Skip to content

A good idea

A while back I made a modest proposal to the effect that Bill Barr should be disbarred. I am pleased to report that someone in Congress had the same idea (No, I don’t claim to have inspired him).

Rep. Bill Pascrell announced last night that he filed complaints against AG Bill Barr in both Virginia and the District of Columbia to remove his law license.

Pascrell cites the fact that Barr is aiding and abetting Trump’s crime spree, and is using the Justice Department was Trump’s personal lawyer. I cited his refusal to honor a lawfully issued subpoena, but Pascrell’s arguments all have merit as well. Barr is not merely abusing the power of his office, he is a co-conspirator in Trumps crimes.

Now, when will someone do the same for Guiliani, who should be even easier to pick off?

Mike Pence in a nutshell

Mike Pence doesn’t know a thing about all that Ukrainian Stuff. Rachel begs to differ.

Shorter Mike Pence:

Science scores a hit

Blogging has been sparse lately, my only excuse being that it becomes tedious to repeat oneself, and there are only so many ways of saying that a certain very stable genius is out of his mind. So this post has nothing to do with the genius, and everything to do with me.

I have been on this earth for 3 score and 9 plus years, and in all that time only about one tablespoon of coffee has passed through the portals of my mouth. Not for me that detestable beverage. I am a tea person, and have for years maintained the superiority of this all American (it was a Tea Party after all) beverage over its overhyped competitor. Turns out that I have science on my side:

A recent study led by researchers from the National University of Singapore (NUS) revealed that regular tea drinkers have better organised brain regions — and this is associated with healthy cognitive function — compared to non-tea drinkers. The research team made this discovery after examining neuroimaging data of 36 older adults.

“Our results offer the first evidence of positive contribution of tea drinking to brain structure, and suggest that drinking tea regularly has a protective effect against age-related decline in brain organisation,” explained team leader Assistant Professor Feng Lei, who is from the Department of Psychological Medicine at the NUS Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine.

The research was carried out together with collaborators from the University of Essex and University of Cambridge, and the findings were published in scientific journal Aging on 14 June 2019.

Anyone who has read this blog would have to agree that I have tons of well organized brain regions. You might even say I’m a stable….wait…forget that.

Back to science. I will fervently believe this study is valid even if it turns out it was bought and paid for by the folks at Lipton (whose detestable tea I will not drink). As further proof of tea’s superiority, I submit the fact that Barack Obama is also a tea drinker (I have this on Pete Sousa’s authority, who I follow on Instagram.) Given his track record, we must assume that a certain individual to whom I have referred previously has never touched the stuff, which, in any event, even I would agree does not go well with McDonald’s cheeseburgers.

CAVEAT: Some might say that a sample of 36 people might be a bit too small to form the basis for such a conclusion. But those people would be wrong, for after all, the New York Times can tell you what “swing voters” think about impeachment by sampling only six die hard Trumpers, which proves that 36 randomly selected people is a massive sample.

Things that make you swear and curse

As Eric Idle wrote:

Some things in life are bad
They can really make you mad
Other things just make you swear and curse

This is one of those swear and curse things.

We all know that the New York Times sends its reporters into diners in the hinterlands to scout out unrepentant Trump voters and present them as salt of the earth bellwethers for our political future. We also know, deep down in our hearts, that non-Trump voters are studiously ignored by the intrepid reporters as they sip their cups of Joe and interview their brain dead favorites. This is already enough to make one swear and curse, but now we find that they have their favorite “swing voters”, all die hard Trumpies, on speed dial, so when, for example, the Democrats move toward impeachment, we can hear that swing voters are not pleased.

The article in question asserts that swing voters, as the reporter alleges in a tweet, are repelled by the thought of impeachment. She scientifically sampled six such voters. One of the “swing voters” (all of whom have been featured in past NY Times articles) has gone to 23 Trump rallies. One has a portrait of Robert E. Lee hanging in his living room. All of them are die hard Trumpers. See the article to which I’ve linked for full details.

This sort of journalistic malpractice has never been practiced in the Times to throw shade on Republicans.

All we can do is swear and curse, though I’m contemplating ending my subscription to the Times.

It’s easy to see when they’re afraid

It’s easy to see when the right wing is afraid of someone. They start engaging in hysterical attacks. We saw it with AOC, we’ve seen it with Elizabeth Warren, and we haven’t seen it with Joe Biden. I’m not talking about digging up dirt, I’m talking about crazy. 

So all hail Greta Thunberg, who has managed to attract the ire of trump apologist Michael Knowles, (who referred to her as mentally ill), Laura Ingraham,(who compared her to characters in a Stephen King film, earning Laura the twittered wrath of her own brother), and Dinesh D’Souza (who compared her to a Nazi because he found a Nazi poster with a braided girl on it).

They don’t fear them because they disagree with her and their other targets merely because they disagree with them. They fear them because they recognize what the Democratic establishment doesn’t: that they present a clear and present danger to the right.

A bit off the topic, but I can’t wait until Greta gets her peace prize. The Trump tweets will be hugely entertaining.

Time for some Democratic pushback

The New York Times is trying to both sides the whistleblower thing with Trump, attempting to breathe life into the Biden allegations, which were apparently originated by the same guy who wrote Clinton Cash, to whom the Times gave credence back in 2016. Yet another example of the need for the Democrats to learn to work the refs. They should be pounding on the Times, since the Biden story has been debunked by multiple media outlets, and there’s no additional evidence warranting the attempt to reinvigorate it. The only purpose reopening it serves is to water down the allegations against Trump. You know, the treason. 

Actually, they’re not allegations, they are now admissions.

I’m no Biden fan, but his response to the son of Doocy was right on, and in my humble opinion, the other candidates should pile on the media as well, as should the other Democrats in Washington. There is no equivalency between an oft debunked claim (debunked even by the Wall Street Journal) and an almost outright admission that the person sworn to perform the duties of the president of the United States (including protecting the constitution) sought to use a foreign government to influence an American election. The Times can only get away with this stuff because the Democrats protest too little. It’s really about time they took a page from the Republican playbook and started criticizing the media. In their case, they’d just be telling the truth.

Must watch TV

This year marks the 400th anniversary of slavery in English North America. (The Spanish beat us to the punch) Purely because I believe that everyone should be aware of the impact of slavery on this nation, I am suggesting that absolutely everyone should watch this video, which previously aired on CSPAN.

The fact that one of the presenters shares my last name and 50% of my genes has nothing to do with it.

How to get rid of Kavanaugh (A fantasy)

Kavanaugh’s perjury is back in the news, and there’s some interesting speculation hereabout a way to get rid of Kavanaugh if and when we get a presidential administration that will back such an effort, not a sure thing even if the Democrat wins. (Squinting at you, Joe)

Apparently, a few years ago, some right-wing law professors wrote a law review article in which they expressed the opinion that you need not impeach a judge to get rid of him (I’ll stick with masculine pronouns, since we’re talking about Kavanaugh). The constitution, they point out, states that a judge serves “during good behavior”, meaning, they state, that a judge can be removed by the judicial department itself upon a showing of bad behavior, such as, those newly interested in the article point out, lying at one’s confirmation hearing about one’s sexual escapades, etc.

Now, since the original proponents of this theory are right wingers, they will no doubt patiently explain that their theory only applies to liberal judges, but let us put that caveat aside for the moment.

Since Kavanaugh was approved by the Senate, I’ve cherished an iota of hope that a Democratic administration would play hardball and bring perjury charges against him. Were he convicted, his status as a judge would be somewhat confused, I suppose. If, indeed, he had to be impeached to be removed, then we would end up with the anomalous situation of a sitting Supreme Court judge in prison. Whether he could continue his work as a judge from that venue would be an open question, unless he could in fact, be removed as the professors suggested. Congress could, perhaps, merely pass a law providing that conviction of certain crimes would be prima facie evidence of a lack of good behavior. In fact, as the linked article points out, the 1790 Congress did just that.

Of course, even if he could not be removed from his office, were he breaking rocks in prison, he might resign “voluntarily” were it made clear to him that he could, upon submission of said resignation, leave the hoosegow.

My guess is that this is all speculation, as charges will never be brought, and if they are, the judges hearing the case will find a way to let him off the hook. We have entered an era in which we can expect judicial decisions that are hyper-partisan (in a Republican direction) for years to come. The present Supreme Court, for instance, can’t seem to find its way clear to stopping the genius’s unconstitutional exploits, but it will have no trouble distinguishing its own cases to trim the sails of his potential Democratic successor. 

I beg to differ

Lawrence O’Donnell thinks that John Bolton’s inevitable book could have a significant impact on the 2020 election. I beg to differ.

I certainly agree that Bolton’s book will be timed to have an impact, because that timing will maximize sales and free pundit plugs, but the question is: how many votes will he sway from the R column to the D? How precisely do the complaints of an ultra right wing warmonger move a significant number of individuals to the left

Sure, the book could well expose stuff other than policy differences. It will very likely document the genius’s stupidity, obtuseness, general indifference to acquiring knowledge and ongoing mental illness. But these are already well known. They have already taken their toll, and those still with the man will likely never hear (Fox will ignore him) what Bolton has to say, and won’t believe it if they do.

Driftglass comes through again.

As a rule, I don’t read David Brooks. I prefer to read him through Driftglass’s filter, but this morning I glanced at the first few paragraphs (I refuse to link to him). I stopped after getting to this, in which he purports to speak in the voice of an internet “fanatic”:

“I am one of those fanatics on the alt-right and the alt-left, the ones who make online forums so vicious, the ones who cancel and call out, the minority of online posters who fill the air with hate…”

What, I wondered, is this “alt-left” of which you speak? Has the both siderist disease seated itself so firmly in your brain that you now feel licensed to make up terms and movements that don’t exist?

I decided then and there to await the Driftglass treatment, and he didn’t disappoint. It really would be a pleasure to watch Brooks wilt if he were ever exposed to a skillful cross examination, rather than the fawning treatment he gets on teevee.