Wednesday Open Thread

Yesterday I was all caught up on the news. Today, I'm not. But we do need a new open thread until I find some blogging time, so here it is, all topics welcome.

< Thursday Open Thread | When ISIS Ran City Hall >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    THE AMERICANS (5.00 / 2) (#93)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 02:46:01 PM EST
    OK, I love this show.  I really think it's one of the best things out there.
    But they do things that drive me crazy.  Things I believe that have kept the series from getting the attention it deserves.  Some times small things.

    My current pet peeve is her "fake smoking".  You see it a lot in film and tv.  People smoking who don't know how to smoke or hold a cigarette.
    It was sort of acceptable when it only happened once in a while but it has become a plot point.   Discussed in the dialog of the show.  She is now a chain smoker and she doesn't freaking know how to smoke.
    Seriously, what the hell.  If she has some health reason for refusing to inhale fer God's sake do it with CG.  It's really cheap and easy.  But just stop doing close ups of her taking a tiny pull, holding it in her mouth and blowing it out.

    It yanks me right out of the story every time and it's going to keep them out if the EMMYS again.

    Rant over.

    Ha. I'm with you on fake smoking. (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 04:55:32 PM EST
    It takes me right out of the movie/TV show.

    Both the obvious non-smokers trying to fake it, and the others fellating their Marlboros in an attempt to create a "character."

    The "real" smokers I've seen, like my mom for most of my life, do it with no more awareness than scratching an itch.


    This (none / 0) (#97)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 03:06:03 PM EST
    Probably clove or herbal. (none / 0) (#102)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 03:40:09 PM EST
    Those things are horrible to inhlale. Worse than skunkweed.

    Just watched it (none / 0) (#136)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 08:44:21 PM EST
    How did Elizabeth not get her own head blown off at the end? Her head was completely over his. I don't think you splatter like that if the bullet doesn't exit.

    You know what else bugs me (5.00 / 2) (#142)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 09:10:16 PM EST
    The "disguises" seriously.  Let me ask you, have you ever had sex with someone, even once let alone an on going thing, when you would not know they were wearing a bad wig?

    The disguises are just laughable some times.  


    The wig thing has bothered me too (none / 0) (#147)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 09:40:58 PM EST
    Elizabeth is always in the sack with someone. Nobody ever comes away with a handful of wig? What does she have them pasted on with? Hahaha

    Philipp was deep in the Kama Sutra and Martha never slapped his wig off either.


    Ok (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by FlJoe on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 05:47:22 PM EST
    this is weird
    35 year old Benjamin Sparks, a prominent Republican political consultant who has worked for Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan and Scott Walker among others, was engaged to an unnamed woman. Sparks had his fiance sign a five page contract in which she agreed to be his "slave and property," shortly after they started dating last November. This involved kneeling, looking at the ground while she spoke to him, being nude at all time, engaging in sex on request at any time and wearing a collar. At the end of March he began to demand that she have sex with other men, while bound and blindfolded, while he watched.
    Oh well when the going gets weird......but this old pro wants to know if we get an off-season.

    Youtube reality check (5.00 / 1) (#120)
    by ragebot on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 05:53:29 PM EST
    It gets a little easier to understand the youtube shooter with a little history lesson.  Not trying to justify her actions, just saying there were a lot of unhappy campers.  For what ever reason youtube radically changed it's monetization rules.

    The updated rules state that in order for creators to be eligible for the Partner Program,..., they must have a total watch time of 4,000 hours in the past 12 months and a minimum of 1,000 subscribers.
    This is a major departure from the program's previous policy, which only required channels to have 10,000 lifetime views.

    There were lots of small time folks I know of, especially cruisers with sailboats, who were making a little money by posting vids of their adventures.  Not making a lot of money; but to them every little bit helped.  I know of one boat who posted what I thought was a beautiful vid of  them going up the Rio to install a solar lighting system in the school of a very poor village.  As one might expect for a dirt poor village in a third world country some of the very young children did not wear clothes below their waist resulting in the vid being restricted.  It maybe occurred for 5 seconds of the vid and reminded me of those old NatGeo pix of bare chested women.

    There is no justification for shooting strangers who simply work for a company you don't like.  Especially since your gripe is most likely due to something done by a computer app.  But there is plenty to dislike about how youtube pulled the rug out from under a lot of folks.

    A Marxist Understanding of YouTube Policies (none / 0) (#155)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 11:15:55 PM EST
    Re: `There is no justification for shooting strangers who simply work for a company you don't like.  Especially since your gripe is most likely due to something done by a computer app.  But there is plenty to dislike about how youtube pulled the rug out from under a lot of folks.`

    I agree with all your points.

    This reminds me of someting I leaned at University. A Professor told a personal story of a colleague he knew in the old Soviet Union. His colleague explained to him how correct titles and preambles were required to allow even the driest scientific work to pass the political censors. Typically, an appropriate title such as `A Marxist Understand of [Geothermal Vents in Eastern Siberia]' and a appropriately pandering introductory paragraph was sufficient.  

    Of course there is no justification for shooting strangers who simply work for a company you don't like. The fact that one needs to add such an obvious disclaimer as a preamble before you can criticize YouTube policies demonstrates how stilted open discussion has become due to the excessively reactive criticism from a vocal few. In my opinion.


    Coulter counter. (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by KeysDan on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 11:55:38 AM EST
    Trump's Proclamation to send National Guard troops to the border does not entirely count toward satisfying Ann Coulter's xenophobic taunt to Trump to build his wall.

      Coulter says it doesn't count;  it will not stop migrants, unless one is shot to send a message--invoking Voltaire's notion in Candide: "we hang one to encourage others."

    Trump is not federalizing national guard troops under Title 10, US Code (putting control under the Sec of Defense), but is requesting state governors to send its state's national guard troops under Title 32, sent at the determination of the governor and remaining under state control.  

    Federalized national guard troops (Title 10) are prohibited from enforcing domestic laws under the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA) signed by President Hayes in 1878.  The PCA bans military forces from getting involved with domestic issues such as immigration.

    National Guard, under state control, are not subject to PCA, but may be federally funded in border security triggered by Homeland Security needs, under a federal law enacted in 2004.

    Therefore, Trump's Proclamation allows state governors to refuse to send troops; and those states that do send troops can request funding for their national guard troops so the federal government, not the states pick up the tab.  

    The governors of AZ and TX are all in; CA is reviewing it; and OR says no.

    This proclamation, goaded on by the likes of Ann Coulter, without regard to relations with an ally, will have to do until Trump builds his wall and Mexico pays for it.

     And, apparently, that parade of rapists and murderers trying, shamefully, to become DACA, according to the ignorant Trump, is causing great urgency along the border.  This despite just a month or so ago (Feb 28, 2018), Trump tweeted a chest-thumper: "a 45-year low, doing a great job at the border."  

    My new boat drink is (5.00 / 2) (#178)
    by fishcamp on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 03:22:32 PM EST
    actually an old drink I invented, in Aspen, for a bartenders contest, which I won.  It was one ounce of white rum in a highball glass of orange juice with a tiny float of cremê de banana liquor on top .. I called it a warm wave.  

    You are on a boat (5.00 / 1) (#179)
    by MKS on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 03:34:09 PM EST
    having drinks?

    Nice weather too.



    No. (none / 0) (#188)
    by Zorba on Sat Apr 07, 2018 at 03:01:24 PM EST
    Just no.
    Forget the cremê de banana liquor.
    If you want to use white rum, BTW, it makes lovely mojitos.
    Daughter Zorba gave us two bottles of really excellent white rum.

    I just saw Roger Stone (5.00 / 3) (#182)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 07:58:37 PM EST
    on CNN and I swear the guy is nuts. I wish though Anderson Cooper would call him out on his lies. This is one of the problems with the press. Stone was going on about Uranium One the debunked story about how it was the greatest treason every committed in America and Cooper just sat there and let him spew the garbage. Stone looks to be a target of Mueller since he has not been called in to testify. I will do a happy dance the day he gets indicted.

    Avenatti hints at "major announcement" (5.00 / 1) (#186)
    by Yman on Sat Apr 07, 2018 at 11:57:49 AM EST
    ... re: the unidentified man who threatened Stormy Daniels/Stephanie Clifford.  To be honest, I'm not expecting much, but if they could identify the guy and tie him to Cohen/Trump, things would get very interesting very quickly.

    David Hogg, the Stoneman-Douglas (5.00 / 1) (#187)
    by KeysDan on Sat Apr 07, 2018 at 02:31:25 PM EST
    survivor, was threatened in a post on twitter, by a Trump-supporting, wingnut host on a Sinclair radio affiliate in St. Louis, for advocating for gun control.

     Jamie Allman tweeted: " When we kick their a$$ they all like to claim we're drunk. I've been hanging out getting ready to ram a hot poker up David Hogg's a$$ tomorrow. Busy working. Preparing."

      As with Fox host, Laura Ingrahm, who after taunting Hogg as a whiner about not being accepted to four colleges despite his GPA and SAT scores, experienced boycott action that had her fleeing to a vacation, so too has Allman's threat to sodomize the 17-year old high school student resulted in a campaign to boycott sponsors of his shows.

    Bill Maher, on his Friday HBO show, attempted to defend Ingrahm, even though she is admittedly vile, on the basis of the First Amendment right of free speech.

     However, Bill's panel, which included Max Boot and Eliot Spitzer, took him on successfully, getting Bill to admit that boycotts are a form of free speech as well.

     (Spitzer is such a good thinker and the uproar and his political demise over his hooker indiscretions, these days, seem almost quaint).

    One of the many reasons (5.00 / 2) (#194)
    by Anne on Sat Apr 07, 2018 at 04:18:47 PM EST
    Bil Maher gets on my nerves...I would really like it if people who talk about the 1st amendment would at least have some sort of working knowledge about what it protects us from.

    As near as I can tell, the government didn't prohibit or interfere with Ingraham's comments; and no one's saying she isn't still free to say what she wants.  But there are consequences to what we say, as there were consequences to what she said.

    The 1st amendment doesn't say that I don't have the right to react to what people say, and for some reason, people not only don't understand that the 1st amendment is about protection from government interference, they also don't understand that the amendment doesn't protect them from the consequences of what they say, nor does it require us to accept what people say.

    Say what you want, just don't hide behind the 1st amendment when people disagree and react in ways that you don't like.


    Good news from Wisconsin (4.86 / 7) (#8)
    by Peter G on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 04:02:02 PM EST
    The more liberal (so we're told) woman candidate won the state-wide election for a seat on the state Supreme Court, over a Scott-Walker-appointed, NRA-endorsed, conservative male judge. Governor Walker seems to be concerned about this. Good.

    A long time coming (5.00 / 4) (#148)
    by Towanda on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 10:01:24 PM EST
    with the first liberal non-incumbent to win in 23 years.

    Kudos to Eric Holder, who has "put on the comfy shoes" in the promise broken by his boss to march with us in Wisconsin.

    Holder's organization gave almost $350,000 to our candidate's campaign, when the national Dem Party gave only $6,000. Every cent was needed to counter massive funding from the national GOP and, of course, the Kochs.

    Holder's votng rights organization also helped to fund our three court battles that culminated last week in forcng Walker to finally call special elections to fill two legislative seats, long left vacant. And Holder's organzation, of course, also helped in getting our redistricting case to the Supreme Court.

    We still await a ruling on the redistricting case, but we're feeling lucky . . . and no longer alone.  Thanks, Eric Holder.


    My LTE in today's paper (4.83 / 6) (#7)
    by Repack Rider on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 03:40:50 PM EST
    If you can make a good point in two sentences, your letter will get published. No link, here's the text.

    A boy named David, armed only with his cellphone, took on a broadcasting giant, and forced a surrender.

    If only there were a metaphor for that.

    A cell phone... (1.00 / 3) (#60)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 12:25:05 PM EST
    and the communication resources of CNN et ai.

    No love for Faux News? (5.00 / 2) (#85)
    by Yman on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 02:25:37 PM EST
    Fox "News" was covering the Parkland survivors at least as much as CNN.

    Of course, their "communications resources" were used to smear the survivors, sooooooo ...


    Sorry, mistyped (none / 0) (#137)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 08:51:20 PM EST
    Should have been "CNN et al" rather than "CNN et ai. "

    So you WERE including Faux News (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by Yman on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 08:59:14 PM EST
    ... as a "communications resource" that helped the Parkland survivors defeat ...

    ... Fox News.



    Twitter (5.00 / 4) (#108)
    by Repack Rider on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 04:15:51 PM EST
    You have it exactly backward. He used Twitter.

    CNN covered him because BY USING TWITTER, he inspired millions of people all over the globe to stand together.

    When somebody gets millions of people to say the same thing at the same time, worldwide, it will be covered.

    So a FOX host had to give the kid with a 4.2 GPA a hard time about not being accepted to every school where he applied, not at all uncommon, happened to my daughter who had a 4.0. You think a kid named Hogg hasn't heard a few personal insults?  He's also been shot at and seen his friends die. So he swung back like Babe Ruth, and who doesn't enjoy seeing David beat Goliath, except maybe a Philistine?

    Those rejections took place before he became a public figure.  By this time next year, Oxford, Harvard, Stanford, Yale, whatever would be happy to send a limousine if he would get in.  He will be a Rhodes Scholar.

    In a world where media try to manufacture leaders, real leadership stands out, and Mr. Hogg brings a truckload of it.


    AUTHORITY (4.67 / 3) (#35)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 05:51:10 PM EST
    Second book in the SOUTHERN REACH TRILOGY of which ANNIALIATION was the first.  I'm about half way through.  I think I like it even more than the first.

    NYTimes review

    Stormy Daniels - linea (3.67 / 3) (#168)
    by ZtoA on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 10:59:30 AM EST
    In a now closed open thread linea said [ "Re:  `He did not wear a condom. That CD or DVD might be a lawyer's tease but it could contain information other than pictures... Any thoughts?'] (<--my comment)

    If you have some wild speculation about condoms or the lack of condoms, feel free to post it.

    To me, the only thing notable about condoms is that Anderson Cooper keeps asking women whether they used condoms. Maybe AC is going to launch his own brand of cherry 🍒 flavored condoms.

    Linea, she brought it up. Cooper followed up to clarify. So your snotty comment actually makes no sense. I suggest you stop thinking about Anderson Cooper. It's not a good look on you, man or woman.

    In any case we don't know what, if anything is on that tease of a CD. But we do know that Avenatti and Stormy are playing Trump's game against him. Donald Trump is in essence a pro-wrestler MC. Even his reality TV show functioned like pro-wrestling. So we may not know now but......stay tuned for the next episode!! and there will be more episodes to follow that are even better!!!  We'll see.....

    YouTube shootings (2.67 / 3) (#56)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 12:00:56 PM EST
    I feel sorry for Nasim Aghdam. It was terrible that, in her distress, she shot and wounded three innocent people but I also feel sorry for her. Both the shootings and her suicide were just horrible.

    It seems like the parents did everything possible by notifying the police and explaining their concerns. I wonder if law enforcement could have intervened more effectively to get her the health care she needed. It's such a tragedy that she died.

    I also feel that she and the other vegan activists are right to accuse YouTube of unfairly demonetizing and hiding animal cruelty videos as adult-only content.

    Right..especially when there's (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by jondee on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 12:48:56 PM EST
    an effin' thousand-and-one "Sandy Hook was a false flag" videos, which have inspired gun nutjobs to harass traumatized, grieving families, and a veritible plethora of videos that tell you all you need to know about (Soros controlled) Luciferan Reptilian Overlords bent on subverting all that we hold near and dear..

    That said, we don't murder innocent people just because our message has been temporarily stifled and our income stream takes a hit. "Don't mourn, organize."


    The tragedy isn't that she died, it's that (5.00 / 4) (#104)
    by Anne on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 03:49:38 PM EST
    she had decided that before she killed herself, she was going to try to kill others who were not responsible for whatever grievances she believed she had against youtube.

    I feel bad for anyone who has reached the point where all hope is gone and the only solution he or she can come up with is to end their life.  That is terrible.  

    But deciding to try to kill others?  To make a plan, to carry it out?  Most of my sympathy drains away.  The victims who survive are left with physical and emotional trauma they may never completely get over.  The families of these shooters are consigned to a hell many of them don't deserve.

    Does youtube have the right to decide what it will and won't allow to be viewed, or the conditions for viewing?  I think they probably do, as unfair and as aggravating as that may be for those who don't agree with their decisions.


    I'm amenable to the shooer's death (none / 0) (#160)
    by oculus on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 11:40:04 PM EST
    also being considered a tragedy.

    demonetizing (2.33 / 3) (#59)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 12:20:47 PM EST
    It's time for someone to come up with some competition for YouTube. Discriminatorily demonetizing or blocking videos is what you would expect from a defacto monopoly corporation.  

    Funny how this "demonetizing" meme (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by jondee on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 12:52:17 PM EST
    popped up suddenly like mushrooms when youtube announced that they were thinking of blocking gun nut videos.

    But but (none / 0) (#66)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 12:59:13 PM EST
    It was a victimized vegan woman so....

    My perspective (none / 0) (#70)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 01:09:18 PM EST
    I feel it's wrong for YouTube to place the animal-rights activists videos in the adult-content category. If documentaries showing animal abuse and cruelty are too disturbing than maybe a reasonable approach would be to provide a `depicts animal cruelty' notice. Not to effectively censor the video from view.

    So you are (5.00 / 5) (#71)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 01:14:55 PM EST
    Justifying a mass shooting for this

    You never disappoint I will give you that

    Everything it appears the bottom of the barrel has been reached you prove it has no bottom.

    As a person who is actively involved in preventing animal cruelty I really wish you would just STFU.

    people who watch or would watch animal cruelty videos are not people who care about stopping it.   It's dog hating folks like you.


    This is silly (none / 0) (#76)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 01:32:20 PM EST
    Re: `So you are Justifying a mass shooting for this'

    Yours is a silly post that is meant to inflame. People should be able to chew bubblegum and walk at the same time. Rational people can discuss the shooting AND discus the validity of the complaint by the vegan and animal rights activists that their message is effectively being censored.


    : no not silly (none / 0) (#77)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 01:35:05 PM EST
    Fu@king stupid.

    You just explained McBains comment expressing sympathy was misguided because they all will live.

    You passed silly miles back


    McBain's post (none / 0) (#80)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 01:51:05 PM EST
    McBain's post left me with the impression that he believed their are families of the shooting victims grieving their deaths. An FYI on the status of the shooting victims is not inflamitory.

    No, not "inflammatory" (5.00 / 4) (#89)
    by Yman on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 02:39:39 PM EST
    Also not relevant, since they are still the victims and the shooter - despite the fact that she's a woman - is not.

    Really? (none / 0) (#81)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 01:56:37 PM EST
    for showing her displeasure with Youtube.  If the reporting is correct, my sympathies go in this order...
    The victims
    The victims' families
    The Aghdam family

    Which of those words made you think that he thought they were "grieving their death"


    Howdy, sometimes I get the distinct (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by Anne on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 02:26:10 PM EST
    feeling we're conversing with a Russian bot determined to fk with us.  

    I think it's the disconnect between being schooled on the dictionary definitions of words and the inability to correctly comprehend and interpret comments.  


    You know (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 02:36:15 PM EST
    I thought that or something like it for a long time.

    But I'm afraid it's real.  Which is way more scary.


    Or perhaps... (5.00 / 3) (#96)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 03:04:10 PM EST
    just an attention seeking troll who is best ignored?

    You are right (none / 0) (#98)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 03:12:34 PM EST
    Of course.

    I am weak and backslidin

    Well, and I actually give a sh!t about animal cruelty and sick f@cks who watch the videos on YouTube


    Not my fault (1.00 / 1) (#88)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 02:37:00 PM EST
    that he's a poor writer who can't form proper sentences. I'm one of the best writers on this forum.

    Hahahahahaha .... (5.00 / 3) (#94)
    by Yman on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 02:46:04 PM EST
    Of course you are.  You have the "best words". Bigly!  I know it, and YOU know it too!

    You are also one of the (5.00 / 2) (#129)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 07:01:04 PM EST
    Most humble writers on this forum :)

    Sorry (none / 0) (#92)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 02:44:12 PM EST
    that was directed toward CaptHowdy not McBain.

    McBain is an excellent writer (but we have very different politics) and he tends to post rational topics for discussion which are often met with hysterical antipathy. My opinion.


    Linea, didn't Jeralyn (5.00 / 3) (#106)
    by fishcamp on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 04:01:24 PM EST
    tell you last week, this blog isn't about you?

    It's the tofu (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 04:08:08 PM EST
    I am with Howdy (none / 0) (#127)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 06:55:26 PM EST
    Most folks attracted to animal abuse videos are those inspired by them.

    I believe if they were monetized it would inspire the creation of more of them too by people claiming to be trying to expose when they are actually participants.


    YOU ARE A TROLL AND A JERK (none / 0) (#164)
    by linea on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 03:21:32 AM EST
    ⚫️ ⚫️ ⚫️ ⚫️ ⚫️ ⚫️ ⚫️ ⚫️ ⚫️ ⚫️ ⚫️ ⚫️

    Let me demonstrate why you are a troll and a jerk:

    So you are
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018
    Justifying a mass shooting for this
    It's dog hating folks like you.

    It is the height of trolling for you to purposefully twist my post to insidiously claim that I am `justifying a mass shooting' but it's even more petty and bullying that you would post `dog hating folks like you.'

    I am constantly pestered on this site to reveal information about myself and invariably when I do I am ridiculed and mocked.

    by linea on Fri Mar 16, 2018
    I'm sorry for clogging this thread with my irritation of dogs.
    I can like individual dogs very much if I am introduced to them slowly and don't feel overwhelmed. But strange dogs frighten me and I typically express my anxiety as irritation. Yes, I'm even frightened of little dogs.

    You have made no secret that it is your goal to badger, berate, and bully me from this site and if that doesn't work to get the Admin to ban me. Fine. The boys always win. You can badger and berate and troll me and make me angry and get me kicked off this site but I'm not leaving on my own. I'm not letting the boys and the bullies win. Because you always win.


    linea, you pester just as much (5.00 / 3) (#165)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 04:56:19 AM EST
    As you claim to be the victim of pester.

    Based on your past postings about dogs, it isn't a stretch for a dog lover to conclude that you wouldn't understand the dangers of encouraging animal abuse videos.


    You don't converse, you confront. (5.00 / 3) (#166)
    by Anne on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 07:00:02 AM EST
    And you think saying  "just my opinion" makes your often-passive/aggressive comments untouchable.  You declare others' opinions "garbage" and "ridiculous," and worse, and then berate those same people for not taking it well.  You lecture, consider it your job to school people on the meanings of words we quite well know.  Eventually, you become enraged, unhinged, and then the insults really fly.

    Some people are just annoying: you are one of them.  Howdy is not a troll. Yman is not a troll. People who push back are not bullies.

    I don't know what you are, I just know that when you show up, the thread is going to go off the rails.  I should just pretend you are like the seemingly happy drunk at the end of the bar, who only needs one "wrong" word or one "bad" expression to get belligerent, and avoid all eye contact and conversation.

    Wonder how much an "Ignore" button would cost: I'd contribute to that, for sure.


    At the risk (5.00 / 1) (#167)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 07:07:21 AM EST
    Of making yet one more thread "about you", I can't speak for yman but I don't necessarily want you to leave.   I once did.  But you are like a gift that keeps on giving.  Reading your nonsense and ravings are often the funniest thing I do all day.

    Believe it or not I try to take MileHighs advice, which I have given myself, and ignore you.

    I do not always succeed.


    I keep picturing that crusty (none / 0) (#170)
    by jondee on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 12:08:28 PM EST
    old ex-Naval Aviation guy having a fantasy double life as a haughty Scandinavian damsel..

    I feel pretty..oh so pretty..


    Strangely (none / 0) (#171)
    by FlJoe on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 12:10:49 PM EST
    I have had the same thought.

    That's another whole issue (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by jondee on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 01:18:20 PM EST
    somewhat out of place in the context of a mass murder attempt. Not to put too fine a point on it.

    Seriously (none / 0) (#73)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 01:18:54 PM EST
    Jesus Christ

    What?!! (none / 0) (#78)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 01:44:19 PM EST
    Re: `That's another whole issue'

    THAT'S the issue I brought up. Didn't you notice that I started this thread? I posted on Nasim Aghdam AND whether the vegan and animal cruelty activists were being treated unfairly.

    Was I required to make TWO SEPARATE posts on an Open Topic discussion?


    Actually (none / 0) (#79)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 01:50:05 PM EST
    You should have included the bit about how they will all live in the original thought.

    It rounds out your logic perfectly

    But please, keep digging


    You make no sense (none / 0) (#84)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 02:18:42 PM EST
    I have no idea what `live in the original thought` means but I assume it has to do with my sympathy for both the shooting victims and Nasim Aghdam (as in, keep someone in our thoughts and prayers). I'm not required to hate anyone. I have the capacity to both condemn her immoral and criminal actions and to feel sorrow for her death and sympathy for her family.

    See jondee's comment above (none / 0) (#74)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 01:20:36 PM EST
    It all depends on whose ox is gored. BTW, YouTube still has plenty if firearm how to maintenance videos. Maintaining a firearm's safety features should not be a matter of controversy.

    Interesting analogy (5.00 / 6) (#75)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 01:29:52 PM EST
    If you and her had your apparent way I'm sure children could find d a video or two of an ox being gored on you tube to make your point

    It a bit late to try to appear reasonable.  Everyone here had your number years ago.


    "[Y]ou and she." (none / 0) (#158)
    by oculus on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 11:36:01 PM EST
    "Effectively" censor? (none / 0) (#82)
    by Yman on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 01:57:20 PM EST
    IOW, not actually censoring, but simply putting in place measures to prevent children from having access to inappropriate content.

    I'm fine with it.


    I'm not replying to you (1.00 / 3) (#103)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 03:44:20 PM EST
    I'm posting this for the other readers. Parents need to enable parental control applications to prevent children from accessing inappropriate content on the Internet.

    Vegan activists are complaining that YouTube is categorizing videos exposing animal cruelty in the meat industry as adult content thus requiring that one have a YouTube account and age verify as 18 or over to view them.


    I couldn't care less ... (5.00 / 5) (#112)
    by Yman on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 05:27:57 PM EST
    ... who you were replying to.  See - the thing is - when you post on a blog, any other poster can read your reply and respond.  You would think someone with such an amazing writing capability would understand how a blog works.

    Guess not.

    BTW - Parents can't put controls on every device their children have access to.  But feel free to give out more of your expert parenting advice while those of us who are actual parents and know what we're talking about will feel free to laugh.


    I never realized how fortunate I was (5.00 / 2) (#145)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 09:23:24 PM EST
    As a child until I read this. My immediate family was killed when I was seven. I was very sensitive about anything dying for several years.

    I also spent my summers on my family's ranch after losing my mom. I bottle fed the bum lambs, made me so happy my Great Uncle bought extra powdered milk and I supplemented all the twins and triplets too. He got me as bucket calf (motherless calf) and a runt piglet to feed also.

    Nothing on the ranch went to market until I left for school until I was older. My Great Uncle was such a kind, patient, wise man. I was very lucky.

    I know where a steak comes from, but I don't think I would have been okay watching back to back videos of animals being butchered when I was little.


    I'm so sorry to hear that (5.00 / 3) (#174)
    by jondee on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 01:06:07 PM EST
    about your family, Tracy. That's brutal.

    It was tough (5.00 / 2) (#191)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Apr 07, 2018 at 03:20:39 PM EST
    Time heals a lot.

    Plus resilience and determination. (5.00 / 4) (#193)
    by oculus on Sat Apr 07, 2018 at 04:12:42 PM EST
    Thank you (5.00 / 3) (#195)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Apr 07, 2018 at 04:39:50 PM EST
    Both of you. I think because an older generation was directly involved in raised me after that, they knew something about resilience that they could impart too. They had more of a long view of life and priorities.

    Agreed. (5.00 / 1) (#197)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Apr 08, 2018 at 05:23:01 AM EST
    Militarytracy: "I think because an older generation was directly involved in raised me after that, they knew something about resilience that they could impart too. They had more of a long view of life and priorities."

    With all due respect to my mother, I have to say that the biggest overall influence in the shaping of my own outlook on life came from my maternal grandparents. Even she would admit that they played a significant role in my own upbringing.

    Growing up in Pasadena, I lived just two blocks from my grandparents. And because Mom remained a widow after my father died until she remarried when I was 15, she was a single working mother, so my siblings and I went to their house every day after school until she could pick us up on her way home from work. Quite often after Mom got there, my grandmother would insist that we all stay for dinner. (She loved to cook.)

    Even when they don't have to step into the role of surrogate parents as yours did in your particular case, older relations often have a profound influence on younger generations.



    Oh, sweetie, (none / 0) (#200)
    by Zorba on Sun Apr 08, 2018 at 01:19:22 PM EST
    I am so sorry about your immediate family.  {{Hugs}}
    We raised beef cattle for years, but even though our kids had no such trauma as you did, they did help feed and water the cattle, and help raise the calves.
    There were two things that, although they knew what was happening, we didn't have them witness (we waited until they were at school or visiting friends), and those were when we sent the steers and older cows off to market (yes, the old cows get slaughtered, too; they're called "canners" because their meat generally winds up as canned chili, corned beef hash, etc, or hamburger mixed in with steer meat, or beef hot dogs and sausages).  
    The second thing was when Mr. Zorba and I castrated the male calves to turn them into steers.  We used an elastrator (look it up, I'm not going to describe it) but while Mr. Zorba used the elastrator on the calf, I stood by with a cattle cane to bonk the irate, upset mothers on the nose when they tried to interfere.  

    It appears she chose the absolute worst method (none / 0) (#58)
    by McBain on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 12:19:29 PM EST
    for showing her displeasure with Youtube.  If the reporting is correct, my sympathies go in this order...
    The victims
    The victims' families
    The Aghdam family

    I'll need to know more about Nasim's potential mental illness before giving her any sympathy.


    FYI (1.00 / 3) (#67)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 01:01:23 PM EST
    Of the three shooting victims (all wounded), the only one still in hospital is in `fair condition' and expected to make a full recovery.

    Oh well (none / 0) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 01:04:08 PM EST
    The fact that she was a sh!try shot as well as well as a deranged lunatic certainly make it ok.

    For f@cks sake


    Youtube demonetizing (none / 0) (#189)
    by ragebot on Sat Apr 07, 2018 at 03:04:02 PM EST
    did not just popup and was far from related to the gun stuff.  As I posted earlier lots of sailors who were making a little money pointed it out well before youtube started limiting vids about weapons.  There have been several threads on cruising forums related to this topic; including this one I found interesting.  What is most depressing to me about the youtube stuff is which youtube channels are the most popular and get the most hits and ad revenue.  While I understand not everyone is interested in boats in general or sailboats in particular; much less interested in vids of folks cruising in exotic places it really bums me out to see what grabs the most eyeballs on youtube.  Quite frankly I never knew about any of the top ten youtube channels and if the truth be known I was sorry when I found out what they were.  If this is the direction youtube, and the country, is heading stop the world I wanna get off.

    Jury selection in the Cosby Trial (none / 0) (#1)
    by McBain on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 01:20:06 PM EST
    Cosby's lawyers accused the prosecution of racial discrimination today.
    The third day of jury selection for Bill Cosby's second sexual assault trial was temporarily derailed Wednesday morning as the 80-year-old entertainer's lawyers accused prosecutors of attempting to exclude African Americans from the panel.

    I don't know exactly how the process works but I thought each side could exclude a certain number of jurors for any reason they see fit.

    Batson challenge (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by MKS on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 03:38:10 PM EST
    To be expected.  Usually handled on the fly with an oral objection and side bar conference with the Judge.  

    After the Batson challenge has been raised, the side seeking to strike the juror then would need to articulate some basis not based on race for excluding the juror,)even though it is a peremptory strike not otherwise needing any justification, as opposed to challenges for cause.) So, the side seeking to uphold striking the juror would need to say something like, "the potential juror frowned at me," or, the potential juror is "an accountant and would take a too harsh view of our client," etc.

    Generally, whether to sustain a Batson challenge is in the discretion of the trial court. The challenge typically does not work.  In the Cosby context, no reason not to try a Batson challenge if African Americans are being excluded across the board.


    article is behind a paywall (none / 0) (#3)
    by CST on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 01:39:48 PM EST
    So it's not clear if that is what they are talking about or if the prosecution went above and beyond that by excluding jurors for cause.

    Also, they technically can't exclude jurors due to their race.  They can for any reason - they look funny, they got bad vibes, etc... - one of the few limitations is that they can't do it because of race explicitly.

    As you can imagine, this is widely exploited.

    Here is a bit more on the subject.

    If the defense can prove that the prosecutors intentionally excluded jurors due to race, they would certainly have a case.  While we might consider that unlikely (stupid) - it has happened before.


    Not sure what happened to my link (none / 0) (#45)
    by McBain on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 10:26:04 PM EST
    that I quoted above but the article that shows up now is different.  Anyway, it sounds like lawyers boot someone off a jury pool because of race as long as they don't admit it.

    Sorta (none / 0) (#150)
    by MKS on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 10:21:02 PM EST
    As long as you don't get caught.

    Also, even if the Judge allows you to boot all Blacks, etc., the jury will know.   If you boot an African American carpenter, then an African American accountant, then an African American social worker, what you are doing will stand out.  

    I am firm beliver in how certain atmospheres or feelings can take over a case. If you act like racist, that taint will rub off--even if the Judge allows it.  The self interest of most counsel should prevent the wholesale exclusion of jurors solely on the basis of race.


    Seems to me (none / 0) (#153)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 10:43:43 PM EST
    In the court cases I followed, jurors were brought in randomly from the waiting jury pool and the ability to exclude seemed very constrained. I didn't see much flexibility to `stack' the jury. It seemed like the only challenges that were granted by the judge were the ones based bias arising from social media comments made by a prospective juror.  

    That's a narrow view. (none / 0) (#156)
    by oculus on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 11:17:22 PM EST
    The court should exercise discretion to excuse a juror the court concludes will be unable to decide the facts and apply the jury instructions given by the court.

    Isn't there two parts? (none / 0) (#157)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 11:29:25 PM EST
    There is the initial screening to get on (or excluded) from the jury pool and then later those on the jury pool are brought in one at a time (randomly) to be challenged. The court cases I followed were nothing like TV. Every request to exclude was challenged and unless there was an actual biased post on social media the juror were kept.

    In most cases, the jury pool isn't screened before (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by oculus on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 11:54:09 PM EST
    a jury panel is sent to the courtroom. If the trial is expected to be lengthy or the jury will be asked to decide a death penalty case, there may be some screening of the panel.

    Once the panel is in the courtroom,  at least in CA state court, the judge will tell the potential jurors to ask for a private questioning (judge, attorneys, court reporter, and criminal defendant unless defendant waives being present) if there is anything the potential juror prefers not to say in the open courtroom.


    Cable news ratings (none / 0) (#2)
    by McBain on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 01:28:40 PM EST
    CNN continues to finish in third place for prime time viewership but they did have one of their better Q1s.
    CNN finished outside of the top 10 in prime time, and was No. 3 in cable news during prime time. Per Nielsen live+same-day data, CNN was down double digits from Q1 2017 in total prime time audience (-17 percent), and also down double digits in total day viewing. Q1 2017 happened to be CNN's most-watched Q1 since the lead up to the Iraq War in 2003.

    I haven't been able to watch much of CNN since they went completely nuts during the 2016 election.  I usually like their specials and documentaries better than their prime time news shows or whatever you call them.  

    MSNBC for me (none / 0) (#5)
    by Repack Rider on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 03:37:25 PM EST
    ...but only during the three hours of Chris Hayes, Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O'Donnell.

    Hard to forgive MSNBC for Morning Joe and Chris Matthews.  How do either of these clowns get work?

    Rachel Maddow is so much better than anyone else on TV that whoever is next is in seventh place. Brian Williams is on there as a participation trophy as far as I can tell.


    Better than all of the above (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Towanda on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 05:02:14 PM EST
    is Nicolle Wallace these days. She assembles a smart group daily of commentators (not including Charlie Sykes, ugh) -- and especially, increasingly, experienced prosecutors.

    She really is good. (5.00 / 3) (#27)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 05:19:20 PM EST
    Suprisingly good IMO. Better than a lot of these overrated men. I'm looking at you Joe Scarborough and Chris Matthews and Chris Hayes. Hayes is just a terrible interviewer.

    I like Joy Reid (5.00 / 5) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 05:25:51 PM EST
    Too.  The women are the ones pushing MSNBCs ratings.

    I can't believe Matthews still has a show.  Let alone an almost primetime show.  I guess he will be around till he drops dead screaming over somebody.


    Cosby pill Tweety (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 06:06:13 PM EST
    Needs to go. The only reason he still has a job is because Trump sets something on fire every day and we forgot to make sure he got fired :)

    Oh my God (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 06:17:39 PM EST
    Tweety just asked a guest if Trump target soy beans because the Chinese use a lot of soy sauce.

    He honest to God said that.

    Then I thought, you know what? He might have.


    "Hard to forgive MSNBC for".... (none / 0) (#11)
    by desertswine on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 04:16:52 PM EST
    and that's not even mentioning Chuck Todd and Brian Williams. (Oh wait, you did mention Brian Williams).

    Chuck Todd is a tool. (none / 0) (#17)
    by Anne on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 04:50:19 PM EST
    I can only watch him in small doses because buying a new TV isn't in my budget at the moment.

    And you posted this because.... (none / 0) (#15)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 04:24:25 PM EST
    Rachael Maddow is now the most watched cable news program. She beat Hannity

    MSNBC and CNN should merge (none / 0) (#46)
    by McBain on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 10:29:50 PM EST
    Fox has dominated the cable news ratings because they are the only major conservative leaning option.  If there was only one liberal option I think things would be a lot different.  

    Maybe (5.00 / 3) (#91)
    by FlJoe on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 02:42:48 PM EST
    the GOP and the KKK should merge. If there was only one racist option I think things would be a little different.

    Are you serious? (none / 0) (#57)
    by CST on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 12:09:30 PM EST
    CNN is absolutely not liberal.  Being pro-corporate, pro-establishment, anti-Trump - doesn't all of a sudden make you liberal just because you hate the current president.

    Conservative and Liberal actually have meanings beyond just Republican and Democrat.  I'd even go so far as to say that Fox is not conservative, it's pro-Republican, which is not the same thing.


    It depends on your definition of liberal (none / 0) (#62)
    by McBain on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 12:31:31 PM EST
    I've felt CNN was liberal or left wing long before Trump dominated the news coverage.  Their coverage of other events like police related shootings has leaned heavily toward the left. Their decision to go all in with hating Trump has been disappointing.

    I don't watch much Fox News anymore.  I've explained why in the past.  

    Conservative and Liberal actually have meanings beyond just Republican and Democrat.

    I agree. Often they get lumped together.    


    Here's the problem, McBain (5.00 / 6) (#90)
    by Peter G on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 02:41:39 PM EST
    The truth has a left-liberal bias.

    Can you be more specific? (none / 0) (#95)
    by McBain on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 02:56:07 PM EST
    How your comment relates to this discussion?

    I'll help (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by vicndabx on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 03:26:23 PM EST
    Their coverage of other events like police related shootings has leaned heavily toward the left.

    I think you should make a distinction between news reporting and news commentary.  News reporting should be neither left or right if what's reported are facts, i.e. what is known.

    As the Fox's of the world have shown, news commentary can be all over the place.


    Hatred? (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by FlJoe on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 03:31:25 PM EST
    Definitely, in the sense that truth tellers hate the serial liar. tRump lies every single day in ways both big and small. tRump himself pours out hatred on a regular basis, to both the big and the little. If some of the big boys like CNN don't push back, the bully wins.

    However, despite the occasionally voracious push back, CNN always manages to snap back into both-siderism. They still invite the most outrageous propagandists and tRump fluffers, and despite their "hatred" his "sins" are absolved via normalization through  the corporate newscycle grinder.


    The problem with your point (none / 0) (#101)
    by McBain on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 03:39:28 PM EST
    is CNN often looks like the bully. I don't think their coverage really hurts Trump. I might have even helped him win with all the free publicity.  

    Examples (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by FlJoe on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 05:57:03 PM EST
    please? Pointing out that someone is lying is not bullying, matter of fact it's one of journalism's primary jobs.

    You, as usual have no valid arguments.


    Your criticism of Trump (2.00 / 1) (#125)
    by McBain on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 06:45:30 PM EST
    is similiar to CNN's... way over the top and not to be taken seriously.  

    Try addressing something specific and suggest how a better president would do things differently. Otherwise, all you're doing is appealing to other Trump haters and not putting forth a quality argument for people in the middle to consider.


    A better President (5.00 / 7) (#151)
    by MKS on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 10:27:25 PM EST
    would not lie all the time.

    There you go. Specific.  Objectively verifiable.

    Sorry if that seems over the top to you.  This "President" is "over the top."


    Here's the thing about the terms ... (none / 0) (#162)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 11:58:35 PM EST
    ... "liberal" and "conservative": Right-wing reactionaries don't get to re-define their respective meanings for everybody else. There is absolutely nothing wrong with either of those words that deserves a wingbat's unique far-right spin.

    Suffice to say that a liberal is someone who's so open-minded that he / she refuses to take his / her own side in an argument, whereas a conservative is someone who believes that nothing can be done for the first time. (H/T to Robert Frost.)



    Ed Henry's interview with Pruitt (none / 0) (#105)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 03:54:43 PM EST
    On FOX was actually really good

    he absolutely roasted him


    Muller time (none / 0) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 03:10:19 PM EST
    For those who worry about Mueller being fired, this part of the filing in the case of the just sentenced lawyer should be good news.

    And the Senior Assistant Special Counsel in charge of this prosecution is a long time, career prosecutor with the internal authority to conduct this prosecution separate and aside from his role in the Special counsel's office

    Rachel Maddow MSNBC

    Replying to @maddow
    Special Counsel Office press office now confirms that the `senior assistant special counsel' referenced on p.42 of today's filing is indeed Andrew Weissmann.

    10:06 PM - Apr 3, 2018

    Mueller (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by FlJoe on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 04:05:59 PM EST
    is now, apparently aggressively, questioning Russian oligarchs.  
    Special counsel Robert Mueller's team has taken the unusual step of questioning Russian oligarchs who traveled into the US, stopping at least one and searching his electronic devices when his private jet landed at a New York area airport, according to multiple sources familiar with the inquiry.

    A second Russian oligarch was stopped during a recent trip to the US, although it is not clear if he was searched, according to a person briefed on the matter.
    Mueller's team has also made an informal voluntary document and interview request to a third Russian oligarch who has not traveled to the US recently.

    An interesting wrinkle (none / 0) (#13)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 04:19:18 PM EST
    If Trump fires Sessions (none / 0) (#10)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 04:16:05 PM EST
    And puts Pruitt in for the 210 days, Pruitt can end the investigation.

    Right now I don't see Trump being indicted by Mueller. Mueller plans on making a report to Congress about the President and collusion or obstruction of justice. Mueller has no legal authority at this time though to make such a report.

    Anticipating that Congressional Republicans will do everything in their power to block the report, if we make it that far.

    As far as I can tell, nothing holding Trump accountable is certain right now.


    The report Mueller is (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 04:46:35 PM EST
    About to make, the one he said Trump is the subject but not (yet) the target of is on obstruction.  It's said he wants to get that out of the way and it's expected by summer.
    It is not about conspiracy.  That will be a a different report.   So i heard yesterday.

    Trump is not going to replace Sessions with Pruitt.

    It's also said the bit about Trump not being a target is bait to get Trump to be interviewed by Mueller.  It's said that will happen and that's when he could become a target.


    Obstruction of justice (none / 0) (#19)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 04:51:09 PM EST
    Isn't small taters. If Mueller isn't going to outright bust Trump for that, why would he bust him for conspiracy?

    It's just my opinion, but to me Mueller seems to embrace that a sitting President cannot be indicted.


    According to the WaPo (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 05:29:40 PM EST
    Mueller wants the people of this country to know what went on. Maybe Mueller can't indict him. There seems to be a back and forth on that. The more reliable example Watergate said you cannot. The idiot Ken Starr said you could. I can't blame Mueller for following the Watergate example instead of Ken Starr.

    If everybody knows what all went on with obstruction of justice and the GOP does nothing (likely) it will just be more Republicans that fall in November.


    I think Mueller expects Congress to do (none / 0) (#32)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 05:32:19 PM EST
    Their job once they learn from him that the President committed high crimes and misdemeanors.

    I frankly (none / 0) (#37)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 05:53:31 PM EST
    don't know what Mueller expects the GOP to do. Maybe he has inside information on what the GOP is thinking but if he's looking at it from the outside like the rest of us there is no evidence that the GOP is ever going to do anything about Trump no matter what Mueller sends out to the public.

    I agree (none / 0) (#33)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 05:32:36 PM EST
    Mueller will make a report on obstruction.  Raise your hand if you think that report will not be either released or leaked

    I think it is going to be a fight (none / 0) (#34)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 05:48:57 PM EST
    If Republicans fight it this summer, please God let them lose the Senate too. Some say it is too much to hope for but the mfers are crazy criminal! I'm not sure the Senate is out of reach if they block the Mueller report, or if the report is made and they fail to begin impeachment.

    I agree (none / 0) (#36)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 05:52:19 PM EST
    If they whiff we will get both houses.  Then buckle up.

    Here's my layman's understanding of ... (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 03:52:01 AM EST
    Militarytracy: "It's just my opinion, but to me Mueller seems to embrace that a sitting President cannot be indicted."

    ... how the U.S. Dept. of Justice defines "subject" and "target," respectively -- and please, Jeralyn and / or Peter, please feel free to correct or further expound as you think necessary.

    Per my reading of DOJ guidelines, a "subject" of an investigation is a person whose conduct falls within the scope of a grand jury's official inquiry, whereas Prosecutors will name someone as a "target" when there is substantial evidence which links that individual directly to the commission of a crime.

    Whether or not a subject eventually becomes a target for prosecution is based upon the actual extent to which said subject is perceived to be actively and personally involved in the matters presently under criminal investigation. A good prosecutor isn't going to bring charges against someone which can't necessarily be proved in court.

    So, Trump being a subject of Special Counsel's investigation does not preclude Robert Mueller naming him later on as a target for potential criminal prosecution later on.

    No pun intended, but the jury's really still out on whether or not a sitting president can be criminally indicted, because there is no actual case law on the subject. Personally, given prior court rulings on record which state categorically that the president is not above the law, I'm of the opinion that yes, Trump can be indicted.

    Further, I can almost guarantee you that should conclusive evidence ever come to light during the Special Counsel's Russia investigation which shows that Trump has been actively serving as an agent for the Kremlin, Mueller will throw the book at the president, indict him accordingly and thus put SCOTUS and Congress on the spot to step in and quash it, if they even dare.



    See my comment above (none / 0) (#51)
    by Peter G on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 08:39:18 AM EST
    Thank you, Peter. (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 06:33:22 PM EST
    I saw it after I wrote my post. On such matters, I defer to your knowledge and experience.

    I hope you are right (none / 0) (#52)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 09:14:12 AM EST
    I'm not feeling very positive about it though.

    Because the Trump Administration has no respect for due process I think Mueller might consider Congress doing their job as part of restoring integrity and confidence in our system.


    Hmmm, well, I think the GOP would be (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by Anne on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 09:59:22 AM EST
    all about restoring integrity to the system, as long as they could blame Democrats and a Democratic president, but since this president is a member of their own party, I don't know that they will be able to admit that it might have to be up to them to right this sinking, stinking ship by making Trump walk the plank.

    And it's not as if it's just Trump, either.  This administration is marinating in  corruption and graft and greed - and quite possibly, treason -  has a complete lack of interest in serving the public good, and an abiding mission to divert as much money and advantage to themselves as possible.  

    And their brothers and sisters in arms in the Congress are doing little but ignoring and defending them in service to their agenda.

    I do not see them having any interest in impeachment, because doing so is as much an indictment of themselves as it is of Trump.  Had Hillary been elected, the impeachment charges would have been slipped into the Bible before she took the oath.

    Mueller has to know that there isn't a snowball's chance in hell of a majority GOP House impeaching Trump.  Can Mueller wait until after the midterms, when the screams of political bias will suck all the oxygen out of the room?

    Not sure where that leaves us, but even as it feels like Mueller is closing in, I'm worried that Trump is going to survive this.


    I think he will somewhat survive (none / 0) (#55)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 10:28:04 AM EST
    But he will be scathed. I think business-wise he will be bankrupt and there will be no foreign money bail out by the time Mueller is finished. Also how is Jared going to make that payment on 666 from his office in the White House now?

    The Democrat appears to be leading in the Tennessee Senate race. If Congress won't act it seems the voters will.


    He said he was not currently (none / 0) (#21)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 05:00:25 PM EST
    A target.  That's all he said.  He want an interview.  That could change everything.

    As far as the other most people seem to think he would not charge him with obstruction unless he can charge the underlying crime.

    And as for Pruitt

    Pruitt and allies launch campaign to save his job
    But the White House says it's `reviewing' the ethical storm surrounding the EPA chief.

    He's not even going to keep his current job


    We shall see (none / 0) (#23)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 05:04:50 PM EST
    Who really knows (none / 0) (#25)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 05:13:20 PM EST
    What Trump might try to do.  He is a cornered mad dog (with apologies to rabid dogs) and certifiably bat shi+.

    But if tried to do something, like replace Sessions with a guy who even elected Republicans are calling for his firing, it will not end well for him.


    USA Today (none / 0) (#24)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 05:10:02 PM EST
    Not so sure Captain that Pruitt is in danger.

    So his (none / 0) (#26)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 05:16:18 PM EST
    "looks safe for now"

    We might ask Shulkin what that's worth.

    I don't think his jobis safe


    Shulkin was really fired (none / 0) (#31)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 05:30:26 PM EST
    For refusing to privatize the VA, not for his scandals. Trump just hired Rob Porter for his 2020 campaign. Remember how he wanted to unfire Porter after he rethought things? He didn't want to fire Flynn either, but he was still taking advise from grownups then.

    Trump loves Pruitt (none / 0) (#30)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 05:30:17 PM EST
    He loves him.  He is Trump's favorite wrecking ball.  And I'm sure Trump has told people he would like to replace Sessions with him.

    But we know how loyal Cheeto is.  That politico story says he is basically waiting to see if the press cones up with one more thing.  Then it's under the bus.

    What are the odds of that?


    Do we necessarily believe this info's source is (none / 0) (#43)
    by oculus on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 08:58:21 PM EST
    Mueller?  All I've read is "according to three sources."

    I wish I knew (none / 0) (#49)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 04:09:24 AM EST
    Also (none / 0) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 04:50:28 PM EST
    They can not block the report.  It's made to Rosenstein and he is the sole decider of what happens to it.

    The general consensus seems to be there is no way in hell it wont be made public.  One way or another


    I don't think Rosenstein (none / 0) (#20)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 04:52:53 PM EST
    Is the sole decider of anything if recused Sessions is replaced.

    And, of course, (none / 0) (#61)
    by KeysDan on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 12:27:36 PM EST
    Rosentein is not the sole decider of anything if he is replaced.

    The Captain is right that the Special Counsel's report will get out one way or another, but bits and pieces of the report will not have the same impact as the report in its entirety, un-redacted.

    According to the General Powers of the Special Counsel (Section 600.8) at the conclusion of the Special Counsel's work, he/she shall provide the AG (AAB, with Sessions recusal) a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel.  Section 600.9 (a) calls for the AG (AAG) to notify the chair and Ranking minority member of the Judiciary Committees of each House of Congress with an explanation for each actions.  

    Making the reports public, officially, appears to reside with the AG (AAG).  But, it would be difficult, if not explosive, for the Mueller report to be put in the AG's file cabinet.


    Do you really (none / 0) (#68)
    by Chuck0 on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 01:01:48 PM EST
    believe this administration or the current GOP cares what the optics are of burying Mueller's report. They would let it lie in a file cabinet and tell the public "nothing to see here" and they will buy it.

    No, of course, (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by KeysDan on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 02:08:27 PM EST
    I don't believe Trump or the Republicans care. Anything that they think they can get away with, or that they think will die down fast or can be easily distracted works for them. And, we know his base will always be in his corner, even if he shoots someone on Fifth Ave.  The file cabinet strategy may be Trump's last best hope, since firing of Mueller may no longer be politically feasible.

     But, the file cabinet strategy has the problem of requiring description and explanation in which the AG concluded that a proposed action by the Special Counsel was so inappropriate or unwarranted that it should not be pursued.  And, with the notification provision to both the chair and ranking member of the Judiciary Committees of both Houses of Congress. (Senator Feinstein and Rep.Schiff, Democratic ranking members).  

    But, having someone other than Rosenstein (who has been overseeing and approving various steps in the investigation) would assist in effecting the file cabinet strategy---by holding up and covering up to the extent and as long as possible.

    Mueller can continue to bring criminal charges/indictments against all those around Trump (if not Trump, himself) in accord with the terms of the investigation to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation, including such possible contenders as Jared, Ivanka, and Don jr.    


    You know (none / 0) (#38)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 05:58:50 PM EST
    even if what you say happens do you not think that those legions of lawyers are going to leak all over the place to the press about what Pruitt shut down? It would not be long before the special counsel would be up and running again simply because the GOP would have to start it up again. I mean these people are on a suicide mission it looks like but at some point they have got to decide and the voters are going to make them decide.

    And, it (none / 0) (#12)
    by KeysDan on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 04:18:54 PM EST
    is reported (WaPo) that Trump is a "subject" of a criminal investigation--a reporting that, apparently, has generated a sigh of relief from Trump. Not a criminal target, at least, as of last month.

    Yes, Trump is special, being the first US President to be the subject of a Special Prosecutor's counter-intelligence/espionage investigation to assess national security threats and any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and his campaign to achieve the presidency. And, to pursue any matters that arose or may arise from the investigation.  The special prosecutor may prosecute federal crimes arsing from the investigation.


    "Subject" is perfect, for now (5.00 / 6) (#44)
    by Peter G on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 09:51:24 PM EST
    A "subject" of a grand jury investigation is someone in the risk zone for indictment, but whom the prosecutor has not yet decided ought to be indicted. The latter (a "target") is someone the prosecutor is not so much investigating any more, as just accumulating evidence against. Only in very rare situations would a competent lawyer advise a "subject" to meet with the prosecutor voluntarily. But I cannot tell you how many self-centered "subjects" have insisted on doing so, against their lawyers advice, in the deluded belief that they can just talk themselves out of being indicted ... only to discover to their dismay that the opposite is what happens.

    I have to believe there is a way (none / 0) (#14)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 04:21:53 PM EST
    That he will be held accountable. Also any Trump children who have broken the law.

    Trump Gets it Right! (none / 0) (#41)
    by RickyJim on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 06:53:43 PM EST
    Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump grew irritated with his top military brass and national security team on Tuesday when they advised him an immediate withdrawal of US troops from Syria would be unwise and could not provide a timeline for when American forces could exit, people familiar with the matter said.

    In a sometimes-tense meeting of his national security team, Trump complained at length about the amount of American money being spent in the region, which he said had produced nothing for the US in return, according to senior administration officials.

    Here he deserves credit.  I hope Afghanistan is next.

    The Generals (none / 0) (#63)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 12:39:46 PM EST
    ... want to rebuild Syria because the rebuilding of Afghanistan went so well? Someone must be getting rich from this.

    One person familiar with Tuesday's meeting said attendees left "beside themselves" about how a hasty withdrawal and cutting of funds for recovery projects like restoring water and power and rebuilding roads could affect the future of Syria...

    I suppose this also assumes the US armed anti-Assad rebel groups are installed in power and they don't actually hate -  SUPRISE! - the US and that somehow these groups all get along, and that there is no continuing internal power struggle or opposition to the continuing US presence. And I suppose the anti-Assad rebel groups once installed as the government will shock everyone by being less violent, corrupt, and oppressive than the Assad regime?


    ... has a 32% grade, making it one of the steepest streets in the entire city. And now, thanks to a new GPS directional app, it's quickly become an increasingly popular -- but potentially hazardous -- shortcut for people seeking to avoid the heavy traffic on busy Glendale Blvd.

    Suffice to say that because of the substantial increase in the number of mishaps and accidents due to drivers having trouble navigating Baxter Street's sharp inclines, particularly during recent late-season rainstorms, local residents along that newfound quasi-thoroughfare are none too happy.

    It's an amusing but cautionary tale about one of the unanticipated pitfalls of our technology-driven society, and how one person's self-perceived convenience may well prove to be another's very real consternation.

    On a personal note, I'll be returning home to Hilo on Saturday night, as my younger sister is scheduled for release from rehab tomorrow. Our elder sister is here from France for a month to help her transition to her newly-found sobriety in the real world. It's scary, but we're hopeful for her sake that it takes hold. Her physicians have warned her that any further use of alcohol on her part would likely result in a fatal outcome.


    I wish you and your sister the best... (none / 0) (#47)
    by desertswine on Wed Apr 04, 2018 at 10:47:41 PM EST
    It can be a rough and tough road.

    Thank you. (none / 0) (#50)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 04:26:40 AM EST
    I was looking at the calendar the other day and saw that since Christmas, I've actually spent more time in Southern California than in Hawaii. I'm looking forward to returning home and getting back to my own routine. My partner's been great at covering for me at the state legislature this winter, but she has meetings later this month on the east coast so I need to be there in the islands.

    As for my sister, it is what it is and she knows what she needs to do. We can't be sober for her; all we can do is love her unconditionally, and support and encourage her efforts to regain control of her life to the greatest extent we can. She has a lot to live for, and everyone is rooting for her.

    (I have to admit, though, that I do miss making my pitcher of margaritas for my wife and me after work. I've been trying to be a good uncle by setting a good example for my teenaged nephews, so there's no alcohol at all in their house while their mother's been away at rehab and I've been staying with them. The only time I've had a margarita is when my mother and aunt take us on a weekly dinner date to Casa Del Rey Cantina in nearby Sierra Madre for Mexican food. And last night I had two.)



    I'm finally back home! (none / 0) (#198)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Apr 08, 2018 at 06:04:45 AM EST
    And as eminently befitting the rainiest town in the United States, I arrived in Hilo at 7:45 p.m. local time tonight right in the middle of a late-season monsoon, which made for a bumpy landing. But this evening's flight on United was otherwise uneventful, if somewhat long -- 5 hours and 42 minutes nonstop from LAX, to be exact. Lots of funky weather over the eastern Pacific right now, so we faced some strong headwinds, but we made good time once we were finally airborne. LAX is so busy nowadays; it took 20 minutes to taxi from our gate at Terminal 7 to our departing runway on the other side of the airfield. That's why I love our cozy little airport in Hilo, which has two runways and only nine gates total.

    It feels good to be home.


    It's good to be home (none / 0) (#199)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Apr 08, 2018 at 10:38:30 AM EST
    At least it's not snowing

    After a long nowhere discussion (none / 0) (#54)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 10:12:54 AM EST
    With a Berner, why do I feel like I just met the next mass shooter?

    Watch yer back Donald (none / 0) (#109)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 04:27:43 PM EST

    I WILL have one of those hats

    Trump just made Stormy (none / 0) (#111)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 05:26:09 PM EST
    Front page news again.  In on camera remarks he denies knowing about the 130,000 and basically threw Coen under the bus

    Stormys lawyer in on MSNBC doing a happy dance and three other prosecutors are shoving 20s in his thong.

    This means many things. if he did not know about the deal there is no deal.  Plus throwing Coen overboard seems really unwise.

    It feels like (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 05:28:37 PM EST
    A distraction.  Tomorrow is FIREday.

    I know (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 06:38:52 PM EST
    Trump himself basically voided the NDA and now his lawyer committed campaign fraud which apparently is a felony.

    All the NDAs may now be considered void and a fire is going to engulf Trump and the entire GOP.


    At this point, does it matter? (none / 0) (#130)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 08:13:25 PM EST
    If the NDA was ever valid, than SD already violated it by going on 60 Minutes prior to a judge ruling on the matter.

    It matters (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 08:20:01 PM EST
    Because of the DVD.   It matters because they can not sue her for millions.  Among other things.

    Okay (none / 0) (#132)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 08:26:59 PM EST
    What's on the DVD?

    Dog videos (5.00 / 2) (#134)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 08:28:10 PM EST
    Fine (none / 0) (#140)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 09:04:51 PM EST
    It matters (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by CaptHowdy
    Because of the DVD.

    I assume `dog videos' means you are unwilling to make a fool of yourself with wildly speculative claims.


    It also matters (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 08:27:53 PM EST
    Because there is no way in hell they will be able to get into arbitration because the document said she and "David Dennison" agree to arbitration.  If David Dennison did not know about it he could not have agreed to it.

    Well (none / 0) (#138)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 08:54:13 PM EST
    I'm not a lawyer (ha!) but why can't I pay someone monies and have them sign an NDA to not talk about a one-night-stand with a third party? For example, a father paying someone off to protect their adult son or daughter?

    They got what they wanted (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 06:48:22 PM EST
    NDA probably not enforceable now

    Avenatti (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 09:13:48 PM EST
    Is just having way too much fun tonight

    The man is tempered (none / 0) (#146)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 09:31:12 PM EST
    Like a sword

    Wooed Trump to speak like a siren


    Stormy Daniels' (5.00 / 2) (#149)
    by MKS on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 10:04:02 PM EST
    lawyer is entertaining as hell.   He is talking about the Crime/Fraud exception to attorney client privilege.  Valid point under California law, and with a Federal Judge, it might just work.

    I'd hire this guy to try a case anytime.  Howdy, he is all yours after five.


    Has anyone seen Isle of Dogs? (none / 0) (#114)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 05:35:19 PM EST

    You know I have (none / 0) (#115)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 05:37:07 PM EST
    And? (none / 0) (#116)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 05:39:55 PM EST
    It's Wes Anderson (none / 0) (#117)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 05:43:30 PM EST
    So it's weird and hilarious and probably not for everyone.

    If you liked Fantastic Mr Fox you will like it.


    Haven't seen that one... (none / 0) (#119)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 05:50:14 PM EST
    but we like Wes Anderson. We're weird and hilarious, so there's that.

    I liked it a lot (none / 0) (#122)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 06:01:51 PM EST
    I have a couple of friends who worked on it.  So I drove e kind of a long way to see it because it's not local yet and I had some other business anyway. Just not that many stop motion animators any more.  I wanted to support it.  

    Apparently (none / 0) (#135)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 08:40:16 PM EST
    There is some controversy over the `whitewashing' of the cast, the caricature of Japanese culture, and claims of inappropriate cultural appropriation. Some critics have even called this film `racist.'

    That said, I saw the previews for this film at the theatre and to me the film seemed delightful and I would have liked to see it but that will never happen.


    That took longer (none / 0) (#141)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 09:05:13 PM EST
    Than I expected

    Elaborate? (none / 0) (#143)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 09:13:39 PM EST
    Feel free to elaborate.

    But be clear that I'm not personally making those claims and understand that I would love ❤️ to see the film. It looks cute.


    Some people say (none / 0) (#159)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 11:37:10 PM EST
    You are a ridiculous delusional troll with issues.  Of course I would never say that.  But that's what I have heard.

    Actually (1.00 / 2) (#163)
    by linea on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 12:23:18 AM EST
    I tried to make a welcoming post hoping (pointlessly) that you would be less hostile to me.

    Elaborate? (none / 0) (#143)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 09:13:39 PM EST
    Feel free to elaborate.
    But be clear that I'm not personally making those claims and understand that I would love ❤️ to see the film. It looks cute

    There seems to be a serious misunderstanding and it is this:

    You are the troll. You are the bully. It is you and Yman who troll and bully and go out of your way to pester and infuriate those you have a personal grudge against.

    You are the bully.


    No puppet, no puppet. (5.00 / 6) (#177)
    by oculus on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 02:03:42 PM EST
    You're the puppet.  

    LOL! (5.00 / 1) (#190)
    by Zorba on Sat Apr 07, 2018 at 03:04:24 PM EST
    Good one, Oc.

    ... here in Southern California a few hours ago. We had just arrived at the rehab facility in Thousand Oaks to pick up my younger sister, and the place really rattled. Everybody immediately moved outside until it was apparent that an even bigger quake wasn't following immediately on its heels. We just got back to my mother's in Pasadena an hour ago.

    Speaking of which, the good folks over at Caltech here in Pasadena said the temblor measured 5.3 on the Richter Scale, making it the biggest earthquake to strike the region in several years. Its epicenter was just off of Santa Cruz Island in Channel Islands National Park, but it was felt from Santa Barbara north to Bakersfield and southeast to Santa Ana.

    Mother Nature: Keeping us grounded, real and on our toes since the dawn of time.


    the earthquake as experienced at an eagle's nest (5.00 / 4) (#152)
    by leap on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 10:41:19 PM EST
    Oh (none / 0) (#154)
    by linea on Thu Apr 05, 2018 at 10:46:00 PM EST
    That makes me feel sad.

    The stock market was going up (none / 0) (#172)
    by fishcamp on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 12:32:36 PM EST
    his morning as I left for the gym and store.  When I arrived back home it was down 445 points.  I immediately wondered what stupid story did he come up with in four hours.

    Bad jobs report (none / 0) (#176)
    by MKS on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 01:42:48 PM EST
    as a contributing factor?  Tariffs.   Rising interest rates which is related, I think, to the fiscal mess in the federal budget.

    Trump is a disaster.


    TGIF (none / 0) (#173)
    by fishcamp on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 12:45:17 PM EST

    More Avenatti fun (none / 0) (#175)
    by MKS on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 01:40:10 PM EST
    Trump's lawyers went whining to the Judge that Avenatti did not get back to them sooner on their request for an extension.  

    He has enough time to appear on national t.v. Trump's lawyers argued, but takes his time getting back to us on our request that we have more time to meet our deadlines.

    Weenies.  Weak.  Avenatti must be having the time of his life.

    How can we miss ya (none / 0) (#180)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 04:42:22 PM EST
    If you won't go away?

    Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-TX) resigned Friday afternoon, months after it was revealed that he settled a sexual-harassment claim using government funds.

    "While I planned on serving out the remainder of my term in Congress, I know in my heart it's time for me to move along and look for new ways to serve," Farenthold said in a statement.

    "Therefore, I sent a letter to Governor Greg Abbott today resigning from the House of Representatives effective at 5:00 p.m. today, April 6, 2018." He asked of his colleagues in a video statement: "Please stay in touch. I love y'all."

    He promised to repay the $84,000 (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by Towanda on Fri Apr 06, 2018 at 06:30:10 PM EST
    settlement, but not a word about that since.

    Twiter hashtag #FarentholdMustPay is all over my feed now.


    So glad it's finally (none / 0) (#183)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Apr 07, 2018 at 07:27:01 AM EST


    I have a friend (none / 0) (#184)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Apr 07, 2018 at 09:43:31 AM EST
    in Ohio who after the last few snows has said oh, this is the last snow of the season and then a few days later says we have snow. LOL.

    A curve-billed thrasher... (5.00 / 4) (#185)
    by desertswine on Sat Apr 07, 2018 at 11:36:26 AM EST
    has made a nest in a cholla cactus in my front yard.  I was sitting outside listening to it sing this am. It's song is quite beautiful.  

    CLASH OF THE OZARKS (none / 0) (#192)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Apr 07, 2018 at 04:10:08 PM EST
    OK, this is weird.  I had a class reunion lunch today.  We just had one in Sept but we were trying to decide on spring or fall.  Since it was snowing today we decided on fall from now on.  
    At some point the subject if this show came up.  I had never heard of it.  I don't do reality tv.  But I was intrigued so I googled.  It's discovery and it's people I actually know.  Hardy is were my post office is.  About 2-3 miles from my house.
    It sounds sort of interesting in a WINTERS BONE kind of way.  It's just weird there was a reality show that people apparently watched about my town that I knew nothing about.


    Garbage such as "Amish Mafia" needs to be vigorously condemned -- not analyzed. But "Clash of the Ozarks" is such a cleverly done time-waster that analysis is justified.

    It's tempting to think someone at Discovery watched "Justified" (especially the second season) and thought "We need a reality show like that." Well, they have it.

    The story lines are roughly similar. Both involve economic battles among locals, with a "grand dame" pulling strings from her web. In "Ozarks", the principal antagonists are Kerry Wayne Evans and "Crowbar" Russell.

    Evans scrabbled his way up from poverty to become a major property owner and developer. He sees the development of business and industry as a benefit to everyone, even if it destroys their traditional lower-class way of life -- indeed, /especially/ if it does. And what does it matter if Kerry Wayne Evans gets rich in the process?

    Russell is content for things to remain as they are. His problem is that the bank is about to put up his farm for auction, and he needs $70K to cover a down-payment. (/Why/ the property is going through foreclosure has not yet been explained.) Given the bad blood between the Evanses and the Russells, Kerry Wayne wants to get the property, hoping it will force Crowbar (and family) to leave Arkansas, seeing their exodus as a good thing for everybody.

    Neither Evans nor Russell is particularly "nice", but my initial sympathies are with Russell, if only because someone is trying to "improve" the community, whether or not its members want it, while profiting greatly from the change.

    This is a plausible story, but it seems all too convenient. How much of what we see is "real", and how much is Discovery's manipulation of an existing situation?

    From what up heard today it's a real story

    Here's a longer story (none / 0) (#196)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Apr 07, 2018 at 04:50:50 PM EST
    In the local liberal newspaper

    i know basically everyone quoted in this story.  The music store owner quoted first was at the lunch today

    I like this quote

    "You'd rather try to pour hot butter up a wildcat's ass than mess with him when he's mad."

    Russel died last year.  Natural causes.

    Arkansas was always a lot more (none / 0) (#201)
    by jondee on Mon Apr 09, 2018 at 10:29:02 AM EST
    interesting to me than loud-mouthed Texas. My experience is that people who go too far out their way to publicly proclaim their "pride" are compensating for some deep-seated insecurity. Enough about Texas already..

    I'm almost shocked at this point that there hasn't been a Boardwalk Empire type of series made about Hot Springs. Early 20th century racketeer and Cotton Club founder Owney Madden moved out there in the 1930s, married some local bigwig's daughter, and quietly carved out his own little gambling/rackets fiefdom right under everyone's noses. What happened in Hot Springs stayed in Hot Springs; it was that kind of place. For decades, apparently.

    FBI raids Cohen multiple locations (none / 0) (#202)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Apr 09, 2018 at 03:25:19 PM EST
    If you are not paying attention Cohen got his office and residence at the Recency Hotel and possibly other locations raided by the Southern District of NY.  This was not Mueller but was apparently referred by Mueller.

    This is said to be unusually aggressive.  Not sending a request from a grand jury.  I would guess they thought the more likely response to a "request" would be a shredding party.

    The main story is in the NYTimes so no cut and paste