Trump: Miss Fourth of July Brings Nothing But Thorns

I just waved goodbye to Miss Fourth of July
The queen of the roses has left us with nothing but thorns
Don't say we never tried, Miss Fourth of July

From Reuters: Trump casts himself, military, Republican VIPs as stars of July 4th pageant

So Donald Trump, in a blaze of inimitable narcissistic infamy, robs us of the meaning of the Fourth of July holiday by bringing tanks and the military to the streets of Washington, D.C., for no reason other than to pretend his crown has not fallen off his head.

He is no King, he is no President and he certainly is not a leader. I wish everyone would just ignore this latest equivalent of a temper tantrum by Little Miss Fourth of July. He's not even worth a protest. He should go back to his desk in the Oval Office and sulk as he ponders why no one came out to applaud him and who to blame. But, he won't. He'll go play golf.

This is a Fourth of July I won't be watching the news and I certainly won't listen to a word he says.

< Donald Trump's Photo Op at the DMZ | El Chapo: Gov't. Asks for Life Plus 30 Years >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Traditional family picnics and fireworks v. (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jul 03, 2019 at 02:53:28 PM EST
    fireworks displays, tanks, planes, military gold-braided generals, entertainment, and "an address by your favorite president, me."  No word yet if Trump will trade in his ill-fitting blue suit for an ill-fitting generalissimo costume, but maybe Ivanka is working on it. To be a surprise.

    Trumpapalooza--another brazen breaking of norms and, as a bonus, an opportunity to aggravate and thumb his nose at opponents.  A taxpayer supported political rally, at which we can all look forward to chants of "lock her up."  Can't have a Trump rally without them.

    But, what about France? They do it.  Trump fell in love with the Bastille Day military parade down the Champs-Elysees. A French celebration of "might" started at the time of the imbalance of European powers-- France's relative decline and the rise of a new united Germany after Napolean III's military defeat in the Franco-Prussian War (1870-187l).

    Trump wanted one too. And off to the races he went.

    Guess we just need to enjoy our own Fourth of July  traditions and let the Trumpapalooza collapse under its abundance of absurdity.

    Interesting morning consult poll (5.00 / 5) (#14)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 04, 2019 at 12:26:04 PM EST
    that tracks Trumps approval state by state since he took office

    I was pleased to see it's dropped 25 points in my state since Jan 17

    Down by 17 in New Jersey (none / 0) (#26)
    by Yman on Sat Jul 06, 2019 at 06:51:26 AM EST
    56 disapprove/41 approve.  I'm surprised by 2 facts:

    1.  He actually started his term above water here at 46 approve/44 disapprove.

    2.  41% still approve of him - I assume mostly because he hasn't crashed the economy (yet).

    Most people don't even have (none / 0) (#34)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 06, 2019 at 03:25:10 PM EST
    A political opinion, beyond the standard tribal krap, unless something effects them directly.  I would guess about 90% of that 41 are white and Christian and clueless.

    Interesting read (5.00 / 2) (#35)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 06, 2019 at 03:43:23 PM EST
    Happy 4th of July, everybody. (5.00 / 5) (#16)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jul 04, 2019 at 05:04:13 PM EST
    Jeralyn's right. The best way to deal with self-absorbed attention wh*res like the Trump family is to ignore their nonsense, go on about your business, and then stand up and be counted when the time comes to do so.

    My youngest cousin is 26 years my junior. She recently passed the bar in Illinois and this coming Monday, she be joining the ACLU's Chicago office as a legal fellow for that organization, working on immigrant rights. I'm so proud of her.


    Wow! Congrats to your cousin! (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by Yman on Sat Jul 06, 2019 at 07:03:49 AM EST
    Lawyers in general get a lot of cr@p (often justifiably), but the ACLU has a mission to be proud of.  My nephew (public policy/social work background) is a policy analyst in their DC office.

    We went to Gettysburg (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jul 04, 2019 at 08:32:31 PM EST
    It seemed much more fitting.

    We did go to the Lincoln Memorial when we arrived in the DC area 2 years ago. We went very early and we were able to be at the very top in front of Lincoln. I see tonight that that wasn't something the unwashed could do today. Trump had the memorial shutdown unless you were VIP.


    It's a great park (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Yman on Sat Jul 06, 2019 at 06:58:33 AM EST
    I went a couple times as a kid (grew up an hour away) and camp there every year with my sons' scout troop.  The facilities are great and the rangers are very knowledgeable.  It's a beautiful place to hike in the fall.  Probably been there a dozen times and still learn so much every time we go.

    Is this (none / 0) (#21)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jul 05, 2019 at 04:55:22 AM EST
    your first time visiting Gettysburg? I have never been but have heard wonderful things.

    2nd time (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jul 05, 2019 at 07:03:40 AM EST
    A lot of peeps had the same idea too. It is a beautiful place today. Very well tended by everyone who lives there too.

    I'm headed to Sharpsburg today. (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Chuck0 on Fri Jul 05, 2019 at 09:20:14 AM EST
    I have not been there yet (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jul 05, 2019 at 09:59:42 AM EST
    Or properly visited Hagerstown yet either. It is on the list though.

    Amanda Marcotte (5.00 / 6) (#25)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jul 05, 2019 at 05:06:40 PM EST
    It turns out that Trump's base isn't in this because they're bamboozled by fascist theatrics or swept up in Trump's gaudy, cheap version of glamour. What this has always been about for the Trumpers is making a stand for white supremacy and male domination. While they may indeed long for some cheesy bombast, they will continue to stand there on a drizzly evening, even when all the glitz is stripped away and their reality TV leader is looking lame behind a wet barricade.

    This is important: What drives the Trump base isn't actually Donald Trump himself. It's the bigotry. Everything else is gravy

    Yeah.  What she said.

    Jeffrey Epstein Arrested for Sex Trafficking (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 06, 2019 at 09:48:54 PM EST
    Concidentally (or perhaps not) (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Peter G on Sat Jul 06, 2019 at 09:59:39 PM EST
    The federal appeals court with jurisdiction over the Southern District of NY (that is, the Second Circuit) just ruled a few days ago that thousands of pages of Epstein-related documents from the earlier, Florida investigation can be made public. The ruling arises out of civil litigation between self-described victims and various of Epstein's former associates and representatives.

    Perhaps not (none / 0) (#46)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 07, 2019 at 10:53:01 AM EST

    Having engineered his arrest for late on a Friday (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Peter G on Mon Jul 08, 2019 at 07:39:07 PM EST
    (of course), to ensure Epstein would spend a long weekend, without any preparation, in solitary at the federal jail in Manhattan, the Southern District prosecutors today disingenuously asserted they needed 3 days (the maximum allowed by statute), in addition to the weekend they already got themselves, to "prepare" for a "detention hearing," that is, to make the extraordinary showing that Epstein should not be allowed bail at all. Frankly, I don't think it will be hard to make that showing in this case, but still it rankles me when prosecutors lie and abuse their power, whether unnecessarily or not. Today's other Epstein news: the FBI executed the search warrant for his mansion on East 71st St, NYC, Saturday by battering down the door (a la drug raiders); and the indictment demands forfeiture to the government of ownership of the mansion as property "used" to commit the crime. That should be an interesting issue in the case.

    IMO (none / 0) (#60)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jul 08, 2019 at 07:50:15 PM EST
    Couldn't happen to a nicer guy.  That townhouse has a pretty interesting story.  I like this part

    On the second floor, Mr. Epstein hung a mural he had commissioned in recent years: A photorealistic prison scene that included barbed wire, corrections officers and a guard station, with Mr. Epstein portrayed in the middle.

    "He said, `That's me, and I had this painted because there is always the possibility that could be me again,'" said R. Couri Hay, a public relations specialist invited by Mr. Epstein to a meeting at his home and to view the mural three months ago.

    Inside Epstein's $56 Million Mansion: Photos of Bill Clinton, Woody Allen and Saudi Crown Prince

    As an aside, no one will ever convince me it is a coincidence that Acosta was put in charge of the government agency that is supposed to police sex trafficking.  

    It's no different than putting a coal executive in charge of the EPA.


    Trivia (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jul 08, 2019 at 08:36:00 PM EST
    I don't generally keep magazines.  The one exception is Architectural Digest which I subscribed to for many years.  After reading that article I realized I likely had the referenced issue.  Turns out I do.

    Speaking of Architecture (none / 0) (#82)
    by jondee on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 08:16:42 PM EST
    For some reason I find myself imagining Jeffrey having a picture of young Evelyn Nesbit in a red velvet swing put-up somewhere in his palace.

    Whether or not he is a "nice guy" (none / 0) (#62)
    by Peter G on Mon Jul 08, 2019 at 09:07:51 PM EST
    Epstein's rights as a criminal defendant should be scrupulously respected, and we should not rejoice if and when they are not. I have butted heads a few times with the lawyer masterminding the litigation for the alleged victims; he is brilliant, but often overreaches. I love watching him battle with Dersh. The assigned judge is a very experienced (senior, in fact) Clinton appointee, with a Masters in Social Work, who was a NYC Family Court judge, not a prosecutor, before becoming a federal judge. Looks like an interesting draw.

    Maybe (none / 0) (#63)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jul 08, 2019 at 09:26:41 PM EST
    OTOH his "rights" sure seem to have been scrupulously respected so far.  I confess to a tiny bit of rejoicement in his perp walk and having one of his many luxury properties, which he doesn't seem to have ever actually bought, confiscated.

    Dershowitz is now trying to keep the press out of the proceedings.

    On Monday, the Miami Herald reported that an attorney representing former Harvard Law Professor and high-powered defense lawyer Alan Dershowitz has written to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, requesting that the press be blocked from the child trafficking proceedings against billionaire wealth manager Jeffrey Epstein -- a measure that, if it is successful, would once again hide the most crucial details of Epstein's crimes from the general public.

    Fellow Harvard Law professor Laurence Tribe offered a scathing response

    The whole thing of where is money (none / 0) (#64)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jul 08, 2019 at 09:53:30 PM EST
    Comes from is pretty curious.  No one really seems to know.  Apparently he only had one client.  The guy who seems to have just given him this 50-60 million dollar property.

    Another thing he seems to have in common with Trump.

    This is going to be a very interesting proceeding I think.


    Epstein got a 'Get Out of Jail Free' card ... (none / 0) (#65)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 01:15:23 PM EST
    ... from the then-U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta in 2008, which amounted to an egregious miscarriage of justice. It's highly unlikely he'll get such a pass this time around from USA-SDNY, absent a presidential pardon. And for that, we can thank in part reporter Julie K. Brown of the Miami Herald for her dogged pursuit of the Epstein story. IMHO, she deserves a Pulitzer Prize.

    You have no idea whether the prior (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by Peter G on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 02:29:39 PM EST
    non-prosecution agreement was a miscarriage of justice unless you are privy to the strengths and weaknesses of the S.D.Fla. prosecutors' case, as it appeared to them at that time. Maybe the witnesses were unreliable or unwilling; maybe Epstein had some good alibi evidence for particular accusations; maybe the case couldn't be tried without damage to the privacy of innocent individuals; maybe the investigating agents had engaged in some sort of misconduct; who knows? Maybe the whole thing was "fixed," and maybe it was the best an honest prosecutor could do. I don't know, and neither do you. (The one thing we do know is that Acosta and his prosecutors failed to comply with the federal Crime Victims Rights Act, which is not something the defendant can be blamed for.)

    We know that (none / 0) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 03:00:13 PM EST
    Who ever was in charge chose to call the abuse of underage girls prostitution, meaning the girls were magically transformed from abuse victims to prostitutes, because it was a less serious charge for Epstein.  

    There is actually quite a lot we know about this that stinks.


    A friend (none / 0) (#70)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 03:12:43 PM EST
    of mine, a Trumper, was complaining about Trump going to church in Palm Beach and the people there not being nice to him. Well, now we know why. All those people in Palm Beach know what Trump was up to there. Epstein might have had the goods store in NY but it seems Palm Beach was where all the action happened.

    Well (none / 0) (#71)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 03:44:00 PM EST
    As far as why you would not be nice to Trump in church.....

    Its a long list.  I would have thought.  Just went to the wrong church apparently.  That opinion doesn't not seem to be widespread in "church".

    As if I need another reason to stay away.


    Interesting legaleze (none / 0) (#72)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 04:20:25 PM EST
    Jeffrey Epstein prosecution could rise or fall on a single word

    The new sex-trafficking prosecution against Jeffrey Epstein could rise or fall on how a judge interprets a single, rather mundane word.

    The pivotal term -- "globally" -- lurks on the second page of a seven-page agreement signed in 2007

    In this context "globally" is (none / 0) (#73)
    by Peter G on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 04:46:02 PM EST
    a "term of art," meaning "not limited to this District." Unless the SDNY indictment charges subsequent (mis)conduct (which I gather it doesn't), I think Epstein has a very good argument for dismissal of the new charges. The government's counter-argument would be that in the particular context of the Epstein investigation at that time "globally" meant "both state and federal," but limited to the normal geographical reach of the prosecutors signing off on it, that is, Southern Florida only.

    Does one District's decisions/actions (none / 0) (#74)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 05:42:21 PM EST
    speak only for that District, or for the DOJ as a whole?

    If only for that District, it would seem to me that in order for an agreement with the Southern District of Florida to bind other Districts, those other Districts would have had to agree to be bound. Which, apparently, they did not.

    However, for a second (or third, etc.) District to bring charges for the same actions that were previously charged by the initial District would seem to violate the "You Only Get One Bite at The Apple" legal concept.

    If one District's actions speak for the DOJ as a whole, it would seem to me Epstein would be in the clear.


    The linked article (none / 0) (#75)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 05:52:16 PM EST
    Does a pretty good job of explaining this

    Agreements of this sort typically (none / 0) (#78)
    by Peter G on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 07:42:24 PM EST
    contain a clause expressly stating who is bound by them, which more often than not is just the USAO for that district. That clause obviously serves to avoid this sort of ambiguity and controversy. There are detailed central DoJ rules for any US Atty going beyond that authority to bind either another office, the whole DoJ, or the entire US government. But the USAO does serve as the attorneys for "the United States," that is, the US government, and in a court case, their actions bind the entire U.S. government. In the event of silence an agreement like this could readily be understood, or perhaps misunderstood, as being entered into on behalf of the U.S. government, or perhaps at least on behalf of the entire DoJ. (Typically, such agreements do not bind the IRS not to bring tax charges, for example, because the IRS is in the Treasury Department, not the Justice Dept.) So, all in all, it's complicated.

    Thanks, that explains a lot. (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Jul 10, 2019 at 10:55:13 AM EST
    Well (none / 0) (#76)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 06:22:30 PM EST
    it was an Episcopal church, the one in Palm Beach, and apparently he got the cold shoulder. But you're right. He should have gone to an evangelical megachurch and they would have worshiped him like Jesus if he showed up.

    Acosta say he's glad this is happening (none / 0) (#77)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 07:12:07 PM EST
    I am open to the idea he might be telling the truth when he says this was the best he could do.  I want to know why that was the best he could do.  Julie Brown was just on Hayes suggestion Dershowitz and Starr were "looking into the backgrounds" of the prosecutors.  What the hell does that mean.

    Also I'm becoming more sympathetic to Acosta because word is there are right wing forces in the White House that want him out because he has not rolled back enough regulations.  Or something.

    It might not be Epstein who flips

    Labor Secretary Acosta says Epstein Crimes `Horrific'

    U.S. Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta said on Tuesday that he was glad financier Jeffrey Epstein was being prosecuted on sex trafficking charges and defended himself against criticism over the way he handled the case as a former federal prosecutor.

    Rawstory (none / 0) (#79)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 07:49:02 PM EST
    Mulvaney isn't an Acosta fan, not merely because of the public accusations that are increasing Trump's bad press, but because he hasn't been strong enough in getting rid of workers' rights regulations.

    Pedophilia (none / 0) (#81)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 08:16:05 PM EST
    not a problem but not getting rid of enough regulations is. They need to just stop now.

    This is (none / 0) (#80)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 08:15:15 PM EST
    a new line I have seen elsewhere that this was the best deal Acosta could get. And Ken Starr looking into his background for blackmail would not surprise me one little bit. We already know the reasons why Dershowitz would be looking into the background--self protection. I would say the same for Starr. Lordy all these nightmare people who have been around for the last 25 years or so.

    Trump also has this ever shifting timeline first he didn't have anything to do with Epstein after 1999 then a picture surfaces showing him with Epstein in 2000 and now a defendant's lawyer says it was 2008 before Trump cut ties with Epstein. And also we have a witnesses saying he saw Trump with Epstein's girls in 2000 "a lot". I guess this was in NY.


    Dershowitz (5.00 / 2) (#83)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 08:23:35 PM EST
    Has copped to getting a massage at Epstein's townhouse.  But the person, he said, was very very old.

    I guess the right question would be, compared to what.


    And oddly (none / 0) (#84)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 09:28:22 PM EST
    enough he said she was Russian. The Russian part is probably the truth but possibly not the old part.

    Russia, Russia, Russia. (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jul 10, 2019 at 09:45:50 AM EST
    Masseuse to Moscow and more.  Wonder if the mysterious source of Epstein's money and shield is his Meyer Lansky-like management of sketchy money and clients.

    Really, really old (none / 0) (#87)
    by Peter G on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 10:00:26 PM EST
    compared to someone "on the younger side" [of 16]? Perhaps so old she was old enough to be his granddaughter, perhaps?

    It (none / 0) (#103)
    by FlJoe on Thu Jul 11, 2019 at 01:44:15 PM EST
    was all kosher
    "I kept my underwear on during the massage," Dershowitz went on to stammer. "I don't like massages particularly."

    just couldn't turn down an old Russian, out of politeness I suppose.

    Im a sucker for (none / 0) (#104)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 11, 2019 at 01:51:42 PM EST
    A babushka

    Those (5.00 / 2) (#105)
    by FlJoe on Thu Jul 11, 2019 at 01:53:40 PM EST
    Moscow hags really knock me out!

    They leave (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by jmacWA on Thu Jul 11, 2019 at 02:46:03 PM EST
    the west behind

    A babuska on a teenager (none / 0) (#106)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 11, 2019 at 01:55:24 PM EST
    Is the bomb

    And (none / 0) (#107)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 11, 2019 at 02:04:33 PM EST
    f'ck you very much for the mental image of Dershowitz in his underwear

    Not only by (none / 0) (#108)
    by KeysDan on Thu Jul 11, 2019 at 02:13:35 PM EST
    Czar-era masseuse, but he claims he kept his unders on.  Dershowitz should heed the adage--he who acts as his own lawyer has a fool for a client.  

    Stop digging (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 11, 2019 at 03:36:34 PM EST
    Acosta proposed (none / 0) (#89)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jul 10, 2019 at 10:08:02 AM EST
    cutting funding for the Labor Department division responsible for sexual trafficking by 80 percent ($68 million to $18.5 million).  

    We know that then-U.S. Attorney Acosta was involved in highly improper ex parte discussions with Jeffrey Epstein's defense counsel, which was confirmed tonight by then-Palm Beach State's Attorney Barry Krischer in direct response to Labor Secretary Alex Acosta's presser earlier today:

    "As the State Attorney for Palm Beach County for 16 years (1993-2009), which included the entire period of the Epstein investigation, I can state emphatically that Mr. Acosta's recollection of the matter is completely wrong. Federal prosecutors do not take a back seat to state prosecutors. That's not how the system works in the real world.

    "The State Attorney's Office took the Palm Beach Police Department's investigation to a Grand Jury, and subpoenaed witnesses. The Grand Jury heard all the evidence that was available at the time (which did not include later evidence that emerged from civil depositions), and returned a single count indictment of Felony Solicitation of Prostitution, a third-degree felony.

    "The U.S. Attorney's Office produced a 53-page indictment that was abandoned after secret negotiations between Mr. Epstein's lawyers and Mr. Acosta. The State Attorney's Office was not a party to those meetings or negotiations, and definitely had no part in the federal Non-Prosecution Agreement and the unusual confidentiality arrangement that kept everything hidden from the victims. No matter how my office resolved the state charges, the U.S. Attorney's Office always had the ability to file its own federal charges.

    "If Mr. Acosta was truly concerned with the State's case and felt he had to rescue the matter, he would have moved forward with the 53-page indictment which his own office had drafted. Instead, Mr. Acosta brokered a secret plea deal that that resulted in a Non-Prosecution Agreement in violation of the Crime Victim Rights Act.

    "Mr. Acosta should not be allowed to rewrite history."

    I suppose it's possible that both Krischer and Acosta have been caught with their pants down, pun intended, and that both are now trying to throw each other under the bus. nevertheless, it appears highly likely that thanks to Acosta's ex parte discussions with defense counsel back in 2008, the fix was in and thus, Epstein subsequently had many more opportunities to re-offend.

    And given the evidence against Epstein at the time, not to mention the fact that the victims here were minor children, what Acosta did in this case to subvert the cause of justice is simply unforgivable.

    Just my opinion.


    Maybe one (none / 0) (#94)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jul 10, 2019 at 07:25:14 PM EST
    of legal experts will weigh in on this. I have read this type of deal would never have been approved by just Acosta. It would have had to go up to the DOJ to be approved. So if that is true then this goes a lot higher up the ladder into the Bush DOJ.

    "Leave it alone" (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 10, 2019 at 07:49:44 PM EST
    I don't understand what you think (none / 0) (#97)
    by Peter G on Wed Jul 10, 2019 at 08:41:44 PM EST
    "ex parte" means, Donald. A negotiation between the two parties to a legal matter is not and could not be "ex parte" in the legal sense, that is, a contact between the court and one side in the case without the knowledge and participation of the other. It is not improper for the defense side to try with all its might to negotiate a favorable disposition of serious charges with the prosecution. In my previous comment, I agreed that the prosecutors (but not the defense lawyers) violated the CVRA. In what other way, if any, do you claim that the Epstein NPA was "improper"?  You can certainly argue that it represented an unwarranted capitulation by the prosecutors, that it was too lenient, that it failed to protect the public interest, etc. But how was it "improper"?

    Have you been following the coverage of this (none / 0) (#98)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 10, 2019 at 09:10:07 PM EST
    At all?  I don't know was ex parte means but they have been talking about this all day.  And pretty much everyone with any legal knowledge is saying it was very odd and not at all good for Acosta to have a private meeting with his lawyers without the line prosecutors in attendance.

    "Odd" ... "Not at all good"... (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by Peter G on Wed Jul 10, 2019 at 10:47:34 PM EST
    Is basically the same as what I suggested.e., "bad judgment," failed to protect the public interest, etc. All I said was that this does not equate to "improper" and does not suggest "corrupt." Yes, unusual, but No, not unheard of, for the U.S. Atty himself to meet with defense counsel and make the final call. And that's not "ex parte."

    I (none / 0) (#100)
    by FlJoe on Thu Jul 11, 2019 at 05:31:04 AM EST
    think that the oddness most definitely suggests something. Corruption, cowardice or incompetence, something stinks to high heaven here.

    Acosta basically used the cowardice excuse, although he cast it as brave compared to the State's Atty. I could even almost believe it, but even so that fear of an extremely rich, politically connected suspect is just corruption built into the system.


    This made me LOL (none / 0) (#66)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 02:10:25 PM EST
    Oops posted to soon (none / 0) (#67)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 02:12:15 PM EST
    Among the leading candidates for a Pulitzer Prize in investigative journalism is the Miami Herald and its reporter Julie K. Brown for its series on the Jeffrey Epstein case. The series, however, was not based on rigorous and objective investigation, but rather on one sided, and largely false tips from self-interested lawyers who used the series to their financial advantage. Brown refused to investigate and/or publish highly credible information that undercut the simplistic and largely false narrative fed her by her biased sources. I know, because I have been providing her with much of the documents and information she chose to bury rather than report. Had she reported this contradictory material, she would have endangered the Pulitzer Prize she has been aiming to win. The Pulitzer Committee should not reward such biased and result oriented "reporting" by giving her the prize.

    Sorry (none / 0) (#39)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 06, 2019 at 09:49:25 PM EST
    That was supposed to go in the open

    Given that the federal prosecutor who ... (none / 0) (#41)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Jul 06, 2019 at 10:31:38 PM EST
    ... brokered Epstein's super-secret sweetheart deal over a decade ago was none other than Alex Acosta, Trump's current Labor Secretary, I think a nexus between the story an this thread is established. A federal judge recently ruled that Acosta broke the law when he did so by failing to inform the other parties of standing in the case.

    As our host will be the first to remind you (none / 0) (#44)
    by Peter G on Sun Jul 07, 2019 at 09:26:58 AM EST
    the "parties" to a criminal case are the defendant and the government (state or federal). What Acosta failed to do, but which the law at the time required him to do, was notify alleged victims. By statute those young women had certain rights in the case, including a right of notification and (sometimes) to be heard before decisions were made about handling the case (although not a veto over those decisions). Nevertheless, they were not and are not "parties."

    OTOH (none / 0) (#45)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 07, 2019 at 10:29:28 AM EST
    There is a stellar group of Trump supporters who have been named in these ongoing stories about Epstein.   I will not rename them but I think we all know who they are.  

    And I would note some of them have been conspicuously absent from the cable news sewer recently.


    Interestingly, the one-time Harvard professor (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Peter G on Sun Jul 07, 2019 at 11:28:50 AM EST
    took the position in the (alleged) victims' civil litigation that the records should be released, claiming that they would vindicate his denial of the most inflammatory of the accusations against him. We shall see whether he soon regrets having taken that position.

    Forbes (none / 0) (#50)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 07, 2019 at 04:27:22 PM EST

    Topline: A federal appeals court Wednesday ordered that 167 documents in a lawsuit that alleges famously well-connected financier Jeffrey Epstein participated in a sex-trafficking ring should be unsealed--and that many of his powerful friends could be named.  

    In its 27-page decision, the court cited the public's right to access the case information outweighed the privacy of certain individuals, "including numerous prominent American politicians, powerful business executives, foreign presidents, a well‐known Prime Minister, and other world leaders."

    Virginia Guiffre (now Roberts) filed the lawsuit against Ghislane Maxwell, alleging that she had used her as part of a sex trafficking network of underage girls to Epstein and a number of his famous friends, including his lawyer Alan Dershowitz and Prince Andrew. Both men denied the accusations.

    Dershowitz has supported unsealing the documents, according to the Daily Beast.

    The documents will not be immediately available, as anonymous individuals involved in the case have two weeks to file appeals.

    The court advised the documents be read carefully. "We therefore urge the media to exercise restraint in covering potentially defamatory allegations, and we caution the public to read such accounts with discernment," wrote the court in its decision.

    I wonder (none / 0) (#51)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jul 07, 2019 at 04:40:32 PM EST
    if the PM is Bibi since he's such a Trumper.

    From what I'm reading (none / 0) (#52)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 07, 2019 at 06:40:23 PM EST
    It seems unlikely all the rich and powerful men will be right wingers or even republicans.  Bill Clintons name could come up for one.  The two have a bit of shared history.  Which doesn't mean anything really.  Just a factoid.

    No (none / 0) (#53)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jul 07, 2019 at 07:42:56 PM EST
    it's definitely not just going to be right wingers. Epstein hung out with a lot of people, donated to a lot of charities and Harvard etc.

    So far at least the people we know that are in trouble are Dersh and Acosta and his madam.


    Do we know that? (none / 0) (#54)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 07, 2019 at 07:47:10 PM EST
    We don't really "know" much.

    We know Acosta (none / 0) (#55)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 07, 2019 at 07:48:22 PM EST
    Did not follow the law.  In Trumpland that's just a workday.

    Well (none / 0) (#56)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jul 07, 2019 at 08:30:20 PM EST
    that's true but I was going from the story in the Miami Herald and they were naming those names.

    And unless the GOP senate gets a spine which is certainly questionable they are not going to force Acosta to do anything and Barr just attempted to cover for Acosta recently regarding Epstein.


    OK (none / 0) (#47)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 07, 2019 at 11:26:21 AM EST

    Watch yer azz


    Maggie Haberman, the (none / 0) (#91)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jul 10, 2019 at 04:50:45 PM EST
    access NYTimes journalist, reports that a Mr. Houraney, a partner with Trump to host events, provided 28 girls for a party that was supposed to be with VIP's. When no one was there but Trump and Epstein, he said, are you telling me that its just you and Epstein?   The answer was yes.

    The article also claims that it was Epstein who introduced Trump to Melania---although that is not the story Melania tells (they met at a party).


    Maybe (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jul 10, 2019 at 05:38:14 PM EST
    Epstein and Melania are both telling the truth. Epstein introduced Melania to Trump at one of his parties.

    Just so we are all on the same page (none / 0) (#96)
    by ragebot on Wed Jul 10, 2019 at 08:41:09 PM EST
    The local SA in Florida took the Epstein case to a grand jury (you know the one where they can indict a ham sandwich) and they only came back with a single charge.  Given how easy it is to get a GJ to agree with the SA compared to how much harder it is to get a jury in a trial where the defense can come into play to go along with the SA the feds thought it was time for them to step in.  At least with the plea it was assured Epstein would have a record and be designated as a sex offender.

    Bottom line is even if Epstein is a slime doggie proving it in court was no sure thing.  His accusers under the best of circumstances in front of a GJ were simply not up to the task and there was a real concern than in open court under cross they would fold like a cheap suit.

    I am not trying to defend Epstein, who I think is a slime doggie.  But back when the case first came to light it was not all that good.  The SDNY raided one of his houses, breaking down the door and finding lots of pix of what seemed to be underage girls being abused.  If the search warrant is legit (not saying it is not, just wondering what is required to issue a warrant allowing the door being smashed in) the current case is much stronger.

    But lets all remember even if you thought OJ was guilty he still got off; you have to prove guild in court and the feds took over because of what seemed to be a weakness in the Florida SA's case and got a guilty plea; along with being stabbed in the back by the prison officials who let Epstein out on work release six days a week.

    What may be a bigger shock if it comes to light is the Ponzi scheme Epstein seemed to be running to amass his fortune.


    Michelle Obama (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 09:37:41 PM EST
    Should run for President.

    How much would you pay (none / 0) (#86)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jul 09, 2019 at 09:50:43 PM EST
    To see a debate between her and Cheeto.

    If you're going to DC (none / 0) (#1)
    by Chuck0 on Wed Jul 03, 2019 at 01:18:59 PM EST
    for the 4th. Bring your bananas. And cheetos. And tin pots.

    The whole thing is so crazy (none / 0) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jul 03, 2019 at 01:42:26 PM EST
    I think my favorite Trump quote was something like "what, we already have the tanks and planes..."

    Sort of suggesting we should be happy he is not buying tanks and planes just for the occasion.

    The Baby Blimp is going to be there.  It seems to me the whole thing could get quite ugly.

    I (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by FlJoe on Wed Jul 03, 2019 at 02:36:16 PM EST
    liked the brand new Sherman tanks. Party like it's 1944!

    Baa Waa Waa (none / 0) (#5)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jul 03, 2019 at 02:48:14 PM EST
    Trump is remaking Moon over Parador but there's no mistaken identity in regards to the dictator.

    I get my fill of seeing tanks (none / 0) (#3)
    by Chuck0 on Wed Jul 03, 2019 at 01:52:01 PM EST
    (BTW, the proper term is tracked vehicles) just by coming to work everyday. Lots of them out on the yard. And I get to watch them play on the test track.

    Speaking of fireworks (none / 0) (#7)
    by jondee on Wed Jul 03, 2019 at 08:25:48 PM EST
    My fantasy is that we find a way to have  Megan Rapinoe and Jussue Smollett sing a duet of the national anthem at a big venue somewhere so that all the heads at Fox simultaneously explode in a pink mist.

    Happy Fourth... (none / 0) (#8)
    by desertswine on Thu Jul 04, 2019 at 12:28:40 AM EST
    Shaina Taub - Huddled Masses

    If I still lived in DC ... (none / 0) (#9)
    by Yman on Thu Jul 04, 2019 at 08:19:39 AM EST
    ... I'd be headed there to join the protests.  The next-best thing would be some serious thunderstorms ... or a plague of locusts.

    We chose to visit Gettysburg today (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jul 04, 2019 at 08:36:27 PM EST
    Had dinner at the Appalachian Brewing Company.

    I really don't want an image of tanks destroying the structural integrity of the Lincoln Memorial in my memory. It is enough to know it happened.


    I actually hope it doesn't rain (none / 0) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 04, 2019 at 08:36:36 AM EST
    He will use that as the reason no one came.

    IMO the best thing you could do is stay away.


    I think we were better off (none / 0) (#15)
    by KeysDan on Thu Jul 04, 2019 at 01:45:11 PM EST
    when Republicans went to Moscow to celebrate the Fourth of July.

    He is no King, he is no President ... not a leader (none / 0) (#11)
    by john horse on Thu Jul 04, 2019 at 10:40:29 AM EST
    But he is starting to look more and more like a tyrant and I believe our Declaration of Independence has a few words of advice about how we should deal with tyrants.

    Trump and the GOP have been systematically destroying our democracy.  I know watching them get away with their cr*p can be fatiguing but lets not lose our outrage over what they've done.  

    Outrage fatigue is clearly the point (none / 0) (#12)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 04, 2019 at 11:55:29 AM EST
    This whole thing.  It's for the outrage it will create.

    He sits around with his flying monkeys thinking up shi+ that will make normal people crazy.

    For example the latest immigration idea is to deport the families of serving military.  

    You can imagine the crosstalk.  "Let's see what they say about THAT".  


    Yes, getting liberals (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jul 04, 2019 at 06:03:25 PM EST
    outraged. Making children drink from toilets makes liberals mad. So let's make them do it.

    In case you think I made that up (none / 0) (#13)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 04, 2019 at 11:58:51 AM EST
    And it can't possibly be true


    Parole in Place grants undocumented dependents and spouses a reprieve to be able to legally adjust their immigration status without having to leave the United States or be deported first. The program was rarely used until senior military leaders and then-members of Congress -- including Vice President Mike Pence -- urged in 2010 that the Department of Homeland Security increase access to the program.

    A USCIS official confirmed exclusively to McClatchy, on condition of anonymity, that the agency is now reviewing the program. Any changes would be limited to dependents of service members, the official said.

    He's simply an aspiring tyrant (none / 0) (#18)
    by Dadler on Thu Jul 04, 2019 at 06:22:04 PM EST
    And I have no doubt his fondest wish is to disappear an an American opponent off the street and kill that person with impunity. He desperately craves the kind of power Putin and Kim have. Desperately.

    On this infuriating topic, "adlerpoems," my raging, anti-Trump, incendiary, satirical, and freely American, get me thrown in jail in a lot of places, volume of verse is finally published and available for purchase. Yes, it's on Amazon, but I'm offering a link for those who, understandably, want to avoid the shAmazonian at all costs. Thank you in advance, any reviews on shAmazon are much appreciated and greatly help sales they say. Pease & Loaves to all. D.A.

    ADLERPOEMS Amazon link

    ADLERPOEMS F--K Amazon link via Small Press Distribution in Berkeley

    ADLERPOEMS funniest online algorithm pickup link

    God was angry (none / 0) (#29)
    by Repack Rider on Sat Jul 06, 2019 at 12:18:56 PM EST
    God sent an earthquake, but He missed, so he had to ad lib with a thunderstorm.

    With fourth of July (none / 0) (#30)
    by NoSides on Sat Jul 06, 2019 at 02:27:50 PM EST
    celebrations generally ignoring the plight of the native Americans - as well as the fact that our soldiers have been placed in hellholes like Iraq and Afghanistan for no good reason - it is very hard for me to feel the sense of patriotism I am expected to feel.

    I will add that this is the same thing I have coped with during the Obama administration - and certainly with the Bush administration before it.

    It is as if the government wishes us to endorse its heinous crimes by invoking the founders.

    Can't do it. Much too abstract.

    I really don't think that much (none / 0) (#31)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 06, 2019 at 02:44:05 PM EST
    Is expected from you.  

    I don't (none / 0) (#33)
    by NoSides on Sat Jul 06, 2019 at 03:03:20 PM EST
    expect much from you either - no problem.

    Made my day (none / 0) (#32)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 06, 2019 at 03:00:34 PM EST
    The statue's sculpting (none / 0) (#49)
    by KeysDan on Sun Jul 07, 2019 at 03:28:19 PM EST
    material aptly depicts her outward bearing.  Can't see the back of the blue dress ---does it have "I don't care, do you?"

    SITE VIOLATOR (none / 0) (#37)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jul 06, 2019 at 05:36:59 PM EST

    The (none / 0) (#42)
    by FlJoe on Sun Jul 07, 2019 at 06:12:26 AM EST
     Brits burn the White House House again
    Diplomatic cables sent from the United Kingdom's ambassador to the United States back to London describe President Donald Trump as "inept," "insecure" and "incompetent," a UK government official confirmed Saturday to CNN.
    Ram the manparts!

    The tiny thing (5.00 / 2) (#43)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jul 07, 2019 at 07:24:08 AM EST
    Will require micro targeting

    One wonders if Boris Johnson's allies ... (none / 0) (#57)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jul 08, 2019 at 07:16:14 PM EST
    "We don't really believe this administration is going to become substantially more normal; less dysfunctional; less unpredictable; less faction riven; less diplomatically clumsy and inept."
    - Sir Kim Darroch, UK Ambassador to the United States, to Whitehall (June 2019)

    ... in the Foreign Secretary's office are responsible for leaking the memo. It's no secret that Johnson -- who, let's remember, served as Foreign Secretary earlier in Theresa May's government -- and Sir Kim Darroch aren't exactly on the best of terms, and word on the street is that once he becomes prime minister, Johnson wants to replace Darroch with (gulp!) Nigel Farage.

    (Sigh!) We're trapped inside a Fellini film.


    I've been reading (none / 0) (#58)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jul 08, 2019 at 07:18:03 PM EST
    No need to wonder.  It's pretty much a given.  He will be replaced by someone who is more of a FOX news fit.

    Heads Up! (none / 0) (#101)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jul 11, 2019 at 12:52:49 PM EST

    Donald J. Trump

     · 6h
     The Fake News Media loves the narrative that I didn't use many banks because the banks didn't like me. No, I didn't use many banks because I didn't (don't) need their money (old fashioned, isn't it?). If I did, it would have been very easy for me to get.

    Donald J. Trump

    ....And remember, a bank that I did use years ago, the now badly written about and maligned Deutsche Bank, was then one of the largest and most prestigious banks in the world! They wanted my business, and so did many others!

    6:45 AM - Jul 11, 2019
    Twitter Ads info and privacy

    Money laundering (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jul 11, 2019 at 01:08:29 PM EST
    Must hitting the news soon

    Manufacturing a win for himself is pitiful. (none / 0) (#111)
    by Jack E Lope on Tue Jul 16, 2019 at 10:22:01 AM EST
    From the title of the thread, "Trump: Miss Fourth of July Brings Nothing But Thorns"...

    I thought it was going to be about the US national team in the 2019 FIFA Women's World Cup, and the dilemma that their win poses for Drumpf.  Though no games were played on the 4th, I think that many fans in Lyon were dressed as Miss Fourth of July (or equivalent).  Plus, the Portland Thorns have 4 players on the US Nat'l Women's team, and 5 other players on teams of other nations.  

    Faux News covered some anti-Trump reaction from the crowd in a local (Lyon, FR) sports bar.   The crowd in the background of Fox's live feed was chanting something akin to "Truck Fump".

    but you must realize (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Jul 17, 2019 at 01:36:48 PM EST
    by now that I almost never cover sports events. I am sports-illiterate and intend to remain that way. Sorry!