Monday, January 27, 2020

All Plowed Out


49 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. I wonder if it was katyushas again (if indeed katyushas were used in the previous incident); sounds like something much smaller than a Scud and larger than a rocket propelled grenade. Maybe something like a recoilless rifle? That would be easy enough to carry in an automobile.

      Delete
    2. An updated story [click] says it was a mortar attack. The story also details more widespread protests and political turmoil in Iraq than I had previously been aware of.

      Delete
  2. Granted that it is truly too bad about Kobe Bryant and his daughter perishing in that helicopter crash, but I find nary a word about any of the other seven people who died. I don't think that is right.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree! Their lives meant something too.

      Delete
    2. Turns out the news about the Bryants wasn’t supposed to be reported just an hour and a half after the crash, before rescue was complete and before family could all be contacted. The delay in the rest of the names was out of respect for the families. A coach who once served in Brewster, MA on Cape Cod died with his wife and daughter (team mate of Gigi’s) too.

      Delete
    3. Sorry to be cynical, but if Bryant hadn't been involved we would probably have heard nothing about the crash at all.

      Delete
  3. Lots of reports this morning that the Senate GOP has been thrown into disorder by Bolton’s book. Perhaps they would have done well to consider the advice of Helmuth von Moltke the Elder: “No plan of battle ever survives contact with the enemy.” It is often misunderstood to mean that planning is futile, but that is not what he meant. His point was that a general must be prepared for anything that might happen—then victory is assured. This has been an obvious possibility ever since Trump fired Bolton, and more and more is likely to come out before the election. I anticipate that Bolton’s actions will embolden others when they see that Trump can’t stop them and that obedience to him may not be the safest thing for them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In fact, the Senate GOP plan seems to have been rather like that of Japan for WWII: one sudden decisive battle. I am hopeful, although I do not rule out the possibility that the Democratic Party will screw it up.

      Delete
    2. Oh, and in case you would like to order Bolton’s book (due out March 17th), you can do so here [Click]

      Delete
    3. Josh Marshall:

      "...But the biggest thing is we shouldn’t lose track of what a disgrace this is. Bolton, as we’ve suspected, denied critical information to a lawful and constitutional judicial inquiry while making it available for what is at the end of the day a private business venture. There is just no conceivable justification for this from any, any perspective. It is really a disgrace."

      Delete
    4. I don't want him to profit from his book. He did NOT do the right thing and he should not make money because he did the WRONG thing.

      Delete
  4. CNN is calling the Bolton Bombshell “the elephant in the room.” I love the double entendre! 😂

    ReplyDelete
  5. Apparently today’s thrust in the Trial is that all we have here is a policy dispute.

    Nice try, bucko!

    ReplyDelete

  6. Ken Starr claims we are living in “an Age of Impeachment” that is destabilising. So apparently if the Dems hadn't called for impeachment, all would be stable and well in our nation.

    Yeeeaaaah, riiiigghhht ~ not

    ReplyDelete
  7. A new Salt Lake Tribune/Suffolk University survey in Utah shows Bernie Sanders leading the Democratic presidential field with 27%, followed by Elizabeth Warren at 14%, Joe Biden at 12% and Michael Bloomberg at 10%.

    No other Democratic presidential candidate had double-digit support.

    ReplyDelete
  8. So now the thrust is that the only problem here is that the House's approach wasn't perfect, in his view. So *if* the process wasn't perfect, apparently that means the President did nothing wrong? And, oh my gosh, he's boring to listen to. I imagine the Senate will be droned into stupor.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The news from the Republican lunch is that Bolton's revelation is just a wrinkle and doesn't change anything. Really? Seriously? What is wrong that this news means nothing to the Republicans in the Senate? It means nothing that the President withheld vital aid unless they investigated his opponent who is an American citizen? That means nothing? I say their strings are showing. Have you already called your Senators to demand Bolton (and others) be allowed to testify?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Joe Biden has a problem in Iowa. His supporters there aren’t too keen on caucusing. There is less overlap between caucusgoers and people who regularly vote in primaries than one might expect.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Intersting. How do his supporters expect him to get the nomination if they don't show up to caucus?

      Delete
    2. "Supporters" in a different sense. They would pick him from a list of candidates in a primary but aren't enthusiastic enough to spend three or four hours at a caucus. There's also demographics involved. Seniors are much more likely than young people to vote in a primary but less likely to spend hours at a caucus.

      Delete
  11. What I wanna know, and hope one of the Senators brings up during questioning, is how was it okay for DT to have Giuliani, Parnas and Fruman involved in private national security involved work who had no security clearance?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Senators Collins and Romney are now saying they will likely vote for witnesses. Romney added that he thinks there will be others, perhaps as many as 5 or 10 total.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/gop-senators-under-pressure-witness-testimony-trump-trial-after-bolton-n1123776

    ReplyDelete
  13. LOL! Attny Jane Raskin is making the Dems case for them: If you don't have the law and the facts on your side, yell loud and distract. Pure projection.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Raskin: "The evidence doesn't support [the House Managers'] claims."

      This is not only not true. They are making the huge miscalculation of assuming Bolton's news is somehow unrelated and not evidence.

      Delete
  14. "you cannot use executive privilege to hide wrongdoing or criminality or impeachable misconduct.”"

    “Mr. Bolton already announced he’d testify if the Senate issued a subpoena,” Schumer told the press. “He’s not in the executive branch. So executive privilege cannot be used against him, because it can’t be used to prevent a witness who’s willing to testify.”

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/schiff-lobbies-chief-justice-roberts-to-rule-on-questions-of-executive-privilege/ar-BBZiZ3w?li=BBnb7Kz

    ReplyDelete
  15. The bastards are raking the Bidens over the coals with innuendo and worse.

    Seriously, this has nothing to do with what we're looking at here. A President cannot ask a foreign entity to investigate his political opponent, and American citizen. Add to that that our President withheld vital foreign aid to strong-arm the President of another nation to do his bidding. It's just WRONG.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Viktor Shokin: "His appointment was controversial from the outset and he was widely considered to be a key obstacle in the fight against corruption"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Shokin?fbclid=IwAR1WbJIHBpEMfMpCCcdfDdroM58WJKsYk3f52z9grhQGR9K_6vEwGXZMqOI

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If the President was being open and above board by asking for an investigation, why didn't he ask his own Intelligence Agency to investigate instead of a foreign entity?
      And what about the fact that this whole conspiracy theory began with Putin? Doesn't that mean anything?

      Delete
  17. So now they're on to President Obama. They want to show that DT did far better than Obama. Sure, lethal weaponry, and that's fine. But that too has nothing to do with the issue that DT used a foreign entity to dig up dirt on his American opponent, and withheld aid to make it more likely to happen.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh c'mon. We aren't stupid. There is a HUGE difference between President Obama a foreign gov't (Russia) to wait on something until after an election and President DT withholding aid to a foreign gov't until they investigate an American citizen he is running against!!!

      Delete
  18. (I am sure glad I'm an Independent!)

    ReplyDelete
  19. Man, it would be a lot easier to listen to the Senate Trial if these guys wouldn't be so snide and sarcastic! How about a little more decorum?

    No evidence, just insinuation and innuendo. Argh.

    Falsehood: Biden did *not* get corrupt Viktor Shokin fired because of Hunter. Everyone wanted Shokin fired...from the EU to Republican Senators.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Fact check: 4 things Trump's attorney left out of her arguments about Biden and Burma

    https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-impeachment-trial-01-27-20/index.html

    ReplyDelete
  21. Robert Ray, I don't need you to stand in my defense as a member of the American people. It does not follow that impeachment negates an election. It simply seals that the President has since that time lost our trust due to his actions of self serving bad faith. Also, it does not have to be a statutory crime. We're not stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Dang! I just realised we didn't critique all the ties the speakers are wearing! Not a whale tie among them. 🐋

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I only thought about it as I realised I could see Robert Ray's second button because his tie is so cooked. LOL! One guy today had a vivid pink tie that just didn't look solemn enough for the event.

      Delete
  23. Alan Dershowitz (well dressed, plain sapphire tie), is seeking to show that abuse of power and obstruction of justice are not impeachable offenses, and that the Framers wouldn't want that. Geesh. If he can show that reasonably, then anything can be "fixed" by having expensive lawyers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I cannot believe that the Framers wouldn't mind abuse of power and obstruction of another branch of government. Else, why leave England at all?

      Delete
    2. Technical bull aside, right is right and wrong is wrong. How about common sense? How about what's really best for the nation?

      Delete
    3. Somebody needs to tell Alan Dershowitz that (a) there was no understanding of psychoanalysis when the Framers framed the Constitution, and (b) that his example of Israel was not a quid pro quo but merely a policy issue; this is a quid pro quo.

      Delete
    4. I begin to see how O.J. Simpson got off. Alan Dershowitz overwhelmed the jury with legalese. So, unless we set things in exactly the perfect terminology we can't catch a rapist?
      "Help! He's raping me and has a knife!"
      "Sorry, you didn't put that in just the right terminology. No one can help you."

      Delete
    5. What the Framers didn't want was the President to be a King. ARGH!!!!

      Delete
    6. When DT gets acquitted and jubilantly runs roughshod over this nation, it will be partly on the head of Alan Dershowitz.

      Delete
    7. Paul Begala just said on CNN that as regards waiting for the other shoe to drop, "They're living in Imelda Marcos' closet!" ROFL!!

      Delete
  24. Home, and sympathizing with you. I didn't expect anything more from this trial, so I'm not as upset. HugZ!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I didn't expect otherwise either. But I still cannot abide fabrications and lies and twistedness ~ and of such a magnitude as to undermine our Constitution and nation.

      Delete