home

Friday Open Thread

Serial groper George HW Bush gets a pass because...why? His age, his wheelchair, his ex-presidential status? Three women have now come forward, and he's admitted his conduct.

A 10 year old leads police on a 1 hr chase because he was bored waiting for his sister to get ready for school. It was his second time stealing a car for a joyride in a month.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Feeding the Swamp: GEO Holds Private Event at Trump Resort | White House: All Women Who Accused Trump Were Lying >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Two (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by FlJoe on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 04:13:07 PM EST
    head slappers from  from the pundits today

    David Brooks: The Week Trump Won
    Party like its 1917!

    One hundred years ago on Friday, John Reed was in St. Petersburg watching Lenin, Trotsky and the rest of the Bolsheviks take over Russia. It was interesting to read his account, "Ten Days That Shook the World," this week -- the week when Donald Trump and Steve Bannon solidified their grip on the Republican Party and America's national government.
    strange read of history unless you think Lenin was a dotard
    The Republican senators went to the White House and saw a president so repetitive and rambling, some thought he might be suffering from early Alzheimer's. But they know which way the wind is blowing. They gave him a standing ovation.
    Not to be outdone Chris Cillizza chimes in with, This has been an incredibly confusing week in politics. That's good for Trump.
    When you look down at the Washington swamp after this week, you'd be lucky to see your feet. Which means Trump is having a good week.
    No Chris, you are having a bad week, allowing tRump to win by muddying the water.  Gee, if only there was some kind of profession whose job it was to clarify these things, next week's column "What happened to my feet?"

    James Madison (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by KeysDan on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 04:49:21 PM EST
    let us down.  He, and other founders, having seen the Kings, authoritarians and despots of the world, crafted the Constitution so as to guard against such in the new nation.  Emoluments, high crimes, misdemeanors...anything, essentially, of political nature against the Constitution and people, provided the safeguard of impeachment, conviction and removal of the president from office.  

    However, there was no provision for a derelict, complicit or criminal Congress....ignoring or deliberately not living up to its responsibilities.  Or just stupid. Such as abiding a Trump in exchange for goodies...e.g. tax cuts.  And, their jobs. Of course, this problem can be cured with votes, if the system is not rigged.

    Madison et al. did good for the "press", with First Amendment protections of freedom of speech and the press. But, of course, there is always the Chris Cillizza, Maggie Habermana (MoDo clone), and Mr. Bothsiderism, David Brooks.

     For a bad press, a price to pay in poor reporting and blatant propaganda. For a bad Congress, the price is the end of Constitutional government. So, what do we do about a Congress that is comprised of f...morons, a vapid, or worse, media, in light of a f..moron president*.?

       *per the Secretary of State.

    Parent

    they warned us (5.00 / 4) (#13)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 05:14:09 PM EST
    John Adams

    There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.

    Washington

    The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty
    ---
    There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

    i would not blame them.

    Parent

    Madison (5.00 / 4) (#14)
    by FlJoe on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 05:23:06 PM EST
    and the others were products of the enlightenment and expected the power of reason, logic and empirical fact to always grow. They were wrong, we have arrived quite suddenly in a new dark ages where those qualities are all but useless.

    Parent
    you only have to read those quotes (none / 0) (#15)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 05:29:02 PM EST
    can you imagine the reaction to those words now?

    its a tragic/comic image.

    "Huh?  whud he say? is he speakin anglish?

    Parent

    original funder of THE DOSSIER (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 06:38:12 PM EST
    was the WASHINGTON FREE BEACON.  said to be funded by a supporter of Little Marco.

    CBS (none / 0) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 06:40:53 PM EST
    i think (none / 0) (#40)
    by linea on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 08:07:30 PM EST
    it would be more correct to say that the "conservative website the Washington Free Beacon originally funded research by the firm Fusion GPS" during the republican primaries. which was followed up by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign paying for additional research and Fusion GPS using DNC/Clinton moneys to pay russian officials for information that resulted in the Trump dossier. the dossier was then leaked to the press to damage the oppostition candidate.

    DNC, Clinton campaign paid for research that resulted in Trump dossier: Report

    Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee contributed funding for research that culminated in the infamous dossier alleging Donald Trump's connections to Russia, according to a Washington Post report citing people familiar with the matter.


    Parent
    oh (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 08:09:10 PM EST
    thank you linea

    of course.  no one here knew that except you.  as with so much of your shared wisdom.

    Parent

    Hopefully (5.00 / 3) (#63)
    by hilts on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 09:16:59 PM EST
    Tonight is the beginning of the end for this knuckle dragging neanderthal Donald Trump. He's a buffoon, a crook, and a pathological liar.

    on tonight (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by linea on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 09:07:23 PM EST
    This is also an issue in Poland (5.00 / 1) (#114)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 29, 2017 at 01:39:53 PM EST
    The rolling back of domestic violence and abuse progress that had been made.

    Parent
    La David Johnson (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 29, 2017 at 01:37:50 PM EST
    Died going back to save others and Trump can't honor the family appropriately or stop attacking his widow.

    Spooky 5k (5.00 / 4) (#116)
    by MKS on Sun Oct 29, 2017 at 04:53:11 PM EST
    This may be tacky, but I came in 2nd in my age division this morning in a 5k.   Nasty course. Uphill for a mile and a half, then back down hill.   Two women in costume (in the their 20s) passed me at the finish line.   I guess I was better able to chug up the hill for the first half, downhill not so much.

    But, many women competitors today. Some really impressive athletes.

    Ain't that so true (none / 0) (#119)
    by MKS on Mon Oct 30, 2017 at 11:31:23 AM EST
    HS girl golfer (none / 0) (#1)
    by Repack Rider on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 12:01:43 PM EST
    ...wins the MA state HS BOYS' golf tournament, by three strokes, hitting off the same tee.

    Denied trophy b/c she's a GIRL.

    somewhat more complicated than that (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by CST on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 12:19:17 PM EST
    Essentially if there's no girl's team the girl can play with the boys team, and if there's no boy's team the boy can play with the girls team.  This was due to a court ruling that said you have to let boys play on the girl's team if there is no alternative.

    So then they have these tournaments where you have both team and individual wins, one for girls and one for boys. They said the boys can still play on the girl's team and the girls can still play on the boy's team for the respective tournaments but their individual scores will only count for the correct tournament.  The idea here was they didn't want boys playing on the girls team to routinely win the individual girls trophy.

    Given what happened in this tournament they are all in agreement that the rule likely needs to be looked at/changed.  But that's why it was set up.  Also, the boy who "won" tried to give his trophy away to the girl, but she declined.

    Parent

    Kudos to the boy (none / 0) (#29)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 07:19:10 PM EST
    who got the trophy. Encouraging in light of all the dismal revelations about sexual harassment.

    Parent
    Ashley Judd says she made a deal with (none / 0) (#3)
    by McBain on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 01:39:12 PM EST
    Harvey Weinstein to avoid being sexually assaulted. Judd says she promised to give in to his advances if she ever won an academy award for one of his films.  
    "Am I proud of that? I'm of two minds. The part that shames myself says no. The part of me that understands the way shame works says, 'That was absolutely brilliant. Good job, kid. You got out of there.'"

    I'm not sure what to make of that.  Not sure what to make of this entire scandal.

     

    Quick thinking on her part (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 02:36:10 PM EST
    Good for her.....

    What is so hard to understand about this entire scandal?  Powerful men are no longer able to get away with bad conduct--at least in these publicized instances....

    Parent

    Yeah, she got away (1.00 / 3) (#17)
    by McBain on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 05:46:46 PM EST
    but why did she come forward now that she's had a successful career? Why not before.  In this article, she says...
    Judd tells Sawyer that she hadn't heard stories about Weinstein's alleged behavior before she was summoned to meet with him in his hotel room at the Peninsula in Beverly Hills two decades ago, and she had no reason to be wary of him.

    "I had no warning," she said.

    How many women did she warn after that incident? If Weinstein is truly a sexual offender, why did it take so long to get him out of power in Hollywood? There's something missing here.  No one is talking about those who have benefited from a romp on the casting couch.  How many careers were made because of it?  We're not getting the entire story.

    Parent

    seriously dude (5.00 / 4) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 05:55:29 PM EST
    just stop digging

    Parent
    Because it causes a storm in the victims life (5.00 / 3) (#19)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 05:56:44 PM EST
    And a bunch of people like you blame the victim, who has already been through hell. Victims need some sort of safety and a possibility of being able to have something in life their life other the trauma and scars.

    Once you've been a victim it's very easy to be revictimized, redamaged, more scars

    Weinstein was powerful, a critical mass had to be reached before many victims could come forward.

    Ashley Judd was also molested in childhood. So she was streetwise enough to save herself from Weinstein, but coming forward risks redamage. That has to be approached carefully

    Parent

    A few things about your post (1.00 / 1) (#34)
    by McBain on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 07:51:54 PM EST
    I believe the abuse of children is more common than most people want to believe. I don't think society is ready for that conversation yet.

    What moral responsibility do victims, or near victims,  have in regards to reporting crimes in order to prevent future crimes? You  make it sound like they have very little.  I'm not sure about that.

    What moral responsibility to people who hear stories about alleged crimes have?  Right now, many in Hollywood are being criticized for "not doing more" about the Weinstein scandal.  But what exactly were they supposed to do... make  a citizens arrest? Refuse to work with him even it meant not being able to get a certain roll or a certain project made?    

    I think there's a lot of hypocrisy going on right now. Most people will work with/for a creep or even an alleged criminal if the money is good.

    Parent

    Society isn't ready for the discussion (5.00 / 4) (#49)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 08:24:17 PM EST
    About child molestation? Really? Cuz I thought that conversation has been ongoing for years.

    Parent
    Indeed (5.00 / 5) (#71)
    by Yman on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 08:49:13 AM EST
    I think there's a lot of hypocrisy going on right now. Most people will work with/for a creep or even an alleged criminal if the money is good.

    You mean working for this administration or the Trump companies?

    True.

    Parent

    Why does that even matter? (5.00 / 6) (#23)
    by Yman on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 06:10:06 PM EST
    If Weinstein is truly a sexual offender, why did it take so long to get him out of power in Hollywood? There's something missing here.

    No ... there's nothing "missing".  It took a long time because he was extremely powerful in Hollywood and the victims were reluctant to come forward.  By there very nature, these things usually happen without witnesses and victims are often attacked as not credible or even blamed, so they decide to remain silent.  They also are also afraid of being blackballed by a powerful producer.

    No one is talking about those who have benefited from a romp on the casting couch.  How many careers were made because of it?  We're not getting the entire story.

    Why is that even relevant?  Seriously.  BTW - Love your characterization/minimization of sexual harassment/assault as a "romp on the casting cast".  It's not remotely surprising.

    Parent

    You (5.00 / 4) (#26)
    by FlJoe on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 06:36:04 PM EST
    leave out the possibility that she would not have had a successful career if she had made waves. The reality is Hollywood was run by creeps like this and fighting against it could only hurt your career.

    Story after story, almost universally, the women understood that coming out would more than likely be a losing move, the brave ones often got labeled as unbelievable trouble makers (see Anita Hill) while the creeps were rewarded immensely (see Clarence Thomas).

    You ask silly questions. Why were any of these creeps allowed to thrive? Money and power in a man's world of course. Maybe you are not getting the entire story because you choose to willfully ignore the most important side of it.


    Parent

    Re "You ask silly questions." (none / 0) (#31)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 07:26:41 PM EST
    Rhetorical, perhaps.  Op ed.

    Parent
    You start off making a good point (none / 0) (#32)
    by McBain on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 07:36:26 PM EST
    the possibility that she would not have had a successful career if she had made waves. The reality is Hollywood was run by creeps like this and fighting against it could only hurt your career.

    I agree

    Maybe you are not getting the entire story because you choose to willfully ignore the most important side of it.

    No, I'm not getting the story because it's not being reported.  Let's here from more women and men who are convinced not sleeping with someone cost them an acting career. Let's here from those who claim the exact opposite.

    Parent
    ok (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 07:47:46 PM EST
    Let's here from more women and men who are convinced not sleeping with someone cost them an acting career

    just stop.  please for the love of god.

    you are not this stupid.  the wide eyed questioner thing is just sad really.

    you understand as well as i do no one is going to say this.  and if they did they would probably be laughed at.  

    if i told you i was denied a film career because i did not put out what would your reaction be?  the same as mine would be if you said it i expect.
    but you can be sure those people exist.  i lived in LA and worked in the industry for years,   i know some.

    you really just need to stop.  or go to 4chan or where ever and get some better material.

    Parent

    Actually, I'd like to hear more about (1.00 / 1) (#43)
    by McBain on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 08:10:20 PM EST
    what you know of this Hollywood scandal since you've done some work there.

    "you understand as well as i do no one is going to say this."

    Actually, some have already come forward.
    Here's one story

    Evans said that Weinstein's overt and repeated proposition was not illegal, however the actress was left feeling that "somehow I will be made to pay".

    "I was never again considered for a Weinstein film, and neither was Ioan," she said.

    As for your continued rude advice..
    "you really just need to stop.  or go to 4chan or where ever and get some better material."

    When have I ever let you or anyone else here, other than Jeralyn, tell me what to do?  This isn't your blog.  It's a legal/political blog and this is a topic that's extremely relevant. We shouldn't be afraid to discuss it.

     

    Parent

    well (none / 0) (#45)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 08:13:31 PM EST
    perhaps that will happen

    but im done.

    Parent

    Skating on thin ice McBain. (none / 0) (#53)
    by fishcamp on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 08:42:54 PM EST
    Believe me now!

    Parent
    Can you be more specific fishcamp? (1.00 / 1) (#86)
    by McBain on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 10:51:45 AM EST
    Is that some kind of threat or warning? I'm not the one making ridiculous personal attacks.  Are you OK with those who are? Please explain.

    I've never been afraid to discuss a controversial topic in here.  As long as we adhere to Jeralyn's rules, I don't see why we should be?

    Parent

    Sure McBain (5.00 / 5) (#101)
    by fishcamp on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 02:34:05 PM EST
    If you don't recognize the absurdity of your comments then you need to seek help or stop posting.  Your hidden agenda of the facts concerning rape and molestation are provoking many on this blog.  We know you are not a stupid person, so why are you continuing with this evil type of communication.  I suggest you reevaluate your thoughts.  Are you so shallow minded that you need the attention to bolster your ego?  I'm asking you to please stop.  

    Parent
    Nothing I've said is absurd (1.00 / 1) (#109)
    by McBain on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 07:45:54 PM EST
    I don't have a hidden agenda.  I like talking about controversial cases/scandals where certain aspects aren't been reported/discussed. TL can be great place for that when people play nice.

    If you don't like my comments don't read them.

    Parent

    And why did it take HRC so long (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 07:22:51 PM EST
    to denounce him?  [Snark.]

    Parent
    HRC (5.00 / 3) (#93)
    by MKS on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 11:28:51 AM EST
    More and more she sure seems like such a decent person.  Probably why she was not deemed a good politician.

    Parent
    She is (5.00 / 3) (#95)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 11:45:08 AM EST
    I've been following her since her first year as first lady of AR.

    She is.

    Parent

    She tried (5.00 / 3) (#97)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 11:54:36 AM EST
    her best to save the country from Putin. One day I hope her efforts are deemed worthy of a Presidential Medal of Freedom.

    Parent
    It is entirely possible that there (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by Anne on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 10:26:11 PM EST
    were women who quite willingly traded sexual favors for career advancement, and having done so, didn't see any advantage to admitting to it, but so what?

    Really, so what?  Does any woman's willingness mean all women must be willing?  Does Weinstein have some sort of right to expect cooperation just because some women cooperated?

    I hate to break it to you, but there are men in all corners of the world who have been taking advantage of their power and position for years, "getting away with" harassment and assault, and the fact that they are getting away with it doesn't mean they aren't "really" predators.  

    The reality is that the harassment, the assault, the rape, the unwanted touching, the threats to one's job, to one's reputation - these are all things that actually help the predator because they get at a woman's sense of herself, make her question herself, she knows that society still tries to blame the victim.  So she keeps it to herself.

    That she does this doesn't make it her fault, doesn't make her complicit, she is not responsible for his behavior, not when he went after her, not when he goes after someone else.

    The fact that this has to be explained to you is depressing, because I know there are a lot of others just like you, who don't seem capable of seeing and treating women as fully actualized and are so intent on shielding men from taking responsibility for their behavior that you end up treating women like property.

    We already know, because you have argued it ad nauseam, that you believe women want to be dominated and prefer a sexually aggressive man, so it isn't difficult to infer that you believe the women coming forward about Weinstein must be lying   for their own nefarious reasons, and that Weinstein is the proof of the existence of the sexually ideal man.

    Thank goodness a lot of men have evolved out of their caveman tendencies; too bad you aren't one of them.

    Parent

    Response to Anne (1.00 / 1) (#85)
    by McBain on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 10:47:28 AM EST
    "possible that there were women who quite willingly traded sexual favors for career advancement, and having done so, didn't see any advantage to admitting to it, but so what?"

    Generally, I'm ok with consenting adults doing just about what ever they want behind closed doors. The problem here might be it encourages people in power to try this with those who aren't interested.

    "We already know, because you have argued it ad nauseam, that you believe women want to be dominated and prefer a sexually aggressive man"

    You're the one who seems obsessed about that.

    "so it isn't difficult to infer that you believe the women coming forward about Weinstein must be lying"

    I don't know who's telling the truth.   Neither do you.

    "Thank goodness a lot of men have evolved out of their caveman tendencies; too bad you aren't one of them."

    You don't know me.  I don't know you.  Based on comments in this blog, you and a few others are the ones who haven't matured.  Quit making it personal.  


    Parent

    So much hypocrisy (5.00 / 5) (#89)
    by Yman on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 11:19:07 AM EST
    You don't know me.  I don't know you.  Based on comments in this blog, you and a few others are the ones who haven't matured.  Quit making it personal.

    ... and lack of self-awareness in the space of just three sentences.  Do you live at 1600 PA Ave.?  

    Parent

    "There's something missing here." (5.00 / 4) (#78)
    by vml68 on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 09:39:03 AM EST
    How many women did she warn after that incident? If Weinstein is truly a sexual offender, why did it take so long to get him out of power in Hollywood? There's something missing here.

    Yes, it would be your question about what she was wearing to her meeting with Weinstein. You've covered most of the other victim blaming statements.

    Parent

    You sound like (5.00 / 4) (#88)
    by MKS on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 11:07:36 AM EST
    someone from a Men's rights group.

     

    Parent

    I once told some gangbangers (none / 0) (#5)
    by jondee on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 02:42:54 PM EST
    who converged menacingly around me that I was a man of the cloth doing work in the community. It worked.

    Some times you just have to think on your feet and live to fight another day.

    Parent

    You always seemed (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by MKS on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 02:43:48 PM EST
    Godly to me.

    Parent
    Right back atcha (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by jondee on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 02:50:56 PM EST
    I'm like the lizard in Proverbs who's "wise" because he lives on the stone floor of the king's house for free ;-)

    Parent
    Really? (5.00 / 5) (#9)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 03:41:28 PM EST
    Spoken like someone who never had to think quickly in order to escape a rapist

    FTR, I find you a hideous representation of the male sex

    I'm sorry other men must attempt to make up for your attitudes and actions

    Parent

    Actually, it's spoken like someone who's (1.00 / 6) (#20)
    by McBain on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 05:57:08 PM EST
    not afraid to look beyond the surface of something controversial.  You know, the kind of thing one does on a message board?

    If we're speaking on the record, I don't think you're hideous.... just extremely childish at times.  Unfortunately,  that type of behavior is rarely criticized in here.  


    Parent

    No...it's spoken as a predator (5.00 / 5) (#22)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 06:02:56 PM EST
    But you have argued for predation to be normalized before here. I realize it's the only way you know how to negotiate sex, by being predatory, thank God every man isn't like you, just some.

    Parent
    FBI Crime Report - Significant Data Reduction (none / 0) (#8)
    by vicndabx on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 03:19:48 PM EST
    ...according to an analysis by FiveThirtyEight, the 2016 Crime in the United States report -- the first released under President Trump's administration -- contains close to 70 percent fewer data tables1 than the 2015 version did, a removal that could affect analysts' understanding of crime trends in the country
    These removals mean that there is less data available concerning a perennial focus of Trump and his attorney general, Jeff Sessions: violent crime.

    538 Link

    Watch for the propaganda coming - based on 30% of data previously available.

    Now, that's what I call (5.00 / 4) (#11)
    by Peter G on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 04:27:14 PM EST
    a significant statistical reduction in reported crime!

    Parent
    It's a making America great again miracle (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 06:33:58 PM EST
    CNN (none / 0) (#35)
    by FlJoe on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 07:53:00 PM EST
    Reporting Mueller has issued the first charges, currently has sealed indictments arrests expected as early as Monday, the nature of the charges and the target unknown.

    Just as we all (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 08:02:39 PM EST
    thought. The GOP knew this was coming and it was the reason for attempting to blame Hillary for colluding with the Russians, uranium and then more email BS.

    Who do you think is gonna go first? Flynn would be my guess. Maybe Mueller has got them all and is going to let it out soon.  

    Parent

    My (5.00 / 3) (#47)
    by FlJoe on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 08:15:54 PM EST
    money is on Manafort his crimes are more widespread and longer running, he also does not have an easy out with a pardon because of looming state charges.

    Parent
    yes (none / 0) (#50)
    by linea on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 08:28:53 PM EST
    definately Manafort. likely all sorts of crimes involving not reporting moneys and not filing federal paperwork related to representing a foreign government.

    but not just him. my guess is that several people (say three) are being charged for various tax evasion and non reporting of moneys type crimes.

    Paul Manafort, a former Trump campaign chairman who spent lucrative years as a political consultant, including to pro-Russian candidates in Ukraine.


    Parent
    Yes, the White House (none / 0) (#102)
    by KeysDan on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 02:34:35 PM EST
    Congressional Republicans and "State TV (aka FOX News), have been on a campaign. Hillary (who Gorka wants to roll out 'Old Sparky' and execute her) because emails and uranium, and, the smear'm program for Mueller.  

    Moreover, the Trumpification of the former Republican Party (the new GOP, Great Orange Party) with all the faux unity schtick is also a part of circling the wagons to protect the Party in the face of Mueller.

     I wonder if Corker or Flake would vote to convict in an impeachment trial...my bet would be no.  They voted for, essentially, all things Trump.  As very conservative senators, it could be argued that they supported the legislation, just not Trump. But, their revulsion did not include not voting for all Trump nominees, no matter how clearly part of the swamp or incompetent (Betsy DeVos, Tom Price, Ben Carson, Rick Perry).  

    Parent

    then we get (none / 0) (#107)
    by linea on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 04:54:44 PM EST
    re: "I wonder if Corker or Flake would vote to convict in an impeachment trial."

    president pence? his stance on social security and medicare alone would make him unelectible in a national presidential race.

    Parent

    The boundless cruelty of irony! (none / 0) (#120)
    by NYShooter on Mon Oct 30, 2017 at 10:35:04 PM EST
    While we're all lamenting the indescribable horror of seeing a true 20th. century monster in our revered White House, who, as Condoleezza Rice, famously asked, "who could have predicted someone taking an airplane and slamming it into a building?" (slightly paraphrased)

    And, as we suffer under this demented sadist, "who could have predicted his successor would be even worse?"

    His views are so abhorrent, rumor has it that's why Trump chose him for V.P......anti-impeachment insurance.

    Parent

    Actually (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Nov 01, 2017 at 07:29:06 AM EST
    from what I have read Trump did not want Pence. It seems Putin/Manafort are the ones that choose Pence as VP. If you remember that introduction of Pence last year Trump seemed none too pleased to have Pence as his VP. Pence has the reputation of being very stupid as well as very cruel. I guess those are the qualifications of being a Putin stooge.

    Parent
    Read on the intertubes... (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by vml68 on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 09:30:42 AM EST
    If Tr*mp is charged will he be tried as an ADULT?

    Parent
    here we go (none / 0) (#36)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 07:58:00 PM EST
    some reports (none / 0) (#37)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 08:00:37 PM EST
    say indictment some use the plural,

    did CNN say one or the other?

    Parent

    CNN (none / 0) (#39)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 08:05:03 PM EST
    said indictments.

    This guyis really good.

    Parent

    he is very good (none / 0) (#44)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 08:10:40 PM EST
    but he says INDICTMENT

    Parent
    Correct. (none / 0) (#46)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 08:13:41 PM EST
    I got so excited I added an S. Mueller must have given the news to CNN just to make Trump even more irate.

    Parent
    An indictment can name more than one (none / 0) (#56)
    by Peter G on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 08:56:08 PM EST
    defendant, and obviously can include multiple charges against any of them. While technically that would be a multi-defendant, multi-count "indictment," I would not fault anyone for referring to each count as an "indictment" and thus to either a multi-count or a multi-defendant indictment -- and particularly the latter -- as "indictments."

    Parent
    Thank you (none / 0) (#59)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 09:02:29 PM EST
    I was hoping you would clarify

    Parent
    Also (none / 0) (#61)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 09:03:56 PM EST
    Since its sealed would anyone know those details?

    Parent
    Anyone on the prosecution team would (none / 0) (#64)
    by Peter G on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 09:21:48 PM EST
    know. Many of the prosecutors, as well as agents assigned to execute the warrants. A sealed indictment ordinarily comes with a warrant for arrest. A publicly filed indictment, on the other hand, can (and in white collar cases against represented defendants fairly often does) come instead with a summons. No arrest. Just tells lawyer to bring client to court within a day or two to be arraigned by the U.S. Magistrate. "Arraigned" means formally informed of the charges and granted bail. Also a stop by the U.S. Marshal's Office to be fingerprinted and photographed.

    Parent
    I'm so grateful for you Peter (5.00 / 3) (#80)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 10:02:00 AM EST
    When these sorts of things are happening. Thank you so much for sharing your knowledge.

    Parent
    You're very welcome. I really appreciate (5.00 / 4) (#110)
    by Peter G on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 08:19:13 PM EST
    your insights into the experience of military members, veterans, and their families.

    Parent
    It's nice to have a place to vent (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Oct 29, 2017 at 09:21:07 AM EST
    Curious what you might (none / 0) (#66)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 09:37:14 PM EST
    Think about Dana Boenta.  Linked below.

    Reportedly he loved his job and had no plans to leave.  Suddenly he resigns.  Would he need to do that to be a witness?

    Parent

    As I read the story, Boente did not (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by Peter G on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 10:05:10 PM EST
    "suddenly resign." He is an acting assistant AG, temporarily heading an entire division of the central Dept of Justice. He said that when the permanent nominee is confirmed, he will leave DoJ (after 33 years) rather than go back to the U.S. Attorney's office or take a lesser position in Main Justice. (He had been the chief U.S. Attorney for one of the flagship districts (E.D.Va.).) Doesn't seem unusual to me. This is his chance to make more than $500,000 per year in some big D.C. law firm for several years before retiring. I could be missing something, of course.

    Parent
    Sure (none / 0) (#68)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 10:21:11 PM EST
    I used those words because some legal reporter was talking about how just days ago he was talking about the plans he had for this and that all work related.

    There is a lot of talk about it.  You have to admit the timing is interesting.  But to the actual question, if he WAS going to be a witness supporting obstruction would he have to resign?

    Parent

    Not for any technical reason I can think of (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by Peter G on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 10:30:37 PM EST
    he wouldn't. And not right now, anyway.

    Parent
    Marcy (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by FlJoe on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 12:09:09 PM EST
    Wheeler asks the same questions
    She discounts the witness angle, while raising the possibility he was forced out  
    Miller assumes that means Boente was forced out, rather than chose to announce his departure -- he'll stay until someone is confirmed in his place -- after some things he started (such as the investigation into Mike Flynn) are coming to closure.

    I don't believe, contrary to what Rachel Maddow has floated, that Boente is stepping down solely or primarily to be a witness. Mueller already has a list of people who witnessed Trump's obstruction. He doesn't need Boente and he'd be better off with Boente at the helm of related investigations than sitting before a grand jury.

    So if Boente was forced out, it suggests the charges announced have led to a Trump decision to get rid of Boente, perhaps yet another person he believed would protect him or his close associates.



    Parent
    One (none / 0) (#42)
    by FlJoe on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 08:09:28 PM EST
    of the reporters seemed to imply that she knew who the target was and my sense it was a single person with perhaps multiple charges, but to sketchy to really tell.

    Parent
    guy on MSNBC (none / 0) (#48)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 08:20:08 PM EST
    says you dony usually ask for it to be sealed unless flight is feared.

    also some discussion it could be someone we have never heard of.

    Parent

    Unfortunately, I often see defendants (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by Peter G on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 09:32:03 PM EST
    arrested on sealed indictments who were no risk to flee, but only because the prosecutors (and agents) want to "send a message" by embarrassing and humiliating the target (and terrorizing their children when the agents come into the house showing their weapons at 6:15 a.m.).

    Parent
    So, who's going to be (none / 0) (#55)
    by Zorba on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 08:53:49 PM EST
    catching a plane to Moscow this weekend?

    Parent
    Anyone who wants to be arrested (none / 0) (#57)
    by Peter G on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 08:57:16 PM EST
    at the airport, and then detained (for attempting to flee) rather than granted bail.

    Parent
    I'd kind of like (none / 0) (#60)
    by Zorba on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 09:03:07 PM EST
    to see this happen.
    I'd also like to find out if Trump will be granting some pre-emptive pardons (as Ford did for Nixon) in order to avoid trials and all the attendant publicity.

    Parent
    Maybe (none / 0) (#58)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 09:01:11 PM EST
    They all will.  Heard some interesting talk that it's more likely coming so early and in the news/cultural climate we find ourselves that this first one goes straight at collusion and would be someone who might not have even been in the news so much.

    He said Manafort or Flynn could be indicted any time.

    Parent

    If you don't like my posts (none / 0) (#52)
    by McBain on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 08:41:35 PM EST
    then stop replying.  There are people in here who I ignore.  You're perfectly capable of doing the same.

    My comment was I don't think our society is ready to talk about how common that crime is. Not just priests or certain Hollywood directors but regular people from the neighborhood or family.  

    And there are some MEN ... (5.00 / 4) (#76)
    by Yman on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 09:19:27 AM EST
    My comment was I don't think our society is ready to talk about how common that crime is. Not just priests or certain Hollywood directors but regular people from the neighborhood or family.
     

    ... who aren't ready to talk about how common sexual harassment/assault is, try to minimize it by using terms like a "romp on the casting couch" and who attack the victims by asking trolling "questions".  Luckily, there are fewer and fewer of them with each passing generation.

    Parent

    US Attourney Dana Boenta (none / 0) (#62)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 27, 2017 at 09:12:07 PM EST
    Resigned today.  You may remember based on Comeys testimony he would be a witness to obstruction of justice.

    Interesting timing.

    WaPo

    interesting strategic timing (none / 0) (#72)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 08:55:53 AM EST
    on these charges from Mueller.

    if this had not happened the primary subject of the chattering class this weekend would have been the flurry of charges from the right intended only to cause exactly that and muddy the waters.

    now, not.  all weekend, every sunday show and everywhere in between will be all indictments all the time.

    there may well be other reasons for the timing but it seems unlikely to me it was unreladed to the public discussion.

    I saved this (none / 0) (#73)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 09:08:33 AM EST
    Tweet when it showed up in my feed early yesterday. All I could do was hope there was something to it. And it looks like there was.

    Parent
    I (none / 0) (#74)
    by FlJoe on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 09:12:30 AM EST
    think it's the opposite, so far to his credit Mueller has ignored the news cycle. It is much more likely that  the tRump team knew it was coming and launched these diversionary attacks.

    Even the clueless pundits understood that tRump was "muddying up the water" to an extreme even for him.

    Parent

    its totally possible (none / 0) (#75)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 09:18:09 AM EST
    but he did not have to announce on friday that they were making arrests on monday.

    Parent
    It (none / 0) (#79)
    by FlJoe on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 09:58:26 AM EST
    was not an announcement, it was a leak.  There had to be a healthy buzz all week about these indictments coming, once they were signed and sealed they were probably impossible to hide.

    Nobody has "announced" that there will be arrests on Monday, my reading of the reporting is that the sources have indicated that arrests are unlikely before Monday, which of course gets turned into arrests as early as Monday, which gets heard as arrests on Monday.

     

    Parent

    IMO (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 10:05:21 AM EST
    Mueller does not "leak".  At least not by accident.

    Parent
    What I mean is (none / 0) (#82)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 10:19:59 AM EST
    This is leaked perfectly timed to grab the Friday night news dump.  The night we have all been getting scoop after scoop for months.
    Also, it's leaked there is an "indictment".  Not who, how many or for what which makes everyone chatter about that AND be glued to their tv's.

    Not saying there was definitely calculation in that but I think there was.

    We can agree to disagree

    Parent

    There (none / 0) (#84)
    by FlJoe on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 10:36:27 AM EST
    is no evidence that Mueller is behind any leak. My understanding is that the GJ process has a rather largish cast of players, most of which are not working directly for Mueller.

    IMO, once these indictments were a done deal, they would become known no matter how tight-lipped Mueller was.

    Parent

    Correct. (none / 0) (#87)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 11:06:32 AM EST
    and now the MSM is kind of laughing at the right wing idiots for the uranium one story they have been pushing. It's blatantly obvious what they were doing.

    Parent
    Not (none / 0) (#94)
    by FlJoe on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 11:38:10 AM EST
    really, just today I saw Jack Kingston and some other pundit stating Hillary sold Uranium to Russia as a point of fact, no alleged or questions arising involved. There was little if no pushback, much less being called out for the blatant lying.

    For their apple vs. banana rhetoric, CNN continues to give the banana whisperers plenty of air time.

    Meanwhile over in the real the fever swamps, you have the central casting Nazi Gorka virtually calling for the execution of Hillary over this.

    Parent

    Would (none / 0) (#96)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 11:50:32 AM EST
    have been nice if CNN pointed out that Jack Kingston is on Putin's payroll.

    Parent
    It (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by FlJoe on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 12:14:48 PM EST
    be nicer if they never let serial liars pollute the "newsroom".

    Parent
    True that. (none / 0) (#100)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 12:39:49 PM EST
    How is it helpful to democracy to allow these people to spew their lies on the air? Oh, that's right. They don't care about democracy.

    Parent
    TV alert (none / 0) (#83)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 10:36:20 AM EST
    TCM is killin it today.  It's Halloween week.

    Just watched Whatever Happened to Bette and Joan
    Right now is Little Shop of horrors.

    Then
    Village of the Damned
    Children of the Damned
    House of Dark Shadows
    Night of Dark Shadows
    The Lost Weekend - amazing
    They Live by Night - Billy Wilder
    M
    The Brood - when Cronenberg was best
    And
    Repulsion

    set those DVRs or spend the day with TCM  which is my plan.
    Today is the first really cold day and I have vodka hot coco firewood and pot.
    I'm happy.

    I was just reading about how (none / 0) (#90)
    by jondee on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 11:19:51 AM EST
    Peg Entwhistle, Bette Davis's first acting inspiration, came out to Hollywood in the early days and ended up committing suicide by jumping off the H on the Hollywoodland sign.

    Or so the story goes.

    Hollywood was a merciless meat grinder for many even back then.

    Parent

    Still is (none / 0) (#91)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 11:21:27 AM EST
    Sorry about the eyeballs thing.

    Parent
    It was funny (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by jondee on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 11:23:18 AM EST
    I was just all outa rejoinders that would pass muster around here.

    Parent
    the way this is going down (none / 0) (#103)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 03:27:04 PM EST
    i start to think it might be a bigger fish than Flynn or Manafort.

    like the Presidents son or son-in-law.

    OTOH (none / 0) (#104)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 03:36:10 PM EST
    all 4 would be nice.

    Parent
    WSJ seems (none / 0) (#105)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 04:45:57 PM EST
    to be saying more than one person. However that could be in total so far indictments not necessarily what is going down on Monday.

    Parent
    And I have (none / 0) (#106)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 04:46:54 PM EST
    a doctor's appointment at 10:30 on Monday. I am probably going to miss whatever happens.

    Parent
    i think we are going (none / 0) (#108)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 28, 2017 at 04:55:35 PM EST
    to know more by 10:30

    Parent
    Jeanine Pirro wants to "lock her up!" (none / 0) (#115)
    by Yman on Sun Oct 29, 2017 at 03:59:39 PM EST
    Jeanine Pirro thinks it's time to "lock up" Hillary Clinton.

    "It's time, folks. It's time to shut it down, turn the tables, and lock her up. That's what I said. I actually said it. Lock her up," Pirro said during her show, "Justice with Jeanine."  She further claimed that the funding revelation means "whatever was developed as a result" of the dossier is "illegal and unusable."

    What an embarrassment to the legal profession.

    As (none / 0) (#117)
    by FlJoe on Sun Oct 29, 2017 at 05:54:01 PM EST
    I said elsewhere they are beyond lying and are into pure fabulism.

    Parent
    The Trump done loosed his mind (none / 0) (#122)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Nov 03, 2017 at 10:23:30 AM EST
    On The Twitter.

    He tweets something supporting Bernie follower outrage but then calls their candidate Crazy Bernie a few tweets prior. Warren is Warren sometimes, Pocahontas other times. Hillary is always crooked though.

    What exactly is he trying to foment? If he wants us all to fight each other he can't stand there holding a mic insulting every Dem candidate and possible candidate. That just makes us all want to beat HIS a$$.


    Pretty sure he wants us all to be (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by Anne on Fri Nov 03, 2017 at 10:56:00 AM EST
    fighting among ourselves so we won't notice what's going on.

    I still can't believe anyone thinks it's a good idea to send him overseas for 11 days; based on how they are structuring his events, there is considerable worry that he's going to make a mess of things.

    Parent

    Presidents have always done this (none / 0) (#124)
    by NYShooter on Fri Nov 03, 2017 at 01:39:54 PM EST
    When things at home get too hot they, either, start a war, or, fire up that big, patriotism inducing, Air Force 1 and travel the globe, meeting foreign dignitaries, and holding lots & lots of photo ops. You know, (I think it's a law, or, something) "you can't criticize a President when they're on foreign soil."

    Parent
    unless they are (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Nov 03, 2017 at 02:26:08 PM EST
    an African American Democrat.

    Parent
    labels (none / 0) (#126)
    by thomas rogan on Sat Nov 04, 2017 at 12:49:17 PM EST
    If George HW Bush is a "serial groper" then what label will history put on Bill Clinton, JFK, or RFK?