    The fact is however much we want it impeachment will divide the country and rally support to Trump.

    No doubt it would feel great.

    Seeing him beaten, imo, could feel better.

    Even better if he is beaten in a primary.  Then indicted and prosecuted as a citizen.

    Again, I did not say "off the table".

    I said strategically it might be better to "leave it to the voters".

    Parent

    For example (none / 0) (#59)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 11:17:58 AM EST
    God knows there is more than enough to keep house committees busy just exposing all the BS the republicans worked so hard to hide.

    Parent
    I would even say (none / 0) (#60)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 11:20:23 AM EST
    "Exploitation" of impeachment might be a great idea.

    But the fact is the Senate will not remove him.

    Parent

    Explotation (none / 0) (#62)
    by FlJoe on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 02:39:03 PM EST
    or constitutional duty? Of course the Senate won't convict and it would carry some political risk, but it is absolutely the correct thing to do constitutionally speaking.

    Parent
    Spell correct (none / 0) (#64)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 03:10:15 PM EST
    That was supposed to be EXPLORATION.

    but exploitation kind of works too.


    Parent

    Well, (none / 0) (#61)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 12:35:55 PM EST
    by the time we hit the summer all that might be a different story. 6 months of investigations into him covering for MBL, colluding with Putin, laundering money for the Russian mob and assorted campaign finance felonies along with whatever the NY AG comes up with you might even have Republican clamoring to get rid of him. He also revels in being the victim and uses it to manipulate people. So all of this is going to have to be handled sad to say differently than Nixon.

    Parent
    Quite possible they will be (none / 0) (#63)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 02:51:53 PM EST
    Clamoring to get rid of him.  My question is if and when that happens why should democrats do their dirty work for them?

    MIGHT it not be better to force them to do it if they want it done instead of being the mules and giving them something to run against in their safe districts?

    Make them primary him.  Make them, after months of exposing the criminality, step up in congress so its not a partisan exercise?

    Look, it seems almost impossible to me that Trump will even be the republican nominee in 2020.  I think he will either resign or be primaried.

    I just think democrats should use every opportunity to shove him up their butts and down their throats before the 2020 election.

    Parent

    Considering the fact (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 07:10:35 PM EST
    that the GOP holds the senate they are going to have to be the ones that get rid of him if an impeachment is kicked up from the house.

    I still think Trump is going to be the nominee in 2020 because while I also believe that he is going to have a primary challenger he is still extremely popular with Republicans. I can't see him resigning because then he's going to have to face the prosecutors in court immediately thereafter. I suppose if an actual indictment is issued on Trump the GOP might move to remove him from office. My thinking is that he would have to removed via impeachment because again I can't imagine him voluntarily giving up the protection of the presidency.

    Parent

    How about an offer of no prosecution (none / 0) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 07:50:03 PM EST
    If he resigns?

    We can't stop the IRS from taking your money but just go away you or your family won't be prosecuted

    Not very likely I guess since prosecution is now coming from so many directions state and federal  but it seems like a possible way to avoid the horror the other path with be for the country.

    As far as him winning a primary.  We are a long way from a primary and I would bet we don't know the tiniest part of what will be known by then.  I'm not at all sure he would win a primary.

    Parent

    That would not be unprecedented (none / 0) (#70)
    by Peter G on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 07:54:56 PM EST
    I have seen plea agreements that include the requirement of resignation from public office. No reason why a non-prosecution agreement could not include the same. It is also legally possible, as part of an agreement, for a putative defendant to agree to extend the statute of limitations.

    Parent
    Seems like an option (none / 0) (#72)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 07:58:16 PM EST
    Most people could live with.

    Parent
    Great minds (none / 0) (#79)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 10, 2018 at 05:26:30 PM EST
    I guess

    While the party's voters may want impeachment, most may be savvy enough to realize that there's no point in pursuing a doomed gambit and that the best hopes for removing Trump lie in 2020.

    But....It sends the signal that, despite Trump's obvious wrongdoing, his actions are not impeachable.

    There is a solution to this dilemma, and it's one surprisingly few Democrats have embraced: Call for Trump's resignation.

    Trump may prove more difficult to oust than Nixon if it ever comes to that. But Vice President Mike Pence might be able to offer the right incentive to leave: the promise of a pardon -- perhaps not only for Trump but for any of his family members who are likewise implicated in crimes.

    That might be enough to get Trump to go of his own accord. And maybe Pence would follow through, or maybe he would not. President Gerald Ford was not treated kindly by the voters for pardoning Nixon.

    But forced resignation, rather than impeachment, will likely end up being the best way to hold Trump accountable for any crimes if it comes to that. Democrats should start laying the groundwork for that potentiality by demanding he step down now.



    Parent
    A pardon (none / 0) (#81)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Dec 10, 2018 at 05:31:16 PM EST
    will not keep Trump out of jail though since he apparently has committed numerous crimes in NY and possibly other states as well.

    Parent
    Sure (none / 0) (#82)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 10, 2018 at 05:33:23 PM EST
    But similar idea

    Avoid Trump trying to take the world down with him

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#74)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 08:23:24 PM EST
    I could see the "no prosecution if you resign" thing working if it was just Mueller but since Trump has Mueller, SDNY, NY AG and then he has the AGs across the country suing on the emoluments clause I just can't see that working. Too many people would have to agree to drop their cases to get him out of office. The emoluments thing is really important for the future. Any business person should have to divest themselves of their business or do some sort of blind trust in the future.

    Parent
    Btw (none / 0) (#71)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 07:55:54 PM EST
    I would hope (none / 0) (#73)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 08:20:48 PM EST
    he wouldn't win a primary under indictment but these Trumpers probably wouldn't believe he was indicted in the first place and that it was "fake news".

    It would seem that Fox News is preparing their viewers for the downfall of Trump though.

    What is this thing about Obama campaign violations that are "worse". It would seem to me that Obama had the same problem a lot of politicians have and they just pay the money back.

    Parent

    There is no legal prohibition ... (none / 0) (#65)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 03:15:26 PM EST
    ... to the criminal indictment of an incumbent president, either in the U.S. Constitution or in federal statute. The basis for our so-called conventional wisdom which implies otherwise appears to be rooted solely on the 45-year-old opinion of the late Watergate Independent Prosecutor Leon Jaworski.

    And as we learned recently from the wealth of Watergate-related material that was released after decades under seal, the grand jury empaneled in early 1974 was fully ready to indict President Nixon on four felony counts. Jaworski never told those grand jurors they were wrong. Rather, he said that he would not prosecute the president criminally until Congress first had its say.

    Should the evidence and circumstances warrant President Trump's criminal indictment, I hope that Special Counsel Robert Mueller ignores the bleating cable news punditocracy, proceeds to lay out the case clearly and publicly, and thus compels the federal judiciary to render a definitive opinion on the matter, one way or another.

    In my honest opinion, there's a good reason why our country's founders, when debating and drafting the Constitution in 1787, never expressly prohibited the indictment of an incumbent president. They assumed, as do most sane and sober people, that appeals to reason and consciousness of fact and truth would generally prevail in congressional oversight and deliberations.

    However, they also likely foresaw the possibility that a future Congress would not just fail to provide an effective check on the abusive behavior of the executive branch, but might further enable -- or even participate in -- a future president's criminal conduct.

    Regardless of whether or not there is a bona fide legal basis in our criminal laws to underscore the impeachment and removal of an incumbent president, its pursuit thereof was clearly intended by the founders to be an overt political act on the part of Congress and the citizenry. And such overtly political acts require a sufficient and corresponding level of political capital and will to carry them out successfully.

    The true measure of our Constitution has yet to be fully tested by the federal judiciary's own resolve, as we confront the likelihood of just such a breakdown in the system of checks and balances at the legislative and executive levels of our government, and the subsequent failure of nerve on the part of Congress and American citizens to address it politically through the impeachment and electoral processes.

    So, here's hoping that Special Counsel Mueller does not also suffer from any such failure of nerve himself, and possesses the personal resolve necessary to call the very question that now dares to be asked. Our country's democracy may very well be hanging in the balance.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    It's not just Mueller any more (none / 0) (#66)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 03:30:09 PM EST
    Andrew C. McCarthy: Why Trump is likely to be indicted by Manhattan US Attorney

    But I agree.  I've been saying for a year there is a good chance he will be indicted.

    On one of the morning shows a prosecutor was explaining how he could be indicted but not put on trial until after he leaves office as a way of insuring he can't slide on limitations

    Would be curious what the lawyers thing about that.

    Parent

    There has been plenty of speculation ... (none / 0) (#78)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Dec 10, 2018 at 04:40:46 PM EST
    ... that Trump is already the target of one of several dozen sealed indictments which have reportedly been issued by Mueller's office. Of course, we won't know that for certain until those indictments are unsealed. But a boy can dream, can't he?

    ;-D

    Parent

    The hour and 45 min finale of (none / 0) (#67)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Dec 09, 2018 at 04:09:55 PM EST
    Enemies: The President, Justice & the FBI

    Is on HBO at 6 central.

    Trump appears to fulfill (none / 0) (#77)
    by fishcamp on Mon Dec 10, 2018 at 04:20:31 PM EST
    all seventeen or so character traits necessary to being a sociopath.  The foremost one being lack of remorse.  One of the traits is torturing animals as a child.  That one I cannot confirm, but don't discount it either.

    Chris Christie will fit right in as our sociopathic Chief of Staff.  

    I'm betting on.. (5.00 / 2) (#100)
    by desertswine on Tue Dec 11, 2018 at 02:27:29 PM EST
    Is Chris (none / 0) (#80)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Dec 10, 2018 at 05:30:27 PM EST
    Christie now on the list instead of Mark Meadows? Christie I would imagine would at least be able to tell Trump he's in a lot of trouble. Meadows would just feed Trump more conspiracy theories.

    Parent
    The reporting seems to say (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 10, 2018 at 05:38:21 PM EST
    Trump is considering Christie.  It does not say Christie is considering taking the job, that I can find.

    I would be surprised.  As desperate as he is to be relevant I would think he is smarter than that.

    Otoh he's not really that smart

    But really, who in their right mind would take job?

    Parent

    Hubris (none / 0) (#84)
    by FlJoe on Mon Dec 10, 2018 at 05:57:32 PM EST
    and hunger for power. Maybe he thinks he could the one who tames the beast and crown himself the true adult in the room.

    He could go from a has-been (who can't even make it on the wingnut welfare circuit because he once hugged Obama), to one of the most powerful people in DC(on paper at least).

    The risk/reward ratio is not that bad in Christie's case, it's unlikely that he would allow himself to get caught up in criminality and he could gain credit for holding things together if and when tRump's presidency implodes.

    Parent

    Good thinking (none / 0) (#85)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 10, 2018 at 06:00:03 PM EST
    I say go for it.

    :)

    Parent

    Rant alert (none / 0) (#86)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 10, 2018 at 06:22:31 PM EST
    WHY THE HE11 ARE HEARING AIDS SO FREAKING EXPENSIVE?

    I may need one of these some day and I was stunned how much they cost.  Seriously, when every kind of electronic "thing" gets cheaper by the day they get 2,500 for a tiny piece of plastic. WTF

    I see no good reason they should cost more than a decent set of ear buds.

    So of course I googled


    "One reason the prices remain high is that a fairly small group of companies controls the market," says Dan G. Blazer, the J.P. Gibbons professor of psychiatry emeritus at Duke University Medical Center in Durham, N.C., who chaired the NASEM committee. Six global manufacturers control 90 percent of the market. Consumer choice is also limited because hearing aid providers typically contract with only two or three selected manufacturers, says Carole Rogin, president of the Hearing Industries Association (HIA). Not all models are available at all dispensers. "This is problematic," says Blazer.

    Another problem, he adds, is lack of transparency, "including transparency of the cost of production of hearing aids compared to the cost to distributors." Many hearing care professionals bundle all their costs into the final retail price. This includes not only manufacturer's costs like materials and research and development, but also the expenses incurred by the provider: rent, salaries, training, licenses, diagnostic machines, marketing and ongoing patient support.

    Why is this legal?

    The article goes on to explain it's getting better and online sales are lowering prices but it seems even worse that the people who need them are likely to be less skillful at net navigation.  Plus medicare does not pay a penny.

    It sucks.

    I went through this last year (5.00 / 2) (#93)
    by Chuck0 on Tue Dec 11, 2018 at 11:01:50 AM EST
    with my mother. I found the best price by through the doctor's office's audiologist rather than dealing with a brand name dispenser (like Beltone). But still, it was $3000 for the "intermediate" hearing aids. And this is for a woman whose net income is barely $13000 a year. She has Medicare and Tricare and they will pay for the exams, but not for the hearing aids. Same with eyeglasses.

    Parent
    Yes, (none / 0) (#88)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Dec 11, 2018 at 05:43:09 AM EST
    my mother had to get them and when she was telling me how much they cost I almost couldn't believe it. So she shopped around and apparently Costco had the best price but I'm not sure how much under the $2500 is "best price".

    Parent
    Costco (none / 0) (#89)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 11, 2018 at 08:31:42 AM EST
    Was mentioned in that article as a major player in bringing down prices.   Apparently they have their own brand.

    The article gave 2500 as the "average" price

    Parent

    Costco (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by jmacWA on Tue Dec 11, 2018 at 09:23:34 AM EST
    SO went there because they are supposedly not like the typical place where once you are in the door, they are going to sell you a hearing aid.  The experience was exactly that... She went in had a 45 minute hearing test (which they keep on file) and was told that at this point she does not require a hearing aid, but at some point in the future she likely will.

    Parent
    eye glasses (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by leap on Tue Dec 11, 2018 at 11:02:35 AM EST
    I would love to get my eye glass prescriptions at Costco, because they are so vastly less expensive than any other place in my area. But I wear tri-focals. Alas, Costco doesn't do tri-focals.

    Parent
    That quote was from 2016 AARP (none / 0) (#90)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 11, 2018 at 08:49:46 AM EST
    This is consumersadvocate 2018

    The price of hearing aids will depend on the kind of features and style a customer wants. There is no way around it though, hearing aids are expensive--they typically run from $1000 to $4000 per ear. This is because the cost will more often than not include the price of a preliminary hearing test, consultation with a specialist, and any follow-up adjustments or routine cleanings.


    Parent
    Why is what legal? (none / 0) (#97)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Dec 11, 2018 at 01:15:39 PM EST
    My dad got hearing aids and they really didn't help him much, especially in "loud" places like stores, restaurants, etc.

    Very isolating.

    Parent

    Harvard study suggests the gender wage gap (none / 0) (#92)
    by McBain on Tue Dec 11, 2018 at 10:44:49 AM EST
    has to do with work schedule related choices.
    Women value time away from work and flexibility more than men, taking more unpaid time off using the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and working fewer overtime hours than men.  

    more...

    Mechanically, the earnings gap can be explained in our setting by the fact that men take 48% fewer unpaid hours off and work 83% more overtime hours per year than women.  The reason for these differences is not that men and women face different choice sets in this job. Rather, it is that women have greater demand for workplace flexibility and lower demand for overtime work hours than men.  These gender differences are consistent with women taking on more of the household and childcare duties than men, limiting their work availability in the process (Parker et al., 2015; Bertrand et al., 2015).

    My household situation is a little bit different.  I'm the one who opts for a more flexible schedule.

    OMG (none / 0) (#95)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 11, 2018 at 11:05:43 AM EST
    The first Trump-Nancy-Chuck meeting is a total train wreck.

    Bahaha ha

    Incredibly (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 11, 2018 at 11:24:38 AM EST
    Chuck baited Trump into admitting he WANTS a shutdown.

    Parent
    And the stock market went back down (none / 0) (#98)
    by fishcamp on Tue Dec 11, 2018 at 01:44:30 PM EST
    after that border wall disagreement.  Such a terrible leader.

    Parent
    Trump or Schumer? n/t (none / 0) (#99)
    by leap on Tue Dec 11, 2018 at 02:09:30 PM EST
    -

    Parent
    The best part (none / 0) (#101)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 11, 2018 at 03:34:18 PM EST
    Was Pence.  It was Weekend At Bernies.

    Parent
    If you didn't see it (none / 0) (#102)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 11, 2018 at 03:41:54 PM EST
    you should

    Just for fish this is CNBC with a live market graph

    Parent

    Assumptions (none / 0) (#103)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 11, 2018 at 05:33:01 PM EST
    George R.R. Martin's NIGHTFLYERS (none / 0) (#105)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Dec 12, 2018 at 06:00:27 PM EST
    This is running right now on SYFY.

    I forgot about it but that's ok.  It's being done the same as the CHANNEL ZERO series which is all on consecutive days and streaming at premier.

    I have been streaming it.  You can do that free from the SYFY channel site or the app.  Broadcast is up to episode 8 I think.  Do not start at episode 8.

    It's really really REALLY good

    Well that's it... (none / 0) (#106)
    by desertswine on Wed Dec 12, 2018 at 11:41:39 PM EST
    Ivar the Boneless has finally gone too far.  He's heading for a comeuppance.  

    Julian Castro is in (none / 0) (#107)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Dec 13, 2018 at 07:51:19 PM EST
    He is on with Chris Hayes basically announcing a run.

    That's good!