“Conspiracy theory?” Yes, though as time passes and the patterns repeat closer to fact than not. The national shootings, like another school shooting in Colorado, often pretty much require motives be covered. But otherwise…
April was sliding towards an end here in Nashville and then there was… a MURDER!!! “A murder?” These days there seems to be a local murder or two every day, and not a lot of knowing why. Two people at a Mobil station were arguing. They went outside: still arguing. Then one shot the other. Why? Once upon a time journalists covered motives whether local or not, at least eventually. But given the lack of journalistic standards these days we may never know.
Did Stand Your Ground help cause this? What were they arguing about? Was it politics? Is it any accident that since 2016 in Nashville one on one murder rates have exploded, yet motives are rarely, if ever, mentioned? Is it just incidental that this is not just some singular Nashville phenomenon? Do the motives line up with goals of the extreme right? How many murders have been inspired by what has spewed forth from Trump’s ever active, ever vicious, hate promoting, piehole? We already know nationwide and even overseas: more than a few. Read more
You have to have heard so many times: the nonsense that the bar is very high for impeachment. You know: “High crimes and misdemeanors?”
“A criminal act that is less serious than a felony is considered to be a ‘misdemeanor.’ While specific laws vary by jurisdiction, misdemeanors generally include such acts as disturbing the peace, petty theft, drunk driving with no injury to others, public drunkenness, simple assault and battery, and traffic violations.”-legaldefinition.net
”Traffic violations” a “high bar?”
The conversation usually turns to spin: there has to be overwhelming evidence and obvious guilt. Essentially both assume guilt must be proven first before impeachment proceedings even start. No. NO. NO. Impeachment is where evidence is put forth and the president is tossed out if Congress votes to do so. An investigation no more proves guilt than those detectives necessarily proved you or I murdered someone. Both claims miss one hell of a big step either way. That’s what the Senate and the House are for, or if you or I were accused a court.
Given the definition they really could impeach over a traffic violation, if they wanted to. Certainly not likely, at least for now. But even with impeachment it’s not like a regular court trial. Can they therefore sentence him to death or imprisonment? No. An impeachment tosses a president out of office: PERIOD. Anything in regard to punishment would most likely be done by a regular trial. This would be the norm, if there were any “norm” to this at all. Read more
I challenge no one’s faith, nor insist which version of what has been called “the greatest story” you should accept. Likewise if you reject them all I understand that too. This is all about human nature and our narratives.
Easter 2019. Why should we be surprised there are so many alternate versions of what happened to JFK? Or RFK? Or MLK? Why would we be surprised there’s always some official story that one dare not question, and that official story is often convenient to those in power? This is an old human endeavor going back to our first sentient moments. Once people understood there was power to be had in controlling the narrative controlling that narrative became crucial.
Repurposing the Jesus story has been happening at least since Calvary. Who went to the tomb, exactly what happened there: the story varies per book. Differences between eyewitnesses were to be expected, if that’s what happened. Temptation to expand the story, edit the story, variations among scribes, certainly were to be expected, if that’s what happened. It’s almost impossible to talk about historical Jesus without using the Bible: the Romans wrote little to nothing about him. Read more
”How do you progress as a culture if you set out to destroy any common agreement as to what constitutes fact? You can’t have conversations. You can’t have debates. You can’t come to conclusions.” -Andrew McCabe
Essential to Jude Wanniski’s 3 Santa Claus Theory has been when Republicans are in power they spend worse than drunken sailors on anything and everything their base wants. (And how do YOU like being standing in for Mexico who was supposed to pay for the wall, or being space-forced into militarizing space?) It’s amazing how Democrats let Republicans make presidents become their economic bitches because Republicans scream endlessly about the debt THEY CREATED by “spending worse than drunken sailors on anything and everything their base wants.” It’s also amazing how willingly Democrats kill their own Santas. And I don’t just mean when it comes to spending. Read more
In many ways he’s everything Trump is NOT. And Andrew McCabe’s book, The Threat, is the opposite of everything Trump and his protectors say about books that don’t put Donald in a marvelous, saintly light. It’s methodical, not all about the president and certainly no “hit job.” Indeed not that much is about Donald Trump. He starts with what you have to do to even apply to be in the FBI. I know that all too well: right out of college I tried to apply. Among all one has to provide I had to know the exact date I started living at a location, and exact date I left. Having had multiple college apartments, lived with friends, lived with my soon to be wife’s parents, that was impossible. And I was just considering being a clerk, not an agent.
Mr. McCabe talks about cases involving both Clintons and others that highlight procedure. He shows how they worked 9/11. While not getting so specific it would reveal sources, Mr. McCabe spends a lot of time explaining how the FBI works on their cases v. what other law enforcement agencies do. The purpose is obvious; to show how the Russian investigation wasn’t all that different and no “hit job” or all the other self serving claims Trump trumpets like a 6th grader who plays the trumpet so poorly he’s kicked out of the band.
So far we don’t have that option. Read more