home

Thursday Open Thread

Here's a new open thread. All topics welcome.

< Arianna Leaves HuffPo for Wellness Venture | More Prominent Republicans Balk at Trump >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    If you've had (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by CST on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 10:46:52 AM EST
    too much sunshine and roses in your life, and are looking for something depressing, here you go.

    "In six pages of the 163-page report documenting how Baltimore police officers have systematically violated the rights of African-Americans, the Justice Department also painted a picture of a police culture deeply dismissive of sexual assault victims and hostile toward prostitutes and transgender people. It branded the Baltimore Police Department's response to sexual assault cases "grossly inadequate.""

    ""There's a lot of women in the same communities that have been victimized just as much," Ms. Hill-Aston said, adding of the police, "They just didn't care, because it was a poor black woman or a poor black neighborhood.""

    "In 2010, The Baltimore Sun reported that in the previous four years, the police had routinely failed to solve rape cases; in reviewing F.B.I. data, the newspaper found that the percentage of rape cases dismissed as false or baseless was higher in Baltimore than in any other city in the country."

    Finally... this statement... If it's true, and not taken out of context, is a deeply revealing and disturbing view of the police:

    ""The challenge of interacting respectfully with victims of sexual assault is a challenge to our profession," Commissioner Davis said"

    Why the f*ck is that a challenge?  It should be the default.

    This report on the Baltimore PD (none / 0) (#92)
    by caseyOR on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 12:43:59 PM EST
    should shock and anger everyone enough to spur significant change. I am not holding my breath. The sad fact is that Baltimore is not unique among police departments in the way they treat victims of sexual assaults, nor is Baltimore unique in its treatment of people of color, and I would bet, the poor.

    And, while bad police behavior toward those groups precedes the militarization of local police, it has certainly been exacerbated by the war zone mentality of so many police departments.

    Parent

    Still waiting for TrevorBolder (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by CoralGables on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 11:58:17 AM EST
    to accept Repack Rider's wager offer.

    Repack is willing to bet that Hillary wins by 100 electoral votes.

    To be fair to Trevor and other Trump supporters like him. It's a terrible bet to take but it is a great bet for Repack.

    Personally I don't see Clinton's total electoral votes to be anything less than 326. That would be 326-212 at a minimum and a Repack victory.

    I'm confused (5.00 / 1) (#134)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 07:11:45 PM EST
    Please show where I have supported Trump.
    I basically have reviled him since the primaries, and that hasn't changed.
    Change the prescription for your reading glasses.

    Parent
    Last night (none / 0) (#88)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 12:09:07 PM EST
    Larry Sabato said he has had it at 370-380 for many months and he may "revisit" Clintons margin.

    Parent
    Didn't want to keep Repack from winning (none / 0) (#97)
    by CoralGables on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 12:58:34 PM EST
    but the 326 was a minimum. On the upper end I would say 369-169 if Trump continues being Trump.

    Parent
    Please god let the jibber-jabber (5.00 / 5) (#117)
    by CoralGables on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 03:58:49 PM EST
    over he who shall not be named stop. TM is still dead; GZ is still an a$shole. It's never going to change. Let it go.

    Dear Jeralyn, (5.00 / 3) (#125)
    by oculus on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 05:29:32 PM EST
    Please ask your webmaster to fix TL so that new comments are distinguishable in the latest posted diary. Thank you.

    Or maybe (none / 0) (#152)
    by Nemi on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 08:09:28 AM EST
    as someone -- sorry forgot who -- suggested a while ago, put a sort of fixed, 'non-commentable' post up at the top?

    Parent
    Of all the (5.00 / 2) (#128)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 06:13:20 PM EST
    Horrible irresponsible vile ignorant and destructive things Trump has said and done this new thing about how if he loses it will be because they "cheated" because "it's fixed" is the worst.  It's the most craven.  It's the most destructive and dangerous to the republic.  It's really frightening.  

    It's effectively delegitimizing the next government in advance with a third of the country.   It's almost unbelievably fu@ked up.


    I wonder why (5.00 / 3) (#142)
    by Towanda on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 07:54:38 PM EST
    there was not similar outcry when Bernie Sanders repeatedly claimed that the process was rigged?

    Parent
    It was rigged. By Sanders' (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 11:56:31 AM EST
    team hacking Clinton research hosted by DNC.

    Parent
    Speaking only for me (none / 0) (#143)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 08:07:52 PM EST
    Because he was a loony old coot who was never going to win the nomination.   That said you would have to look hard to find anyone who headed more scorn on Sanders than me.

    Also it's was a different context.  IMO.  Sanders supporters at least to me seem far less likely to actually go violent when the loss occurs.   Millennials might hurl their lattes and Birkenstocks Trump supporters are armed.  And many are certifiably nuts.

    Parent

    Also ... (none / 0) (#145)
    by Erehwon on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 08:30:52 PM EST
    Bernie was complaining about the process ... who got to vote in a Democratic primary (whether they should be open to non-Democrats) and about the use of super-delegates. He did not claim that the voting itself was rigged. Quite different from what Trump is ranting about now ...

    Parent
    instead of "rigged," (5.00 / 1) (#155)
    by Lora on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 11:34:49 AM EST
    ...can we say "hacked"?

    Hacker demonstrates how voting machines can be compromised

    This issue has been around for years and years.
    Without paper, we have no way of knowing whether our votes have been cast and counted the way we intended. We have the absolute hubris to think that here in 'Merica our elections are somehow pristine.

    I recommend we all think again.

    NOTE:
    Please do NOT take this as any sort of endorsement of DT or his methods of raising the fear and anger of voters.  It is definitely not.

    I expect that DT knows he will probably lose, and this is his way of losing without giving in -- it was rigged! I would've won if the election was fair!

    DT aside, the actual issue of whether or not we can guarantee a fair and accurate election process is non-partisan and should be of concern to all voters.

    Parent

    I'm aware (none / 0) (#129)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 06:20:42 PM EST
    It's not actually a "new" thing.  But there is a new focus on it.  A new emphasis.   He is now doing a long segment in every speech targeting those "urban" people on each state.

    Parent
    I know (none / 0) (#130)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 06:22:24 PM EST
    and he's not the only one unfortunately using the word rigged this election season.

    Parent
    A hundred unhinged AM talk radio hosts (none / 0) (#131)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 06:26:25 PM EST
    scattered across the  country have been saying virtually the same thing every day since Obama was elected.

    Trump knows who he's talking to. And the scarier part is that he and his nutwing cohorts encourage these people to load up on guns and ammo.

    Roger Stone is saying there will be blood.

    Parent

    That's my point (none / 0) (#132)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 06:38:00 PM EST
    In a way.  Yes, this has been a meme since Obama took office.  Even before that. But never has a candidate run by saying this.  Never.  McCain and Romney were not great but neither ever once said if they lose its because the election was fixed or because Obama cheated.

    This is being taken to the next level.  It could have long range implications we can't even imagine.

    Parent

    It could very well be Trump's ego (5.00 / 2) (#133)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 07:08:26 PM EST
    he could actually get creamed in this election in a way that McCain and Romney didn't, so he's concocting this preemptive scenario that let's his monumental narcissism and his gross incompetence off the hook. And damn the longterm consequences.

    Does anyone seriously believe Trump has ever spent three seconds of his life thinking about societal implications?

    Parent

    I am hoping (none / 0) (#135)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 07:13:03 PM EST
    It is the effect upon his family fortune that will impact his decision making

    Parent
    Seeing as how (none / 0) (#199)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Aug 14, 2016 at 09:42:59 AM EST
    JFK was elected by the walking dead of Chicago there is every reason to worry. Plus....

    If an election can turn on a sentence, this could be the one: "You don't need papers for voting."

    On Thursday night, Francine Busby, the Democratic candidate for the 50th Congressional District, was speaking before a largely Latino crowd in Escondido when she uttered those words. She said yesterday she simply misspoke.

    Sure she did....lol

    Later on November 9, Gore's team demanded a manual recount in Palm Beach, Broward, Miami-Dade, and Volusia counties. News outlets carried images of Florida election officials staring at hanging, dimpled, and pregnant chads on Florida's punch-card ballots, trying to "discern the intent" of the voters.

    Of course the "intents" were all Democrats.

    For instance, instead of a ballot that had marking for more than one candidate being thrown out as an overvote (say an X in one and another totally filled in) the canvassing board was awarding that vote for which ever candidate had an "X" in the spot:

    So in the case of this ballot... which is normally an overvote, the canvassing board awarded the vote to Franken.

    Link

    And if you can't cheat'em at the polls then stop'em from getting there.

    MILWAUKEE - A congresswoman's son and three Democratic campaign workers were sentenced Wednesday to four to six months in jail for slashing tires outside a Bush-Cheney campaign office on Election Day 2004.

    Link

    Parent

    Please (5.00 / 1) (#200)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Aug 14, 2016 at 10:01:43 AM EST
    Why rehash the Killing of Trayvon (5.00 / 2) (#160)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 11:54:14 AM EST
    Martin now?  Rhetorical question.

    What a sad cry for attention (5.00 / 1) (#195)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Aug 14, 2016 at 08:36:17 AM EST
    This is.

    Yes, but (none / 0) (#197)
    by KeysDan on Sun Aug 14, 2016 at 08:48:54 AM EST
    what else can be expected of a Trumpette.

    Parent
    Pay no attention to what's on the screen... (none / 0) (#198)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Aug 14, 2016 at 09:16:29 AM EST
    Besides, those are probably Trump supporters.

    And Hillary said that Trump should die

    .....but let's don't mention that either.

    Parent

    NY, I take it you didn't watch that part of (5.00 / 1) (#204)
    by McBain on Mon Aug 15, 2016 at 02:28:30 PM EST
    the trial?  Dr. Rao's testimony was embarrassing.  Jeralyn had a good write about her and other witnesses...here

    The state called a medical examiner/pathologist Valerie Rao. She acknowledged Angela Corey recommended her to the Governor for one of her two positions. (Actually, as O'Mara originally asked her, and despite her runaround answer, she was appointed by Angela Corey to serve as Medical Examiner for the Fourth Judicial District.)

    O'Mara didn't bring up the ten years of complaints in multiple cities against her including concerns expressed by law enforcement, funeral homes and organ donor organizations. Or the complaints by co-workers who said she called employees rednecks and criticized their weight. (These are in addition to the criticisms of her as an ME.) Her contract was not renewed...

    ...she never examined Martin's body and wasn't on the autopsy team.

    Rao wasn't alone.  All of the state's witnesses actually helped the defense.  It was an amazing spectacle.

    Rachel Maddow (none / 0) (#1)
    by mogal on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 03:11:01 PM EST
    Does anyone know why she hasn't been on her show for some time?

    It's august (none / 0) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 03:16:11 PM EST
    Maybe she is on vacation

    Parent
    Maddox (none / 0) (#3)
    by mogal on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 03:20:46 PM EST
    I have only heard, "she is at off tonight" and nothing last night.

    Parent
    i like her (none / 0) (#42)
    by linea on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 02:10:55 AM EST
    summer break i suppose

    Parent
    Probably taking time off (none / 0) (#51)
    by jbindc on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 07:52:29 AM EST
    Gonna be busy after Labor Day until the Election.

    Parent
    Heard a rumor (none / 0) (#127)
    by BackFromOhio on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 06:12:55 PM EST
    they will be moving her to the 8pm (Eastern) slot.

    Parent
    There have been rumors (5.00 / 2) (#139)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 07:29:11 PM EST
    For a while they Hayes would go.  Personally I don't get the hating on Hayes.  I like his show at least as much as hers.  If there was any sanity there they would ax Tweety, move everything up and find someone new for 9.

    Tweety is way overdue for putting out to pasture.

    Parent

    Why does hayes have to go? (none / 0) (#144)
    by BackFromOhio on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 08:30:51 PM EST
    Can't his show time and Rachel's just be switched?

    Parent
    Got me (none / 0) (#146)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 08:48:11 PM EST
    They say his ratings are bad.

    just repeating what I read

    Parent

    Just announced (none / 0) (#150)
    by mogal on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 09:53:58 PM EST
    she will be back Monday without any explanation.

    Parent
    Lawyer calls suspect "Zimmerman 2.0" (none / 0) (#4)
    by McBain on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 03:35:13 PM EST
    At first I thought this was a dumb thing to say. Not only are the facts of this case much different but Zimmerman was found not guilty in his trial.  Then I remembered the goal of a "family" lawyer isn't to secure a conviction, it's to win some kind of civil settlement.  

    Here's one big difference between these two shootings...

    But one significant difference between the two cases, Bamberg said, is that Zimmerman reported an altercation before the fatal shot.

    It's amazing how many people still ignore that fact.

    No, he wasn't (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by Yman on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 11:47:40 AM EST
    He was acquitted.

    Parent
    I should say one "alleged" difference (none / 0) (#8)
    by McBain on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 04:12:28 PM EST
    It's unclear if the suspect in this case called the police before the shooting took place.  Here's a better article....

    With an interesting quote...

    "Well, I don't know if they're shot or not, ma'am. I fired my warning shot like I'm supposed to by law. They do have firearms, and I'm trying to protect myself and my family," the man replies.

    I'm pretty sure you're not allowed to fire warning shots under the law. Anyone know about that?      

    Parent

    Scott-Cervini Case is Closer (none / 0) (#16)
    by RickyJim on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 06:30:33 PM EST
    In Greece, New York in 2009, Roderick Scott, a black man, shot to death a white youth Christopher Cervini.  Scott said that Cervini threatened him when he confronted Cervini and his friends who were mucking around with some cars outside Scott's house in the early morning.  Despite the fact that the jury was mostly white and NY is not a "Stand your ground" state, Scott was acquitted.  If you Google this case you will be amazed at how paltry the literature is compared to Zimmeran-Martin.

    Parent
    I didn't know about that one (none / 0) (#28)
    by McBain on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 08:10:35 PM EST
    I do remember the Dunn-Davis case in Florida, prosecuted by the same team that tried to put Zimmerman away.  Dunn claimed self defense but didn't have the evidence to back him up.  I'm not sure he deserved the life without parole sentence he received.  

    Parent
    And Zimmerman was (none / 0) (#62)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 09:13:56 AM EST
    getting his head bashed in before he shot.

    Parent
    It has never been explained to me (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by Repack Rider on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 10:27:22 AM EST
    ..how the unarmed kid was able to chase down Zimmerman's vehicle while on foot, force open the locked door, and drag a much bigger man out.

    Parent
    Whaaaaa? (none / 0) (#149)
    by RickyJim on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 09:47:42 PM EST
    Where did you read that account of what happened in this incident?  Or is it it some sort of joke you are making that I am too dense to get?

    Parent
    If he wasn't such a gun nut... (5.00 / 2) (#73)
    by kdog on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 10:57:47 AM EST
    (key word nut), maybe he woulda learned how to fight?  

    Especially if you're gonna go cruising for a bruising as a hobby, it might be a good idea to learn non-lethal self-defense techniques.

    Parent

    He was learning how to fight (none / 0) (#84)
    by McBain on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 11:45:24 AM EST
    He took some boxing or MMA lessons at an gym.  He just wasn't very good. Based on the evidence, his encounter with Martin wasn't much of a fight.  It was a vicious attack.  

    Parent
    Where I'm from... (5.00 / 3) (#86)
    by kdog on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 11:53:44 AM EST
    we have a saying McBain..."don't start nuthin', won't be nuthin'".

    Parent
    Which is the basis for (none / 0) (#188)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Aug 14, 2016 at 07:28:54 AM EST
    not dropping a dime when you see a crime..

    ???

    Which is multicultural and explains why rural southerners, who had seen the corruption of the local sheriffs and politicians, ignored first the bootleggers, then the "white lightening," then the pot growers and now the speed merchants.

    Parent

    Maybe he should auction off (none / 0) (#104)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 01:44:19 PM EST
    his boxing gloves.

    And his soiled undies from that night.

    Parent

    When I was in high school (none / 0) (#101)
    by MKS on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 01:30:51 PM EST
    there were all kinds of fights.

    But it was a different and in some ways more innocent time--no one was armed or would even pull a knife.  If you got your arse whupped, you just plain got your arse whupped.

    Parent

    Indeed fights were (none / 0) (#187)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Aug 14, 2016 at 07:22:42 AM EST
    mostly about establishing the pecking order within groups. A bloody nose and some bruises were the norm.

    Parent
    Because he wasn't knocked unconscious (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by McBain on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 11:40:57 AM EST
    or had his head completely split open,  people think Zimmerman shot too soon.  They don't understand, or don't care, about the legal rights of self defense.

    Parent
    legal rights of self defense.. (1.00 / 1) (#100)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 01:23:07 PM EST
    that observation coming from the quarter that has always refused to consider for even one millisecond that TM might possibly have thought his own life was in danger.

    And the idea that Martin's first priority was to "start trouble" makes no logical sense whatsoever.
    People who are truly chomping at the bit for a violent altercation don't go looking for it in darkened gated neighborhoods late at night, they go where the action is.

    If anyone was unarguably seeking out trouble, it was that fat ass cop wannabe Z.

    Parent

    If Martin felt his life was in danger (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by McBain on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 02:55:05 PM EST
    why didn't he call the police or simply walk back to his father's place?  The evidence presented at trial showed he had plenty of time to avoid any confrontation.  

    There's no evidence Zimmerman was seeking trouble.  There is evidence he wanted the police to handle the situation (his phone call).

    As for this statement...

    And the idea that Martin's first priority was to "start trouble" makes no logical sense whatsoever.

    Criminals do things that make no logical sense whatsoever all the time, especially when they're on drugs.  


    Parent
    The evidence presented at trial.. (1.00 / 1) (#120)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 04:43:16 PM EST
    i.e., little more than the word of career belligerent slime ball that he never threatened TM's life.

    Parent
    Zimmerman's head wasn't "completely split open." In fact, the report from his own family physician noted that he suffered a closed fracture of his nose, a couple of black eyes, two small lacerations to the back of his head which did not require stitches, and a minor back injury, all of which resulted from an otherwise avoidable altercation which he himself had clearly instigated that night. He had no concussion or any other significant injuries which required further medical treatment.

    Parent
    Breathe, Donald (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by Peter G on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 12:56:48 PM EST
    McBain said the opposite of what you are accusing him of. That is not to say he is correct on the merits. But before you attack, I suggest that you slow down and re-read.

    Parent
    You're right. (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 02:13:02 PM EST
    I misread his post. My bad.

    Parent
    Ever been on your back (none / 0) (#189)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Aug 14, 2016 at 07:36:38 AM EST
    having your head being bashed on concrete??

    These were just the start.

    Parent

    That in my opinion (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 01:20:54 PM EST
    Was never proven, just some reasonable doubt found.

    Parent
    I believe you left out the part where ... (1.00 / 1) (#89)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 12:29:46 PM EST
    ... Zimmerman was chasing down the kid while brandishing his gun, in willful defiance of the police dispatcher's request that he remain in his vehicle and let the police handle the matter after he first called it in.

    But then, like the good fabulist that you are, it really doesn't surprise me any more that you once again deliberately chose to leave out an inconvenient if otherwise entirely relevant fact which doesn't comport to your preferred white-wing narrative. Lather, rinse, repeat.

    Given the Z-Man's penchant for angering others and getting punched out by complete strangers while acting out the part of d*ck-swinging macho guy, it's probably a good thing he wasn't packing heat in that Sanford, FL restaurant last week. This is one sad sack of a man who's clearly courting his own bad karma, and quite possibly his eventual fate.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Speaking af fabulists (5.00 / 2) (#95)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 12:57:07 PM EST
    Don's imagination:
    Zimmerman was chasing down the kid while brandishing his gun, in willful defiance of the police dispatcher's request that he remain in his vehicle and let the police handle the matter after he first called it in.

    Actuality:

    Dispatcher: Are you following him?

    Zimmerman: Yeah.

    Dispatcher: Okay, we don't need you to do that.

    Zimmerman: Okay.



    Parent
    "Okay" (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 01:37:26 PM EST
    so then he stopped following him?

    Is that what happened?

    Parent

    No support for the fable that (none / 0) (#105)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 02:04:46 PM EST
    "Zimmerman was chasing down the kid while brandishing his gun"

    No support for the fable that the dispatcher made a request. No support for the fable that the dispatcher had any clue as to whether GZ was or was not in a vehicle, etc., etc...

    Parent

    ... do you NOT understand -- the part where the dispatcher asks if Zimmerman's following Martin, or the part where he says "we don't need you to do that?"

    Zimmerman was in his truck, and it was raining. He further says in his official statement to Sanford police that he was on his way to the grocery store when he first saw Martin. If you listen to the audio recording of the dispatcher exchange, you can clearly hear Zimmerman shift the vehicle into park, and eventually unhook his seat belt while he's talking.

    As he opens the vehicle door to get out, the vehicle's chimes ring a warning, not unlike what one would hear if the headlights were left on or the keys in the ignition. As he steps outside the vehicle, you can hear the wind in the phone's mouthpiece and you can hear the truck door slam shut.

    That is what likely prompted the dispatcher to ask Zimmerman if he was following Martin. When he admits to doing so, the dispatcher tells him that "we don't need you to do that." As he continues to follow Martin, he tells the dispatcher where his truck is parked. which was apparently by the townhouse complex's mailboxes. The dispatcher then requests that Zimmerman wait for the police near the mailboxes.

    Zimmerman ignores the request, and tells the dispatcher to have officers call him when they arrive, so that he can tell them where he is, which is evidence that he's continuing to give chase despite having been directly requested by the dispatcher to not do so, not once but twice.

    Don't comment definitively on such things when you obviously know nothing about it. Or are you back to picking fights with me again, like some petulant pre-adolescent?

    Jesus.

    Parent

    Once again, this is what Jeralyn wrote.... (5.00 / 2) (#114)
    by McBain on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 03:12:12 PM EST
    George Zimmerman: The Most Likely Scenario

    GZ did not have TM in sight when the dispatcher told him they didn't need him to follow TM. He responded OK. He didn't follow him after that. He didn't know where Trayvon was. He continued walking towards the front of the Retreat View Circle, where the first house is 2861, home to W-13 and W-12. He then turned around to walk back to his car. He just passed the T and the pet waste can when Travyon came up on his left. After a few brief vocal exchanges, which even according to Dee Dee were initiated by Trayvon, GZ got punched and fell down.


    Parent
    I notice you stopped making the fabulous claim that "Zimmerman was chasing down the kid while brandishing his gun."

    Smart move on your part.

    "We don't need you to do that" is not a request, it is a suggestion. Small fable on your part, perhaps, but I know how carefully you choose your words.

    A suggestion that followed the dispatcher's actual request that GZ "Just let me know if he does anything, ok?" and then seconds later requested again "Yeah we've got someone on the way, just let me know if he does something else."

    Kinda hard to let the dispatcher know what TM is doing if you don't follow him so you can see him.

    During the entire call the dispatcher never requests GZ to "remain in his vehicle," as your fable contends.

    And, lastly, the dispatcher did not "requests that Zimmerman wait for the police near the mailboxes." The dispatcher asked GZ how GZ wanted to handle the situation and then agreed with GZ's plan:

    Dispatcher: Okay do you want to just meet with them right near the mailboxes then?

    Zimmerman: Yeah that's fine.

    Dispatcher: Alright George, I'll let them know to meet you around there okay?

    Zimmerman: Actually could you have them call me and I'll tell them where I'm at?

    Dispatcher: Okay, yeah that's no problem.

    Ergo, this is a fable.

    Zimmerman was chasing down the kid while brandishing his gun, in willful defiance of the police dispatcher's request that he remain in his vehicle and let the police handle the matter after he first called it in.
    Which is really funny since it's in the very same comment where you claim another commenter is a fabulist.

    As usual, I expect that you won't be able to see how you exemplify exactly that which you so loudly deride in others.

    Parent

    I'm confused.. (none / 0) (#107)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 02:14:53 PM EST
    the "actuality" noted above means the dispatcher never made a request, and had no idea at all what Z was doing?

    An actuality still denotes the opposite of a fable, doesn't it?

    Parent

    You do sound confused. (none / 0) (#108)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 02:16:14 PM EST
    Deeply enlightening response (none / 0) (#109)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 02:24:39 PM EST
    you do know the difference between an actuality and a fable, right?

    Parent
    I don't recall (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by jbindc on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 12:58:26 PM EST
    Any evidence of Zimmerman "brandishing" (i.e. waving around) a gun.  Did you just mis-type the wrong word or do you have a link to that evidence?

    Thanks.

    Parent

    Guys from the hood (2.00 / 1) (#102)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 01:32:53 PM EST
    I've talked to tell me you never "brandish" the gun when you're threatening someone; you just lift up your shirt so they can see it.

    Brandishing runs the risk of attracting too much attention.

    Parent

    I mistyped. (2.00 / 1) (#113)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 03:09:02 PM EST
    But that said, there is no question that Zimmerman clearly followed Martin into the townhouse complex while armed with a handgun. As to whether he actually brandished it in front of Martin prior to shooting him, the only person who could have definitively clarified that one way or another is Martin himself and he's dead. In light of that, Zimmerman's subsequent statements to the authorities, which were at times contradictory, should be viewed as potentially self-serving.

    Parent
    You mistyped??? (none / 0) (#191)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Aug 14, 2016 at 07:44:44 AM EST
    Really?

    lol

    Parent

    This is what Jeralyn had to say 4 years ago.. (4.00 / 1) (#112)
    by McBain on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 03:06:01 PM EST
    Link

    Was hers a "white-wing narrative" or a careful examination of the evidence?

    As for the recent encounter.... looks like more proof he can't live a normal life anymore.  The war on George Zimmerman continues.

    Parent

    ... that Zimmerman bragged about shooting Martin to his dinner companion(s) loud enough to be overheard, just prior to being confronted by another patron and punched. Obviously, someone took offense at what Zimmerman was doing, which of course is no excuse for then committing a violent assault upon the man.

    But as I said, Zimmerman openly courts his own karma. Since being acquitted, he's been accused of domestic violence, he's been shot at, and now he's been punched out. He certainly has a penchant for finding trouble where it might otherwise not exist.

    And at some point, logic should compel one to fairly evaluate and assess the common denominator in all these incidents, which is Zimmerman himself, rather than continue to blame the other parties exclusively for each of these various confrontations.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Based on the horrible media coverage (5.00 / 1) (#119)
    by McBain on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 04:39:05 PM EST
    of GZ, it wouldn't surprise me if the "bragging" claim was exaggerated or not true at all.  When Mathew Apperson shot at GZ it was reported as "Zimmerman involved in another shooting" as if it was his fault.  

    My guess, is that GZ isn't the same person he was 7 years ago.  He probably has a lot of anger and resentment towards a lot of people.  I can't really blame him.   That doesn't mean I approve of all of his decisions, just means I sympathize with his overall ordeal.  

    Parent

    You mean he has more anger (none / 0) (#122)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 05:09:01 PM EST
    and resentment toward people than he did before.

    It had to be terribly frustrating for him when he found out society frowns on posting pictures of confederate flags and dead young men.

    And all when a poor guy's just trying to keep a peaceful low profile..

    Parent

    I imagine his anger comes from... (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by McBain on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 05:25:17 PM EST
    • Being falsely accused of murder
    • Being unfairly treated by most in the media
    • Having the DOJ drag it's feet before deciding not to bring charges
    • Having the same judge from his criminal case preside over his civil case against NBC
    • Being shot at by Mathew Apperson

    As for your other post where you said...
    The evidence presented at trial..
    i.e., little more than the word of career belligerent slime ball that he never threatened TM's life.

    If that's all GZ had, he probably would have been convicted. Fortunately, he had a lot more.  The phone calls and 7/11 video provided a timeline that showed TM had plenty of time and opportunity to avoid a confrontation.  The physical evidence and a credible eye witness helped support his word.    

    Parent
    How even-handed of you (5.00 / 2) (#126)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 05:40:34 PM EST
    to grant all that oppurtunity to avoid a confrontation to Martin and none at all to Zimmerman who is the perpetual victim of circumstance.

    Even now, as he continues to find ways to make a spectacle and nuisance of himself, it's still everyone else's fault.

    Parent

    No doubt you do (5.00 / 1) (#159)
    by Yman on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 11:52:28 AM EST
    That's the benefit of "imagining" things.

    Parent
    Poor beleagured George (none / 0) (#118)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 04:35:35 PM EST
    if you don't want a war, you shut up and disengage and don't add fuel to the fire by moronically waving confederate flags, tweeting "black slime doesn't matter", posting a picture online of TM'S dead body, and making a perverse freak show out of publicly auctioning the gun you used in the commission of a homocide.

    Parent
    "Bashed in" - heh (none / 0) (#158)
    by Yman on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 11:50:53 AM EST
    A seriously funny characterization.

    Parent
    Hilarious (none / 0) (#5)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 04:09:49 PM EST
    Vapid joke Kelly Ann Conway, Trump translator, just tried to explain "what he really meant" when he said by Obama and Hillary founded ISIS.  Chuck Todd stops her, plays a clip of Hugh Hewitt asking Trump "if he means" what she said, he categorically no, he means they founded ISIS.

    She then broke into "what she really meant" explaining "what he really meant"

    Wonderful.

    Just wonderful (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 04:12:23 PM EST

    More than 70 Republicans have signed an open letter urging RNC Chairman Reince Priebus to cut off funding to Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and instead use the funds to finance Republican Senate and House races, according to a letter obtained by CBS News.

    "We believe that Donald Trump's divisiveness, recklessness, incompetence, and record-breaking unpopularity risk turning this election into a Democratic landslide, and only the immediate shift of all available RNC resources to vulnerable Senate and House races will prevent the GOP from drowning with a Trump-emblazoned anchor around its neck," a draft of the letter stated. "This should not be a difficult decision, as Donald Trump's chances of being elected president are evaporating by the day."



    Parent
    Heres (none / 0) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 04:18:35 PM EST
    They've (none / 0) (#11)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 05:10:46 PM EST
    got worse problems. Money is not going to fix their problems. I guess those 70 Republicans are in districts where they are in danger of losing.

    Parent
    CNBC (none / 0) (#30)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 08:13:30 PM EST
    Under the headline TRUMP JUST CONFIRMED EVERY REPUBLICANS WORST FEARS


    Donald Trump told CNBC on Thursday he will either win with his frank and uncensored style of campaigning or enjoy a "very, very nice long vacation."

    Republicans have long hoped Trump will pivot on his behavior, but in the "Squawk Box" interview, he said:

    "I'm a truth teller. All I do is tell the truth. And if at the end of 90 days, I've fallen short because I'm somewhat politically correct even though I'm supposed to be the smart one and even though I'm supposed to have a lot of good ideas, it's OK. I go back to a very good way of life."

    That sounds kind of "resigned"

    Parent

    He's going (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 08:24:44 PM EST
    to walk away with millions and besides I really don't think he wants to be president. He's seemed kind of bored lately with the rallies and all.

    Parent
    I want him to complete the run (none / 0) (#49)
    by BarnBabe on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 07:39:18 AM EST
    He will make more goofs during the next 2 months. That is ok. I just don't want him walking away and there being a new GOP candidate. Like a Ryan to save the day and the Senate or House. Right now it is pretty hard to get on the ballot but I don't want a reason for a fight till the end in the press.

    I don't know 'bout you, but I can't wait until this is finished.

    And a shout out to all the amazing athletes competing in Rio. And a double thumbs up to the USA. Their new motto should be "We came to win",

    Parent

    Me too (none / 0) (#50)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 07:46:52 AM EST
    There was talk yesterday that one last ditch effort to get rid of hm might be if the RNC,   they are having an emergency "come to Jesus" meeting today, shuts off funding and support to concentrate on down ticket races as pressure is growing on them to do.

    They said everyone knows Donald hates to lose.  It's clear he's losing and might take the opportunity to say he was forced out by the fixed system.  

    I can't see it happening but it's become unwise to predict.
    that politico article is pretty stunning.

    Parent

    I can (none / 0) (#54)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 08:00:48 AM EST
    see them shutting off funding as being more likely than getting rid of Trump. But that just gives him more ammunition to go after the GOP establishment and getting 60% of the party mad and sitting home on election day by doing that is not going to help down ticket one bit.

    Parent
    For many (none / 0) (#57)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 08:19:22 AM EST
    Win or lose is no longer the issue.  It's a moral thing.  They are appalled he is the party standard bearer and believe if he stays thru the election the party will effectively be destroyed.

    Possibly permanently.  It's not an unreasonable idea.

    Parent

    Good lord. (5.00 / 3) (#59)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 08:29:30 AM EST
    these people make me want to scream. Where has their conscience been for 50 years while they have been dancing with the likes of Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms? Where was their conscience the entire Bush Administration?

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#66)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 09:33:45 AM EST
    I think for some few it actually is a moral thing.  For many others it's simply a problem of him saying stuff out loud that is not allowed.

    He has exposed the wretched racist ignorant republican base for exactly what it is.  Instead of fleecing them and speaking in dog whistles to play them he is playing to them.  Telling them what they have wanted to hear out loud since at least Reagan.

    This is a problem for the Republican Party.  A big problem.

    Parent

    I agree (none / 0) (#68)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 10:17:55 AM EST
    but just can't believe that those ones that all of a sudden seem to have developed a conscience didn't know what has been going on for 50 years.

    Parent
    The moral line that cannot be crossed (5.00 / 2) (#76)
    by Peter G on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 11:07:00 AM EST
    is why in today's Philadelphia Daily News their regular contributor who almost always takes a right-wing, religious point of view in her well-written and witty columns explains why Tr*mp has now gone too far, even for her.

    Parent
    I've seen this (none / 0) (#82)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 11:42:14 AM EST
    Locally

    Parent
    Perhaps I should have included (none / 0) (#90)
    by Peter G on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 12:35:02 PM EST
    a direct quote from the linked column.
    This week, though, I actually do need to take a side. It has nothing to do with whom will get my vote, because that has been changing .... This week, I need to peel back the layers of rhetoric and excuse about the "lesser of two evils" and focus deliberately and clinically on why Trump is a horror show of a human being.
    I should also mention that the Phila Daily News is our tabloid "People Paper," aimed at a less-educated, more working class readership, as opposed to its more "high class" sister paper, the Phila Inquirer.

    Parent
    My guess is that (none / 0) (#70)
    by KeysDan on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 10:40:08 AM EST
    in a Republican religious switcheroo, the big 75 will be the ones traveling to Jesus. A grandeur bargain.  As Paul Krugman says  (NYTimes, August 12), while obvious to all with open eyes, Trump is "an ignoramus, wildly dishonest, erratic, immature, bullying egomaniac.  On the other hand, he's a terrible person."  But despite all of this, most senior figures in the Republican Party--very much including Paul Ryan,...and Mitch McConnell...are still supporting him, threats of violence and all."

    Why?  Professor Krugman goes on to give several explanations, his favorite is taxes.  The Republicans don't want any.  Or at least, not on the rich. Trump the "populist" if he wins, taxes on the wealthy go down, especially the estate tax--the linchpin of the conservative movement. Republicans are not are not really taking a stand on principle; they're just complaining about the price.

    Parent

    Better link (none / 0) (#71)
    by KeysDan on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 10:46:46 AM EST
    They pretty (none / 0) (#53)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 07:58:35 AM EST
    much are stuck with him. I'm sure they can pull his money though I'm not sure that is wise because it will give Trump more ammunition to go after the GOP establishment. At this late date I'm not sure any person would be willing to take on the suicide mission of replacing Trump on the ticket. If Trump did quit it's most likely that Pence would be moved up.

    And yes, I was long sick of the primaries before they were over and I'm tired of all the nonsense in the press these days too regarding the presidential election.

    Parent

    There are a growing (none / 0) (#55)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 08:01:54 AM EST
    Number of republicans who don't care if no one runs in his place.  They just want Trump gone.   Not hard to understand from their point of view.  

    Parent
    But (none / 0) (#56)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 08:15:27 AM EST
    There is another view.  David Ignatius just said something I've heard before.

    Some think that if he stays in and it results in a historic blowout it will "burn the crazy" out of the party and allow for a reset going forward.

    Personally I find that n unlikely outcome of a blowout.

    Parent

    Hard to say. (none / 0) (#58)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 08:26:45 AM EST
    The denial is very heavy on the GOP side. They've been dancing with the devil for 1/2 a century now. They might be better off just forming a new party. I remember 16 years ago John McCain warned that unless the GOP changed they were going to go the way of the Whigs. I'm honestly not sure the party is capable of changing if they've been being warned for 16 years and have done nothing but produce autopsy reports that no one pays any attention to.

    Parent
    Seen this (none / 0) (#60)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 08:31:19 AM EST

    Public Policy Polling. They interviewed nearly 750 Republican, Democrat and independent Arizona voters. Forty-three percent said they'd support Kirkpatrick if the general election was held today, while 41 percent would choose McCain.


    Parent
    No (none / 0) (#61)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 08:37:43 AM EST
    but I heard that race was close. It's really time for McCain to retire anyway.

    Parent
    So many reasons (none / 0) (#74)
    by KeysDan on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 11:00:05 AM EST
    for McCain to lose.  His interference in the military justice system, meddling in the Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl case is a good example.  Colonel Morris Davis (ret) chief prosecutor of the military commissions at Guantanamo during the Bush Administration presents his argument against McCain.  

    Parent
    That sounds like (none / 0) (#64)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 09:23:50 AM EST
    What you see is what you get.

    The DCers are upset that he won't let them tell him what to do.

    Parent

    Mental health workers (none / 0) (#123)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 05:14:25 PM EST
    are also upset that he won't let them tell him.

    Parent
    It's now (none / 0) (#33)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 08:18:33 PM EST
    75

    Parent
    What a stupid letter (none / 0) (#63)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 09:21:10 AM EST
    Trump is raising the money. If he quits they get nothing.  

    Everyday we see more proof that the Washington insiders are neither Demo or Repub...they're DCers that are worried that if Trump is elected they'll be out..

    People need to look around. Are you better off now than you were 16 years ago?

    Parent

    Why 16 years? (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by CST on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 09:33:41 AM EST
    The end of the last Clinton presidency?

    Do you really not see any irony at all in that statement?

    Also, no matter how hard you try - you can't dump the Bush fiasco on Democrats.

    Parent

    16 is a rather (none / 0) (#184)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Aug 14, 2016 at 07:07:01 AM EST
    arbitrary number. It harks back to when there was still a difference between the party elders and the various hangers on.

    That slowly disappeared. The loss was first noticed on a national basis in 2010 and later in 2012.

    I rather liked Bernie. Several of some of his social programs resonated with me. It was his foreign policies that turned me off.

    Trump is fun to watch in that he managed to beat down the DCers and get nominated. The ex-Repubs attacking him are just doing what the ex-Demos would  have done if they had not stolen the nomination from Bernie.

    Outside of immigration and crime I don't see much difference between Trump's and Hillary's internal policies. .... Obamacare is going to have to be fixed no matter who wins and the riots, no matter the reason, are going to have to be stopped.

    I am watching Milwaukee burn and looters loot as I write this.

    It is the destruction of the country's foreign policies by the deadly duo of Hillary and Obama and the lies she has told that leads me to vote for Trump.

    Parent

    Heh, heh ... (5.00 / 1) (#190)
    by Yman on Sun Aug 14, 2016 at 07:41:32 AM EST
    It is the destruction of the country's foreign policies by the deadly duo of Hillary and Obama and the lies she has told that leads me to vote for Trump.

    Someone voting for Trump because of lies allegedly told by the other candidate, when Trump gets caught doing it on a daily basis???

    That's pretty funny.

    Parent

    What the Director of the FBI said (1.00 / 1) (#193)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Aug 14, 2016 at 07:56:23 AM EST
    From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were "up-classified" to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent.

    The FBI also discovered several thousand work-related e-mails that were not in the group of 30,000 that were returned by Secretary Clinton to State in 2014.

    And

    Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

    And one man has died. Hanged by Iran.

     

    We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial e-mail accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton's use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's personal e-mail account.

    Link

    Just the person we want in charge...of anything.

    Parent

    I am far far better off than I was 8 years ago (5.00 / 2) (#75)
    by CoralGables on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 11:03:32 AM EST
    Spoken like a... (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by kdog on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 11:35:41 AM EST
    true Wall St. gambler;)

    Parent
    Investor (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by CoralGables on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 11:38:58 AM EST
    Semantics... (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by kdog on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 11:40:39 AM EST
    Sell Mortimer...Sell! Turn those machines back on!!!

    Parent
    If you had enough (none / 0) (#185)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Aug 14, 2016 at 07:13:12 AM EST
    money to take advantage of the taxpayers giving Wall Street free money you did well.

    If you were hurt going in you probably didn't do was well.

    Parent

    Without a doubt (none / 0) (#141)
    by Chuck0 on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 07:37:53 PM EST
    A resounding YES! I make nearly $40K more than I did in 2000. I own two residences instead of one. I have no debt except one mortgage.

    Parent
    GoodO for you (none / 0) (#186)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Aug 14, 2016 at 07:14:37 AM EST
    But the work force participation rate is at 1976 levels.

    Parent
    Just out of curiousity (none / 0) (#192)
    by Yman on Sun Aug 14, 2016 at 07:48:06 AM EST
    You know why the participation rate has declined, right?

    Parent
    vapid? (none / 0) (#43)
    by linea on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 02:29:10 AM EST
    i googled this word. purportedly, but not actually, vapid refers to a person who is dull or uninspiring. an adjective. recently, i was on a job interview and one of them (one of three) commented that i was "chatty." yah, took a while to sink in, but really, who ever uses that word to refer to a professional educated man who is pleasant and sociable? chatty means vapid and vapid means a ditsy woman. and "chatty" and "vapid" and "ditsy" are all reserved words for chatty vapid ditsy "girls."

    Parent
    Vapid (none / 0) (#48)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 07:33:03 AM EST
    vap·id
    ˈvapəd/
    adjective
    offering nothing that is stimulating or challenging.
    "tuneful but vapid musical comedies"
    synonyms:    insipid, uninspired, colorless, uninteresting, feeble, flat, dull, boring, tedious, tired, unexciting, uninspiring, unimaginative, uninvolving, lifeless, tame, vacuous, bland, trite, jejune

    Parent
    ... in a paper published today in the journal Science, the Greenland shark -- a ponderous creature from the Arctic which can grow to more than 20 feet in length -- is likely the longest lived vertebrate on earth, with a life span estimated to exceed 250 years. Nielsen further estimates that individuals of that species don't reach maturity until age 150 or so. Fascinating.

    Is anybody a marine biologist?! (none / 0) (#10)
    by vicndabx on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 04:24:33 PM EST
    Huh? (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 05:27:22 PM EST
    Sorry, couldn't link before (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by vicndabx on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 07:07:38 PM EST
    Classic Seinfeld episode, George Costanza caught in a lie.  Here's a good clip

    Parent
    George (none / 0) (#36)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 08:44:44 PM EST
    Can be anything he put his mind to.
    Besides, it is not a lie if you really believe it!!!

    Parent
    Ponderous.. (none / 0) (#13)
    by jondee on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 05:35:27 PM EST
    250 years is a long time to ponder the mysteries of the deep..

    So, is he the only shark that can live to 100 + years?

    I remember hearing a discussion about leatherback sea turtles in which there was some speculation about them potentially having a remarkably long lifespan.

    I think there's some sort of mollusk (clam ?) that can live for hundreds of years..  

    Parent

    A clam called Ming.. (none / 0) (#14)
    by jondee on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 05:41:12 PM EST
    the next heart-warming Disney film for the whole family.

    Parent
    You mean (none / 0) (#153)
    by Nemi on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 08:15:17 AM EST
    Ming, the clam that scientists accidentally killed while trying to find out how old it was?

    So sad, snif, yet I can't help giggling over that story. In a sort of lolsob way. ;)

    Parent

    After 500 years (5.00 / 1) (#183)
    by jondee on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 11:15:38 PM EST
    at the bottom of the ocean, you learn to be philosophical about that sort of thing.

    Parent
    I've read (none / 0) (#15)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 06:27:16 PM EST
    No one knows how long some whales live

    Parent
    When someone asked the French poet (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by jondee on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 06:40:03 PM EST
    Nerval why he had a pet lobster (rescued from a fishing net), he said "Because he doesn't bark. And he knows the mysteries of the deep".

    Parent
    ... along the west coast (J-pod), "Granny (known officially to researchers as J2), who was first identified as a juvenile back in 1911, which would make her 105 years old.

    Parent
    I think this was Bowhead whales (none / 0) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 07:41:53 PM EST
    They think they live 200 years and maybe much longer.

    Parent
    Certain tortoises can live for a very long time... (none / 0) (#39)
    by desertswine on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 09:31:03 PM EST
    Harriet the tortoise..

    Harriet (c. 1830 - June 23, 2006) was a Galápagos tortoise (Geochelone nigra porteri) who had an estimated age of 175 years at the time of her death in Australia. Harriet is the third oldest tortoise, behind Tu'i Malila, who died in 1965 at the age of 188, and Adwaita, who died in 2006 at the estimated age of 255.[1][2][3][4]

    She was reportedly collected by Charles Darwin during his 1835 visit to the Galápagos Islands as part of his round-the-world survey expedition, transported to England, and then brought to her final home, Australia, by a retiring captain of the Beagle. However, some doubt was cast on this story by the fact that Darwin had never visited the island that Harriet originally came from.



    Parent
    I've read (none / 0) (#41)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 09:39:06 PM EST
    In the days of wooden ships they would put these animals in the hold, on their backs, where they could live for many many months without food or water.

    That made me a little sick.

    Parent

    Great TIME cover (none / 0) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 06:32:52 PM EST
    I attempted (none / 0) (#18)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 06:35:23 PM EST
    to read the article but it kept freezing my browser.

    Parent
    An increasing number of websites such as SFGate.com (home page for the San Francisco Chronicle) are doing this, to the point where they're no longer user-friendly. I know they like all that advertising revenue, but eventually they're going to lose eyeballs as viewers finally fun out of patience with slow or unresponsive sites and stop coming.

    Parent
    Scripts, blocked pop ups (5.00 / 3) (#26)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 07:33:44 PM EST
    I'm done.  I've a new rule.  Freeze once I'm done.  Repeatedly trying to get through their click hole wall of bullsh!t is encouraging more of it.   I really really hate it.  And it's spreading.  There is a growing list of sites I just won't use.   The Internet is big and wide.  Nothing is just in one place.  Screw um.

    Parent
    I froze once and said good bye (none / 0) (#19)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 06:36:46 PM EST
    The visual is fine.

    Parent
    That's pretty good (none / 0) (#21)
    by jondee on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 06:43:40 PM EST
    but I wish they'd have hired R Crumb to do one.

    Parent
    There are quotes (none / 0) (#22)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 06:57:40 PM EST
    At Clinton headquarters in Brooklyn, aides still nursing scars from skirmishes with Bernie Sanders marveled at their good fortune. As in all campaigns, researchers watch every public event, read every interview, archive every tweet. "On other campaigns, we would have to scrounge for crumbs," says a senior Clinton adviser. "Here, it's a fire hose. He can set himself on fire at breakfast, kill a nun at lunch and waterboard a puppy in the afternoon. And that doesn't even get us to prime time."



    Parent
    Why is it, that when someone wins a gold medal, (none / 0) (#29)
    by desertswine on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 08:12:24 PM EST
    they always take pictures of that person "biting" the medal?  It's silly.  I've been watching too much olympics.  NBC's fluffy coverage is actually making me root for the opposition.

    pure gold (none / 0) (#44)
    by linea on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 02:33:45 AM EST
    is soft and i think it is an old tradition? i dunno.

    Parent
    Used to be (none / 0) (#52)
    by jbindc on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 07:54:34 AM EST
    To prove it was real gold, but the medals haven't been real gold since before WWII.

    Nowadays, it's what the world photographers want a shot of, so the athletes do it.

    Parent

    I'm too lazy to google... (none / 0) (#98)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    ...but iirc, back in the day day, when I was a wee chile, an Olympic weight lifter, I think American, who also had a rep as being a funny guy, bit his gold medal while on the medal stand humorously testing whether is was "real" or not.

    Parent
    Agree (none / 0) (#154)
    by Nemi on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 08:43:39 AM EST
    It's annoying. As is kissing a victory cup. Not to mention a bit gross when a whole team takes turns kissing the same cup.

    But I'm sure as is mentioned below, that the photographers are calling for, demanding, it ... which is why I really admire those that don't.

    Goes for women too, actually, who don't bend to photographers demands to pose the 'right way' on the red carpet. Don't know if anyone even dares not to oblige anymore?

    Parent

    Anyone watching the meteor shower tonight? (none / 0) (#31)
    by McBain on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 08:13:54 PM EST
    I always seem to miss the Perseid meteor shower that comes just about the same time every year.   Tonight I'm determined to get a good look.  I'm going to get away from the city lights and stay out late.  

    I was reading about it (none / 0) (#32)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 08:18:07 PM EST
    I'm already away from city lights.  But it's cloudy here.

    Parent
    Not really the same (none / 0) (#34)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 08:23:45 PM EST
    I didn't get to see as many meteors as I hoped (none / 0) (#148)
    by McBain on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 09:47:19 PM EST
    but some of the ones I saw made the trip well worth it.  

    Parent
    Been watching and listening (none / 0) (#40)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 09:36:18 PM EST
    Online

    This is known as "the most dangerous object in the known universe".  They say it will, at some point, hopefully in the far distant future, hit the earth.  With 27 times the destructive force of the one that took out the dinosaurs.  It's 25 miles wide.   That one was about 7.  It would hit us head on going 40+ miles per second.

    Parent

    Homeland (none / 0) (#37)
    by TrevorBolder on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 08:51:42 PM EST
    Homeland season 6 is jumping right back into the current political conversation

    In the new season, Carrie Mathison (Claire Danes) has begun working at a foundation that aims to provide aid to Muslims living in the U.S. The show's action will tackle the events after a U.S. presidential election, with the season taking place between election day and a new president's inauguration.

    "We talked a lot about the Iran nuclear deal, because a lot of that business gets conducted in New York City in terms of the sanctions and banking," Gansa said.



    i am so sorry (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by linea on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 03:10:47 AM EST
    i believe i have "homeland" confused with a tv show called "24" that was popular ten years ago. ive seen neither.

    i dont feel obama did a very good job with the "iran nuclear deal" and that whole region is a complete mess. i realize it was a mess when he inherited it but he made it a bigger mess,  just mt feelings.  

    Parent

    24 (none / 0) (#47)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 05:06:59 AM EST
    Was an American version of the British show "Spooks", or also called MI5. I had watched all (10 seasons I believe) of MI5, but have never watched 1 episode of 24.
    Prisoners of War is an Israeli television drama series made by Keshet and originally aired on Israel's Channel 2  In 2010 it won the Israeli Academy Award for Television for Best Drama Series.

    The programme was acquired by 20th Century Fox Television before it aired in Israel, and was adapted into the acclaimed series Homeland for Showtime in the United States.



    Parent
    If you had watched any of "24"... (none / 0) (#151)
    by unitron on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 10:07:08 PM EST
    ...I don't think you'd consider it a version of "Spooks/MI5", except in the most general of ways, like calling Poirot or Father Brown a version of Sherlock Holmes.

    Especially since "24" debuted about 6 months before "Spooks" did.

    Parent

    season 6? (none / 0) (#45)
    by linea on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 02:36:09 AM EST
    really? is that show only six years old? ive never seen it and i thought it was cancelled like ten years sgo.

    Parent
    High ground Donald? (none / 0) (#38)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 11, 2016 at 09:11:24 PM EST

    SYDNEY - A major earthquake with a magnitude of 7.6 struck about 535 km (330 miles) southeast of the South Pacific island nation of Vanuatu on Friday, the United States Geological Survey said, triggering a local tsunami warning.

    The Pacific Tsunami Warning Center issued a warning for areas close to the quake, although there was no Pacific-wide threat of a tsunami, the Hawaii-based center said. The shallow quake was measured at a depth of about 10 km (6 miles).

    This just happened

    article today about how (none / 0) (#67)
    by CST on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 09:49:47 AM EST
    "Nearly two-thirds of travelers today are women"

    Kind of an interesting statistic, and the article, while attempting to explain why, doesn't really seem to figure it out.

    In any event, I'll say that this definitely seems reflected in my own life, both among people my age, as well as my parents age.

    The answer to this is too simple (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by CoralGables on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 11:11:39 AM EST
    The majority of travelers are older.  Age 60-64, there are 2.3 single women to every single man. 70-74, the ratio is 4 to 1.

    They live longer and have the time and money to travel. The reality isn't that they travel more. It's that there are more of them alive to travel.

    Or stated another way:
    Dead men don't travel.

    Parent

    Not quite that simple, CG. (none / 0) (#91)
    by caseyOR on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 12:38:08 PM EST
    I read CST's article. The increase in women travelers crosses generations. It is not just retirees. From millennials to Boomers, women are choosing to go it alone.

    Some of this is due to more women being single, either because they are divorced or widowed or because they have not married. Some, the article says, is because more women travel for business or to study abroad, and so, become comfortable with solo travel in a way that women were not before.

    There are other possible reasons cited in the article. Some, or none, of them may be actual reasons. Still, that women feel confident and free enough to travel without men, as well as with men, is IMO a good thing.

    Parent

    Huge state numbers for Clinton from Marist today (none / 0) (#83)
    by CoralGables on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 11:42:41 AM EST
    Colorado Clinton +12
    Florida Clinton +5
    North Carolina Clinton +9
    Virginia Clinton +12


    Some of the lies told by Trump that are (none / 0) (#85)
    by vml68 on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 11:50:43 AM EST
    mentioned in this 'Open letter to Paul Ryan asking him to condemn Trump by Kurt Eichenwald', are absolutely mind boggling and at the same time hilarious.

    One example

    The all-time classic Trump deposition is the one he gave in 2007 in a libel lawsuit he brought against Timothy O'Brien, author of  TrumpNation , because the book stated that Trump's net worth was far less than he claimed...
    Trump needed to prove he was damaged by the purported libel, but he wasn't content with just saying he had lost some specific bit of business. Instead, he claimed to have lost business he never knew existed. "The fact is that a lot of people who would have done deals with me didn't come to do deals with me,'' he testified. "I can't tell you who they are because they never came to me."


    Bendan Dassey conviction overturned! (none / 0) (#121)
    by McBain on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 04:59:41 PM EST
    I don't know who actually murdered Teresa Halbach.  Maybe Dassey played a part, but his "confession" was beyond ridiculous.  

    (Magistrate Judge) Duffin found that investigators made false promises to Dassey during multiple interrogations.

    "These repeated false promises, when considered in conjunction with all relevant factors, most especially Dassey's age, intellectual deficits, and the absence of a supportive adult, rendered Dassey's confession involuntary under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. The Wisconsin Court of Appeals' decision to the contrary was an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law," Duffin wrote.



    4 words (none / 0) (#136)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 07:13:46 PM EST
    GO
    SEE
    SAUSAGE
    PARTY


    Favorite review blurb (none / 0) (#137)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 07:17:03 PM EST
    Sausage Party is like a Pixar movie that's gotten hopped up on crystal meth and Viagra

    Yeah baby

    Parent

    I'm still trying unsee parts of that von Trier (none / 0) (#138)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 07:28:26 PM EST
    movie you said to "go see"

    Pixar sounds a little safer though..

    Parent

    Keep telling yourself that (none / 0) (#140)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 07:29:48 PM EST
    :)

    Parent
    I've seen (none / 0) (#147)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 12, 2016 at 09:30:30 PM EST
    our concern trolls making the statement about how another candidate (insert fantasy here) would be beating Hillary. The whole GOP theory on this is debunked here

    They couldn't beat Trump (none / 0) (#157)
    by Repack Rider on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 11:50:15 AM EST
    ...who can't beat Hillary.  Maybe it has something to do with the absolute ineptness of the GOP.

    That's my theory, anyway.

    Parent

    I think it's the GOP version (none / 0) (#162)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 03:00:11 PM EST
    Of "rigged".  But they will keep saying it.  Even after she beats another one 4 years from now.

    Parent
    PeterG and others in the law (none / 0) (#163)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 03:05:39 PM EST
    Hillary is being urged by some democrats to stick with Merric Garland.  Because it would avoid a fight.  It would hoist the republicans on their own petard.  Because he is a good choice.

    What say you?

    Garland seems to me like (5.00 / 6) (#164)
    by Peter G on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 03:38:52 PM EST
    the most conservative nominee that a Democratic President could choose. That is, an ordinary, mainstream, ex-prosecutor liberal. Yes, very smart. Yes, very judicious. Objectively highly qualified. But another point is that at 63 he is about as old as or older than any reasonable choice might be. Why not pick someone who can serve 25-30 years, rather than 15-20? So, if we capture the Senate, I would like to see an equally qualified but more progressive and younger choice, of whom there are many in this country. And frankly, I am uncomfortable with the Supreme Court being basically half Catholic and half Jewish, with not a single Protestant, in a country that is more than 50% Protestant. I favor more diversity on the Supreme Court: gender, racial, ethnic, geographical, religious, prior professional experience, etc. Again, our talent pool is so deep for this job, there is no reason why the nominees should come from any sort of cookie-cutter.

    Parent
    Agreed. My (5.00 / 1) (#171)
    by KeysDan on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 06:02:16 PM EST
    reservations at this point are the same as I had at the time of Judge Garland's nomination.  However, those reservations were outweighed by the pragmatism of President Obama nominating a replacement for Scalia,in his last year.  Merrick Garland was a good choice given the practical considerations, but for a President Clinton in her first year of office the nomination offers substantial latitude.

    The merits of a fresh start by a new Democratic president would need to be balanced with the values of completion of unfinished business of the predecessor Democratic president---uncompleted owing to Republican recalcitrance.

    I am cautiously confident that Mrs. Clinton, if elected president, would stay with the nomination of Judge Garland and work hard toward his confirmation, completing the nomination initiated by President Obama. There seems, from my vantage point, to be a sense of fairness involved to both President Obama and Judge Garland.

     There will likely be additional opportunities to nominate justices during her first term, permitting her presidency to identify nominees of great qualifications and to provide diversity within that talent pool.

    Of course, it may well be that Judge Garland's nomination will be acted upon in the final days of President Obama's term.  But, it would seem that that, too, would receive the favorable consultation of the newly elected Democratic president.

    Parent

    I agree with you too (5.00 / 2) (#172)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 06:13:08 PM EST
    While I might prefer a different, younger, choice I think it likely she will stick with Garland.   No idea what protocol or etiquette is but it seems a bit unfair to toss him into this and then withdrawn him.  

    Parent
    I couldn't care less (5.00 / 4) (#177)
    by Peter G on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 08:45:18 PM EST
    about "protocol," "etiquette" or "fairness" to Garland in this situation. This is the Supreme Court for the next few decades we're talking about. He can go back, quite happily to the D.C.Circuit, where he has an important job that he apparently enjoys and is good at. I want someone who opposes the death penalty, is not afraid of the gun lobby, and believes in strong civil rights  and civil liberties protection. Maybe Garland is all that, and maybe he isn't. But he's 63.

    Parent
    I agree with PeterG. (5.00 / 3) (#178)
    by caseyOR on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 09:00:42 PM EST
    And  Harry Reid, Dick Durbin and the other "top Democrats" need to STFU. Clinton has not even won the election yet, and already these guys are trying to control her.

    Geez.

    Parent

    I think (none / 0) (#196)
    by KeysDan on Sun Aug 14, 2016 at 08:45:44 AM EST
    that if Senators Reid, Durbin, et al., think they can control a President Clinton, they are barking up he wrong tree.  And, I also believe that they know it.   Therefore, their talk seems to be a strategy to get Judge Garland confirmed by November, and, perhaps, to signal to dispirited Republicans an inevitability to Mrs. Clinton's election.

    Parent
    Don't care that much either (none / 0) (#179)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 09:10:11 PM EST
    Like I said I agree with a younger choice.

    I still think she will probably go with Garland.  I'd like to be wrong.   Unless perhaps Obama withdraws the nomination just to poke the republicans.  I could see him doing that actually.  Keeping them to their word about letting the next president pick.

    And I don't think anyone is trying to control her.  

    Parent

    I think if HRC wins on Nov. 8, , (none / 0) (#180)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 09:21:45 PM EST
    and Pres. Obama does not immediately w/d his nomination of Judge Garland, the Senate will quickly confirm Garland.

    Parent
    Yes I thought this was interesting (none / 0) (#181)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 09:30:12 PM EST
    From the link

    Some Democrats have even mulled the possibility that, if Democrats retake control of the Senate in November, they might move on Garland in the two weeks after the new Senate is in session but before Inauguration Day.



    Parent
    The Senate could do that. (5.00 / 2) (#182)
    by caseyOR on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 09:46:28 PM EST
    It would prove that the Republicans, who have refused to vote on Garland because they claim the next president should make the choice, are just big fat liars, and Mitch McConnell will be engulfed in the flames from his on fire pants.

    Parent
    Also (none / 0) (#173)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 06:15:57 PM EST
    It seems it might offer a bit of cover, his being centrist,to nominating a reall liberal to replace the Notorious RBG which seems likely in the next 4 years.

    Parent
    Yes, this is (none / 0) (#174)
    by KeysDan on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 06:39:47 PM EST
    my thinking as well.  Judge Garland is not unqualified, indeed, Democrats have been touting him for the past months.  And, it would be a little stick in the eye to the Republicans, not that that is what we have in mind.

    Parent
    Well, (none / 0) (#176)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 06:56:05 PM EST
    you've been right about a lot of things when it comes to Hillary. So she probably will stick with Garland. The way I look at it though is he's 1000% improvement over Scalia.

    Parent
    Yes (none / 0) (#165)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 03:44:24 PM EST
    I agree with everything you said.  it seemed a rather spineless argument to me.

    And one made by a site seen by many as republican stenographers.

    I just wonder if the preserving capital thing will carry any weight.  

    Also I suspect this congress will try to confirm him if Hillary is elected.

    Parent

    I think (none / 0) (#166)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 04:46:06 PM EST
    if Hillary wins the election the GOP will go ahead and nominate Garland in the lame duck session.

    Parent
    Unless HRC asks Obama to withdraw (5.00 / 1) (#167)
    by Peter G on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 04:58:49 PM EST
    the nomination, so that she can have her own pick. Or even if she asks Garland directly to withdraw. I'm sure both Obama and Garland would honor her preference in that way, if she expressed it. Not saying she would; I have no idea. But since her first pick would certainly not be more to the liking of the R's in the Senate, they'd be crazy not to swallow the hypocrisy ("the next President should decide") and approve Garland ASAP. That's what I was thinking when I wrote in my initial comment that my suggestion depended on whether the D's win control of the Senate.

    Parent
    Yes (none / 0) (#168)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 05:27:32 PM EST
    it seems the GOP may have painted themselves into quite a corner with their rhetoric.

    Parent
    Senate (none / 0) (#169)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 05:46:28 PM EST
    I'm staring to think the senate question, like this quote from a poster at KOS on the state of the race -

    Not quite, but for all practical purposes the issue now seems less whether or not Trump can win, but more so how much more than 400 electoral votes are possible for Clinton.

    In a post about this article in the NYTimes today titled "inside the failing campaign to save Trump from himself."

    It is nearing the point where the question is not if they will take the senate but by how much they will take it.

    That TIMES article is just stunning.  No other word.  Like the KOS poster says, this is when you know things are really bad.

    (please spare me the caution lectures, it's not my first rodeo.)

    On that subject, if you have been avoiding cable news you might want to rethink that.  It has gotten very entertaining recently.  This has been blogged about all over.  There are several good posts at KOS on this subject too.

    Like this one spotlighting just some of the beat downs Trumps pathetic surrogates have gotten recently.

    As a person who has followed politics all of my adult life, seriously, I've never seen anything like this.  I've never seen the wheels come off quite like this.

    Parent

    Mitch McTurtle (none / 0) (#170)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 05:54:39 PM EST
    This week


    Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is not optimistic that he will be in charge of the Senate come November ― and Donald Trump, he implied, is not helping matters.

    McConnell told a civic group in Kentucky on Thursday that the chances of the GOP retaining control of the Senate were "very dicey," the Associated Press reported.



    Parent
    Trump's (none / 0) (#175)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 13, 2016 at 06:53:34 PM EST
    surrogates have become the but of jokes. No more than Katrina Pierson who seems to constantly have Katrina Pierson History trending on twitter.

    Paul Krugman has a good take down on why the GOP has so many problems. It's all about tax cuts for the rich. They were willing to dance with Neo Nazis and all sorts of white nationalists as long as they got tax cuts.

    What really shocks me is did the GOP think they were going to get away with what they have been doing forever? It seems I guess they had gotten away with it for so long they thought they were invincible,

    Parent

    A lot of thugs and looters (none / 0) (#194)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Aug 14, 2016 at 08:20:09 AM EST
    in Milwaukee are gonna have new flat screens to watch football this year.

    Wonder why the Prez hasn't told us if he a son he would look like these??

    Oh well. He has a Milwaukee surrogate, an elected councilman, to tell'em it's okay.

    The New Yorker cover (none / 0) (#201)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Aug 14, 2016 at 10:17:53 AM EST
    HRC Supreme Court picks (none / 0) (#202)
    by jbindc on Mon Aug 15, 2016 at 09:35:27 AM EST
    FWIW, "those in the know" say Garland is at the top of her list

    Still, while Clinton hasn't followed Trump's lead in releasing names, advocates say her most likely choices for a high court appointment are already apparent.

    The Hill talked to three well-connected groups in Washington about Clinton's Supreme Court options should she win the White House. None would go on the record, citing the sensitivities surrounding the issue.

    But there's broad agreement about who Clinton would be most likely to consider, not only for the vacancy already on the court, but also the additional ones that could open up over the next four years if liberals like Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Justice Anthony Kennedy were to retire.

    Topping the list, insiders say, is Garland.

    He's an obvious choice, having already completed the background checks from the FBI and the American Bar Association to be a Supreme Court nominee; that process can take up to four months.

    Garland already serves on the powerful D.C. appeals court, and personally knows some of the other members of the Supreme Court, including Chief Justice John Roberts.

    And while Republicans have refused to consider Garland's nomination this year, saying the court vacancy should be filled by the next president, many have spoken highly of his qualifications, giving him a good chance at being confirmed.



    To preclude further embarrassment: (none / 0) (#203)
    by NYShooter on Mon Aug 15, 2016 at 01:46:53 PM EST
    Dr. Valerie Rao, the Jacksonville, Fla., medical examiner for Duval, Clay and Nassau counties, testified (in response to the defense's claim)  that the word "slam" conveys great force, and there was no great force used here. If you look at the injuries, they're so very minor. Mr. Zimmerman's injuries not only were not life-threatening, but also were "very insignificant."