home

Thursday Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 01:33:15 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Still a very busy week here. Here's an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Sanders' Speech: "The Struggle Continues" | Obama Endorses Hillary, Sanders Marches to His Own Drum >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Thursday Open Thread | 208 comments (208 topical)
    President Obama (5.00 / 7) (#1)
    by KeysDan on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 01:46:16 PM EST
    endorses Hillary Clinton.

    For those of you that haven't seen it (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 04:33:18 PM EST
    Here it is

    Parent
    So glad (none / 0) (#3)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 02:10:37 PM EST
    to be moving on past the primary officially.

    Parent
    It would appear (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by smott on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 02:24:42 PM EST
    Obama's little chat w Sanders settled him down.

    Parent
    it did (none / 0) (#6)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 02:27:12 PM EST
    except for bizarrely going into his stump speech.

    Parent
    Yah lol! (none / 0) (#12)
    by smott on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 03:23:08 PM EST
    But when has he ever NOT gone into his stump speech?

    Seriously that's all he ever did in any opportunity never mind if it was totally inappropriate. Win a cactus, stump speech, lose a primary, stump speech. Keep going, stump speech, admit it's over, stump speech.

    Talk about foreign policy in a critical interview, stump speech.

    It made him look incredibly shallow.

    Parent

    i know. (none / 0) (#18)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 05:17:25 PM EST
    LOL. Yes.

    Parent
    How many cacti did he win? (none / 0) (#21)
    by oculus on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 05:23:34 PM EST


    Parent
    Three prickly pears. (5.00 / 4) (#25)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 05:41:13 PM EST
    Jeff Weaver, Tad Devine, and his wife Jane.

    Parent
    So Happy! (none / 0) (#7)
    by Jane in CA on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 02:36:39 PM EST
    I knew he had to, but I worried nonetheless ... Great News and thank you!

    Parent
    Just Had to Add (5.00 / 4) (#9)
    by Jane in CA on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 02:44:02 PM EST
    That the President was more eloquent and more gracious than I ever expected him to be in endorsing Clinton. Give credit where credit is due, Obama gave Clinton an outstanding endorsement. And he hit exactly the right tone.

    Parent
    Supreme Court's Reputation Saved (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Mr Natural on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 01:58:46 PM EST
    - But barely.

    A closely divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a Pennsylvania judge violated a convicted murderer's constitutional rights by voting to uphold his death sentence following a prosecution he supervised as district attorney.
    Very excited for my friend Stu (5.00 / 5) (#29)
    by Peter G on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 06:38:02 PM EST
    who argued and won that case. No greater heroes than the public defenders who specialize in capital cases.

    Parent
    Elizabeth Warren strongly supported (5.00 / 6) (#36)
    by oculus on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 07:37:22 PM EST
    public defenders and civil rights advocates today.

    Parent
    Agree, contrary to (5.00 / 6) (#43)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 08:04:14 PM EST
    Dick Wolf's over-glorified view of crime-fighters, it's the underfunded, understaffed and underpaid capital public defenders who sacrifice so much in their quest to save a life who are doing "G-d's work" and warrant more recognition.

    Parent
    Have you expressed an opinion on the Stanford (none / 0) (#56)
    by ExPatObserver on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 02:41:19 AM EST
    rape case verdict?
    What I would like to know is whether Turner's sentence was unusual or not. I am not going to trust headlines on this point.

    Parent
    Every case and every sentencing is unique (5.00 / 5) (#67)
    by Peter G on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 09:06:43 AM EST
    No one is in a better position to say what the sentence should be in a particular case than the judge (especially a good judge, such as presided in that case) who heard all the evidence from both sides. Especially difficult are cases of violent and harmful conduct where there are potentially mitigating facts (youth, lack of prior violent behavior) and other factors that can be seen either way (defendant was himself very drunk at the time of the act; some would view that fact as mitigating, by reducing blameworthiness, and many would not).

    Parent
    Thanks. That's the way I view it, (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by ExPatObserver on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 11:03:57 AM EST
    including respecting the judge's judgment.
    Interesting point about different standards on drunkenness.


    Parent
    BTW, although defendant was charged with rape, (none / 0) (#91)
    by oculus on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 12:28:32 PM EST
    the jury returned verdicts of guilty on three counts of felony sexual  harassment. Given that the victim remembers nothing, in my opinion this would have been a difficult case to try from the prosecution's standpoint.

    Parent
    The jury trial (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by KeysDan on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 01:23:21 PM EST
    convicted Brock Turner of three felonies: assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated person; sexually penetrating an unconscious person with a foreign object; and sexually penetrating an intoxicated person. Apparently, digitally.  The victim was found partially clothed, bloodied and with pine needles in the "swimming suit" area.

     The "twenty minutes of action" as Brock's father described it all, may well have been extended but for the interruption by the two Swedish graduate students riding by on their bicycles. Brock was on top of the victim partially clothed, ran when confronted, but was caught and held down by one of the cyclists.

    The actual charges seem consistent with the evidence as determined by the jury.  The issue, of course, is the sentence. Judge Aaron Persky's sentencing, in my opinion, did not adequately match the crimes.

    It is true, as the judge remarked, "that a prison sentence would have a severe impact on him,"  As any jail or prison sentence would, including the six month sentence (out in three months).  The mitigating factors in this sentence, as Peter G, points out above, are reasonable in setting forth a sentence of less than the maximum possible of 14 years.  Except, in my view, the alcohol defense, even if he was truly out of it.

    The alcohol worked against the victim (3 times the legal blood level) and for the felon (2 times the legal blood level). If alcohol is a mitigating factor of such dimension, it is difficult to see why drunk drivers who cause injury or death are culpable in any serious manner.

    The "Olympic hopeful" as Brock was referred to during the trial, did not cloud the jury's mind as it went about its work, but, it may have unduly influenced the judge's sentencing.  Registration as a sex offender, for life, is perhaps where I would differ. But, a more substantial jail sentence was warranted for conviction of these felonious crimes.

    These opinions having been stated, I do not like the idea of recalling a judge who finds in a way that I do not agree.  It may have a chilling effect on judging. But, the national discussion is wholesome in justifying crimes on a "party culture," and too much to drink.  


    Parent

    I'd like to read the prosecutor's (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by oculus on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 02:19:58 PM EST
    sentencing brief, if any; and sentencing transcript; and the probation report. And see the actual Penal Code sections the jury found defendant guilty of violating.

    I am surprised the court considered defendant's B.A. to mitigate his sentence. Not the norm in CA state court.

    Parent

    I would also urge both you and Peter to read ... (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 03:24:20 PM EST
    ... the victim's statement to the court, in which she addressed both the judge and the defendant  prior to sentencing.

    I fully realize that her detailed and emotional recounting of what happened to her that night and its consequent effect on her life rightly has no legal relevance in the judge's sentencing decision, and I accept that he did what he thought best. I disagree with those who now seek his recall.

    That said, I think the judge erred here, because as trials don't occur in a vacuum, neither should sentencing. Reading the victim's statement, given that it's since gone viral, will help you to understand why the subsequent public outcry over the 6-mo. sentence has been so loud and sharp.

    From the public's point of view, it's as though the judge had considered the potential impact of jail or prison upon the defendant, to the virtual exclusion of the very real harm which the defendant had inflicted upon his victim by his selfish actions. As a direct consequence of this, aside from the potential judicial recall, the California legislature will likely be sorely tempted to reactively impose its own "solution" on future such cases. And I don't think that's helpful at all.

    An independent judiciary can't afford to also be tone-deaf.

    Parent

    I did read the victim's statement (none / 0) (#110)
    by Peter G on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 05:43:32 PM EST
    What would make you think I didn't? Nor can I fathom what would make you insinuate that I don't understand the public outcry. Nothing in my comment supports that claim. I wrote what I wrote, in response to the question to which I was responding. It's not a complete analysis of the case, which I hope I made clear I didn't and couldn't know enough about to have a final opinion on; certainly not one I would publish.  
        And I totally disagree with you that victim impact is legally irrelevant to the sentencing decision. Cannot imagine why you would think so, Donald, but I certainly don't. Not controlling. Not overriding. But hardly irrelevant.

    Parent
    I read that Turner was going to appeal (none / 0) (#113)
    by ding7777 on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 05:52:41 PM EST
    the verdict. Do you think that is a wise?

    Parent
    I stand corrected. (none / 0) (#117)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 06:19:40 PM EST
    Sorry. I was actually responding to oculus, but had initially and mistakenly thought her comment to be yours. I then added her name and failed to delete your own. My apologies.

    Parent
    And thank you, Peter, for clarifying that ... (none / 0) (#119)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 06:51:59 PM EST
    ... victim impact can be a relevant factor at sentencing. It's always been my impression that it was not to be a controlling factor, and mistakenly assumed that the victim's statements were not to be given weight.

    Given what you noted, however, it's now appears to me as though Judge Persky may have ignored it entirely and gone out of his way to give the defendant an undue benefit of doubt.

    Ultimately, Judge Persky acted entirely within his proper discretion. While I don't believe he should face recall or sanction for his actions, which is a punitive and emotion reaction by some members of the public to what occurred, he should certainly not be above public criticism.

    Further, he and his colleagues on the bench may need to publicly address this controversy personally, lest state legislators react by deciding to impose additional conditions upon a judge's discretion at sentencing. In that regard, I would note that the California State Legislature does not adjourn sine die until November 30, and this being an election year, conditions are ripe.

    But even though sentencing guidelines are a policy call that's entirely within their own purview as state legislators, it's been my experience that their unsolicited political meddling in such matters almost never turns out well over the long term. That's how we've ended up with dubious policies like "three strikes."

    Aloha.

    Parent

    The BA thing ... (5.00 / 2) (#103)
    by christinep on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 03:50:54 PM EST
    Just an emotional reaction on my part, but could that be an indication of something else at play here.  For whatever reason--even tho the scale is different--that gosh darn "affluenza teen" episode of recent vintage keeps interfering with my thinking on this one.  It just seems like an extraordinary benefit-of-the-doubt thing in the sentencing.

    Parent
    what does BA mean in this context? (none / 0) (#109)
    by ding7777 on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 05:43:13 PM EST


    Parent
    That he was a college grad, (none / 0) (#111)
    by Peter G on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 05:44:42 PM EST
    isn't that all that was meant? A bachelor's degree.

    Parent
    Brock Turner was a freshman (none / 0) (#118)
    by ding7777 on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 06:42:10 PM EST


    Parent
    That's correct. Turner's only 20 years old. (none / 0) (#120)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 07:00:11 PM EST
    USA Swimming, the governing body in this country, has now banned him from the sport for life.

    Parent
    BA (none / 0) (#127)
    by Jane in CA on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 09:22:32 PM EST
    I read it as Blood Alcohol ...


    Parent
    that makes a lot more sense (none / 0) (#131)
    by Peter G on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 10:42:30 PM EST
    thanks

    Parent
    Although here in Pennsylvania (none / 0) (#142)
    by Peter G on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 09:26:30 AM EST
    we refer to that concept as "BAC" (blood alcohol concentration, or perhaps blood alcohol content) not simply "BA."

    Parent
    Yes (none / 0) (#157)
    by Jane in CA on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 03:32:23 PM EST
    That confused me too at first, but then I figured it was simply shorthand.

    Parent
    That explains why I thought (none / 0) (#160)
    by Peter G on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 04:51:21 PM EST
    from your moniker, Jane, that you were from California. Now I understand; you are from Canada, and the "CA" is just shorthand. Or is it the Canary Islands or Cameroon?

    Parent
    My response (none / 0) (#166)
    by Jane in CA on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 06:29:26 PM EST
    about initially being puzzled by the shorthand BA was sincere. I certainly didn't mean any disrespect to anyone by it ...  

    Parent
    Hey, Jane (5.00 / 1) (#182)
    by Peter G on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 09:26:58 AM EST
    Just kidding. No one was offended, I'm sure.

    Parent
    thank-you (none / 0) (#135)
    by ding7777 on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 04:53:59 AM EST


    Parent
    Blood alcohol (none / 0) (#141)
    by oculus on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 09:21:34 AM EST


    Parent
    "I can't believe what you did." (none / 0) (#115)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 06:16:22 PM EST
    The fallout from the Brock Turner case has since impacted another unrelated criminal case under Judge Aaron Persky's jurisdiction, as more than 10 potential jurors reportedly refused to serve in his courtroom. According to sources, the judge was eventually able get get a jury impaneled, but the open contempt and scorn shown him by a few of those potential jurors surprised a number of court officials.

    California Attorney General Kamala Harrris, who's also a heavily favored candidate for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by the retiring Barbara Boxer, also criticized Judge Persky, voicing her concern to reporters during a campaign stop in Oakland that the victim "was not respected" and "was not given dignity" by the judge in pronouncing sentence on Turner.

    "The concern I have in that case is that the victim's voice was not heard. It was not respected. She was not given dignity in the process. I have not had time to read the transcript. But I am very concerned about that. As you know, I have personally prosecuted rape cases and sexual assault and child molestation cases, and when someone is facing 14 years exposure, there has got to be extraordinary mitigation facts to reduce down to six months. And I don't know if the facts actually met that kind of mitigation."
    - CA AG Kamala Harris, to KPIX-TV news reporters in Oakland (June 9, 2016)

    In my honest opinion, it's now in the best interests of Judge Persky and other senior members of the state judiciary to publicly and immediately address this issue forthrightly, because it's now about to turn into a major political football.

    Speaking from personal experience, angry and / or opportunistic state legislators can screw the judiciary six ways to Sunday if they put their minds to the task, starting with prospective budget appropriations.

    And on that note, I'm sure that Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye and her colleagues on the California Supreme Court, who oversee the state judiciary, do not appreciate it when their magistrates at the district or circuit court levels give anyone in Sacramento any excuse to even think about going there. Judge Persky just gave them that excuse.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    See California Rules of Court (none / 0) (#108)
    by oculus on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 04:45:42 PM EST
    Rule 4.421. Circumstances in Aggravation; and Rule 4.423. Circumstances in Mitigation.

    Parent
    Anyone else (none / 0) (#136)
    by ragebot on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 08:13:14 AM EST
    recall hearing about a disagreement between the vic and the probation officer who prepared the probation report for this case.

    The probation officer claimed the vic said she did not want to see the defendant serve jail time,  while the vic said this was not the case.

    I have seen a couple of blurbs about this on the internet saying it was a factor in the light sentence given.

    My experience is in civil not criminal law.  Maybe someone could explain how a judge weighs recommendations from the prosecution, defense, vic, and in this case probation (are there other sources).  And maybe more to the point what happens if there is a disagreement between parties as in this case.

    Parent

    I'm Glad You Brought This Up (none / 0) (#158)
    by Jane in CA on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 03:40:41 PM EST
    I also heard that the Judge relied heavily on Probation's report, which favored little or no prison time for the rapist. If that's the case, shouldn't we also be examining the culture that could produce such a report, even after speaking to a clearly articulate, and very wounded victim?


    Parent
    That's often a lonely and thankless task. (5.00 / 2) (#51)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 08:39:20 PM EST
    "Someday this war's going to end."
    - Col. Kilgore (Robert Duvall), "Apocalypse Now!" (1979)

    But those of us who've long opposed capital punishment as a matter of public policy really do appreciate their efforts.

    Please extend my sincere thanks to your friend Stu.

    Parent

    Stu was one of my co-counsel (5.00 / 5) (#54)
    by Peter G on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 09:12:22 PM EST
    for six or more years, ending about 12 years ago, in the case where we won a DNA exoneration from death row in Pennsylvania. A terrific documentary about that case is showing on Netflix this month.

    Parent
    Murderpedia has some background (none / 0) (#57)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 04:38:33 AM EST
    on the behavior of the prosecution.

    Parent
    Being on death row (none / 0) (#59)
    by Chuck0 on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 07:35:12 AM EST
    in PA is nearly the same as LWOP. PA hasn't executed anyone since 1997 and our current governor, Wolf, will not allow any executions on his watch. Which to me, is a very good thing. I've been hoping he would take steps to eliminate the death penalty in PA. Unfortunately there is little support in the legislature. Even the Democrats in the PA house are conservatives.

    Parent
    Correction. (none / 0) (#60)
    by Chuck0 on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 07:36:18 AM EST
    The last execution in PA was in 1999.

    Parent
    somewhat long article (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by CST on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 02:42:44 PM EST
    today in the NYTimes about school segregation and school choice.

    I have a ton of opinions on this subject.  My parents were radicals who sent their white kids to public schools in Boston during an era where every single white kid in Boston went to Catholic school.  And yes, you had to be a bit radical to do something like that in the late 80s early 90s.  Now my sisters are facing similar questions for their kids, only with gentrification and an increase in charter/magnet schools it's gotten even more complicated in a lot of ways.

    I guess that I fundamentally agree with a lot of what the author has to say, but I also recognize that it comes from a place of privilege to say that whatever school your kid goes to they will be well educated because their parents are well educated.  At least until High School.  At which point - we all did eventually "sell out" and go to the magnet High School.

    your part of Boston (none / 0) (#10)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 03:00:09 PM EST
    or Boston sounds a lot like south and Central GA where the white kids with some sort of resources go to private schools while the lower income whites and minorities go to public schools. IMO this has been one of my issues with the big voucher lie. It would basically make that issue more stark.

    They have charter schools in my county but the buses don't go there. So in order to go there you have to have transportation to get there on your own.

    Parent

    back then (none / 0) (#11)
    by CST on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 03:16:48 PM EST
    It was catholic schools which were technically private but relatively affordable and there was at least one in every neighborhood.

    These days I'm not really sure, I know that a lot of Catholic schools closed after the church scandal, and that there are just fewer kids in general in the school system. There are also a lot more charter/magnet type schools then there used to be, although the charters have a similar racial breakdown as the public schools and are served by buses (I think), if not there is public transit.  It still creates a bit of a two-teared system, but at least it's less blatantly racist?  I dunno.

    I should also mention that it's not a simple thing being in an urban public school.  Would I do it all over again?  Probably, but at the time I really hated it.  And I did have one friend who had to get out of it due to social problems.  Looking back now it's easy to say that we all turned out OK, but it's not always obvious that it will end that way.

    Parent

    OMG Clinton Twitter (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by smott on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 03:24:21 PM EST
    To Trump
    "Delete your account"
    ROFL.

    Bad choice of zing... (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by kdog on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 08:16:37 AM EST
    with the email thingy, as dumb as the email thingy may be.

    All future zingers should not contain words like "delete" and "account" if I were Team Clinton.  Just sayin'.

    Parent

    lol; I thought it was funny, kdog. (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 08:35:13 AM EST
    Clinton is very fast on her feet.

    Parent
    Oh I did too Nat... (none / 0) (#66)
    by kdog on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 08:40:58 AM EST
    but it left an opening for a counter-punch.  Regardless of the merits, there is a federal investigation into Clinton's email accounts and deletions.

    There are a million and one ways to mock Trump effectively....don't use buzz words that can come back to bite you.  

    Besides, Trump is not smart enough to delete his Twitter and stop embarrassing himself, and our country.

    Parent

    You miss the point (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 09:09:21 AM EST
    It was irony.  At its best IMO.  It also got 400,000 retweets.  How many retweets do you think the snappy comebacks got.

    It was Hillary saying bring it.  The definition of Donald started yesterday.  The mountains of oppo they have on Trump make eghazi look like a resume bullett point .

    Ps
    She is not going to be indicted.

    Parent

    You do know (none / 0) (#114)
    by Nemi on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 06:07:47 PM EST
    that it's a commonly used 'meme'/insult on Twitter, right?

    The tweet became Clinton's most retweeted tweet ever and the most popular of the US presidential campaign so far, reaching 370,000 retweets and 450,000 likes at present. Of course, Twitter users had a field day.


    Parent
    Word is leaking out (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 04:42:59 PM EST
    that it's Elizabeth's Warren turn to endorse tonight on The Rachel Maddow Show.

    Watching her speech now on MSNBC (5.00 / 3) (#30)
    by ruffian on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 06:38:26 PM EST
    She is giving it to the Donald big time and better yet tying him back to the rest of the GOP. "He's Mitch McConnell's kind of candidate"

    Parent
    For those that didn't see Warren earlier today (none / 0) (#42)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 08:03:22 PM EST
    It's definitely worth the 15 minutes

    The endorsement (if coming) should be on Maddow's show right about now.

    Parent

    She is (none / 0) (#47)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 08:13:02 PM EST
    It will be interesting to monitor the level of vitriol that will be thrown at her starting right now.

    Parent
    Once word leaked (none / 0) (#48)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 08:15:38 PM EST
    out that she might endorse Hillary it started. Already all over facebook I understand.

    Parent
    The fingers sometimes type what they want (none / 0) (#17)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 04:44:21 PM EST
    while the brain proceeds to type something else.

    Parent
    Yeah, heard (none / 0) (#19)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 05:20:29 PM EST
    that on twitter but I don't know if it is true. I also heard that she wouldn't endorse for a couple of weeks on down the line.

    Parent
    It's true (none / 0) (#20)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 05:23:20 PM EST


    Parent
    Done deal (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by CoralGables on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 08:15:40 PM EST
    She did an interview with the Boston Globe before the Maddow Show.

    "I'm ready. I'm ready to jump in this fight and make sure that Hillary Clinton is the next president of the United States and be sure that Donald Trump gets nowhere near the White House."

    "I'm supporting Hillary Clinton because she's a fighter, a fighter with guts."

    Parent

    "I want to add another part to this.... (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 08:19:59 PM EST
    ....I just want to be sure I get this on the table and get it on the table early,  Hillary Clinton won."

    Parent
    It seems (none / 0) (#26)
    by KeysDan on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 05:50:20 PM EST
    to be a pincer squeeze on Sanders. He will feel the burn.

    Parent
    Slow Bern (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 08:04:33 PM EST
    Bern Notice
    Third Degree Bern
    Heart Bern

    Parent
    Senator (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by FlJoe on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 06:36:24 PM EST
    Warren is ripping the Donald to shreds ! Wow.

    Love that she is tying him to the rest of the GOP (5.00 / 3) (#31)
    by ruffian on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 06:39:39 PM EST
    They created him, after all.

    Parent
    KITTIES! (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 07:18:30 PM EST
    TURNS OUT

    THERE WAS MORE

    THAT 2 KITTENS

    these were taken by stealth from the bedroom window

    So cute. Hope you can get (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by caseyOR on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 07:37:49 PM EST
    them spayed and neutered.

    Parent
    Me too (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 07:51:14 PM EST
    Braveheart seems to be the bravest/most curious.  Probably be my first contact.  They are very wild.

    Parent
    You've (none / 0) (#45)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 08:10:27 PM EST
    named them? Aw.

    My dad had dealings with feral cats where he went to dump his trash. There was a local organization that would come and get the cats spayed and neutered if they could catch them. Might be the same type organization in your area.

    Parent

    Just Braveheart (none / 0) (#46)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 08:11:43 PM EST
    Trust me, there isn't.

    Parent
    Howdy, wear gloves... (5.00 / 4) (#53)
    by fishcamp on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 08:59:55 PM EST


    Parent
    I'm hoping I can earn their (none / 0) (#34)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 07:22:14 PM EST
    Trust in time to have them fixed.  Five is enough.

    Parent
    Can't believe you aren't naming them (none / 0) (#132)
    by ruffian on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 10:51:31 PM EST
    after Stark children! Little Arya's got some needle claws!

    Have fun but be careful!

    Parent

    Beautiful (none / 0) (#146)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 11:33:01 AM EST
    I'm told Alabama has feral cat problems. None in our neighborhood though. We are out of town, lots of coyotes and foxes, I think that's why.

    Parent
    Funny you should mention that (none / 0) (#152)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 01:33:03 PM EST
    But not that funny.  They have disappeared.  All 5 without a trace.  I accused my a$$holr neighbor of poisoning them but my brotherinlaw say it was probably coyotes.  On reflection I think he could well be right.  I hear them almost every night.

    Parent
    I'm sorry Capt (none / 0) (#153)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 01:52:42 PM EST


    Parent
    Cats (none / 0) (#161)
    by KD on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 05:05:07 PM EST
    If the mother cat has smelled human around the kittens, she'll move them to a new hiding place. Maybe that's what happened. When I was little, I experienced that often. We kids would find the kittens in the barn and play with them, and then the mother cat would move them somewhere else.

    Parent
    Maybe. I hope so. And thought of that. (none / 0) (#162)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 05:17:33 PM EST
    But I doubt it.   They had been living in a rubbish/construction pile beside my house.  And had been eating the food I put out.  For a few days.  It occurred to me it might have even been the food that alerted/attracted to predators.

    Anyway.  I hope you are right and I have been looking around the area for any sign of them.

    Parent

    I think I found them! (none / 0) (#168)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 06:46:22 PM EST
    Watch this space.  

    Parent
    Yay! Mama kitties are pretty smart (5.00 / 1) (#171)
    by ruffian on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 07:39:49 PM EST
    Stray cat that adopted us when I was a kid had a litter at our house, but that didn't go well..a bit chaotic. She had the next litter in the neighbor's closet.

    Parent
    And now for something non-political ... (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 11:30:58 PM EST
     ... from the San Gabriel Mountains National Monument in Los Angeles County, it's time for mountain lions on cruise control.

    Interesting (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 08:07:20 PM EST
    A battle is escalating over the potential release of videos of Donald Trump dodging and weaving during depositions in the Trump University case, footage that could make its way into attack ads aimed at the Republican White House hopeful.
    The plaintiffs' attorneys in two class-action lawsuits are pressuring U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel -- the target of Trump's racially charged attacks -- to take steps that could make public four dozen video clips of Trump being pressed on whether his real estate seminar business was a sprawling scam, as well as his thoughts on the 2016 political race.
    Oooh, ooh (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by Peter G on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 09:40:18 AM EST
    I want to see those.

    Parent
    It looks like we may (none / 0) (#145)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 09:47:32 AM EST
    Get the chance.

    Parent
    Awsum (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 06:54:12 PM EST
    CITY, Utah -- Mitt Romney warned that a Donald Trump presidency could normalize racism, misogyny and bigotry in the national conscience. Businesswoman Meg Whitman compared the presumptive Republican presidential nominee to Adolf Hitler. House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) was asked, uncomfortably, how he could explain his endorsement of Trump to a young child.

    Then came Trump's boosters, awkwardly imploring about 300 business executives and GOP establishment donors and strategists gathered here for Romney's annual ideas festival to unite for the fall campaign. In a stroke of defiance, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus declared that Trump and the GOP would win in November "with or without you," according to attendees.

    Anthony Scaramucci, a New York financier who was one of Romney's top funders in 2012, came to Park City seeking to galvanize his old friends to help him raise money for Trump. He likened the atmosphere here to the hit HBO series "Game of Thrones."

    feel like Jon Snow, trying to get the Wildlings to team up with the kings of the castles," Scaramucci said.

    Recalling what he told Romney loyalists, Scaramucci said: "Your father just got slayed by your uncle, whom you don't really like, and your uncle is now in charge. You've got the White Walkers descending from the north and they're coming to hunt you and all the living. What do you do? Do you fight with your uncle or band together and fight the White Walkers?"

    LINK

    WHAT IS DEAD CAN NEVER DIE!

    Oh Reince (none / 0) (#172)
    by ruffian on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 07:56:15 PM EST
    You give yourself away

    Parent
    I thought comparing Hillary to Hitler (none / 0) (#174)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 08:10:26 PM EST
    And themselves to Roosevelt and Stalin was good but I did not see Hillary being compared to the Night King and themselves to the humans coming.  

    That link is great.  For so many reasons.

    Parent

    I don't know where they got that either (none / 0) (#175)
    by ruffian on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 08:58:47 PM EST
    One of them is an unkillable relentless steely blue eyed ancient warrior that defeats anything in its path, and the other is the Night King!

    It's only June ffs.....

    Parent

    Latest reports on the (5.00 / 1) (#204)
    by KeysDan on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 11:24:23 AM EST
    murerous attack on Pulse, the gay club in Orlando, is 53 dead, and many injured.  As always, we need to await facts as they may become known.  Of course, human beings like Mrs. Clinton, also await information while extending thoughts and prayers. Then there is the all purpose wingnut humanoid, Tucker Carlson, who says it is Obama's fault. (someone should update the wingers, the kool kids now say it is Hillary's fault).

     And, then there is  the ersatz human being,Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who tweeted a horrible bible verse, about a man reaping what he sows...And, this the worst in terrorist deaths: San Bernardino (14), Ft. Hood (13), Charleston (9).   Only silver lining: No guns were injured. Good thoughts and hopes to victims, their families and friends.  And, the good people of Orlando.

    Basically the FBI mostly catches terrorists ahead (5.00 / 1) (#205)
    by ruffian on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 12:45:27 PM EST
    of time if the FBI itself helps them plan the attack in a sting operation. They can't detect attacks like this.

    Back to the OJ verdict (none / 0) (#4)
    by Repack Rider on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 02:24:23 PM EST
    There was a discussion in the previous Open Thread about the OJ trial, with a couple of people claiming that OJ was either framed (but guilty anyway) or had help.  I followed the trial closely and later downloaded the transcripts.  I am ready to demolish these claims with a discussion of the actual evidence and testimony.

    Anyone?  Bueller?

    questionable actions? (none / 0) (#14)
    by ding7777 on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 03:39:12 PM EST
    vannatter carrying oj's blood back to house while the techs were still collecting evidence was the most questionable action

    Parent
    See what I mean? (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by Repack Rider on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 05:41:00 PM EST
    vannatter carrying oj's blood back to house while the techs were still collecting evidence was the most questionable action

    Does that mean OJ didn't do it, and the other 175 or so items of physical evidence linking him to the crime are invalid?

    As you know, at that time Vanatter believed that OJ had an ironclad alibi of being on a plane, because his timeline had not yet been established.  Are you suggesting that Vanatter  "framed" a man he ASSUMED at the time was innocent and had an alibi for his whereabouts at the time of the crime?

    What's your POINT?

    Parent

    My point is a detective bringing (none / 0) (#90)
    by ding7777 on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 12:07:17 PM EST
    blood to a live crime scene is a questionable action.  

    I diagree that Vannatter assumed OJ was innocent. Vannatter mirandarized OJ, got a blood sample, photoed OJ's cut, encouraged OJ to submit to a lie detector and told OJ that he and Lange had problems because of the blood on the Bronco/driveway.


    Parent

    BFD (none / 0) (#102)
    by RickyJim on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 03:48:36 PM EST
    After getting the sample from Simpson at Police Headquarters, in the late afternoon of the day after the murders, Vannatter drove out to Simpson's Rockingham estate and gave the vial of blood, in a sealed envelope, to evidence collector Dennis Fung, who was about to leave.  The blood evidence had all been collected at the scene in the morning.  How sinister!  Of course it shows that Simpson was not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  HeHeHe.

    Parent
    I don't beleive anyone here is saying (none / 0) (#104)
    by McBain on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 03:53:45 PM EST
    O.J. wasn't involved in the murders.  Some, including me, are saying the LAPD might have messed with the evidence to strengthen their hand.

    Parent
    You Are Exercising Your Freedom of Speech (none / 0) (#107)
    by RickyJim on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 04:08:17 PM EST
    and the fact that Jeralyn doesn't have to time to moderate the threads to make a contentless, evidenceless assertion saying that the evidence could have been tampered with by the police.  It is impossible to prove you wrong in this or in any other case.  So?  Again, BFD.  The defense in this case thrived on this and many other non issues.  The real question is whether it is reasonable, in light of the presented evidence, that Simpson didn't commit the crimes.  

    Parent
    More empty claims masquerading as thought (none / 0) (#170)
    by Repack Rider on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 07:35:37 PM EST
    Some, including me, are saying the LAPD might have messed with the evidence to strengthen their hand.

    Be specific.  I know what you are SAYING, but I also know you have not shown a single reason for saying it.

    WHO "messed with the evidence?"

    HOW was the evidence "messed with?"

    WHAT support can you give for what you are saying?  Use the testimony and evidence from the trial, not some weird website.

    Like the jury, you're claiming that you have "reasonable doubt," but you can't supply the REASON that is the basis for your "doubt."  I say you are full of it, do not have a clue what you are talking about, and I challenge you to support your claim.

    Parent

    I alread have but you don't want to listen (none / 0) (#173)
    by McBain on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 07:57:08 PM EST
    Mark Fuhrman lied in court and took the 5th on several questions including.... did he plant or manufacture evidence.  That's  huge.  Ding brought up Vanatter's handling of key evidence.   Those were two detectives I didn't trust during the trial. Not trusting them = reasonable doubt.  

    I don't buy your "airtight alibi" theory.  Feel free to elaborate but when you include caps, insults and personal attacks, it weakens your argument.      

    Parent

    yes, it is a BFD (none / 0) (#112)
    by ding7777 on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 05:48:19 PM EST
    LAPD changed how it collects, stores, logs evidence
    because of the OJ trial - and one of the changes is you cannot re enter a crime scene with evidence collected elsewhere

    Parent
    how do you get Vannatter (none / 0) (#176)
    by ding7777 on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 04:19:28 AM EST
    ASSUMED at the time [OJ} was innocent and had an alibi for his whereabouts at the time of the crime?

    Look at the interview:

    Vannatter: OJ, we've got sort of a problem.

    Simpson: Mmm hmm.

    Vannatter: We've got some blood on and in your car, we've got some blood at your house, and sort of a problem.

    Simpson: Well, take my blood test.

    Lange: Well, we'd like to do that. We've got, of course, the cut on your finger that you aren't real clear on. Do you recall having that cut on your finger the last time you were at Nicole's house?
    -------------------------

    Lange: Understand, the reason we're talking to you is because you're the ex-husband.

    Simpson: I know, I'm the number one target, and now you tell me I've got blood all over the place.

    Lange: Well, there's blood at your house in the driveway, and we've got a search warrant, and we're going to go get the blood. We found some in your house. Is that your blood that's there?

    Those comments do not sound like Vannatter/Lange assumed OJ was innocent with an alibi.

    Parent

    this is absurd (none / 0) (#177)
    by mm on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 07:21:30 AM EST
    There was indisputable scientific evidence presented that none of the blood collected could have come from the sample taken from Simpson later.  The sample had an anti-coagulant, EDTA, in high concentration.

    And to be fair, Simpson had already admitted to cutting himself and bleeding, cause you know, he bleeds all the time.

    *****
    Vannatter: How did you get the injury on your hand?

    Simpson: I don't know. The first time, when I was in Chicago and all, but at the house I was just running around.

    Vannatter: How did you do it in Chicago?

    Simpson: I broke a glass. One of you guys had just called me, and I was in the bathroom, and I just kind of went bonkers for a little bit.

    Lange: Is that how you cut it?

    Simpson: Mmm, it was cut before, but I think I just opened it again, I'm not sure.

    Lange: Do you recall bleeding at all in your truck, in the Bronco?

    Simpson: I recall bleeding at my house and then I went to the Bronco. The last thing I did before I left, when I was rushing, was went and got my phone out of the Bronco.

    Lange: Mmm hmm. Where's the phone now?

    Simpson: In my bag.

    Lange: You have it...?

    Simpson: In that black bag.

    Lange: You brought a bag with you here?

    Simpson: Yeah, it's...

    Lange: So do you recall bleeding at all?

    Simpson: Yeah, I mean, I knew I was bleeding, but it was no big deal. I bleed all the time. I play golf and stuff, so there's always something, nicks and stuff here and there.


    Parent

    Questionable as to what? (none / 0) (#23)
    by RickyJim on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 05:35:49 PM EST
    What the hell could he have done with the blood to frame OJ?  The fact that the defense case was built on drivel like that shows how poor a case it was and how poor the prosecution was for not being able to demolish it.  

    Of course, I have to add that for me, that the whole affair was convincing evidence that US criminal justice is inferior to those in other first world countries as far as accuracy of its results.  I can't believe he would have been acquitted in France or Germany.

    Parent

    I can't believe that, either. (none / 0) (#27)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 05:54:42 PM EST
    RickyJim: "I can't believe OJ would have been acquitted in France or Germany."

    That would only occur if the victims so happened to be Jewish.

    Parent

    The Firebombers Were Convicted (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by RickyJim on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 07:42:11 PM EST
    of "Attempted Serious Arson". Apparently this judge didn't buy that further charges of anti-semitism were justified.  I don't agree with him but the relevancy of the German case to my comments above is naught.  By the way, one of Simpson's victims was Jewish.

    Parent
    One part of the trial that bugged me (none / 0) (#105)
    by McBain on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 03:58:30 PM EST
    was when Fuhrman refused to answer the question.... did he plant or manufacture evidence?  
     

    Parent
    It Bugged Me Too (none / 0) (#116)
    by RickyJim on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 06:18:53 PM EST
    Fuhrman explained in the book "Murder in Brentwood" that if he answered any of Uelmen's questions, he would have to answer all of them. (Of course Ito shouldn't have allowed any questions if Fuhrman had the plan of taking the 5th.)  The questions he didn't want to answer had to do with his use of the N word on a tape with a screenwriter.  He had said under oath that he never used that word.  I think he could have defended himself by saying that he was in character for a screenplay and that didn't count as using it.  However he believed that the defense wouldn't give him the opportunity to explain and the prosecution had made it clear that they didn't want anything to do with him.

    Fuhrman later pleaded nolo contendere to the perjury charge, and as part of a plea bargain, was sentenced to 3 years probation and fined $200.  He said he couldn't afford the expense of a trial.

    And you think this is serious evidence that Fuhrman planted evidence in the Simpson matter?  It would be in character for you. :-)

    Parent

    If I was on the jury, I wouldn't have been able (none / 0) (#123)
    by McBain on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 07:38:08 PM EST
    to trust Furhman.  I still think there's a possibility he or someone else on the LAPD planted or manipulate evidence.  For some reason, people get all bent out of shape about that after all these years.  

    Parent
    Hey Repack Rider (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by RickyJim on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 07:56:54 PM EST
    Do you see what you are up against?  I give up and leave it to you to answer ding and McBain.

    Parent
    Of course you do (none / 0) (#140)
    by Repack Rider on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 09:02:54 AM EST
    I still think there's a possibility he or someone else on the LAPD planted or manipulate evidence.

    Please support that statement with you know, EVIDENCE.

    And tell me what would motivate L.A. police to frame a man that they thought had an airtight alibi.

    How do you think the murderer's glove got behind the guest house where Kato Kaelin lived?

    You are worse than the jury, you have complaints about the process, but you can't begin to tell me what they are.

    As my sainted eighth grade teacher Mrs. Robinson would have said, "If you can't tell me what you believe, how do you know you believe it?"

    Parent

    Dear ny shooter: you may be too (none / 0) (#22)
    by oculus on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 05:34:24 PM EST
    young to remember the 1968 Dem. convention in Chicago. And Hubert Humphrey's subsequent defeat in the general election. I'm confident HRC will be our next President. But why tempt fate. All the televised confrontation during the '68 convention hurt the party and the candidate.

    I'd like to offer ... (none / 0) (#40)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 07:59:03 PM EST
    ... four points here:

    • As Democratic party delegates convened in Chicago in late August 1968, the United States was at the height of its then-very controversial involvement in the Vietnam War, an undeclared conflict in which our country was then losing an average of 350 men killed and 21,850 wounded per week.

    • Sen. Robert Kennedy had been one of the leading contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination that year, only to be assassinated in Los Angeles on June 5, 1968, mere minutes after he had been declared the winner of the California primary. His death created a political vacuum within the party's liberal wing, which Sen. Eugene McCarthy was never able to completely fill.

    • Most delegates to the Democratic National Convention in 1968 were appointed by party bosses and leaders, and not allocated according the the popular vote in a primary election or party caucus.

    • As a direct result of the previous two points, Vice President Hubert Humphrey was able to secure his party's nomination despite having declined to participate in a single Democratic primary election or party caucus anywhere in the country. Rather, he chose to work the party's back-channels to garner the support of a requisite number of convention delegates, particularly after Kennedy's death.

    The street battles that occurred in Chicago  and the corresponding chaos inside the convention hall directly resulted from the confluence of those four points into the prevailing political jet-stream. Clearly, it was a different time and era, and none of those volatile conditions exist in our country today.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    As oc said (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 08:02:23 PM EST
    Why tempt fate?

    Parent
    I gather you do not envision (none / 0) (#52)
    by oculus on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 08:44:59 PM EST
    rabble rousers hounding the GOP convention and hounding Trump until election day and maybe hounding HRC and the Democratic convention?  Bad optics.

    Parent
    IMO the bad optics... (none / 0) (#64)
    by kdog on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 08:27:15 AM EST
    is herding protesters or any stripe into "free speech" cages to keep them from hounding the poor poor power brokers. Or busting protesters heads or tasing them.

    It's a constitutional right to peaceably assemble and air grievances, thank goodness...and what will be, will be.

    It may not be as volatile as '68, but we do have wars going and income disparity at dangerous levels, and global environmental crises.  Hardly an age of contentment with the state that would preclude the need for protest.

    Parent

    As far (none / 0) (#70)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 09:43:29 AM EST
    free speech zones go, shouldn't delegates be allowed to walk to the convention without being attacked by protestors? A lot of these people are just lowly party members that are delegates, middle class people who support the party.

    Parent
    Is walking by a peaceable assembly... (none / 0) (#72)
    by kdog on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 09:51:20 AM EST
    an attack?  I don't think so.

    If protestors cease to peaceably assemble they can be dealt with, you don't pre-emptively herd them into a cage...that's not kosher.  

    Parent

    What are the limits to that? (none / 0) (#73)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 09:55:51 AM EST
    Do you think people should be allowed to surround abortion clinics in a barricade that women have to cross while people are screaming murder and shoving horrible pictures of dead babies in their face?

    Or should the be kept at a distance but allowed to "assemble"

    Parent

    The thing (none / 0) (#75)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 10:07:02 AM EST
    is though protestors these days lack the self disciple themselves to stay in one location and have a protest. It is the reason why ribbons were put up. Ribbons are the same as cages?

    Okay. So like Howdy says evangelicals are within their rights to block women from going to Planned Parenthood?

    Parent

    I would expand the question (none / 0) (#78)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 10:10:34 AM EST
    Does any one have the right to block anyone from anything?  Including a political convention.

    Your "rights" stop at the end of my nose.  I thnk the answer is no.  That's not peaceful assembly.

    Parent

    No (none / 0) (#79)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 10:21:02 AM EST
    it's not and there is a reason why we have protest zones. It's not something that someone just dreamed up to protect themselves.

    Parent
    Blocking access... (none / 0) (#80)
    by kdog on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 10:40:22 AM EST
    would cease to a peaceable assembly, obviously.

    Agree or disagree with the respective causes, but the anti-choicers and the anti-GOPers and anti-DNCers do have a right to air their grievances publicly and in close proximity to the events they are protesting.  And personally, I wouldn't have it any other way as the alternative is far more unsavory.

    I remember the TL community being in almost universal agreement that this was an abomination in 2004, from wiki...

    Free speech zones were used in Boston at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. The free speech zones organized by the authorities in Boston were boxed in by concrete walls, invisible to the FleetCenter where the convention was held and criticized harshly as a "protest pen" or "Boston's Camp X-Ray".[11] "Some protesters for a short time Monday [July 26, 2004] converted the zone into a mock prison camp by donning hoods and marching in the cage with their hands behind their backs."[12] A coalition of groups protesting the Iraq War challenged the planned protest zones. U.S. District Court Judge Douglas Woodlock was sympathetic to their request: "One cannot conceive of what other design elements could be put into a space to create a more symbolic affront to the role of free expression.".[13] However, he ultimately rejected the petition to move the protest zones closer to the FleetCenter.[14]

    Free speech zones were also used in New York City at the 2004 Republican National Convention. According to Mike McGuire, a columnist for the online anti-war magazine Nonviolent Activist, "The policing of the protests during the 2004 Republican National Convention represent[ed] another interesting model of repression. The NYPD tracked every planned action and set up traps. As marches began, police would emerge from their hiding places -- building vestibules, parking garages, or vans -- and corral the dissenters with orange netting that read 'POLICE LINE - DO not CROSS,' establishing areas they ironically called 'ad-hoc free speech zones.' One by one, protesters were arrested and detained--some for nearly two days."[15] Both the Democratic and Republican National parties were jointly awarded a 2005 Jefferson Muzzle from the Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression, "For their mutual failure to make the preservation of First Amendment freedoms a priority during the last Presidential election".[13]

    I mean c'mon Guys...let's try to remain at leat a little objective despite silly season.  Time and place restrictions cannot possibly apply to a political convention, I can think of no more apt time and place to protest.

    Parent

    well (none / 0) (#82)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 10:48:37 AM EST
    first of all I wasn't here in 2004. So I'm not going to comment on that. however what is close enough? Close enough to be able to shoot someone or throw something at them? I personally have no problem with rope lines as long as they are far enough way as to where the people entering a building won't be hurt or killed.

    Parent
    A path as wide... (none / 0) (#83)
    by kdog on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 10:56:21 AM EST
    as a NYC sidewalk works for me.

    You cannot use an assumption of some arsehole getting violent to deny the right to protest...that's not how I read the Bill of Rights, though I am known for my liberal interpretation of that blessed document.

    Parent

    How effective (none / 0) (#89)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 11:31:24 AM EST
    are protests? It seems these days it does zero to help and may even hurt. Besides if something does get out of line this kind of thing makes people side with the police more. Do you really want to give the police an opportunity for great PR? I guess people making themselves feel important by protesting is more important than the actual PR damage they're doing to their cause.

    Parent
    Effectiveness is another question... (none / 0) (#92)
    by kdog on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 01:20:02 PM EST
    I won't be protesting either convention, and I'm trying to talk my nephew out of taking the bus to protest in Philly.

    I'm talking rights, not effectiveness.

    Parent

    I don't think (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 01:48:50 PM EST
    protests help anyone or anything. they've long outlasted their usefulness. There are actually productive ways to change things and protests are actually counterproductive IMO.

    Parent
    I wouldn't go that far... (none / 0) (#95)
    by kdog on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 01:57:11 PM EST
    the police state and "free speech zones" have certainly put a damper on their effectiveness, and kept me out of the protest game for selfish reasons (been in a holding cell, don't wish to repeat) ...but there is too much historical precedent of protests being very effective to say they're obsolete.

    Recent examples of Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter have certainly gotten politicians and the media talking about those issues that would otherwise be ignored, and raised the public's awareness. Lasting results are of course harder to come by.  But for change to happen, you must first voice your displeasure in some form and get yourself arrested, more often than not.

    Parent

    Objective? (none / 0) (#84)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 11:00:45 AM EST
    I'm not concerned with 12 yo threads.  If I agreed with that, I grew up.  Loud violent aggressive protests, like the ones almost certain to happen at the republican convention, are stupid and counter productive.  If they move a single vote it will be to Trump.  It may make the kids feel awsum.  It may be tons of fun.  But it's stupid.  It's counterproductive.  

    Parent
    "Almost certainly" is an assumption... (none / 0) (#86)
    by kdog on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 11:14:20 AM EST
    what happened to innocent until proven guilty? Too quaint like the Geneva Convention now in our Brave New World?

    I will almost certainly buy more weed tonight, as I ran out last night, but I can't be arrested based on that assumption...I have to buy the weed first.

    Fear not, if and when a protestor gets violent or blocks a doorway there will be an army of riot cops on 'em faster than you can say police state, and they'll spend the duration of the convention in a cage at the police station.  That's a certainty, no almost.  Lets at least grant a protestor the courtesy of actually breaking the law first before their rights are abridged.

     

    Parent

    Right (none / 0) (#87)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 11:20:05 AM EST
    Not a reason on earth to think there will be violent protests at Trumps nominating convention.

    How could I have ever assumed such a thing.


    Parent

    I'm not saying you're wrong... (none / 0) (#88)
    by kdog on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 11:28:19 AM EST
    I'm saying the law can't assume it and abridge rights based on that assumption...unless you wanna start a Pre-Crime Div. down at the precinct.

    Maybe I shouldn't give ya any ideas...;)

    Parent

    Spoken like a man who has never (none / 0) (#98)
    by vml68 on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 02:36:58 PM EST
    had to make the tough choice of terminating a pregnancy for whatever reasons and then had to deal with these loons at a time when they are vulnerable.

    the anti-choicers and the anti-GOPers and anti-DNCers do have a right to air their grievances publicly and in close proximity to the events they are protesting.  And personally, I wouldn't have it any other way as the alternative is far more unsavory.

    I feel just as strongly about the Westboro Baptists f@ks.
    Sure, let them air their grievances but that 'close proximity' needs to be beyond a one mile radius.

    Parent

    With ya in spirit... (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by kdog on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 02:48:01 PM EST
    but one must tread carefully with the law, one mile radius for Westboro or the douchbags who harass women seeking healthcare means a one mile radius for the protests we support and admire too.  

    The good of the 1st Amendment far outweighs the ugly side you refer to.

    That being said, I'm more than ok with a liberal interpretation of the 1st and a private citizen kicking their arses from the clinic to a mile down the road and the state finding a jury to convict them.  Who's offering a better deal than that? ;)

    Parent

    They'll be safe (none / 0) (#188)
    by TrevorBolder on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 10:30:51 AM EST
    Rumor is that they are hiring Trump to build a wall around the convention site

    Security at the Sports Complex during the Democratic National Convention next month will include "no-scale fencing" to enclose the Wells Fargo Center and Xfinity Live!, the Secret Service special agent in charge said in an interview Thursday.
    But exact boundaries of the security perimeter around the sports arena, where the convention will take place July 25-28, are not yet finalized, Special Agent James Henry told NBC10.com.


    Parent

    Life itself is full of bad optics. (none / 0) (#97)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 02:32:07 PM EST
    I can't worry about things that I can't control, and prospectively bad optics six weeks hence is one of them. Given what recently happened in San Jose, I would think that Cleveland PD will deploy sufficient numbers of personnel in the streets to discourage potential anarchists and provocateurs.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Somewhere in my piles of books, (none / 0) (#58)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 05:09:52 AM EST
    I've got an issue of the Chicago Seed from the week of the convention.  The cover art: a chubby pink faced pig wearing a Chicago Police Department uniform, with Mayor Daley looking down from the corner of the page.

    The cover's online, but without the feel of newsprint.


    Parent

    The Democratic Convention in Chicago was ... (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 02:53:37 PM EST
    ... but one of the horrible events and tragedies which plagued our country in 1968, a watershed year which was arguably one of the most pivotal and disastrous single annums in U.S. history. It was literally all downhill from the outset, beginning with the Tet offensive in South Vietnam and concluding with the political resurrection of Richard Nixon as President-elect. What happened in 1968 conclusively altered our national trajectory, and not for the better.

    Parent
    The next big attack on Trump .... (none / 0) (#33)
    by christinep on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 07:21:21 PM EST
    And, it is about money and his extensive, documented practice of stiffing named hundreds of people--including blue collar workers and small business contractors--via non-payment, underpayment, and a series of sleazy operations.  Yes, this from the man who poses and brags of his big business largess.

    A top story in USA Today investigative network (a long story with many references) is worth a read.  See it on TPM.  The story is given high billing on HuffPo.  The story has also moved to NBC news with high-placed coverage on the evening news.  When you read this report ... well, the reaction will be "Deadbeat Don" or worse. When you read or hear Trump's response that that is how he does business and--get this--that we ought to do business that way in the US that way too, you can understand why ol' Trump has said, during the course of the primary, that it might be the thing to do to default on any US foreign debts via short-change, etc.

    The Fraudulent Con-Man, indeed!

    We just watched the Obama endorsement (none / 0) (#35)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 07:22:32 PM EST
    Spouse in the background quipping, "So I'm going to let her out of her cage"..."I'm going to let her off the chain"

    #smartassruiningeveryfeelgoodmoment

    Aw too bad (none / 0) (#38)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jun 09, 2016 at 07:41:21 PM EST
    Mr. MT had to comment.

    It was really nice. Honestly this seems like the nicest primary ever in a lot of ways. The big downside, huge downside, was the bros but the bros were there in 2008 also.

    Parent

    Watching soccer with him now (5.00 / 1) (#128)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 09:41:33 PM EST
    Argentina and Peru. Refs really cracking down on aggression and play acting you are hurt. I'm glad for the ref bend toward justice, he's loyal to some BS deal where the the refs red card equal numbers on each team.  Whaaaaat? What kind of perverted status quo is he supporting? Is he supporting the past FIFA corruption or what? He must be having a Testosterone peaking week or something. He's about to get in trouble with me.

    Parent
    From The Onion (none / 0) (#61)
    by Nemi on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 07:59:41 AM EST
    `I'd Like You To Post Long, Aggressive Rants On Social Media,' Says Bernie Sanders In Supporter's Interpretation Of Speech.

    Rather sad that you wouldn't necessarily know that it's satire.

    Take it away (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 08:17:17 AM EST
    HOMER

    Parent
    Chuck Terd (none / 0) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 09:21:22 AM EST
    Grinning like the Cheshire Cat teases something very big for the opening of Press the Meat that he "can't talk about"

    Yeah, yeah, it's awful, it's stupid, it's a waste of time.  Got it.

    But I wonder if it might be Donald desperately trying to change the story and turn the page by appearing with his VP pick.

    They are really whipping the idea that Trump is doing a MAJOR SPEECH AND STARTING THE GENERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN ON MONDAY.

    They ran (none / 0) (#71)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 09:49:16 AM EST
    with this story before but I guess they think Donald gets a second chance.

    Parent
    It just amazes me how many of (none / 0) (#74)
    by fishcamp on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 10:02:25 AM EST
    my long time Aspen good friends are planning to vote for Trump.  When I speak to them about it they are stuck with the idea that Trump will bring a long needed change, while Hillary is a liar and untrustworthy.  They stumble and mumble when I point out that Trump too has lied, along with the rest of the bs he's pumping out. They say he never lies like Hillary does.  They're stuck a deep rut.         Hopefully Trump's alleged Monday speech will change them, but that's doubtful.  Sometimes I get so mad I just hop in my boat and go for a fast boat ride, even in the wind and rain.  That does make me feel better, even if I'm wet.

    Parent
    There (5.00 / 4) (#77)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 10:10:20 AM EST
    are people I have decided that have serious problems with voting for a woman. It's long and deep and cultural and they'll come up with every excuse in the book not to admit it like Trump's lying is okay or whatever. There is some serious deep seated misogyny in this country.

    Parent
    Agreed. (none / 0) (#121)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 07:15:15 PM EST
    I have a friend who's otherwise very liberal in his support for policies near and dear to our hearts, but who simply refuses to consider women as fit for high office. He says they're "too emotional." Of course, this is a guy who's also had to call his mother on several occasions to bail him out financially, so go figure. There's sometimes no accounting for what passes for logical thought in some people's heads.

    Parent
    Dude... (5.00 / 2) (#81)
    by kdog on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 10:47:23 AM EST
    my family reunion is right around the corner...I will be aghast at how many of my extended clan are gonna vote for this douche.  My blood! I don't do facebook but I hear one of my cousins is all up on there with Trump bullsh&t.  

    Should make for some fun drunken debates though!

    Parent

    That's why I tend to avoid family reunions. (none / 0) (#122)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 07:19:32 PM EST
    Especially the one's on my father's side back in Illinois. LOL. I find nowadays that I have very little tolerance any more for such willful ignorance and its accompanying moronitude.

    Parent
    Wouldn't miss mine... (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by kdog on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 08:35:45 AM EST
    We don't take it too seriously in my family...political discussions as a form of our cultural tradition of good natured ball busting.

    I'll tell my uncle I didn't know he was ugly and stupid if he tells me he's voting for Trump. And he will say to me go smoke another doobie Che Guevera.

    Parent

    I think there is a pretty simple explanation (none / 0) (#76)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 10:08:09 AM EST
    For that.  If you live in Aspen you either have money or are deeply involved with people who have money.  Trump is a republican.

    Parent
    Or the other demographics (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by christinep on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 04:07:42 PM EST
    might be involved as well.  E.g., gender, age, race/ethnicity, education, derivation?

    Parent
    74% of Aspen Voters are Democrats (5.00 / 2) (#134)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 03:05:37 AM EST
    Stats

    Only 25% are Republican and only 1.33% are independent.

    Parent

    So fishcamps democratic friends (none / 0) (#144)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 09:46:52 AM EST
    Are voting for Trump I guess.  My friend said several members of the wealthy family I mentioned in another thread called themselves democrats.  But they did not vote for or contribute to democrats.  At least in the era of Bush.

    Perhaps it was family connections in that case.  But not sure why they would vote for Trump.

    Parent

    Are they the friends in Aspen OR (none / 0) (#155)
    by christinep on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 03:18:24 PM EST
    the friends where fishcamp lives now?

    Parent
    Fishcamp? (none / 0) (#159)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 04:31:47 PM EST


    Parent
    My Aspen friends (none / 0) (#178)
    by fishcamp on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 07:46:28 AM EST
    that are voting for Trump are the worker bees of town and are Republicans.  Aspen is very small and was even smaller when I moved there in 1959.  One tends to see the same people every day.  The lift operators, garbage collectors, police forces, restaurant workers, plumbers, electricians, carpenters, etc. were all Republicans when I lived there.  The wealthy folks up in the hill top mansions are the ones that sponsor fund raiser breakfasts, lunches, and dinners for the Democrats, like Bill, who came several times, and now Hillary, who has also visited often.  I had a few friends among the Democratic elite, but since I skied 120 days a year, I saw and was friends mostly with Republicans.  It's really not a typical location to exact a normal theory about who and why.

    Parent
    As with Dante's levels of hell (none / 0) (#138)
    by ragebot on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 08:45:07 AM EST
    there are levels of lies; at least in some folks mind.

    I know several vets who think the worst "lie" Hillary told was the story about when she and her daughter took small arms fire after her plane landed.  For some vets who have been in combat and under small arms fire no lie is worse.

    To these vets if someone does this it only re enforces the idea they would lie about anything.

    At the other extreme there are lies told to some one who is dying to make the last moments of their life easier; something most of us accept as OK.

    Donald has no doubt been caught in lies as well, but it does not seem to have affected him as much as it has affected Hillary.

    Parent

    No (none / 0) (#139)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 08:50:19 AM EST
    actually Donald's lies have had a huge effect on him but Donald's biggest problem is not the lies but what he says in general and what he proposes.

    But hey, the GOP is all about slander these days because when you've lost the debate character assassination is all you have left. In effect conservatives have conceded that their issues are losers with the voting public.

    Parent

    People are fed up (none / 0) (#191)
    by TrevorBolder on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 10:35:23 AM EST
    With politicians.
    Hillary has been a life long politician

    A big draw for Trump supporters is that he is not a politician.

    When considering that both candidates do not tell the truth, that may be a tipping point

    Parent

    Argentina and Messi on fire (none / 0) (#129)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 10:28:30 PM EST


    Yes, they are! (none / 0) (#130)
    by caseyOR on Fri Jun 10, 2016 at 10:36:13 PM EST
    Blazing!

    Parent
    Messi is a magician (none / 0) (#151)
    by jondee on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 01:26:52 PM EST
    He put on a veritable clinic last night.

    Parent
    Bernie Sanders (none / 0) (#133)
    by texpolitico on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 01:02:47 AM EST
    is just an *** of the lowest order.  

    More bad behavior from Freddie Gray prosecutors (none / 0) (#147)
    by McBain on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 11:44:38 AM EST
    Link
    The judge overseeing the trial of a police officer charged with murder in the death of Freddie Gray has determined that prosecutors withheld information that would have been beneficial to the defense.

    This has to do with a key witness who undermines the prosecutions theory of a "rough ride".


    Judge (none / 0) (#192)
    by TrevorBolder on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 10:39:24 AM EST
    Is not very happy with the prosecution.

    It appears that the prosecution may have rushed to indict for initial PR gains, but to the detriment of a airtight prosecution

    Parent

    Romney trying to unseat (none / 0) (#148)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 12:09:37 PM EST
    Trump again.

    Romney has become Zombie Romney. (none / 0) (#149)
    by desertswine on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 12:42:04 PM EST


    Parent
    You don't think he'll split (none / 0) (#150)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 12:45:51 PM EST
    The Republican vote by endorsing Gary Johnson and continuing to discuss Trump's flaws and trying to build a Republican anti-Trump vote?

    Parent
    No (none / 0) (#154)
    by CoralGables on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 02:03:50 PM EST


    Parent
    Not sure, MT (none / 0) (#156)
    by christinep on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 03:30:06 PM EST
    So much depends upon how the next few weeks shape up> If Trump cannot pull himself out of what seems a downward spiral, the Johnson/Weld combo could pull more from the Repub side when Romney & others equally unhappy look for an acceptable alternative.  

    For me, when Mary Matalin announced several weeks ago that she had switched him Repub affiliation to Libertarian--she of the principal Repub strategy and go-to supporter background--my eyebrows involuntarily raised.  That and the on-going searching around would seem to hurt Repubs more than Dems.  Then, of course, we witness the ongoing standoff from the Bush clan--Jeb, his son George P, and--of course-George W ..who won't attend the convention and indicate that they won't vote for Trump.

    When ol' Mitch McConnell signaled last week, in fairly strong & direct words--that Trump needed to change for the better in the next few weeks, that also signaled something else.  What it signaled, who can say ... but it isn't that they have unity.  

    Parent

    I can't (none / 0) (#164)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 05:28:59 PM EST
    see Johnson Weld being any more acceptable to a lot of the GOP base than Trump.

    Parent
    its not the base (5.00 / 1) (#165)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 05:44:07 PM EST
    they could be attractive to.   if they are attractive to any republicans it will be the middleish libertarian types.  there are plenty of those.  for example in the effects industry, my old job, mostly males, mostly young, mostly libertarian.  mostly hate Hillary more than enough to vote for a republican in sheeps clothing.

    Parent
    Yeah (none / 0) (#167)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 06:30:40 PM EST
    I can see that and it's also why I said a lot of the GOP base. There are those that have been voting Republican who will find Johnson acceptable this year whereas before they could convince themselves to vote for Republicans like Romney but just can't do it for Trump.

    Parent
    I think so too Capt (none / 0) (#189)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 10:31:36 AM EST
    I'm getting a chuckle out of all my Conservative cousins who are suddenly Libertarians. Like just last week newborn Libertarians. The IT tech who works security for the Air Force as a contractor has always been a clear and self proclaimed Libertarian. Now suddenly 10 of his immediate family members are too. I asked since when? I'm told they have always been.  Really? All these years of good natured political arguments with you guys, who I love with my whole heart, and now I'm just discovering you are all Libertarians? I'm calling bull$hit here.

    Parent
    He he (none / 0) (#197)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 10:48:40 AM EST
    I noticed a lot of conservatives/Republicans started calling themselves Libertarians sometime during the Bush Administration. It seems to have now gone to the point that the only people calling themselves Republicans and/or conservatives are the wacko conspiracy theorists.

    Parent
    Send Trump your resume. (none / 0) (#190)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 10:33:56 AM EST
    He'll be hiring somebody to fill the air around his appearances with fluttering and admiring gold leafed cherubs.  Lots of 'em.  "It'll be beautiful."

    Parent
    This can be categorized as being a (none / 0) (#195)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 10:46:41 AM EST
    Very witchy comment. But I'm a woman so I can make these sorts of comments. My family has noticed that all the Trump female talking heads sport the new makeup doll eye. It's this really bizarre makeup trend where women are attempting to look like a Big Eye painting. It actually started in Japan I believe, but it has arrived stateside. It takes several hours on YouTube to learn to paint the Big Eye technique. And I'm not kidding, the base makeup around the eye you start with is right out of Keene painting technique.  I find it bizarre and gruesome. When feminists are screened next to the Big Eye women it makes me laugh. We have makeup on too, but our eyes look more natural and our expressions match the words coming out of our mouths....then there's the Big Eye girls.

    Parent
    Hemlock Grove (none / 0) (#163)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 05:26:00 PM EST
    Netflix series.  I'm 5 episodes into the first season and I really like it.  I love Famke Janssen and Lilli Taylor.  And the whole cast is great.  Not for everyone but if you like it weird, creepy and well done you could do a lot worse.  

    Not sure how I missed this for so long.  There are 3 seasons ending last year.

    Florida (none / 0) (#179)
    by CoralGables on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 08:10:33 AM EST
    We can't stay out of the news

    CG is probably posting about (none / 0) (#180)
    by ragebot on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 08:40:31 AM EST
    this.

    Still early but it looks like something that will wind up being a plus for Trump.

    Jerlyn will most likely have a thread dedicated to this; a shooting in Orlando by a US born Afgan in a gay bar LEOs are saying is terrorism.

    Parent

    Seriously? (none / 0) (#184)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 09:51:55 AM EST
    The guy who wants to give out guns like candy and the GOP which has been the handmaiden of the NRA? No, it does nothing for Trump and probably hurts him a lot.

    Parent
    Just heard about it at the dog park (none / 0) (#181)
    by ruffian on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 09:13:58 AM EST
    Less than 10 miles away. I hadn't seen any news before I got here. Unbearably sad. Waiting for names to be released, or ask about acquaintances at work tomorrow. I have several coworkers that go to the clubs, gay and straight.

    This world, too much.

    Parent

    hope your friends are safe (none / 0) (#183)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 09:31:59 AM EST
    the father says he did it because he became enraged because he saw two men kiss in public.  

    Parent
    Happy Pride Month, Orlando. (none / 0) (#187)
    by caseyOR on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 10:26:12 AM EST


    Parent
    Thanks. One thing I have said since I moved here (none / 0) (#194)
    by ruffian on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 10:45:45 AM EST
    is that his is the friendliest and most diverse community I have ever lived in. You can see it even in the local news right now - the local people affected are of every race and accent and everyone just wants to help.

    Just overwhelming.

    Parent

    50 Dead? Is that a misprint? (none / 0) (#185)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 10:14:14 AM EST


    Parent
    Sadly, not a misprint. 50 dead, and (none / 0) (#186)
    by caseyOR on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 10:20:57 AM EST
    53 injured, many critically. So death toll could rise. Per NBC, deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.

    Parent
    It Is Pretty Hard To Figure Out Who Benefits (none / 0) (#193)
    by RickyJim on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 10:45:23 AM EST
    Hillary if most people blame guns; Donald if most people blame Muslims. Of course if a religious kook was running he would say that the gays deserve what they got.  So maybe nobody benefits.


    Parent
    no doubt (5.00 / 2) (#200)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 10:57:11 AM EST
    it will be a quandary for the Pat Robertsons of the world.  Muslims killing gays, so hard to pick a side.

    Parent
    In today's USA there will be more tragedies like (none / 0) (#196)
    by ruffian on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 10:46:48 AM EST
    this before the election. It is only June.

    Parent
    You left (none / 0) (#199)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 10:55:19 AM EST
    out the part about the GOP whipping up anti-LGBT fervor with their bathroom laws.

    Parent
    Oh god, Bill Nelson (none / 0) (#198)
    by ruffian on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 10:54:09 AM EST
    If you don't have facts don't say anything please.

    Parent
    I am sick of the discussion I am (5.00 / 4) (#202)
    by caseyOR on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 11:00:49 AM EST
    hearing on the TV as talking heads try to decide if this is terrorism or not. It is a terrorist act. It does not matter if the shooter slaughtered these people because of intense homophobia or because he is a radical Islamist. It is terrorism either way.

    Parent
    looking forward (none / 0) (#201)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 10:57:56 AM EST
    to Gov Crazy Eyes

    Parent
    Ugh, just the one I want representinag us to the (5.00 / 1) (#203)
    by ruffian on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 11:01:27 AM EST
    world.

    It is his VP audition, too. Should be a doozy.

    I have an apt to get my hair cut and colored later. My stylist is a young woman that knows lots of young people, and gay people, and I asked her if she wanted to cancel, but she wants to work, so we will watch it all unfold together.

    Parent

    Have they designated the (none / 0) (#206)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 02:37:07 PM EST
    Ft Hood shooting a terrorist attack? I mean, I know it pissed a lot of unprincipled people off that DOD wouldn't do that at first, but technically any attack upon a military target cannot be an act of terrorism. In the Ft Hood attack it can be treason, but it can't be terrorism. The attack on the USS Cole can't legally be considered a terrorist attack either, though often in the press I see it mislabeled as one.

    Sorry such a stickler for those distinctions. My proximity to the military forces me to keep those facts and labels clear in my own thinking because that is the foundation that war legalese is written upon.

    It took me a long time to be able to wrap my head and intellect around the fact that the Iraq War wasn't illegal. I work to keep my military legal understandings clear now.

    You know what they say, MT (none / 0) (#207)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Jun 12, 2016 at 04:49:06 PM EST
    There's illegal, damned illegal, and foreign policy.

    It was the wording of the AUMF that legalized the (none / 0) (#208)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jun 14, 2016 at 11:50:52 AM EST
    Iraq War along with the resolution Powell tortured out of the UN. In an ideal world we would have no need for lawyers and legalese, but that doesn't exist. I have learned to read the fine print and be as concise as I can where war is concerned, or things some might want to base the next war on. And that's why I bristle when anyone calls the attack of a military target a terrorist act...the act of thinking in those terms is Imperialism. It easily happens to most of us though, and we don't even realize it. The US military is force projection oriented to....so, if you get my drift

    Thursday Open Thread | 208 comments (208 topical)