home

Friday Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 01:53:20 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Sorry for the lack of posting. I've been too busy with work to read the news. I hope to catch up this weekend.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< Donald Trump's Russia Signing Statement | DEA Wants to Cut Production of Painkillers >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Friday Open Thread | 202 comments (202 topical)
    My nephew (husband's sister's son) (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by Anne on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 02:19:42 PM EST
    stars in a new ad (not in the US yet, I don't think):

    Breath Pearls ad

    If nothing else, a break from the unrelenting Trump story.

    We now return to our regularly scheduled program: (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 07:04:34 PM EST
    Los Angeles Times | August 4, 2017
    The Trump administration vs. the sage grouse: One more way to undermine the Endangered Species Act - "Here is how radical the Zinke crowd's approach is: Without the [conservation] plan to protect the sage grouse, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service almost certainly would have concluded in 2015 that the bird deserved an endangered listing. But it couldn't have followed through because a rider Republicans attached to the federal budget bill in December 2014 -- which is still in effect -- bars the service from acting on a decision to list sage grouse. By freeing Republican policymakers from the restraints imposed by the Endangered Species Act, that rider opens the way to eviscerating the conservation plan with no worries that another regulatory process will impede them."

    ;-D (Your nephew kicks a$$, Anne.)

    Parent

    Five Stars, at Least (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by Jeralyn on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 08:35:34 PM EST
    I loved it. Your nephew is a natural!

    Parent
    That's better than most TV shows (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Lora on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 10:27:12 AM EST
    And he's so handsome, too :D

    Parent
    Hmm, (none / 0) (#4)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 02:24:17 PM EST
    does he have an acting career ahead of him?

    Parent
    i would say (none / 0) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 03:24:27 PM EST
    yes

    Parent
    We need (none / 0) (#12)
    by KeysDan on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 03:31:57 PM EST
    a breath of fresh air.  Your nephew delivers.

    Parent
    its very english language (none / 0) (#13)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 03:41:47 PM EST
    Canada?

    Parent
    Australia, I think... (none / 0) (#30)
    by Anne on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 07:13:25 PM EST
    but probably made here, because Dan - my nephew - lives in the LA area; he just finished an MFA program at UCLA.

    Here's his CV:

    Theatre Teacher/Director at Crash Test Theatrics

    Actor at Theater

    Former Actor at Nebraska Theatre Caravan

    Former Actor at Sirens Media

    Former Actor at Texas Shakespeare Festival

    Former Counselor at American Shakespeare Center Theatre Camp

    Former Professional Acting Apprentice at American Shakespeare Center

    Studied Theatre/Acting at UCLA



    Parent
    yeah (none / 0) (#35)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 07:45:27 PM EST
    you can tell.

    from time to time you see someone show up in a commercial that you just know will be on a hot cable series in a season or two.  at the least.

    actually i have friends who are actors who say cable is now seen as the place where serious grownup entertainment is beng done.

    unless you are into leotards, motion capture and masks.

    Parent

    not that there is anything necessarily (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 07:50:57 PM EST
    wrong with leotards motion capture and masks.

    it was a good living.

    Parent

    He's good... now I want a truckload of those (none / 0) (#14)
    by desertswine on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 04:11:21 PM EST
    those mints.

    Parent
    Pharma Bro (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by FlJoe on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 02:50:27 PM EST
    convicted on 3 charges of fraud.

    Link

    Couldn't happen to (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by Zorba on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 02:56:07 PM EST
    A "nicer" guy.  (Yes, that's sarcasm.)

    Parent
    The Jesuit priest, Antonio Spadaro (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by KeysDan on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 03:28:12 PM EST
    and the Argentinian Presbyterian minister, Marcelo Figueroa, are authors (both long time collaborators of Pope Francis) of an article in La Civilta Cattolica, a Roman journal that has the seal of the Vatican, entitled: "Evangelical Fundamentalism and Catholic Integralism, A Surprising Ecumenism."

    The authors discuss the rhetoric and mindset that have seeped into the US culture and politics including in the Trump campaign and government.

     They observe an "ecumenism of hate," a feature of which is a Manichean delineation between absolute good and evil. Spadaro and Figueroa examine how groups or movements become targeted as a threat to "the American Way of Life."...triumphalist, arrogant and vindictive ethnicism is actually the opposite of Christianity, and the strange ecumenism between Catholics and Evangelicals has the danger of xenophobia and Islamophobia that promotes walls and purifying deportations.

      The ecumenism confuses spiritual power with temporal power. A false alliance has been built between politics and religious fundamentalism on the generation of fear and chaos and the breakdown of order. Followed by manipulations that exaggerate disorder and create worrying scenarios that have nothing to do with reality.

    The Dominionist doctrine (a nation built on Christian ideals and strict laws drawn from the Bible) inspires Bannon (and his conservative American and Vatican allies, such as Cardinal Burke) and his apocalytic worldview.

     However, the authors opine,  theocracy uses the same rationale as Islamic fundamentalism. Defending freedom of religion cannot be driven by a sense of religion in total freedom...freedom that challenges the secularity of the state.

    Great article (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by jmacWA on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 06:28:26 AM EST
    After reading this it becomes obvious to me why Newt is now a catholic of that particular stripe.

    Thanks for posting

    JMAC

    Parent

    Sessins leak tirade (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 04:31:08 PM EST
    this morning was made more interesting by a conversation on MJ this morning with the reporter who broke the story that included the transcripts.

    it was preceeded by lots of tut tuting and tongue clucking about how bad it was.  just a terrible thing to publish a presidents private conversations with other leaders.

    then the reporter came on.  the set up was very skillful and interesting.  they discuss the process of writing the story.  how they contacted the white house for comment.  oh, so they must have asked you NOT to publish them?

    no, they did not.

    wait, what?  they never even asked you not to publish these stunning embarrasing transcripts?

    nope.  not a peep.

    wow, that would almost make you think they leaked it.

    stranger thngs have happened.

    then the conversation proceeded to discuss at some length how everything we know pointed to the fact the White House leaked this.  partly to get everyone to have the conversation they had just had about how terrible it was and how out of control the press is.

    it was very interesting.

    even more so later in light of the Sessions tirade.

    the (none / 0) (#23)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 05:47:28 PM EST
    VIDEO

    this is really just a wrap of the much longer segment that preceeded it

    Parent

    Now Sessions is threatening the press. (none / 0) (#75)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 02:34:06 PM EST


    Parent
    Any Comments on the Arpaio Conviction? (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by msaroff on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 08:53:39 PM EST
    I'm wishing that more law enforcement misconduct resulted in criminal sanctions.

    Him and (5.00 / 3) (#46)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 09:48:25 PM EST
    Pharma Bro on the same day.

    Christmas in August

    Parent

    Same week (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 09:50:16 PM EST
    Whatever.

    Just couldn't let that other thing be your only reply.

    Parent

    it's confusing to me (1.00 / 2) (#45)
    by linea on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 09:24:16 PM EST
    i would have benefited from a link that detailed your perspective because my google search made me inclined to see this as flawed.

    apparently, he was denied a jury trial and in a summary judgement was handed a misdemeanor criminal conviction for 'contempt' by the judge.

    what comes to mind are scenes from tv-legal dramas where the judge, horrified that a female lawyer is wearing slacks rather than a skirt in his courtroom - orders her to leave and only return when she is properly attired. when she protests, he strikes his gavel and declares, "i find you in contempt. two days in jail. do you want to make that three days miss smarty-pants?"


    Parent

    A federal judge ordered Arpao to stop violating (5.00 / 6) (#49)
    by Peter G on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 10:11:31 PM EST
    the civil rights of local Hispanics. He willfully continued to do what he was ordered to stop doing. The judge held him in contempt after a trial. As long held by the Supreme Court, the right to jury trial does not apply to offenses with a maximum sentence of six months or less. What sentence he receives has yet to be determined, but it cannot exceed six months. Your false analogy to a case of arbitrary and summary contempt, Linea, is absurd and ignorant.

    Parent
    well, i dont understand (1.20 / 5) (#53)
    by linea on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 11:18:16 PM EST
    re: "A federal judge ordered Arpao to stop violating the civil rights of local Hispanics."

    i didnt read that he was charged or convicted of any civil rights violations. aren't federal civil rights violations felonies? i read that he was found guilty of 'contempt' for 'disobeying a court order.'

    your reactive post seemed devoid of any intellectual discussion of the legal issues. it was a hysterical "fuk him, fuk repubicans! you're ignorant!" how is any of this civil or helpful?

    and i wasnt making an ANALOGY - i was explaining the only CONTEXT that i have for 'contempt' charges.  

    i realize people here hate him. but this is a legal blog and one would think some level of legal analysis would be allowed.


    Parent

    You want an "intellectual discussion ... (5.00 / 6) (#60)
    by Yman on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 10:37:15 AM EST
    ... of the legal issues"?  First, spend at least a few minutes becoming at least semi-informed about the issue (Arpao's conviction and what criminal contempt is).  Second, avoid silly, irrelevant "analogies" from TV dramas where ( surprise, surprise) a judge is making a sexist attack on a female lawyer.  Finally, stop putting false words in the mouths of others who's knowledge is orders-of-magnitude greater than yours and who took the time to explain something when you asked.

    Parent
    It ain't just on TV that (none / 0) (#79)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 02:47:19 PM EST
    an irrate judge, usually after much aggravation, holds a lawyer in contempt for the lawyer's actions in the courtrioom in the presence of the judge.  

    Parent
    Of course not (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by Yman on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 07:02:33 PM EST
    I've seen it a couple of times.  But my point was that her "context" example was a silly, fictional account from a TV drama (according to her own words) having nothing to do with Arpaio's case, which involved the willful disregard of a judge's order.  

    Parent
    yes (1.00 / 1) (#137)
    by linea on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 03:14:19 AM EST
    But my point was that her "context" example was a silly, fictional account from a TV drama (according to her own words) having nothing to do with Arpaio's case, which involved the willful disregard of a judge's order.

    yes. that was my point. i have no context to understand this other than silly fictionalized tv accounts. and i didnt pick "two days in jail miss smarty-pants" to be a radical feminist. that's the meme. ive seen it dozens of times.

    Parent

    No "context" is needed (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by Yman on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 05:06:56 AM EST
    No law degree is needed.  Just read one of many, available news reports.  Arpaio was not jailed for a crime.  He was jailed for willfully disobeying a judge's lawful order (criminal contempt).  Arpaio is not some poor, TV lawyer being sent to jail for wearing pants.  He's also not a woman.  No idea what "meme" you're talking about that you've "seen dozens of times", But if you mean the "meme" of a woman lawyer being held in contempt for wearing pants, I'll call BS on that, too.

    Parent
    im sorry (1.00 / 1) (#139)
    by linea on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 05:22:58 AM EST
    No "context" is needed (#138)
    by Yman

    im sorry. there is no 'context' or discussion of arpaio after peter called me ignorant. i lost it at that point. my response to that post and every subsequent post, even if it seemed to be discussing the arpaio issue, was actually driven by my feelings of hurt and betrayal.

    Parent

    My comment had nothing whatsoever to do (5.00 / 3) (#61)
    by Peter G on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 11:43:55 AM EST
    with my personal opinion of Arpao or of Republicans, much less could it be fairly compared to an obscene rant. I took the time to explain, in plain English and calm terms, what the case was about, and in particular why Arpao's own rights were in no way violated by the failure to give him a jury trial on the misdemeanor charge of criminal contempt. (Sorry if you wanted me to cite the Supreme Court cases that support what I wrote. If you want to find them, Google works well for that task.)

    And no, most violations of civil rights are not felonies. (In federal court, you cannot be convicted of a crime for violating someone's civil rights unless you actually know that your conduct violates the Constitution and nevertheless intentionally do it. [Again, Supreme Court cites available for those interested.] That's one reason it is so hard to convict abusive police on criminal charges.) The underlying action against Arpao, as in most civil rights cases, was a civil suit (here, by the federal government). The result was what lawyers call an "injunction," that is, a binding and enforceable court order to stop violating the law. When Arpao adamantly refused to obey the federal judge's order, he was charged with contempt, which is a normal was to enforce an injunction. (One of the few cases Martin Luther King ever lost at the Supreme Court of the U.S. was an appeal of his conviction for criminal contempt for holding a march in Birmingham, where a local judge had issued an injunction against the march, even though that injunction itself was later held unconstitutional and invalid -- a lot more sympathetic case than Arpao's.)

    If your reference to a judge abusively holding a lawyer in contempt from the bench during a trial was not intended to be an analogy, I don't understand what you thought its relevance might be.

    Parent

    Oops. It appears that I have been (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Peter G on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 11:53:07 AM EST
    misspelling the good Sheriff's name. It's "Arpaio" not "Arpao." I do try to be careful about that sort of thing.

    Parent
    Even the best slip up once in awhile (5.00 / 3) (#70)
    by jondee on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 01:52:54 PM EST


    Parent
    Oh, so THAT'S how you spell his name. (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 04:06:41 PM EST
    I've long thought it was "Schittforbrains." ;-D

    Parent
    You are quite brash to criticize peter g. (4.56 / 9) (#78)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 02:44:54 PM EST
    A most knowledgeable and patient legal scholar who is kind enough to share his considerable expertise with us.  Back off.

    Parent
    Thanks for the compliment, but (5.00 / 2) (#81)
    by Peter G on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 02:53:46 PM EST
    I am entirely open to criticism or contradiction here, whether directed at my factual assertions or at my opinions. I would just appreciate any criticism being presented on a logical and evidence- (or experience-)based foundation. Criticism of information that I present based on deep knowledge, when that criticism is based on "feelings" or TV dramas, is kind of frustrating.

    Parent
    I am convinced you (5.00 / 3) (#82)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 02:57:16 PM EST
    saved your critic from bannishment.  Where's the gratitude?

    Parent
    None expected. (3.00 / 1) (#89)
    by Peter G on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 04:10:53 PM EST
    Or needed.

    Parent
    how i feel (1.50 / 2) (#91)
    by linea on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 04:27:06 PM EST
    Thanks for the compliment, but
    by Peter G
    I am entirely open to criticism or contradiction here, whether directed at my factual assertions or at my opinions.

    there was nothing wrong with your reply until you called me ignorant. on this forum i get called stupid and moron and now ignorant. it is belittling and infuriating.

    the post that i was responding to was:
    Any Comments on the Arpaio Conviction?

    because there was no link, i googled the topic. not every person on this forum has followed the details of sheriff arpaio. i read a few news articles and posted my comment based on what i read. i didnt do anything wrong.

    i read the articles and court decisions that people post here. i change my mind when presented with a good argument and i apologize when im wrong. i dont deserve the way some people treat me.

    i read these articles and court decisions this morning:



    Parent
    chill, linea (5.00 / 4) (#109)
    by Lora on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 06:39:37 PM EST
    ignorant

    lacking knowledge or information as to a particular subject or fact

    Peter G was not attacking you.

    Hang in there, and keep learning.  

    Parent

    I have never called you (or anyone here) (5.00 / 2) (#119)
    by Peter G on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 08:11:30 PM EST
    "stupid" -- much less used a derogatory term like "moron." And in fact I do not believe you are remotely stupid. And as a matter of fact, I did not even describe you as "ignorant." I said that a particular example you used (which seemed like you meant it as an analogy) was "absurd" and "ignorant." That word has a specific meaning, and that's exactly what I meant.

    Parent
    f@ck (1.00 / 1) (#93)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 04:43:14 PM EST
    how you "feel"

    Parent
    THIS (1.00 / 1) (#98)
    by linea on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 05:24:47 PM EST
    f@ck  (#93)

    by CaptHowdy

    how you "feel"

    this is an example of the constant petty insults i recieve from a couple individuals on this forum.

    it is entertainment for them.


    Parent

    If you want to learn about Arpaio (none / 0) (#112)
    by Chuck0 on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 06:57:25 PM EST
    go to the Phoenix New Times website. You can find years of local coverage of the Maricopa County sheriff.

    Parent
    Yeah, kinda (5.00 / 5) (#90)
    by MKS on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 04:24:30 PM EST
    makes some of the rest of us look bad....

    If you pis* off Peter, you have done something wrong.

    Now, Armando,.....

    Parent

    He's preoccupied with ... (none / 0) (#101)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 05:38:50 PM EST
    ... the online firefight on Twitter. His latest cause d'heure is Glenn Greenwald.

    Parent
    You are woefully behind. (none / 0) (#172)
    by oculus on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 09:02:50 PM EST
    It's the Sanders devotees.

    Parent
    Huh? (none / 0) (#187)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Aug 08, 2017 at 05:56:35 AM EST
    How exactly am I the one who's "woefully behind," when you're responding belatedly to a comment that I posted nearly 52 hours prior? ;-D

    Greenwald on Saturday, Bernie Bros today and tomorrow, it's likely Chris Cillizza. And woe to the person who brings up Dean Baquet, executive editor of the New York Times. I miss BTD's posts here. Following Armando on Twitter just isn't the same. ;-D

    Aloha.

    Parent

    and (1.17 / 6) (#54)
    by linea on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 11:35:27 PM EST
    you dont seem to understand any nuance. and i cant tell you how offensive your rant of a post is

    it's confusing to me

    i would have benefited from a link that detailed your perspective because my google search made me inclined to see this as flawed.



    Parent
    Sorry you were offended. (5.00 / 3) (#64)
    by Peter G on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 11:56:40 AM EST
    My post criticizing and disputing your comment about the judicial charge of "contempt" simply cannot be legitimately viewed as a rant, and my description of your analogy, while harsh, was accurate.

    Parent
    and this one? (5.00 / 3) (#66)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 12:15:49 PM EST
    in my opinion (1.00 / 1) (#42)
    by linea on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 08:42:44 PM EST
    the use of 'common law' and 'grand juries' is an outmoded relic from the middle ages.
    The United States and Liberia are the only countries that retain grand juries, though other common law jurisdictions formerly employed them... [Wikipedia]
    and the separate military u.c.m.j. - that needs to go too.

    in my opinion.

    Parent

    I seriously considered responding to (5.00 / 4) (#83)
    by Peter G on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 03:00:04 PM EST
    that comment, and then decided against it.  Three mostly unrelated opinions, adamantly asserted as being nothing but personal opinions -- the "common law" system is bad because it developed in the Middle Ages, grand juries are bad (perhaps for the same reason), the military should not have its own separate criminal code -- offered with no rationale for any of those opinions, was just more than I cared to address at this time in this forum.

    Parent
    respone is up to you (5.00 / 4) (#92)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 04:40:29 PM EST
    being largely responsible for the rest of us having to put up with this.

    IMO.

    Parent

    to me (1.50 / 2) (#94)
    by linea on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 04:47:31 PM EST
    it seems like other people are allowed to express opinions. im not required to provide a thesis for every opinion. i also clearly marked that post as an opinion.
    • on this forum, other people are allowed to have an opinion on the use of grand juries without providing a thesis.

    • on this forum, other people post that 'parlimentary systems are better' and that the 'electoral college must go' without providing a thesis. i never make those assertions on parlimentary systems or the electoral college.

    the aside mentioning the u.c.m.j. is a carry-over from the previous open-thread where i provided my opinion that the military should be reformed.


    Parent

    nothing wrong with "opinions" (4.67 / 3) (#95)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 04:54:52 PM EST
    also
    nothing wrong with pointing out they are fu@king stupid opinions.

    Parent
    THIS (2.50 / 2) (#99)
    by linea on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 05:27:42 PM EST
    nothing wrong with "opinions" (#95)

    by CaptHowdy

    also
    nothing wrong with pointing out they are fu@king stupid opinions

    this is an example of the constant petty insults i recieve from a couple individuals on this forum.

    it is entertainment for them.


    Parent

    Nothing wrong (3.00 / 2) (#102)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 05:44:55 PM EST
    With whining about having stupid opinions pointed out.

    It is entertaining.

    Parent

    THIS (3.00 / 4) (#103)
    by linea on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 05:58:33 PM EST
    Nothing wrong (#102)

    by CaptHowdy

    With whining about having stupid opinions pointed out.
    It is entertaining.

    this is an example of the constant TROLLING that i am subjected to by a couple people on this forum.

    Trolling: make a deliberately offensive or provocative online post with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them.

    Parent

    They're afraid of your opinions (2.67 / 3) (#104)
    by McBain on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 06:09:31 PM EST
    Which is crazy because this is supposed to be a liberal forum.  

    The insults show lack of confidence in their arguments. Sometimes it's entertaining, sometimes it's sad.  I'm not sure why you continue to debate them? My only suggestion is to lower your expectations a bit.

    On the there hand, there are message boards where the behavior is much worse.    

    Parent

    Definitely (5.00 / 2) (#105)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 06:17:41 PM EST
    We are shaking in our boots


    Parent
    ROTFLMAO (5.00 / 4) (#108)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 06:31:11 PM EST
    I know. Calling nonsense nonsense is the same as "fear".

    Parent
    Are we (none / 0) (#110)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 06:43:25 PM EST
    Missing ppj yet?

    Parent
    Do I miss (5.00 / 3) (#117)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 07:48:34 PM EST
    banging my head on the wall over and over? No, though there are days when another Russian story breaks that it might be amusing to see him twist himself into a pretzel and if Mueller does end up taking Trump down it might be amusing to see him scream and fling poo. But other than that I certainly can do without the repeated nonsense of his cut and paste over and over.

    Parent
    Did he finally cross the line? (none / 0) (#173)
    by oculus on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 09:05:46 PM EST


    Parent
    Jeralyn (none / 0) (#176)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 09:16:47 PM EST
    got tired of his blog clogging and she's just too disgusted to put up with a Trump supporter. So a number of them got the axe.

    Parent
    Would those be go-go boots? (none / 0) (#177)
    by MKS on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 09:22:29 PM EST
    I like go-go boots.....

    Parent
    Naw (5.00 / 4) (#106)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 06:23:12 PM EST
    the ones that are ruled by fear are conservatives. Don't project your fear onto everybody else here. I guess you haven't been paying attention to the debate where FACTS are used against FEELINGS and OPINIONS. Feelings and opinions are not facts FYI.

    Parent
    As someone once said (none / 0) (#107)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 06:24:46 PM EST
    I'm not sure why you continue to debate them? My only suggestion is to lower your expectations a bit.


    Parent
    Indeed (5.00 / 4) (#114)
    by Yman on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 07:14:14 PM EST
    "They're afraid of your opinions".

    Yep.  I'm afraid of the headaches that inevitably follow reading countless posts with fact-free "feelings", faulty logic, and constant whining about being a victim.  The head-desk banging probably doesn't help, either.

    Parent

    It has nothing to do with being (4.83 / 6) (#115)
    by Anne on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 07:24:22 PM EST
    afraid of her opinions; what is has to do with is what those opinions are based on, and how defensive she gets when she's challenged.

    If the topic is art or movies, books or comedy, food or music, wine or fashion, there's no question that an opinion based on feelings is fine because whether we like or don't like those things is all a matter of personal taste.

    In my opinion, linea's trying too hard; she's making what she believes to be good comments and doesn't understand why no one's clapping.  Perhaps the problem is trying to opine about things on which she has no expertise, and seeming to resent the efforts of those who do to enlighten her.

    Yeah, I think there's a bit of unnecessary button-pushing going on, but I suspect that's the result of growing bored with all the whining - and it is whining.  

    And it has grown tiresome.

    Parent

    this is exactly (none / 0) (#124)
    by linea on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 09:46:46 PM EST
    i know im trying to hard!!

    In my opinion, linea's trying too hard; she's making what she believes to be good comments and doesn't understand why no one's clapping. Perhaps the problem is trying to opine about things on which she has no expertise, and seeming to resent the efforts of those who do to enlighten her.

    • yes, i absolutte believe that im making good comments and i do not understand why no one is clapping.

    • yes, i know i dont have any expertise. i tell everybody here - all the time - that im not a lawyer.

    • but, i dont resent being 'enlightened.' i often post that 'i dont undersand" or "im confused" and the reaction by some here is to be even more mean to me. i apologize when im wrong and i say im sorry. all the time! and then people treat me worse!

    im trying to learn things. i often leave this forun crying! (ok, maybe part of that is the wine). i just feel... why? why am i being picked on?

    i dont understand how certain people are allowed to abuse me, call me stupid, call me moron. i thought this was a blog for adults. i was told i could post here and that it's fine that im not a lawyer.


    Parent

    First, it isn't worth crying over. (none / 0) (#129)
    by Anne on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 10:48:31 PM EST
    Really, it's not.  

    Part of the reason you may be getting the reactions you are is that you sometimes seem to be all over the place, and when people are uncertain about where you are on this mostly-political/legal  spectrum, it tends to make them somewhat more skeptical about your motives - it can feel a little like maybe we're being played.

    And then there's the problem of the written words not always coming across the way the writer intended them to be taken.  We can't hear your voice, see your body language, know whether you are smiling or being sarcastic or just goofing on us.  As clear as we all think we're being, invariably there's that one person who doesn't take it the way we intended, and all hell breaks loose.

    This isn't supposed to be hard, at least not in the way it seems to be for you, to the point where it's making you cry.  Yeah, I get frustrated sometimes, I've had some heated discussions with people here, and some people I just don't engage because no good ever comes from it.

    Sometimes, it's better to move on to a different conversation, or a different point of view.  Sometimes, it's better to just walk away for a bit and come back later.

    Parent

    thank you (1.00 / 1) (#130)
    by linea on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 11:23:54 PM EST
    First, it isn't worth crying over. (#129)

    by Anne

    Really, it's not.  

    thank you!!

    but you dont know that im being trolled and insulted and belittled beyond anything i deserve.

    how can anyone look at this thread alone and not see that?

    this thread is typical.

    the haters and trolls posting "f@ck how you feel" and "fu@king stupid opinions." i get this all the time! do you want me to link to the post where CaptHowdy calls me a moron?

    why? i dont deserve this!

    and all you haters who post, "she's a whiner!" because im finally pointing out all the abuse im subjected to -- you dont understand how im being treated. you arent being trolled and belittled and insulted constantly on this forum like i am.


    Parent

    Feel free to call me a moron (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 11:56:17 PM EST
    If it will get you to shut up about it.

    If I remember correctly that was an exasperated response to one of your by now all to familiar diatribes that begin with "everyone here thinks blah, or no one here understands blah".  Which is ridiculous on its face because in spite of your repeated assertions, there is not a single thing here that everyone here thinks.

    I wonder if you are capable of even understanding how maddening it is to have a person who clearly has no idea what they are taking about constantly trying to explain everything from the law to our government to our language.

    I mean really,  in the middle you the pity party with which you have hijacked this thread you took a time out to say this

    and people here are using 'think' wrong. the correct word when dicussing morals or ethics or justice is 'feel."

    Feeling is subjective whereas thinking is objective.
    Feeling is based upon our perception of right and wrong.

    In this thread you have said absolutely laughable things with a tone that is the equivalent of writing "kick me" on your forehead.

    You know what?  I shouldnt have called you a moron.  That was unnecessary. I apologise from the bottom of my black little heart.   I won't do it again.  

    I will limit myself to replying to the things you say.  

    Can we stop whining now?


    Parent

    im sorry (1.50 / 2) (#136)
    by linea on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 03:06:15 AM EST
    I wonder if you are capable of even understanding how maddening it is to have a person who clearly has no idea what they are taking about constantly trying to explain everything from the law to our government to our language.

    please tell me.


    Parent

    Now who's trolling? (4.67 / 3) (#140)
    by Lora on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 07:30:20 AM EST
    linea,

    You seem to have willfully refused to understand one commenter who posted in an extremely informative, if a bit harsh, style, even when it was explained to you several times, that "ignorant" meaning "uninformed" referred to your comment and not you. You have run with that particular perceived insult to the exclusion of what you could learn about the case.

    Additionally...

    Yes, you were poked fun at by other commenters, one of whom has apologized to you.  You continue to insist that you have been abused here, and no amount of explanation as to what you are doing that might invite that behavior seems to have reached you.

    I strongly suggest you reread the entire thread when you are cool-headed and learn from the experience.

    No one is perfect.  I have gotten into it with commenters past and present and have had my feelings hurt, and felt misunderstood.  I have stood up for myself and sometimes been successful, and sometimes not.  It is the way with blogs.

    I, for one, invite you to keep reading, keep learning, ask questions, and comment appropriately.

    All best,
    Lora

    Parent

    NO (1.00 / 1) (#132)
    by linea on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 12:07:52 AM EST
    If I remember correctly that was an exasperated response to one of your by now all to familiar diatribes that begin with "everyone here...

    NO, NO.

    i posted, "im sorry, your links dont work" and you called me a moron.

    are you seriously claiming that you arent constantly trolling and insulting and belitting me? really?

    IS ANYONE READING THIS TREAD?
    seriously? the adults cant see the bullies on the playground? really? really. really, really?


    Parent

    Apparently not (none / 0) (#133)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 12:10:17 AM EST


    Parent
    you are a troll!! (1.00 / 1) (#134)
    by linea on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 12:42:55 AM EST
    i have gone out of my way to ignore your incessantly abusive posts. but you continue to insult me and troll me.

    In this thread you have said absolutely laughable things with a tone that is the equivalent of writing "kick me" on your forehead....  

    Can we stop whining now?

    you think im stupid? why dont you just call me a 'whiny little b!tch'? that's the subtext of all your posts.

    and im sick of you criticizing my english language skills. i have "native / bilingual proficiency" in english to a university college level. you or somebody here doxed some information about me and suddenly im the stupid foreign girl? is that what this is about? you have no idea! im a u.s. citizen. im not a "mail order bride" or whatever demeaning or insulting idea you have in your head. what's wrong with you? why are you picking on me?


    Parent

    That's a pretty serious accusation, linea, (5.00 / 4) (#141)
    by Anne on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 09:47:11 AM EST
    and for what it's worth, I just don't see anyone caring so much about "getting" you that they would take things to that level.

    A number of us have taken the time to address your issues and concerns in a very objective and calm way, with the result that you have just continued to escalate your grievances: nothing satisfies you, not even several direct and unequivocal apologies.  People have tried to explain and in some cases educate and bring more information to the table, and on every level, you seem to have decided none of it is good enough.

    Trust me when I tell you that no one is engaging you with the goal of pushing you out, but your own behavior and wild accusations are going to do that for you.  

    And I'm guessing fairly soon.


    Parent

    I reserve the right to diss (none / 0) (#174)
    by oculus on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 09:07:43 PM EST
    other's opinions re the arts.

    Parent
    really? (1.50 / 2) (#111)
    by linea on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 06:53:04 PM EST
    Sorry you were offended. (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by Peter G

    if you were having an actual in-person conversation with (for example) a computer programmer, would you say to her, "your analogy is ignorant."?

    im not being insulted and called stupid and a moron - enough?

    Parent

    Comments on a blog, as I view them, (5.00 / 3) (#121)
    by Peter G on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 08:38:26 PM EST
    are not a personal, one-on-one conversation. They are statements made to (and hopefully for the benefit of) a community of strangers, some of whom are also participating in the commenting. My comments about other comments are a form of written expression, and are not fundamentally similar to my part in a private conversation. So, to your first question, my answer is No. To your face, I would either ignore the remark, or I might say that it seems to me that you are making a false analogy. I might add that it appears to be based on a lack of necessary information about the difference between two legal concepts, "summary, direct contempt" and "indirect contempt." As for your second question, I don't remember anyone here (or elsewhere) calling you either "stupid" or "a moron," much less doing so frequently. A few people do like to make fun of you when they "feel" you are making foolish arguments or offering shallow opinions. I'm not one of them, although I have tried a few times to point out why they think so, and have suggested how you could express yourself better. Because you have made clear that you are not interested in such advice, I stopped doing that.

    Parent
    all the time (none / 0) (#126)
    by linea on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 10:21:05 PM EST
    I don't remember anyone here (or elsewhere) calling you either "stupid" or "a moron," much less doing so frequently.

    im picked on all the time. you just dont notice. capthowdy recently called me a moron and he constantly trolls me. there is another petson who constantly belittles and trolls me too.

    i know you're trying with me. that's why i was even more upset. and people here are using 'think' wrong. the correct word when dicussing morals or ethics or justice is 'feel."

    • Feeling is subjective whereas thinking is objective.
    • Feeling is based upon our perception of right and wrong.


    Parent
    Of course I have noticed that you (5.00 / 3) (#143)
    by Peter G on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 11:49:26 AM EST
    are picked on. I didn't say otherwise. I said I didn't remember you being called "stupid" or "a moron."  Of course, I could have missed it. If I did notice that, I would have expressed disapproval, presumably by down-rating the comment.

    My knowledge of you and your background is limited to what you have chosen to reveal about yourself on this blog. (Which, by the way, is a lot more than most of us choose to reveal.) From that, I seem to recall that you are a naturalized citizen who immigrated from a Scandinavian country. Your higher education was obtained there. English is not your native language. Obviously, you are "proficient" in American English, but it is my perception that you have not achieved the level of native fluency, at least not in your writing on this blog. None of these facts and observations is a criticism. As someone who has studied and taught moral philosophy, I can tell you that most serious thinkers about moral issues (both religious and non-religious in perspective) would dispute that perceptions of right and wrong are simply "feelings" and are inherently not capable of being based on rational thinking and evidence.


    Parent

    linea, I am not sure (5.00 / 1) (#183)
    by MKS on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 09:45:45 PM EST
    how you keep getting bollixed up here.

    I'm not reading all these things too closely.....I think the less personally and seriously you take the personal comments the better....

    From what I can tell, Peter likes you fwiw....

    Parent

    What I like about Linea is her sincere (4.00 / 1) (#185)
    by Peter G on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 10:26:27 PM EST
    efforts -- when she makes them -- to articulate a European Left perspective on U.S. political issues, which is critical of the power-establishment-supportive tendencies (and the militarism) of U.S. liberalism. I find that informative and thought-provoking. The refusal to capitalize in her writing, however, is not, imho, an effective critique of capitalism. And her adamant misuse of "feel" and incessant and unnecessary labeling of what are clearly (and appropriately) opinions as "my opinion" make me want to scream, as does her publication of definitions of English words to prove (to whom?) that she is using them correctly. All of that, however, I generally think is outweighed by the refreshing insertion of Leftism into our conversations.  

    Parent
    IM SICK OF THIS (1.00 / 2) (#135)
    by linea on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 02:28:24 AM EST
    i've dealt with this my whole life. i cant tell you how many times i was told in high school: "he only likes you cuz he thinks you're stupid" and constantly being treated like i was so naive that i would go to bed with anyone. i didnt appeciate it then and i dont appreciate it now.

    i was INFORMED that several men on this forum met off-line and shared DOXED information on me. i dont appreciate it. and you have no context to understand any of it.

    Parent

    I'm sick of it, too (5.00 / 4) (#142)
    by Yman on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 10:47:32 AM EST
    i've dealt with this my whole life. i cant tell you how many times i was told in high school: "he only likes you cuz he thinks you're stupid" and constantly being treated like i was so naive that i would go to bed with anyone. i didnt appeciate it then and i dont appreciate it now.

    The constant whining about imaginary (usually sexist) victimization.  No one here "likes you because you're stupid".  No one wants to go to bed with you.  I suppose this is another failed attempt at some sort of analogy or "context" ... or whatever.  It's irrelevant.  If you don't "appreciate it", stop imagining it.

    i was INFORMED that several men on this forum met off-line and shared DOXED information on me. i dont appreciate it. and you have no context to understand any of it
    .

    Who told you this?  Name them.  Then be prepared to back up this tinfoil conspiracy theory with actual facts and evidence.  Which - of course - you won't ... because you can't.  It never happened.  If you want to lash out at people, stick to what they actually say, rather than what you're imagining they think. Don't pretend to speak for others and don't pretend to think for others just so you can pretend to be a victim.

    Parent

    I will go to bed with anyone (5.00 / 2) (#148)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 09:03:42 PM EST


    Parent
    I think J will have to establish (5.00 / 2) (#150)
    by Peter G on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 10:04:44 PM EST
    a whole new rating system for that comment, Howdy.

    Parent
    Is that a statement of fact or an offer to all and (5.00 / 2) (#151)
    by vml68 on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 10:44:44 PM EST
    I will go to bed with anyone

    sundry? :-)

    I should take a break from TL more often. Anne, Zorba and Oculus are back and PPJ is gone. Nice to "see" all of you.
    Hopefully, Sj, MoBlue, Shoephone and Scott will make their way back too.

    Parent

    Yes, hope those (5.00 / 4) (#158)
    by KeysDan on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 07:13:59 AM EST
    commenters will return. They all added so much to Talk Left.  Noted that MoBlue ranked a comment so maybe we all will soon benefit from her sage commentaries.

    Parent
    I miss seeing more frequent comments (5.00 / 4) (#180)
    by Peter G on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 09:37:39 PM EST
    from Towanda. And I continue to miss Andgarden's contributions.

    Parent
    And steve m (but that's really going back). (5.00 / 2) (#186)
    by oculus on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 11:38:03 PM EST


    Parent
    If I recall correctly, (5.00 / 1) (#195)
    by NYShooter on Tue Aug 08, 2017 at 09:20:34 AM EST
    Andgarden stopped being a regular contributor after he passed the bar.

    Hope he's making lots of moolah.

    Parent

    Met offline? (5.00 / 4) (#171)
    by MKS on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 06:35:06 PM EST
    I was not invited.  That really ticks me off.

    Parent
    Commenters here are from everywhere (none / 0) (#163)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 01:38:54 PM EST
    Get to meet seldom, and more likely to go to the opera together or a dancing bear cover band than spend time doxxing someone?

    Parent
    Or have a beer (not Howdy) (5.00 / 4) (#164)
    by Yman on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 02:22:10 PM EST
    I don't even like opera, but I'd happily pick that over slowly boring myself to death.

    Parent
    To clarify (5.00 / 1) (#165)
    by Yman on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 02:24:07 PM EST
    "Boring myself to death" by doxxing someone.

    Parent
    I had to google "doxxing" (none / 0) (#166)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 02:41:22 PM EST
    to even know what she was talking about.

    Parent
    Same here (5.00 / 2) (#175)
    by Zorba on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 09:11:27 PM EST
    And who the he!! would want to meet up in person just to "dox" someone like linea?  Or anyone else on this forum, for that matter.
    Meet up to, you know, meet new people, go to new places, be tourists, etc., yes, and some of the commenters here have done so and will continue to do so.
    But to "dox" someone?
    It takes a certain amount of either paranoia or egotism to believe anyone cares about you to do so.

    Parent
    By "off line" I understood Linea (5.00 / 2) (#179)
    by Peter G on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 09:29:56 PM EST
    not to mean "in person" but rather "outside the blog," presumably meaning by email. But I admit that makes only marginally more sense and does not seem to me to be any more credible or plausible. This is hardly a community of 4chan types. I don't recall, in all the years I've participated here, anyone trying to "expose" the true identity of other commenters, friend or foe (so to speak), even when they made it fairly easy to do so.

    Parent
    Outside the blog (5.00 / 3) (#184)
    by Zorba on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 10:01:54 PM EST
    or in person, Peter, I don't think it matters.
    Some of us do, in fact, email "outside the blog," and some have even met up in person, and will continue to do so.
    But as far as I know, nobody gives a flying (insert your favored swear word) who linea is in person, or is trying to "dox" her or "expose" her in any way.
    I think that the vast majority of us simply do not care who she is or is not in real life.  People respond to what she says, and if she does not like the responses sometimes, oh, well, too bad, "not my circus, not my monkeys."   (An old Polish saying: Nie mój cyrk, nie moje malpy.)
    And I do wonder why she thinks that she is important enough for anyone to care enough to try and "dox" her.
    In some ways, I admit that I feel sorry for her.

    Parent
    I'm not even allowed to share memes on Facebook (5.00 / 1) (#188)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Aug 08, 2017 at 06:05:29 AM EST
    My son says, "You're just enabling 4chan mom!"

    Parent
    Yeh me too. (none / 0) (#170)
    by desertswine on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 05:13:18 PM EST


    Parent
    Dial back the drama, Linea. (5.00 / 3) (#152)
    by vml68 on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 10:50:59 PM EST
    i was INFORMED that several men on this forum met off-line and shared DOXED information on me.

    If you really believe this, you need to get off the internet and get help.

    Parent

    Whaaaaaat? (none / 0) (#162)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 01:35:07 PM EST


    Parent
    i thought we were meeting (5.00 / 8) (#169)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 05:12:14 PM EST
    to discuss adoption but it turned out we were meeting to discuss doxxing

    Parent
    Linea (none / 0) (#144)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    please get some love in your life. Obviously you are not getting the love you need here. So I'm kind of surprised that you continue to hang around.

    Parent
    Hmm, getting love (none / 0) (#181)
    by MKS on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 09:42:18 PM EST
    on line, or is it on-line love?

    I'm all for it, in whatever form...  

    Parent

    Does the "R" after (5.00 / 2) (#96)
    by KeysDan on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 05:15:20 PM EST
    Republican office holders stand for "Russia?"  A tangled web of money connects Russian oligarchs to several Republican senators.  McConnell received $2.5 million from oligarchs close to Putin allies, for a GOP Senate Leadership campaign.

    Yeah, R stands (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 05:30:32 PM EST
    for Russian or if you want to use GOP the P stands for Putin. Grand Old Putin party.

    Parent
    RAY DONOVAN (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 05:52:51 PM EST
    starts tonight.

    They hired that effing (5.00 / 2) (#189)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Aug 08, 2017 at 06:07:44 AM EST
    Susan Sarandon. I have a Susan Sarandon problem now. I may have to skip this season.

    Parent
    Did you see it yet, Howdy? (none / 0) (#197)
    by Anne on Tue Aug 08, 2017 at 10:05:16 AM EST
    Won't spoil it for you if you haven't , but will just say it took me by surprise - didn't see that coming at all.  And I have a lot of questions that I know are going to take all season to answer!

    I think it's going to make for an excellent season - I wasn't sure I could stand another season like the last one.

    Parent

    i have (none / 0) (#198)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 08, 2017 at 12:10:54 PM EST
    very sad.  she was the only really "good" character.

    that cant be good.

    as far as Sarandon, villian.  she should be great at that.

    Parent

    ORPHAN BLACK (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 10:24:53 AM EST
    the final season has been outstanding

    if you are not following this series you are missing something special.

    as always start from the beginning with the BBC app.

    THE FUTURE IS FEMALE

    Deep in the dust-filled heart of Texas. (5.00 / 1) (#168)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 04:21:21 PM EST
    "This is one of the worst things I've ever done. I've never dealt with such angry people. I'm washing my hands of everything. ... I'm going to travel. I'm going as far away from Von Ormy as I can."
    - Former Von Ormy Mayor Trina Reyes, speaking candidly about her experience as the central Texas town's chief executive

    The Texas Observer offers an amusing but highly cautionary tale of what happened when the hyper-conservative residents of a small town near San Antonio bought the magic elixir being peddled by a local libertarian snake oil salesman, and then doubled down on stupid when it didn't work the first time.

    Worth a read.

    The future of rural Texas (5.00 / 1) (#192)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Aug 08, 2017 at 06:33:05 AM EST
    It sounds like


    Parent
    Sounds similar to what's been going on in Kansas (5.00 / 1) (#193)
    by Chuck0 on Tue Aug 08, 2017 at 08:40:37 AM EST
    Under Brownback.

    Parent
    Great article, (none / 0) (#178)
    by Zorba on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 09:27:35 PM EST
    Donald, thanks.
    And I can't say that I have a whole heck of a lot of sympathy for the residents who voted for this fustercluck.  You get what you pay for.  Or don't pay for.  
    Isn't karma a b!tch?

    Parent
    Sure is. And I'm plumb out of empathy for morons. (5.00 / 3) (#191)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Aug 08, 2017 at 06:21:58 AM EST
    The crackpot notion that a municipality can somehow run on fumes, after its tax base is eviscerated and its revenue stream becomes the fiscal equivalent of tumbleweeds, is the stuff of sitcoms -- were it not so pathetic. If one votes for stupid and stupid gets elected, one can expect stupid decisions as a matter of course. The fools of Von Orny, TX got exactly what they deserved.

    Parent
    Just don't try to beat them on messaging (5.00 / 3) (#196)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Aug 08, 2017 at 09:51:05 AM EST
    One solid wall, it was gonna be hell. So now we're getting a Smart Wall :)

    So they are using the Obamawall. The failing wall. They are going to incorpirate the Obamawall instead of repealing the Obamawall and replacing the death spiral of failure Obamawall.

    Fire, fire and fury.... (5.00 / 1) (#202)
    by desertswine on Tue Aug 08, 2017 at 03:16:27 PM EST
    and frankly power the likes of which the world has never seen.   Sounds like Ming the Merciless.

    Richard Haass spoke at the Pentagon (none / 0) (#1)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 02:09:22 PM EST
    Last week against most of Trump's foreign policy without actually ever saying the name. Pointed out the things we did right during the cold war, and did say that what is going on now, dissing our allies, allowing foreign hostile powers into our inner sanctum, will not Make America Great Again.

    I'd say he voted for Clinton

    And if rumors are to be believed it is only Steve Bannon who is preventing a new American war in Afghanistan. How repulsive is that? And we thought Generals would save us.

    Trump likes "his" generals (none / 0) (#2)
    by KeysDan on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 02:18:13 PM EST
    in civil/domestic positions..as Cabinet, chief of staff,  and other officers.  Not so much for military strategies and fighting wars...since he knows more than "his" generals.  Actually, Trump had some good questions for the generals about Afghanistan, but he seemed to have lost them when he wanted to move on the Afghan minerals. And, as a priority.

    Parent
    Mineral acquisition and war (none / 0) (#7)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 02:37:18 PM EST
    Never works out since that damn AL Gore invented the Internet :)

    Parent
    speaking of mineral acquisition (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 05:40:48 PM EST
    Dragon Glass

    based on leaks tomorrows GOT will most definitely be one NOT to miss.

    Dragon Glass, cave paintings and returning heroines and turning worms.

    Parent

    It was awesome (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by Yman on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 12:35:11 PM EST
    No spoilers - but it was a great episode.  A lot happening in what was supposed to be the shortest episode of the series so far.  Only found a 480p version with a watermark and annoying clock/runtime display on the bottom, but I couldn't wait.

    Parent
    It was wasn't it (none / 0) (#149)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 09:20:53 PM EST
    I'm glad they learned of the Scorpio without a fatality.  I was very worried for the boys.  

    Parent
    It was not awesome (none / 0) (#155)
    by ragebot on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 02:47:15 AM EST
    for the Lanisters.  The look on Tyrion's face when the Dothraki guy said "your people can't fight" said it all.  Not to mention Jamie's mess.  Seems like the best he can hope for is being captured, along with Bron. But being knocked off his horse into deep water wearing metal armor does risk death; even if it avoided certain death from a fire breathing dragon.  And all of that was just in the last five minutes.  Even if Jamie somehow escapes and gets back to King's Landing he still has to figure out how to tell his sister what the Queen of Thorns said about Joffery's death.

    I have to say even with all the deaths we know of being extras and all the main characters seemingly surviving this may be my favorite episode.  Little Finger was his usual evil self.  Ari had a great training fight with Brienne.  And the Iron Bank is making Goldman Sachs seem like good guys.

    Parent

    Chaos is a ladder (none / 0) (#190)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Aug 08, 2017 at 06:11:56 AM EST
    Little Finger isn't taken by surprise very often. I really like the 3 eyed raven character, even though he is no longer "himself" and it is a heartbreak for those who loved Bran.

    Parent
    sorry (none / 0) (#22)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 05:43:13 PM EST
    sundays

    you know what i mean

    Parent

    Wow (none / 0) (#72)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 02:07:15 PM EST
    The episode got stolen. I haven't watched it. I'll wait for tomorrow. But the spoIles are impossible to avoid now.

    Parent
    Is Sessions on this leak? (5.00 / 4) (#73)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 02:29:25 PM EST


    Parent
    What exactly (none / 0) (#5)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 02:26:56 PM EST
    is the "New American War in Afghanistan" actually supposed to be about and why would anybody think this is a good idea? It might have seemed like a good idea at the time to go into Afghanistan but it's not looking so great 15 years later.

    So far the only thing I have seen the generals do is clean out the edges of the scum with McMaster firing a Nazi recently and Kelly getting rid of the Mooch.

    Parent

    I don't know (none / 0) (#6)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 02:35:01 PM EST
    We only know that McMaster wanted a new investment and troop increase and engagement and didn't get it. That was pre Kelly. Jointly they've now forced a couple of undesirables out of NSC. Rumor is it's only Bannon arguing that Afghanistan is fruitless.

    I'm thinking he loses this battle.

    I also acknowledge this leak could have been completely and most likely devised by: Steve Bannon :)

    Parent

    The generals are (5.00 / 2) (#16)
    by KeysDan on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 04:39:09 PM EST
    bucking up against Trump's military experience as told to him by the owner of NYC's "21 Club"...the guy took some bad advice from his consultant and closed the restaurant/bar to revamp it.  But,after all was said and done, the restaurant was the same, other than for a bigger kitchen.  

    Same kind of experience is no doubt playing into Trump's proposal to revamp legal immigration----his old hangout, Studio 54 had strict entrance requirements, only the beautiful people.  The rest behind the velvet ropes.

    Parent

    Apparently Iran is filling (none / 0) (#74)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 02:31:22 PM EST
    the void.

    Parent
    FOX NEWS (none / 0) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 05:04:23 PM EST
    rolls out the attacks of the grand jury system

    Jarrett: "There's only one other nation in the world other than the U.S. that employs a grand jury, it's Liberia"
    i predict (5.00 / 3) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 05:07:00 PM EST
    lots of talk about ham sandwichs

    Parent
    It's all they (none / 0) (#19)
    by KeysDan on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 05:26:40 PM EST
    have.  

    Parent
    they got (none / 0) (#21)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 05:42:28 PM EST
    the cheeze

    Parent
    Uh, no, Cap'n. (none / 0) (#25)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 06:01:06 PM EST
    Rather, they CUT the cheese.

    Parent
    FYI (none / 0) (#44)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 08:59:37 PM EST
    TCM is doing a noir night

    Murder My Sweet
    Crack-Up
    Key Largo
    Borderline

    Parent

    I noticed that. (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 07:05:19 AM EST
    But thanks for the head's up anyway. I  watched "Key Largo." Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall are the quintessential Hollywood couple for the ages.

    Parent
    Murder My Sweet (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 12:17:34 PM EST
    had not seen it in ages.  awsum.  the "drug trip" was amazing.

    Parent
    Believe it or not (none / 0) (#71)
    by jondee on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 02:03:18 PM EST
    Farewell My Lovely, the color seventies version with Robert Mitchum, Charlotte Rampling, and Anthony Zerbe is pretty damned good.

    They of course had a little more leeway in being able to stick to the original novel due to loosened censorship restrictions.

    Parent

    I would watch (none / 0) (#97)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 05:16:22 PM EST
    Charlotte Rampling read the phone book.

    Ever since Night Porter

    Parent

    For the uninitiated (none / 0) (#116)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 07:40:58 PM EST
    THE NIGHT PORTER

    Rampling at her most beautiful and most twisted

    Parent

    Charlotte Rampling was pretty twisted ... (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 10:00:20 PM EST
    ... as the mysterious Helen Grayle in "Farewell, My Lovely," which managed to throw at its audience a veritable treasure trove of shopworn casting clichés that one normally associates with film noir. And yet director and cast still pulled it off handsomely, without ever devolving into campiness. And that's no small feat, coming in the immediate wake of "Chinatown," which was released the year prior.

    I mean, you've got your lonely and cynical private eye, your married temptress with a calculating eye and a big secret, your skeptical but trustworthy police detective, your ingratiating but untrustworthy police detective, your gangster bookie, your gangster's moll, your former professional prizefighter-turned-mob enforcer (who in this instance is appropriately nicknamed "Moose"), your businesslike madame who's also a junkie, your gay male blackmailer who skulks around in the shadows, your shady assistant D.A., your corrupt judge and finally, your likable jazz club musician whose career you know is going absolutely nowhere despite his ambitions.

    Everyone is either suspected or suspicious in "Farewell, My Lovely," and on the mend or on the make. And Robert Mitchum embodied Raymond Chandler's world-weary private detective Philip Marlowe in a way that Humphrey Bogart only hinted at the 1946 film "The Big Sleep." (Which is still one of my favorite noirs.) As for the luminous Ms. Rampling, she put the fatale in "femme fatale" as Mrs. Grayle.

    It doesn't get any more noir than that. And that's why I love this genre.

    Parent

    I remember liking it (none / 0) (#128)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 10:26:22 PM EST
    But it's been among time.  Probably time for another look.

    Parent
    Just watched "The Night of the Hunter." (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 11:12:47 PM EST
    The noirish 1955 thriller has garnered more critical appreciation as time goes by. Robert Mitchum was really good at playing irredeemable creeps and his Rev. Harry Powell is one of the creepiest.

    Powell's showdown with the no-nonsense Rachel Cooper (Lillian Gish) was certainly something to watch. She was one tough old broad who wasn't intimidated at all by Powell's menacing bluster. Hearing him squeal in pain and fear as she turned the tables on him was awesome. It's a dark and menacing film that nevertheless holds out hope of redemption, not unlike David Lynch's "Blue Velvet."

    Given that this was actor Charles Laughton's only turn behind the camera, I think it's really too bad that he didn't do more directing, because his vision, framing and expressionist style are both unique and outstanding. Its I once saw an interview with Martin Scorsese, who noted that "The Night of the Hunter" was one of those films that made a profound impression upon him, and later influenced his own work as a director.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    The child actor, (none / 0) (#157)
    by KeysDan on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 07:09:59 AM EST
    Billy Chaplin, really carried that film.  Chaplin's movie and, then, TV career, took a slide after about 1960.  He had a rough course in life, dying at age 72 after a long illness.  Another sad child star story.

    Parent
    Laughton initially wanted to cast his wife ... (5.00 / 1) (#159)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 08:12:35 AM EST
    ... Elsa Lanchester to play Rachel Cooper, the kindly but determined older woman who ultimately saves young John Harper (Billy Chapin) from Harry Powell's deadly clutches. But she declined and instead suggested her longtime friend Lillian Gish for the part.

    Laughton was at first skeptical, mindful that Gish's stature as one of the great stars of the silent film era could make her casting look like a marketing gimmick. But he ultimately agreed with his wife, and Lillian Gish proved to be an inspired choice for this pivotal supporting role.

    That climactic scene where Rachel's seen only in silhouette, sitting quietly on her porch with her rifle in hand as Powell - bathed in an eerie glow -- returns for John, is an unforgettable image. Goodness patiently awaits her quarry in darkness, as Evil arrogantly shows himself in the light.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Just one more (none / 0) (#118)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 07:52:16 PM EST
    it is perhaps my favorite movie

    Ever

    Parent

    The Night Porter (none / 0) (#120)
    by Chuck0 on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 08:35:19 PM EST
    is the first that comes to mind at any mention of Charlotte Rampling. I can't even think of anything else she has been in.

    Parent
    DEXTER (none / 0) (#122)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 08:45:55 PM EST


    Parent
    She is actually (none / 0) (#123)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 08:48:58 PM EST
    Having a bit if a revival.  She was just in Assassins Creed and I looked on IMDB and she has six completed and not yet released films

    Parent
    Rampling recently received an Oscar nomination ... (none / 0) (#127)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 10:23:46 PM EST
    ... for Best Actress in the 2015 film "45 Years." She was also Paul Newman's love interest in Sidney Lumet's awesome 1982 courtroom drama "The Verdict," a relationship which Newman's character comes to dearly regret.

    And like Kirsten Scott-Thomas, Ms. Rampling's also equally fluent in French and has appeared in a number of French productions over the years. One I highly recommend is François Ozon's 2000 drama "Sous le Sable" ("Under the Sand"), in which she plays a happily married university professor in Paris, whose husband mysteriously vanishes without a trace while the couple is vacationing on the coast in southwest France.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Swimming Pool (none / 0) (#145)
    by McBain on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 05:50:49 PM EST
    is my favorite Rampling film.  

    Parent
    I never saw that film. (none / 0) (#154)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 11:27:21 PM EST
    Charlotte Rampling is one of a handful of actors and actresses whose work is so consistently good that their great performances are often taken for granted by critics and audiences alike, even as they are appreciated.

    Parent
    Loved her in (none / 0) (#199)
    by ruffian on Tue Aug 08, 2017 at 12:16:37 PM EST
    The Verdict, with Paul Newman. Small role, but unforgettable.

    Parent
    This is Jarrett two days ago (5.00 / 3) (#24)
    by Repack Rider on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 05:53:50 PM EST
    ...calling for a grand jury to investigate...Hillary Clinton!

    There is much to investigate. Did Comey usurp the authority of the Attorney General in terminating the Clinton email investigation?  How could downloading more than a hundred classified documents onto Clinton's private and unsecured email server not constitute crimes under the Espionage Act? Why were five people given immunity while others invoked the Fifth Amendment, yet no grand jury was empaneled?

    He was for it before he was against it.

    Parent

    i can top that i think (5.00 / 3) (#32)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 07:39:13 PM EST
    Ken Starr--famous for his role as independent counsel investigating President Clinton's Whitewater deal and eventually his Lewinsky affair--told CNN on Friday that "we do not want investigators and prosecutors out on a fishing expedition."


    Parent
    Oh, for Heaven's sake! (5.00 / 6) (#55)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 03:50:58 AM EST
    Touché. I'm surprised that the recently cashiered president of Baylor University even has the nerve to show his face in public, given the incredible cloud of scandal and cover-up which first overtook the Baylor Bears football program and then completely enveloped that entire Christianist school on Ken Starr's watch.

    Seriously, what happened on that campus was infinitely worse than any of the overblown political contretemps associated with Bill and Hillary Clinton during Starr's all-too-lengthy tenure as the Inspector Javert-like Whitewater special prosecutor. The public relations damage to Baylor's once-unassailable reputation will likely take that university many years to live down. It's certainly comparable to the Sandusky scandal at Penn State.

    Starr's utterly tone-deaf lack of self-awareness over the last couple of years has been both mesmerizing and pathetic. It's as though he somehow believes that he still possesses some smidgen of moral authority to comment on these sorts of public matters.

    One wonders if Starr even understands the concept of karma.

    Parent

    I dunno, maybe it's just me. (none / 0) (#26)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 06:09:55 PM EST
    But I think it's becoming increasingly problematic for Fox News Bros to make a convincing case when they repeatedly and deliberately misstate that case's body of facts. It's a cardinal rule in any successful propaganda campaign that one should never sucker-punch one's self by actually believing one's own manufactured bullschitt.

    Parent
    That's pretty funny. Very few states use (5.00 / 5) (#28)
    by Peter G on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 07:01:54 PM EST
    grand juries. The federal courts have to, because the "right" to have evidence screened by a panel of citizens prior to formal charging by indictment is enshrined in the Fifth Amendment. Its one of very few civil liberties protections found in the original Bill of Rights that was never determined by the Supreme Court to be "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty" -- for which "due process" is a shorthand expression -- and thus "incorporated" into the Fourteenth Amendment so as to be binding on the States. Where grand juries are not used, the suspect can be formally charged (thus becoming "the defendant" or "the accused") on the sworn statement of a prosecutor alone (this is called charging by "information"). Is that what the Pr*sident*'s defenders want instead? A system where the acolytes, enablers and obstructors would have to face trial on Mueller's word alone?

    Parent
    Ja! Ja! Sieg Heil, Herr Mueller! (none / 0) (#31)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 07:26:51 PM EST
    Oops. Sorry. My bad. My evil German side suddenly saw the endless possibilities in your suggestion, plied the good Irishman in me with beer, and then seized the keyboard when I wasn't looking, just like the Sudentenland in 1938. It won't happen again. I promise. There will be peace in our time.

    ;-D

    Parent

    Yes, well, (none / 0) (#34)
    by Zorba on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 07:44:37 PM EST
    The state of Maryland, where I live, is one of the states which use grand juries, Peter.

    Parent
    And I did not mean to suggest (none / 0) (#39)
    by Peter G on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 07:57:58 PM EST
    that the grand jury system does not enhance the prosecutor's power to investigate; it does, by allowing the prosecutor, in effect, the authority to invoke compulsory process (subpoenas) and to put witnesses under oath, in secret, with no lawyer present (in the federal grand jury, at least). And as a result, is definitely subject to abuse. But systems without grand juries are by no means inherently more fair to the subjects of the investigation.

    Parent
    Peter, I am of (5.00 / 1) (#182)
    by Zorba on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 09:45:07 PM EST
    two minds about the grand jury system.
    I know that there was a judge in New York State who said many years ago that a grand jury would "indict a ham sandwich" or some such.  (And as I vaguely recall, wasn't that judge indicted for something or other himself?)
    But are the states that who do not use the grand jury system any better?
    To be frank, I don't particularly trust the state or federal prosecutors.  Some are good, but a some are not, and the latter seem to me, at least, to treat getting a conviction as a type of game which they win or lose, as opposed to trying to find out the truth.


    Parent
    The Judge was Sol Wachtler (none / 0) (#194)
    by RickyJim on Tue Aug 08, 2017 at 09:01:44 AM EST
    who was later indicted and jailed in a sexual harassment case.  My guess is that forcing a preliminary hearing will prevent some outrageous examples of prosecutorial indiscretion.  For example, in the Zimmerman case in Florida, a judge simply accepted a probable cause complaint coming from a very political prosecutor, without investigating whether it was reasonable or not.  A juror at the subsequent trial called the case a "waste of time."

    The best system, which I hope at least one state in the US would try, is to have the entire police investigation under the direction of a neutral judge rather than a partisan prosecutor and that judge decides whether or not the case should go to trial, as well as compiling a complete dossier of evidence to be used by both sides at the trial.  I say the hell with the "adversary system."

    Parent

    A "neutral judge" - heh (5.00 / 2) (#200)
    by Yman on Tue Aug 08, 2017 at 12:19:39 PM EST
    Despite the fact that, like prosecutors, they're just people - and in many states (like Florida), they are elected.  If your system wad in place in Florida at the time of the Zimmerman trial, you'd simply claim the judge want truly neutral, because you didn't like the decision to charge.  It's the converse of the Michael Brown case.

    Parent
    in my opinion (1.00 / 2) (#42)
    by linea on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 08:42:44 PM EST
    the use of 'common law' and 'grand juries' is an outmoded relic from the middle ages.

    The United States and Liberia are the only countries that retain grand juries, though other common law jurisdictions formerly employed them... [Wikipedia]

    and the separate military u.c.m.j. - that needs to go too.

    in my opinion.

    Parent

    One of the best courses I took (none / 0) (#87)
    by Peter G on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 03:46:36 PM EST
    in law school was on "Early English Legal History," that is, the origins of the common law.  Awesome visiting professor from Cambridge. The man basically lived (in his mind) in the Middle Ages; he made that period and its ideas come alive in the classroom.

    Parent
    Does Mueller have discretion, (none / 0) (#76)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 02:37:33 PM EST
    absent convening a federal grand jury, to issue sub dts?

    Parent
    A federal prosecutor has no authority (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by Peter G on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 03:12:37 PM EST
    to issue a subpoena in aid of an investigation except on behalf of the grand jury. Congress has given some federal agencies authority to issue what they call "administrative subpenas" (usually spelled that way, for some reason) for certain kinds of records within the scope of those agencies' investigative or regulatory authority. (I question the constitutionality of those, if used to advance a criminal investigation, but that is neither here nor there.) So, if I interpreted "sub dts" correctly, the answer is basically No.

    Parent
    I just figured out what you meant (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by Peter G on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 03:40:52 PM EST
    by "sub dts" -- "subpoenas duces tecum," that is, an enforceable order to bring documents or other tangible things to a government authority for examination. ("Duces tecum" being Latin for "bring with you.") Anyway, my answer stands.

    Parent
    The Only Fair Method To Decide Whether to Indict (none / 0) (#58)
    by RickyJim on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 09:13:10 AM EST
    is for a judge to review all the evidence and decide if the indictment is warranted.  In some cases, like the Michael Brown one in Missouri, a Grand Jury was given all the evidence, but that was a rarity.

    Parent
    Funny how those "rarities" (5.00 / 3) (#65)
    by Yman on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 12:05:53 PM EST
    ... where a grand jury hears "all" the evidence happens to be a decision you like.

    Parent
    In the Anglo-American system (none / 0) (#62)
    by Peter G on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 11:50:53 AM EST
    of criminal law, in contrast with the "inquisitorial" system used in Europe and in some other places, the judge does not review the evidence before charges are brought. Instead, if charges were brought by complaint or information rather than by indictment, there is post-charging judicial review at a "preliminary hearing." But there, as before a grand jury, hearsay is generally permitted, defenses are often disregarded, and the standard of proof is only "probable cause."

    Parent
    Defenses are Disregarded? (1.00 / 1) (#69)
    by RickyJim on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 12:55:15 PM EST
    In the "preliminary hearings" I know about the defense was able to present witnesses and other evidence to head off the case going to trial.  That is much fairer than the usual Grand Jury procedure.  Google tells me that D.C., Pennsylvania and Connecticut don't use Grand Juries.  
    Preliminary Hearings

    In states where indictments are not required, whether probable cause exists to charge a defendant with a crime may be determined at a preliminary hearing. At a preliminary hearing, a judge will listen to arguments from both sides before determining whether or not the case should proceed to a criminal trial.

     Link  I agree with you that still the case will probably not be as vetted as much as by an Investigative Judge who compiles a complete dossier of evidence as in the Continental System.

    Parent
    Generally, at least in CA state courts, (none / 0) (#77)
    by oculus on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 02:41:10 PM EST
    defendant does not call witnesses or present any evidence at a prelim.  It is quite rare for rhe prelim. judge to fail to bind over a defendat for trial.

    Parent
    The defendant has the right (none / 0) (#80)
    by Peter G on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 02:48:31 PM EST
    at a "prelim" to present evidence or argument to defeat "probable cause," which is the issue for decision there. More often than not, the defense side will cross-examine but not call witnesses. That is not the same as what I meant by "presenting a defense." Affirmative defenses and doubts about intent, for example, do not defeat "probable cause."

    Parent
    Pennsylvania does not use grand jury (none / 0) (#85)
    by Peter G on Sat Aug 05, 2017 at 03:16:49 PM EST
    indictments to initiate most criminal charges, even routine felonies. But PA law does provide a statutory system for convening a grand jury for investigations of possible criminal conduct that appear to require that sort of power, if the prosecutor's office can convince a jury that one is needed.

    Parent
    Oh, the better (none / 0) (#27)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 06:34:19 PM EST
    one is Judge Jeanie talking about armed insurrection or something. Then there is Krauthammer in the Hill talking about how we should consider his voters and their feelings how demoralized that they will be if Trump is removed from office. In the same article Krauthammer even says that Trump is unfit for the office. The BS these people are laying on is just pathetic but I'm sure the GOP base will be just fine with it.

    Parent
    when this blows (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 07:41:49 PM EST
    when all the shoes drop.  when the evidence is spread before the nation.  its going to be better than sex.

    Parent
    Poor Howdy (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by Zorba on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 07:47:47 PM EST
    I'm  so, so sorry for you if you think this stuff is "better than sex."
    😉

    Parent
    better than i remember it (5.00 / 4) (#37)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 07:48:48 PM EST
    anyway

    Parent
    Will Fox News completely (none / 0) (#40)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 08:06:15 PM EST
    explode? I mean they're already swirling the drain. I wish I knew what the date was gonna be so I can figure out work. I'm having a hard enough time these days squeezing work in with attempting to keep up with what is pretty much sometimes an hour by hour changing story.

    Parent
    HBO hacked (none / 0) (#48)
    by ragebot on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 10:01:07 PM EST
    Seems like tomorrow nights episode of GOT has been released.  Reports are it came from the Indian connection HBO has.  Several web sites are roping off areas for those who wish to avoid posts about it.  The night is dark and full of spoilers.

    That's wild (none / 0) (#50)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 10:14:12 PM EST
    There was a leak of the story line of the whole season a while back.  I have been reading the episode by episode outlines.  It was not as specific as an entire episode but I know pretty much all the important things that are expected to happen Sunday.

    They do it by taking the previously leaked information and mixing it up with officially released and sometimes unofficially leaked photos and on site information from  a whole network of people who stake out the places where they are shooting and reporting who is on site and who is not.

    All that said I don't think I would really want to see a pirated episode.  I can wait two days.

    Probably be crappy quality.  And I already know anyway.

    Parent

    Quality is 1080 (none / 0) (#51)
    by ragebot on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 10:30:21 PM EST
    with watermarks from India and a warning for internal use only.  Maybe it is just the side I cheer for but I thought it was one of the better episodes.  

    Parent
    Yeah (none / 0) (#52)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 04, 2017 at 10:37:14 PM EST
    See my comment above.  Sounds like a great episode.

    Still i will wait.

    Parent

    bad week (none / 0) (#147)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Aug 06, 2017 at 05:58:12 PM EST
    So, It Turns Out The "Game Of Thrones" Night's Watch Capes Are Actually Just Ikea Rugs



    Parent

    Did Philippine Pres. Rodrigo Duterte ... (none / 0) (#156)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 05:38:40 AM EST
    ... just order the summary massacre of Ozamiz City (Mindanao) Mayor Reynaldo Parojinog and members of his family? 15 people were killed in the 2:00 a.m. police raid on the mayor's home:

    "The incident represents a new stage of President Rodrigo Duterte's war on drugs, a brutal, often extralegal campaign that has left thousands dead. So far, most victims have been impoverished addicts and low-level runners who turned to drugs -- primarily shabu, an inexpensive methamphetamine -- to escape the grinding drudgery of urban life. In March, National Police Chief Ronald dela Rosa announced a new phase of the campaign. Police would now target the trade's enablers -- 'big-time drug personalities and groups.' Parojinog was on the list."

    Duterte's behavior is both an affront to common decency and unacceptable in a civilized world. This ongoing slaughter of Filipino citizens at the president's directive, ostensibly for their involvement in drug trafficking, is making former longtime power couple Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos look like models of judicial restraint in comparison.

    Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is in Manila right now. Why doesn't he address the carnage and confront this Mafioso-like thug?

    Aloha.

    Because his boss (5.00 / 2) (#160)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 08:20:25 AM EST
    thinks Duterte is the cat's meow. He approves of and admires Duterte's tactics

    Parent
    Note to Special Counsel Mueller: (5.00 / 1) (#167)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Aug 07, 2017 at 03:10:36 PM EST
    "Please pick up the pace, and hustle that bubble-headed bleached blond out the White House front door ASAP."

    Parent
    They hired that effing (none / 0) (#201)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Aug 08, 2017 at 01:56:09 PM EST
    They hired that effing (5.00 / 2) (#189)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Aug 08, 2017 at 03:07:44 AM PST
    Susan Sarandon. I have a Susan Sarandon problem now. I may have to skip this season.

    Dear lord, on this we agree. Though I don't know what you detest in her.

    For me, her personality simply makes my skin crawl. Don't know why, but I've watched her on the screen for decades, and she's always had that effect on me.

    I fell asleep during the show last night, is she in the first show?

    Friday Open Thread | 202 comments (202 topical)