Un-President's Day #3 Open Thread

Oh well, at least most people have the day off.

Here's an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Happy Valentine's Day Open Thread | Can Donald Trump Find Venezuela on a Map? >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    What to do if you are wondering what it might take (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by Peter G on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 05:25:13 PM EST
    Come on (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 05:56:08 PM EST
    Stone eventually took down the post, and told the New York Daily News that he had not seen the crosshairs symbol beside Jackson's head.

    It was an innocent little mistake.

    You could hardly see the crosshairs


    Stone summoned to court on Thursday (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Peter G on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 10:58:21 AM EST
    to answer for his Instagram post. Apparently a mere apology was not sufficient. Judge wants the parties to address whether bail should be revoked or its terms tightened.

    The smarmy very public (none / 0) (#70)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 07:45:33 PM EST
    Apology seemed almost as offensive as the act.  At least to me.

    To say it reeked with insincerity would be an understatement.


    An immediate, smarmy, insincere apology (none / 0) (#72)
    by Peter G on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 07:58:23 PM EST
    is expected for a minor "contempt of court," such as interrupting the judge, or getting caught calling her an "assh*le" when you thought she couldn't hear you. It is not suitable for impliedly threatening the judge or encouraging violence against her from random crazy followers of your Instagram.

    Bighouse for Stone? (none / 0) (#74)
    by MKS on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 08:11:24 PM EST
    Seems like a distinct possibility (none / 0) (#75)
    by Peter G on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 08:16:59 PM EST
    to me. Same judge who left Manafort in a county jail hellhole for months, knowing he'd have to be kept in solitary for his own protection, and refused to recommend a transfer to a more decent facility. She's not kidding around, and she's not a soft touch.

    Mr. Stone is one lucky dude (5.00 / 1) (#135)
    by Peter G on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 03:29:27 PM EST
    I wonder if his (none / 0) (#136)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 03:43:39 PM EST
    lawyers will try to get him to close all his social media accounts.

    My Kung fu is strong (none / 0) (#137)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 04:28:07 PM EST
    It a rather limited one at this point (none / 0) (#76)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 15, 2019 at 05:13:24 PM EST
    The over under seems to be about a week until he gets, seriously, STFU.

    Parent | Reply to This

    I give it another week till he is in jail


    For the record, let me say (none / 0) (#194)
    by Peter G on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 04:56:07 PM EST
    that I question the validity under the First Amendment of a pretrial order prohibiting the defendant from speaking publicly about the case against him. Even if the judge offers him that unconstitutional condition as an alternative to revoking his bond. Barred from public statements designed or likely to influence potential jurors, maybe. But a blanket gag, I dunno about that.

    The judge made it clear she (none / 0) (#196)
    by oculus on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 05:51:34 PM EST
    found his Instagram post and subsequent statements to the media could influence the jury pool.

    "could" influence is too broad (none / 0) (#197)
    by Peter G on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 07:14:27 PM EST
    and speculative for my First Amendment antennae.

    You did see (none / 0) (#198)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 07:17:28 PM EST
    The coast guard guy they just arrested with a Democrat hit list?

    Where do you think he got that list?


    I don't see the connection between (none / 0) (#199)
    by Peter G on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 08:47:14 PM EST
    the Coast Guard case and Stone's potential jury being "influenced" by Roger's Instagram ravings.

    You don't see any connection (none / 0) (#200)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 09:01:06 PM EST
    Between posting a picture of a federal judge with crosshairs next to her head and a guy who was literally planning to put real crosshairs over the heads of multiple people.  

    Multiple people who similarly share the ire of Trump Stone Alex Jones and others.



    When there is (none / 0) (#201)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 09:04:07 PM EST
    Talk on radio and cable of violent civil war against liberals ever day all day I do not personally think free speech is or should be a excuse for promoting violence against your political enemies.

    But that's just me


    That (none / 0) (#6)
    by Repack Rider on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 05:41:08 PM EST
    ...could move up the starting date for "the rest of his life in prison."

    I guess (none / 0) (#8)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 05:43:46 PM EST
    he learned nothing from watching Manafort then.

    Wow. Just ... wow (none / 0) (#10)
    by Yman on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 07:59:29 PM EST
    I always knew he was either a loon or liked playing one as part of his schtick, but apparently he's also a special kind of stupid, too.

    Per Politico: (none / 0) (#11)
    by oculus on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 08:12:38 PM EST
    Steve Vladeck, a professor from University of Texas School of Law, who linked to the statute, wrote on Twitter: "This. Is. Not. Okay."

    Meanwhile Stone's kawyer filed a notice of apology to the court.


    Just saw on Rachel (none / 0) (#12)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 08:22:11 PM EST
    In this "apology" they misspelled Instagram

    SO SORRY (none / 0) (#13)
    by Peter G on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 08:30:17 PM EST
    Did Stone (none / 0) (#18)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 10:23:34 PM EST
    sign a supporting declaration?  Or just the lawyer's words, not that a declaration would represent an honest expression.  

    I think he signed it (none / 0) (#19)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 11:05:50 PM EST
    He signed but not under penalty of (none / 0) (#132)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 12:28:05 PM EST
    perjury. And not really a declaration. Very odd.

    Unbelievable arrogance (none / 0) (#17)
    by MKS on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 10:20:05 PM EST
    Stone thought he could really do this?

    A NIGHT AT THE GARDEN (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 09:00:10 PM EST
    Is nominated for an Oscar.

    watch it

    FOX NEWS does not want you to see it

    Fox News has refused to air an ad for the short documentary film A Night at the Garden, according to a new report from the Hollywood Reporter.

    The 7-minute movie, which was recently nominated for an Academy Award, explores the terrifying day on February 20, 1939 when thousands of American Nazis held a rally at Madison Square Garden in New York. The CEO of Fox News reportedly claims that an ad for the anti-Nazi movie is "not appropriate for our air."

    The 30-second ad, titled "It Can Happen Here," was supposed to run during the Sean Hannity Show earlier this week. The title of the ad is a reference to the 1935 novel It Can't Happen Here, by Sinclair Lewis which predicted a rise of fascism in the United States during the 1930s. But Fox News apparently doesn't want anti-Nazi content on its channel.

    She's Baaack! And apparently (5.00 / 3) (#40)
    by Peter G on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 02:57:02 PM EST
    lookin' good and thinking well. That's why she's notorious.

    Thanks for the update (none / 0) (#41)
    by ragebot on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 03:30:20 PM EST
    Federal authorities charged (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by KeysDan on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 04:57:00 PM EST
    Coast Guard Lt. Christopher Hasson, age 49, with illegal weapons and drugs.  According to Court documents, "the defendant intends to murder innocent civilians on a scale rarely seen in this country."

     The Court documents refer to Hasson as a domestic terrorist and self-proclaimed white supremacist who is a follower of Anders Breivit, the white supremacist who murdered 77 Norwegian citizens. Hasson worked at the Washington, D.C. headquarters since 2016.

     The Court documents included a hit list of media and politicians who are critical of Trump and/or are liberals, such as Don Lemon, Joe Scarborough, Ari Melber, Chris Hayes, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, A. Ocasio-Cortez, Tim Kaine, K. Gillibrand, "poco Warren," Booker, Kamala Harris, and Maxine Waters.

    I got the impression (none / 0) (#128)
    by ragebot on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 01:23:35 AM EST
    his list of targets was the start of an insanity defense.  As my Granny would say his eyes are bigger than his stomach.

    Seems like he suffers from delusions of grandeur.


    In the better late than never (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 06:49:09 PM EST
    category: Andrew McCabe tells @AriMelber "We were overconfident" in the decision to have Comey speak about uncharged conduct in the Clinton email case. "It was undeniable that those actions had an impact on the election."

    For (5.00 / 1) (#178)
    by FlJoe on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 11:18:28 AM EST
    all you Patriot haters
    New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft is a wanted man -- cops say they've issued a warrant for his arrest as part of a recent prostitution, human trafficking sting operation in Jupiter, Florida.

    Cops say 77-year-old Kraft will be charged with 2 counts of "soliciting another to commit prostitution," according to Jupiter Police Chief Daniel Kerr.


    Good thing Kraft recently came out for (none / 0) (#182)
    by Peter G on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 12:48:06 PM EST
    Amen (none / 0) (#1)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 12:29:36 PM EST

    On Trump: (none / 0) (#2)
    by KeysDan on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 01:44:04 PM EST
    Former Secretary of State Rexxon Tillerson said it best.

    Trump is seeking (none / 0) (#3)
    by KeysDan on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 02:52:27 PM EST
    a nominee for UN Ambassador, after Heather Nauert withdrew from consideration as a possible nominee (she was not formally nominated).  Apparently, Ms. Nauert bumped into vetting in which her nanny, while in the country legally, did not have legal status to work.  And, too some issues with paying taxes. Ms. Nauert brought to her possible nomination, experience as State Department spokesperson and as a FOX news reporter.  Also, a lot of people were concerned that she was totally unqualified.

    Among those now being considered are Richard Grenell, the controversial US Ambassador to Germany and guest expert on Tucker Carlson's FOX show. It would not be a surprise if Chancellor Merkel was the first to offer a farewell party for Grenell.

    Another possible nominee being bandied about is Ivanka Trump, while not as qualified as Ms. Nauert, she does bring experience with development of a Trump Tower in Moscow, including a spa to be named after her.  

    I've been thinking for a while (none / 0) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 04:57:58 PM EST
    SDNY is a bigger threat to Trump Inc than Mueller.

    Alumni from the office have said SDNY's investigative powers and independent streak are so robust that -- depending on what it finds on Trump -- the office could skirt DOJ legal protocol dating to Watergate that holds a sitting president can't be indicted.

    "I'm thoroughly convinced the SDNY will make its own evaluation. They will not say that's a department policy," said Jon Sale, a former SDNY and Watergate prosecutor who is close with Trump personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani. "They're obviously looking at the president and I wouldn't rule out that they could decide you can indict a sitting president."

    Trump can't run the Mueller playbook on New York feds
    For starters, they have jurisdiction over the president's political operation and businesses -- subjects that executive privilege doesn't cover.

    I wonder (none / 0) (#7)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 05:43:14 PM EST
    if they could indict him based on crimes he did before being president. I guess they could use that claim and then issue an indictment. With Nixon it was all about crimes committed while president.

    So Rosenstein is leaving (none / 0) (#15)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 09:25:58 PM EST
    Next month.  I wonder if this means we might be hearing something from Mr Mueller soon.

    Can we just get this over with already? (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 11:09:47 PM EST
    My health is waning but I want to live long enough to see this entire criminal organization in orange jumpsuits at an arraignment. Donny, Donny jr, Ivanka and Jared. Eric and Baron can be taken by DCS.

    Once that's complete, pack me full of popcorn and peanut oil and slide me in the oven. Let fireworks begin.


    I'm with you (none / 0) (#21)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 05:54:59 AM EST
    on this. I'm so ready for all of this to be over, beyond tired of this. I am left wondering though how his brainwashed cult is going to react when he is gone. That's where I see the benefit to him being the GOP nominee in 2020.

    After all this time (none / 0) (#22)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 08:03:20 AM EST
    It better be good.

    That said I still think it will be.


    Or maybe (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Feb 18, 2019 at 09:30:28 PM EST
    He expects to be fired because of the McCabe book.

    Ruh rho (none / 0) (#105)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 04:30:34 PM EST
    WaPo (none / 0) (#109)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 05:55:35 PM EST
    I wonder (none / 0) (#112)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 08:08:25 PM EST
    how much Barr is going to try to cover up for Trump?

    I believe (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by KeysDan on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 08:53:09 PM EST
    We are in the midst of a smarter version of a Saturday Night Massacre.   Barr is cleverly ending the Mueller investigation-- time to move on, election season coming.  Mueller is not even close to completion so if reports of conclusion are correct, he, is, in effect, being fired.  

    Barr was brought in to save the Republican Party, as he did for Daddy Bush.   It is his specialty...seems a reason for a 69 year old to put off retirement for a year.

    In my view, the priority of Mueller,s work should have been the counter-intelligence investigation-- is Trump a spy?  An asset?  Started by the FBI and picked up by Mueller, according to McCabe.   And, letting Trump continue without a definitive answer for two years is malpractice. We did not need to know about emoluments,   It is obvious that he is in the president business and his supporters like the idea of running the WH as a business.  Maybe,less so for espionage.


    Certainly (none / 0) (#119)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 09:17:03 PM EST
    is concerning. If we don't get an answer on whether he's a Russian asset or not what do we do? His legal headaches are far from other though with SDNY and NY AG having him in their sights.

    Not much I think (none / 0) (#113)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 08:09:21 PM EST
    Or I guess I hope

    Best option (none / 0) (#114)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 08:12:19 PM EST
    is probably for the house to call Mueller to testify as to what he found. That would force Barr to pretty much tell as much as he can.

    It's hard to believe (none / 0) (#115)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 08:19:46 PM EST
    There won't be more indictments.

    Still, Trump has plenty to worry about even is Muller just quits or gets stopped.  Which I don't think will happen.

    There's stil SDNY and possibly even worse for the Trumps the NY AG.


    Bernie is officially in (none / 0) (#23)
    by CST on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 08:31:59 AM EST
    Personally I wish he would have sat this one out as there is too much bad blood we don't need carrying over from 2016.  That said, maybe this will finally put to rest the idea that something was "stolen" from him once he gets crushed in South Carolina/California/etc... a second time.

    Sadly not a surprise (none / 0) (#24)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 08:43:40 AM EST
    I still think Biden and Beto may not.

    Perhaps 50-50 in both cases.  IMO

    The other think is, when the democratic primary gets nasty it will be Bernie and his minions who draw first blood.

    You watch.


    Do I have to? (none / 0) (#25)
    by CST on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 08:57:16 AM EST
    Honestly my only real problem with Beto is that as a congressman he's a bit of a lightweight for president.  Fun fact,  there's only one person who has ever gone straight from the house to president and he was a compromise pick. Also he had been elected as senator but never had the chance to serve and only made it 6 months before getting assassinated. I'm not saying Beto couldn't be the second,  but I think it's unlikely. As for Biden... lets just say I'd rather have Bernie.

    no, no, no (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Peter G on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 09:39:52 AM EST
    No more presidential candidates (or Presidents) over the age of 70. Not Sanders, not Biden, not Tr*mp ... and not Warren for that matter. And I say that as someone who will be turning 70 in a few months.

    I thought I was older than you (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 10:23:14 AM EST
    To be clear (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by CST on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 11:13:37 AM EST
    In no way was I implying that he's my first choice.   It's just that Biden is my last choice. Right now I'm between Harris and Klobacher, with Warren a distant third, mostly for electability concerns  (that I also have with Harris otherwise she'd be an automatic first choice). I think a Dem from the midwest has a better shot, for various cultural reasons. Harris is formidable though.

    I'm with you Peter. (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Chuck0 on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 12:36:06 PM EST
    No more septuagenarians for president. And get rid of all the octogenarians in the Senate (looking at you Feinstein).

    I'll be 60 this year. I would like to see a president in their 50s or thereabouts. I was happy that Obama was younger than I when he was elected.


    Also (none / 0) (#32)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 10:28:23 AM EST
    As much as I reject Bernie, I think he could beat Trump.  I really do.  And probably Pence.

    Peter G (none / 0) (#34)
    by ragebot on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 10:56:49 AM EST
    you are just a young whippersnapper compared to me.  But on the upside I retired when I was 48 after getting lucky in some financial deals.

    As Paul and Grace sang

    Tell me old man how long have you lived
    To have such amazing talent
    I'm twenty years short of a century
    And the best years are in the balance


    I retired at 60 (none / 0) (#43)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 03:41:48 PM EST
    Or rather was retired by an unexpected layoff.

    I decided screw it, I am not moving for another one year job.  Cashed out a 401k, bought a fixer upper and the rest is history.

    Not sure where I got the idea I was older.


    Bernie makes me ill (none / 0) (#26)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 09:05:57 AM EST
    Honest to god, after what we have been through what could be worse than another personality cult/SNL presidency?

    I think I would take Biden.  Something I never thought I would say.

    The media will of course be fully onboard with Bernie or Biden.  For what ever reason.  Good sound bites I guess.

    Our one hope might be they are both stupid old white men. Mica seems totally on the Bernie/Biden train.

    Could we have a new rule?

    Vapid bobble heads, never Trump republicans and Claire McCaskill have to stop telling democrats what they HAVE to do to win.   For the love of god.  Just stop.


    Yes and (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by KeysDan on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 01:53:10 PM EST
    Ignore the bobbles, nevers, and sweet Claire's focus on "overriding" issues such as Amy Klobuchar's meanness to staff, Sherrod  Brown's gravelly voice, Kirsten Gillibrand's eating chicken the "wrong" way, picking up on Trump's bigotry by calling Eizabeth Warren, Pocahontas, or faulting prosecution by Kampala Harris when she a prosecutor.  

    It would be novel if actual policies and vision could be discussed.  


    Maybe Claire (none / 0) (#46)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 03:46:19 PM EST
    Will get a job and disappear from cable news.

    Can't find a link (none / 0) (#42)
    by ragebot on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 03:41:45 PM EST
    but FOX News reported Sanders got more donations in his first 4 hours than Harris got in her first 24 hours.

    I am not sure who is leading in fund raising but in  2016 Sanders did better than expected against Clinton with a disadvantage in fund raising.

    Since I don't really have a dog in this hunt my first data point is who is leading the fund raising.

    My previous understanding is that CA was late in the primaries so candidates with less funding could compete on ideas instead of who had the biggest checkbook.

    With it moving up (possibly to aid Harris) there seems to be even more pressure to gain favor of the big donors.  Harris and Sanders seem to be at odds over free tuition for students at public universities; and probably some other stuff as well.

    My guess is Biden and Sanders will dominate the big money at the start of the race.


    Yes (none / 0) (#45)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 03:44:19 PM EST
    Bernie raised a lot out of the gate.

    Will it be sustained?

    Not so sure.  


    This seems alarming (none / 0) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 10:06:27 AM EST
    Alarming and some how hopeful (none / 0) (#29)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 10:07:38 AM EST
    There are whistle blowers inside the NSA

    California discovers the fruits (none / 0) (#30)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 10:19:05 AM EST
    This is great news for pot heads (none / 0) (#33)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 10:29:07 AM EST
    On many levels

    From the article (none / 0) (#44)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 03:44:07 PM EST
    ...the "problem" such as it is, is the result of no regulation whatsoever.

    Well, to be fair, (none / 0) (#47)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 04:13:24 PM EST
    I think the illegal weed is so popular because it's cheaper than legal comparatively overtaxed weed, and it's cheaper because it's not being taxed.

    That said, any tax at all on any product would make it more expensive, compared to a similar untaxed product.

    CO has the same situation:

    Taxes and fees on marijuana have brought in more than $250 million US to the state last year. Bolivar says those additional costs are the biggest driver toward the local black market.

    "I really think a lot of it has to do with price," Bolivar says.

    The tax rates vary by municipality. In Denver, for example, people buying recreational marijuana pay a tax of 23.15 per cent.

    "If I can save $5 on a purchase, that is a cheap lunch," Bolivar said.

    So, I'd say the regs are there, but I'd chalk it up mainly to too little enforcement of existing regulations.

    And I'd also say it is an actual problem.

    Many (most?) of the illegal grows really eff up the environment with all the heavy-duty pesticides, etc., being used in illegal grows on national forest land, etc.


    Black market pot (none / 0) (#48)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 04:17:16 PM EST
    Is not just cheaper because of tax.  Legal pot is very very strong generally.  Back yard pot is not as strong but perfectly acceptable to many people.

    Fair enough, which why I specified (none / 0) (#50)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 04:25:39 PM EST
    "similar" product.

    However, why then would licensed sellers not stock "backyard" strength pot and sell it for less than the stronger stuff?

    It would/could bring in the customer base that finds the weaker weed perfectly acceptable, and those customers might become customers of some of the other products that dispensaries stock that your local guy probably doesn't?


    "shake" (5.00 / 3) (#59)
    by leap on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 05:19:07 PM EST
    The by-the-gram stuff is so damn strong--well, it's like smoking late-1960s hashish, really--, I just can't handle it. It is the resinous flower head, after all. I asked at the shoppe across the street from me (in Warshington state), only half-jokingly, don't you have something with leaves, stems, and seeds in a dime bag? The budtender pulled out a baggie containing leaves. Yes!!! So I bought an ounce (not a gram!) of clean loose leaves in a zip baggie. They call it "shake." It cost 15 bucks. No seeds or stems, though. Too bad. I'd like some of the seeds.

    You can actually roll a joint out it. So I bought a pack of papers, too.


    Seriously? $15? That was the exact price (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by Peter G on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 07:51:57 PM EST
    of the same product in 1969. So I'm told.

    It was on sale. (none / 0) (#82)
    by leap on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 10:23:09 PM EST
    I think the usual price was $25 or $30, which is still an amazing deal considering what I paid back in the early '70s.

    Do you or anyone know (none / 0) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 07:42:16 PM EST
    If this is common practice?

    If it is excellent.  


    Very common here. (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 08:53:03 PM EST
    A lost leader to get people in the door. Usually listed as a "special" online.

    I've got some right now. (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 08:53:45 PM EST
    Like to be my fedex pin pal (none / 0) (#87)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 12:54:53 AM EST



    My 84 y.o. Mother... (5.00 / 2) (#165)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 11:45:50 PM EST
    was so excited and happy when I got a mad case of the munchies from the edibles I got out there and was eating everything in sight (don't eat much with my stomach all jacked up and that really kills her). She was going to buy more and mail those to me. So, we had a conversation about THC v. CBD and why it was illegal to mail.

    She had a hard time understanding why it would be a problem when it is legal here and there and has gotten CBD oil in the mail. Plus, she really just wanted me to have anything that would give an appetite. Had I only know, we would had that conversation 40 years ago.


    exactly that (none / 0) (#83)
    by leap on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 10:26:48 PM EST
    It got me in the door! Of course, I was going in that door anyway, with a friend who frequents that particular shoppe and who had told me about shake. I'd never heard of it before.

    For the same reason dealers don't (none / 0) (#52)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 04:27:32 PM EST
    The profit margin is higher on the exotic stuff

    When you said "black market pot" (none / 0) (#54)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 04:30:16 PM EST
    that is not sold by dealers? Who then?

    Firends (none / 0) (#55)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 04:36:58 PM EST
    Neighbors.  A guy you know who knows a guy.

    Generally speaking "pot dealers" around here and pretty much every where stopped selling "reg" ,pronounced like the first syllable of Reggie, many years ago.

    Why would you take the risk of selling something that you make 1/4 the profit on because it's 1/4 the price.

    I get it.  I also hate it.  And have maintained contacts who are generally not "dealers" who traffic in the low end.  Which I actually prefer.


    Makes sense, thanks. (none / 0) (#56)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 04:37:57 PM EST
    pre rolled joints (none / 0) (#95)
    by fishcamp on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 09:13:21 AM EST
    are six bucks apiece in the Aspen mj shops.  They're fatties too.

    My friend grows (none / 0) (#85)
    by Repack Rider on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 12:46:37 AM EST
    ...in his back yard about half a mile from me. I usually help him with the trimming, but this year I spent the month of October in UK and missed that window.

    When I got home, he gave me a jar of "table dust."  That's the fine stuff that's left on the table after a trimming session.  You can make hashish out of it, but I prefer to roll it, because there is just enough leaf matter in the fine powder to keep it burning.

    This shytte should be illegal.

    Also, when you talk about "back yard pot," my grower friend is coached by a mutual friend, a somewhat legendary guitarist from the '60s, who has been growing and refining his strains and his methods for fifty years now. He enters the contests in Amsterdam and Hawaii. You can't buy anything like this legally.


    Sure (none / 0) (#86)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 12:53:10 AM EST
    I know people who grow very strong strains but usually it doesn't have a name.  Just pot.   Although now that you can buy specialized feminized seeds and stuff it's much easier to grow something strong with a snappy name.

    Speaking of snappy names (none / 0) (#100)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 11:20:59 AM EST
    One of my favorite scenes from "The Office."

    Michael, interrogating Creed about the bag of weed found in the parking lot.

    Michael: Do you know what this is?

    Creed: That is Northern Lights, Cannabis indica.

    Michael:(SIGHING) No. It's marijuana.


    Yes (none / 0) (#101)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 11:37:20 AM EST
    One important factor (none / 0) (#49)
    by ragebot on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 04:22:58 PM EST
    is that illegal sellers often provide credit to buyers who then sell part of what they bought at a profit and are able to pay for not only the purchase but what they smoked as well.

    I have never (5.00 / 3) (#53)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 04:29:25 PM EST
    In 50 years of smoking pot have encountered this.   Not once.

    There's a (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by CST on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 04:59:10 PM EST
    Notorious BIG reference there but something tells me this is the wrong  crowd for that.  Let's just say he would not approve of selling drugs on credit.

    If you have never (none / 0) (#63)
    by ragebot on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 06:36:05 PM EST
    known anyone who bought a OZ and sold a few joints to friends you need to get out more.  Hedoublehockeysticks half the peeps I knew in college did that.

    I know lots of people (none / 0) (#66)
    by CST on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 06:58:57 PM EST
    who did that.  I don't know any who didn't pay for it upfront.

    Thank you (none / 0) (#67)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 07:27:13 PM EST
    And most "illegal sellers" (none / 0) (#68)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 07:35:24 PM EST
    I have know do not encourage you buying and selling because their business is impacted

    And I may not get out much but I would bet I know more illegal sellers than he does.

    Although it never occurred to me getting my DNA tested might lead to the arrest of a family member so maybe not.


    You don't (none / 0) (#80)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 09:39:33 PM EST
    watch enough Investigation Discovery then. There was a recent case IIRC where they found a partial match from a sister on DNA to catch the brother for a crime or something.

    I don't but (none / 0) (#81)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 09:47:44 PM EST
    What I meant was more along the lines of not being that worried about a family member having committed a crime that would involve DNA evidence.

    Seems like cutting out the middle man (none / 0) (#51)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 04:27:05 PM EST
    would benefit the consumer.

    Really OT (none / 0) (#37)
    by ragebot on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 11:30:16 AM EST
    but this pix seems like a modern day GOT, kinda.

    Nice picture (none / 0) (#61)
    by Zorba on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 05:37:22 PM EST
    Very гарний.

    Greek toenglish says (none / 0) (#62)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 06:30:22 PM EST
    Very garnish

    Ukrainian to English translates to (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by leap on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 06:45:20 PM EST

    Yes (none / 0) (#90)
    by Zorba on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 05:55:49 AM EST
    It's Ukrainian.

    I figured that out (none / 0) (#96)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 10:25:32 AM EST

    I did find it funny (none / 0) (#97)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 10:26:30 AM EST
    That Greek translated it to "garnish"

    Try it


    Very strange (none / 0) (#103)
    by Zorba on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 02:50:37 PM EST
    Given that all the letters in the word are not even Greek.
    Yes, the Cyrillic alphabet was based on the Greek alphabet to a great extent, but they had to add a lot of other letters because the Slavic languages are pronounced differently than Greek is.

    The Greek word for "garnish" is γαρνιτούρα, BTW.  "Gharnitoura" in English phonetics.


    PS (none / 0) (#104)
    by Zorba on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 03:05:42 PM EST
    The first four letters of the word in Ukrainian would be pronounced, in Greek, "ghari."  The last two letters have no Greek equivalents.

    Getting somewhat addicted to music trivia (none / 0) (#57)
    by McBain on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 04:43:59 PM EST
    games on my Alexa Echo.  Anyone else do this?  They have all kinds of trivia including Jeopardy but I'm too dumb for most of those.  I seem to be better than average at name-that-tune kinds of games like Song Quiz.... specifically 60s, 70s and 80s. Anything after that, I'm in trouble.   Basically, the radio/DJ days, not the satellite era.  

    Rats leaving a sinking barge (none / 0) (#60)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 05:25:38 PM EST
    Well (none / 0) (#64)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 06:36:16 PM EST
    I hope he is "finishing" his work. I know he has done it better and faster than any other SC in history but we've also never had a Trump before.

    SPACE FORCE (none / 0) (#73)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 08:02:47 PM EST
    not the dump Trump version

    The Steve Carrell NETFLIX version

    Nick Sandmann sues WaPo for (none / 0) (#76)
    by McBain on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 08:33:37 PM EST
    $250 million...
    The lawsuit claims that the Post "wrongfully targeted and bullied Nicholas because he was the white, Catholic student wearing a red 'Make America Great Again' souvenir cap on a school field trip to the January 18 March for Life in Washington, D.C."

    The lawsuit adds that the Post engaged in "a modern-day form of McCarthyism."

    The lawsuit goes on to say that the Post "ignored basic journalist standards."

    I don't know about WaPo for 250 million but I hope he eventually gets something significant from the media and an apology from Nathan Phillips.

    None of those things (even if accurate, (5.00 / 2) (#79)
    by Peter G on Tue Feb 19, 2019 at 09:28:32 PM EST
    which I question) is any basis for a federal lawsuit. The event was newsworthy. How was the coverage, even conceivably, outside the protections of the freedom of the press under the First Amendment? Sounds like a frivolous lawsuit to me, unless there's a lot more than you summarize, which could result in those lawyers having to pay penalties for filing it. As for Mr. Philips, I heard him apologize the very next day (on NPR) for how his intentions were misconstrued and thus backfired.

    The suit claims (none / 0) (#84)
    by ragebot on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 12:29:21 AM EST
    WAPO continue to published "False and Defamatory Accusations" after the complete video proved what WAPO published was untrue.

    The suit goes on to say among other claims that "Nicholas suffers and will continue to suffer severe emotional distress" and that "Nicholas is forced to live his life in a constant state of concern over his safety and the safety of his family".

    WAPO did publish several things that were based more on the word of Phillips and Chase Iron Eyes, an attorney with the Lakota People Law Project; most all of which was quickly refuted by longer vids.

    L. Lin Wood is the attorney of record; best known for getting Richard Jewell big bucks from several MSM outlets.

    Not saying he will get $US250 mill and I am almost sure the settlement will be undisclosed given that of the three of the four suits Lin won in the Jewell suits were settled for an undisclosed amount and the forth was for $US500,000.


    Not for nothin (none / 0) (#99)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 11:13:05 AM EST
    by I've always thought "Chase" was a cool name, kinda wished it was mine.

    But "Chase Iron Eyes?"



    I'm curious if his TV interview will work (none / 0) (#111)
    by McBain on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 08:07:13 PM EST
    against him because it somehow makes him a public figure? I'm also curious if the Sandmann family would settle for college tuition and a full apology.

    I hope I'm wrong, but I seriously doubt any precedent will be set that will prevent the media from rushing to judgement in the future.


    Check out (none / 0) (#120)
    by ragebot on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 09:26:03 PM EST
    Lin Woods history.  He is a real heavy weight who has won big bucks from MSM outlets in the past.  He is in it for blood.  While he does make a good living he seems to be dedicated to what he views as MSM over reach.

    To answer your first question Lin has argued that it is all to easy to make someone a public figure.  Literally over night Sandman turned from a HS kid on a field trip to what the MSM claims is a public figure because he did not rush away from his group when an activists got in his face.

    Many years ago he got multiple six figure pay outs for Richard Jewel.  I expect higher payouts in the Sandman case because he was a minor.

    The thing is the six figure payouts to Jewel did nothing to slow a rush to judgement.  In part that may be why Lin asked for $US250 mill.  If multiple six figure payouts were not enough to make MSM outlets more careful maybe eight or nine figure payouts would do the trick.


    You don't (3.00 / 2) (#121)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 09:34:21 PM EST
    know much about the Jewell case if you think this is comparable. This was a snotty nosed kid being a snotty nosed kid while Jewell was actually made to be a criminal. Nobody is accusing this snotty nosed kid of being a criminal. He's being accused of being an entitled snotty nosed kid which he proves further by filing this case.

    The kid (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by ragebot on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 01:49:03 AM EST
    got death threats, and his family did as well.  It would have been trivial for WAPO (and others) to look at the quickly posted vids and see Chief Dances with Refrigerators walked up to him and beat a drum six inches from his face.  The Indian activists also has been caught in so many lies there are several legit Indian NGOs distancing themselves from him.

    You may think he is a snotty nosed kid but that is a matter of fact for the jury to find.  Remember the jury will be picked from the snotty nose kids home team.  

    Keep in mind the key word in your description is kid.  Minors are treated differently in court than adults.  Not just the two Indian activists who were clearly harassing minors but also the adults at multiple MSM outlets that knew, or should have known, there were lots of other vids that showed a much different story than what they were publishing.  

    Maybe the biggest strike against WAPO and the other MSM outlets being sued is before the suit they got letters saying print a retraction to avoid the suit.  Even if they had published a more even handed retraction story showing several views refuting what the Indian activists claimed it would have helped their case.  Phillips said he simply wanted to walk up stairs to the monument; problem is there was s shorter clear path he could have taken instead of taking a longer path directly into a large group of minors.

    Maybe a bigger problem is there have been too many recent bogus MSM stories like the VA mess and Smollett where the MSM looks bad.


    I'm somewhat familiar with Wood (none / 0) (#124)
    by McBain on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 09:46:56 PM EST
    I'm just not convinced the realistic goal is a huge financial settlement.  For the most part the media gets to pick sides and can be really nasty about it. I think it's going to take someone getting killed or seriously injured from a stupid smear campaign. As I said, I hope I'm wrong.    

    Totally disagree (5.00 / 2) (#116)
    by MKS on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 08:36:14 PM EST
    Thriller will never sound the same (none / 0) (#88)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 01:11:28 AM EST

    Dan Reed's documentary Leaving Neverland has been the subject of hot, hot, hot controversy since its premiere at last month's Sundance Film Festival. The two-part film, built around a series of interviews with James Safechuck and Wade Robson, tells the story (or, for MJ stans, a story) of how Michael Jackson befriended the pair as children, invited them to his Neverland Ranch, and ultimately sexually abused them.

    The film's trailer dropped today, and it's definitely teasing huge revelations.

    Given Jackson's beloved status amongst his fans and the broader public, it's understandable that people would be outraged at the film's allegations - and equally understandable that others would be outraged at the acts detailed in the allegations. From what we've heard, the movie spares no detail, painting a vivid and painful picture of both Jackson's alleged abuse and his attempts to cover it up.

    Leaving Neverland screens on HBO across March 3rd and 4th. We're sure you'll leave your feelings aboutt it in the comments

    Probably more lawsuits (none / 0) (#89)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 01:19:55 AM EST
    This is not a movie about Michael Jackson," said director Dan Reed to Variety. "This is not a movie about Michael Jackson abusing little boys. It's a movie about two families and how two families came to terms with what their sons revealed to them many years after Jackson died."

    Jackson's estate has already criticised the film in a 10-page letter addressed to HBO's CEO. It denied the allegations and condemned director Dan Reed for not speaking to anyone in Jackson's family or legal team. Since the film premiered, some Jackson fans have attacked the director and the two accusers.

    "There is also this league of fans who are almost like a cult, and they say very nasty things [about the film] on social media," Reed said to Vice. "And their words echo the two-decade-long rhetoric of the Jackson family and legal team, which is shaming the victims. It happens often in these cases. It's what they do very aggressively and relentlessly, and I don't think you can get away with that in 2019 like you could in the past."

    Earlier this month, a Chicago pre-run of an upcoming Broadway show based around Jackson's music was cancelled because of the Actors' Equity Association strike reportedly causing delays. Equity has rejected that its "modest" demand was to blame for the cancellation.

    Still suffering from (none / 0) (#91)
    by ragebot on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 07:45:12 AM EST
    GOT withdrawal.  But this pix only seems to have made things worse.

    The more I read (none / 0) (#92)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 08:18:34 AM EST
    The more I think everyone, or most everyone, dies.

    Every tease suggests it.  Reportedly Kit Harrington's wife refused to speak to him for a week when she learned about the ending.

    Another interesting bit is that of the 5-7 spinoffs considered Martin has said every one of them was a prequel

    That alone suggests the story as we know it could end I think.

    I am preparing for the worst and hoping Sam, Gilly and little Sam survive.  

    The spinoff supposedly starts shooting this month and is set around 1000 years before Game of Thrones.


    Also (none / 0) (#93)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 08:20:09 AM EST
    Interesting that in the one teaser Jon, Arya and Sansa all find their likenesses in the crypt.  Looking the way they do in life.  

    My personal favorite (none / 0) (#94)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 08:47:51 AM EST
    The whole show will be revealed as Samwell Tarly's story

    Sensitive and sensible, Samwell Tarly (John Bradley) probably should have been gutted ages ago. Yet he's become one of Game Of Thrones' unlikeliest--and most unkillable--heroes. As Bradley himself has said, "If he's still around at this stage, you do suspect that there is gonna be a point to keeping him around." And while the series definitely needs someone to pore over musty tomes and "well, actually..." Jon, many believe Sam has a much grander purpose: writing the story of Game Of Thrones.

    The show's been hinting in that direction since last season, when Sam tells one of the maesters of the Citadel that his in-progress history book, A Chronicle of the Wars Following the Death of King Robert I, could use a "more poetic" title. There's also the fact that the Citadel sports a gyroscope very similar to the one seen in Game of Thrones' opening credits, suggesting it's the origin of the show we've been watching. And finally, Martin himself has said that, of all his characters, Sam is the one closest to himself. All of this definitely points to the show ending with Sam finally sitting down to put all this to paper--perhaps while a hundred nerds gather around him, clamoring that he hurry up.

    Typeo (none / 0) (#98)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 10:27:55 AM EST
    10000 yrs

    Martina Navratilova dropped by LGBQT group (none / 0) (#102)
    by McBain on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 01:50:23 PM EST
    for "transphobic" comment...

    "Martina Navratilova's recent comments on trans athletes are transphobic, based on a false understanding of science and data, and perpetuate dangerous myths that lead to the ongoing targeting of trans people through discriminatory laws, hateful stereotypes and disproportionate violence."

    This is what she said
    "Letting men compete as women simply if they change their name and take hormones is unfair," she wrote. "Simply reducing hormone levels -- the prescription most sports have adopted -- does not solve the problem."

    "To put the argument at its most basic: a man can decide to be female, take hormones if required by whatever sporting organization is concerned, win everything in sight and perhaps earn a small fortune, and then reverse his decision and go back to making babies if he so desires," she continued. "It's insane and it's cheating. I am happy to address a transgender woman in whatever form she prefers, but I would not be happy to compete against her.

    The article goes on to talk about previous comments from Navratilova.  I tend to agree with her, it does seem unfair to women who were born women and didn't take drugs to significantly change their bodies.  But competitive sports are rarely fair.

    I know several (none / 0) (#118)
    by ragebot on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 09:15:55 PM EST
    female national, and a few world class, athletes.  Without exception they all agree with Martina.  These are ladies who have paid the price to compete at a high level and it pains both them and me to see them have to face a competitor who has an unfair advantage.

    Even with drugs to change hormone levels males who have transitioned to females still have advantages in multiple ways in competition.

    I also get the idea that if someone wants to transition from a male to a female (or vice versa) they deserve to be treated fairly.

    The bottom line for me is I have never seen any female who transitioned to a male compete at a high level in athletics; but the converse is not true.


    Near where I live it was a big deal when (none / 0) (#125)
    by McBain on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 09:54:53 PM EST
    a 52 year old transgender athlete played junior college basketball. Maybe, someday there won't be any gender divisions in sports.  Women will have to compete with men and transgender athletes to make a team.  

    Doubt that happens (none / 0) (#130)
    by ragebot on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 01:59:13 AM EST
    I have seen several tennis pros say the Williams sisters would not be ranked in the top 100 mens players.  Same goes for most other sports.

    The only exception that comes to mind is Maria Gushchina who finished sixth in overall production in the IPSC match.  Previously she had finished forth a couple of years ago.  No other ladies were in the top twenty.


    Sell Montana to Canada? (none / 0) (#106)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 04:49:12 PM EST
    No no no no NO

    This is WRONG


    please please please


    Smollett, now a criminal suspect, adds (none / 0) (#108)
    by McBain on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 05:50:37 PM EST
    Mark Geragos to his legal team.
    It will be interesting to hear Geragos, who loves to talk, defend his client.  

    He was just charged (none / 0) (#110)
    by ragebot on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 07:02:17 PM EST
    That's good news (none / 0) (#126)
    by Peter G on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 10:23:11 PM EST
    Mark G is very talented. Yes, he seems to love the limelight. But he's also an excellent defense attorney.

    I enjoyed the book he co-wrote (none / 0) (#127)
    by McBain on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 10:45:23 PM EST
    with Pat Harris (Mistrial). He's always entertaining to hear on CNN but I don't remember ever actually seeing him in action. I assume he's a good trial lawyer and can connect well with a jury.  

    Cohen will testify in open session (none / 0) (#122)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 09:35:35 PM EST
    One week from today 27th 10am

    Pretty sure it will be popcorn worthy

    Nancy Pelosi (none / 0) (#123)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Feb 20, 2019 at 09:37:29 PM EST
    is going to put forth a resolution about the emergency powers Trump is attempting to use for the wall.

    OVERLORD (none / 0) (#131)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 11:41:50 AM EST
    Is running on PPV,

    I so love this movie.  Just watched it again.  And I plan to watch it again.

    Next UN Ambassador? (none / 0) (#133)
    by desertswine on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 01:14:33 PM EST
     Mitch McConnell has spoken to President Trump and recommended U.S. Ambassador to Canada Kelly Craft as the next UN ambassador.

     Craft is from Kentucky, where she and her husband, billionaire coal CEO Joe Craft, rank among the state's highest-profile Republican donors. (Axios)

    Here is a... (none / 0) (#134)
    by desertswine on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 02:15:18 PM EST
    link to the House Report on the Trump Administration's attempt to sell nuke technology to the Saudis for billions of dollars.  

    Epstein redux (none / 0) (#138)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 04:42:48 PM EST
    Federal prosecutors broke law in Jeffrey Epstein case, judge rules

    A judge ruled Thursday that federal prosecutors -- among them, U.S. Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta -- broke federal law when they signed a plea agreement with a wealthy, politically connected sex trafficker and concealed it from more than 30 of his underage victims.

    U.S. District Judge Kenneth A. Marra, in a 33-page opinion, said that the evidence he reviewed showed that Jeffrey Epstein had been operating an international sex operation in which he and others recruited underage girls -- not only in Florida -- but from overseas, in violation of federal law.

    I hesitate to even contemplate (none / 0) (#139)
    by Zorba on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 05:01:19 PM EST
    What Mr. Zorba would have done to Epstein if Daughter Zorba had been younger and victimized like this.
    Let's just say it would not have been pretty.

    And what (none / 0) (#144)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 05:52:02 PM EST
    is going to happen to Acosta or the rest of them?

    Read it (none / 0) (#145)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 05:55:50 PM EST
    It says among other things there is no statute of limitations for sex trafficking

    The judge (none / 0) (#148)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 06:43:36 PM EST
    didn't negate the plea deal but I guess prosecutors in NY could charge him?

    There's nothing in there about any accountability for the prosecutors who apparently lied to the victims.


    I do believe this case has to do with freeing (none / 0) (#161)
    by Peter G on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 08:54:52 PM EST
    up the victims to sue, not accountability of anyone for prosecutorial misconduct. The defense negotiated a great deal for Epstein, in which the prosecutors, including Acosta, agreed to all sorts of stuff they really shouldn't have. I don't know that this ruling actually exposes Epstein to anything he was  formerly protected from. I don't think Epstein is a party to this case. Could be wrong about that, though.

    Thanks (none / 0) (#162)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 09:04:01 PM EST
    for the explanation. To me the legal reasoning was not well explained in the article. What you are saying make sense when combined with the article.

    Is there any recourse against the prosecutors for the victims?


    In short, no, there is no recourse (none / 0) (#163)
    by Peter G on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 09:17:06 PM EST
    No individuals named in the (none / 0) (#164)
    by oculus on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 11:11:41 PM EST

    With (none / 0) (#151)
    by FlJoe on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 06:50:25 PM EST
    this on his resume Acosta is probably next in line for AG.

    If I am not mistaken some of Epstein's crimes occur ed at Mar-A-Largo.


    I imagine his cabana boy Dershowitz (none / 0) (#147)
    by jondee on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 06:37:05 PM EST
    will be twittering up a storm doing damage control, especially since his own name has come up so often in connection to this case.

    I believe (none / 0) (#149)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 06:44:40 PM EST
    he was even accused by one of Epstein's victims. I have heard the reason Dershowitz is a cabana boy for Trump has to do with Epstein.

    Followed this case for a long time. (none / 0) (#168)
    by ragebot on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 10:15:50 AM EST
    Key blurb from the link

    Acosta, who was nominated as labor secretary in 2017, issued a written statement through a spokesman:
    "For more than a decade, the actions of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida in this case have been defended by the Department of Justice in litigation across three administrations and several attorneys general. The office's decisions were approved by departmental leadership and followed departmental procedures. This matter remains in litigation and, thus, for any further comment we refer you to the Department of Justice."

    Lots of folks from Florida thought Acosta was pressured from big shots at DOJ to make this agreement.  Bill Clinton was accused of throwing his weight around (along with other big wigs) to get the agreement.

    There were plenty of pols and other heavy weights who flew on Epstein's plane to tropical islands and there were lots of nubile young girls at both places.  The theory was that Epstein had dirt on several peeps who pushed for an easy plea for him.

    No question Epstein is a slime doggy but he is certainly not the only person in Florida who is one.  Florida is second most sinful state.


    The joke used to be (none / 0) (#180)
    by jondee on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 11:53:50 AM EST
    that Florida was "the second chance state" as in, eff up somewhere else and then move to Florida.

    I know Chuck Shepherd's News Of The Weird used to have so many Florida entries that he had to come up with a seperate Florida special edition at one point.

    My personal favorite among many was the guy cops arrested for being drunk and disorderly after he shot his dead, gas-filled pet python in his backyard flooding the neighborhood with dead snake gas.


    Peter Tork dead at 77 (none / 0) (#140)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 05:14:59 PM EST
    When I was a junior in HS I got in trouble for writing his name on the back of a bus seat to impress a girl.

    I listen to a local radio station (5.00 / 1) (#160)
    by Peter G on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 08:49:16 PM EST
    where one of the regular oldies DJs refers to the Beatles as "the Fabs" (for the Fab Four, obviously) and the Monkees as the "Prefabs."

    Way back a few centuries ago (none / 0) (#141)
    by fishcamp on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 05:19:30 PM EST
    The Templar's were accused of Heretical Depravity.  

    That was random (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 05:22:36 PM EST
    God I f'ing hate ticks (none / 0) (#143)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 05:33:59 PM EST
    This is such a creepy story.  With an equally creepy photo graphic.

    Climate Change Enters Its Blood-Sucking Phase
    As winters grow warmer in North America, thirsty ticks are on the move.

    This is such a problem here.  There are so many deer.  My nephew who works for state fish and game tole me the average deer would have 10,000 ticks.  I found that hard to believe.  But...

    Debow, wielding his ruler, called out square-centimeter tick counts to Blouin: nine ticks in the first square centimeter, seven engorged; eight in the second, none engorged; 28, four engorged; eight, none. This count would later produce an estimated infestation total of just under 14,000 ticks. This was actually far fewer than they often found, but it was enough to render this calf chronically anemic from January through March and then acutely, fatally anemic in the last couple of weeks of his life.

    I really hate ticks.  I dose my yard with more tick killer than I should to protect my dogs.  It works but a couple of days ago I took a walk around my yard to toss in some dead limbs for firewood.  After about 15 mins outside the yard I got 4 ticks off me.


    One last thing

    And I apologize but I saw this photo the other day And I have been entirely unable to unsee it

    Opossums can kill lots of ticks. (none / 0) (#146)
    by desertswine on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 06:29:03 PM EST
    Try not to run them over. Foxes kill lots of mice on which ticks can breed and should be protected.  Of course that's not going to save us from climate changes.

    Agree (none / 0) (#170)
    by ragebot on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 10:23:25 AM EST
    I had always considered possums (none / 0) (#177)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 10:40:24 AM EST
    Pretty vile little creatures.  Usually the ones you see in the wild, very common here, look like some hissing rabid nightmare.

    Then about a year ago I was at the vet and a woman brought in a pet possum she had rescued as a baby from a roadkill.

    It was absolutely the cutest thing I have ever seen.  Beautiful beautiful fur.

    I will never see them as nightmares again.


    I actually lived in Lyme (none / 0) (#152)
    by jondee on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 07:00:37 PM EST
    for awhile in the seventies and yeah, it was effin' tick central.

    People were frequently diagnosed with "mono" (mononucleosis) back then which was probably in most cases Lyme Disease.

    I had no idea they could in-effect drain the blood out of a fawn or a moose calf.


    Not just a calf or fawn (none / 0) (#153)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 07:11:25 PM EST
    Part of the link (none / 0) (#154)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 07:12:51 PM EST

    And what a (none / 0) (#155)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 07:14:56 PM EST
    Horrific way to die.  Unimaginable

    I'm amazed that I never heard (none / 0) (#156)
    by jondee on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 07:25:32 PM EST
    any of this before. They were just talked about as annoying inconvenience like fleas.

    I think it's a fairly new thing (none / 0) (#157)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 07:31:55 PM EST
    Not sure how new.  It's been the case since I've been back here since 2011 but it was not like this when I was a kid.  I spent hours and hours in the woods and weeds and ticks were an occaisional thing.

    Now it's like I described.  No one with a brain goes into any unkept area without soaking themselves in tick spray.


    And also (5.00 / 1) (#159)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 07:44:17 PM EST
    As the article says it's the climate.  

    I know nevof the reasons (none / 0) (#158)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Feb 21, 2019 at 07:34:10 PM EST
    Is the explosion of the deer population.  Deer sightings were very rare things when I was a kid.  Now they are a roadway menace.  You can't drive 5 miles without seeing them and probably stopping to let them pass.

    And deer are tick factories.  Poor things.


    I live in mortal fear (none / 0) (#189)
    by jondee on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 02:27:26 PM EST
    of hitting a deer. Haven't so far, but just about everyone I know has or has had a very close call at one time or another.

    You probably know this already, but they respond much more to a loud car horn than flashing lights etc.


    have you considered using deer (5.00 / 1) (#195)
    by leap on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 05:50:35 PM EST

    There are lots of makes. I first started to use them 30 years ago or so, but the ones that whistle from moving air don't work at lower speeds. That's how come a deer ran down a slope, jumped a fence, and ran right into my left front fender & headlight. I was slowing down to make a left turn, and was going about 25 mph. The collision killed her; broke her neck. :(    I'm thinking of trying one of the electronic ones that mount on a car.


    I'm beginning to think (none / 0) (#166)
    by CST on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 09:16:50 AM EST
    That Elizabeth Warren, being the first choice of almost no one, might be the only person who could unite the party after the primary.   Say what you will about her lack of political finesse, but she's managed to not piss off a large group of Democrats. That's not to say she won't have other issues in a general election,  but she's the only one I can think of that could unite the Bernie and anti-Bernie factions.

    I haven't (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 10:16:41 AM EST
    really seen anybody ticking off a large group of democrats. What I have seen is everybody who is running who is not Bernie being attacked by the Bernie supporters and their supporters pushing back against the Bernie supporters. Like Armando says Bernie is an incredibly divisive candidate.

    In time I think though this problem is going to resolve itself. Bernie apparently had a disastrous interview with Chris Hayes last night. I think he's going to fade out over time.


    I am not a Bernie fanboy (none / 0) (#171)
    by ragebot on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 10:25:12 AM EST
    but still think his fundraising shows how wide and deep his support is.  No one else is close.

    Fanatical (5.00 / 1) (#173)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 10:28:59 AM EST
    Is the word I would use

    And I think it's very bad news.  I expect we are going to find ourselves right back in 2015

    Except I think the woman could easily be Harris.  So in addition to all the misogynistic horse shi+ there will be a racial component.

    My only fear of 2020 is Sanders.  He could screw us again.


    That said (none / 0) (#175)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 10:31:07 AM EST
    He could also win

    The problem is, again, if he loses he will take us all down with him.  Again.


    In fact (none / 0) (#176)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 10:35:48 AM EST
    I'm willing to bet that will become an implied threat by his faithful fan(antic)s

    It already (none / 0) (#184)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 01:00:13 PM EST
    is a threat from the bros. If you don't nominate Bernie we are going to make you lose again. It's also one of the reason I think why the oppo dump on Bernie has started already.

    You can't (none / 0) (#186)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 01:05:08 PM EST
    tell yet if his fundraising means anything. He has supporters from 2016 that he is tapping right now. Nobody else has that same network. Polling does not support what you are saying. Biden polls higher than Bernie and he's not announced that he is running. Both have identical name recognition.

    Wishful thinking (none / 0) (#172)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 10:25:40 AM EST
    I'm afraid

    Considering (none / 0) (#185)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 01:01:18 PM EST
    the fact that he's polling behind Biden in NH should tell you something. And if Biden doesn't run it's not like his supporters are going to go to Bernie.

    All due respect (none / 0) (#174)
    by CST on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 10:30:01 AM EST
    I think this is because you don't consider Bernie fanatics part of the party.  They've already started going after Klobacher hard, and to a lesser extent Harris - not Warren though. I agree that Bernie himself is problematic,  but he still has his base of supporters.

    Oh, no (none / 0) (#183)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 12:57:34 PM EST
    they've gone hard after Harris and Warren both. They have been screaming over and over that Kamala is a cop and her prosecutor's record should keep her out of the white house and away from the nomination. They started after Warren when she announced right way. They were saying Warren completely botched the whole Native American thing so she shouldn't be the nominee. She was first so she got the first round of hits from this crowd. Klobuchar is the most recent and they are accusing her of "abusing her employees". Gillibrand "made Al Franken resign" is another one. They lie about Booker's record with regards to the pharmaceutical industry. The only one they seem to have not gone after is Tulsi Gabbard. I guess a Sanders/Gabbard ticket is their ultimate goal or whatever.

    Everyone thinks (none / 0) (#187)
    by CST on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 01:19:24 PM EST
    She botched the  Native American thing. But that's not the same as refusing to support her in the end.   Like I said,  she's very few people's first choice,  but she hasn't actually been polarizing,  just not the best politician.   In a way, Bernie entering the race has made people say they'd support her again if she won even if they prefer Bernie.

    I noticed (5.00 / 1) (#192)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 03:25:20 PM EST
    some lessening of the hardening against her in some quarters when she came out with the child care proposal. That won her some maybe she's better than I thought accolades. One of the problems she has had and this is not her fault is her followers are like johnny one note on income inequality and it spilled over on her. I'm glad to see she is broadening her appeal.

    I'm afraid she has that (none / 0) (#190)
    by jondee on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 02:46:31 PM EST
    "I don't know, there's just something about her I just don't trust" problem. Like Hillary had. No schlong and no alpha-ape booming-voice visceral appeal, in other words. Not to put too fine on point on it.

    We're not a deeply reflective, thoughtful people.

    People who think the "Bros" are misogynistic should get out and circulate a little more.

    I remember even a couple of people here talking about how they thought Warren was "shrill".


    Frankly (none / 0) (#191)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 03:23:08 PM EST
    I have heard there's something I don't trust about her and she's conniving about every female candidate unfortunately not just Warren. Yes, misogyny is rampant in our society and it's not a left/right thing because both sides have this problem.

    Great point (none / 0) (#167)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 09:53:36 AM EST
    New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft charged with soliciting prostitution in human trafficking probe


    Seen a lot of people (5.00 / 2) (#181)
    by CST on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 12:32:59 PM EST
    Attempting to dismiss this as "this is why it needs to be legal".   Someone with his means could have sought out legal means if he cared, and the fact that he was paying so little should have been a huge red flag that it was not a case of willing participants. And as it turns out in this case they certainly were not.

    Imo, that's no different from rape, although they might have a hard time proving that he knew they were being trafficked, so I doubt he'll get charged that way.


    But as you said, (5.00 / 1) (#188)
    by Zorba on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 01:30:56 PM EST
    The females were not willing participants.  Even if prostitution was legal, sex trafficking would not be.
    Yes, it's rape.

    Agreed. (none / 0) (#193)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Feb 22, 2019 at 04:01:35 PM EST