Maggie's FarmWe are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for. |
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Categories
QuicksearchLinks
Blog Administration |
Friday, November 30. 2018Friday morning linksPhoto: FYI, Advent begins this Sunday Gerard sees what is left of his home in Paradise Betsy retires from blogging. It went from a hobby to a chore Payless sold its discount shoes for $600 a pair at mock luxury influencer event How overparenting backfired on Americans - Being raised indoors might the reason young Americans struggle in the adult world. First world war paintings go on show for first time since 1919 Wow Is Rudolph The Red-Nosed Reindeer “Problematic”? Is the US really so racist? No. There is almost no racism in America today. Chinese scientist's gene-edited babies have opened Pandora's box. Brace yourselves. Brazil Cancels Hosting Of 2019 UN IPCC Climate Change Conference The ACLU Declines to Defend Civil Rights - The civil-liberties organization has taken a stand against stronger due-process protections in campus tribunals that undermines its own principles. Is New York's "Safety Net" A Success? Jerome Corsi explains the perjury trap Mueller's team sprang on him Why Trump will look back fondly on the Mueller probe Joke of the day: Obama takes credit for oil boom CNN’s Chris Cuomo Compares Criminal Illegal Aliens to Baby Jesus Tijuana Official Slams Caravan Organizers: Not 'Coming Through' on Promises to Migrants The Russians and the Kerch Bridge: What Would Reagan Do? ICC Takes Anti-Israel Bias to New Heights - A betrayal of justice. Tracking China’s Muslim Gulag Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
I like the photo. My neighbor has had her house decorated since before Halloween. Thankfully, she kept the outdoor lights off until Thanksgiving, but the Christmas tree is on every night since mid-October. I can see it from my living room window. It's white plastic. And it blinks in unison.
Amen on the photo. Where the heck was this photo two months ago when I really needed it? Oh well, it will be just as apropos next year.
I have declared my own season, Friggin' Xmas, which begins with the first Xmas store displays in September, and ends on Thanksgiving Day. During Friggin' Xmas, I respond to any and all Christmas talk with "Bah, humbug!" Commencing on Thanksgiving day, my response changes to "Merry Christmas." RE: Jerome Corsi's perjury trap.
It is automatically a lie and false testimony to assert that you do not remember writing and sending a specific email? And when these guys are questioned why don't/can't they say, "you have all my records and electronic devices, review them to see what I said and wrote"? Yeah, I don't understand this. Is there a jury that would convict someone for perjury because he couldn't remember something? I don't even see how it would stand up to a motion to dismiss. Perjury has an element of deliberate misrepresentation; a mistake, especially about something trivial, won't cut it. Don't these guys have lawyers of their own to advise them about this attempted "trap"?
This experience does show how important it is, when being questioned by powerful people without ethics, to repeat constantly that you're answering to the best of your recollection, but you could be wrong. There are standard methods for attempting to impeach witnesses by confronting them with evidence of prior inconsistent statements. If the witnesses responds by saying, "Oh, yes, now I remember saying that," the impeachment fails. The judge should halt the line of inquiry at that point. It works only if the witness says, in essence, "Whoops, you got me," and completely fails to explain the contradiction between the prior statement and the current testimony. Obviously if an FBI guy asks you for definitive statements about the exact contents of a zillion emails, the only safe and appropriate answer is, "I couldn't say for sure without reviewing all the emails first. All I can tell you is a general sense of what sticks out in my memory at this moment, under stress, and with significant distractions." "On an unrelated topic, what was your mortgage balance on 15 April 2017? Remember, you're under oath here."
"I'm not sure, I'd have to check my records. Why are you asking this?" "Your best guess will be adequate. How much did you owe then?" "I'm not sure... $270k or thereabouts. Again, I'm not sure why this is rele..." "Your Honor, on 15 April 2017, from his bank his balance was $275,155.43. We intend to prosecute this witness for committing perjury and knowingly lying in a trial proceeding unless he fully cooperates with whatever we ask him, up to and including making stuff up to help us get our primary target." "Wait - I'm off a few thousand on my balance, and you're going to charge me with perjury?" "You lied under oath. It's really open and shut. So... would you rather go to jail for an indefinite time, AFTER spending several hundred thousand dollars defending yourself? Or cooperate fully in whatever we ask?" It really doesn't matter what's true or false in a perjury trap, does it? JLawson: It really doesn't matter what's true or false in a perjury trap, does it?
Of course it does. For a charge of perjury, the statement has to be a willful misstatement of fact, and it has to be relevant to the proceedings. For instance, Clinton was not found guilty of perjury, because the court determined his lie wasn't relevant to the proceedings, and the case was tossed for lack of merit. Instead, Clinton was found to be in civil contempt. Judges and juries will hear the evidence, so they are the ones who have to be convinced it meets the lawful standard. What Corsi did was lie about something of significance to the investigation of Russian interference in the election. You're describing the threats they use, and I have no doubt it's an accurate depiction. But the target should know it won't hold up in court. Honestly, no matter what some unscrupulous agents are willing to say, any half-decent lawyer could beat a perjury rap on those facts. The real danger is that, once the Feds have a guy in their claws, they can make extremely credible threats of other sorts to induce him to lie convincingly.
The ability to twist and distort testimony words, to synthesize context favorable to mal-interpretation, and to mine the system for sympathetic judges, panels, grand juries, so forth, is the specialty of Andrew Weissmann and his cohort of assorted jackbooters. They have had an exceptional run, almost completely free of any kind of critical oversight.
#2.1.1.2.1
Aggie
on
2018-11-30 15:31
(Reply)
Aggie: The ability to twist and distort testimony words
Corsi's foreknowledge is documented in his emails.
#2.1.1.2.1.1
Zachriel
on
2018-11-30 16:25
(Reply)
QUOTE: Jerome Corsi explains the perjury trap Mueller's team sprang on him steve walsh: It is automatically a lie and false testimony to assert that you do not remember writing and sending a specific email? Nope. Texan99: Is there a jury that would convict someone for perjury because he couldn't remember something? Nope. QUOTE: I suppose it is possible that Corsi is making up this story, but it has the ring of truth. Gee whiz! Truth? Jerome Corsi was a birther. This is an excellent example of the right-wing echo chamber. Jerome Corsi lies about his lies, and Tucker Carlson encourages him to do so. Either Carlson is blind to the truth, or simply doesn't care. And people believe this because it confirms their prejudices and avoids having to face unpleasantries. The facts are easily attainable; from public records and from Corsi's own statements. The allegation doesn't concern that Corsi forgot sending an email, but his lie about not having had advance knowledge of WikiLeaks possession and schedule for release of stolen emails from the chair of Hillary Clinton's campaign, John Podesta, and whether he shared this information with others connected to candidate Trump. Corsi's emails reveal not only his foreknowledge, but that he shared the information with Roger Stone, who directed Corsi to contact Julian Assange of WikiLeaks. Here's Corsi's latest story: “Jeannie Rhee, one of the prosecutors, said, ‘Dr. Corsi, you are asking us to believe, on an extended international flight with your wife for your anniversary, you had divine intervention? God inspired your mind and told you Assange has Podesta’s emails and they’re going to be dumped in October and dumped in a serial fashion? Is that what you’re saying?’ I said, ‘Yes, Ms. Rhee, that’s about what I’m saying.'” Now ask yourself why all these people associated with Trump are lying. Gee whiz! Truth? Jerome Corsi was a birther.
Libtard logic: He's lying about (A) because I disagree with him about (B). Rusty: He's lying about (A) because I disagree with him about (B).
No. Corsi is a liar; a liar who demonstrably lied about (B) birtherism, and demonstrably lied about (A) WikiLeaks. His current problem is that he demonstrably lied to the FBI. The reason to bring up birtherism was to address the author's claim about "the ring of truth". Just a reminder: There are many of us who do not believe what you say.
#2.2.1.1.1
Sam L.
on
2018-11-30 11:23
(Reply)
Sam L: There are many of us who do not believe what you say.
We don't expect you to accept what we say at face value, but based on the evidence. Corsi lied and his emails show that he did. His defence is now that he knew based on "divine intervention".
#2.2.1.1.1.1
Zachriel
on
2018-11-30 11:37
(Reply)
Once again the kiddiez are full of shit.
Remember when they claimed up and down Trump colluded with Putin to beat Hillary? The Steele Dossier was "evidence"? LOL
#2.2.1.1.1.1.1
Zzzatemypuppy
on
2018-11-30 13:16
(Reply)
Remember when the kiddiez claimed Carter Page was an agent for Russia?
Comey and the FBI claimed the same thing before a FISA court. Now Comey is refusing to testify before Congress. Let's discuss some "perjury" shall we, kiddiez? Doubt the little Kiddiez will respond.
#2.2.1.1.1.1.2
Zzzatemypuppy
on
2018-11-30 13:46
(Reply)
Maybe you can provide a link to the emails you say show that Corsi demonstrably lied to the FBI. I'd like to see them.
If Corsi did lie than he deserves to be in trouble. On the other hand, treatment about Republican liars seems much more severe than Democrat liars.
#2.2.1.1.2
mudbug
on
2018-11-30 11:49
(Reply)
"Word is friend in embassy plans 2 more dumps. One shortly after I'm back. 2nd in Oct. Impact planned to be very damaging."
Jerome Corsi Doesn’t Understand Why Mueller Isn’t Accepting His ‘Divine Intervention’ Defense mudbug: If Corsi did lie than he deserves to be in trouble. It's more than Corsi. Many top officials have lied about their contacts with Russia and WikiLeaks. Trump lied about his financial dealings with Russia. Why would they all be lying?
#2.2.1.1.2.1
Zachriel
on
2018-11-30 12:27
(Reply)
"Why would they all be lying?"
They learned it from watching the left in action, especially Barry O and Nacho Clinton, Comey, Brennan.....the list is endless. Still, it's always good to see someone from the left suddenly so concerned about the truth.
#2.2.1.1.2.1.1
Hank_M
on
2018-11-30 12:34
(Reply)
Oh FFS, a link to the Rolling Stone.
Some "evidence" of perjury. BWAHA!
#2.2.1.1.2.1.2
Zzzatemypuppy
on
2018-11-30 14:07
(Reply)
Yeah, huh?
And the bots first link was even worse, the fake newsworthy Washington Post.
#2.2.1.1.2.1.2.1
Hank_M
on
2018-11-30 14:22
(Reply)
Hank_M: And the bots first link was even worse, the fake newsworthy Washington Post.
The document is almost certainly authentic, and is much better evidence than saying "Is not!", even if you say it more than once.
#2.2.1.1.2.1.2.1.1
Zachriel
on
2018-11-30 14:33
(Reply)
"The document is almost certainly authentic"
ALMOST certainly authentic? Well, I guess that settles that......almost.
#2.2.1.1.2.1.2.1.1.1
Hank_M
on
2018-11-30 14:54
(Reply)
Hank_M: ALMOST certainly authentic?
It's much better evidence than saying "Is not!". Gee whiz. Corsi himself provided the draft statement of offense.
#2.2.1.1.2.1.2.1.1.1.1
Zachriel
on
2018-11-30 15:00
(Reply)
"much better evidence than saying "Is not!"
I didn't say that though, did I? Tell you what. You run with your "almost certainly authentic" evidence. And I'll almost believe you.
#2.2.1.1.2.1.2.1.1.1.1.1
Hank_M
on
2018-11-30 15:12
(Reply)
Hank_M: Tell you what.
Let us know when you become open to evidence.
#2.2.1.1.2.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1
Zachriel
on
2018-11-30 15:21
(Reply)
Again, the kiddiez have a problem with the meaning of the term evidence.
#2.2.1.1.2.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
Zzzatemypuppy
on
2018-11-30 16:56
(Reply)
Hillary Clinton was almost certainly going to become our 45th President a couple of Novembers ago!
#2.2.1.1.2.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.2
Bill Carson
on
2018-11-30 16:31
(Reply)
Bill Carson: Hillary Clinton was almost certainly going to become our 45th President a couple of Novembers ago!
There is no reasonable doubt as to the authenticity of the draft statement of offense. Did you have a point to make, or are you just trolling?
#2.2.1.1.2.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.2.1
Zachriel
on
2018-11-30 17:09
(Reply)
There's plenty of reasonable doubt in your interpretation of said draft, kiddiez.
#2.2.1.1.2.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.1
Zzzatemypuppy
on
2018-11-30 17:19
(Reply)
QUOTE: ... a letter drafted by Gray addressed to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team argues that Corsi shouldn’t be charged with a crime, based on faulty memory, "He had not had the benefit of reviewing all of his emails prior to the interview and you graciously allowed him to review his emails and amend his statements — which he did. Now, after various amendments to his statements, Dr. Corsi is being asked to affirmatively state that he lied to FBI agents. The issue is that the statements that Dr. Corsi made were, in fact, the best he could recall at the time.” For some reason the kiddiez ignored that part. Wonder why?
#2.2.1.1.2.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.2
Zzzatemypuppy
on
2018-11-30 17:43
(Reply)
I almost certainly have a point to make!
#2.2.1.1.2.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.3
Bill Carson
on
2018-11-30 18:01
(Reply)
Oh my, another err... almost certainly "process" crime?
Some more weak shit, kiddiez. Keep grasping for strawsl
#2.2.1.1.2.1.2.1.1.1.1.2
Zzzatemypuppy
on
2018-11-30 15:20
(Reply)
The birth certificate was so obviously doctored and edited numerous times that the reasonable default position must be one of doubt.
That's why you were mocked.
#2.2.1.1.3
Rusty
on
2018-11-30 12:58
(Reply)
Rusty: The birth certificate was so obviously doctored and edited numerous times that the reasonable default position must be one of doubt.
Zombie lies that never die and the modern American political right. The State of Hawaii officially certified Obama's birth. There was never any real doubt.
#2.2.1.1.3.1
Zachriel
on
2018-11-30 14:00
(Reply)
So you ignore the very obviously faked document (which was available for download and debunked ad nauseam) and you appeal to the noble and honest Government Workers of Hawaii.
I did have a suspicion you were one of those NPC's, robotically parroting whatever you were told to believe. Suspicion confirmed.
#2.2.1.1.3.1.1
Rusty
on
2018-11-30 16:38
(Reply)
So you ignore the very obviously faked document (which was available for download and debunked ad nauseam) and you appeal to the noble and honest Government Workers of Hawaii.
I did have a suspicion you were one of those NPC's, robotically parroting whatever you were told to believe. Suspicion confirmed!
#2.2.1.1.3.1.2
Rusty
on
2018-11-30 16:48
(Reply)
Rusty: So you ignore the very obviously faked document (which was available for download and debunked ad nauseam) and you appeal to the noble and honest Government Workers of Hawaii.
Half of Republicans still don't think Obama was born in the U.S. Zombie lies never die.
#2.2.1.1.3.1.2.1
Zachriel
on
2018-11-30 17:12
(Reply)
The thrust of that article about CRISPR editing seems to be that any technological advance should be squelched if there's a danger that something good will come into the world that we can't guarantee will be shared equally by every human being on earth, rich or poor. "I see you're trying to eat a cookie. Did you bring enough for the whole class?"
There may be reasons to worry about the ethics of CRISPR editing, but this isn't one of them. And frankly, I'm not convinced of any of the others, either, which I find difficult to distinguish from the Christian Scientist view that all medical intervention is fraught. We have powers, so we always have to be examining how we're using them, but that doesn't make powers morally reprehensible in themselves. Brazil and the climate conference: "Bolsonaro’s incoming foreign minister, Ernesto Araujo, a career diplomat, has called the movement to reduce global warming a plot by 'Marxists' to stifle the economic growth of capitalist democracies while lifting China." Bingo! Well, I'm not sure about the "lifting China" part, but it does sound like Brazil's voters got tired of this nonsense.
QUOTE: Is the US really so racist? The U.S. has struggled with the issue of race. There is the legacy of chattel slavery, and institutional racism persisted until the 1960s. Is America unique in this regard? Not at all. Most societies exhibit some aspects of xenophobia, though racism has been especially pernicious. But there are also people who seek peace across cultural and ethnic divides. Look for the helpers. Bird Dog: No. There is almost no racism in America today.
While overt racism is not as common as it once was, there is still a strong undercurrent of racism and ethnic hatred in American society. Well, the NY Times affirms racism when they hired that chick who hates white people.
I remember seeing a show in the '90s on one of the alphabet networks about affirmative action and the blacks who participated in it. The blacks they talked to said they experienced very little racism. The show went on to say that those who participated in affirmative action to get into college studied harder than they would have because they didn't want it to look like they got there because of the color of their skin. It was clearly an effort to praise affirmative action so it's more noteworthy that the blacks they talked to didn't see much racism, but that was before the leftist racism machine got really going. If racism isn't that much of a problem, then more of them might consider voting for Republicans. It was very important to label Republicans as racist to maintain a high percentage of the black vote.
I see a lot of racism today but most of it comes from the left. Even during the Democrat instituted Jim Crow laws, there were no college classes that overtly taught that blacks were inferior. I don't believe never heard a politician publicly denounce the ideas of "black men" (unless it was in the early '60s and a Democrat was saying it. Today, however, there are classes that teach "white privilege and it's common for Democrats to discount the ideas of "white men" and to blame things on "white women." mudbug: Even during the Democrat instituted Jim Crow laws, there were no college classes that overtly taught that blacks were inferior.
Well, that's not true. White supremacy pervaded textbooks at every educational level during the Jim Crow period, even depicting the KKK in positive terms. Textbook Racism Text books were slanted but that's different from having a class devoted to explaining why the world's problems are because of white people.
#5.1.2.1.1
mudbug
on
2018-12-01 23:19
(Reply)
mudbug: Text books were slanted but that's different from having a class devoted to explaining why the world's problems are because of white people.
No. They taught that the KKK was a righteous response to the depravities of blacks.
#5.1.2.1.1.1
Zachriel
on
2018-12-02 10:21
(Reply)
As my essay says - compared to whom?
Racism is humanity's default setting. America has done more unlearning of it than anyone else. Assistant Village Idiot: As my essay says - compared to whom?
As our comment says — Is America unique in this regard? Not at all. Assistant Village Idiot: Racism is humanity's default setting. Racism per se is fairly new, a product of the Age of Discovery. However, xenophobia is intrinsic to the human condition. In group - out group is an important distinction for all cultures. Assistant Village Idiot: America has done more unlearning of it than anyone else. What's interesting about U.S. history is that it isn't that the Americans haven't had problems, but that it has often faced its problems, made progress, and served as a model for other countries. The key is to avoid the paired problems of despair at continuing racism and self-satisfaction with incomplete progress, both resulting in passive inaction. Is Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer “problematic”? Only to the PuffHo, their readers, and their running-dog friends.
The ICC, like the ACLU, has gone against its previous claimed remit. I am not surprised. >> Is there a jury that would convict someone for perjury because he couldn't remember something?
Conviction doesn't matter all that much. Not many (any?) convictions have out of this probe, but there sure has been a lot of angst and $$$ spent on legal fees. Repeat after me: The process is the punishment. Hey, you gotta choice. Go bankrupt, lose your job, health family, etc....or be Arkancided. We've seen plenty of both over the last few decades.
As for Justice? It's just as fake as The News,The Legislative Branch and all those Alphabet Agencies filled with anti-Constitutionalists -- all of whom have worked for over a century to give us a Fake Economy managed by the private Federal Reserve. Who's to blame. We are. For sitting on our keisters while allowing The State to reeducate our children, manipulate our economy, send our young off to fight ridiculous wars that only profit the few, manage taxation to control our right to property, and abuse the justice system to bury the rule of law. We have been very lazy about protecting a nation that was unique in its design to protect the individual. We have sold it down the drain for freebies that mean nothing if you don't have rights and the rule of law. Nona Mouse: Conviction doesn't matter all that much. Not many (any?) convictions have out of this probe
Trump's national security advisor, campaign manager, deputy campaign manager, foreign policy advisor for the campaign, and even his personal attorney have all been found guilty or pleaded guilty. Consider who's running the "investigation".
Mueller, who helped keep 4 innocent men in prison after they'd been framed by the FBI. That was in Boston when Whitey had the FBI in his back pocket. This is the same Mueller who bungled the 2001 anthrax investigation, prosecuting the wrong suspect. The same Mueller who's FBI raided the home of Curt Weldons daughter weeks before the election. Nothing came of the raid except that Weldon lost the election. Or consider Muellers FBI framing of Ted Stevens. I could go on. Mueller is an incompetent hack. Trust him at your own risk. Hank_M: Mueller, who helped keep 4 innocent men in prison after they'd been framed by the FBI. That was in Boston when Whitey had the FBI in his back pocket.
The families of the four men sued the U.S. government and won a $100 million judgment. The judge in the case, Nancy Gertner, has said, "I can say without equivocation that Mr. Mueller, who worked in the United States attorney’s office in Boston from 1982 to 1988, including a brief stint as the acting head of the office, had no involvement in that case." No involvement?
Then explain why, according to the Boston Globe, Mueller, first as an assistant US attorney then as the acting U.S. attorney in Boston, wrote letters to the parole and pardons board throughout the 1980s opposing clemency for the four men framed by FBI lies. Of course, Mueller was also in that position while Whitey Bulger was helping the FBI cart off his criminal competitors even as he buried bodies in shallow graves along the Neponset…
#7.2.1.1.1
Hank_M
on
2018-11-30 14:20
(Reply)
Hank_M: Then explain why, according to the Boston Globe, Mueller, first as an assistant US attorney then as the acting U.S. attorney in Boston, wrote letters to the parole and pardons board throughout the 1980s opposing clemency for the four men framed by FBI lies.
You are probably referring to Kevin Cullen's 2011 Boston Globe column. He was told about such letters, but said he never saw the letters, and there is no evidence of the letters in the files.
#7.2.1.1.1.1
Zachriel
on
2018-11-30 14:54
(Reply)
Nope. I was referring to a Boston Globe Metro section story from Jan 1970 referenced in an article written by Rep Gohmert last may.
#7.2.1.1.1.1.1
Hank_M
on
2018-11-30 15:07
(Reply)
Hank_M: I was referring to a Boston Globe Metro section story from Jan 1970 referenced in an article written by Rep Gohmert last may.
At that time, Robert Mueller was still serving as a decorated Marine, including Bronze Star (with valor), having returned wounded from Vietnam.
#7.2.1.1.1.1.1.1
Zachriel
on
2018-11-30 15:19
(Reply)
And everyone went to his own town to register. So Joseph also went up from Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to the City of David called Bethlehem, since he was from the house and line of David. He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to him in marriage and was expecting a child.
So even Chris Cuomo agrees that the illegal immigrants should go back home? When you've lost Chris Cuomo..... Jerryskids: So even Chris Cuomo agrees that the illegal immigrants should go back home?
Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem for Augustus's census, not to live. Before that, Joseph, Mary, and Jesus went into Egypt as political refugees, to escape Herod, only returning after Herod's death. In regard to the genetic engineering piece, I can only cite Emperor Palpatine: "Everything is proceeding as I have foreseen."
https://davidhuntpe.wordpress.com/2017/11/12/a-quote-from-jurassic-park-life-imitates-art/ |
Tracked: Dec 02, 09:27