home

Thursday Open Thread: Aspen Bound

I'm off to NORML's annual Aspen legal conference. My talk this year: "Getting High With Someone Who Dies: Defending Drug Users Charged With Complicity and Enhanced Penalties in Drug Overdose Cases." Here's the entire agenda, it's a privilege to be included with these impressive lawyers.

I'll be back Saturday night, after the annual Owl Farm picnic.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.(I'll put up new open threads if this one fills up.)

< Wednesday Open Thread | NYT Defense of Clinton Coverage: Drudge Loves It >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    I'll be feeling NORML (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Repack Rider on Thu May 28, 2015 at 09:04:07 PM EST
    ...in a few minutes.

    Clean up in Aisle 7... (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Anne on Thu May 28, 2015 at 10:21:18 PM EST


    That would be a sewage leak in aisle 7 (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by CoralGables on Thu May 28, 2015 at 10:25:33 PM EST
    Feels like (none / 0) (#63)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 12:09:56 PM EST
    I missed something.

    Parent
    Feels like ... (5.00 / 1) (#148)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat May 30, 2015 at 12:39:07 PM EST
    ... I'm glad that I missed something. ;-)

    Parent
    Dennis Hastert (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by KeysDan on Fri May 29, 2015 at 01:12:12 PM EST
    was the longest serving Republican Speaker of the House (1999 to 2007) serving during one of the most critical periods in recent American history--9/11/2001 and its aftermath including managing legislation on new limits to  civil liberties (Patriot Act), authorization to use military force (the Iraq war), and support for the occupation of Iraq.  Hastert during this turbulent period, was also second in line to the presidency.  As 9/11 happened, Cheney was in a White House bunker, possibly a target, and Bush was hop-skipping around the country in accord with attack plans of the 1950s.  

    Clearly, a very important official.  Yet, Hastert has been indicted on criminal charges involving "prior misconduct"--charges shrouded in mystery and stripped of details, at the request, in part, of the Hastert attorney.  The predictable speculation was apparently balanced by the merits of postponement.  

    But, the indictment's reference, to the exclusion of most other aspects of Hastert's extensive biography, of an Individual A, from the olden days when Hastert was a wrestling coach, and both were linked to the small town, Yorkville, Illinois,  does give even the  sinus-impacted blood hound a strong scent.

    And, the mystery is compounded by the fact that Hastert was indicted (Bank Secrecy Act 1970/Patriot Act provisions),  Usually, the person being shaken down is considered the victim, and the one doing the shaking down is the criminal.   And, all to amend for and conceal this $3.5 million  "prior misconduct"  (seemingly, a term apt to personal matters, not to a crime such as bribery, bank fraud, or embezzlement).

    The indictment of Hastert, for me, puts a lie to the argument that is made that high ranking officials cannot be held accountable for misdeeds even after leaving office.  It was said that Nixon, for example, could not be prosecuted after leaving office--it would destroy the country.  He needed to be pardoned--the national nightmare was over. Just wake up, now.

     We would be like a banana republic, it has been said, cannot do it.  Let them go.  And, of course, not only was impeachment off the table for Bush and Cheney, in which the penalty would be for them to lose a nice job, but, also, no indictments could ever be entertained.

     We need closure, except we continue to discuss their deeds to this day. So much for closure. Bur, Bush and Cheney had better not have any "prior misconduct" going on, or they may be in big trouble.

    I guess what I mean is (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 01:35:13 PM EST
    to bad those other guys didn't have some sexual picadillo since war crimes don't tend to hold the publics attention.

    Not saying Hastert had one.   I'm just sayin.

    Parent

    Hastert's (none / 0) (#84)
    by jbindc on Fri May 29, 2015 at 02:22:27 PM EST
    Weird call on C-SPAN


    There was an odd exchange between former House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and an unidentified C-SPAN caller from his hometown in light of Thursday's surprise indictment that he illegally transferred $3.5 million to a Yorkville resident to "conceal prior misconduct."
    The call came in while Hastert appeared on CSPAN's "Washington Journal" on Nov. 13, a week after last year's midterm elections. The caller identified himself only as "Bruce" from Illinois.

    "Hello, Denny," the caller said.

    "Do you remember me from Yorkville?" he added, before laughing and hanging up.

    CSPAN's host Pedro Echevarria immediately moved onto the next caller and Hastert had no significant reaction to the call than other than indicating he knew "Bruce."

    There's no evidence linking the caller to Hastert's alleged illegal activity, but the strange clip was posted onto the "My-CSPAN" video library by a C-SPAN viewer the day that the indictment was announced.



    Parent
    Sad (none / 0) (#85)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 02:28:02 PM EST
    and honestly, if there's one.......

    Parent
    Yup. (none / 0) (#90)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri May 29, 2015 at 02:57:05 PM EST
    Yep (none / 0) (#128)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 08:11:07 PM EST
    An anonymous source familiar with the case of former House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) said federal prosecutors knew of "prior misdeeds" Hastert committed against potentially several alleged victims that were not included in Thursday's indictment, BuzzFeed News reported Friday.



    Parent
    Don't disagree with a single word of that (none / 0) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 01:17:52 PM EST
    but part of me is a little sad if it turns out he has been paying hush money because of some latent unfulfilled need.  If you know what I mean.
    Sad it would be for that.  

    Old fashioned stealing from the poor would be much less complicated.

    Parent

    Yes, if there is any sad (none / 0) (#73)
    by KeysDan on Fri May 29, 2015 at 01:36:11 PM EST
    part of me, it would be the torment that Hastert must have been reeling in since his meeting with Individual A in 2010.  Agreeing to pay off to the tune of, ultimately, $3.5 million is a lot of concealment money.  I will await more information (hopefully, a plea will not be made with a seal, although I do not think this can happen), to determine if I will add to or subtract from, my present modicum of sadness.

    Parent
    Longer than that I'm thinkin (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 01:42:03 PM EST
    if what we are tap dacing around happened it was when he was a coach probably many years ago.  
    Probably an actual tormented man.

    Not defending anything.  It would just be sad.

    Parent

    Meanwhile, the Press, (none / 0) (#137)
    by Mr Natural on Sat May 30, 2015 at 08:40:26 AM EST
    which did virtually nothing to expose idiotic and misguided Hastert/Bush era policies, at least back when it actually would have mattered, will be all over this story.

    They'll morph from napping newshounds to yapping, overnight.

    Parent

    Everyone is dancing around the subject. (none / 0) (#113)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri May 29, 2015 at 06:14:50 PM EST
    So, I'll come right out and say it: Yes, Dennis Hastert is very likely a deeply closeted gay man, and the hush money was to maintain the ruse that he was a straight, happily married man. No small wonder why he insisted upon keeping up the façade, given the circles in which he travels and the company he keeps, not to mention his horrible record on LGBT civil rights.

    During the Mark Foley scandal and its exposure of a rather prominent gay group within the GOP House leadership staff, there was brief mention in the media about then-Speaker Hastert living with his chief of staff (who is gay), even though he was a married man. But for some reason, the media decided to ignore it and focus almost exclusively on Foley, whose own public record on LGBT rights was equally bad. So, I think I'm going to rather perversely enjoy watching this unfold. He deserves the attention.

    Let the Schadenfreude begin.

    Parent

    We were dancing around it (none / 0) (#120)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 07:03:46 PM EST
    ecause it hadn't been reported yet and J doesn't like stories sourced by the kind of thing I was reading earlier today.
    But they made it pretty clear.  

    Parent
    Should say (none / 0) (#124)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 07:18:58 PM EST
    not that I had seen.

    The LATimes link posted here was the first mainstream press I had seen about it.  But earlier the fringe was buzzing.

    Parent

    Well, that's our L.A. Times! (none / 0) (#149)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat May 30, 2015 at 12:48:09 PM EST
    The venerable paper is a longtime institutional veteran at covering sex scandals, being just down the I-5 and US-191 from Hollywood studios. At such moments, its reporters and editors know almost instinctively when there are bodies probably buried nearby, and they aren't afraid to say so.

    Parent
    "misconduct" is a broad enough term (none / 0) (#98)
    by Reconstructionist on Fri May 29, 2015 at 04:57:40 PM EST
     to encompass things ranging from serious criminal conduct to conduct civilly but not criminally actionable to merely morally wrong or "inappropriate."

      EDIT: it's now being reported sexual abuse of a student was the conduct.

      Perhaps, the thin silver lining for Hastert is that if his misconduct toward Individual A was in fact criminal, A's resort to blackmail would so taint his credibility as a witness Hastert might not have to worry about being prosecuted for THAT.

      Beyond the sensational aspect is how wonderful it is  that a former congressman (not the most lucrative job in the world) can in a few short years amass enough money as an influence peddler, or lobbyist, if you prefer, to agree to pay 3.5 mill in hush money.

    Parent

    Yes, "misconduct" (none / 0) (#105)
    by KeysDan on Fri May 29, 2015 at 05:43:00 PM EST
    is a broad term.  But, its use is not customarily deployed, in a criminal indictment,to describe charges such as bank or wire fraud or other white collar crimes, not to mention, violent felonies.   Or, is it in common parlance such as Bonnie and Clyde were charged with misconduct involving Oklahoma banks.  My take was that it involved something personal--Brokeback coaching, for example.

    The matter of Individual A is puzzling at this point, and with this amount of information.  Blackmail victims and perps prosecution is tricky.  And, it may be that no blackmail or extortion is involved: Hastert may have bribed Individual A so as not to file a lawsuit or otherwise, in some manner,  bring their past to the forefront.

    Parent

    Even if true (none / 0) (#107)
    by jbindc on Fri May 29, 2015 at 05:54:39 PM EST
    EDIT: it's now being reported sexual abuse of a student was the conduct.

    Pretty much seems the statute of limitations would prevent any charges being filed. Hastert stopped being a coach at the high school in 1981.

    Parent

    Probably (none / 0) (#116)
    by Reconstructionist on Fri May 29, 2015 at 06:35:29 PM EST
      but not certainly,  

    Illinois now  has a very convoluted SOL structure but,  even if the current law was applicable it would clearly bar prosecution in illinois. The pre-1984 Illinois law (which would still apply to conduct that occurred before 7/1/84)  was even more restrictive (i.e more defendant friendly, 3 yrs.).

      That though assumes the conduct took place only in Illinois and not a state with a much longer or no SOL for  child sex crimes. That may well be the case but there are states where prosecution would be a legal possibility. Who knows, maybe the wrestling team went to a tourney in SC which has no SOL for any criminal prosecution.

       I should have mentioned the reason one has to wonder about this  is if all Indiv. A has is his own uncorroborated  accusation of long past unprosecutable conduct why was Hastert so deeply worried about him making a public accusation? I suspect most people would view an unsupported accusation of  30+ year old acts with considerable skepticism.
     

    Parent

    The S/L may not be the issue here (none / 0) (#118)
    by christinep on Fri May 29, 2015 at 06:51:06 PM EST
    Right now, I think, the legal aspect has to do with banking regs passed in relation to the Patriot Act.

    What the piercing matter is:  Yet, another modern day version of The Scarlet Letter writ clear.  (Or, perhaps, becoming clear.) The hypocrisy factor ... reportedly involving a male student (a minor?) in a high school where/when Hastert was the wrestling coach a number of years ago.  The hypocrisy of one at the center of the sanctimony during the Clinton impeachment.

     So ... no, the sexual aspects of any S/L may not really matter ... as the issue and lesson likely will be much broader.  As I said elsewhere, the harm & hurt that appears to have led to what looks like hush money amount to what is the real definition of Scandal.

    Parent

    The banking limitations (none / 0) (#99)
    by christinep on Fri May 29, 2015 at 05:11:36 PM EST
    As I understand it, the over-10K trigger regarding reporting is fairly direct & fairly automatic ... in the case of Hastert and the patterned withdrawals of much larger sums over a period of time is not a difficult, involved, complicated matter to understand (nor is the direct lie about it to the feds.)

    While I understand the point that you may be trying to make that the Hastert indictment would suggest that pursuing a President (& company)for a false entry into a catastrophe of a war in terms of human and other tolls ... I would only offer that the political intricacies inherent in pursuing former Presidents for political corruption, political lying, dishonest policies--while appealing--have much more national energy-depleting, time-consuming, emotional "nuances" (that even W could grasp), unpredictable turns, unintended consequences than the fairly straightforward bank-reporting matter apparently at center of the Hastert indictment.  Even with the convolutions of potential sexual abuse (a minor?) that are suggested in the emerging reports today ....

    Parent

    Wasn't the Patriot Act Passed Under Hastert? (none / 0) (#127)
    by RickyJim on Fri May 29, 2015 at 07:37:45 PM EST
    Was he "hoist by his own petard"?

    Parent
    Yes. (none / 0) (#132)
    by Mr Natural on Fri May 29, 2015 at 09:14:45 PM EST
    Illinois is reeling from (none / 0) (#208)
    by caseyOR on Sun May 31, 2015 at 05:18:26 PM EST
    yet another Illinois politician facing indictment. We are only five months into the year and already two politicians from the Land of Lincoln find themselves hip deep in scandal.

    The feds and their grand jury are still investigating former congressman Aaron Schock, of "Downton Abbey" office decor fame, for financial improprieties. And now Denny Hastert.

    The Illinois legislature was just about to vote on funding a statue of Hastert, who once served in the IL legislature.It passed out of committee, and was headed to the floor of the House when Denny called House Speaker Mike Madigan and asked him to nix the vote and the statue. Denny's reason was that the state's deficit was huge (it is) and the money could be better spent elsewhere (it can),

    Still, one cannot help but wonder if this investigation might have been the real reason Hastert asked Madigan to call off the vote.

    Parent

    In recent years, Illinois (none / 0) (#209)
    by christinep on Sun May 31, 2015 at 06:38:41 PM EST
    seems to be giving Louisiana and maybe New Jersey a run for a dubious distinction in pairing prison terms and officials.  

    And, curious me, I wonder if all the latest Hastert info & resultant indictment reflect tips/info from old Illinois politico-connected types as well as the diligence of the banks together with the FBI.  In matters politick, there usually is someone who has a useful long memory....

    Parent

    "Manhattanhenge" to occur tonight (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by Anne on Fri May 29, 2015 at 01:35:14 PM EST
    Manhattanhenge, the moment when the setting sun aligns precisely with the street grid in Manhattan, can be seen this weekend.

    Half the sun will align with the grid on Friday at 8:12 p.m., and the full-sun Manhattanhenge will happen the same time on Saturday, according to the Hayden Planetarium.

    On a clear day, the typical resulting effect of Manhattanhenge is a "radiant glow of light" across the skyscrapers and buildings, "simultaneously illuminating both the north and south sides of every cross street of the borough's grid," according to Hayden Planetarium.

    Link

    And linked in that same article was this interesting headline:

    9 Brains Found Next to Train Tracks in NY

    Nine brains were found along a street in a northern New York village, but authorities say there's nothing to fear.

    The brains are believed to have been part of a collection for educational or research purposes. No criminal activity is suspected. Residents discovered the brains on a street near railroad tracks in Governeur and notified police Wednesday.

    My favorite part of the article?  This:

    Mishaps with preserved brains are not uncommon.

    I mean, who knew?


    I've never even heard of (none / 0) (#80)
    by sj on Fri May 29, 2015 at 02:07:31 PM EST
    Manhattanhenge. Would love to see it sometime.

    Parent
    Have seen it a couple of times. (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by vml68 on Fri May 29, 2015 at 07:25:28 PM EST
    Very cool and depending on the angle blinding!

    Parent
    John Wick (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 01:55:29 PM EST

    Heard good things so I paid 1.99 on PPV for this.
    So worth it.  It's very good.  I'm not a big Keanu fan.
    Tough for dog lovers.  But the dog is righteously avenged.

    LINK

    Ps (none / 0) (#77)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 02:00:52 PM EST
    the primary antagonist is Reek from GoTs

    Parent
    We enjoyed it too (none / 0) (#147)
    by Militarytracy on Sat May 30, 2015 at 11:12:58 AM EST
    turned into a revenge porn weekend (none / 0) (#162)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat May 30, 2015 at 04:00:18 PM EST
    Honestly (5.00 / 2) (#163)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat May 30, 2015 at 04:16:53 PM EST
    i didn't watch it so much as it was on.    The dogs left the room.

    Parent
    Just getting in the mood for (none / 0) (#168)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat May 30, 2015 at 07:58:00 PM EST
    Outlander

    Parent
    Quite a buzz (5.00 / 2) (#185)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun May 31, 2015 at 12:52:55 AM EST
    MTV

    Of course, no one wanted to see Jamie violated and humiliated by Jack Randall. But given that this was such a defining moment in Diana Gabaldon's books -- a moment that stayed with Jamie and was frequently brought up for years afterwards -- most fans probably figured that the rape would stay. And since it did, I'm glad that the scenes were as vomit-inducing and literally hard to watch as they were. Because that's how much rape really f-king sucks, and in real life you don't get to turn the camera away when it's happening... or during its aftermath.

    I concur.

    Parent

    Howdy, that was a tough part to read (5.00 / 2) (#190)
    by fishcamp on Sun May 31, 2015 at 07:57:21 AM EST
    in the book too, but it only happens that one time in all seven books.  Unfortunately Jack Randall shows up in most of the other books doing dastardly deeds.  His ultimate demise is medieval in method.  Don't give up on it.  You can learn some Gaelic too.

    Parent
    Did you see Hozier's video to (5.00 / 1) (#192)
    by Militarytracy on Sun May 31, 2015 at 08:16:24 AM EST
    Take Me To the Church?  Filmed specifically to address the gay hate in Ireland.

    Parent
    I skimmed an article on the GOT torture rape (none / 0) (#191)
    by Militarytracy on Sun May 31, 2015 at 07:59:43 AM EST
    Too, some viewers saying they are leaving.  Why?  I'm glad people have a difficult time stomaching it, but it isn't as if young women all over the world aren't enduring such things.  More isolated occurances in this country, but the U.S. has its Boltons.

    Parent
    Holy hell (none / 0) (#172)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat May 30, 2015 at 08:18:54 PM EST
    Outlander is pushing the envelope.  

    So disturbing.  

    Parent

    HA! (none / 0) (#181)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat May 30, 2015 at 10:11:04 PM EST
    PreviouslyTV


    Highland Flung
    Want to know the exact moment Matt Debenham decided to toss Outlander out of his life? Read on!

    Matt Debenham
    May 30th, 2015  

    It was intense.  But I will be there next week.   I would venture to say it's a side of rape American TV viewers are not accustomed to.

    Parent

    Perhaps " denial"? (none / 0) (#189)
    by Militarytracy on Sun May 31, 2015 at 07:50:42 AM EST
    That sort of torture rape thing happens, we don't like to talk about it much.  Culturally taboo, and we certainly don't talk about the trauma a man must heal from.  We like to pretend that branch of rape never happens unless men are in prison.  And those guys, we don't care what happens to them, they deserved it.  Outlander is asking us to reconsider our cultural stance on prison rape?

    Parent
    The part that surprised me (none / 0) (#196)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun May 31, 2015 at 10:05:57 AM EST
    is that they went "there".
    If you saw it you know what I mean.  But it's the same thing men often have to deal with in prison rape situations.  

    I won't spoil it for those you have not seen it but it's the part that gets them in the aftermath.  Not even so much that it happened but ........

    Parent

    Which (5.00 / 1) (#197)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun May 31, 2015 at 10:24:24 AM EST
    btw

    Turns out to be the part that bunched the most panties.  
    PreviouslyTV

    And then there's another flashback where we learn Jamie LEARNED TO ENJOY HIS RAPE via some Stockholm Syndrome storytelling bullsh!t. That's right, Outlander and Starz: the big thing missing in this rape storyline was making it play like erotica!

    Could you possibly miss the point more completely.  That bit was absolutely key to understanding his torment after.  KEY.
    I like that site.  It often makes me laugh but some of the writers are just idiots.  I've hated the way this series has been covered and they were equally clueless about others, like American Horror Story.  You would think they would make a effort to assign particular show to people who get the point. What, do the freakin draw straws?
    This story line was amazing and ground breaking.  Maybe they could give this writer Dancing With The Stars or something he would be more comfortable with.

    Parent

    Most molestation victims have (none / 0) (#201)
    by Militarytracy on Sun May 31, 2015 at 01:09:33 PM EST
    To deal with a form of it also.  If they ever admit it, then crazy people try to claim the act was consensual.

    Parent
    It was remade? Uggh. (none / 0) (#169)
    by Mr Natural on Sat May 30, 2015 at 08:12:00 PM EST
    The original sucked to such a degree that Siskel or Ebert, I forget which, used it as an example of how completely a film could not deserve the right to exist, or something to that effect.  

    (Post google part of the post)  
    Ebert's review of the original.  

    A vile bag of garbage named "I Spit on Your Grave" is playing in Chicago theaters this week. It is a movie so sick, reprehensible and contemptible that I can hardly believe it's playing in respectable theaters, such as Plitt's United Artists. But it is. Attending it was one of the most depressing experiences of, my life.

    Ebert's review of the remake.

    This despicable remake of the despicable 1978 film "I Spit on Your Grave" adds yet another offense: a phony moral equivalency.
     [I'm stopping the quote here, because it is an ugly description of an ugly premise.}

    Roger Ebert saved me a lot of time.

    Parent

    Meh (none / 0) (#170)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat May 30, 2015 at 08:14:23 PM EST
    the 78 film was bad.  The remake was at least well made.  

    Parent
    Honestly (none / 0) (#175)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat May 30, 2015 at 08:26:27 PM EST
    no harder to watch than the episode of Outlander I'm watching right now.

    It will probably win awards for it.

    Parent

    Yeah, but you were in the business. (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by Mr Natural on Sat May 30, 2015 at 09:14:28 PM EST
    You can check out the effects.  

    I don't have any room to talk.  I've watched a bunch of really bad films.  Heck, I love bad film.  How many Jess Franco plots can fit on the head of a pin?  All of them put together.  And still I watch, occasionally.  Anybody else remember the dif between monkey style and drunken style kung fu?  I do, and there was only one way to learn it.  Hong Kong cinema.

    Parent

    Judith Miller AutoBio: 400 pages of dogs - (5.00 / 6) (#146)
    by Mr Natural on Sat May 30, 2015 at 10:42:02 AM EST
    - eating 400 pages of homework

    by Matt Tiabi, Rolling Stone

    I'd say this will be a no-holds-barred review, but I promised myself I wouldn't compare this book to Mein Kampf for at least 500 words. So it's not completely without restrictions.

    Most of The Story is a tale of dog after scheming dog eating Miller's homework. Sometimes it's editor Roger Cohen undermining her, or columnist Maureen Dowd side-eying her (at the direction of the paper, she implies), or Post media critic Howard Kurtz defaming her based (she thinks) on Gellman's intel, or unknown colleagues within the Times viciously leaking her infamous email about Ahmad Chalabi being the source of most of the Times scoops, etc., etc.

    It isn't until May or June of 2003 - chapter 17, in The Story time - that Miller begins wondering if CIA analysts, who had "severely underestimated" Saddam's weapons cache before the first Gulf War, had maybe "grossly exaggerated" them this time. (This rhetorical technique - always reminding us that some prior act of hyper-vigilance would have been justified, before conceding to some later instance of over-credulity - is used throughout the book.)



    Ms. Miller cut a sad and pathetic figure ... (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat May 30, 2015 at 12:55:25 PM EST
    ... of herself while appearing on "The Daily Show" to plug her book, and John Stewart didn't hesitate to say so. While she may be a gifted writer and wordsmith, she's a truly lousy journalist.

    Parent
    Dante's Circle of Hell (5.00 / 1) (#193)
    by MKS on Sun May 31, 2015 at 08:48:49 AM EST
    surely has a place for her....

    Instead of being a journalist, she became Dick Cheney's propagandist....

    Parent

    Agreed. However, (none / 0) (#202)
    by KeysDan on Sun May 31, 2015 at 01:50:24 PM EST
    she should have a partner in that circle, and, as of yet, she has not.   Most of those Iraq war articles carried the byline of Judith Miller and Michael Gordon.   Gordon is still reporting for the NYT.

    Parent
    Beau Biden, son of Joe Biden, has died. (5.00 / 1) (#176)
    by caseyOR on Sat May 30, 2015 at 08:50:38 PM EST
    The cause of death was brain cancer.

    Incredibly sad for the family (5.00 / 1) (#180)
    by christinep on Sat May 30, 2015 at 09:45:40 PM EST
    After seeing your brief note here, casey, I found the newest reports, looked at the pictures of Beau Biden & his father,Vice President Joe Biden, as they stood arm-in-arm so similar in appearance apart from the years.  The father and son had a tenderness together that shone through the pictures.

    Godspeed to Beau; and, may God's blessing be upon his family.

    Parent

    How very sad (4.50 / 2) (#178)
    by MO Blue on Sat May 30, 2015 at 09:14:31 PM EST
    My condolences to his family. It is so very hard for a parent to have one of their children die before they do.

    Parent
    Oh Jeez... (none / 0) (#179)
    by desertswine on Sat May 30, 2015 at 09:36:18 PM EST
    He was only 46.

    Parent
    He and his family will be in my thoughts and prayers these next few days.

    Parent
    Dowd's latest (5.00 / 1) (#210)
    by lentinel on Sun May 31, 2015 at 08:58:55 PM EST
    column in the NYTimes, "Hooray for Hillarywood", seems to me to be completely unhinged.

    I mean, really incoherent.

    The only point that seems cogent to me is the one she makes about Obama - that the movie didn't live up to the trailer.

    !Of course, she neglects to mention her own descent into glassy-eyedness with respect to "the one"...)

    Her contempt for Clinton seems pathological.
    There is plenty to dislike - but for me, those things are issue-oriented. Dowd just seems nuts -- as if the mere mention of Hillary sets off an explosion of babble.

    Just my impression, but I think MoDo has lost her marbles.

    In honor of the NORML conference (2.00 / 1) (#100)
    by jbindc on Fri May 29, 2015 at 05:19:52 PM EST
    What are we smoking?

    Should you be allowed to drive after a hit of pot? Or three? Is a hit the equivalent of a glass of wine or half a bottle of vodka? What about when a bit of pot is combined with a beer or two? How does a police officer judge the sobriety of a person who is high? Right now, people mostly just guess.

    That's wildly irresponsible. According to a recent study by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, people are now more likely to encounter drugged drivers on the highway than drunk drivers. Hawaii, New Jersey, and Arizona, among other states, have seen increased visits to hospital emergency rooms since approving the use of medical marijuana. Between 2007 and 2012, such visits grew by fifty per cent in Colorado, for example, and that was before the drug was fully legal. Since then, the increase has accelerated.

    Interestingly, it is not that people are smoking more, or even that more people are getting high, but that the potency has increased immensely.

    SNIP

    The joints I rolled as a teen-ager contained about one per cent THC by weight. By the early nineteen-eighties, that figure was four per cent. It's now likely to be closer to twenty per cent. More than that, while occasional smoking seems relatively benign for most adults, there is clear evidence that exposure during adolescence can cause long-term changes in the brain.

    SNIP

    It is a strange country that is filled with people who object to life-saving vaccines, insist on labelling G.M.O.s, protest the use of pesticides that, when used correctly, have not been shown to cause harm, and yet seem ready to smoke whatever a dealer hands them to put in their pipes.


    Our internal dichotomies and (none / 0) (#103)
    by christinep on Fri May 29, 2015 at 05:33:53 PM EST
    inconsistencies are, indeed, interesting.  You raise a challenging point, jbindc.

    Parent
    I was a rock band roadie (none / 0) (#108)
    by Repack Rider on Fri May 29, 2015 at 06:00:27 PM EST
    The odometer on one of the trucks I drove quit at 300,000 miles and I drove it another fifteen years without ever hitting anything, or picking up a moving violation.  We could average 50 mph day and night to any point in the continental US.  Drove coast to coast in 63 hours.

    Rolling a fattie when we pulled out onto the slab was a ritual.  YMMV

    Parent

    And what year was that? (none / 0) (#109)
    by jbindc on Fri May 29, 2015 at 06:03:32 PM EST
    And mine are not long ago at all (none / 0) (#122)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 07:07:02 PM EST
    Always loved road trips (none / 0) (#121)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 07:06:24 PM EST
    many thousands of miles.   Back and forth between LA and AR many many times.   You don't do it without pot.

    Parent
    Right now... (none / 0) (#115)
    by kdog on Fri May 29, 2015 at 06:25:34 PM EST
    a strain called Cherry Pie. Indica. Two thumbs up!

    Your revolution is over Lebowski! The prohibitionists lost! I suggest you do what your great great grandparents did, use it to treat many ailments (if not for fun;)

    Parent

    I would put all the money I have (none / 0) (#117)
    by jbindc on Fri May 29, 2015 at 06:39:48 PM EST
    That my great great grandparents did not smoke weed.  :)

    Parent
    I know... (5.00 / 1) (#119)
    by kdog on Fri May 29, 2015 at 06:53:34 PM EST
    My Lebanese ancestors did, hashish to be exact...the Irish ones were probably too drunk to know any better;)

    If they bought any tinctures at the ol' pharmacy I bet they drank some weed! Maybe some coke.

    Parent

    Hand over your cash, jb (5.00 / 2) (#143)
    by Mr Natural on Sat May 30, 2015 at 09:10:24 AM EST
    Check out some old herbals.  Queen Victoria smoked it for menstrual cramps.  Cannabis was a common ingredient in patent medicines.  Your great, great grandparents were still using herbals because modern medicine didn't exist.  Maybe they didn't smoke it, but they had it.

    Parent
    Not to mention, although they weren't herbals, (5.00 / 1) (#160)
    by Zorba on Sat May 30, 2015 at 03:45:51 PM EST
    Cocaine and opium, which were legal, and common in patent medicines.  Cocaine was also present in the original Coca Cola formulation.

    Parent
    My grandfather (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat May 30, 2015 at 03:54:58 PM EST
    used pot for "asthma".   I found this out one day when I was about 13-14 when I was at their house with a pal who had moved there from California.  We came through the house and he was "smoking" - which he did in a strange way of making a little pile on a metal tray and burning it like incense while cupping his hands over the smoke and breathing it.
    My friend recognized the smell and freaked.   I learned later he grew it.

    He was the absolutely typical stoner.  Always sitting there smiling like the cat who ate the canary.  Never saw him upset.  Never heard him raise his voice.  He was a very happy and zen guy.

    Parent

    I must be getting old (none / 0) (#1)
    by CoralGables on Thu May 28, 2015 at 04:48:33 PM EST
    because it's beginning to feel like the annual Owl Farm picnic comes up about four times a year.


    Jeralyn loves to visit Aspen CG, (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by fishcamp on Fri May 29, 2015 at 08:34:25 AM EST
    and she usually stays out at Owl Farm when she's in town.  Looks like some great lawyers will be speaking at the MORML convention.  I used to need several lawyers back in the day.  Now it's several doctors.  Jeralyn chooses very difficult topics and totally stuns other lawyers with her presentations.  She's a superstar lawyer.

    Parent
    I am watching (none / 0) (#2)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 28, 2015 at 06:11:28 PM EST
    Bloodline right now on Netflix. I watched Frankie and Hope and does anybody have any suggestions about other Netflix original series?

    The Unbreakable Kimmie Schmidt (5.00 / 1) (#207)
    by ruffian on Sun May 31, 2015 at 04:40:01 PM EST
    is really funny, if you like the Tina Fey '30 Rock' style of humor, where there are 50 jokes a minute and you grab what you can. I really liked it. At least watch the opening title sequence. Cracks me up just thinking about it.

    Parent
    Hear good things (none / 0) (#3)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 28, 2015 at 06:59:31 PM EST
    about Marco Polo

    Parent
    okay. (none / 0) (#4)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 28, 2015 at 07:06:34 PM EST
    Thanks. I was also thinking about watching Narco I think it's called.


    Parent
    Orange/black starts again soon (none / 0) (#29)
    by nycstray on Thu May 28, 2015 at 10:15:25 PM EST
    Bloodline is a very dopey story (none / 0) (#47)
    by fishcamp on Fri May 29, 2015 at 08:38:15 AM EST
    Ga, but it was shot here in Islamorada.  All the outdoor beach and dock scenes are places we go frequently, which makes it kind of fun to watch.

    Parent
    The Dennis Hastert thing (none / 0) (#5)
    by christinep on Thu May 28, 2015 at 07:49:59 PM EST
    Other than having the day's big laugh, I was also offended ... remembering Hastert and all the other sanctimonious Repubs who voted to impeach President Clinton in 1997.  The offense heightened as I remembered the Congressman from Florida (Foley?) who, hypocritically, sought male pages for whatever almost routinely; the wide-stance Senator from Repub Idaho (Craig?) and his soliciting situation; and the Repub mayor of Spokane who trolled for boys on the Internet after taking a public posture against gays.

    Since Hastert has long put himself in the public sphere, I have little concern here with lambasting him on a number of levels.  Am I missing something?  Ah yes, I missed the latest iteration that appears to involve the Duggars and their self-righteous Repub supporter, Huckabee.  What is wrong with these people?  It really is more than "the lady doeth protest too much."  Foremost in my mind is the lessor of Hawthorne's "The Scarlet Letter" and the much later "father of political science" Harold Laswell with his observations about sex and the allure of political power.  The only real question I have about these examples at this point: Do these people really believe what they say when they preach about the evils of everyone else OR are they so far gone that they are oblivious to their far worse practices?

    As for Hastert:  Yes, I am making an assumption about the latest allegations in the indictment ... but, what is worth his 1.5M payments over years if it weren't blackmail & if it weren't at a level <in the reported high-school environment> that would be so scandalous as to comply with extortion or other demands over a period of years?  (BTW: Compared to the latest phony scandals re the Clintons pushed by the Repubs and their buddies in some press, these allegations--if anywhere near true--are what would really constitute a "scandal.")

    Last I checked, blackmail/extortion (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by Anne on Fri May 29, 2015 at 02:58:32 PM EST
    wasn't legal, so I am hard-pressed to understand why the individual who was extorting money from Hastert isn't under indictment.

    Unless...this is one of those things that started as an investigation into financial transactions, and in the process, other crimes were discovered.  And that possibly the person blackmailing Hastert may have made some kind of deal in order for the FBI to resolve these other crimes.

    I would have no interest if Hastert was being blackmailed for engaging in something with another adult that he didn't want revealed; if there were underage individuals involved, then I think that's a whole other can of worms.

    I don't know why, because we really don't know enough for me to feel this way, but I'm starting to get that same ooky feeling I had when we learned about pedophile priests.  I hope, more for the sake of there not being child-victims, that this is not the case.

    I'm also starting to get the feeling that Hastert may decide to shuffle off this mortal coil ahead of schedule.

    This just doesn't seem to be going anywhere good.

    Parent

    The reports from several sources (none / 0) (#101)
    by christinep on Fri May 29, 2015 at 05:24:07 PM EST
    Including the Chicago Tribune and LA Times would affirm your suspicion about the involvement of a youth ... in this case, allegedly, a male student at the high school in which Hastert taught & served as wrestling coach before he became a Congressman.  If a high school student, that would involve a minor allegedly abused.  

    If the building reports are accurate, your feeling that more negative is to come could be accurate as well.

    One thing is very clear:  This is what a real, genuine "scandal" would look like ... a lot different in hurt, harm, & consequence than the manufactured time-fluff that has been taking up space in the beltway lately.

    Parent

    I'm guessing (none / 0) (#33)
    by Repack Rider on Thu May 28, 2015 at 10:51:49 PM EST
    ...there is an adult offspring who shares DNA with Mr. Hastert and a former HS senior.

    If I had to guess.  

    It has to be pretty freaking juicy to take down a guy who isn't even in the public eye any more.  We'll know soon enough.  You can't dangle this much bait without someone doing the math and blowing the whistle, if you know what I mean and I think you do.  

    Parent

    I'm guessing that former (and convicted) (none / 0) (#38)
    by Mr Natural on Fri May 29, 2015 at 05:32:08 AM EST
    Louisiana Governor Edwin Edwards is in the ballpark with a joke he made during his 1983 campaign, "The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy."

    Parent
    It was not a dead girl... (none / 0) (#81)
    by leap on Fri May 29, 2015 at 02:10:28 PM EST
    It was a live boy.

    Parent
    That (none / 0) (#82)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 02:12:04 PM EST
    didnt take long

    Parent
    Funny (none / 0) (#43)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 08:09:20 AM EST
    I suspected improper conduct with one of the wrestling team.


    Parent
    If you google (none / 0) (#48)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 08:41:14 AM EST
    as I just did you will find lots about things supposedly known to certain segments of the DC community.

    Not surprising.   Won't link or quote because they are just rumors.  

    Parent

    that would be my guess, too (none / 0) (#75)
    by ding7777 on Fri May 29, 2015 at 01:50:06 PM EST
    but $3.5 million still sounds excessive for
     
    ...there is an adult offspring who shares DNA with Mr. Hastert and a former HS senior

     

    Parent
    I guess (none / 0) (#40)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri May 29, 2015 at 06:02:18 AM EST
    we'll find out more sooner or later but I remember all the sanctimonious lectures from the GOP about how "holy" Hassert was back in the 1990's. How he was a member of this religious organization or that one and what a moral and upstanding person he was. You would think the GOP would have learned to quit their sanctimonious moralizing by now but no. No one ever accused conservatives of being smart though.

    Parent
    Yes - if revenge is a dish best served cold (none / 0) (#61)
    by ruffian on Fri May 29, 2015 at 11:38:16 AM EST
    this one is mighty tasty.

    Parent
    Prosecutors want more restrictions on Apperson (none / 0) (#6)
    by McBain on Thu May 28, 2015 at 07:55:50 PM EST
    http://tinyurl.com/pz24nk2

    They want Apperson to wear a GPS monitor.  They claim he was released from a mental hospital 3 weeks before he tried to shoot George Zimmerman.  They say GZ had his tinted window rolled up at the time of the shooting.  

    It will be interesting to see what Judge Nelson does.

    "Interesting"? That's it? (5.00 / 3) (#54)
    by Yman on Fri May 29, 2015 at 09:44:39 AM EST
    I was expecting a flood of pro-defense posts premises on your professed "pro-defense bias".

    Huh.

    Parent

    Hastert ! (none / 0) (#7)
    by FlJoe on Thu May 28, 2015 at 08:04:00 PM EST
    another rascally Republican.
    Individual A and defendant discussed past misconduct by defendant against Individual A that had occurred years earlier" and Hastert agreed to pay Individual A $3.5 million "in order to compensate for and conceal his prior misconduct against Individual A," the indictment says.
    Let the speculation begin!

    In the words of the great Republican word-smith, (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by leap on Thu May 28, 2015 at 08:28:13 PM EST
    "Great Republican" (none / 0) (#14)
    by CoralGables on Thu May 28, 2015 at 09:37:06 PM EST
    isn't that phrase obsolete now?

    Parent
    not if one is being (none / 0) (#15)
    by leap on Thu May 28, 2015 at 09:39:08 PM EST
    sarcastic. Shoulda put that in scare quotes, I guess.

    Parent
    How about we don't speculate (none / 0) (#8)
    by CoralGables on Thu May 28, 2015 at 08:23:55 PM EST
    and instead wait for the facts.

    Parent
    You mean not act like (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by nycstray on Thu May 28, 2015 at 10:13:33 PM EST
    Republicans and their bullhorn media? What fun is that?! 😋

    Parent
    The (none / 0) (#10)
    by FlJoe on Thu May 28, 2015 at 08:48:22 PM EST
    talking heads already are, Anderson Cooper came right out and suggested illicit sex, but you are correct it would be irresponsible of us to speculate. Almost impossible not to though, human nature and all.

    Parent
    You are correct, of course, CG (none / 0) (#11)
    by christinep on Thu May 28, 2015 at 08:56:02 PM EST
    But, darn it, the irony and the "wouldn't you know" and all is surprising even in this day of non-surprises.  Before I sit back correctly and await the facts, all I can see in my nasty-minds-eye is what kind of issue of the categorical "moral turpitude" would cause one to pay that amount of $$$$ for that long.  Forgive me for leaping so soon....

    Parent
    The bigger crime (none / 0) (#13)
    by CoralGables on Thu May 28, 2015 at 09:33:36 PM EST
    would have been committed by the person getting paid. Technically, if what people here speculate is true, Hastert is the victim.

    Parent
    Or both are perpetrators (none / 0) (#26)
    by christinep on Thu May 28, 2015 at 10:03:36 PM EST
    Victim? (none / 0) (#37)
    by Repack Rider on Thu May 28, 2015 at 11:17:04 PM EST
    Technically, if what people here speculate is true, Hastert is the victim.

    Hastert is accused of money laundering and lying to the people who asked him about all this cash he seemed to need.  Is he a "victim" of his own acts?

    Whatever the scandal he needed to hold at bay, it must be pretty juicy, and there must be another "victim" somewhere.

    Parent

    That victim will feel even moreso (none / 0) (#39)
    by Mr Natural on Fri May 29, 2015 at 05:33:59 AM EST
    once the IRS has wrestled him to the mat over $3.5M in undeclared income.

    Parent
    Why would you assume it's undeclared income (none / 0) (#42)
    by CoralGables on Fri May 29, 2015 at 07:23:48 AM EST
    for Hastert? Undeclared income for the recipient makes far more sense.

    I'm assuming of course that Hastert is the victim of extortion/blackmail and foolishly lied to the FBI about the withdrawals.

    Parent

    "Undeclared income for the recipient" (none / 0) (#68)
    by Mr Natural on Fri May 29, 2015 at 01:17:43 PM EST
    is what I said.

    Parent
    The last part (none / 0) (#70)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 01:21:06 PM EST
    it seems that's is what happened.

    Parent
    Oh, you're no fun at all! (none / 0) (#151)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat May 30, 2015 at 01:01:59 PM EST
    ;-D

    That aside, how long do you think it will be before Denny's former GOP House colleagues start going all Sgt. Schultz on him?

    Parent

    Wow (none / 0) (#24)
    by CoralGables on Thu May 28, 2015 at 09:54:00 PM EST
    Someone forgot to close the barn door.

    Barns don't stink as bad as gloriad (none / 0) (#27)
    by christinep on Thu May 28, 2015 at 10:07:28 PM EST
    Please (none / 0) (#35)
    by nycstray on Thu May 28, 2015 at 10:53:52 PM EST
    That's an insult to the gentle barn creatures!

    Parent
    On a happer note (none / 0) (#32)
    by CoralGables on Thu May 28, 2015 at 10:27:42 PM EST
    Donald Trump has penciled in June 16 for his jump in the pool 2016 announcement.

    Jon Stewart (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 12:11:51 PM EST
    has said he may delay his exit from the Daily Show if the Donald makes it official.

    Parent
    A SITE VIOLATOR if (none / 0) (#34)
    by caseyOR on Thu May 28, 2015 at 10:53:13 PM EST
    ever there was one.

    Site violator (none / 0) (#36)
    by oculus on Thu May 28, 2015 at 11:04:47 PM EST


    What could (none / 0) (#41)
    by FlJoe on Fri May 29, 2015 at 07:23:34 AM EST
    possibly go wrong?
    "People are also encouraged to utilize (their) second amendment right at this event just (in case) our first amendment comes under the much anticipated attack," the event's Facebook page says.


    Let's see if I can guess what this is (none / 0) (#44)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 08:32:19 AM EST
    without looking.

    I'm thinkin the open carry draw Mohammed event outside a Mosque.

    Close?

    Parent

    Give that man a cigar! (none / 0) (#46)
    by kdog on Fri May 29, 2015 at 08:37:17 AM EST
    Mind the stray bullets in Phoenix y'all...another dueling arsehole contest on the calendar.

    Parent
    The guy organizing it (none / 0) (#49)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 08:43:48 AM EST
    videos around, seems like a reeeeeal piece of work.  

    The plane to all wear tshirts that say F@CK ISLAM

    Parent

    Let's hope... (none / 0) (#50)
    by kdog on Fri May 29, 2015 at 08:48:17 AM EST
    his extremist brothers of another superstition don't take the bait this time, and he wins the arsehole of the day award unchallenged.

    Dude reminds me of Osama Bin Ladin...trying to goad his "great satan" into a fight.

    Sadly, it's usually a successful tactic.  

    Clowns to the left, jokers to the right.

    Parent

    Shouldn't that actually be ... (none / 0) (#152)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat May 30, 2015 at 01:08:27 PM EST
    ... "clowns to the right of me, jokers to the far right"? Because if you look to your left, you'll see that we're mostly a bunch of Mona Lisas and Mad Hatters.

    ;-D

    Parent

    Stuck in the muddle with you... (none / 0) (#171)
    by Mr Natural on Sat May 30, 2015 at 08:14:53 PM EST
    The Metro responds to hate-monger Geller... (none / 0) (#130)
    by desertswine on Fri May 29, 2015 at 08:57:41 PM EST
    The transit system of Washington, D.C. has banned all "issue-oriented" advertisements on buses and in Metro stations for the rest of the year, a decision that comes just two days after a request to run subway ads that would depict the Muslim Prophet Muhammad.
    The announcement comes on the heels of a request filed by Pamela Geller, the head of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), to publish advertisements in D.C. that would showcase the winning cartoon from the group's "Draw Muhammad" event earlier this month in Garland, Texas.


    Parent
    and (none / 0) (#51)
    by FlJoe on Fri May 29, 2015 at 09:00:26 AM EST
    Bikers too!

    Parent
    Any bets (none / 0) (#52)
    by MO Blue on Fri May 29, 2015 at 09:06:01 AM EST
    on whether any media outlet labels them as thugs?

    Parent
    Of course (2.00 / 2) (#157)
    by Redbrow on Sat May 30, 2015 at 02:20:07 PM EST
    A simple search brings up headlines like this:
    "Biker Thugs Converge On Arizona Mosque Armed Looking For War"

    And many social media postings on Twitter and elsewhere have labeled the protesters, peacefully gathered in front of the mosque where the Isis terrorists came from, as thugs and worse.


    Parent

    Give it a rest, already. (3.00 / 2) (#187)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun May 31, 2015 at 02:54:31 AM EST
    I will! (none / 0) (#66)
    by Chuck0 on Fri May 29, 2015 at 12:52:18 PM EST
    I've come to the defense of many of those rounded up at Waco. Not all the bikers arrested in Waco are guilty of anything other than wrong place, wrong time. But these guys are, to quote kdog, 'arseholes'.


    Parent
    Yeah... (5.00 / 2) (#79)
    by ScottW714 on Fri May 29, 2015 at 02:06:23 PM EST
    ...they coincidentally ended up at a biker brawl while heading to a picnic.

    They might not have committed any crimes, but they were there to fight, which is a crime.  Not saying they deserve punishment if they didn't do anything, but please spare us the 'wrong place at the wrong time'.

    Even the cops knew about the brawl.

    Parent

    This kind of cracks me up. (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by Anne on Fri May 29, 2015 at 02:16:39 PM EST
    If you're riding with the Bandidos or the Cossacks, you're not just out for a scenic ride, anymore than if you're a member of the KKK, you're just in it because you have a thing for Egyptian cotton sheets.

    There are plenty of motorcycle clubs that aren't on the FBI's list of outlaw motorcycle gangs, where people who enjoy riding can get together, plan trips and events and have fun.  

    Parent

    You don't have clue what your'e talking about. (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by Chuck0 on Fri May 29, 2015 at 06:04:03 PM EST
    The gathering at Twin Peaks was a meeting of the Confederation of Clubs. Nearly every state in country has a CoC. Not everyone in attendance was a member of the Cossacks or Bandidos. I know people who were there. I've spoken with them. Not everyone arrested was even a patchholder. Two of the arrested are female. I guarantee that they aren't members of either club. Some of the arrested were members of a antique restoration club. The police just gathered up who they could.

    You wouldn't for a minute speak the same way if the police in Baltimore took everyone into custody at a meeting of the NAACP because a subset decided to start a brawl. The same thing happened in Waco.

    Parent

    LOL!! With all due respect, ... (5.00 / 3) (#166)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat May 30, 2015 at 06:33:28 PM EST
    ChuckO: "You wouldn't for a minute speak the same way if the police in Baltimore took everyone into custody at a meeting of the NAACP because a subset decided to start a brawl. The same thing happened in Waco."

    ... what do you believe that odds are that we'll see members of the Baltimore NAACP brawling one another with chains, knives and guns in a restaurant parking lot?

    Further, I'd offer that your conflating the Waco pseudo-convocation of the Confederation of Clubs with a noted civil rights organization such as the NAACP is a rather inappropriate analogy, to say the very least.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    The first (none / 0) (#111)
    by jbindc on Fri May 29, 2015 at 06:09:16 PM EST
    civil rights lawsuit has been filed.

    Parent
    Your response does not address the (none / 0) (#78)
    by MO Blue on Fri May 29, 2015 at 02:05:42 PM EST
    question posed in my comment which was whether or not the armed protesters gathered outside of the mosque would be labeled as thugs by the media.

    So far I don't see any media reports describing these armed protesters described as "thugs" unlike the unarmed protesters in Ferguson, Baltimore and various other cities across the nation.

    Parent

    Would you please cite (2.00 / 1) (#106)
    by Redbrow on Fri May 29, 2015 at 05:48:43 PM EST
    Examples of media reports, not including blogs or editorials, that described protestors as thugs?

    I can not find any. Just reports of Obama and Mayor Rawlings using the word thug to describe the violent rioters.

    Thanks.

    Parent

    Summary of usage (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by MO Blue on Sat May 30, 2015 at 08:36:42 AM EST
    According to new data from iQ media, the word "thug" was used a total of 54,671 times across Twitter, online news sites, television, and other social-media platforms from April 1 to May 4. More than half of those instances occurred on Twitter alone.

    Looking at just the top TV broadcast networks, ABC has used the word more than any other network, with 2,523 mentions. That's almost 1,000 more than CBS, which ranked second at 1615 mentions. Fox and NBC followed behind, with 1,324 and 1,069 uses of the word, respectively.

    The show that used the word the most was the "CBS Evening News" With Scott Pelley.
    ...
    Use of the word "thug" has sparked a big debate in the U.S., particularly after President Obama himself used the word to describe those involved in the riots. On Sunday, former CNN host Soledad O'Brian urged journalists not to use the term, arguing that it has become the new N-word. Her warning came just after CNN's own Erin Burnett was slammed for insisting that "thug" was the right word to describe the protesters. link



    Parent
    That doesn't really answer (none / 0) (#142)
    by jbindc on Sat May 30, 2015 at 08:59:26 AM EST
    the question at all. It doesn't separate out if people were calling the actual rioters and looters thugs or if they were quoting others who called them thugs, or if they were endlessly focusing on the term thugs in the talking points in the hopes of now making a racial term (up next:  hooligans).  All that study shows is the number of times the term was mentioned in media outlets - there is no context and frankly, is kind of useless to prove your point.

    And since we are taking things out of context, here's the sentence from the HuffPo article you left out:

    Fortunately, IQ Media's research found a silver lining: The term "peaceful protest" was mentioned in the news, online and on social media when referring to Baltimore close to 300 times more than the word "thug" (7,090 to 4,391).


    Parent
    It does answer the question (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by MO Blue on Sat May 30, 2015 at 09:22:37 AM EST
    The question was not a request to show a contrast between the number of times the media described the protesters as peaceful protest or described them as thugs. The question was asking for examples of when media reports used the word thugs to describe the protesters.


    Parent
    Why add the qualifiers? (none / 0) (#135)
    by Yman on Sat May 30, 2015 at 08:36:03 AM EST
    MO Blue said "media".  Are blogs and editorials not part of the media?

    Parent
    Because straight reporting... (none / 0) (#174)
    by unitron on Sat May 30, 2015 at 08:23:07 PM EST
    ...is supposed to be just that, and opinion pieces are supposed to be in a different category.

    There's a lower "standard of proof", so to speak, for opinion.

    The "media" part is the delivery mechanism, i.e., the "medium".

    Parent

    He was challenging the OP's point (none / 0) (#199)
    by Yman on Sun May 31, 2015 at 11:50:06 AM EST
    The OP didn't limit his/her point to "straight reporting" or non-opinion pieces.

    Parent
    Out of curiosity (none / 0) (#104)
    by Redbrow on Fri May 29, 2015 at 05:36:47 PM EST
    Do you have any examples of traditional mainstream media labeling any rioters "thugs" other than them reporting that Obama and the mayor called them thugs?

    Parent
    Out of curiosity (5.00 / 2) (#138)
    by Yman on Sat May 30, 2015 at 08:42:20 AM EST
    Is there some reason you want to limit it to "traditional, mainstream media"?  The OP didn't.  The "thug" label tends to be applied by conservatives ... you don't want to exclude conservatives for some reason, do you?

    Parent
    Wait a minute... (none / 0) (#155)
    by Redbrow on Sat May 30, 2015 at 01:50:11 PM EST
    Are you implying that the traditional mainstream media establishment is biased towards liberal ideology, or what passes for liberal ideology these days?

    Parent
    Not in the least (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by Yman on Sat May 30, 2015 at 03:14:08 PM EST
    I'm implying that you're trying to add qualifiers to the original claim to show it's not true - qualifiers that weren't there.  And I'm flat-out stating that conservative media routinely engages in this kind of race-baiting.

    Anything else?

    Parent

    I am trying to make sense (none / 0) (#156)
    by Redbrow on Sat May 30, 2015 at 02:06:04 PM EST
    Of the claim that Waco bikers were not called thugs. If blogs and social media are included, then that claims has no merit.

    The bikers were called thugs repeatedly on blogs and tweeters from far left to far right, even as the event was still unfolding.

    The whole silly argument falls apart.

    Parent

    And your point is -- what, exactly? (2.00 / 1) (#164)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat May 30, 2015 at 06:19:35 PM EST
    That because a few bloggers referred to the Waco bikers as "thugs," it's therefore okay to continue to characterize black children like Trayvon Martin and Tamir Rice as one and the same?

    Does the word "context" mean anything to you?

    Parent

    WTH? (none / 0) (#165)
    by Redbrow on Sat May 30, 2015 at 06:32:46 PM EST
    Why are you dragging them into this?

    Nobody called Tamir Rice a thug.

    Martin did commit a violent felony assault so technically the definition does fit, but of course, YOU are the one who automatically associated "thug" with these minors, nobody else here did.

    Parent

    I'm "dragging them into this" ... (4.00 / 3) (#186)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun May 31, 2015 at 02:53:44 AM EST
    Redbrow: "Why are you dragging them into this? Nobody called Tamir Rice a thug."

    ... because for far too many white conservatives, "thug" has become today's equivalent of "ni&&er." That's why context matters.

    (And yes, the late Tamir Rice was called both a "thug" and a "thug wannabe" by senseless posters and pundits. So was Trayvon Martin, whose only crime was walking home while black.)

    Why you feel compelled to defend those who use "thug" for purposes of race baiting, with your pretense being that you consider the term to be benign, I don't know and I really don't care.

    But the final determination as to whether or not the word "thug" is considered a racist pejorative is really for African Americans to decide, and not you, given that they are the word's intended target.

    Thus, a white person like you who uses the word "thug" to describe a young black male doesn't have the final say on the matter, because it's clearly not your place to tell others that they have no right to be offended.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Maybe you are referring (2.00 / 1) (#167)
    by Redbrow on Sat May 30, 2015 at 06:40:27 PM EST
    To the articles from Slate, Salon and Wonkette that refer to Tamor Rice as A thug. They are are the top hits for a Google search using the terms ""Tamir" "Rice" "thug".

    Parent
    Just curious... (none / 0) (#53)
    by lentinel on Fri May 29, 2015 at 09:30:40 AM EST
    The NYTimes has posted a photo of Bill Clinton, the husband of the candidate for the presidency in 2016, at a charity gala with the following description:

    Bill Clinton agreed to appear at a gala for the model Petra Nemcova's charity in 2014 after Ms. Nemcova offered a $500,000 donation to the Clinton Foundation.

    The implication, it seems to me, is that Clinton did something shady... even immoral.

    Is it?
    Was it?

    It wasn't as if he pocketed the dough - and even so - he was appearing at a charity benefit to raise funds for someone who had raised funds, or donated funds, to his charity.

    I am no fan of Bill's.
    But this just reads as another attack - through the side door - on Candidate Clinton.

    Is there any merit to this insinuation by the Times?

    Did you read the article? I did and it (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by Anne on Fri May 29, 2015 at 10:24:47 AM EST
    made me want to go take a shower.  It just struck me as wrong - not to mention craven - that a charitable organization that bills itself as being devoted to improving the lives and living conditions of underserved people around the world, would not offer up the services of its eponymous founder until a half-million dollars was promised.  I guess Clinton doesn't have a problem taking money for HIS foundation out of the coffers of an organization with a much smaller budget, making it less able to do the good works it purports to sponsor.

    I'm sure it's all technically legal, but the more layers that are peeled back from the world of charitable foundations, and particularly Clinton's, the more rotten it smells to me.

    Parent

    Amen sister... (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by kdog on Fri May 29, 2015 at 02:51:51 PM EST
    big money philanthropy and charitable work seems almost as shady as the banking and finance industries or FIFA.

    Nothing is sacred.

    Parent

    What (none / 0) (#114)
    by lentinel on Fri May 29, 2015 at 06:19:32 PM EST
    was confusing to me, was that the charity that gave the half mil to Clinton, also spent (I was gonna say, "squandered"), $363;413 on glitz.
    From the Times:
    She booked Cipriani 42nd Street, which greeted guests with Bellini cocktails on silver trays. She flew in Sheryl Crow with her band and crew for a 20-minute set. She special-ordered heart-shaped floral centerpieces, heart-shaped chocolate parfaits, heart-shaped tiramisù and, because orange is the charity's color, an orange carpet rather than a red one. She imported a Swiss auctioneer and handed out orange rulers to serve as auction paddles, playfully threatening to use hers to spank the highest bidder for an Ibiza vacation.

    The gala cost $363,413. But the real splurge? Bill Clinton.

    I wound up feeling that this world of charitable foundations does indeed have a foul smell about it. I think that Clinton himself has a foul smell about him. But that "Happy Hearts" lady, Petra Nemcova, seemed to me to be a piece of work herself, hence my question of whether this was immoral or unethical on the part of Clinton, or whether this was just business as usual in that strange foundation world - and ultimately just another in the ongoing slime and insinuations aimed at Hillary Clinton...

    I'm still not sure what that article was about...

    Parent

    It's shady... (none / 0) (#55)
    by kdog on Fri May 29, 2015 at 09:51:35 AM EST
    but so is the NY Times...does that answer your question? ;)  

    If you're looking for honesty you must look outside the law and outside our "institutions".  h/t Dylan.

    Parent

    What is Shady ? (none / 0) (#86)
    by ScottW714 on Fri May 29, 2015 at 02:33:09 PM EST
    Rich people donating money, Bill Clinton, what exactly is problem ?

    This is a republican wet dream, not only do they get to lambast the Clinton's, they get lambast people who donate money to help people without it.

    I was under the impression Bill could not run again, guess I need to reread the 22nd Amendment.

    Parent

    Read up on... (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by kdog on Fri May 29, 2015 at 02:49:45 PM EST
    the Clinton Foundation's work in Haiti man...shady ain't the half Bro. And  did a great piece on the charity hustle in Haiti, you should check it out.

    From the referenced article...

    Happy Hearts' former executive director believes the transaction was a "quid pro quo," which rerouted donations intended for a small charity with the concrete mission of rebuilding schools after natural disasters to a large foundation with a broader agenda and a budget 100 times bigger.

    "The Clinton Foundation had rejected the Happy Hearts Fund invitation more than once, until there was a thinly veiled solicitation and then the offer of an honorarium," said the former executive director, Sue Veres Royal, who held that position at the time of the gala and was dismissed a few weeks later amid conflicts over the gala and other issues.

    Why would Bill Clinton, or his Foundation employees, shake a charity down for 500 grand to support said charity?  
       

    Parent

    Err... (none / 0) (#89)
    by kdog on Fri May 29, 2015 at 02:53:13 PM EST
    Vice did a great piece on the charity hustle in Haiti.  Haitian Money Pit

    Parent
    Great, Thansk for Answering a Question... (none / 0) (#92)
    by ScottW714 on Fri May 29, 2015 at 03:32:24 PM EST
    ...no asked, my comment was in regards to Ms. Nemcova, who as far as I can tell is Czechoslovakian.

    Someone believes there is some quid pro quo.

    Am I missing the fire here, because I don't smell smoke beyond one person's belief.  And there is no referenced article.

    Parent

    The NY Times... (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by kdog on Fri May 29, 2015 at 03:51:48 PM EST
    article referenced by lentinel...I'll make it easy for ya.

    Here, the smoke is the Clinton Foundation allegedly shook down Nemcova's charity for half a million (and an award, wtf?) just to get Clinton to grace her fundraiser with his presence. And Nemcova's charity has less overhead, and is more focused, that half a million in her charity is more effective in providing actual charity than another half mill in the CGI coffers. If that's not shady to you, I don't know what to tell ya.

    As I said in my reply to Anne, the more I learn about the big money philanthropy and charity circuit, the more cynical I become...and I'm already cynical as f&ck.  

    Parent

    The way it appears to work (none / 0) (#95)
    by christinep on Fri May 29, 2015 at 04:01:08 PM EST
    can be enough to <as they say> give one pause.  Even Catholic Charities, a very large & fairly effective charitable organization, can almost push the strong-arm with escalating doses of guilt as an incentive ... and, when you give, you get pushed for more & more.  On the one hand, I understand it; I accept that the fundraisers will push as hard as they can to raise money for a cause ...and, for me and in the long run, if definable help and assistance is given to so many in need, I'll deal with it.  

    Parent
    I understand... (none / 0) (#112)
    by kdog on Fri May 29, 2015 at 06:14:47 PM EST
    the other hand...but strong arming another charity? I would hope there are limits.  Not to mention involving a former head of state, the kind of pimping of the office we wanted to avoid by giving presidents pensions. Even if "for charity". (Nostalgia tangent...ahh pensions, remember those?;)

    I'm reminded of a line from the HBO show Silicon Valley..."I don't want anyone else to make the world a better place better than we do".

    Or in a word, hubris. The deadliest deadly sin.

    Not to say this makes the Clintons the worst political machine running...better than all of the above in the war racket for damn sure....but let's not deny the apparent (inherent?) shadiness of it. Shadiness of everything involving money and/or power.

    Parent

    You sound like an innocent, kdog (2.00 / 1) (#123)
    by christinep on Fri May 29, 2015 at 07:14:19 PM EST
    to consider this "shady."  Or have you been fooling us all along.

    Parent
    Where you been? (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by kdog on Fri May 29, 2015 at 07:36:27 PM EST
    I've been saying for 10 years that checking accounts are shady. Everywhere I look it's shady shady shady.

    The question is, are you so jaded you don't see it?

    Parent

    There is shady ... and there is shady (none / 0) (#131)
    by christinep on Fri May 29, 2015 at 09:11:45 PM EST
    It helps to tell the difference between what is really a screw job and what is simply a strong-arm to raise funds for charity.  No ... I have little, if any, problem with the NYTimes description ... because it is very much a relative world (and, I don't want to walk around being upset, agitated, or outraged about everything that isn't ideal.)  

    For now, I'm more focused on the guy who once was second in line to the Presidency (Hastert, i.e.) and who allegedly hit on a young male student (a minor?) while, at the same time, professing all kinds of righteousness in the late '90s.  If that is true, the hurt that he caused has lots more consequence--personal & societal--than a bunch of rich people at a cocktail do hustling each other for charity funds.  Whether it is being jaded or whether it is viewing right/wrong on a different scale ... we arrive at a different place, kdog.

    Parent

    IMO, The real smoke (none / 0) (#140)
    by Mr Natural on Sat May 30, 2015 at 08:52:12 AM EST
    is in this part of the Times story, paragraph 23:

    One of those schools, operated by the Haitian group Prodev, was featured in the Clinton Foundation's most recent annual report as "built through a Clinton Global Initiative Commitment to Action." The Clinton Foundation's sole direct contribution to the school was a grant for an Earth Day celebration and tree-planting activity.


    Parent
    The amount of money involved (none / 0) (#56)
    by NYShooter on Fri May 29, 2015 at 10:00:10 AM EST
    and the benefit it supports make it incumbent on everyone involved to manage this appropriately. I don't want a million dollars NOT going to leprosy research because it looks "icky," or, you know, "the Clintons, ooooo.

    On the other hand, because there's a lot of money involved, and the Clintons are involved politically with the levers of U.S. power, every consideration has to be made to establish a firewall between the money, U.S. policy, and the donors.

    For instance, Country "A" wants to gain fishing rights within traditional U.S. coastal limits, and, simultaneously, makes a large contribution to The Foundation. In my opinion, that's a no, no. The entire process may be absolutely as pure as Caeser's wife, but, governments would be involved, as would policy, and, presumably, some of the individual players (President Hillary Clinton?) also. This is where "appearance" really does matter.

    The point really is, all those kinds of situations can be worked out very easily, IF, adults are in charge, good faith is really present, and the participants speak to the public plainly, honestly, and transparently.

    It's not really that difficult.

    Parent

    Those other countries (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by fishcamp on Fri May 29, 2015 at 10:12:54 AM EST
    better not try fishing here in the Keys where MY fish live.  They have basically eliminated long lining and nets here in the Atlantic, after wiping out the Cod industry.  Foreign fishing boats don't like to come near Cuba, and the nest of Homeland Security fast boats we have.  More fish are available in the much larger Pacific Ocean.

    Parent
    Not for long! (none / 0) (#154)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat May 30, 2015 at 01:30:43 PM EST
    There's been a fishing moratorium placed on our west coast's sardine population, which has apparently suffered a 91% decline in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear disaster.

    And Hawaii's renowned resident billfish populations have long been stressed by overfishing, hence the present ban on the sale of Pacific blue marlin in the United States, which applies to their Atlantic cousins as well.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Your billfish are fighting back! (none / 0) (#173)
    by Mr Natural on Sat May 30, 2015 at 08:21:21 PM EST
    According to this story.
    Whitman said this isn't the first time he's heard of billfish fatally impaling someone. "They are very aggressive animals," he said. "If you mess with them they defend themselves pretty good."


    Parent
    Just the NYTimes doing a trolling thing (none / 0) (#59)
    by christinep on Fri May 29, 2015 at 11:09:26 AM EST
    As for Clinton, he was fundraising for his charitable foundation ... similar to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (etc.)

    Frankly, after all these years of the NYTimes--once known as & rightfully considered to be the "paper of record"--doing their own scandal-mongering routine where and whenever the Clintons are nearby, most readers find it somewhat stale. Suggestion: A different angle might involve review & analysis as to what charitable causes have been aided over x-number of years by the Clinton Foundation, including the amounts in aid of different international causes ... and, for a more extensive look, the "venerable" Times might endeavor to compare that with other international charities (especially any founded by other politicians in our country.)  Excuse me, tho, because that actual analysis might be so booooring for them.

    And where is Judith Miller & Jason Blair & the gang, again???

    PS, Lentinel .... No, assertive high-level fundraising is neither illegal nor shady. And, yes, the practice does help those in need ... a goal & reality that should be regarded as a good thing.

    Parent

    You didn't read the article, did you? (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by Anne on Fri May 29, 2015 at 11:27:00 AM EST
    Would that you would do any review and analysis of the issues raised in that article instead of waving them off as nothing to see, move along, trollishness.

    Parent
    Yes, I did (none / 0) (#93)
    by christinep on Fri May 29, 2015 at 03:38:23 PM EST
    The fundraising world is not what we imagine as youngsters ... unfortunately, it never has been.

    Parent
    This is (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by FlJoe on Fri May 29, 2015 at 05:24:17 PM EST
    nothing more then "lifestyle of the rich and famous" on steroids.

    The glitterati buying their way into the big league:

    She has also mingled her celebrity and charity work, both in ways that benefited the charity and in ways that benefited her personally.

    Trying to keep up with their exes:
    notably the actor Sean Penn, an ex-boyfriend of Ms. Nemcova's who had created his own relief organization and forged a relationship with Mr. Clinton.

    Or maybe they are getting more bang for their buck then first meets the eye:

    Frank Giustra, the Canadian mining financier who is one of the Clinton Foundation's largest donors and also a supporter of Ms. Nemcova.
    and
    At the meeting, Ms. Nemcova signed a memorandum of understanding with the president of the Inter-American Development Bank to finance schools in Haiti.
    In this context getting "hustled" by Bill Clinton is a badge of honor with benefits

    Charity at this level is basically the rich and famous  hustling each other all around the  globe for mega bucks at parties fit for a king. Trying to make this story into some kind of gangland shakedown is total fantasy.

    Parent

    similar to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (4.00 / 3) (#141)
    by Mr Natural on Sat May 30, 2015 at 08:54:19 AM EST
    A really clueless comparison.  The Gates Foundation is a source of money, not a sink.  Do you have no idea of where Gates got his money?

    Parent
    So... (none / 0) (#62)
    by jbindc on Fri May 29, 2015 at 12:00:19 PM EST
    Not so good economic news out today.

    The U.S. economy shrank at an annualized pace of 0.7 percent in the first three months of the year, according to government data released Friday morning, a tumble for a recovering nation that until recently seemed poised for takeoff.

    The contraction, the country's third in the aftermath of the Great Recession, provides a troubling picture of an economy that many figured would get a lift from cheap oil, rapid hiring and growing consumer confidence. Instead, consumers have proved cautious, and oil companies have frozen investment -- all while a nasty winter caused havoc for transportation and construction and a strong dollar widened the trade deficit.

    The numbers released Friday were a revision of earlier figures that had shown GDP growing in the first quarter at 0.2 percent. Markets had since expected the downward revision, in large part because of recent data showing the trade deficit at a 6½-year high.



    Under a flash flood watch (none / 0) (#65)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 29, 2015 at 12:22:10 PM EST
    till tomorrow afternoon.  We are sort of on the eastern edge of the "rain event" that's been happening in the central plains and Texas but this whole area is officially no longer in drought.   Very green here.   Lots of fruit on the trees and grapes on the vine.

    That's the good news.  Turn on the tv to see the bad news.

    Silk Road Sysop "Dread Pirate Roberts" (none / 0) (#96)
    by Mr Natural on Fri May 29, 2015 at 04:27:47 PM EST
    send up the river, sentenced to Life without Parole.

    Ulbrict had begged the judge to "leave a light at the end of the tunnel" ahead of his sentence. "I know you must take away my middle years, but please leave me my old age," he wrote to Forrest this week. Prosecutors wrote Forrest a 16-page letter requesting the opposite: "[A] lengthy sentence, one substantially above the mandatory minimum is appropriate in this case."

    The 31-year-old physics graduate and former boy scout was handed five sentences: one for 20 years, one for 15 years, one for five and two for life. All are to be served concurrently with no chance of parole.




    "sent" up the river. (none / 0) (#97)
    by Mr Natural on Fri May 29, 2015 at 04:43:16 PM EST
    urghhhhh.

    Parent
    Apperson to use Stand Your Ground defense (none / 0) (#129)
    by McBain on Fri May 29, 2015 at 08:37:21 PM EST
    according to HufPo
    http://tinyurl.com/p8bud7w

    Some people will probably say this is ironic without knowing George Zimmerman never used stand your ground during his trial.  

    Based on what's known, I don't see how Apperson could convince anyone he was standing his ground.  But with Judge Nelson presiding, you never know.  

    Huh (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by Yman on Sat May 30, 2015 at 08:49:40 AM EST
    Based on what's known, I don't see how Apperson could convince anyone he was standing his ground.

    Nothing demonstrating that self-professed "pro-defense bias"?

    Shocking.

    Parent

    I've already seen one person on Twitter... (none / 0) (#133)
    by unitron on Fri May 29, 2015 at 11:44:28 PM EST
    ...making the irony point despite being an attorney who should know better.

    Parent
    Apperson (none / 0) (#134)
    by Uncle Chip on Sat May 30, 2015 at 08:11:01 AM EST
    Apperson's SYG defense went out the window when Zimmerman made that U-Turn to get away from him, and then Apperson made his U-Turn to follow him and shoot at him from behind and through a closed window.

    This defense will go nowhere and will probably be used as evidence for Apperson's subsequent insanity plea.

    Parent

    Once again (none / 0) (#145)
    by FlJoe on Sat May 30, 2015 at 09:38:35 AM EST
    you are assuming facts not in evidence. You are taking GZ's word about the u-turn and just plain manufacturing them  
    shoot at him from behind
    to fit your narrative.

    My understanding is that invoking SYG requires a  pre-trial evidentiary hearing with the defense bearing the burden of proving the case for immunity.

    While it is hard to imagine what preponderance of evidence what can Apperson can provide to prove SYG, the law says he gets his day in court. You as usual decide all that legal mumbo-jumbo is unneeded and make your usual  unsubstantiated  proclamation of "fact".

    Side question for the experts out there: could Apperson's team subpoena Zimmerman to testify at the SYG hearing or trial?

    Parent

    SYG (none / 0) (#153)
    by Uncle Chip on Sat May 30, 2015 at 01:22:07 PM EST
    you are assuming facts not in evidence.

    LOL -- You can't be serious.

    GZ's statement under oath to investigators IS evidence -- especially when Apperson is giving NO statement at all.

    That evidentiary statement together with the physical evidence and other corroborating witnesses and no evidence to the contrary is why prosecutors filed this slamdunk case.

    How do you post such nonsense when you have no ground to stand on.

    Parent

    Since (none / 0) (#159)
    by FlJoe on Sat May 30, 2015 at 03:31:16 PM EST
    when do police officers make you swear an oath before taking a statement?
    GZ's statement under oath to investigators IS evidence -- especially when Apperson is giving NO statement at all.
    Apperson did make a statement that George was "waving his gun around" and of course he is saying nothing now that he is charged.

    Who are these

    other corroborating witnesses
    you speak of? Have you read witness statements or seen media reports about them? I sure have not.  Please educate us with links.

    As usual you wave off due process

    and no evidence to the contrary
    no need to give the defense a chance to even try. The wise and powerful Chip has declared this a slam dunk.

    Getting accused of posting nonsense by the king of nonsense is rich.

    Parent

    Joe (2.00 / 1) (#183)
    by Uncle Chip on Sat May 30, 2015 at 10:44:52 PM EST
    when do police officers make you swear an oath before taking a statement?

    When your name is George Zimmerman and the police would rather indict you than the other guy if for nothing else lying to the police.

    They did in this case and stated accordingly in their report.

    You should stop while you're behind. You're hatred for Zimmerman is affecting your brain.

    Parent

    Do you have any links to these (5.00 / 1) (#184)
    by Anne on Sat May 30, 2015 at 11:13:57 PM EST
    sworn statements/police reports?

    Parent
    FlJoe and Anne (1.00 / 3) (#195)
    by Uncle Chip on Sun May 31, 2015 at 09:24:43 AM EST
    It's all in the Apperson Arrest Report that I posted for both you and Anne 3 weeks ago:

    According to Zimmerman .... Zimmerman entered the median at the intersection of Crystal Dr. to make a u-turn to travel in the opposite direction.

    At that time, Zimmerman's driver side window was down slightly. While Zimmerman was angled in the median to make the u-turn, the driver of an Infiniti got behind him and yelled, "You remember me you fat mother fucker?" Zimmerman looked back and did not recognize him. The driver then said, "You owe me your life...

    Before Zimmerman rolled up his window, the driver told him to pull over and they could handle it man to man. Zimmerman rolled up his window, completed the u-turn, and began traveling the opposite direction on W. Lake Mary Blvd.

    At that time, the Infiniti completed the u-turn as well and got behind Zimmerman again. The driver of the Infiniti then switched lanes into the outside lanes, sped up, and pulled next to Zimmerman's vehicle. Zimmerman looked over, saw a gun pointed at him, and then heard a bang.

    Zimmerman immediately stopped and saw the Infiniti speed pass him. Zimmerman noticed the bullet hole in his front passenger window....

    Zimmerman swore to his statement and indicated that he wanted to press charges.

    Do y'all have short term memory problems. Read it and weep and then go get those alzheimers medications checked.

    Parent

    It may surprise you to know that (5.00 / 2) (#198)
    by Anne on Sun May 31, 2015 at 11:15:17 AM EST
    I don't hang on your every word, and often do not bother to read your comments.  But I am quite familiar with your tactics, and have learned not to trust much of anything you say unless you can support it with something other than what emanates from your overactive imagination.

    I did my own homework, found and read the police report on my own, and saw the reference to Zimmerman having sworn to his statement.

    The thing is, I don't really care.  I don't care about a guy who's apparently got mental problems, and another guy who seems to find trouble wherever he goes.  

    And don't assume I'm only referring to Apperson and Zimmerman.


    Parent

    I have (none / 0) (#200)
    by FlJoe on Sun May 31, 2015 at 12:36:37 PM EST
    read that statement time several and already stated my issues with it. That's GZ's  official statement to the police, that does not make it gospel truth. I am not sure what level "swore to his statement" (required to press charges?) rises to  as evidentiary value but I am guessing not as a high "statement under oath"  Probably we are just arguing semantics here anyway.

    I will concede to you that GZ was probably a victim here, however victims of crime often "omit" facts in their statements. Just as a mugging victim will forget to mention the drug deal gone bad, Zimmerman would probably leave out "waving his gun around" out of his account, if in fact that's what happened.

    One of the ugly aspects of SYG laws is that the probable victim often stands accused of criminal behavior. If Apperson carries through with SYG his team will try to prove that Zimmerman acted in a dangerously threatening manner.

    Like it or not the process must play out and the defense will presumably present evidence and build a narrative against GZ. In this context the judge has to rule on GZ's actions and presumably consider the possibility that his statement to police is a bit self serving.

    I doubt the defense has much of anything but who know's they might pull some

    other corroborating witnesses
    out of their imaginations that you seem to be able to do.

     

    Parent

    SYG (none / 0) (#204)
    by Uncle Chip on Sun May 31, 2015 at 02:37:38 PM EST
    If Apperson carries through with SYG ...

    He's toast.

    He's pretty much toast right now anyway.

    At an SYG hearing he will have to testify under oath subject to the penalty of perjury.

    He will then be cross-examined by the prosecutor who has all the forensic evidence with which to impeach him including witnesses other than Zimmerman.

    He will have to admit he fired at the driver in a car in front of him making a U-Turn to get away from him and did so through a closed tinted window.

    The SYG law in Florida and anywhere else for that matter precludes you firing on someone moving away from you under the name of self-defense. That's why it's called Stand Your Ground.

    And then what he has said on the stand can and will be used against him in the trial that follows.

    He's just posturing here for a plea deal.

    Parent

    As (none / 0) (#206)
    by FlJoe on Sun May 31, 2015 at 03:43:00 PM EST
    much as I hate to agree with you, it does look like he is toast.

    Parent
    Yes (none / 0) (#194)
    by Uncle Chip on Sun May 31, 2015 at 08:51:43 AM EST
    Yes I do and I posted them already.

    Go find them --

    Parent

    It (5.00 / 2) (#188)
    by FlJoe on Sun May 31, 2015 at 03:00:04 AM EST
    is apparent you feel like you must "defend" Zimmerman beyond all reason. You just make stuff up
    When your name is George Zimmerman and the police would rather indict you than the other guy if for nothing else lying to the police.


    Parent
    Dennis Hastert (none / 0) (#203)
    by KeysDan on Sun May 31, 2015 at 02:01:20 PM EST
    is culpable, according to Jeb.  Asked on CBS Face the Nation what mistakes were made by his brother, W,  he answered: the inability to keep the reins on spending, largely the legislative body in Washington, he let the Republican Congress get a little out of control, in terms of spending.  

    if Jeb had presidential chops, he would have (none / 0) (#205)
    by Mr Natural on Sun May 31, 2015 at 03:34:33 PM EST
    Instinctively blamed the Democratic House minority for everything.  By that I mean every piece of bad legislation that those poor helpless majority party Republicans were forced to write and jam down our collective throats by the out of power, marginalized, sidelined, snubbed, and laughed off Democratic party.

    Parent
    Jeralyn, tell us about Aspen :) (none / 0) (#211)
    by fishcamp on Mon Jun 01, 2015 at 11:22:46 AM EST


    Sorry, MOBlue (none / 0) (#212)
    by jbindc on Mon Jun 01, 2015 at 01:03:36 PM EST
    From above re: "thug' and the media.  You are just plain wrong.  The IQ Media report just counts the number of times "tjug" was used across many media platforms. So for example. The HuffPo article you linked to, had it been in the date range they were studying, would have had 8 counts of the word.  The study shows nothing regards ng context, nor illustrates how a word which is not racist is being sold that way because weight hurt people's feelings for calling them out for engaging in violent and criminal acts.

    The bikers in Waco were called "vriminald' and even " domestic terrorists ".  I guess we could use those terms for the rioters if "thugs" is the latest word they don't like.

    RIP (none / 0) (#213)
    by sj on Mon Jun 01, 2015 at 01:13:16 PM EST
    Beau Biden

    I hope to never experience the loss of my child.
    ------------
    jb

    (as long as you are adding comments this way, so will I) You are still not taking the original question into account. Maybe MOBlue didn't address some issue that you had, but that's on you, not on her.

    More Love from our Pryer-in-Chief (none / 0) (#214)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Jun 02, 2015 at 09:54:51 AM EST
    AP:
    WASHINGTON -- The FBI is operating a small air force with scores of low-flying planes across the country carrying video and, at times, cellphone surveillance technology - all hidden behind fictitious companies that are fronts for the government, The Associated Press has learned.

    The planes' surveillance equipment is generally used without a judge's approval, and the FBI said the flights are used for specific, ongoing investigations. In a recent 30-day period, the agency flew above more than 30 cities in 11 states across the country, an AP review found.