Happy New Year and Open Thread

New Year's Eve seems very somber tonight.

In Boulder, the fire has been devastating. Here's a few second video from the West Metro Fire department. Updates are available at the Boulder Office of Emergency Management.

In Europe, the Wall St. Journal has a report on how Antwerp, Belgium has become the "Miami of the 1980s" with respect to money coming in from cocaine. It's a "cash tsunami". (free link). The Mayor says,"Every layer of society is infected.”


In Colorado, Governor Jared Polis issued a slew of pardons --including to everyone with a state conviction (not municipal over which he has no authority) for possession of up to 2 ounces of marijuana. He also granted clemency to trucker Rogel Aguilera-Mederos and reduced his sentence for the highway accident that killed four people from the mandatory 110 year sentence imposed a few weeks ago to 10 years. (Thank you Governor Polis).

R.I.P Betty White, who died today at age 99.

What's going on in your neck of the woods tonight? Please stay safe. I would miss each one of you if you disappeared from the comments section!

Happy New Year everyone. I'm off to make lasagna for New Year's Day supper.

Let us know what you're cooking and how it turns out. And what, if anything, you think will improve in the coming year!

< Ghislaine Maxwell Guilty On 5 Counts | Some Much Needed Normalcy >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    But then, it's been a very soggy month. It's starting to clear now at sunset and it's beautiful. Elder Daughter and her family flew in from Honolulu on Christmas Day to spend the week and her younger sister drove down here from Waimea, so our house is certainly lively.

    I was worried about them traveling but being Christmas Day, Honolulu and Hilo airports weren't crowded at all and their flight over here was only half-full. Since it turned nice outside, we're BBQing tonight in the backyard, teriyaki chicken and burgers, pretty basic fare.

    Happy New Year, everyone. Please stay safe. Aloha.

    With the idea you can't have too many dogs (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jan 01, 2022 at 06:16:18 AM EST
    I'm starting the year with a new family member

    He is a Jack Russell/Doberman mix.  And he is a handful.  I took him from my older brother because he could not keep him at home.  The very first day he does a Houdini and disappears.  Gone for hours.  Lost dog post on Village Facebook.  Several sightings including one police officer.  Twice.  Finally he just came home.  He is now on a shorter leash until I finish the fence.  I spent all day yesterday zip tying chicken wire to 450ft of dog fence.

    His name is Little Sh!t.  

    he has his moments

    Nice looking quilt Howdy. (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by fishcamp on Sat Jan 01, 2022 at 06:28:48 AM EST
    My mom (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jan 01, 2022 at 06:56:11 AM EST
    Such a Doberman coat (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Peter G on Sat Jan 01, 2022 at 10:44:09 AM EST
    that guy has. We adopted a new dog (mostly Pomeranian), about five years old, last March. Our ancient cat, who has had the run of the house for the last 11 or 12 years, immediately retreated to the upstairs and refused to come down to the ground floor, where the new dog stays. (He is under the mistaken impression that he cannot climb stairs with his little legs, of which he have no wish to disabuse him.) Last night, some folks in the neighborhood were setting off fireworks for New Year's Eve, and the cat decided to come downstairs and jump in my lap, as we (re)watched the first three movies of the Thin Man marathon on TCM. A good New Year's at home.

    I have been trying (none / 0) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jan 01, 2022 at 10:52:50 AM EST
    To keep him away from the other dogs as much as I can.  They are old.  His history with the Lab has not been good

    I would never ever have intentionally stuck them in a crate together.  I would have expected chaos.  I guess they decide when to bond,



    He has relentlessly tormented my other two dogs (none / 0) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jan 01, 2022 at 06:55:25 AM EST
    The Golden loves it and sees him as a delux dog toy.  The Lab has not been as relaxed about it.  Mostly keeping him at bay with a angry bark.

    For the benefit of everyone's sleep, we all sleep in the same room, Little sleeps in a crate.  He doesn't seem to mind at all.

    Last night it rained and thundered all night.  Still is.  We are under a flash flood watch.  The Lab really doesn't like thunder.  Usually crawling under the bed.

    Last night I herd them into the bedroom.  I grab Little as usual and shove him in the crate.

    This morning I could not find the Lab.  I always let the old dogs out first to go in peace.  I looked everywhere.  I though, oh my god, did I have too many Mimosas and leave poor Woody outside in the rain all night?  

    I was feeling very guilty when I let Little out of the crate and Woody came out too.  It's not a really big crate.  They spent the entire night in there and there was not a squeak out f either of them.   I guess they are friends now.


    Jack Russells (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by jondee on Sat Jan 01, 2022 at 10:02:35 AM EST
    are known for being live wires. Full of piss and vinegar.

    I'm waiting for round 2 (none / 0) (#48)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jan 08, 2022 at 06:18:59 PM EST
    Of escape from Howdy's yard LOL.

    Got visitin to do, treats to be had, a neighborhood to schmooze.


    He can't get out (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 06:48:18 AM EST
    I leave him out every day.  He's caged.  The next time he get out will be when he sneaks through a gate.

    The only thing more single minded than a Jack Russel is me.


    But (5.00 / 3) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 06:56:12 AM EST
    I did make him a sweater.

    I have always snickered at dog clothes but it's been in the teens and he's not really made for it.


    My grandson has (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by MO Blue on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 09:37:38 PM EST
    a rescue greyhound and has moved to Chicago. They are definitely not made for winter weather. She now has several items of winter apparel. Sweaters, puffer coats, you name it. Only problem, the dog hates having them put on. She looks like she is being tortured. Definitely not a fashionista.

    You might have him (none / 0) (#141)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 08:45:33 PM EST
    If you have him yard committed first try, you've got skills. I did note that chicken wire is difficult to dog climb. But I thought he'd have caught a lucky break along a post.

    Last October, my mother adopted ... (none / 0) (#121)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 04:28:41 PM EST
    ... a 7-year-old Jack Russell that belonged to a middle-aged fellow parishioner at her church who had recently passed. She said he's quite a friendly and mellow dog and generally obedient, although he does have his moments where he is - as you noted - "full of piss and vinegar." Anyway, she's enjoying his company and likes that his need for activity compels her to take him twice daily for a long walk.

    That said, I worry about the coyotes which do roam occasionally through her Hastings Ranch neighborhood in Pasadena. An octagenarian, even one who's in very good shape like my mother, is probably no match for a hungry coyote eyeing a small dog as its next meal.



    They are pretty fierce (none / 0) (#123)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 05:15:46 PM EST
    It might take a big coyote.  Maybe more than one.  

    I love the dog.  But it involves some surrender of control.  Everything you read about them is true.  Also you said the dog was seven.  They do live a long time but that's the more mellow Years.  This is a puppy maybe a year.

    Hide the shoes.


    My sister in law (none / 0) (#10)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jan 01, 2022 at 12:06:10 PM EST
    has a Jack Russell mix. The stories are becoming family legends. The dog disappeared for a month one time and a friend found the dog in another town with painted nails and a new collar. The entire area many blocks wide all know the dog because when she got out she would go everywhere. If they saw her and tried to get her, she would run. Eventually someone would show up at her door and say is this your dog? LOL. Now that she has gotten older they know where she is every time she gets out. She always goes to Ms. Grandma's at this point because Ms. Grandma cooks chicken every day to feed her own dogs and she always feeds Stephanie (dog's name) when she shows up. The owners these days just call Mrs. Grandma to see if Stephanie is there before doing anything else and Stephanie is always there if she gets out.

    It's good to have a mission (none / 0) (#11)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jan 01, 2022 at 01:01:13 PM EST
    I now have a mission.  It is to create a yard he can not get out of.   He knows I am planning this and I think he welcomes the challenge.

    You think I'm joking (none / 0) (#12)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jan 01, 2022 at 01:08:56 PM EST
    It's already (none / 0) (#13)
    by jondee on Sat Jan 01, 2022 at 01:17:24 PM EST
    sounding more and more like the guy on the BBC special trying to raise Stoffel the honey badger.

    you leave (none / 0) (#14)
    by leap on Sat Jan 01, 2022 at 01:29:17 PM EST
    the chicken wire stretched out on the ground, to make it hard to walk/grasp/jump? You could also electrify the fence.

    Nope (none / 0) (#18)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jan 02, 2022 at 06:14:03 AM EST
    totally do not think you are joking. Totally believe your dog thinks he can beat you at this game. But you will win the war while he may win many battles. LOL.

    Another (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by KeysDan on Sat Jan 01, 2022 at 09:13:52 AM EST
    successful trip around the sun together--riding Earth.  

    We spent hours on NYE prepping (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Peter G on Sat Jan 01, 2022 at 10:37:10 PM EST
    and then simmering a soupe joumou, which we have never done before. This is the national New Years dish of Haiti, commemorating the January 1, 1804 slave rebellion (first in modern history to succeed) that established Haitian independence from France. A UNESCO-protected intangible cultural heritage item. More a stew than a soup, combining root vegetables, beef chunks, pasta, and spices. More work than we usually are willing to put into making a dinner dish, but wow, we had it for dinner on New Years, and it was really delicious. My wife also made a pan of hoppin' john, from her Southern (Kentucky) tradition, which supposedly brings good luck in the new year if consumed on January 1. A golden bread is eaten on the side (for financial success); we substituted challah for cornbread this year. Anyone else eat special New Years foods?

    pickled herring (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by leap on Sat Jan 01, 2022 at 11:40:40 PM EST
    in wine sauce. That's our family tradition. Mmmmmmmm! With pumpernickel bread.

    Hoppin' John (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by Chuck0 on Sun Jan 02, 2022 at 03:13:45 PM EST
    Every year. Didn't seem to work this past year.

    Made "Schrafff's Lobster Thermidor" (none / 0) (#19)
    by KeysDan on Sun Jan 02, 2022 at 10:26:07 AM EST
    following a NYTimes recipe adapted from that served at Schrafft's, apparently an upscale chain of restaurants popular in the northeast in the first half of the twentieth century. According to the NYTimes, the first Shattuck's was opened on Broadway in  1898.

    The meat of the lobster is cooked in a creamy mustard sauce then returned to its shell for baking.  A great dish, but rich and a little complicated.  Nice for a special event such as New Year's Eve--a prelude to an exciting evening sitting on the couch watching "The Unforgotten" on Amazon Prime. And, protecting our kitty, Claire, from the scary fireworks at midnight.


    Just seems insulting (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jan 01, 2022 at 05:19:07 PM EST
    an apology? Maybe?

    Scotland Moves to Pardon Thousands Executed as Witches

    January 1, 2022 at 3:30 pm EST By Taegan Goddard 71 Comments

    Scotland will issue pardons to 3,837 women who were accused of being witches four hundred years ago, the Wall Street Journal reports.

    Roughly two-thirds of them were executed under the Witchcraft Act.

    Mistakes were made. (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by oculus on Sun Jan 02, 2022 at 01:08:08 PM EST
    Attorney General Merrick Garland's (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jan 05, 2022 at 03:42:46 PM EST
    address today on the January 6 insurrection may be a disappointment to those expecting a fire and brimstone pledge to lock up Trump et al, but it seemed to be a measured and careful notice that everyone and anyone involved in the putsch will be investigated wherever the facts lead.  

    Mr. Garland, once again (reiterating what he said to Senator Whitehouse in Oct 202l at a DOJ Oversight Hearing) reassured as follows: "The Justice Department remains committed to holding all January 6th perpetrators, at any level, accountable under law--whether they were present that day or were otherwise criminally responsible for the assault on our Democracy." We either believe him, or charge, in effect, that he is being mendacious.

    The Attorney General weaved the insurrection, the attack on voting rights and violence on election workers, public officials, school board members, airline crews--into one and the same attack on democratic principles. And, pledged the resources of the DOJ as well as calling upon all Americans to join the fight to preserve democracy.

    While setting forth the work achieved and the challenges ahead stemming from the January 6 attack, he asked for patience in achieving justice.

    He forcefully called out the Big Lie and the use of such to undermine faith in our elections.  However, he faltered with lame "bothsiderism" in an attempt to appear nonpartisan, stating: "These acts are not associated with any one political view."

    Yes, they were and are. The violence cited: Jan 6, threats and violent actions against those to which they disagree--were all fascist thuggery. All Republican/Trumpistas.  Everyone except Trump and his henchmen should want investigations and prosecution for Jan 6 and its lead-up. It should not be partisan, although we know the Congressional Republicans voted down an investigation of January 6--an assault on its own body.  And, voted to acquit Trump at his impeachment trial.

    I thought (none / 0) (#35)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jan 05, 2022 at 07:01:42 PM EST
    it was a really good speech but that is me.

    I thought it was exactly what was needed (none / 0) (#38)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jan 06, 2022 at 10:44:53 AM EST
    Well he needs to get on the stick. (none / 0) (#36)
    by desertswine on Wed Jan 05, 2022 at 09:52:41 PM EST
    He really does (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 06, 2022 at 07:01:42 AM EST
    He talked a lot about officials from election workers to politicians being threatened.  That's nice.  I don't think many of the threat makers have been arrested.

    Rove nailed it
    If Dems don't start acting like republicans we are screwed.

    Republicans Are Responsible for January 6

    January 6, 2022 at 6:52 am EST By Taegan Goddard 36 Comments

    Karl Rove: "If Democrats had done what some Trump supporters did on that violent Jan. 6, Republicans would have criticized them mercilessly and been right to do so. Republicans would have torched any high official who encouraged violence or stood mute while it was waged and been right to do so. Republicans would have demanded an investigation to find who was responsible for the violence and been right to do so."

    "To move beyond Jan. 6, 2021, we must put country ahead of party. For Democrats, that means resisting their leadership's petty habit of aggravating partisan fault lines by indiscriminately condemning all who came to Washington that day."

    "We Republicans have a heavier burden. I've been a Republican my entire life, and believe in what the Republican Party, at its best, has represented for decades. There can be no soft-pedaling what happened and no absolution for those who planned, encouraged and aided the attempt to overthrow our democracy. Love of country demands nothing less. That's true patriotism."

    If Merrick (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by KeysDan on Thu Jan 06, 2022 at 12:24:41 PM EST
    needed any signal from the President for a full court press on the defeated former twice impeached president, Biden's speech at the Capitol can be put on a re-play loop in the DOJ's cafeteria.

    Webb is fully deployed (5.00 / 2) (#90)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 06:13:41 AM EST
    I a still in awe of the images coming (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by desertswine on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 09:41:11 AM EST
    from the Hubble telescope.  I cannot even imagine what to expect from the Webb.

    In all the years (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 05:42:34 PM EST
    I have been posting/reading here at TL it never ceases to amaze me that any of us laymen would try to win a legal argument with Peter. Being a know nothing when it comes to the law, I figure he's pretty much right all the time.

    Dr. Fauci speaks (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by BGinCA on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 06:55:10 PM EST
    for us all. When Sen. Marsahll (Rep. -KS) demanded that Fauci's publicly available financial disclosures be made public he commented on a hot mike - "what a moron".

    In that same hearing (5.00 / 1) (#171)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jan 12, 2022 at 08:22:04 AM EST
    He called out Randi Paul for posting lies about him and fundraising off it.

    Which Paul immediately turned into another new fundraising email.


    Grifters (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jan 12, 2022 at 12:27:08 PM EST
    gotta grift.

    Fauci was right (5.00 / 2) (#183)
    by Zorba on Wed Jan 12, 2022 at 04:38:49 PM EST
    Marshall is a moron.
    People who work for the feds in upper-level positions must submit their financial paperwork every year.
    Fauci has had to do it. Heck, Mr. Zorba (who works for the feds) has to do it every single year.
    And those forms are available for the public to see.
    (Meanwhile, did former President Trump ever make public his financial forms???)

    I find all this hand wringing (5.00 / 4) (#180)
    by Chuck0 on Wed Jan 12, 2022 at 11:55:24 AM EST
    a bit curious and not at all amusing over the sentence for Roddy Brian, the McMichaels and well, even Maxwell.

    People of color, the poor and disenfranchised have been taking it in the tuchus from the American legal system since its inception. Now a few white and/or rich folks are getting it too and the concern is overwhelming.

    Give me an effing break.

    Take your goldfish (5.00 / 1) (#187)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 13, 2022 at 08:56:59 AM EST
    The first charges (5.00 / 1) (#197)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 13, 2022 at 06:49:00 PM EST
    of seditious conspiracy seems like kind of a big deal

    Seditious conspiracy: 11 Oath Keepers charged in Jan. 6 riot

    Something coming up a lot tonight (none / 0) (#199)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 13, 2022 at 08:03:48 PM EST
    the Fort Smith (AR) sedition trial

    I remember hearing about this but I really knew nothing.  It seems like a cautionary tale.  I hope and expect the prosecutors see it the same way.  They were all acquitted.  By an all white jury.  If the trial is in DC at least the all white jury seems unlikely to be repeated.


    Interesting connections (5.00 / 1) (#200)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 13, 2022 at 08:08:53 PM EST
    From wiki

    Snell was executed by lethal injection on April 19, 1995, in Arkansas. Snell was executed on the same day the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building was bombed in Oklahoma City. Snell, Ellison and another CSA had previously plotted to bomb the Murrah building in 1983. Some conspiracy theorists and former members of the CSA, including Ellison's second-in-command Kerry Noble, alleged that the Oklahoma City Bombing was meant to coincide with Snell's execution. An Arkansas prison official reported that Snell laughed while watching news of the bombing in the hours prior to his execution. Noble also alleged that the bombing was a continuation of The Order's war.[6]

    Normalization (none / 0) (#21)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 02, 2022 at 01:58:40 PM EST
    It's the scariest part.

    Most Americans Expect More Political Violence

    January 2, 2022 at 11:31 am EST By Taegan Goddard 47 Comments

    A new CBS/YouGov poll finds that 68% of respondents see the Jan. 6 attacks as "a harbinger of increasing political violence, not an isolated incident."

    The (none / 0) (#23)
    by FlJoe on Mon Jan 03, 2022 at 10:24:36 AM EST
    sht hits the fan, Ivanka and Jr subpoenaed in NY fraud case, per CNN.

    Yes, and they (none / 0) (#31)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jan 05, 2022 at 03:06:28 PM EST
    have filed a motion to quash the subpoena. However my understanding is they really are wasting their money because it is only going to delay maybe a month them having to testify. Really at this point they should just suck it up and claim the 5th or whatever they are going to do.

    Hilarious and wonderful if true (none / 0) (#24)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 04, 2022 at 02:24:25 PM EST
    Inside Peter Navarro's Scheme to Overturn the Election

    January 4, 2022 at 3:05 pm EST By Taegan Goddard 64 Comments

    Former Trump adviser Peter Navarro told Rolling Stone about his plan to block the certification of the electoral vote on Jan. 6, 2021, saying "There were over 100 congressmen ready to implement the plan."

    Said Navarro: "One of two things could happen. They go back there to the states, they look at it and they say, `Nope. It's certified.' The votes come back, and that would be it. Fair enough."

    He added: "But the more likely scenario based on our assessment of the evidence was that states would withdraw any certification. And the election would be thrown to the House of Representatives. And even though the House is controlled by Democrats, the way votes would be counted in a presidential election decided by the House, Trump would almost certainly win."

    If you believe Navarro, it was the Capitol rioters that likely derailed his scheme.

    Liz wants to talk to Sean (none / 0) (#25)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 04, 2022 at 02:25:47 PM EST
    Select Committee Wants to Talk to Sean Hannity

    January 4, 2022 at 3:16 pm EST By Taegan Goddard 29 Comments

    "The Jan. 6 select committee is preparing to ask Fox News Channel host Sean Hannity for his voluntary cooperation with its investigation of the assault on the U.S. Capitol," Axios reports.

    Interesting choice (none / 0) (#26)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 04, 2022 at 05:03:04 PM EST
    Can hear (none / 0) (#27)
    by KeysDan on Tue Jan 04, 2022 at 05:08:02 PM EST
    a sigh of relief from the Turtle and some others who knew Trump would go off unhinged.

    You gotta think (none / 0) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 04, 2022 at 05:20:21 PM EST
    there was pressure for him to do this.  It would have been a disaster.  
    Also I wonder if he is starting to worry about legal liabilities for the lies with the recent news about all the info they have.

    I (none / 0) (#29)
    by FlJoe on Tue Jan 04, 2022 at 05:33:00 PM EST
    think someone close to him(Ivanka?) was worried he might have a "Col Jessup moment' and was able to talk him out of it. I am sure some of his co-conspirators are breathing a bit easier.

    He is still (none / 0) (#30)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jan 05, 2022 at 03:04:05 PM EST
    planning to have another grievance session next week. But I am guessing that is going to be less damaging than having a Jan 6th white grievance speech.

    I have won (none / 0) (#32)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jan 05, 2022 at 03:12:00 PM EST
    I left a Little Sh!t out all morning and he's still in the yard.

    I know it's early but work has been done.


    I knew you could (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jan 05, 2022 at 07:00:11 PM EST
    do it! Now as long as no trees or large branches fall on the fence you are good to go.

    Life without the possibility of parole (none / 0) (#40)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 07, 2022 at 01:43:26 PM EST
    For everyone but Bryan.  He gets life with the possibility of parole.

    Doesn't seen unfair to me.

    CNN (none / 0) (#41)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 07, 2022 at 02:08:25 PM EST
    Stupid CNN (none / 0) (#42)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jan 07, 2022 at 02:10:51 PM EST
    Agree completely (none / 0) (#43)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jan 07, 2022 at 04:29:33 PM EST
    I think we should (none / 0) (#44)
    by jondee on Fri Jan 07, 2022 at 04:41:42 PM EST
    be looking to the countries with the lowest recidivism rates and emulate what they're doing - in every regard.

    Not a horrible idea. (none / 0) (#45)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jan 07, 2022 at 05:34:25 PM EST
    I'd be interested to see a "test" prison based on Norwegian methods. I'd also be interested in the metrics of the 20% of Norwegian inmates who do re-offend.

    Not much flexibility (none / 0) (#46)
    by KeysDan on Sat Jan 08, 2022 at 03:27:21 PM EST
    in sentencing for a conviction of murder in Georgia. Either death penalty, life imprisonment without parole, or life imprisonments with possibility of parole---eligible for parole after 30 years.  Bryan would be 80 years old when eligible for parole.  

    And, in Georgia there are not, essentially, degrees---murder or manslaughter.   There is a second degree murder in special circumstances involving children,


    Historically, Georgians (none / 0) (#47)
    by jondee on Sat Jan 08, 2022 at 04:16:50 PM EST
    aren't known for having a lot of flexibility when it comes to certain things. Considering that over 500 people were lynched in the state between 1882 and 1968.

    But I suppose we should allow for change.



    My church (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jan 08, 2022 at 06:33:27 PM EST
    has been prior to the pandemic erecting monuments at lynching sites. Some places this has not been welcome and the diocese has had to re erect ones that people are tearing down or defacing.

    Way too harsh for Bryan (none / 0) (#52)
    by McBain on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 10:11:55 AM EST
    I hope he gets a new trial.  

    The problem here, if there is one, (5.00 / 5) (#53)
    by Peter G on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 10:35:43 AM EST
    is the harshness and rigidity of punishment options for homicide cases in Georgia. Not the application of those rules to this case. There must be hundreds of other cases, no doubt disproportionately affecting Black defendants, crowding Georgia's state prisons. What is remarkable about this case is that three white men were treated the same, for killing a Black man, as anyone else might be, rather than enjoying the privileged quasi-immunity that they surely expected.

    But someone could question (none / 0) (#54)
    by ladybug on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 11:16:25 AM EST
    whether the prosecutor's charges fit the actions of all involved, which triggered the sentences. Just a counterpoint.

    What (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by FlJoe on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 11:20:27 AM EST
    don't you understand about a guilty verdict and mandatory sentencing?

    Well (none / 0) (#56)
    by ladybug on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 11:25:45 AM EST
    that had nothing to do with my comment, which alluded to the charges.

    A (4.50 / 2) (#57)
    by FlJoe on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 11:28:51 AM EST
    guilty verdict validates the charges, yet you continue to question them in a trollish manner.

    I'm sorry (none / 0) (#58)
    by ladybug on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 11:30:23 AM EST
    I'm not trolling for a fight. I actually value free thinking and debate. It was just a counterpoint.

    But (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by FlJoe on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 11:35:01 AM EST
    you don't even seem to be making a a point. Just asking "questions".

    Even rhetorical (none / 0) (#60)
    by ladybug on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 11:40:13 AM EST
    questions can be used effectivly in an argument. The counterpoint would be delving more deeply into the charges and evidence, but I doubt if anyone really wishes to do that.

    Tuckems Carlson (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 12:00:40 PM EST
    Could not have said it better.

    Hi Capt (2.00 / 1) (#62)
    by ladybug on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 12:05:36 PM EST
    I hope your Sunday is going well. It is a beautiful morning where I am.

    This is interesting (none / 0) (#68)
    by ladybug on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 02:32:38 PM EST
    As you know, I am not  regular here but I sometimes like to read the comments on legal cases from a defense perspective. So I am not very familiar with the rating system. I honestly was wishing Capn a nice morning since he posts frequently, usually responds to my posts, and I sort of feel an affinity with him. Why would that get a 2 rating? That seems like it is disapproving my comment. Since I don't know all your histories it must have something to do with that? Should I have retorted instead? I am not tying to pick fights, just discussion.

    Please (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 03:03:35 PM EST
    I absolutely do not "usually respond to your posts"  And the wide eyed act isn't fooling anyone.  Our "histories" is we have seen trolls of every size and skill set.  And we see you.  In the Na'vi sense of the term.

    Yes, (none / 0) (#70)
    by ladybug on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 03:13:27 PM EST
    after I wrote that I realized that I had probably mixed up people since I really don't know any of you. I have read through some of these posts and you all seem to be good people even if our opinions differ on things. Jeralyn says that a troll knows if they are one, and I do not consider myself a troll. I do wish all of us the best New Year.

    I'm honored (5.00 / 2) (#80)
    by leap on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 06:22:27 PM EST
    that you seem to think we are all good people.

    Yeah, well (none / 0) (#71)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 03:18:23 PM EST
    in my experience trolls rarely know if they are the one.

    And they are the worst.  The rest are usually just annoying.


    OK (none / 0) (#73)
    by ladybug on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 03:39:13 PM EST
    I have difficulty knowing exactly what trolling is, but I hope you don't mind discussion and debate. I will try not to offend you, but all of my questions are sincere. I have more questions than answers.

    For no good reason, let me assume (5.00 / 3) (#78)
    by Peter G on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 05:46:16 PM EST
    that you ("Ladybug") are being sincere. I downgraded your comment because it had every indication of being passive aggressive and snide. The discussion began with my comment about the harshness and lack of nuance in the charges available to the prosecutors in Georgia, and the inflexible penalties associated with conviction on those charges. You responded that someone "could" question the choice of charges. But you did not say on what basis, factual or legal; nor did you suggest some other charge that you thought should have been brought (or, perhaps, why no charges should have been filed). You did no research into the Georgia criminal code to see whether your comment had any basis other than a gut reaction, nor did you link to any source or analysis that did so. Three times, FlJoe tried to get this across to you and three times you failed to offer any substance to support your JAQ'ing. (You might have noticed that I downrated FlJoe slightly for the sarcasm of his first comment, because he did not first give you the benefit of the doubt by clearly and courteously inviting a better response from you.) Howdy then pointed out that this is a common technique of professional fact-averse a-holes like T.Carson. That provoked your pretend-friendly "reply," again ignoring the effort to get you to either substantiate your position or else stop wasting blog space. It is not a "counterpoint" to a fact-based position to say "someone might disagree," without articulating the logical and/or factual basis anyone would have for disagreeing. If you did, then everyone here would relish the discussion. Honest differences of opinion are welcome, but only when an effort is made to substantiate them.

    RE: "JAQ'ing" (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 02:59:24 PM EST
    "Oh Lord! Do we have the strength to pull off this mighty task in one night - or are we just jerking off?"
    - Reverend Johnson (Liam Dunn), Blazing Saddles (1974)

    I'm sorry, I know you're making a serious point here, but the 6th grade adolescent version of me just can't help it.

    Please feel free to send me to the principal's office. ;-D


    Yes, I get that (none / 0) (#84)
    by ladybug on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 08:02:32 PM EST
    it looked passive-aggressive and understand your rating now. I didn't respond to the one-liner comment about a guilty verdict automatically vindicating the charges because I do think that it is possible that convictions can be gotten despite overcharging, and social pressure or corruption may taint convictions, etc.  I do have stronger opinions about the Maxwell trial and other trials than this one, but in general I feel too many convictions are overcharged and unfair and I hope we can discuss issues without snark and personal attacks.  

    Homicide in Georgia (5.00 / 5) (#115)
    by KeysDan on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 03:21:09 PM EST
    Homicide is the broad term for any killing of another human being (unless legally justified, Georgia is a stand your ground state).

    Homicide includes murder or manslaughter.

    Murder in Georgia (essentially only one degree) is when a person illegally kills another: if the person acted intending to kill another; the person acted with depraved disregard for human life (e.g., firing a gun into a house known to be occupied); or when a person kills another while committing a felony in the course of a robber. In such cases, the killing need not be intentional.

    Manslaughter in Georgia can be (a) voluntary or (b) involuntary.

    (a)voluntary occurs when a person intentionally kills another while in a state of sudden and violent passion.  The passion must be caused by a serious provocation that would create such a passion in a reasonable person.  An example, would be a person catching their spouse in the act of adultery. And, for "sudden" to apply, the killing would happen at the time of such discovery. If the person left the site of the adultery discovery and rode around the block to think about it, then returned and killed a person, this would no longer be considered as voluntary manslaughter. Voluntary manslaughter is punishable by one to 20 years in prison.

    (b) involuntary manslaughter is the unintentional killing from  illegal or reckless conduct. Deaths from an auto accident would be an example. The maximum penalty is ten years in prison. And, based on circumstances, could be a misdemeanor, with less than one year in prison.

    So, if there is agreement that the death of Ahmaud Arberry was a homicide and not natural causes, the charge by the prosecutor would need to be murder or manslaughter. And, if voluntary manslaughter, the killing would need to be provoked and done in a state of sudden and violent passion. While it was violent, for sure, was it provoked and sudden passion? The video would seem to rule that out. And, voluntary manslaughter seems inapplicable to the facts.

    Accordingly, the charge as well as the sentencing upon conviction for murder, is prescribed by Georgia law. If one wants to take truck with the range of charges or the punishment upon conviction of the charges made, the place to register dislike is, mostly, with the Georgia legislature. And, while making such dislike known, it is hoped that the odious Georgia voter suppression laws would also be brought to their attention.

    Note: the County's ex-prosecutor, Jackie Johnson, has been indicted on the felony count of violating her oath of office and hindering and delaying the Arberry investigation. The indictment claims she showed favor and affection.  Greg McMichael worked for her prior to his retirement as an investigator.


    Thank you (none / 0) (#120)
    by ladybug on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 04:09:00 PM EST
    What I understand then is that it had to be murder because Bryan was charged with the felony of attempted false imprisonment. I am not JAQing (I had to look that up), but the dispute may be with the prosecutors charging him with the felony too. Otherwise, couldn't it have been involuntary manslaughter for 10 years?

    The prosecutor (none / 0) (#124)
    by KeysDan on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 05:24:32 PM EST
    determined that the charge, given the evidence.  Apparently deciding the charge  was fitting, more akin to a killing occurring in the course of a robbery than a killing consistent with the least serious homicide.  The jury agreed and found him guilty.  Bryant provided a defense to the charge that failed.  The differentiation with the others was in the sentencing---life with the possibility of parole.  

    The prosecutor (none / 0) (#125)
    by KeysDan on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 05:24:32 PM EST
    determined that the charge, given the evidence.  Apparently deciding the charge  was fitting, more akin to a killing occurring in the course of a robbery than a killing consistent with the least serious homicide.  The jury agreed and found him guilty.  Bryant provided a defense to the charge that failed.  The differentiation with the others was in the sentencing---life with the possibility of parole.  

    Regrets (5.00 / 2) (#126)
    by KeysDan on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 05:26:10 PM EST
    on the unintended duplication.  But, it does deserve repeating.

    Not that it will help. (5.00 / 3) (#127)
    by oculus on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 05:34:56 PM EST
    I realize that (none / 0) (#131)
    by ladybug on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 05:57:25 PM EST
    the prosecutor determined the charges. I did not know the specific difference between murder and manslaughter in Georgia, and so I appreciated the response that explained it. I also appreciate your patience in responding to me. Where we seem to not be connecting is I wondered if a lesser charge of manslaughter might have sufficed, especially from a defense perspective. I did not think that anyone  wanted to delve into the depths of the evidence in this trial, or you may have done it already in other threads and I missed it. But I do appreciate your efforts to answer my questions and I do think I have my answer now. No JAQing. I learned a new word.

    To understand the charges, you also (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by Peter G on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 08:11:57 PM EST
    have to consider the law of complicity under the Georgia Criminal Code, which is pretty typical of U.S. jurisdictions in this respect. By aiding and abetting the others' crime in progress, with the intent to assist them, Bryant made himself liable for their criminal conduct even though he may only have participated indirectly or to a lesser personal extent.

    I disagree (none / 0) (#77)
    by McBain on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 05:29:32 PM EST
    There are plenty of cases where innocent people have been wrongfully convicted.  In some cases they had nothing to do with the alleged crime.

    In this case I believe it's likely the jury felt pressure to convict. The defense made several motions for a mistrial based on the activism outside and in the courtroom visible to the jury. The judge basically said it falls within the right of free speech and the right to attend a criminal trial.  I don't have the answer but believe we need to rethink that a little bit.  


    How much "pressure to convict" (5.00 / 3) (#82)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 06:42:14 PM EST
    would they have felt if three black men had done this to a white man,



    Probably a lot less (none / 0) (#99)
    by McBain on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 10:00:29 AM EST
    William 'Roddie' Bryan may be many things. (5.00 / 5) (#116)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 03:43:03 PM EST
    McBain: "There are plenty of cases where innocent people have been wrongfully convicted. In some cases they had nothing to do with the alleged crime."

    But "innocent" and "not involved" aren't among them. Bryan used his pickup truck to block Arbery's escape just prior to the deadly shooting, which Bryan recorded with his cellphone as he followed Arbery. Then he also recorded the man's murder.

    To be perfectly blunt, McBain, there's really nothing here to "rethink." This case has always been about three middle-aged white men in rural Georgia who acted with impunity and lynched a Black man - and yes, Mr. Arbery was indeed lynched - for the mere suspicion of a supposed theft which the defendants could neither document nor specify.

    From my own perspective, the truly horrifying part about this case is that those racist a$$holes were then entirely confident that their white privilege would shield them from any and all legal consequences that might otherwise result from their despicable actions. And for several months, it very nearly did.

    That's why former Brunswick District Attorney Jackie Johnson was subsequently indicted and arrested on felony charges of violating her oath of office and obstruction of a police investigation. Because had it not been for that fortuitous leak of Bryan's self-incriminating video (and may Heaven bless the person who leaked it), I'm of absolutely no doubt that Ms. Johnson likely intended that those guys would walk away scot-free.



    Let me try again. (none / 0) (#93)
    by ladybug on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 08:33:04 AM EST
    My point was that if we think the automatic sentence is too harsh we might consider if the charges could have been different--for both black and white defendants in Georgia. I don't think that a guilty verdict necessarily vindicates the charge in all cases. A better example for me would be Kim Potter, where I do think she was overcharged and convicted.  

    They chased, trapped, and killed him (5.00 / 5) (#95)
    by Peter G on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 09:12:02 AM EST
    What other charges than false imprisonment and homicide would you suggest?

    You mentioned (none / 0) (#96)
    by ladybug on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 09:31:37 AM EST
    that the prosecutors had little leeway in the charges in Georgia, so I guess that was my question. Could there have been more nuanced charges for the different defendants? I am at a disadvantage in that I did not follow this case (and that I do not have a law degree). My comments were more general. Your statement is pretty black and white but did for example Bryan chase block and intend to kill him? I accept the juror's verdict but still am uneasy about how we cheer on life senbtences for people that we do not like.

    At no time have I cheered a life sentence (5.00 / 2) (#102)
    by Peter G on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 10:46:08 AM EST
    in this case or any other. My comments speak for themselves. If you have understood otherwise, then I think it is time for me to give up trying to converse with you.

    That comment was absolutely not directed at you! (none / 0) (#103)
    by ladybug on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 10:59:58 AM EST
    I meant we as a nation. I myself do not cheer life sentences and yet included myself in that. I am sorry to have offended you and sorry for the sloppy articulation of my point. As I said, I am very appreciative of your responses and have a great deal of respect for your opinions.  

    I really feel bad (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by ladybug on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 11:24:50 AM EST
    I offended you. I hope you accept my apology.

    You seem familiar. (5.00 / 5) (#143)
    by desertswine on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 01:21:13 AM EST
    I don't see Bryan (none / 0) (#76)
    by McBain on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 05:21:59 PM EST
    as I would the driver of a bank robbery gone bad.   I think his was a very unique case. False imprisonment while driving a truck?  That fact that his trial was attached to two very unpopular defendants hurt his chances in my opinion.
    There must be hundreds of other cases, no doubt disproportionately affecting Black defendants, crowding Georgia's state prisons.

    Agreed, but that doesn't make this look any better. I believe Bryan was charged, in part, because the Arbery family and activists demanded it.  Bryan cooperated with the investigation thinking he did nothing wrong.  I feel bad for him. From the reports I read, he wasn't a bad guy, just a dumb guy.

    In the Amber Guyger trial, Botham Jean's brother gave Guyger a hug during the trial, a remarkable moment that likely led to an unusually lenient murder sentence.  Where's the compassion for Roddie Bryan?  We can be outraged with the treatment of people of color by the justice system without encouraging overcharging dumb white guys.      


    "False imprisonment while driving (5.00 / 3) (#79)
    by Peter G on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 05:51:21 PM EST
    a truck?" Sure. Using your truck to intentionally impede another person's freedom of movement, and in particular their ability to get away from you, is clearly false imprisonment.

    To a non-lawyer (me) (none / 0) (#85)
    by ladybug on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 08:16:31 PM EST
    it seems that prosecutors may bend legal terms to fit their case. I have been trying to get my head around the charges in Maxwell and see how they fit the evidence and conviction. If "imprisonment" means blocking a path with a truck, that does bend the everyday meaning. These issues are not black and white. It is difficult to have a real discussion in this format. But I think they are interesting questions.

    Again, you did no research before (5.00 / 2) (#86)
    by Peter G on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 09:09:19 PM EST
    forming an opinion based on an admittedly uninformed gut reaction. Less than five seconds on Google produced the terms of the Georgia crime of "false imprisonment":
    A person commits the offense of false imprisonment when, in violation of the personal liberty of another, he arrests, confines, or detains such person without legal authority.
    Prosecutors do not make up the definition of the terms in a single case. The State Legislation enacts those terms, and courts enforce them. If the terms of the statute could not be understood by a fair-minded person wishing to obey it, then the law is unconstitutionally vague, and the charge would be dismissed. If no reasonable jury could have concluded beyond a reasonable doubt from evidence at trial that the defendant's conduct satisfied the statutory language, then the conviction would be set aside by the trial judge or else will be overturned on appeal.

    I was careful to note (none / 0) (#87)
    by ladybug on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 09:29:32 PM EST
    that I am a non-lawyer and was giving my opinion as a layperson on how terms seem often to be bent to fit a case. The words 'confines' and 'detains' can be interpreted in different ways, including blocking the path with a truck as the prosecutor argued, but it is not the usual meaning of "imprisonment" and requires interpretation.  Isn't the law a matter of interpretation? Reasonable people can disagree. There are instances of confinig abd detaining that I can think of that would not be imprisonment, but I am not arguing this case. Just the elasticity of words.

    The word "imprisonment" does not appear (5.00 / 3) (#94)
    by Peter G on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 09:08:41 AM EST
    in the wording of the statute that defines the crime, which I set forth verbatim. It is therefore essentially irrelevant. It is the name of the crime, but not the definition of the crime. The key word here would appear to be "detains." (It does not seem that "confines" or "arrests" really applies, but the three prohibited acts are presented in the alternative, so doing any of them, as long as the state of mind and other conditions exist, will suffice to support a conviction.) I fully realize you are not a lawyer. That's why I explained, in terms that I think any interested person could understand, what the pertinent principles are. I agree that prosecutors have a professional tendency to advocate ever broader applications of the terms of criminal statutes. The doctrines that I have mentioned (and others) serve to put restraints on that unfair tendency.

    Hmmm (none / 0) (#98)
    by ladybug on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 09:43:18 AM EST
    Of course you do not define the word with the word itself...so I'm not sure I get that point. But I think we agree that it is the prosecutor's job to show how the specific facts of a case fit the definitions and statutes in the law. And the defense pushes back. I appreciate your replies and find them very interesting. And educational.

    I don't think Bryan (none / 0) (#100)
    by McBain on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 10:29:00 AM EST
    confined or detained Arbery. He certainly didn't arrest him.  I don't believe Bryan forced Arbery into confronting Travis McMichael. At most he tried to block him.   I don't believe a prosecutor should argue false imprisonment for that.  I'm not sure if you actually disagree. It's not a "can they" argument, it's a "should they".  

    If you followed this case (none / 0) (#111)
    by ladybug on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 01:17:01 PM EST
    you are more familiar with the facts and evidence than I am. It seems you are exploring reasonable doubt for some of the charges in the case of Bryan. That helps me to try to see the case from the defense view. But the larger issue for me is what these sensational cases and convictions say about our culture. It's another question I ask myself but have no clear answer.

    ladybug's real name is Colin Robinson. (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 05:09:20 PM EST
    If anyone is not familiar with this character you must watch the TV series What We Do In The Shadows immediately.

    You can thank me later.


    I too have wondered why (none / 0) (#133)
    by ladybug on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 06:29:01 PM EST
    I have engaged in this interaction for the past few days. I have found it interesting but expected that people would just stop responding and then I would be back in the shadows. Your opinions obviously don't annoy me even though they are different. I want to say that I think you are an interesting group but I am afraid someone will take offense at that.

    linea (5.00 / 8) (#134)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 06:53:11 PM EST
    is that you?

    You've done it again. (none / 0) (#149)
    by ladybug on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 08:10:43 AM EST
    You piqued my interest. No I am not, but is linea a friend or a foe? Does this mean some of you actually may not be annoyed by my presence or does it just seal the coffin?

    Just (5.00 / 4) (#150)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 08:23:40 AM EST
    asking questions

    First you must state "I am not (5.00 / 1) (#166)
    by oculus on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 08:10:06 PM EST
    a lawyer."

    Where's the compassion for Roddie Bryan? (5.00 / 2) (#81)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 06:39:49 PM EST
    He is eligible for parole.   The judge said in sentencing he was different than the other two.  And then added he was convicted of felony murder.  

    Rightly so IMO.  


    It's still way too harsh a punishment (none / 0) (#101)
    by McBain on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 10:36:54 AM EST
    I hope something can be done for Bryan and others like Kim Potter who were convicted first in the court of public opinion.  It seems obvious to me they have been over punished by society to try to make up for our sins of the past.  

    On what basis is it "too harsh"? (5.00 / 1) (#132)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 06:21:20 PM EST
    Jeez, guy, the evidence clearly established that William Bryan Jr. was an active and willing participant in the events immediately leading up to Ahmaud Arbery's death, as well as afterward.

    The sentencing judge took in account the fact that Bryan didn't shoot the young man himself, but otherwise certainly played a key role in ensuring the man's unlawful detention, which led directly to his killing.

    Stop trying make that racist a victim. He got exactly what he deserved.


    I don't think Bryan should have been charged (none / 0) (#153)
    by McBain on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 11:35:18 AM EST
    in the first place.  As for the McMichaels, a life sentence without the possibility of parole should only be given to the worst of the worst, they don't fit that description in my opinion.

    This case wasn't what the media reported over and over... that Arbery was killed simply because he was black jogger.  The McMichaels had reason to believe Arbery was the same man who had trespassed and possibly stolen items in their neighborhood.  The police were called several times but could never quite get to the scene in time.  The McMichaels decided to take the law in their own hands, a poor decision, but not one entirely without cause.

    I don't see why Travis and Greg could not be rehabilitated and released on parole at some point. I hope they get a new trial as well but I think they also face federal charges so it might not matter.  The way I see it, the entire thing is messed up and people are either cheering or looking the other way.


    Tell it to the Georgia Legislature (5.00 / 1) (#154)
    by Peter G on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 04:11:35 PM EST
    And while you're at it, tell them that every eligible voter should be encouraged and facilitated, not impeded and obstructed, in their desire to participate in our American democracy.

    Right now I'm telling it to you Peter (none / 0) (#156)
    by McBain on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 05:03:26 PM EST
    and others here since you're the ones I'm having a discussion with.  The "tell it to... so and so" response always sounds like a wimpy cop out/deflection to me.  Do you agree or disagree with my comment?  I get the feeling you mostly agree but are hesitant to say so.

    I don't have the ability to change Georgia law but I can at least try to positively affect public opinion, which is what I think propels some of these bad outcomes.


    Kindly (5.00 / 3) (#158)
    by FlJoe on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 05:25:28 PM EST
    STFU, Peter has been fighting draconian sentencing and over-zealous his entire career.

    You manage to only show up when some cop or cop want to be (white of course) finally gets a dose of "equal"  justice.


    Race is not the ONLY issue. (none / 0) (#160)
    by ladybug on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 05:39:49 PM EST
    I know it is brought up a lot but there are other legal issues as well. No wonder people are on the lookout for passive-aggressive on this site. Kindly take my admonishment.

    Could we please (5.00 / 2) (#161)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 06:11:15 PM EST
    stop feeding this one.

    OK (none / 0) (#169)
    by ladybug on Wed Jan 12, 2022 at 08:16:20 AM EST
    I agree and it is my last comment. The Arbrey killing is widely described as a lynching and Epstein's perversions as a child sex traffickibg ring. These are highly charged words and seem to be inaccurate to me. The emotions they arouse make some question whether this affected the trial and jury pool. But if you think they are accurate, then the sentences fit the crime. Even on this site McBain has aroused anger just for pushing back on the charges. Although I think questions stimulate discussion and have enjoyed the conversation I agree that it is time to move on.

    "Lynching" and "child s*x (5.00 / 4) (#176)
    by Peter G on Wed Jan 12, 2022 at 10:15:40 AM EST
    trafficking ring" are both pretty fair descriptions.
       A lynching is the kidnapping and killing (often accompanied by torture or at least the prior infliction of extreme fear) of a person suspected (or convicted) of a crime, by private persons who choose to substitute their own instincts and power for the normal judicial process. Exactly what happened to Awbery.
       In Epstein, a ringleader employed a number of persons to pay teenage girls to engage in sexual activities with men with whom they had no personal voluntary relationship.
       Both catchphrases seem pretty on-point to me.

    I respect you Peter so much (none / 0) (#177)
    by ladybug on Wed Jan 12, 2022 at 10:32:45 AM EST
    (and never ever tried to "win" a debate with you) that I cannot resist. I keep saying I am not a lawyer because I rely on everyday meanings and look to you for legal guidance. Dictionary.com: "kill (someone), especially by hanging, for an alleged offense with or without a legal trial." I think we may disagree whether they intentionally set out to kill him. Child: "a young human being below the age of puberty or below the legal age of majority." Because 'child' is usually associated with below puberty it becomes a charged word in this context. I am still waiting for Jeralyn's comments on Maxwell, but I agree that lynching and child sex crimes are horrendous.

    The use of "child" to mean (5.00 / 1) (#184)
    by Peter G on Wed Jan 12, 2022 at 09:07:22 PM EST
    "under 18" in this context is now ubiquitous. As in, "child porn*graphy," which is certainly not limited to depictions of sexual activity involving persons under the age of puberty. You can object to that usage, but that ship has sailed, about 30 years ago I would say.

    That's interesting. (none / 0) (#186)
    by ladybug on Thu Jan 13, 2022 at 08:55:06 AM EST
    I didn't know that. I always thought of that kind of pornography as depicting prepubescents. When I was 18 and a freshman in college people thought I was 14 and a freshman in high school cause I looked (and probably acted) so immature. Some 14 year olds look and act like 18. Different states and countries have different laws regarding the legal age of consent, and I have difficulty seing the difference between 17 and 18, even 16.  Since the "sexual revolution" in the 60s, it seems to me that teenagers are being normalized for sex younger and younger though our culture. So the use of "child" in the context of Epstein does bug me.

    Highly unlikely they set out (none / 0) (#178)
    by McBain on Wed Jan 12, 2022 at 10:48:39 AM EST
    with the goal of killing Arbery.  At trail, Travis McMichael said they first wanted to "talk" to him.  I think they either wanted to detain Arbery until the police arrived or scare him out of town never to return.

    Pretty sure you're not allowed to scare/intimidate someone off.  Detaining would have been legal if they had probably cause for the citizen's arrest.  In my opinion, they did but I can understand the argument against.    


    It may for some reason matter (5.00 / 4) (#182)
    by Peter G on Wed Jan 12, 2022 at 01:49:04 PM EST
    to you if they did not initially "set out with the goal of killing Awbery." But it certainly doesn't matter under the law (nor do I think it would matter to most decent people) so long as when they did kill him, they had the intent to do so and had deliberated (even if only for a moment) before deciding to take his life. That's called first degree murder in most places. "Lynching" has no legal definition, so if you want to quibble about how you feel about that term, be my guest. To me, if a mob kidnaps a prisoner from the county jail to "put him on trial" before some kangaroo court, for example, and only after that decides to kill him, I'd still call it a lynching.

    What Did the Defense Present (none / 0) (#179)
    by RickyJim on Wed Jan 12, 2022 at 11:23:57 AM EST
    to show that it was reasonable to believe that Arbery had committed a crime serious enough to justify an attempt to detain him?

    The defense showed the jury video (none / 0) (#189)
    by McBain on Thu Jan 13, 2022 at 09:48:01 AM EST
    of Arbery that day coming out a home that wasn't his and video of him on other occasions being inside.  The owner of that home testified that he called the police and reported items missing.  Police testified they came out to that location but were too late catch Arbery in the act.  Other people testified that they were afraid/concerned about the Arbery situation.  Travis McMichael tesitfied the he believed he had seen Arbery, possibly with a gun, on previous occasion and the  call he made to police about that incident was played for the jury.  

    So, the defense argued it was reasonable to believe Arbery was once again trespassing with intent to steal, which in George can be enough for a citizen's arrest.   But here's the problem for the defense.  Travis McMichael never saw Arbery go into or out of that house that day.  A neighbor saw arbery, informed Greg McMchael, who then told Travis.  Georgia law states you don't have to actually see the crime but it needs to be in your "immediate knowledge".  The defense argued one interpretation, the prosecution another and the judge wasn't much help in clarifying.    

    As usual, there were a lot of facts most of the media ignored.  Had the general public known the full story before hearing the spin, there would be been a better chance of a fair trial in my opinion.  In the end, I believe the jury convicted these guys based on what the law should be, not was it actually is.


    Was It a House or a Construction Site? (none / 0) (#190)
    by RickyJim on Thu Jan 13, 2022 at 10:10:57 AM EST
    The owner issued a complaint but didn't secure the entrance afterwards?  What was missing, nails? Was there also video showing Arbery sipping water from a hose on that site?

    I believe it was considered to be (none / 0) (#191)
    by McBain on Thu Jan 13, 2022 at 11:13:24 AM EST
    a home under construction.  Not ready to live in but not open for the public to legally walk through. Going by memory here, the owner reported electronic equipment was missing from his boat.  I believe he had an initial video camera set up and then after the equipment went missing installed more cameras.  

    I don't think there was video of Arbery sipping water. I don't think the water faucets were in camera range. He may have gone in there for water, he may have stolen things, he may have done both.


    I Can't Verify Your Claims, McBain (5.00 / 2) (#192)
    by RickyJim on Thu Jan 13, 2022 at 11:38:00 AM EST
    This is what I found about the evidence by googling:
    Five days later, footage from a surveillance camera emerged, showing a black man in a white T-shirt - believed to be Mr Arbery - at a home construction site shortly before the shooting.

    He is seen walking on to the site and looking around for a few minutes before jogging down the street.

    During the trial, the site's owner, Larry English Jr, testified that the man in question had not disturbed or damaged his property during the visit. He added others had also been seen trespassing on his property, but he never authorised the McMichaels to enter his property or confront anyone.

    Jurors were also shown bodycam footage of the armed McMichaels searching for a suspected burglar at Mr English's property 12 days before the jogger was killed.

    Police records show one report of theft in the neighbourhood between 1 January and 23 February 2020, US media report. That incident involved Travis McMichael's pistol going missing from the family's unlocked pickup truck on 1 January.

    This is what you want Ricky (none / 0) (#193)
    by McBain on Thu Jan 13, 2022 at 02:39:16 PM EST
    Here's the video link to the testimony/deposition of Larry English...

    At 31:00 he talks about a trespasser who fits the description of Arbery looking at his boat "looks like he's up to no good". Says it's the same guy he saw before.  
    at 36:00 he talks about installing more cameras.
    At 44:00 text messages about tools being stolen from the truck of English's neighbor.
    At 1:17:00 electronic equipment and cooler being stolen from English

    From you link...

    Jurors were also shown bodycam footage of the armed McMichaels searching for a suspected burglar at Mr English's property 12 days before the jogger was killed.

    There was a coordinated effort between neighbors and police to try to catch Arbery.  Larry English was very concerned about the illegal activity at his property. He called the police multiple times and installed several cameras.

    In this video...
    English talks about the intimidation/threats he faced once this became a big story.  The defense basically, suggested English was pressure into downplaying the concern he had about the trespassing/thefts.  Most of the media, of course, ran with the downplayed version.


    You forgot (5.00 / 1) (#194)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jan 13, 2022 at 03:59:27 PM EST
    to mention the toenails.

    Here, listen to (none / 0) (#195)
    by leap on Thu Jan 13, 2022 at 05:57:07 PM EST
    I meant (none / 0) (#173)
    by ladybug on Wed Jan 12, 2022 at 08:43:03 AM EST
    "you" in the sense of "one" not you pesonally.

    I was fine (5.00 / 1) (#174)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jan 12, 2022 at 08:58:56 AM EST
    with me personally

    Not true Joe (none / 0) (#175)
    by McBain on Wed Jan 12, 2022 at 09:05:32 AM EST
    I've commented about a variety of topics over the years including non white and/or non cops treated unfairly by the justice system.  Here's a recent one involving a false identification that led to a wrongful 43 year prison sentence.

    And several non justice related topics such as TV and film.  Speaking of which, I watched the odd but interesting Netflix film Lost Daughter last night.  Another strong performance by Olivia Coleman.


    You have certainly done heroic work (none / 0) (#159)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 05:34:08 PM EST
    changing opinions around here.    You should be so proud.

    Since this topic is still alive (none / 0) (#157)
    by ladybug on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 05:06:00 PM EST
    I have some more questions, IYDM. What are the chances that Johnson will be convicted, especially now that she has been voted out? Was she corrupt or was she "just" biased toward police? They were on the fourth prosecutor and the second one, Barnhill, felt that there should not be a charge, if I understand correctly, which makes me think that some amount of discretion is given to the prosecutor.  I thought involuntary manslaughter could have been an option if the prosecutor judged it that way, which leaves us with the possibility of prosecutors possibly overcharging. This would not be something fixed necessarily by the legislature, would it? Two lawyers have mentioned that it is up to the legislatue to fix so I just want to clarify that.  
    Caveat: I accept the jury verdict. I am queazy about the prosectors and media coverage in these publicized trials.

    If I had a delete key I would. (none / 0) (#172)
    by ladybug on Wed Jan 12, 2022 at 08:26:04 AM EST
    Ach du lieber Himmel! Enough, already. (5.00 / 3) (#163)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 06:51:39 PM EST
    McBain: "This case wasn't what the media reported over and over... that Arbery was killed simply because he was black jogger.  The McMichaels had reason to believe Arbery was the same man who had trespassed and possibly stolen items in their neighborhood.  The police were called several times but could never quite get to the scene in time.  The McMichaels decided to take the law in their own hands, a poor decision, but not one entirely without cause."

    The defense presented absolutely no evidence at trial to support their unfounded suspicions - and yours, too, for all intents and purposes - about the deceased. There should be no credence whatsoever attached to their specious allegations.

    And yet here you are, parroting those unsubstantiated claims as though they're somehow gospel truth because apparently in your world, white people should always get the benefit of the doubt whenever there's a dispute or incident involving a person of color, and Black people in particular are almost always considered the suspect party.

    William "Roddy" Bryan and the McMichael pere et fils lynched Ahmaud Arbery. Let me say that again for emphasis: They lynched him. Then Greg McMichael just as clearly used his connections as a former investigator for the Brunswick D.A.'s office in an effort to avoid legal culpability for the crime.

    They ultimately got arrested because Bryan was fckn stupid enough to record the heinous deed, and that video likely got leaked by someone in the Brunswick D.A.'s office who was appalled by Jackie Johnson's intent and effort to cover it up on behalf of her former investigator. That's why she's now the former D.A., was subsequently indicted for obstruction of justice, and is presently facing an upcoming trial herself.

    A young man was killed for no good reason due to the racist tendencies of the defendants, who are now in prison for life. And that's the only good thing to come out of this entire tragic affair. So, go cry a river about the fate of the poor misunderstood Georgia good ol' boys someplace else because regardless of the fact that they're presently incarcerated, those three Schitts are also still alive.

    Meanwhile, Ahmaud Arbery gets to spend eternity six feet under at New Springfield Baptist Church Cemetery in Alexander, GA, because he was never given the same benefit of the doubt that you want the rest of us to grant to the men who killed him.

    And speaking for myself only, that just pi$$es me off.


    You can speak for me on this (none / 0) (#168)
    by MO Blue on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 11:10:49 PM EST
    They had no cause to take the law into their own hands or take the life of Mr. Arbery. For once, the jury and the court decided they should received equal justice from the system.

    why race? (none / 0) (#185)
    by thomas rogan on Wed Jan 12, 2022 at 09:15:08 PM EST
    Half of the murders are of black people and half of the murderers are black.  So I guess blacks do get "oversentenced" out of proportion to their numbers in the population, if you're saying that.

    That is why (none / 0) (#188)
    by ladybug on Thu Jan 13, 2022 at 09:12:29 AM EST
    I have tried to look at all these highly publicized cases in terms of the law rather than race. These particular cases are being talked about because the media over-publicizes them. But the issues should apply to all defendants.

    This guy is one to watch (none / 0) (#63)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 12:43:23 PM EST
    Adams Urges Democrats to Be `Radically Practical'

    January 9, 2022 at 11:58 am EST By Taegan Goddard 80 Comments

    New York City Mayor Eric Adams (D) on Sunday said the Democratic Party has to be "radically practical" if it wants to win November's midterm elections, The Hill reports.

    Watch for nepotism (none / 0) (#64)
    by oculus on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 02:08:50 PM EST
    and unwise appointments.

    Yes (none / 0) (#65)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 02:18:46 PM EST
    I have read this.  So far what I have read is not very impressive.

    He is a triangulater.

    The noise from the left will help him in the middle.  So far.



    Speaking of triangulaters (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by jondee on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 03:25:13 PM EST
    that apartment fire in NYC sounds like the Triangle Shirtwaist fire.

    How do that many people get trapped in a fire that started on the 3rd floor in 2022?


    I read there was not a fire extinguisher (none / 0) (#83)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 06:43:47 PM EST
    in the building.   I guess that's how.

    And a space heater (none / 0) (#88)
    by jondee on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 09:51:26 PM EST
    someone apparently needed to stay warm. In January.

    How does that happen?


    Actually (none / 0) (#89)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 05:55:32 AM EST
    I was confusing this Bronx fire with a different one last week.

    Many high-rise buildings in the U.S. ... (none / 0) (#144)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 04:14:15 AM EST
    ... that were built prior to 1970-75 received grandfathered exemptions from then-updated municipal fire codes which required the installation of sprinkler systems in all new construction.

    As the City and County of Honolulu learned from a similar fire at the 36-story Marco Polo condominium on July 14, 2017, any failure or reluctance on the part of public officials to compel building / condo association members to retrofit their older properties with fire sprinkler systems can have serious and deadly consequences.

    The Marco Polo was completed and opened in 1971, three years before Honolulu adopted its revised fire codes to address the huge boom in high-rise construction. Four residents were killed that afternoon in the tragedy, and 13 more residents and one firefighter were injured. One more resident died about a month later from his injuries.



    Correction: (none / 0) (#145)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 04:20:21 AM EST
    Second paragraph should instead read as follows:

    "As the City and County of Honolulu learned from a similar fire at the 36-story Marco Polo condominium on July 14, 2017, any failure or reluctance on the part of public officials to compel building owners or condo association members to retrofit their older properties with fire sprinkler systems can have serious and deadly consequences."

    My bad.


    Grandfathered shmanfathered (none / 0) (#196)
    by jondee on Thu Jan 13, 2022 at 06:11:26 PM EST
    That's a recipe for an even worse tragedy occurring at some point down the road. It's only a matter of time.

    Here's an idea, don't be a landlord if  assuming the responsibility for providing basic, safe living conditions for your tenants is too tall an order


    I've long argued that ... (5.00 / 1) (#198)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 13, 2022 at 07:56:15 PM EST
    ... grandfathering exemptions to the fire code for older buildings was basically ensuring that a tragedy otherwise waiting to happen would likely occur. Three times, residents of the Marco Polo condominium in Honolulu voted down assessments to install a sprinkler system. The last proposed assessment would have been $4,100 per unit. Is life really that cheap?

    Now, I do realize that for many older residents on fixed incomes, $4,100 can be pretty steep. That's why I proposed a bill to our state legislature that would authorize the counties to mandate such sprinkler systems, pay for it themselves with county funds, and then assess condo residents the $4,100 cost over 20 years, which would amount to a slight increase in their annual property tax bill. That would make the upgrade affordable to the individual condo owner, and it would get done.

    There are ways to accomplish this. You just have to be creative.


    To be clear (none / 0) (#66)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 02:20:37 PM EST
    I an not really singing his praises.  Necessarily.  That's a wait and see.  Just commenting on his skill as a politician.

    And his ambition (none / 0) (#67)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 02:22:32 PM EST
    Mayor of NY is not the end game I think.

    Historically (none / 0) (#74)
    by FlJoe on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 04:11:50 PM EST
    being elected NYC Mayor is a political dead end
    The last New York City mayor who succeeded at ascending to higher office was John T. Hoffman, who won his bid for governor in 1869.

    The last mayor to be elected to any office after serving in City Hall was Ardolph Loges Kline, who was briefly mayor in 1913 and later served as a congressman.

    Go ask Rudy what ambition gets you.

    Still (none / 0) (#75)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 09, 2022 at 04:36:13 PM EST
    I say watch him.  Or watch out for him.

    IMO he is definitely no Rudy.


    There is no Rudy but Rudy. (none / 0) (#118)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 03:57:44 PM EST
    And Sugar Daddy Trump is his profit.

    Golden Globes were (none / 0) (#91)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 07:58:13 AM EST
    were announced on Twitter last night

    No variety show.  Personally I'm fine with that as the norm.

    I agree with a lot of the winners but I think the nominees were weird.  Succession (IMO) was not the best drama of the year but it was definitely the best one nominated.

    I love Power of the Dog won over West Side Story.  And I love the young girl from Power of the Dog won.  She was amazing.  It's not easy to steal every scene from Tom Hanks.

    Oh my god that's embarrassing (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 08:18:15 AM EST
    Confusing Power of the Dog and News of the World.

    Kodi Smit-McPhee (Globe winner) was not a girl.  And he also totally deserved to win.  No excuse except not enough coffee yet.


    Power of the Dog (none / 0) (#107)
    by KeysDan on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 12:58:39 PM EST
    did well---Kodi Smit-McPhee.  Also, Jane Campion for director.  Benedict Cumberbarch was nominated for best actor, and would have been my choice from among nominees.

    I agree (none / 0) (#110)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 01:09:28 PM EST
    It was a fierce performance

    Golden Globes (none / 0) (#108)
    by BGinCA on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 12:58:43 PM EST
    Also Power of the Dog did not win 'over' West Side Story. Each won its respective Categories. Best Drama for the former, best Musical for the latter. Most shocking was that Parallel Mothers got zero nominations. IMO, by far the best film of the year. And Penelope Cruz!

    I really know that about best drama (none / 0) (#109)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 01:08:08 PM EST
    I'm not sure who posted that first comment.  I should wait until I wake up in the future

    I was reading about the mothers movie.   A lot of great stuff was ignored.     And a lot of stuff nominated that I never heard of.


    Question for Trial Followers (none / 0) (#105)
    by RickyJim on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 11:48:28 AM EST
    Has the judge at any of these recent high profile cases allowed the jury to question witnesses?  If so, what did the jurors ask?

    That practice is very rare (none / 0) (#106)
    by Peter G on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 12:32:50 PM EST
    It's principal problem is that it forces lawyer to enforce the rules of evidence by objecting to jurors' questions if they are improper, thereby seeming to put themselves in conflict with the jury.

    Rare? (none / 0) (#112)
    by RickyJim on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 02:17:50 PM EST
    According to this link:
    The states that expressly encourage judges to allow jurors to question witnesses are Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Nevada and North Carolina. Out of these jurisdictions, Arizona, Florida, and Kentucky require that judges allow jurors to ask written questions. The respective highest state courts of Indiana and Kentucky have ruled jurors have a right to ask questions of witnesses.
    As you must have surmised, my disdain for the adversary system causes me to look with favor on such juror participation.

    Let's see: (none / 0) (#114)
    by leap on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 03:13:58 PM EST
    Eight states out of 50 seems not very common, might even be considered "rare."

    And considered how much judges and lawyers (none / 0) (#117)
    by Peter G on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 03:56:37 PM EST
    hate jurors' questioning of witnesses, I'll bet (but don't have the data) that even in those eight states the exercise of that right of jurors is not encouraged and as a result is pretty rare.

    Plus the judge has discretion to bar the question. (none / 0) (#128)
    by oculus on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 05:38:39 PM EST
    Speaking as a layman (none / 0) (#130)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 05:51:48 PM EST
    it seems like a bad idea.

    Let's split the difference there ... (none / 0) (#119)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 04:01:33 PM EST
    ... and call it "most certainly not the norm."



    We score (none / 0) (#135)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 07:23:50 PM EST
    "As of Sunday, 142,388 patients with the virus were hospitalized nationwide, surpassing the peak of 142,315 reported on Jan. 14 of last year."

    And it is (none / 0) (#136)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 07:28:17 PM EST
    not just hospitals. My husband's niece's workplace had to shut down for a week because too many of the staff were down with COVID and they did not have enough staff to open.

    Chief Justice Roberts (5.00 / 3) (#140)
    by KeysDan on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 08:40:10 PM EST
    posited in the OSHA mandatory vaccination case hearing that mandating vaccinations (for those with more than 100 employees or masking/testing) would cost the companies too much money.  Apparently, he never thought of the costs of not mandating, including sick days and closures.

    But, then, his was not the only inane question. For example. Thomas wanted to know if there were "other treatments" that could be used,. Kindly, no one pointed out that vaccination is not a treatment.  And, then there was Alito who pressed for the answer he was seeking that the Covid vaccine presents a risk and should not be mandated. Apparently he never heard of risk assessment---or the balance between benefits and side effects,  Maybe he thinks the risks of an American Airline flight from DC to Atlanta is the same as sky diving--after all both are flights.

    The big discussion was about Gorsuch's claim as recorded in the SC transcript, that 100,000 deaths per year from influenza,  And no mandates for it. Of course that was off.  Later,the Court claimed that the Court recorder made a mistake--he really said, so the story goes--hundred, thousand deaths

    Justice Sotomayor may have misspoken on statistics on children, but her point for mandates was clear.. In a way, Gorsuch was giving an argument for mandates.


    The audio of the argument (none / 0) (#152)
    by Peter G on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 10:27:30 AM EST
    bears out the claim that Gorsuch said "hundreds, thousands ...." Whatever we may think of his politics or his jurisprudence, I do not agree with the insinuation that the transcript was altered to protect him from criticism.

    But (none / 0) (#137)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 07:50:08 PM EST
    it's a milder hospitalization



    They say (none / 0) (#138)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 10, 2022 at 07:51:26 PM EST
    the hospitalizations are almost 100% unvaccinated

    Sad face


    Cheers (none / 0) (#146)
    by FlJoe on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 05:40:20 AM EST
    Anti-COVID-19 "Vaccine Police" leader Christopher Key has a new quarter-baked conspiracy theory for his anti-vax followers to use to cure themselves of COVID-19: Drink their own urine.

    Antivax Barbie (none / 0) (#147)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 07:48:16 AM EST
    Do you drink that with (none / 0) (#151)
    by Chuck0 on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 10:24:22 AM EST
    a bleach chaser?

    Pretty amazing (none / 0) (#148)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 07:58:08 AM EST
    Harrison is coming (none / 0) (#155)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 04:33:02 PM EST
    Don't Look up (none / 0) (#162)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 06:44:19 PM EST
    if you have not seen this on Netflix you really should

    It's actually hard to watch it is so dead on.  It's really the most terrifying movie you will see this year.  And the cast is unbelievable.

    The director is on Chris Hayes tonight.  It will be seen as an important movie.  A hundred years from now.  Assuming we survive.  Which the film does not.

    The reviews are not all good (none / 0) (#165)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 07:02:34 PM EST
    in fact they are mostly not.  And I don't even disagree but I still think it's worth seeing.   It's like a PSA made by Gilbert  Gottfried.  This is the last paragraph of the Times review

    Streep is a great deal of fun to watch when she's not unintentionally making you cringe, and Lawrence gives the movie a steady emotional pulse even at its most frantic. McKay's work with DiCaprio is particularly memorable, partly because Dr. Mindy's trajectory -- from honest, concerned scientist to glib, showboating celebrity -- strengthens the movie's heartbreaking, unspeakable truth: Human narcissism and all that it has wrought, including the destruction of nature, will finally be our downfall. In the end, McKay isn't doing much more in this movie than yelling at us, but then, we do deserve it.

    Fell asleep during it. (none / 0) (#167)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jan 11, 2022 at 10:47:40 PM EST
    Woke up to see Meryl ran around naked.



    So did I (none / 0) (#170)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jan 12, 2022 at 08:18:58 AM EST
    But it's good you woke up then.  That is her best scene.