Thursday, June 28, 2018

A Time for Change

With the announced retirement of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, Donald Trump will get to appoint a second justice to our nation's highest court.  The problem is, this should only be his first opportunity to nominate someone to the Supreme Court.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell prevented the nomination of Merrick Garland to the court by President Obama.  When Donald Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, the Democrats weren't able to use the filibuster to obstruct the nomination.  That's because they eliminated the filibuster by invoking the "nuclear option" in 2013 under the leadership of Senator Harry Reid; who was Senate Majority Leader at the time.  The Republicans followed suit and expanded that option to cover Supreme Court appointments.  While there is no guarantee that the Republicans wouldn't have done this themselves to facilitate the Gorsuch nomination, the fact that the Democrats had done it first made it easier to do.

What Senator McConnell did in obstructing the nomination of Merrick Garland was wrong.  Unconscionable.  A severe dereliction of his duty as a senator.  I wrote about this back in 2016.  Senator McConnell gave a speech on the Senate floor at the time.  This is an extract:

The American people may well elect a president who decides to nominate Judge Garland for Senate consideration. The next president may also nominate somebody very different. Either way, our view is this: Give the people a voice in filling this vacancy."

 The people had their voice heard.  They had elected the president and the senators who would fulfill their Constitutional role to "advise and consent."  The decision to stop a nomination of a president when he or she is a true lame-duck, after their replacement has been elected has some merit.  It has no merit when the president still has over 300 days left in office.  

 Now Democrats are saying that Senator McConnell should wait until after the mid-term elections to give that same voice to the people.  It was wrong in 2016 and it would be wrong now.  Further, it isn't a true equivalency.  If we were electing a president, it would be a true equivalency.  Since we aren't, it is a false equivalency.  If you view the role of the Senate as being to advise and consent, as articulated in Federalist Paper #76.  

 IMO, the role of the Senate is to advise and consent regarding the qualifications of the nominee.  Not to make the nomination into a partisan issue, where ideology rather than qualifications determine the suitability of the nominee.  

 But there is no way to separate ideology from this process.  Why was the nominate of Robert Bork to the Supreme Court rejected on a vote of 42-58 that was almost entirely partisan in nature.  It wasn't his lack of qualification for the post that caused 52 Democrats and 6 Republicans to vote against him.  It was his stated opposition to the decision in Roe v Wade that was primarily responsible for the failure of his nomination.  How ironic is it that whoever is nominated by Donald Trump will probably cast the deciding vote in a future case that will overturn that landmark decision.  It is also ironic that when Richard Nixon nominated Harry Blackmun to the Supreme Court, he was considered a conservative jurist, but he ultimately became one of the most liberal justices on the court; and he authored the majority opinion in Roe v Wade.

 * * *

What I am hearing are the primary concerns regarding the nomination and confirmation of the replacement for Justice Kennedy are:

Roe v Wade
Equal rights for the LGBTQ community
Affirmative Action
Civil Rights

All of these are valid concerns.  But there is a more specific concern in the area of civil rights and that is the issue of voting.  I suspect that the Voting Rights Act is in jeopardy.  I suspect that it will be easier for state governments to engage in partisan-gerrymandering even more than they do now.

Pennsylvania has 18 seats in the House.  Two of them are currently vacant.  Ten are held by Republicans and six by Democrats.  The governor of the state is a Democrat but Republicans hold the majority in both houses of the state's bicameral legislature.  We are two years away from another census and that will result in reapportionment of the 435 House seats, and the redrawing of districts afterward.

What do we do?  Engaging in a war on civility won't help the Democratic party gain control of either the House or the Senate.  Is there a strategy that the Democratic minority in the U.S. Senate can use to stop the next nomination from Trump?  Yes, but it is risky.  It was laid out in a piece written by Gregory Koger, a political scientist with a Ph.D. from UCLA who is an expert in filibustering and obstructionism.

Article One, Section Five, Clause One of the U.S. Constitution says:

"Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business; but a smaller Number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide."

There are 51 Republicans currently in the Senate.  Senator John McCain is at home on extended leave.  The Democratic minority could use quorum calls to demonstrate that the Senate doesn't have a quorum and prevent the Senate from doing business.

Professor Koger points out four pieces of legislation that Senator McConnell is preventing from being brought to the floor for discussion.  If the Democrats were to use those four bills as justification for using the quorum call strategy, rather than contesting the nomination of whoever Trump sends to the Hill to fill Justice Kennedy's seat, it could cause the Senate to grind to a halt.  Preventing consideration of the nomination to the Supreme Court to be delayed.  Could it be delayed until after the November elections?  Who knows.

posted by me at 1:28 PM

Tuesday, June 26, 2018

More falsehoods from the Liar-in-Chief

Here are some tweets from Donald J. Trump, followed by analysis:



There is no guarantee that the trade war that Trump has initiated with almost every other major economic power on the planet will end anytime soon.  The EU has imposed new tariffs on US products and this will cause the tariff on Harley-Davidson products made in the US and sold in the EU to go from 6% to 31%.  That adds an additional cost of $2,200 to their motorcycles sold in the EU.  The company sold almost 45,000 motorcycles in the EU in their FY2017.  That's nearly $100 million in additional costs.  If they were to try to pass on the increased costs to their customers in the EU, it would hurt their business.



Actually, Harley-Davidson announced their plans to move production to Thailand back in April of 2017, not earlier this year.  It was in response to Trump's decision to withdraw the US from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which he did during his first month in office.  By building the components in the US and assembling them at the new plant in Thailand, the company avoids the 60% tariff that would be imposed on Harley-Davidson products shipped complete from the U.S. to Thailand.  That's the same arrangement the company has been using in India since 2011 to avoid that nation's 100% tariff.



Harley-Davidson has no plans to build their motorcycles overseas and then sell them back in the US.  The "...big tax" is nonsense.



Mr. Trump prides himself on his business acumen.  Why doesn't he do with his businesses what he insists Harley-Davidson should do, and build his products in the US?  Examples:

Trump Vodka - made in the Netherlands
Trump Signature Clothing - made in Bangladesh, China, Honduras and Vietnam
Trump University - advocated outsourcing jobs overseas
Trump's furniture collection - made in China and India Ivanka Trump's clothing/shoes - made in Bangladesh, China, India, Indonesia and Vietnam. Back in 2013 some of the shoes bearing her name were made in Ethiopia. Trump imports workers from foreign nations for his son's winery and some of his clubs. Perhaps we should add #HypocriteInChief to the list of hashtags he should be labeled with.

posted by me at 7:37 PM

Monday, June 25, 2018

Why Maxine Waters' call for confrontation is a bad idea

While I posted the call by Congresswoman Maxine Waters in yesterday's entry in this blog, it bears repeating.

"For these members of his cabinet who remain and try to defend him they're not goint to be able to go to a restaurant, they're not going to be able to stop at a gas station, they're not going to be able to shop at a department store, the people are going to turn on them, they're going to protest, they're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the president 'no I can't hang with you, this is wrong this is unconscionable and we can't keep doing this to children."

 It is easy to seek out confrontation in the era where Donald Trump has lowered the level of facility toward its lowest point in a very long time.  He didn't start the decline.  Anyone who has followed social media since its inception knows that it was the rise of social media that began this descent.

 The reason that following the advice of Congresswoman Waters is a bad idea is simple.  November 6, 2018.  That is the date of this year's mid-term elections and the last thing those who oppose the policies of Donald Trump and his Republican supporters in the House and Senate should be doing is energizing Republican voters.

 Since 1904, there have been only two mid-term elections where the party holding the White House gained seats in the Congress.  1932 and 2002.  On average, the party holding the White House loses roughly 32 seats in the mid-term elections.  There are two main reasons why this happens.

 First and foremost is that the voter turnout in a mid-term election is traditionally much lower than that seen in a presidential election year.  In fact, voter turnout in the 2014 mid-term elections was the lowest in any mid-term since the end of World War II.

 The other reason that the opposition party does well in mid-term elections is that they are essentially a referendum on the policies of the current administration.

 The way to put a stop to what's going on in our federal government isn't to engage in denying service to those who toil for Trump in his government.  It is to energize the people who want there to be a referendum on his policies to register and then vote.  It is possible to take both the House and the Senate in November for Democrats, if the focus is not on stirring anger and expressing frustration through confrontation.  The focus needs to all about getting our people to the polls.

 If this is a war of words, and Donald Trump is using his bully pulpit on Twitter to motivate his support, our response cannot be to pour gasoline on those fires.  We can put them out by changing who controls Congress.  After that we can focus on choosing someone capable of winning the 2020 election to unseat Trump.

 Denying his people the right to enjoy a meal or fill their gas tank may be emotionally satisfying for those who thrive on confrontation.  That doesn't make it wise or productive.

posted by me at 10:52 AM

Sunday, June 24, 2018

Ignorance of the law is an excuse in some cases and other stuff

In almost every case, someone accused of a crime cannot plead ignorance of the law to avoid conviction.  One of those rare instances is tax law.  If an individual is being charged with a criminal act by having signed a tax return containing false information, they can plead ignorance.  The tax code is complex.  I'm not concerned about criminality when I do my utmost to ensure my clients know what they are signing.  I want them to know and understand what their tax return says.  Why we took the deductions and credits we claimed.

You may or may not know that the New York Attorney General, Barbara Underwood has sued the Donald J. Trump Foundation, alleging a "...pattern of persistent illegal conduct, occurring over a decade, that includes extensive political coordination with the Trump presidential campaign..."

The Washington Post's David Farenthold has done a brilliant job of reporting on the Trump Foundation's activities since the campaign began.  In a piece written on June 22, 2018 he outlines four instances of where Trump signed tax returns that contained false information.  The piece quotes a Chicago based tax attorney, Guinevere Moore.  "There's the adage, 'ignorance of the law is no excuse.'  That's not true in tax law.  In tax law, ignorance is an excuse for criminal violations."

 The statements attached to the amended Form 990PF filed by the Trump Foundation claims it was clerical errors and ignorance of the tax code that led to the errors.  Here's the problem with that as a defense:




You can't claim that you are ignorant of laws that you previously claimed to know so much about.  But this is a pattern for the #LiarInChief.  He claims values for his golf courses on his personal financial disclosure forms that are high.  Then he turns around and claims their values are much lower when he sues the local property tax collector.  In one instance, involving his Trump National Golf Club in Jupiter, FL, he claimed on the disclosure form that it is worth more than $50 million.  Then he sued Palm Beach County, claiming their assessed value of $18.4 million for the property is $5 million too high.

I doubt he'll be prosecuted for the offense of filing false foundation tax returns.  But he should be.

* * *

The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution reads as follows:

"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"

Bail is one of the many inequities in our system of justice that favors those fortunate enough to have money.  The wealthy can make almost any bail, which the poor cannot even hope to raise the funds required to make bail.

Sometimes, no matter how much money one has, bail won't be granted.  Murder charges are usually (but not always) a situation where bail isn't granted.  Then there is the case of Paul Manafort, which generated this tweet from the #MoronInChief




Apparently Trump doesn't understand the difference between a jail sentence and having one's bail revoked.  Manafort wasn't sentenced to a term behind bars.  His bail was revoked by a judge after allegations of witness tampering were made.  "This isn't middle school, I can't take your phone" the judge said.

In California, most people use a bail bond agent to bail out of jail.  They pay a fee of 10% of the bail amount and pledge collateral equal to the bail amount.  When the case is over, the bail bond agent keeps the 10% as a fee.  For many, that's simply unaffordable.

There is a bill in the CA State Senate, SB10.  It would allow people to post 10% of the bail amount in cash to the court, which they would get back once they'd shown up for all required court appearances.  That bill in one form or another has been opposed by the state's bail bond agents for nearly four decades now.

Considering there are more than 3,000 bail bond agents registered with the California Department of Insurance, that opposition is well-funded.

Would passage of this bill cost thousands their livelihoods?  Should that matter?

* * *

People have every right to protest.  To protest injustice, to protest anything they disagree with.  To a point.  I didn't have a problem with the protesters who shouted Homeland Secretary Nielsen out of a Mexican restaurant; as long as the owners of the place didn't charge them with trespassing.  You can't violate the law to protest by breaking a law.

Now Maxine Waters is calling on everyone to confront members of the Trump administration in public.  "For these members of his cabinet who remain and try to defend him they're not goint to be able to go to a restaurant, they're not going to be able to stop at a gas station, they're not going to be able to shop at a department store, the people are going to turn on them, they're going to protest, they're going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they're going to tell the president 'no I can't hang with you, this is wrong this is unconscionable and we can't keep doing this to children."

Is that how far we've fallen?  Is such action justified because we don't believe it is right to do to children what the Trump administration is doing in separating them from their families?  Do people who disagree with you politically forfeit those unalienable rights outlined in the Declaration of Independence; specifically, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

I have mixed feelings about this.  I have no problem with blasting David Bossie for telling another panelist appearing with him on Fox News that he was "...out of his cotton-picking mind."  His apology on Twitter rings hollow.  I didn't have a problem with people blasting mariachi music outside the residence of New York City attorney Aaron Schlossberg after his recorded racist rant went viral.

But those are specific actions taken by individuals.  Is Ms Waters suggesting that such protests be limited to members of the Trump Cabinet and other key members of his staff?  Or is anyone who works anywhere in the Trump administration fair game for harassment and refusal of service?

Will businesses start displaying signs that read "Republicans Will Not Be Served" outside their establishments?  The use of the phrase "if you voted for Trump, swipe left" on dating app profiles in the Washington, DC area makes sense.  We have no obligation to date or be social with people whose political beliefs are in exact opposition to our own.

I know that I'm not going to refuse to serve a client just because of their political beliefs.  I don't talk politics with a client, unless they do.  Then I try to change the subject.  I'm capable of defending my own beliefs, but they aren't important at that time.  Serving my client is.

Choosing to serve a client who supports the separation of families at the border is not support for their position or that action.  Just as baking a cake for a same-sex couple is not an endorsement of their sexual preference/lifestyle.

* * *

Michael Herbert is a 57 year old English soccer fan who was caught on video making a Nazi salute and singing anti-semetic songs at a bar in Russia during a World Cup match.  Now he won't be able to attend a soccer match or go near the stadium where a match is being played for the next five years.

The Football Spectator Act of 1989 allows the justice system in England to impose such bans as part of their effort to curb hooliganism.

Mr. Herbert can be banned from traveling to places where English teams are playing international matches as well.

What do you think of this law?

* * *

As long as we're protesting things, what do we do about a pharmacist in Arizona who refused to give a woman the prescription medication to induce contractions so she could end her pregnancy.  Before you go to the "unborn fetuses are alive" place, bear in mind that this woman had suffered a miscarriage.  The fetus was deceased.  The woman opted for a prescription medication rather than surgical intervention to finish the process.

Walgreen's has a company policy in states where pharmacists have the legal right to refuse to provide a prescription based on their religious beliefs.  The pharmacist is supposed to refer the customer to another pharmacist or manager on duty.  That wasn't done by this jerk.

Is doing your job and giving someone a drug that their doctor has prescribed a form of implicit support/agreement with what the drug will do?  No.

* * *

People wonder why I watch old TV shows over and over again.  The Heroes and Icons network is now showing eight hour blocks of programs on weekdays.  I am recording all of the episodes of JAG on Wednesdays and Hill Street Blues on Fridays.

Today I got to watch some early work by Lindsay Crouse and Chris Noth on Hill Street Blues episodes.  Laurence Fishburne was in one of the episodes with Ms Crouse (who I'm a big fan of, both as a performer and a person).  I recently got to watch six episodes of a very young Frances McDormand playing an assistant district attorney who was addicted to cocaine.

A very young Jeffrey Dean Morgan was on an episode of JAG that aired two weeks ago.  I don't watch these shows solely for the guest stars but because I enjoy the episodes and programs.



posted by me at 7:45 PM

Saturday, June 23, 2018

Sauce for the goose

White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders went to a restaurant called The Red Hen in Lexington, VA.  It's a 26 seat farm to table eatery.  She was the last of a party of eight to arrive.  Stephanie Wilkinson, co-owner of the place asked Mrs. Sanders to join her on the patio of the place.  Once they were there, alone, she asked Mrs. Sanders to please leave.  She claimed, according to a piece in the Washington Post, she said, "I explained that the restaurant has certain standards that I feel it has to uphold, such as honesty, compassion and cooperation."  Then she invited her to leave.  To her credit, Mrs. Sanders did not engage in a confrontation.  She just left.  So did the rest of her party.

If I understand this correctly, by serving Mrs. Sanders and party, the restaurant would be supporting the positions that Mrs. Sanders defends when she speaks on behalf of Donald J. Trump.  How is that any different than a baker refusing to make a cake for a same-sex couple's wedding?

That one situation involves religious beliefs and the other involves political and personal beliefs that are not religious in nature is irrelevant.  Refusing service is, or isn't, supporting the positions/beliefs of the customer.

A business owner has every right to refuse to serve any customer, as long as the business owner isn't violating the various civil rights and discrimination laws.  It may well be legal to discriminate based on politics and not on the basis of gender preference.  But is it right?

Just as I do not believe that the baker who refused to make that cake is supporting same-sex marriage by doing so, I do not believe that serving dinner to Mrs. Sanders and her party is supporting the lack of honesty, compassion and cooperation that we are seeing from the Trump Administration.

It was a tough call for Ms Wilkinson.  The 7,000 residents of Lexington voted overwhelming for Hillary Clinton in the election.  But Rockbridge County, where it is the county seat voted just as overwhelming overall for Donald Trump.  Some of the Red Hen employees are gay and did not like the defense by Mrs. Sanders of the Trump policy to exclude transgendered people from serving in the military.  They did not like the policy of separating families at the border.

That is all well and good,  But if baking a cake for a same-sex couple is not supporting same-sex marriage, how is serving someone a meal supporting their political positions?  How is it supporting their work as being the spokesperson for the #LiarInChief?  Either providing services to people is or isn't tacit support for what they are doing outside of the business.

If the two situations are indeed different, I'd love to hear the reasoning that demonstrates why one is okay and the other isn't.



posted by me at 7:37 PM

Friday, June 22, 2018

Can't sleep thoughts on a Thursday

Since 1969, every one of the five branches of the military has had a position for the senior enlisted individual.  Those positions are:

Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps
Sergeant Major of the Army
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard

It is an interesting position.  For protocol purposes, the individual in the position is the equivalent of a three-star general/admiral.  There is a special rank insignia and a special pay-rate.  Many make it to the paygrade of E-9.  Few become the senior enlisted advisor of the branch of service.

When I was attending technical training in late 1977 at Keesler Air Force Base, my squadron commander introduced me to the then-Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, Robert Gaylor at a reception.  He was visiting the base that day.  My commander introduced me by saying that he should watch out, because I was gunning for his job.  Considering that I was still a slick-sleeved E-1, I was flattered.  The captain said that because I was a student leader and about to become the first honor graduate in the brief (one year or so) history of the course I was taking.

The reason for this background is to make it easier to understand the gravity of what's going on with the incumbent Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy, Steven Giordano.  He has resigned from the job and has submitted a request for retirement.  He announced his intentions in a letter on his FB page.

The Navy Times published a report that says the Navy Inspector General's office is investigating allegations that MPCON Giordano fostered a hostile work environment in his office in the Pentagon.  The report is fascinating reading.  He asked for things not normally provided to people in his position in the Navy or in the other branches of service.

Anyone want to wager he will retire quietly and the results of the investigation will be buried?

* * *

The sitcom Roseanne will be back, but with a new name and no involvement by Roseanne Barr.  This is a good thing.  Hopefully those people who lost their jobs when ABC canceled the show who have yet to find other work, will be brought back.

The working title is "The Conners" but I'd love it if they would name it "Not Roseanne."  Just kidding.

* * *


I really don't care about this message on the rear of Melania's jacket.

We have things that are a lot more important to be discussing at the moment.  Over 2,400 children have no idea how long it will take them to be reunited with their parents.  Congress is considering a budget that they can push through after the mid-term elections on a lame-duck basis; that makes massive cuts to Medicare and Medicaid to pay for the tax cuts for the wealthy.

We should be talking about what's going on at the borders.  What's going on with attempts to influence the upcoming mid-term elections.  Not the message on the back of the First Lady's jacket.  Maybe her next jacket message will be "Trump Hotels Are the Best."

* * *

There is a story in Rolling Stone about how Johnny Depp burned through hundreds of millions of dollars.  The part I'm having trouble wrapping my head around is that he spent $3 million to shoot the ashes of Hunter S. Thompson into space.

* * *

LaVar Ball can't cash the reality check he was handed by the NBA when his son LiAngelo went undrafted in the NBA's annual draft.  It has no value.

The idea that he could work the system to put all three of his sons on the Lakers was never realistic.  The problem is not that LiAngelo was dumb enough to get busted for shoplifting in China.  That isn't the issue.  The issue is he doesn't have NBA level skills yet.  The word is that the Lakers weren't even interested in signing them to their G-League squad, the South Bay Lakers.

I suspect that the only way his three sons will play on the professional team is if they go overseas to play.

* * *



That is an M240 machine gun.  It is the type of weapon that disappeared from an Air Force armory at Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota.  It was found in the home of an unnamed enlisted person.  A colonel in charge of security forces was fired over its disappearance, along with the disappearance of a box of 40mm MK19 grenades.  Apparently the grenades are still missing.

How did that fired officer, Colonel Jason Beers, wind up with a position with the Air Force Special Operations Command?  Makes no sense.

posted by me at 10:46 AM

Thursday, June 21, 2018

Optics and Misleading Equivalencies

Here is a tweet from Donald J. Trump, Jr.




This was in response to this horrifying, abhorrent tweet from Peter Fonda (which he deleted and then apologized for):


Sending this tweet was not just wrong, it was inexcusable.  

People call this a threat against Barron Trump.  Some say it isn't because he never intended to carry out the threat.  Sorry folks, but that's not the test as to whether or not it rises to the level of a threat as defined in the U.S. Code that makes it a crime to threaten to kill, kidnap or cause bodily harm to the family of a President.  This is from one of the cases where courts interpreted the law to mean that the intent of carrying out the threat personally is not required for conviction.

"This Court therefore construes the willfulness requirement of the statute to require only that the defendant intentionally make a statement, written or oral, in a context or under such circumstances wherein a reasonable person would foresee that the statement would be interpreted by those to whom the maker communicates the statement as a serious expression of an intention to inflict bodily harm upon or to take the life of the President, and that the statement not be the result of mistake, duress, or coercion. The statute does not require that the defendant actually intend to carry out the threat."

Here's another one.

Contrary to the dissent's interpretation of case law, the government is not required to establish that the defendant actually intended to carry out the threat. As the Second Circuit noted, "it is the utterance which the statute makes criminal, not the specific intent to carry out the threat...." United States v. Kelner, 534 F.2d 1020, 1025 (2nd Cir.1976). 

Will Peter Fonda be prosecuted?  I don't think he will, but it could happen.  

* * *

Now on to the comparison between what Peter Fonda tweeted and what Roseanne tweeted about Valerie Jarrett; made by Trump, Jr.  

He is comparing a television series that had the highest ratings on TV last season with a small indie film that is opening in limited release in only five theaters.  Only in Los Angeles and New York City.  I do not have any problem with people wanting to boycott this movie.  Unless my editor assigns me to cover it, I will not be seeing it.  Not because of the presence of Peter Fonda, but because it doesn't interest me.

I read a number of the early reviews of Boundaries.  Some of them didn't mention Peter Fonda at all.  Those that did make it clear that his role is very limited.

Roseanne's name was the name of her show.  The comparison is a misleading equivalency.  

All of the people who were involved in the production of Roseanne lost their jobs.  A number of them will apparently get them back in the announced reboot of the show, and Roseanne will not profit from this reboot.  

Should Sony Pictures Classic go back and reshoot a film to excise Peter Fonda's participation and replace him, as was done with All the Money in the World, where Kevin Spacey was replaced by Christopher Plummer (who coincidentally has second billing in Boundaries)?  Boundaries opens on Friday, June 22nd (tomorrow).  It is a tough call.  

I find what Peter Fonda said in his tweet to be worse than what Roseanne said in hers.  They are also not equivalent.  

Peter Fonda should consider donating his salary from this movie to a charity, as a further way of apologizing.


posted by me at 7:59 PM

Tuesday, June 19, 2018

Winning the war to stop family separation

I've lost count of how many posts and images I've seen on social media over the past two days that liken Donald Trump to Adolph Hitler.  Likening the caging of children at the border to the concentration camps like Auschwitz and Theresienstadt.  It was an image of Nazis marching in lockstep, carrying signs with swastikas and the letters NSDAP across the top.  I got a talented artist to change the letters from NSDAP to Trump.  They added the name Trump to the swastikas as well.  I was going to caption it as "How Trump actually sees his military parade in Washington, D.C.  I shared the photo with my FB friends asking for their input as to whether it was too inflammatory.

I got one response and then deleted the post.  There may or may not be a lot of validity to Godwin's Law.  That isn't why I won't share that photo any further.  I'm not sharing it because we are not going to win the war against the policy of separating families at the border by invoking memories of Adolph Hitler.  The people that such imagery will outrage are already outraged.  Further inflaming those feelings won't energize people any more than they already are.  Judging from things his supporters are posting, such imagery doesn't bother them at all.  In fact, it is encouraging them.  So is people like Robert De Niro and others saying "F**k Trump."  As much as it might feel good among the "resistance" it also fuels the fire of those who support him.


We need to get away from the concentration camp photos of the 1930s and 40s and continue to use the current images of children in cages.  We need to focus on the facts that the Trump administration and supporters cannot challenge.

Last November, Ms L and her 7 year old daughter S.S. applied for asylum.  In violation of an ICE policy directive, the San Diego ICE Field Office separated them.  It took until March to reunite them.

If the Trump administration is so concerned that people may be lying about minors being their children to get into the US, set up state of the art labs to run DNA tests.  Those results take less than 72 hours.  People who apply for asylum with or without children should not be detained, if they presented themselves at a border checkpoint.  People who enter illegally who are seeking asylum and pass the credible fear screening, with or without children, should not be detained.  If the concern is that they will fail to appear for their hearings, use ankle bracelets to track their whereabouts.

Separating parents from their kids is not humane.  It is horrific.  So are the images from the era of Adolph Hitler.  I'm going to focus on pushing my elected representatives to take action.  Take action to solve the immediate problem.  Action to solve the issue of immigration for the long-term.


posted by me at 9:21 PM

US Space Command Promotion test

The Pentagon has contingency plans for every scenario.  An old friend gave me a copy of the promotion test that the US Space Command will use to consider personnel in the paygrade/rank E-7/Space Sergeant to the paygrade/rank of E-8/Super Space Sergeant.  Here are the questions and answers.

1.  Which of the following is not part of the Earth's atmosphere?

a.  Ionosphere
b.  Troposphere
c.  Stratosphere
d.  Blogosphere

2.  Escape velocity is the speed a spaceship has to exceed in order to escape from the gravity of a planet.  What is Earth's escape velocity?

a.  25,020 miles per hour
b.  6,935 miles per hour
c.  Light Speed
d.  Warp 9.95

3.  The large, dark basaltic plains of the Earth's moon are known as Mares or Seas.  Which of the following is not one of the real Maria (yes, that is the plural of Mare) on the Earth's moon?

a.  Sea of Tranquility
b.  Sea of Vapors
c.  Sea of Waves
d.  Sea of Trump

4.  Who was the first person to land on Earth's moon?

a.  Buzz Aldrin
b.  Neil Armstrong
c.  Alice Kramden
d.  Donald Trump

5.  What was the name of the first dog to orbit the Earth?

a.  Laika
b.  Spot
c.  Fido
d.  Scooby-Doo?

6.  In the original Battlestar Galactica, the humans believed in deities known as?

a.  The Lords of Dogtown
b.  The Lords of Flatbush
c.  The Lords of Kobol
d.  The Lords of Discipline

7.  In Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope, Han Solo bragged about how fast a ship his Millenium Falcon was.  How fast did he claim his ship made the Kessel Run?

a.   7 hours
b.  43 centons
c.  Less than 12 parsecs
d.  Obi-Wan didn't believe him anyway

8.  On the original TV series Lost in Space, Doctor Zachary Smith wound up stowing away aboard the Jupiter II.  What kind of doctor was Dr. Smith?

a.  Psychiatrist
b.  Robotics
c.  Philosophy
d.  Evil

9.  Identify the proper name of this space toy from the 1960s?


a.  Barbie's Ken - Astronaut
b.  Major Matt Mason
c.  John Glenn
d.  Alex Orbit

10.  In the 1979 James Bond film Moonraker, what was the name of the woman who went into space with James Bond?

a.  Manuela Martinez
b.  Corinne DuFour
c.  Holly Goodhead
d.  Chew Mee




posted by me at 12:33 PM

A welcome 20 joules shock and other Monday stuff

This is an example of what I did this morning, although I didn't wake up when the shock was applied.


This wasn't my first "rodeo" in the cardio wing's outpatient procedure room at the West LA VA Medical Center.  Back in March of 2016 I underwent cardioversion and it was successful.  The details of that morning are here.

I stayed converted in a sinus rhythm for about 18 months.  Then, for no apparent reason, I went back into what's known as A-fib.  Back in February of this year, they tried and failed to get me back into that normal, sinus rhythm.  This morning was a better result.  I converted on the first attempt, at only 20 joules.  For comparison, back in February they shocked me four times.  No luck.

It is difficult to describe the difference between being in A-fib and being in sinus rhythm.  I've been getting so short of breath of late, I have to sit down and rest when walking from the VA parking lot to a doctor's office/clinic.  When I left the recovery room, I walked out.  All the way to the curb.  I allowed my sister to go and get the car, but the truth is I could have continued out to the parking lot.  It makes that big a difference.

My thanks to my sister for getting me there and home.  To my friends for their moral support.  Hopefully I won't have to do this again.

* * *

Space Force?  Here's what Donald Trump said today:

"Very importantly, I'm hereby directing the Department of Defense and Pentagon to immediately begin the process necessary to establish a space force as the sixth branch of the armed forces.  That's a big statement.  We are going to have the Air Force and the Space Force, separate but equal."

This is intriguing to say the least.  He borrows from history, specifically Plessy v Ferguson, harkening back to when "separate but equal" allowed segregation of schools.  He ignores history when it comes to creating another branch of the armed forces.

Prior to September 18, 1947, the US Air Force was part of the Army.  It was known as the US Army Air Force.  It took an act of Congress to change that.  The National Security Act of 1947.  In simpler terms, he doesn't have the authority to create a new armed force.  That's at the discretion of the Congress.

This idea also ignores the reality that is the current situation when it comes to defense spending in this country.  In February of this year, Secretary of Defense James Mattis told Congress that budget shortfalls are damaging military readiness.  Creating a new branch of service will create another level of military bureaucracy.  This is just another attempt at distraction.

* * *

Most of the members of the Congress are parents.  Fathers and mothers.  Why is it that in the Senate, the 47 Democrats and 2 Independents have all signed the bill to stop the separation of families at the border; yet not one single Republican Senator has signed the bill?  By sign I mean become a co-sponsor.

Will the real obstructionist in the Senate, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell allow this bill to come to a vote?

The refusal of the Republicans in Congress to stop this horror is an abdication of their duties.

* * *

I suppose it is good to know that the Republican nominee in the race to become California's next governor isn't a total idiot.  John Cox said this when asked about separation of families at the border:

"I'm against separating parents and children.  I'm a father.  I have four daughters.  That's a congressional problem, and I hope that we get a congressional solution very soon."

Cox's chances of winning the race in November are miniscule at best.  Supporting the separation of families in this state would be political suicide.  Then again, he was clever enough to blame the problem on Congress, which will endear him to Donald Trump.  Then again, it isn't like Trump can endorse anyone else at this point.

* * *







Those tweets are from a man named Spenser Trapone.  He was an officer in the U.S. Army until he resigned his commission on Monday.  In an interview he said, "Of course my military career is dead in the water.  On the other hand, many people reached out and showed me support.  There are a lot of veterans, both active duty and not that feel like I do."

I am a veteran and I do not feel as he does.  I hope that the Army will take action to force him to repay the cost of his West Point education, since he failed to serve out his five-year commitment.

posted by me at 6:34 AM

Sunday, June 17, 2018

A Campaign Commercial for the mid-term elections

OPEN ON -

EXT. ICE FIELD OFFICE - SUNRISE

A mother and a child are standing outside the building

CUT TO -

INT.  AN OFFICE

The mother and child are seated next to each other.  Across from them is an asylum officer.

OFFICER
There are new rules regarding asylum seekers, put into effect by President Trump.  You don't qualify.  We are going to take you into custody for entering the United States illegally.  

He pushes a button on the desk.  Another officer comes in.

OFFICER (CONT'D)
Take the kid and put her on the bus to the detention center.  I'll take the mother to the holding pen.

CUT TO - A VIDEO CLIP OF JOHN KELLY AND WOLF BLITZER 

A label dating the clip as being from March of 2017 displays briefly.

WOLF BLITZER
Are you, Homeland Security, considering a new initiative of separating children from their parents if they try to enter the United States illegally?

JOHN KELLY
Let me start by saying I would do almost anything to deter 

NARRATOR
Do almost anything to deter people from seeking a better life in America.  Using the threat of the separation of children from their parents to try to stop people fleeing tyranny.  Is this the America you want to live in?  Every Republican in the House and Senate had a duty to speak out.  To call for this immoral policy to end.  Evangelicals oppose this.  Theologians oppose this.  Democrats oppose this.

Vote the people behind this horrific act out of office 
in November of this year.



END








posted by me at 7:13 PM

Why children are being taken from their families - the simple facts and other Saturday stuff

Donald Trump is claiming that it is a law passed by Democrats that is causing the separation of children from their families at the border.  That's false on its face.  It is the policy of his administration to choose to prosecute every person who violates our borders.  That is a change of policy from previous administrations.

Is there even a kernel of truth in his claim?  The last major legislation on immigration was the Immigration Control Act of 1990.  It passed the House with more votes from Democrats than Republicans.  But it passed the Senate with more votes from Republicans than Democrats.  It was introduced by a Democrat, the late Ted Kennedy.  If we want to fix blame on this law, shouldn't we blame the person who signed it, President George H. W. Bush?

The problem isn't the law.  The law contains no provision requiring the separation of families at the border.  It is the policy of Trump's administration to choose to prosecute every person that is forcing those separations.

There was a lawsuit, Reno v Flores where a settlement was reached in 1997.  In the settlement, the INS, among other things, agreed to:

"...treat all minors in its custody with dignity, respect and special concern for their particular vulnerability as minors."

Some who support the actions of Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump in this zero-tolerance policy are trying to compare the separation of families to situations where a parent is being jailed for a crime and there is no one to care for that parent's children.  It isn't the same.  The old system worked.

Trump is doing what he's doing because he campaigned on it.  Because it is an issue that appeals strongly to his core constituency.  Because it distracts us from issues he doesn't want us to focus on.

He doesn't give a damn about the children, in spite of his statements to the contrary.

As for the notion that this was a new idea, consider this video of then Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly talking about using the separation of families as a deterrent.



* * *

Speaking of videos, a SnapChat video cost a 20 year old Missouri woman her waitressing job and her position in the Air Force Reserve.

You can see the video here.  Even censored, it is still not suitable for me to insert here in and of itself.

20 year old Tabitha Duncan denied being a racist, saying she had engaged in under-age drinking and done "something stupid."

In vino veritas, Ms Duncan.

* * *



Do you know who this man is?  He approached a black woman and her daughter who were swimming in a pool at the Westin Hotel in Pasadena and asked if they'd showered before entering the pool.  He did not pose this question to the other guests who were swimming in the pool, none of whom were black.  He claimed to be from the health department.

If impersonating a government official is a crime, he should be prosecuted.

* * *

Random Ponderings


In the next week, I will find time to go take my own picture of this.


That's a mural on the side of Grammercy Bar in Santa Monica.  Great tribute to Anthony Bourdain.

* * *

In honor of today being the 40th anniversary of the release of Grease, here's some trivia from the film.

John Travolta did do the play on Broadway, but he played the goofball "Doody" rather than the lead "Danny Zuko."

Among the major cast members, only Lorenzo Lamas was under 20 years of age when the movie was shot.

Jeff Conaway had a major crush on Olivia Newton-John and actually wound up marrying her sister, Rona Newton-John.

"Teen Angel" (Frankie Avalon) sings "wipe off that Angel Face and go back to high school."  Angel Face was a brand of makeup popular at the time.  Here's one of their ads from a 1960 issue of Life Magazine.


Deep Throat star Harry Reems was cast in the role of the Coach.  Sid Caesar replaced him after Reems' work in porn threatened the film's box office success.

* * *

Rudy Guiliani has no room to talk about Joe Biden being mentally deficient considering Rudy's own displays of mental midgetdom.

* * *

Morgan Stanley is estimating that tax refunds next year will be over $60 billion more than this year, due to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.  They may be right.  What will happen to all that "extra" money hitting wallets in a short time?  We'll have to wait and see.

posted by me at 7:35 AM

Friday, June 15, 2018

Breaking up California - Good or Bad

The website calls it Cal 3.  A plan to divide California into three separate states.

Northern California
Southern California
California

California would be comprised of the following counties:

Los Angeles
Monterey
San Benito
San Luis Obispo
Santa Barbara
Ventura

I drive from L.A. County to Orange County once or twice a week.  Would it be a big difference to me if I'm crossing a state line rather than a county line?  Not really.  But there are major problems with this proposal.

The May view of Governor Brown's 2018-19 budget calls for spending $4.04 billion on the cost of the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of state government.  It won't cost three times that amount for three state governments, but it will cost a lot more.

The Republican-controlled Congress won't want to create four new seats in the U.S. Senate.  Four more electoral votes won't go over well either.

The process of divvying up the state's resources would be a nightmare.

Even if the proposal passed, it would spend years tied up in court.  It is a waste of time and money to pursue this bad idea.  But that's our state's initiative process.  Get enough signatures and you can put almost any idea on the ballot.


posted by me at 6:46 PM

Friday Morning Musings

There are two ways for families seeking asylum in the U.S. to do so.  One is to enter illegally and then claim asylum.  The other is to arrive at a border and make a claim of asylum.  One is a violation of U.S. law.  The other is not.  So why are the children of the people who do NOT enter illegally being separated from their parents?

Back in February, the ACLU sued the federal government over the separation of a woman from her child.  This woman was determined to by an asylum officer to have a "significant possibility" of being granted asylum.  ICE has a policy directive that says asylum seekers entering in this way are to be paroled while their case is processed.  The San Diego office of ICE is unilaterally violating that policy.  Because of this, a mother has been separated from her 7 year old daughter for over four months now.

Let's be clear.  It is a crime under current law to enter the US illegally.  Do the de facto policies that were followed in the US before Donald Trump took office, make enforcement of that law improper?  Not in a court of law.  But they do in the court of public opinion.

What's changed is that the federal government is prosecuting every single individual who enters the country illegally.  That requires the accused to be held in jail.  You can't put kids with their parents in a jail cell.  But there is no need to clog the court system with these cases.  Let those who have a legitimate claim of asylum be paroled, under the old rules.

* * *

You can watch the video of Donald Trump saying the following here:

Referring to Kim Jong-un Trump said "He's the head of a country.  And I mean, he is the strong head.  Don't let anyone think anything different.  He speaks and his people sit up at attention.  I want my people to do the same."

Some are trying to spin this that he's referring only to those people who work directly for him.  I don't buy that crap.  He needs to understand that the American people are not "his."  He is not king.  He is not emperor (some would say Trumperor).

* * *

I haven't had a moment (I'll need several) to read the FBI Inspector General's report on the FBI investigation of the 2016 election.  It is 568 pages long.

But I'm struck by the content of the texts between FBI agent Peter Strzok and former FBI lawyer Lisa Page.  They exchanged some 50,000 texts during the campaign and afterward.  One exchange of texts took place on August 8, 2016.

Page:  [Trump's] not ever going to become president, right?  Right?!
Strzok:  No.  No he's not.  We'll stop it."

The way that the Air Force promulgates its rules and regulations has changed since I left the service in 1987.  But I remember a number of those regulations very well.  One of them was Air Force Regulation 30-30 which governed among other things, conflicts of interest.

It contained language that made it clear that it was critical to not just avoid a conflict, but even the appearance of a conflict of interest.

FBI agents cannot let their biases influence how they perform their duties.  It sounds impossible, but it can be done.  An investigator needs to divorce their personal feelings from the mission.

You can read the "explanations" offered by Page and Strzok here.

* * *




This tweet was very-well received by most Hillary supporters.  I know that I've made it clear my vote for Hillary wasn't so much in support of her as it was a vote against Donald Trump.  She was, in my mind, simply the lesser of two evils.

This comparison is one of the reasons why.  It is wrong for any government official to use personal email for government business.  But there is a big difference between what Clinton did in setting up a private email server and using a GMail account.

Then there's this.  The fact that she told those working under her at the Department of State to not conduct official business on personal email accounts makes her own actions unforgivable.

* * *

Quick.  Someone is stealing your car.  You step in front of them, pull out your concealed weapon and order them to halt.  They try to pull away.  Do you shoot?

I hope that most would say no.  But in Chicago, a fire department lieutenant with a concealed weapon carry permit did shoot.  The 17-year old would-be thief died.

Was the life of the fireman at risk?  The legal system says yes, because he was cleared of charges.

You can replace a car.  You can't replace a life.

What was unclear from the story in the Chicago Tribune was if the car was headed directly at the shooter.  Even then, it's kind of dumb to jump in front of a car with the engine running.

* * *

At last night's trivia competition there was a question related to MTV's The Real World, identifying it as one of the first reality TV shows.

A lot of what happens on "reality" TV is scripted.  Since that's the case, scripted reality TV has been around for a long time.  This came out 7 years before The Real World:


And this goes back yet another decade.


I can tell you that the match in this old 8mm footage from the mid-1970s was held at the Olympic Auditorium in Los Angeles.  That's "Classy" Freddie Blassie versus John "The Golden Greek" Tolos.  Yes sports fans, I once paid money to watch wrestling (and roller derby as well) as the Olympic.  Now I watch the WWE on occasion.  Still scripted.  Still entertaining.


posted by me at 9:14 AM

Thursday, June 14, 2018

Things I'm wondering on Wednesday

I have a confession to make.  I like watching Storage Wars.  For those who haven't seen it, storage lockers are sold at auction when the owner of the contents fails to pay the monthly storage fees for a period of time.

If there is a villain to be found on the program, it is this guy.



It isn't just his "yuuup" that gets annoying.  It is his insistence on bidding for units where his sole purpose is bidding is to make the other people pay more.  It's one thing to bid on a unit because you think you can make money by winning the auction.  It is another entirely when you're bidding just to make others pay more.

I'm wondering if Comcast is bidding for the assets of 21st Century Fox to start a bidding war or because they think they can make back the additional amount they offered.  Disney had already entered into a deal to buy those assets, but the Comcast offer is 19% more than what was offered by Disney.

Disney and Comcast are in competition on other fronts.  They also face competition going forward from Netflix, whose market capitalization has exceeded that of Disney.

This will be interesting to watch.

* * *

The cable channel Heroes & Icons (H&I) has changed their programming schedule on weekdays.  They are running 8 hour blocs of one show on each day of the week.  On Wednesdays, they run JAG.  Today they ran the final episode of the program's first season, "Skeleton Crew."

It doesn't get shown often.  That's because it contained a cliffhanger involving the show's main character being arrested and charged with the murder of someone he was close to.  Then NBC canceled the show.  CBS picked it up and recast the female lead role.  There was no way to resolve the cliffhanger, so they just ignored it.

It reminded me how I hate unresolved cliffhangers.

Southland was a gritty cop drama.  Maybe the best cop drama since Hill Street Blues.  It ran for five seasons.  One of the main characters gets shot and we never find out if he lives or not.

The final episode of Lois and Clark: The New Adventures of Superman ends with Lois Lane and Clark Kent/Superman finding a baby with a red cape and a Superman symbol.  Was he their descendant from the future?  If not, who was he?

The reboot of Dallas ended with Christopher Ewing's car exploding.  We never find out if he lives or dies (I wasn't a big fan of that one anyway).

I really was a big fan of Las Vegas.  But NBC canceled it with 3 episodes left in what would be the final season.  Does Delinda survive?  We'll never know.

Quantum Leap was a great show.  Sam Beckett winds up lost in time.  Does he ever get home?

When Soap ended, Jessica Tate was about to be executed by a firing squad.  Did she survive?

In a way, TV show cliffhangers are a lot like life.  We want closure, but we don't always get it.

* * *

TV and radio personality Lauren Sivan joked on Twitter today about the ballot initiative we will vote on in November to break California into three separate states.




My initial reaction was pedantry.  To point out that it is Wakanda, not Wokanda.  But someone beat me to it.

So I suggested alternative names.




My three suggestions are about as preposterous as the notion that the break-up of California will ever happen.  Do you believe that other states, let alone the Republicans currently in control of the Congress will allow something to transpire that will add four more members to the U.S. Senate?  That will give Californians four more electoral votes?

* * *

Is Sarah Huckabee Sanders planning to leave the White House?  She says she isn't.  Her principal deputy, Raj Shah is also reportedly on his way out the door (according to CBS News).

I don't know how she can do what she does, day in and day out.  I wonder if she's a good poker player.

But here's the thing.  It is very easy for her and other White House press people to label this as "fake news" because the story doesn't identify their sources other than to say "Sanders...has told friends..."

That's not unusual.  You won't last in the news biz if you identify your sources for stories when those sources want to remain anonymous.  That doesn't make it "fake news."  I just watched an interview with another deputy WH press secretary who described this item as just that.  Now in fact, he was referencing another news outlet reporting what CBS reported.  CBS did report that item.  The local newscast on which this spokesperson was appearing reported accurately what CBS is claiming.  That is accurate reporting, folks.

* * *

While we were reading all about the moves by Jeff Sessions to force immigration judges to deny requests for asylum based on domestic violence and announcing the Justice Department would not defend the pre-existing condition limitations contained in the Affordable Care Act, we weren't reading about another action he took.

The DOJ filed a brief supporting a lawsuit filed by Speech First (a so-called campus free speech group) against the University of Michigan.  The university maintains "Bias Response Teams" which deal with the following types of incidents:

"A bias incident is conduct that discriminates, stereotypes, excludes, harasses or harms anyone in our community based on their identity (such as race, color, ethnicity, national origin, sex, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, disability, age, or religion).
Bias may stem from fear, misunderstanding, hatred or stereotypes.  It may be intentional or unintentional."

Campuses need to be safe environments.  We don't like hate speech, but the speech itself is protected in almost every instance.  The answer to hate speech is not to prohibit it, but to shine a bright light on it.  To expose its falsehoods.

I think that rather than trying to disrupt events on campus where you don't agree with the views of the sponsors of the events, peaceful protest is to be preferred.  Let them say what they want to say.  Counter their words with your own, in a peaceful, respectful manner.

* * *

posted by me at 8:19 AM

Wednesday, June 13, 2018

When 3 days is 5 hours and other random thoughts



20 years before the 2005 movie version of The Dukes of Hazzard, starring Seann William Scott and Johnny Knoxville; there was a TV series with the same title.  John Schneider and Tom Wopat were "Bo Duke" and "Luke Duke" and is an image of one of the cars used in the series.

John Schneider was supposed to spend three days in the Los Angeles County Jail for failure to pay over $150,000 in back child support.  According to TMZ, he checked in at 10:29 a.m. for his stay.  He was released just over five hours later, at 3:46 p.m.  Why?  Because most non-violent offenders are released very quickly from jails due to overcrowding.

Should we be building more jails so that non-violent offenders aren't cycled through the system so rapidly?  Should we use house arrest with ankle monitors instead for these people so they serve their full sentence; albeit under house arrest.

Tough problem with no easy solution.

* * *

It was a rough first day back on the job for Rachel Elizabeth Tyler at the Twin Peaks location on Southwest 3rd Street in Oklahoma City.  The new waitress was arrested after she was observed skimming credit cards.

This blog will try to stay abreast of the story.

* * *

You have to love politics in Nevada.  Only in Nevada could there be a headline like this on the website of CBS News.



Dennis Hof is the owner of seven legal brothels in Nevada.  He is the star of the HBO reality series "Cathouse."  Only in Nevada could he win a primary election in which he defeated a three-term incumbent member of the Nevada Legislature.  He refers to himself as the "Trump from Pahrump."  He even wrote a book, like Trump.




Consider Wendell P. Williams for a moment.  He spent many years serving in the Nevada State Legislature.  In a 2003 column for the Las Vegas Sun, Erin Neff detailed how he showed his disdain for the law.  He faced jail time for failure to appear on a citation.  He didn't show, he called the judge.  When fined $15,000 for failing to file campaign disclosures, the Secretary of State allowed him to pay off the fine WITHOUT interest and with payments of only $100 per month.

Only in Nevada.

* * *

Jason Frank is owed millions by law firm Eagan Avenatti.  Yes, Michael Avenatti, lawyer for Stormy Daniels, creator of the hashtag #Basta.  Frank filed a motion with the U.S. Bankruptcy court to seize all legal fees the firm could earn from 54 cases; including the $577,000 from crowdfunding to defray the legal bills of Ms Daniels.

Moral:  Don't personally guarantee a payment if it isn't going to be made.

* * *

This next item is something that would normally not appear in this space, due to the ban on things Kardashian.  But I want to give props to Kim Kardashian West, who will finally get to meet Alice Marie Johnson in person.  She worked hard to secure this woman's release from an overlong prison sentence.

Kim Kardashian West did thing here.

* * *

How many more passes will Donald Trump give to EPA Head Scott Pruitt?  The Washington Post is reporting on yet another instance where Pruitt had one of his aides working to find a job for his wife.  The aide contacted someone with connections to the oil industry, and who had been a major donor to Pruitt's campaigns when he was an elected official.

This guy is filling the swamp all by himself.

posted by me at 8:36 AM