It's that dumb.
Lawyers get paid to make dumb arguments. Didn't know Mag Habs was on their payroll.
The Elizabeth Holmes trial was, if you think about it, an assault on her free speech rights.
Thursday, August 03, 2023
And The Mags Hab Special
Taking "free speech" to even more embarrassing heights.
Can't be crimes if there's talking involved! No such thing as conspiracy!
The Elizabeth Holmes trial was, if you think about it, an assault on her free speech rights.
The Elizabeth Holmes trial was, if you think about it, an assault on her free speech rights.
Wednesday, August 02, 2023
A Real Judge
Quite clear Trump's favorite judge in Florida will do everything she can to run interference for him over the classified document indictments, but some comfort that he seems to have drawn a real judge in DC.
Peter Baker Special
Just amazing.
Putting it simply: lies were part of the conspiracy, but the lies are not the crimes.
The third indictment of the former president is the first to get to the heart of the matter: Can a sitting leader of the country spread lies to hold onto power even after voters reject him?The indictment:
Later in the piece it says:
Can a sitting president spread lies about an election and try to employ the authority of the government to overturn the will of the voters without consequence?Yes it's the last bit that's the problem, but 'prosecutors need to prove Trump was lying which of course they can't do' is the right wing line.
Putting it simply: lies were part of the conspiracy, but the lies are not the crimes.
How Did We Get Here
I'm not even a particularly advanced Jan6-ologist, but I was, you know, watching this shit in real time and that they planned to do a coup and use the Insurrection Act as he was, post-election, installing loyalists into top Pentagon positions (TOTALLY NORMAL!!!) was known!!!
Trump had been talking about the Insurrection Act all year!!! He talked about it for protests, then for election sites!!!
Can debate the probability of this actually succeeding but they were planning! Real planning. We could see it! What was it for???
I, personally, was skeptical about successful violence on Jan. 6 because I thought the Capitol Police had their shit together! This was a mistake!
The answer to the question in the title is: centrist dipshits, it's always centrist dipshits.
Whitewater
I've never seen any introspection from the key members of the press corps at the time about why they Clinton drove them all insane, but it's worth remembering how insane the coverage was, whatever the motivation.
Obviously "Whitewater" morphed into "Lewinsky" at some point. That a presidential affair was going to be a 24/7 thing in the late 1990s is one of those things you can't even question. I get that it just was.
However, while The Kids won't remember, the way in which it was covered - the way any sense of balance was completely chucked out the window - is still worth remembering.
Cable news isn't precisely then as it is now, but the "panel" type shows were never more better balanced than 3-1 against Clinton, and usually that '1' was someone whose contribution to balance was along the lines of, "sure Bill Clinton is the nastiest man to ever have lived, but he still shouldn't be convicted in the impeachment trial." Sometimes you'd get a lonely Joe Conason being talked over by tagteam couple Joe diGenova and Vicky Toensing, eagerly supported by whoever was hosting. That was about it.
And, through it all, Clinton was more popular than ever. The public was truly enraging, then, to them. Interesting what does and doesn't enrage them.
I have said "they" can monster anyone they want, but they chucked it all at Clinton and failed, so maybe they can't always do it.
Obviously "Whitewater" morphed into "Lewinsky" at some point. That a presidential affair was going to be a 24/7 thing in the late 1990s is one of those things you can't even question. I get that it just was.
However, while The Kids won't remember, the way in which it was covered - the way any sense of balance was completely chucked out the window - is still worth remembering.
Cable news isn't precisely then as it is now, but the "panel" type shows were never more better balanced than 3-1 against Clinton, and usually that '1' was someone whose contribution to balance was along the lines of, "sure Bill Clinton is the nastiest man to ever have lived, but he still shouldn't be convicted in the impeachment trial." Sometimes you'd get a lonely Joe Conason being talked over by tagteam couple Joe diGenova and Vicky Toensing, eagerly supported by whoever was hosting. That was about it.
And, through it all, Clinton was more popular than ever. The public was truly enraging, then, to them. Interesting what does and doesn't enrage them.
I have said "they" can monster anyone they want, but they chucked it all at Clinton and failed, so maybe they can't always do it.
Merry Smithmas
Who knows what happens next, but I admit to being very stunned that it went this far. A lot of people at the top were clearly not enthusiastic about any serious investigations of Trump, going back to his presidency. Someone will write the definitive book I suppose, at some point, though I am increasingly aware of how "definitive books" can never really be, but that Garland was very hesitant until the Jan. 6 committee (probably the heroes of this story) forced his hand, doesn't seem to be especially in doubt.
Powerful people don't really think laws are for people like them, and class solidarity, with a broad definition of class, is quite a force.
But, really, if you aren't going to prosecute the people involved with trying to overthrow the democracy, it's pretty clear you don't deserve to keep it!
Powerful people don't really think laws are for people like them, and class solidarity, with a broad definition of class, is quite a force.
But, really, if you aren't going to prosecute the people involved with trying to overthrow the democracy, it's pretty clear you don't deserve to keep it!
Tuesday, August 01, 2023
Happy Hour
Get happy
...Don't see how....
Court is now closed. We may have to wait for Trump to get the summons and hop on Truth Social to learn what happened.
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) August 1, 2023
...Don't see how....
Trump’s legal team was notified Tuesday that the former president had been indicted, according to a person familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the indictment had not yet been made public....here it is!
And My Power Is Out
Seems to have knocked out the 4G signal too so I just have tin can and string internet.
It's Not The Economy, Stupid
A thing Dems and Dem-aligned people spend a lot of time doing now is going out there and saying, "AKSHUALLY, THE ECONOMY IS GOOD." There's certainly a fair critique of media *coverage* of the economy, but it comes across more as yelling at the ungrateful voters who don't realize how good they have it.
Anyway, Dems love to talk about how the line is going up, how median take home pay is up SEVENTEEN DOLLARS PER WEEK (or whatever), but they should get out there and talk about how lunatic Republicans are banning books and killing women. Because those things are pretty unpopular and, also, Republicans are banning books and killing women.
My advice to boost the fortunes of Dark Brandon. Maybe I'm wrong!
Anyway, Dems love to talk about how the line is going up, how median take home pay is up SEVENTEEN DOLLARS PER WEEK (or whatever), but they should get out there and talk about how lunatic Republicans are banning books and killing women. Because those things are pretty unpopular and, also, Republicans are banning books and killing women.
My advice to boost the fortunes of Dark Brandon. Maybe I'm wrong!
How Could They Have Known
Hard to do anything but laugh at anyone who willingly worked with Trump.
DONALD TRUMP’S ATTORNEYS are preparing a legal plan to shovel blame onto the lawyers who aided his attempt to overturn the 2020 election, two sources familiar with the matter tell Rolling Stone.
...
lol.lmao.
“It is an argument the [former] president likes, and the team is on board with it,” one Trump adviser bluntly says, then somewhat ominously adding: “John [Eastman] and Rudy [Giuliani] gave a lot of counsel … Other people can decide how sound it was.”
Seems Bad
Near the beginning of the heat wave, a lot of people responded with various versions of "it's Phoenix, it gets hot." And, really, no. There is actually a tremendous difference between 111 and 115 degrees (in a way that there isn't between 91 and 95), and there's a tremendous difference between 115 degrees (high) for a day and 115 degrees high for a few weeks.
Surfaces never cool, AC systems strain from overuse, generally there is just no relief.
The point is Phoenix was long flirting with the line, and now it's starting to cross it.
Surfaces never cool, AC systems strain from overuse, generally there is just no relief.
The point is Phoenix was long flirting with the line, and now it's starting to cross it.
Patients with heat stroke and burns from the asphalt are swamping hospitals. Air-conditioners are breaking down at homeless shelters. The medical examiner’s office is deploying trailer-sized coolers to store bodies, for the first time since the early days of Covid.
For 31 straight days — from the last day of June through Sunday, the second-to-last day of July — Phoenix has hit at least 110 degrees Fahrenheit, not merely breaking its 18-day record in 1974, but setting a significant new one. On Monday, the last day of July, the heat spell finally broke, if only by a few degrees: The temperature reached a high of 108 degrees. Storms offered a slight, temporary respite. The forecast called for 110-plus degree days to return later in the week.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)