Skip to content

Book report

Saturday, October 29, 2022

A couple of weeks ago my wife and I accompanied my brother to Hartford to attend the induction ceremonies for the Hartford Public High School Hall of Fame. Needless to say, I was not being inducted, but my brother, the best swimmer HPHS ever saw, was. I can claim credit only for having started the family tradition of engaging in competitive swimming and also for having gotten my brother into the Hall by contacting the folks running it.

But this post isn’t about my brother.

Everyone attending had an assigned table at the Chowder Pot. We were assigned to a table with members of the family of Les Payne. Mr Payne is deceased, so he was represented by his wife, son, and daughter. From what I gathered, he was a reasonably good athlete, but what put him over the top was his career in journalism, which included a Pulitzer Prize for reporting, and, most recently and posthumously, a Pulitzer Prize for The Dead Are Arising, The Life of Malcolm X. His daughter Tamara assisted him in the 18 years of research that went into the book. The family told us about the book, and I, in turn, told them about my son’s book. I downloaded their book and they ordered my son’s at the same time.

I’ve just finished it, and I highly recommend it. As I mentioned earlier the Paynes, father and daughter, researched it for 18 years, and the fruits of that research are evident. They tracked down and interviewed people that interacted with Malcolm X from back when he was just a child and throughout the rest of his life, as well as combing through official records. Indeed, some of their sources were people who confessed on their death beds to things they’d denied or hidden for years.

The book is by no means a hagiography. Malcolm’s warts are fully exposed, as is the origin of the Nation of Islam, which like so many of our home grown religions (see Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Christian Scientists, and I’m sure there’s more) was founded by a charlatan and grifter and which became, in many respects, particularly after Malcolm left it, a criminal enterprise.

The book also gives, so far as I am aware (and I’m no expert) the most exhaustive and detailed description of Malcolm’s murder, which was planned and executed by the Black Muslims, while the FBI and local police, fully aware of their intentions, stood by and did nothing to stop it. Two men who were innocent of the murder served years in prison for the murder, while two of those actually responsible never served a day and were never charged with anything. No honest attempt was ever made to find those responsible. That’s the way things were in J. Edgar Hoover’s America.

As an old Hartford boy, I enjoyed the chapter on Malcolm’s speech at the Bushnell, which Mr. Payne attended with his white college roommate. It was apparently an eye opening experience for him, for as his daughter relates in the introduction, he said that he went in as a “Negro” and came out as a proud black man. I was personally unaware that Malcolm spent a lot of time in Hartford helping to establish the local Black Muslim chapter, but then, I guess I would have been. I was a kid at the time, and I doubt that he was covered extensively, or at all, in the white media. I’m also guessing that Payne chose to emphasize Malcolm’s Hartford experiences given his connection to the city and access to some of the Hartford folks who worked alongside Malcolm.

The book is a great biography, but more than that, at least for a white reader, it is an excellent and thorough elucidation of the experience of black people in the time periods that it covers. So for all those reasons, plus the fact that it was written by an HPHS alum (“HPHS! Say it louder, we’re the best”) I highly recommend it.

Filed in Book reports | | Comments (0)

Is anyone qualified to sit on a Trump jury?

Tuesday, October 25, 2022

I was not surprised at all to learn that they’re having a bit of trouble picking a jury  for the civil case against the Trump Organization. It seems that a lot of people have preconceived notions about Donald Trump, and although he’s technically not a party, it just might affect their judgment. What a surprise!

I’ve written about this before, and it looks like it’s happening pretty much as I expected. The anti-Trumpers, who are mostly honest, are outing themselves, but you can bet the Trumpers will swear up and down that they’ll be totally fair and will certainly listen to all the evidence. They exist even in New York, so I think we can expect a jury that is predisposed to rule for Trump. Another thing to think about, especially if Trump himself ever goes on trial, is, that to the extent you can get a fair minded jury, those people have to be protected somehow from the inevitable death threats should they convict him. You have to hope that any presiding judge would be aware of the danger and take steps to protect their identities, even going so far as not letting anyone see them physically.

I think these cases pose some interesting legal issues that have, perhaps, never arisen to the extent they have in the Trump related cases. At first blush it would seem only fair that any juror who expresses doubt about the honesty of any party during voir dire should be disqualified. But, one must ask, doesn’t there come a time when a potential juror is allowed to rely on common knowledge when responding to questions. Assume for the moment that a trial involved a flat-earther and a juror was asked if he or she had any preconceived notions about whether the earth was flat or round? Should that juror be disqualified if he or she said that they were of a fairly firm opinion that the earth was round? The fact that Trump is a congenital liar is something that he has proven over and over during his entire lifetime, and it is as incontestable as the shape of the earth. It really isn’t rational to exclude a person from a jury because he or she is unwilling to deny an obvious fact.

As a practical matter, no sentient American citizen (and I’m even conceding for purposes of this post that Trumpers are sentient) has no preconceived notions about Donald Trump. You either worship him despite his lies, or you recognize that he is a liar. If we hold a potential juror to a “no preconceptions” standard, then only liars will be seated as jurors.

Different rules apply in libel and slander cases involving public figures, for a reason. For folks like Trump, justice might be served by crafting standards for jury selection that permit a juror with a preconceived notion about a public figure’s honesty to qualify, so long, for instance, as he or she asserts that they will make their findings based on the evidence presented in the court. At present, the system is such that it is biased toward jurors who will lie their way onto the jury in order to rule in favor of a liar.

Filed in Lawyer stuff, The Very Stable Genius | | Comments (0)

More stuff you couldn’t make up

Thursday, October 20, 2022

I remember a time when you would not expect this sort of thing even from the folks down in Texas:

TODAY is reporting that Texas is sending DNA kits to families to identify their children “in case of an emergency.”

Harking back to the title of this post, would anyone really believe a work of fiction to be credible if it posited that the response to school massacres of an allegedly civilized state would be, and would only be, making sure they can identify the dead. And it should be noted here that the need to identify the bodies using DNA only proves how devastating the weapons are that these same people insist should be freely available. Back in the day when our sainted Founding Fathers passed the Second Amendment, which really was only a way of legalizing slave catching, it would have taken some serious work with a musket to render a body unidentifiable by simple facial recognition. Nowadays, it’s practically a given that the bodies will be unidentifiable masses of tissues.

Yet more proof that we don’t have two political parties in this country. We have one political party and one cult.

Filed in Dysfunction, Republicans | | Comments (0)

Trump’s subpoena

Friday, October 14, 2022

I spent part of Thursday afternoon watching the January 6th hearings. One of the pundits on PBS felt that it was a bad move on the committee’s part to subpoena the genius, because-guess what- the Trumpers will criticize them. I think it may work out well in some ways, though I doubt that Trump will ever testify.

If I understand the procedure correctly, the next step will be a vote in the House about whether to hold Trump in contempt. I assume that the vote can be scheduled prior to the election. If not, the subpoena becomes a bit of empty theater. If a vote can be scheduled, it puts some, though not all, of the Republicans in Congress in a difficult position. If they vote against the contempt citation, they risk alienating the ever shrinking pool of rational people (well, somewhat rational) who have still not faced the reality that the Republican Party has completely gone over to the dark side. Voting for a finding of contempt risks pissing off the nutjobs without whom they can’t win anywhere.

My guess is that the committee members, even the two Republicans (both of whom will soon be ex-Congresspersons) have something along those lines in mind. They’d all like the committee to continue in existence, which means they all (though Kinzinger and Cheney can’t say this out loud) would like to see the Dems keep control of Congress.

Here in my state senatorial district we have a Republican incumbent senator who is so afraid of speaking about national issues that she refused to debate and talked the sponsoring chamber of commerce into blackballing any questions (which were all pre-screened) about national issues. I think she’s symptomatic of what a lot of Republican politicians would like to do: avoid talking about stuff like voter suppression and insurrectionists while throwing red meat to the insurrectionists while nobody is looking.

If there is a vote before Election Day I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of the Republicans find a reason not to cast a vote at all. Quite likely they’ll settle on some sort of talking point like “the subpoena is just the Democrats playing politics”. I’m sure Fox has already come up with something.

I could be wrong about this, that’s for sure. It may very well be that the Republicans will be loud and proud about backing the crime boss that is now their leader. And it could be that a majority of people in this country are too (is stupid the right word?) to see where the Republicans are taking us.

Filed in The Very Stable Genius | | Comments (0)

The Onion has its say

Tuesday, October 4, 2022

I get most of my news from an RSS app, and when I peruse the Unread Items, I often come across an article title that I just can’t believe, until I see that it’s from the Onion, and that I shouldn’t believe it. But, the fact is, that a lot of their articles are, in these dizzying times, initially easy to believe are true. That’s a depressing observation when you think about it, but hardly the Onion’s fault.

Today I read about this brief that the Onion has filed (and this has really happened) with the US Supreme Court – – you know, the Court people used to respect.

The Onion is supporting a case brought by a man that was arrested for operating a parody website making fun of his local police department. He was found not guilty, and he brought an action against the cops for violating his free speech rights, he rather foolishly thinking that free speech applied to him, and not just right wing fanatics. His case was thrown out because the court ruled the cops were entitled to qualified immunity, which should actually be phrased as unqualified immunity, but we must preserve appearances.

Anyway, the Onion’s brief is a masterpiece, howlingly funny but also legally correct, though no doubt the 6 nutjobs on the court will not see it that way.

Here’s a small example:

The Onion is the world’s leading news publication, offering highly acclaimed, universally revered coverage of breaking national, international, and local news events. Rising from its humble beginnings as a print newspaper in 1756, The Onion now enjoys a daily readership of 4.3 trillion and has grown into the single most powerful and influential organization in human history.

,,,

,,, The Onion’s keen, fact-driven reportage has been cited favorably by one or more local courts, as well as Iran and the Chinese state-run media. Along the way, The Onion’s journalists have garnered a sterling repu- tation for accurately forecasting future events. One such coup was The Onion’s scoop revealing that a for-mer president kept nuclear secrets strewn around his beach home’s basement three years before it even happened.

…

Americans can be put in jail for poking fun at the government? This was a surprise to America’s Finest News Source and an uncomfortable learning experience for its editorial team. Indeed, “Ohio Police Officers Arrest, Prosecute Man Who Made Fun of Them on Fa-cebook” might sound like a headline ripped from the front pages of The Onion—albeit one that’s considerably less amusing because its subjects are real. So, when The Onion learned about the Sixth Circuit’s ruling in this case, it became justifiably concerned.

The brief even rightly mocks the Supreme Court. No doubt Elena, Sonia and Ketanji will get a kick out of it (and agree with it).

Well worth reading. Absolutely legally correct. A sure loser.

Filed in Lawyer stuff | | Comments (0)

Climate deniers line up for disaster money they vote against

Sunday, October 2, 2022

It is, of course, no surprise to learn that Ron DeSantis, along with a huge majority of Republican Congresspersons and Senators, opposed financial aid to the Northeast when it was hit by hurricane Sandy, while voting for such aid when it was a red state that was affected. Biden, of course, and the Democrats as well, have done the right thing by rushing aid to Florida, though I have to say that I personally might have given a lot of thought, were I Biden, to expressing my hesitation to send aid to Florida, since the governor there thought such aid was an “irresponsible boondoggle”, though I’d be glad to send the aid if the governor requested it, accompanying his request with an explanation about why it was no longer an irresponsible boondoggle. Something along those lines, anyway, to make DeSantis have to beg a bit.

But there is, of course, a larger issue at play here, one that I’ve not seen much comment about. Not only are the folks from the red state’s in particular, but the Fascist Party generally, likely to oppose aid when it comes to helping blue states, but they are also opposed to doing anything about climate change, even though its most devastating impact is likely to be on their own red states.

If you’ve seen pictures of Fort Myers, it’s pretty clear that the town was almost totally destroyed. Years ago, you could write off a storm of this magnitude as a once in a century thing, and rebuild with the expectation that you could go back to normal for a reasonable amount of time. That’s no longer the case. There’s a better than even chance that storms of Ian’s magnitude will be annual events, meaning that any rebuilding efforts will be incomplete before there is renewed devastation. You have to wonder whether the funds that will be sent to Florida will be spent in such a way as to minimize the impact of future storms on whatever the money is used to construct. In the case of Florida, you have to wonder whether it’s even possible to save the state from the inevitable. The highest point in Florida is a mere 345 feet, and most of it is close to sea level. As Floridian politicians continue to join forces with other climate deniers, sea levels will only rise. If this does become an annual thing, it won’t make much sense to keep pumping money into the state, especially if people like DeSantis remain in control, as they’ll do nothing to make sure the money is spent with future disasters in mind. It might behoove the Biden folks to attach some fairly long strings to the money they send Florida’s way.

Filed in Republicans | | Comments (0)

One cheer for the 11th Circuit

Thursday, September 22, 2022

Back at the end of 2019 I made some New Year’s predictions. One of them was to the effect that after he lost the election, Trump would vanish down the memory hole into which George Bush had leaped (or was shoved) in 2009. I was wrong, as Trump insisted on being worshipped, and the Republican Party establishment had painted itself into a corner such that it had no choice but to cater to his wishes.

Which brings me to some thoughts after reading the Appellate Court decision that makes mincemeat out of Judge Aileen Cannon’s lower court decision. Two of the three judges who decided the case were appointed by Trump, but both chose to actually follow the law in these very limited circumstances.

I would argue that they did so because it was convenient for them, and they don’t have the same pressures on them as do elected Republicans. Don’t expect them to feel the need to respect precedent when it gets in the way of their political objectives.

The Federalist Society (James Madison must turn in his grave every time that name is verbalized) got what it wanted out of Trump. They got to name all the judges, who are now busily at work destroying the republican form of government that the actual Federalists helped create. They don’t need him anymore, and, except for some over the top outliers like Cannon, feel no need to protect him. Their performance in cases trying to overturn the election was indicative of that. Trump can hardly complain, inasmuch as they are doing to him exactly what he typically does to the people who do his dirty work.

It follows from the above that the Supreme Court will decline to step in and save the genius. Thomas might dissent, as he has his wife to worry about, but the others will likely follow the 11th Circuit’s lead. What better way to prove that the Supreme Court is indeed a legitimate institution? If they let Trump go to jail the media will buy into Robert’s bullshit, and say not another word about legitimacy as the court strips away our voting rights, establishes a state “Christian” religion devoid of any of the teachings of Christ, grants rights to Republicans that disappear when Democrats try to use them, and legitimizes the fascism arising from the political party that put them in their seats. They don’t need Trump anymore because, after all, someone like DeSantis will serve perfectly well, and they can always assist in stealing an election for him if he can’t garner the votes on his own.

Filed in Creeping Totalitarianism, Lawyer stuff | | Comments (0)

What are the odds this bill will pass

Monday, September 19, 2022

If I were a betting man I wouldn’t think twice about how I’d bet on the prospects of this bill actually becoming law:

Reps. Liz Cheney (R-WY) and Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) have introduced the Presidential Election Reform Act to prevent Trump from stealing 2024.

According to NBC News, the bill would “The 38-page bill would make clear the vice president’s role in counting votes is simply ministerial and raise the threshold for objecting to electors from one member of the House and Senate to one-third of each chamber. It would require governors and states to send electors to Congress for candidates who won the election based on state law prior to Election Day, according to an official summary, meaning states couldn’t change their election rules retroactively after an election.”

States would also be banned from extending the election or refusing to certify the results. The legislation also requires that if there is an objection during the count to a state’s results, that objection must be based on specific constitutional grounds.

Okay, so the bill makes perfect sense, but it is not, as the fellow at Politicus writes, “bi-partisan”, in that Liz Cheney has been expelled from the Republican Party.

It is plain as day that a substantial portion of the Republican Party intends to steal every election they can, and that includes the presidential election. I’m sure Lindsey and Ted, among others, will be able to come up with some talking points proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the bill is just a blatant attempt by Democrats to enable voter fraud, which the media will present as a “both sides” issue and the bill will die in the Senate. After all, Joe and Kristen continue to believe that the filibuster is more sacred than democracy.

Filed in Creeping Totalitarianism | | Comments (0)

Open criminality is the new norm

Saturday, September 17, 2022

Sometimes things move much too fast for someone who isn’t paid to blog. When I first heard about the stunt DeSantis pulled sending migrants to Martha’s Vineyard, it seemed to me that there was something, you know, illegal about it. My first thought was that it was kidnapping. I didn’t practice criminal law, and even had I done so, I probably would have no experience with kidnapping cases, as they are fairly rare, but this seemed to have all the elements. Apparently, DeSantis imported these people from Texas and shipped them to Martha’s Vineyard, inducing them to go along by a series of lies.

I was glad to see that people with more knowledge than I agreed with my conclusions, though it did prevent me from presenting the idea as original with me. Also, apparently, people who lie for a living had a hard time avoiding the conclusion that this was an illegal activity, though of course Ted Cruz would baselessly claim that Joe Biden is a far worse human trafficker than DeSantis.

Gavin Newsome has asked the Justice Department to investigate and bring criminal charges if warranted, and we can only hope that this will happen. Meanwhile, of course, some in the media are doing their best to normalize what is truly outrageous behavior. After all, it’s just a minor stretch on the road to Fascism.

I suppose the Republican Jesus would approve of what DeSantis did. (Check out the video of the Republican Jesus at the link. I don’t know how to embed TikToks, so head on over to Digby’s blog.

Filed in Creeping Totalitarianism, Republican Corruption | | Comments (0)

One born every minute, or should that be “every second”

Monday, September 12, 2022

I have to admit that I can’t help but think that the folks who fall for this sort of stuff deserve what they get:

While running Money Magnet Platinum Membership Initiative LLC, [Lakenya] Hopkins promised astronomical — and unrealistic — rates of returns on investments…. Hopkins claimed to investors she would get them \(8,000 in monthly returns for every \)1,000 they invested by pooling the money and putting it into a hedge fund that guaranteed a 3-5% daily returns, the feds alleged.

A 3-5% daily return amounts to, let see, a 1095% to 1825% (not taking compounding into account) return on a yearly basis, which seems sort of, shall we say, unrealistic. I’d like to think these suckers all also fell for the grifter-president, as this will reduce their ability to fall for his latest grift and line his pockets.

Filed in Grifters | | Comments (0)