A new nickname for the Donald
In light of the fact that Donald Trump has taken his mocking of those he dislikes to a new level by making fun of a New York Times reporter with a disability; and the fact that The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2 is in theaters, I propose we give Mr. #DumpTrump a new nickname. The MockingFool.
Serge Kovaleski is a reporter for the New York Times and he has a disability. Kovaleski has arthrogryposis. Trump has denied that he was mocking Kovaleski's disability and that he's never met the man.
Kovaleski denies this, saying "I've interviewed him in his office, I've talked to him at press conferences. All in all, I would say around a dozen times, I've interacted with him as a reporter" when he worked for the Daily News.
This one is easy to solve. If Kovaleski is like most journalists, he has a record of the interview he claims to have done with Trump in Trump's office. Trump undoubtedly has his calendars going back to the day he was born with that platinum spoon in his mouth. So let's have Mr. Kovaleski identify the date of that interview and Mr. Trump can refute the claim by providing his unaltered calendar for that date showing that he did not meet with Mr. Kovaleski. Then we'll know for certain who is the truth teller and who is the lying liar here. My money is on Mr. Kovaleski as being the truth teller.
* * *
By the numbers
509
422
426
427
19
107
9
6
So what are these numbers? The first four are the number of murders in Chicago by year from 2012 through 2015. Of course the year still has over a month to do, so that one may change. 19 is the number of men who were among that total of 426 during 2014 who were killed by police officers. Those officers fired 107 bullets in the killing of those 19 men. Nine of those 19 cases were described as "justifiable" by independent review. Six of them can't be declared one way or the other because of conflicting versions of the details being told and still pending investigations. One of the remaining four men was of course, Laquan McDonald.
The protests in Chicago over the death of Laquan and the other, lesser known victims of unjustified police shootings continue. This in spite of the fact that some say they should stop because Officer Jason Van Dyke has been charged with first degree murder. The city accepted responsibility long before then, paying a settlement of $5 million to the family. However, the big question remains unanswered.
Laquan McDonald was murdered in October of 2014. The videos of this heinous act weren't released until more than one year later. Officer Van Dyke wasn't charged until those videos were released. What the heck took so long? That's the question. What did Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel know and when did he know it?
There is another question. Although the number of murders in Chicago may have decreased since 2012, there are still far too many. Where is the outrage over the murders committed by people other than police officers? Where is the outrage over the killing of a nine year old boy by gang members seeking revenge on his father? Pierre Stokes, the father of murder victim Tyshawn Lee has told authorities he will not cooperate in the investigation into his son's murder. Is he seeking more revenge? Should we revise the Confucian saying "before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves" to read a whole bunch of graves?
Every single of a civilian by a police officer must be viewed with the strictest level of scrutiny possible. Especially when it involves a person of color. Numbers can be spun and skewed, but it is clear that far too many minority people, especially teen males are dying at the hands of those who are sworn to uphold the law while protecting all of us. But that is no reason to not be outraged by any and every murder. Nine year olds should not die because their parents are members of gangs.
* * *
Now that a Polish court has made a decision that Roman Polanski will not be extradited back to the U.S. and this decision cannot be appealed, it is worth revisiting the particulars of this case. A grand jury indicted him on six felony charges. His attorney reached a plea agreement where he pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse. As part of that "deal" he agreed to allow the judge to impose sentence after undergoing a 90 day diagnostic evaluation at the California Institution for Men at Chino. He spent 42 days there and was released. The judge was not satisfied with the evaluation and wanted to send Polanski back for the remaining 48 days for further evaluation. This is when Polanski fled.
The Polish court cited issues they consider unfair in the prosecution of Polanski. These include "unethical" discussions between the judge and only one side in the case without all parties involved, informal instructions to the judges, intentional destruction of some of the documents in the case and loss of some others and excessive sensitivity of the judges to criticism in the media.
Did the judge have an ex parte discussion with the victim's attorney? Seems to be the case. But I don't believe it appropriate for one nation's court to cite the "fairness" of a trial in another nation as a reason to deny an extradition request. Besides, if you take a moment to read the treaty between the U. S. and Poland, you'll find that either nation can choose to deny an extradition request from the other without giving a reason.
Personally, I'd like to see Polanski brought back to the U. S., ordered to serve 90 days in jail for his sentence under the plea agreement, with the sentence suspended. It would put this to bed once and for all and he wouldn't have to spend a moment in jail. If he had pleaded guilty to statutory rape, I'd feel differently. But they made a deal allowing him to plead to a much lesser offense and it's time to close the book on this.
Serge Kovaleski is a reporter for the New York Times and he has a disability. Kovaleski has arthrogryposis. Trump has denied that he was mocking Kovaleski's disability and that he's never met the man.
Kovaleski denies this, saying "I've interviewed him in his office, I've talked to him at press conferences. All in all, I would say around a dozen times, I've interacted with him as a reporter" when he worked for the Daily News.
This one is easy to solve. If Kovaleski is like most journalists, he has a record of the interview he claims to have done with Trump in Trump's office. Trump undoubtedly has his calendars going back to the day he was born with that platinum spoon in his mouth. So let's have Mr. Kovaleski identify the date of that interview and Mr. Trump can refute the claim by providing his unaltered calendar for that date showing that he did not meet with Mr. Kovaleski. Then we'll know for certain who is the truth teller and who is the lying liar here. My money is on Mr. Kovaleski as being the truth teller.
* * *
By the numbers
509
422
426
427
19
107
9
6
So what are these numbers? The first four are the number of murders in Chicago by year from 2012 through 2015. Of course the year still has over a month to do, so that one may change. 19 is the number of men who were among that total of 426 during 2014 who were killed by police officers. Those officers fired 107 bullets in the killing of those 19 men. Nine of those 19 cases were described as "justifiable" by independent review. Six of them can't be declared one way or the other because of conflicting versions of the details being told and still pending investigations. One of the remaining four men was of course, Laquan McDonald.
The protests in Chicago over the death of Laquan and the other, lesser known victims of unjustified police shootings continue. This in spite of the fact that some say they should stop because Officer Jason Van Dyke has been charged with first degree murder. The city accepted responsibility long before then, paying a settlement of $5 million to the family. However, the big question remains unanswered.
Laquan McDonald was murdered in October of 2014. The videos of this heinous act weren't released until more than one year later. Officer Van Dyke wasn't charged until those videos were released. What the heck took so long? That's the question. What did Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel know and when did he know it?
There is another question. Although the number of murders in Chicago may have decreased since 2012, there are still far too many. Where is the outrage over the murders committed by people other than police officers? Where is the outrage over the killing of a nine year old boy by gang members seeking revenge on his father? Pierre Stokes, the father of murder victim Tyshawn Lee has told authorities he will not cooperate in the investigation into his son's murder. Is he seeking more revenge? Should we revise the Confucian saying "before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves" to read a whole bunch of graves?
Every single of a civilian by a police officer must be viewed with the strictest level of scrutiny possible. Especially when it involves a person of color. Numbers can be spun and skewed, but it is clear that far too many minority people, especially teen males are dying at the hands of those who are sworn to uphold the law while protecting all of us. But that is no reason to not be outraged by any and every murder. Nine year olds should not die because their parents are members of gangs.
* * *
Now that a Polish court has made a decision that Roman Polanski will not be extradited back to the U.S. and this decision cannot be appealed, it is worth revisiting the particulars of this case. A grand jury indicted him on six felony charges. His attorney reached a plea agreement where he pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse. As part of that "deal" he agreed to allow the judge to impose sentence after undergoing a 90 day diagnostic evaluation at the California Institution for Men at Chino. He spent 42 days there and was released. The judge was not satisfied with the evaluation and wanted to send Polanski back for the remaining 48 days for further evaluation. This is when Polanski fled.
The Polish court cited issues they consider unfair in the prosecution of Polanski. These include "unethical" discussions between the judge and only one side in the case without all parties involved, informal instructions to the judges, intentional destruction of some of the documents in the case and loss of some others and excessive sensitivity of the judges to criticism in the media.
Did the judge have an ex parte discussion with the victim's attorney? Seems to be the case. But I don't believe it appropriate for one nation's court to cite the "fairness" of a trial in another nation as a reason to deny an extradition request. Besides, if you take a moment to read the treaty between the U. S. and Poland, you'll find that either nation can choose to deny an extradition request from the other without giving a reason.
Personally, I'd like to see Polanski brought back to the U. S., ordered to serve 90 days in jail for his sentence under the plea agreement, with the sentence suspended. It would put this to bed once and for all and he wouldn't have to spend a moment in jail. If he had pleaded guilty to statutory rape, I'd feel differently. But they made a deal allowing him to plead to a much lesser offense and it's time to close the book on this.
posted by me at 2:53 PM
<< Home