Search
475 results for “johnbessa”
-
#NowPlaying #JohnBetsch incredibly, his only LP as a band leader. This soulful jazz LP was originally released in 1975. Hat tip to @andr6wmale for turning me on to the repress. https://thejohnbetschsociety.bandcamp.com/album/earth-blossom
-
#TakingABreakFromFilming
#PeterFalk #JohnCassavetes sharing a joke and enjoying each others company.
#FilmMastodon 📽️ 🎬 -
Il #film di oggi è #gliesclusi di #johncassavetes #unofilm #cinema #unocinema #burtlancaster #judygarland #abbymann #genarowlands #cinemadautore #biancoenero #filmastodon #recensioni
https://www.valeriotagliaferri.it/gli-esclusi-di-john-cassavetes/
iscriviti gratis al #podcast #lafogliadacanto e ascolta tutta la #recensione
-
Il #film di oggi è #gliesclusi di #johncassavetes #unofilm #cinema #unocinema #burtlancaster #judygarland #abbymann #genarowlands #cinemadautore #biancoenero #filmastodon #recensioni
https://www.valeriotagliaferri.it/gli-esclusi-di-john-cassavetes/
iscriviti gratis al #podcast #lafogliadacanto e ascolta tutta la #recensione
-
Il #film di oggi è #gliesclusi di #johncassavetes #unofilm #cinema #unocinema #burtlancaster #judygarland #abbymann #genarowlands #cinemadautore #biancoenero #filmastodon #recensioni
https://www.valeriotagliaferri.it/gli-esclusi-di-john-cassavetes/
iscriviti gratis al #podcast #lafogliadacanto e ascolta tutta la #recensione
-
Il #film di oggi è #gliesclusi di #johncassavetes #unofilm #cinema #unocinema #burtlancaster #judygarland #abbymann #genarowlands #cinemadautore #biancoenero #filmastodon #recensioni
https://www.valeriotagliaferri.it/gli-esclusi-di-john-cassavetes/
iscriviti gratis al #podcast #lafogliadacanto e ascolta tutta la #recensione
-
Il #film di oggi è #gliesclusi di #johncassavetes #unofilm #cinema #unocinema #burtlancaster #judygarland #abbymann #genarowlands #cinemadautore #biancoenero #filmastodon #recensioni
https://www.valeriotagliaferri.it/gli-esclusi-di-john-cassavetes/
iscriviti gratis al #podcast #lafogliadacanto e ascolta tutta la #recensione
-
#RIPGenaRowlands #GenaRowlands
Photo via "The Independent" online
#JohnCassavetes #Movies #Film #Cinema #Hollywood #Theater #LegitimateTheater #Broadway #Television #TV -
And our #FridayThrillerClub leading men this week are Robert Duvall, Billy Bob Thornton and John Beasley
#TheApostle #RobertDuvall #BillyBobThornton #JohnBeasley #90smovies -
Finally, Friday Reads: Continued Chaos in Congress and American Policy
“So, since Trump has defeated Venezuela and Iran. Is the Vatican after Cuba, or is that Greenland? So hard to keep track.” John Buss, @repeat1968
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
I’d like to thank JJ again for covering for me on Monday. I’m not sure what’s been going on with my stomach, but the daily news sure doesn’t help! Today’s biggest headline for me is a decision that will impact Louisiana and likely any part of the country where big oil continues to wreck the environment and sicken and murder people with their business practices. It’s a discouraging decision. I have always thought my own bout with an extremely rare form of cancer was due to oil leaking into the drinking water in Ponca City, Oklahoma, where I was born.
This story is from the Washington Post. “Supreme Court hands win to Chevron, Big Oil in environmental damage case. The decision puts into question a $745 million judgment against Chevron to help restore coastal wetlands in Louisiana that were damaged as long ago as World War II.” As you may know, the damage to the wetlands down here is immense, and it’s one of the reasons hurricane season is quite frightening. The industry is deadly for all forms of life. Julian Mark reports on the decision.
This decision seems to say that if they did what they did for a war the government ran, then it’s okay if they ruin our lives. That’s pretty frightening in my estimation. What other things could this apply to? What would it have done to the Agent Orange victims in our military?
The Supreme Court on Friday sided with oil giant Chevron, ruling that it can fight an environmental damage lawsuit in federal court — a decision that could affect the outcomes of nearly a dozen other lawsuits that make similar allegations about the oil and gas industry.
The unanimous decision puts into question a $745 million state court judgment against Chevron to help restore coastal wetlands in Louisiana that were damaged as far back as World War II. Chevron had asked the Supreme Court to order the case moved to federal court.
At the heart of Chevron’s case was the argument that during World War II, the firm’s predecessors played a key role in the refinement of aviation gas, or avgas, to meet the demands of the war. Because the work was on behalf of U.S. government interests, the company and its backers have argued, claims regarding the actions at the time should be heard in a federal court rather than at the state level. The high court agreed.
“In this all-hands-on-deck, wartime context, Chevron needed to produce more crude oil as quickly as possible to facilitate more avgas refining, including its own,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the majority.
Chevron applauded the decision. “As the Court recognized, the plaintiffs’ claims are related to activities that Chevron and other energy companies performed under federal supervision during World War II,” company spokesman Bill Turenne said in a statement. “Those claims are flawed as a matter of both state law and federal law, and Chevron looks forward to litigating these cases in federal court, where they belong.”
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. did not participate in the case. Shortly before arguments in January, he recused himself, citing financial interests in ConocoPhillips, the parent of Burlington Resources Oil & Gas, a party in a related case.
Just a side note: ConocoPhillips was responsible for all the oil that leaked into my small Oklahoma hometown. This story is breaking, so be sure to follow up later as more analysis becomes available.
Lots of weirdness is happening in Congress this week as Democrats put a toe in the water to test the chances of yet another impeachment process. However, there is more afoot. Heather Cox Richardson discusses some of these issues on her Substack today.
Congress is back in session, and there is a frantic feel in the air. Republicans appear to be assessing the fall of Hungarian prime minister Victor Orbán, Trump’s increasingly erratic behavior along with his abysmal job approval numbers, rising prices, and an unpopular war in Iran that currently does not appear to have a solution that will not result in the U.S. losing face.
In Hungary, incoming prime minister Péter Magyar is setting a bar as he appears to want no part of playing business as usual with Orbán’s cronies. A center-right politician, Magyar appeared as a guest on state television after his party’s dramatic win—Orbán’s state media had not let him appear on it before the election—and said he intended to suspend the station’s news service because state media does not provide the journalism that the country deserves. He said that he would end the state subsidies for Orbán’s right-wing-allied university and that Hungarian president Tamas Sulyok, a close ally of Orbán, was “unfit to serve as the guardian of legality” and “must leave office immediately.”
Republicans appear to be trying to grab all the turf they can before the midterm elections.
Today the Senate passed House Joint Resolution 140, a bill that overturns a 20-year mining ban upstream from the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCA) in Minnesota. Representative Pete Stauber (R-MN) introduced the measure, which passed the House in January. It clears the way for a subsidiary of Chilean mining giant Antofagasta to engage in copper-sulfide mining, which produces sulfuric acid, above the pristine BWCA. Those waters include 1,175 lakes and over 1,200 miles of rivers and streams. According to outdoor writer Wes Siler, about 165,000 people visit the BWCA annually, generating $1.1 billion in economic activity and supporting 17,000 jobs.
The Republicans’ attack on the BWCA for the benefit of a foreign billionaire feeds President Donald J. Trump’s ongoing crusade against Minnesota. Trump’s secretary of transportation, Sean Duffy, is targeting New York today as well, saying that the federal government will withhold $73.5 million from the state because it has refused to review the commercial driver’s licenses of almost 33,000 immigrants. New York officials say they are complying with federal law.
Trump is also continuing to try to exert his personal power over the government, threatening again to fire Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell, whose term as chair ends in May but who has said he will continue on the board until the administration drops its trumped-up criminal investigation of him over alleged cost overruns on the renovations of Federal Reserve* buildings.
As Jacob Rosen and Olivia Gazis of CBS News noted, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard is supporting Trump’s attacks on those he perceives to be his enemies by sending to the Department of Justice two criminal referrals yesterday. One is for the former government official who was the whistleblower over the July 2019 phone call in which Trump told Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky he would release money the U.S. Congress had appropriated for Ukraine’s defense against Russia’s 2014 incursion…but only after Zelensky did him the “favor” of smearing Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden.
The whistleblower told the intelligence community inspector general: “I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election. This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President’s main domestic political rivals.”
Gabbard’s second referral is for the inspector general, Michael Atkinson, who found the complaint “credible” and “urgent” and set in motion the process of sharing it with the congressional intelligence committees, which led to Trump’s first impeachment.
As Representative Jim Himes (D-CT), the top-ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, noted, the effort to criminalize whistleblowing from 2019 for what was Trump’s well-established behavior is most likely an attempt to chill future whistleblower complaints.
There certainly appears to be concern on the part of MAGA loyalists that they are in danger of losing power, and that might mean legal repercussions. Testifying before the Senate Budget Committee today, Director of Office of Management and Budget Russell Vought denied that he had held back funds Congress had appropriated. Doing so is called “impoundment,” and it is illegal, but the administration has been engaged in it since it took office in January 2025.
There is a hell of a lot more in this piece, and it’s worth reading. I’m fairly jaded by now, so I don’t think it will actually amount to much. I’m still relying on voters. to come through. I’m into more election-related victories, including this one in New Jersey reported in Politico. “Progressive Analilia Mejia coasts to victory in New Jersey special House election. The Democratic will fill the seat held by Gov. Mikie Sherrill.” Madison Fernandez has the analysis.
Progressive organizer Analilia Mejia will succeed Democratic Gov. Mikie Sherrill in New Jersey’s 11th Congressional District, adding to a run of party victories that suggest voter dissatisfaction with President Donald Trump ahead of the midterms.
Mejia defeated Republican Randolph Township Councilmember Joe Hathaway in Thursday’s special election, according to the Associated Press.
In a victory speech, Mejia labeled her opponent and Republicans such as Trump and Speaker Mike Johnson, as well as billionaires Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, “radicals who are willing to upend our democracy, subvert our Constitution and act with impunity.”
“We must stop them,” she said. “These radicals will watch Rome burn with all of us within, and they are simply cowards — cowards unwilling to stand up to this madness. But we stand up, we resist, we will not allow it to continue.”
Hathaway conceded defeat but said he intends to challenge her again since there will be a regular primary in June and general election in November. He said he will keep a close eye on her voting record in the meantime and “will continue fighting for affordability, public safety, accountable government, and I will continue to stand up for the families of NJ-11.”
Mejia entered as the favorite for the affluent, blue-leaning North Jersey seat after an unexpected victory in February’s Democratic primary — a race that featured nearly a dozen candidates, including many who spent more and had higher name ID than Mejia.
In the primary, hefty outside spending from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee against former Rep. Tom Malinowski in part helped propel Mejia to a win. But outside groups on both sides of the aisle largely stayed out of the special general election — money that could have otherwise made the race more competitive.
Republicans — who are looking to rebuild after brutal losses in the state last year — tried to make the argument that Mejia was too far to the left of the district. Sherrill, a moderate Democrat, first flipped the seat in 2018 and won reelection handily in the years after that; former Vice President Kamala Harris won by around 9 points in 2024. Like in other races across the country, the GOP was eager to refer to Mejia as a “socialist” — a label she did not identify with — and compare her to New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.
But that message didn’t land among the electorate, where Democrats outnumber Republicans by more than 60,000. Mejia also garnered support from Democrats across the ideological spectrum in her general election campaign.
Yesterday, in my social feeds, I started seeing references to a "Rape Academy" that's recently been exposed. This feels like something that should be a top headline at every news outlet. Completely inadequate news coverage of it. But at least some with a big audience are writing/speaking about it.
Turnout is always key. Also, I have a feeling women voters will be hitting the polls hard between the Epstein files and the rampant misogyny in the Republican line-up. It’s likely why our votes are threatened by the Save America Act. Here’s some analysis by Al Jazeera. “What is Trump-backed SAVE America Act and what could it mean for US vote? Senate resumes debate on controversial bill requiring more proof of citizenship, which Trump calls top priority.” Yes, it attacks all immigrants, but it also threatens women who can’t document the name changes from birth to marriage(s).
Here’s what to know.
What would the SAVE America Act do?
The version of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act passed by the House in February would require voters to provide proof of citizenship – a birth certificate or passport – when registering to vote. It would also implement stricter voter identification requirements for individuals casting ballots, whether by mail or in person.
Under the US Constitution, states administer elections, and currently have different processes for registering voters and confirming citizenship. Voting by noncitizens is already illegal, and all people registering to vote attest they are US citizens under threat of perjury.
The bill does not provide any funding for the new verification processes, which would be effective immediately upon the bill being signed into law.
The legislation would also require all states to run their voter rolls through a US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) “Alien Verification Eligibility” system to identify potential noncitizens already enrolled.
What has Trump said about the SAVE Act?
The US president has long maintained that elections in the country are marred by widespread fraud, including noncitizen voting, despite there being no evidence to support these claims.
Even the conservative Heritage Foundation, which has influenced many of Trump’s policies, has found only exceedingly rare instances of voter fraud over decades of US elections.
Trump’s focus on election administration dates back to his 2020 loss to former US President Joe Biden, which he continues to maintain was the result of the vote being “stolen”. Again, no evidence has emerged to back those claims.
The president has called the SAVE America Act “one of the most IMPORTANT & CONSEQUENTIAL pieces of legislation in the history of Congress, and America itself”.
Screenshot
Pete Hegseth is letting his freak fly over the incredible amount of negative media and public response to the Iran War. This is from NBC News. “Pete Hegseth attacks ‘unpatriotic’ media and compares reporters to Jewish biblical group. The defense secretary has frequently attacked the media over Iran war coverage.” It’s really surprising to me how Orange Caligula and his weirdo cabinet members seem to think they know biblical texts better than anyone else, including the Pope. This analysis is written by Rich Schapiro. Also, aren’t the Pharisees supposed to be the bad guys in the Jesus story? At least, that’s what the Presbyterians taught me.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth escalated his attacks on the media Thursday, comparing reporters covering the Iran war to the Pharisees, the biblical Jewish group that opposed Jesus.
The comments came at a Pentagon press briefing in which Hegseth first described the American media as “incredibly unpatriotic.”
“I just can’t help but notice the endless stream of garbage, the relentlessly negative coverage you cannot resist peddling, despite the historic and important success of this effort and the success of our troops,” Hegseth said, referring to the Iran war.
“Sometimes it’s hard to figure out what side some of you are actually on,” he added.
Since the fighting began in late February, Hegseth, who is Christian, has frequently used religious rhetoric at news conferences and attacked the media over its coverage. But he went further Thursday by doing so with religious overtones.
Hegseth said he was at church on Sunday when his pastor read a Bible passage that described Jesus healing a man in front of the Pharisees, “the so-called and self-appointed elites of their time.”
“Our press are just like these Pharisees — not all of you, not all of you, but the legacy Trump-hating press. Your politically motivated animus for President Trump nearly completely blinds you from the brilliance of our American warriors,” he said.
Hegseth added: “The Pharisees scrutinized every good act in order to find a violation, only looking for the negative. The hardened hearts of our press are calibrated only to impugn. I would ask you to open your eyes to the goodness, the historic success of our troops, the courage of this president.”
Hegseth was a member of the media — a Fox News host — before President Donald Trump tapped him to lead the Defense Department. Like some other members of the Trump administration, his use of Christian rhetoric in public statements is a departure from the language used by his predecessors.
In celebration of my goal of better emotional and mental health, I have canceled my cable TV news subscription. I can no longer stand to watch any of these idiots speaking and moving around like they’re live human beings or something. I’m strictly sticking to the places where I can get a timeline without sacrificing my eyes and stomach. I’m hoping this helps the tummy and the budget, which is tighter than I’ve ever had it.
Wired is one media outlet that is on my keep list. David Gilbert writes this analysis today. “MAGA Is Increasingly Convinced the Trump Assassination Attempt Was Staged. Conspiracy theories about the Butler, Pennsylvania, shooting have ramped up in recent weeks as once steadfast Trump supporters turn on the president.”
Are they really waking up? Finally?
In recent weeks, as criticism of President Donald Trump from his own supporters has reached a fever pitch, a new conspiracy theory has taken hold: Some of the president’s biggest supporters are now claiming, without evidence, that Trump staged the assassination attempt on his life in Butler, Pennsylvania in 2024 and is covering it up.
During an open-air campaign rally on July 13, 2024, Trump survived an attempted assassination when a bullet fired by a 20-year-old on a roof nearby clipped the top of his ear. Corey Comperatore, a Trump supporter sitting near the president, was shot and killed. The shooter was later killed by Secret Service agents. Conspiracy theories around the Butler assassination quickly permeated the internet, but for many Trump supporters, his survival was seen as a sign from God that he was the chosen one.
As Trump’s hold over MAGA has waned, though, an increasing number of his supporters have begun to push the narrative that the entire incident was staged.
“I think that maybe it was staged,” Tim Dillon said on his show last weekend about the assassination attempt. Dillon, who was previously a staunch Trump supporter, went on to share that Trump should now come out and say, “Some people are going to be upset by this, but we staged the assassination attempt in Butler to show people how important it was to vote for me and how far I was willing to go for them.”
Some of these claims began months ago. In November, former Fox News pundit Tucker Carlson promoted the idea that the FBI was somehow involved in covering up the shooting, writing on X that the “FBI lied” about the shooter’s online footprint.
A day later, conservative pundit Emerald Robinson went further, posting on X that the FBI “did it.” (In the same post, Robinson claimed that the agency was responsible for everything from the January 6 attack on the Capitol to “Jeffrey Epstein’s blackmail tapes” and the “Gov. Whitmer fake kidnap plot.”)
But the claims that Trump had staged the entire thing really picked up steam when former US National Counterterrorism Center director Joe Kent appeared on Carlson’s podcast last month, one day after he resigned from his position over the Iran war.
During the interview, Carlson and Kent discussed the failure of the Trump administration to provide more details about the Pennsylvania shooter. Kent claimed, without providing any evidence, that investigations into the shooting had been shut down before they finished.
Kent also claimed that this vacuum of information about the incident would lead to more conspiracy theories. “If you don’t want to address that question, then you just go silent and say you can’t ask that question,” he said. “Which then creates people who come out of nowhere and they start drawing their own conclusions.” (This is in fact, experts say, one basic dynamic behind conspiracy theorizing.)
“If you cannot look at this story and use critical thinking skills and have at least some questions, you are the problem and we need you to snap out of it,” Trisha Hope, a GOP national delegate from Texas and former Trump supporter, posted on X about Butler this week.
As usual, more to read at all the links!
What’s on your Reading, Action, and Blogging list today?
#2026Midterms #JohnbussBskySocialJohnBuss #BigOilAndSCOTUS #MAGAAndCongressTurnOnTRUMP #MikieSherrill #PeteHegsethWeirdoSexualAssaulter #SAVEAmericaAct #TrumpTheologicalWeirdness -
Finally, Friday Reads: Continued Chaos in Congress and American Policy
“So, since Trump has defeated Venezuela and Iran. Is the Vatican after Cuba, or is that Greenland? So hard to keep track.” John Buss, @repeat1968
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
I’d like to thank JJ again for covering for me on Monday. I’m not sure what’s been going on with my stomach, but the daily news sure doesn’t help! Today’s biggest headline for me is a decision that will impact Louisiana and likely any part of the country where big oil continues to wreck the environment and sicken and murder people with their business practices. It’s a discouraging decision. I have always thought my own bout with an extremely rare form of cancer was due to oil leaking into the drinking water in Ponca City, Oklahoma, where I was born.
This story is from the Washington Post. “Supreme Court hands win to Chevron, Big Oil in environmental damage case. The decision puts into question a $745 million judgment against Chevron to help restore coastal wetlands in Louisiana that were damaged as long ago as World War II.” As you may know, the damage to the wetlands down here is immense, and it’s one of the reasons hurricane season is quite frightening. The industry is deadly for all forms of life. Julian Mark reports on the decision.
This decision seems to say that if they did what they did for a war the government ran, then it’s okay if they ruin our lives. That’s pretty frightening in my estimation. What other things could this apply to? What would it have done to the Agent Orange victims in our military?
The Supreme Court on Friday sided with oil giant Chevron, ruling that it can fight an environmental damage lawsuit in federal court — a decision that could affect the outcomes of nearly a dozen other lawsuits that make similar allegations about the oil and gas industry.
The unanimous decision puts into question a $745 million state court judgment against Chevron to help restore coastal wetlands in Louisiana that were damaged as far back as World War II. Chevron had asked the Supreme Court to order the case moved to federal court.
At the heart of Chevron’s case was the argument that during World War II, the firm’s predecessors played a key role in the refinement of aviation gas, or avgas, to meet the demands of the war. Because the work was on behalf of U.S. government interests, the company and its backers have argued, claims regarding the actions at the time should be heard in a federal court rather than at the state level. The high court agreed.
“In this all-hands-on-deck, wartime context, Chevron needed to produce more crude oil as quickly as possible to facilitate more avgas refining, including its own,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the majority.
Chevron applauded the decision. “As the Court recognized, the plaintiffs’ claims are related to activities that Chevron and other energy companies performed under federal supervision during World War II,” company spokesman Bill Turenne said in a statement. “Those claims are flawed as a matter of both state law and federal law, and Chevron looks forward to litigating these cases in federal court, where they belong.”
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. did not participate in the case. Shortly before arguments in January, he recused himself, citing financial interests in ConocoPhillips, the parent of Burlington Resources Oil & Gas, a party in a related case.
Just a side note: ConocoPhillips was responsible for all the oil that leaked into my small Oklahoma hometown. This story is breaking, so be sure to follow up later as more analysis becomes available.
Lots of weirdness is happening in Congress this week as Democrats put a toe in the water to test the chances of yet another impeachment process. However, there is more afoot. Heather Cox Richardson discusses some of these issues on her Substack today.
Congress is back in session, and there is a frantic feel in the air. Republicans appear to be assessing the fall of Hungarian prime minister Victor Orbán, Trump’s increasingly erratic behavior along with his abysmal job approval numbers, rising prices, and an unpopular war in Iran that currently does not appear to have a solution that will not result in the U.S. losing face.
In Hungary, incoming prime minister Péter Magyar is setting a bar as he appears to want no part of playing business as usual with Orbán’s cronies. A center-right politician, Magyar appeared as a guest on state television after his party’s dramatic win—Orbán’s state media had not let him appear on it before the election—and said he intended to suspend the station’s news service because state media does not provide the journalism that the country deserves. He said that he would end the state subsidies for Orbán’s right-wing-allied university and that Hungarian president Tamas Sulyok, a close ally of Orbán, was “unfit to serve as the guardian of legality” and “must leave office immediately.”
Republicans appear to be trying to grab all the turf they can before the midterm elections.
Today the Senate passed House Joint Resolution 140, a bill that overturns a 20-year mining ban upstream from the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCA) in Minnesota. Representative Pete Stauber (R-MN) introduced the measure, which passed the House in January. It clears the way for a subsidiary of Chilean mining giant Antofagasta to engage in copper-sulfide mining, which produces sulfuric acid, above the pristine BWCA. Those waters include 1,175 lakes and over 1,200 miles of rivers and streams. According to outdoor writer Wes Siler, about 165,000 people visit the BWCA annually, generating $1.1 billion in economic activity and supporting 17,000 jobs.
The Republicans’ attack on the BWCA for the benefit of a foreign billionaire feeds President Donald J. Trump’s ongoing crusade against Minnesota. Trump’s secretary of transportation, Sean Duffy, is targeting New York today as well, saying that the federal government will withhold $73.5 million from the state because it has refused to review the commercial driver’s licenses of almost 33,000 immigrants. New York officials say they are complying with federal law.
Trump is also continuing to try to exert his personal power over the government, threatening again to fire Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell, whose term as chair ends in May but who has said he will continue on the board until the administration drops its trumped-up criminal investigation of him over alleged cost overruns on the renovations of Federal Reserve* buildings.
As Jacob Rosen and Olivia Gazis of CBS News noted, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard is supporting Trump’s attacks on those he perceives to be his enemies by sending to the Department of Justice two criminal referrals yesterday. One is for the former government official who was the whistleblower over the July 2019 phone call in which Trump told Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky he would release money the U.S. Congress had appropriated for Ukraine’s defense against Russia’s 2014 incursion…but only after Zelensky did him the “favor” of smearing Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden.
The whistleblower told the intelligence community inspector general: “I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election. This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President’s main domestic political rivals.”
Gabbard’s second referral is for the inspector general, Michael Atkinson, who found the complaint “credible” and “urgent” and set in motion the process of sharing it with the congressional intelligence committees, which led to Trump’s first impeachment.
As Representative Jim Himes (D-CT), the top-ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, noted, the effort to criminalize whistleblowing from 2019 for what was Trump’s well-established behavior is most likely an attempt to chill future whistleblower complaints.
There certainly appears to be concern on the part of MAGA loyalists that they are in danger of losing power, and that might mean legal repercussions. Testifying before the Senate Budget Committee today, Director of Office of Management and Budget Russell Vought denied that he had held back funds Congress had appropriated. Doing so is called “impoundment,” and it is illegal, but the administration has been engaged in it since it took office in January 2025.
There is a hell of a lot more in this piece, and it’s worth reading. I’m fairly jaded by now, so I don’t think it will actually amount to much. I’m still relying on voters. to come through. I’m into more election-related victories, including this one in New Jersey reported in Politico. “Progressive Analilia Mejia coasts to victory in New Jersey special House election. The Democratic will fill the seat held by Gov. Mikie Sherrill.” Madison Fernandez has the analysis.
Progressive organizer Analilia Mejia will succeed Democratic Gov. Mikie Sherrill in New Jersey’s 11th Congressional District, adding to a run of party victories that suggest voter dissatisfaction with President Donald Trump ahead of the midterms.
Mejia defeated Republican Randolph Township Councilmember Joe Hathaway in Thursday’s special election, according to the Associated Press.
In a victory speech, Mejia labeled her opponent and Republicans such as Trump and Speaker Mike Johnson, as well as billionaires Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, “radicals who are willing to upend our democracy, subvert our Constitution and act with impunity.”
“We must stop them,” she said. “These radicals will watch Rome burn with all of us within, and they are simply cowards — cowards unwilling to stand up to this madness. But we stand up, we resist, we will not allow it to continue.”
Hathaway conceded defeat but said he intends to challenge her again since there will be a regular primary in June and general election in November. He said he will keep a close eye on her voting record in the meantime and “will continue fighting for affordability, public safety, accountable government, and I will continue to stand up for the families of NJ-11.”
Mejia entered as the favorite for the affluent, blue-leaning North Jersey seat after an unexpected victory in February’s Democratic primary — a race that featured nearly a dozen candidates, including many who spent more and had higher name ID than Mejia.
In the primary, hefty outside spending from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee against former Rep. Tom Malinowski in part helped propel Mejia to a win. But outside groups on both sides of the aisle largely stayed out of the special general election — money that could have otherwise made the race more competitive.
Republicans — who are looking to rebuild after brutal losses in the state last year — tried to make the argument that Mejia was too far to the left of the district. Sherrill, a moderate Democrat, first flipped the seat in 2018 and won reelection handily in the years after that; former Vice President Kamala Harris won by around 9 points in 2024. Like in other races across the country, the GOP was eager to refer to Mejia as a “socialist” — a label she did not identify with — and compare her to New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.
But that message didn’t land among the electorate, where Democrats outnumber Republicans by more than 60,000. Mejia also garnered support from Democrats across the ideological spectrum in her general election campaign.
Yesterday, in my social feeds, I started seeing references to a "Rape Academy" that's recently been exposed. This feels like something that should be a top headline at every news outlet. Completely inadequate news coverage of it. But at least some with a big audience are writing/speaking about it.
Turnout is always key. Also, I have a feeling women voters will be hitting the polls hard between the Epstein files and the rampant misogyny in the Republican line-up. It’s likely why our votes are threatened by the Save America Act. Here’s some analysis by Al Jazeera. “What is Trump-backed SAVE America Act and what could it mean for US vote? Senate resumes debate on controversial bill requiring more proof of citizenship, which Trump calls top priority.” Yes, it attacks all immigrants, but it also threatens women who can’t document the name changes from birth to marriage(s).
Here’s what to know.
What would the SAVE America Act do?
The version of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act passed by the House in February would require voters to provide proof of citizenship – a birth certificate or passport – when registering to vote. It would also implement stricter voter identification requirements for individuals casting ballots, whether by mail or in person.
Under the US Constitution, states administer elections, and currently have different processes for registering voters and confirming citizenship. Voting by noncitizens is already illegal, and all people registering to vote attest they are US citizens under threat of perjury.
The bill does not provide any funding for the new verification processes, which would be effective immediately upon the bill being signed into law.
The legislation would also require all states to run their voter rolls through a US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) “Alien Verification Eligibility” system to identify potential noncitizens already enrolled.
What has Trump said about the SAVE Act?
The US president has long maintained that elections in the country are marred by widespread fraud, including noncitizen voting, despite there being no evidence to support these claims.
Even the conservative Heritage Foundation, which has influenced many of Trump’s policies, has found only exceedingly rare instances of voter fraud over decades of US elections.
Trump’s focus on election administration dates back to his 2020 loss to former US President Joe Biden, which he continues to maintain was the result of the vote being “stolen”. Again, no evidence has emerged to back those claims.
The president has called the SAVE America Act “one of the most IMPORTANT & CONSEQUENTIAL pieces of legislation in the history of Congress, and America itself”.
Screenshot
Pete Hegseth is letting his freak fly over the incredible amount of negative media and public response to the Iran War. This is from NBC News. “Pete Hegseth attacks ‘unpatriotic’ media and compares reporters to Jewish biblical group. The defense secretary has frequently attacked the media over Iran war coverage.” It’s really surprising to me how Orange Caligula and his weirdo cabinet members seem to think they know biblical texts better than anyone else, including the Pope. This analysis is written by Rich Schapiro. Also, aren’t the Pharisees supposed to be the bad guys in the Jesus story? At least, that’s what the Presbyterians taught me.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth escalated his attacks on the media Thursday, comparing reporters covering the Iran war to the Pharisees, the biblical Jewish group that opposed Jesus.
The comments came at a Pentagon press briefing in which Hegseth first described the American media as “incredibly unpatriotic.”
“I just can’t help but notice the endless stream of garbage, the relentlessly negative coverage you cannot resist peddling, despite the historic and important success of this effort and the success of our troops,” Hegseth said, referring to the Iran war.
“Sometimes it’s hard to figure out what side some of you are actually on,” he added.
Since the fighting began in late February, Hegseth, who is Christian, has frequently used religious rhetoric at news conferences and attacked the media over its coverage. But he went further Thursday by doing so with religious overtones.
Hegseth said he was at church on Sunday when his pastor read a Bible passage that described Jesus healing a man in front of the Pharisees, “the so-called and self-appointed elites of their time.”
“Our press are just like these Pharisees — not all of you, not all of you, but the legacy Trump-hating press. Your politically motivated animus for President Trump nearly completely blinds you from the brilliance of our American warriors,” he said.
Hegseth added: “The Pharisees scrutinized every good act in order to find a violation, only looking for the negative. The hardened hearts of our press are calibrated only to impugn. I would ask you to open your eyes to the goodness, the historic success of our troops, the courage of this president.”
Hegseth was a member of the media — a Fox News host — before President Donald Trump tapped him to lead the Defense Department. Like some other members of the Trump administration, his use of Christian rhetoric in public statements is a departure from the language used by his predecessors.
In celebration of my goal of better emotional and mental health, I have canceled my cable TV news subscription. I can no longer stand to watch any of these idiots speaking and moving around like they’re live human beings or something. I’m strictly sticking to the places where I can get a timeline without sacrificing my eyes and stomach. I’m hoping this helps the tummy and the budget, which is tighter than I’ve ever had it.
Wired is one media outlet that is on my keep list. David Gilbert writes this analysis today. “MAGA Is Increasingly Convinced the Trump Assassination Attempt Was Staged. Conspiracy theories about the Butler, Pennsylvania, shooting have ramped up in recent weeks as once steadfast Trump supporters turn on the president.”
Are they really waking up? Finally?
In recent weeks, as criticism of President Donald Trump from his own supporters has reached a fever pitch, a new conspiracy theory has taken hold: Some of the president’s biggest supporters are now claiming, without evidence, that Trump staged the assassination attempt on his life in Butler, Pennsylvania in 2024 and is covering it up.
During an open-air campaign rally on July 13, 2024, Trump survived an attempted assassination when a bullet fired by a 20-year-old on a roof nearby clipped the top of his ear. Corey Comperatore, a Trump supporter sitting near the president, was shot and killed. The shooter was later killed by Secret Service agents. Conspiracy theories around the Butler assassination quickly permeated the internet, but for many Trump supporters, his survival was seen as a sign from God that he was the chosen one.
As Trump’s hold over MAGA has waned, though, an increasing number of his supporters have begun to push the narrative that the entire incident was staged.
“I think that maybe it was staged,” Tim Dillon said on his show last weekend about the assassination attempt. Dillon, who was previously a staunch Trump supporter, went on to share that Trump should now come out and say, “Some people are going to be upset by this, but we staged the assassination attempt in Butler to show people how important it was to vote for me and how far I was willing to go for them.”
Some of these claims began months ago. In November, former Fox News pundit Tucker Carlson promoted the idea that the FBI was somehow involved in covering up the shooting, writing on X that the “FBI lied” about the shooter’s online footprint.
A day later, conservative pundit Emerald Robinson went further, posting on X that the FBI “did it.” (In the same post, Robinson claimed that the agency was responsible for everything from the January 6 attack on the Capitol to “Jeffrey Epstein’s blackmail tapes” and the “Gov. Whitmer fake kidnap plot.”)
But the claims that Trump had staged the entire thing really picked up steam when former US National Counterterrorism Center director Joe Kent appeared on Carlson’s podcast last month, one day after he resigned from his position over the Iran war.
During the interview, Carlson and Kent discussed the failure of the Trump administration to provide more details about the Pennsylvania shooter. Kent claimed, without providing any evidence, that investigations into the shooting had been shut down before they finished.
Kent also claimed that this vacuum of information about the incident would lead to more conspiracy theories. “If you don’t want to address that question, then you just go silent and say you can’t ask that question,” he said. “Which then creates people who come out of nowhere and they start drawing their own conclusions.” (This is in fact, experts say, one basic dynamic behind conspiracy theorizing.)
“If you cannot look at this story and use critical thinking skills and have at least some questions, you are the problem and we need you to snap out of it,” Trisha Hope, a GOP national delegate from Texas and former Trump supporter, posted on X about Butler this week.
As usual, more to read at all the links!
What’s on your Reading, Action, and Blogging list today?
#2026Midterms #JohnbussBskySocialJohnBuss #BigOilAndSCOTUS #MAGAAndCongressTurnOnTRUMP #MikieSherrill #PeteHegsethWeirdoSexualAssaulter #SAVEAmericaAct #TrumpTheologicalWeirdness -
Finally Friday Reads: Abusing Public Office on Steriods
“Markwayne Mullin seems qualified to head the Department of Homeland Security.” John Buss, @repeat1968
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
Our Executive branch is basically captured by idiots and criminals. A headline in the New York Times today shows that abusing their offices is the only skill the MAGA officeholders and the president have. This story broke last spring. “Trump Friend Asked ICE to Detain the Mother of His Child. Paolo Zampolli, a former modeling agent and a longtime Trump ally, was in a custody battle over his son. An ICE official agreed to help.” While the American people suffer, the Art of the Steal runs amok.
Megan Twohey, Shawn McCreesh, and Hamed Aleaziz share the lede.
Last June, the man credited with introducing President Trump to his wife asked the administration for a favor.
Paolo Zampolli, a former modeling agent turned presidential special envoy, had learned that his Brazilian ex-girlfriend was in a Miami jail, arrested on charges of fraud at her workplace. They had been in a custody battle over their teenage son. Now he saw an opportunity.
He reached out to a top official at Immigration and Customs Enforcement, explaining that his ex was in the country illegally, according to records obtained by The New York Times and a person familiar with the communications. Could she be put in ICE detention? That could help him get his son back.
The official, David Venturella, promptly called the agency’s Miami office to ensure that ICE agents would pick up the woman from the jail before she was released on bail, according to the records and a person with knowledge of the conversation who requested anonymity to discuss it. During the call, Mr. Venturella noted that the case was important to someone close to the White House.
The woman, Amanda Ungaro, was placed in ICE custody and ultimately deported, an outcome that may well have happened regardless of Mr. Zampolli’s meddling. But the ICE official’s willingness to spring into action for a Trump ally — even one in a low-level, largely ceremonial role — reflects a recurring theme of the second Trump administration: The levers of the federal government can be pulled to settle a personal score.
You may read the details at the gifted link above. You may also want to check out MEDIAITE for some analysis by Issac Schorr. “One of Trump’s Friends Reportedly Asked ICE to Arrest the Mother of His Child in Custody Battle Gambit.”
Paolo Zampolli, the man who introduced President Donald Trump to his wife, First Lady Melania Trump, and is currently serving as U.S. special representative for global partnerships at Trump’s behest, asked ICE to arrest the mother of his child last June, according to The New York Times.
After learning that his Brazilian ex-girlfriend, with whom he had a son, Amanda Ungaro, had been arrested on fraud charges in Florida, Zampolli allegedly “saw an opportunity” to land a potentially killing blow in his custody battle with her.
This is just one example of the incompetence, revenge-taking, and grifting that make up the heart of the Trump Regime’s reign of Terror. The story that keeps one like the above in the background is still the Iran War. Greg Sargent of The New Republic discusses some of the incredible ‘madness’ surrounding the machinations behind the War with Congressman Adam Smith. “Transcript: Trump War Takes Dark Turn as Leaks Unnerve Dems: ‘Madness’. In an interview, Congressman Adam Smith, the top Armed Services Democrat, sharply condemns the newly leaked war schemes—and tells us that Dems must not agree to one more dime in war funding.”
Everything we’re learning now strongly suggests that Donald Trump’s war is about to get worse. First, word leaked that the Pentagon may demand $200 billion more from Congress. Second, officials let it be known that Trump is considering the deployment of thousands of troops on the ground. Meanwhile, Trump himself just suggested to reporters that he’s envisioning even more military actions that he hasn’t even explained yet.
All this makes it absolutely clear that Congress will not just be asked to fund Trump’s war, but also that the pressure on Congress to do something about this madness will intensify. So today we’re talking to Congressman Adam Smith, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, about what Democrats will be able to do when that happens. Congressman, thanks so much for coming on.
Adam Smith: Well, thanks for having me. It’s always good to see you.
Sargent: So let’s start with all the leaks about Trump potentially sending in troops on the ground. People familiar with planning told Reuters that Trump may deploy thousands of them. The options being discussed are deploying troops to the shoreline of the Strait of Hormuz to secure passage for oil tankers and possibly sending ground forces to Kharg Island, which is the hub for oil exports, which one official describes to Reuters as “very risky.” Congressman, you talk to people at the Pentagon a fair amount. Are you getting any indications of anything like this, and what’s your overall take on it?
Smith: Yeah, no, it’s very worrisome, because the bottom line is it’s clear that Trump is not going to be able to achieve anything meaningful in Iran—which is a change of the regime and a change of action. I mean, degrading their capability is one thing, but at the cost that we’re currently experiencing—13 service members’ lives already lost, massive economic disruption, 14 countries dragged into this, civilian deaths, the tragic killing of 150 schoolgirls in Iran—massive cost, just to degrade Iran a little bit. He wants regime change. He wants something different. That’s not happening under the current plan.
Now, I don’t think it’s going to happen if he sends in a few thousand troops, either, but the pressure on him to escalate is growing in his own mind. The pressure is also growing on him to end this madness, stop this war, and recognize he’s not going to accomplish that. But we’ve sent 2,500 Marines—they’re now in the area. Another 2,500 are on their way. And you know, Marines don’t just sit in boats—they’re there for a purpose. And sadly, what we’ve learned in the last year is that when Trump masses forces, he uses them.
He did it in Latin America, first with the boat strikes, then with taking out Maduro. He did it in the Middle East when he massed these forces for the war with Iran. So if he sends troops to the region, it is distinctly possible that he’s going to use them. It would be an idiotic decision, because the ability of four or five thousand troops to really fundamentally change this war—I don’t think that’s going to succeed. But Trump doesn’t think in a linear way. He trusts his gut and his bones, apparently.
You may watch the interview or continue reading the transcript at the link. Smith and Sargent discuss the implausible reasons given for the war and the difficulty of achieving any real goal from it. As far as I can tell, it just takes the country’s mind off the Epstein files and the constant drip of incompetence and abuse of office. It’s theater that’s costing lives, taxes, and a declining economy.
And a little more dribble from what used to be the Justice Department. “Feds move to dismiss charges against officers accused of falsifying warrant in Breonna Taylor raid.” This is breaking news from the AP.
Federal prosecutors have asked a judge to dismiss the charges against two Louisville officers accused of falsifying the warrant that led police to raid Breonna Taylor’s apartment the night she was killed six years ago.
Prosecutors said in a court filing Friday that their review of the case showed the charges against former Detective Joshua Jaynes and former Sgt. Kyle Meany should be “dismissed in the interest of justice.”
Lawyers for the two didn’t immediately respond to Friday requests for comment.
Judges have twice taken a felony charge against each officer and reduced it to a misdemeanor, saying there wasn’t a direct link between the false information and Taylor’s death. Prosecutors said after the second ruling that they decided to drop the cases.
Taylor was shot to death by police when they broke down the door of her apartment while serving a no-knock drug warrant looking for a former boyfriend who no longer lived there.
Taylor’s boyfriend at the time fired at the officers, and Taylor was killed as police fired back.
Federal prosecutors under former President Joe Biden sought the charges against the officers, while President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice has asked the only officer serving prison time related to Taylor’s killing to be let out of prison while he appeals his conviction.
This headline from Wired is due to our insane #FARTUS, and for whatever reason, we got sent to war. “Iran War Puts Global Energy Markets on the Brink of a Worst-Case Scenario. “This will be so, so, so, so, so bad,” one analyst says.” This is reported by Molly Taft.
The war in Iran reached a new extreme this week, as both Israel and Iran launched strikes on oil and gas production and export facilities. The attacks up the stakes in a war that was already choking energy and commodity markets, and will threaten the long-term health of the global economy. On Friday, the International Energy Agency recommended that people work from home, drive slowly, and use gas stoves sparingly in order to alleviate price shocks from the crisis.
The situation in the Persian Gulf is so extreme, analysts told WIRED, that it’s almost unbelievable.
“This scenario is something that you give to the first-year oil analysts to say, ‘OK, if this happens …’ It’s a really interesting illustrative educational thought experiment,” says Rory Johnston, a Canadian oil market researcher. “It’s kind of like, what would happen if gravity just suddenly stopped working for 10 minutes? The things you just give to students to say, ‘Let’s put a thought experiment to something extreme and see how would the system react’? I never thought we would actually see this.”
Ellen Wald, an energy and geopolitics consultant, agrees. “This is like one of those war game simulations in energy markets,” she says.
The initial attacks on Iran earlier this month effectively closed off the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important shipping routes. The strait is the central lifeline for oil and gas exports from not only Iran, but other countries in the Middle East. The bulk of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), the world’s largest oil and gas cartel, use the strait to ship oil and gas out of the region to customers. The strait is also a critical hub for oil and gas byproducts like industrial chemicals and fertilizer. Closure of the strait sent shocks through the global economy: After the initial attacks, oil prices shot up above $100 per barrel for the first time since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
“Anytime there is any kind of military activity in the Persian Gulf or even in the Middle East, oil markets tend to get very jittery,” says Wald; closing the strait was a sign that this war could have much more extreme impacts than other conflicts. But for the first few weeks, the oil production facilities themselves remained mostly untouched. “No oil and no products were getting out, and some countries don’t have enough storage, and so they were shutting down production simply because they couldn’t store the oil,” says Wald. “But that’s the kind of thing that can be fairly quickly reversible.”
Over the past few days, however, missile strikes have started heavily targeting oil and gas infrastructure. On Thursday, Israel launched a series of strikes on various oil and gas facilities in the region, most notably the South Pars gas field, the world’s biggest natural gas field, which is jointly controlled by Iran and Qatar. Iran retaliated with counterstrikes, including on the world’s largest oil export facility in Qatar. Oil prices temporarily shot up to nearly $120 a barrel.
Israel is just doing whatever it wants to because Bibi can flatter the hell out of Trump and make him do anything. This entire thing was a huge disaster just waiting to happen. There’s even some speculation that Israel will use nukes. This is from NPR. “More Marines are headed to Middle East as Iran war reaches the 3-week mark.” This is the most current update.
More U.S. Marines are headed to the Middle East, NPR has confirmed, as the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran reaches the three-week mark.
Israel launched more strikes in and around Tehran early Friday, as Iranians marked Nowruz, the Persian New Year. Muslims around the world are also observing the end of the holy month of Ramadan.
Overnight, Iranian drones hit Kuwait’s Mina Al-Ahmadi oil refinery again, sparking fires as crews worked to contain the blaze. Authorities in the United Arab Emirates said the country’s air defenses responded to missile and drone threats from Iran with explosions echoing across Dubai as worshippers marked the Muslim holiday of Eid
There’s more on the marine deployment and other topics at the link.
Finally, safer and greater today? I sure am not. Just wondering if anyone is singing Bomb. Bomb Bomb Iran today? Never Mind. It says it’s a parody.
What’s on your reading and blogging list today?
#TrumpCult #JohnbussBskySocialJohnBuss #CadetBonespurSIranWar #highGasPrices #ICEHelpsTrumpFriend #JusticeForBreonnaTaylor #NoJustice #NoPeace #TrumpSellsFavors -
Authorities investigating crash outside Garner Amazon facility :: WRAL.com
Authorities are investigating a crash Friday night in Garner. The WRAL Breaking News Tracker spotted an overturned SUV…
#NewsBeep #News #US #USA #UnitedStates #UnitedStatesOfAmerica #BreakingNews #Amazon #crash #Garner #Headlines #JonesSausageRoad #Topstories #TopStories
https://www.newsbeep.com/us/509159/ -
Finally Friday Reads: He Said, She Said
“It might happen sooner.” John Buss, @repeat1968
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
It’s one of those days where I really wonder if I should actually get up, even though today Temple and I beat the garbage collectors to the street for a walk. We usually manage to shadow the postman. I saw a question on C-SPAN’s Facebook page that’s really worth asking. “Are you better off financially today than a year ago?” The answer for everyone I know is absolutely no. Our democracy and ability to get justice are getting worse by the minute, also.
So, yesterday, Hillary Clinton testified in a closed session about her complete lack of a relationship with Epstein, which she framed as a basic waste of everyone’s time and money. She stated that, to her knowledge, she’d never even met the guy, then told them to ask Bill. Meanwhile, we’re getting more calls for an investigation into Trump’s obvious associations. This headline from Bill Sher writing at the Washington Monthly says it all. “It’s Time for the Media to Press Trump on Allegations of Abusing a Minor. The president should be scrutinized with the same intensity as others in the Epstein Files.”
I was skeptical that the Jeffrey Epstein files would implicate President Donald Trump in illegal sexual abuse of a minor. It’s not that one cannot imagine Trump being untoward; on the contrary, a jury found him to be liable for sexual abuse. But Trump committing sex crimes against underage girls seemed dubious.
Yet inconclusive but tantalizing evidence exists in a 21-slide presentation, apparently created last summer by two joint Federal Bureau of Investigation-New York Police Department task forces, summarizing four “Jeffrey Epstein Investigations.”
A “Timeline” slide of developments in the case, from July 24, 2006, to July 22, 2025, spanning the initial Epstein investigation through Ghislaine Maxwell’s conviction and appeal, indicates that the presentation was created after that date. To put it in context, the allegations against Trump appear to come from a single witness and don’t include physical evidence, such as notes or texts.
One slide titled “Prominent Names” dishes allegations against several famous people and leads with two regarding Trump:
1. [REDACTED] stated Epstein introduced her to Trump who subsequently forced her head down to his exposed penis which she subsequently bit. In response, Trump punched her in the head and kicked her out. (date range 1983-1985, [REDACTED] would have been 13- 15)
2. [REDACTED] remember Epstein introduced her to Trump saying “This is a good one, huh” and Trump responded “Yes”. (date range roughly 1984, [REDACTED] would have been 14)
An email thread from July 24, 2025, circulating in the FBI’s New York field office, appears to include a draft of the “Prominent Names” slide text. The Trump text, which has a typo, is identical to what is in a slightly different, probably draft, slideshow.
When the latest Epstein files were released on January 30, the allegations against Trump immediately drew attention. For example, that same day, the progressive MeidasTouch Network posted the email thread on X and CNN’s Jake Tapper, among others, highlighted an email thread covering August 6 and 7, 2025, about “NTOC Names,” which refers to tips collected by the National Threat Operations Center, the bureau’s hub for receiving and vetting public tips regarding federal crimes. The thread includes Epstein-related tips and, in some cases, how federal authorities responded. One emailer notes that in one document, some rows have “yellow highlighting … for the salacious piece,” which appears to refer to the “Prominent Names” slide. (An emailer in July asks for “a sentence or two” for each of the names with “salacious statements.”)
Several tips mention that federal authorities were unable to follow up with the tipsters or verify their stories; those items were not on the “Prominent Names” slide. But one entry on Trump tracks what’s in the slide:
[REDACTED] reported an unidentified female friend who was forced to perform oral sex on President Trump approximately 35 years ago in NJ. The friend told [REDACTED] that she was approximately 13-14 years old when this occurred, and the friend allegedly bit President Trump while performing oral sex. The friend was allegedly hit in the face after she laughed about biting President Trump. The friend said she was also abused by Epstein.
The table’s “Response” column notes, “Spoke with caller who identified [REDACTED] as friend. Lead was sent to Washington Office to conduct interview.”
Some media outlets, including The Mirror, The Telegraph, The Daily Beast, and Mediaite, covered the allegation. But most reporters elided the bit-penis-hit-in-the-face allegation in favor of vague references to multiple unsubstantiated claims while the Justice Department sought to inoculate the president by stating, “Some of the documents contain untrue and sensationalist claims against President Trump.” The media’s attention gravitated to other famous names mentioned in the Epstein files, regardless of whether the files contained evidence of sexual misconduct. Several prominent figures have since resigned from their positions due to their associations with Epstein.
Then, starting on February 15, Roger Sollenberger, the independent journalist, pieced together information indicating that the FBI interviewed the accuser four times in 2019. Sollenberger suggests this means that the FBI found her “credible.” Furthermore, records of three of those interviews were not in the Epstein Files release. He also found a “Jane Doe 4” in a lawsuit against Epstein with similar biographical details, making similar allegations against an unnamed Epstein friend. Jane Doe 4 was deemed ineligible for the Epstein Victims’ Compensation Program, but the suit nonetheless appears to have led to a settlement for her from Epstein.
Bolstering the case that the FBI found the accuser credible, Nina Burleigh and Katie Chenoweth, the independent journalists, noted that, uniquely, her redacted name is routinely followed by the phrase, “PROTECT SOURCE,” which is “typically used for high-risk informants such as mafia rats.”
There is so much more to this story that I hope you take the time to read it all. The Guardian also has more information on the claim. “Epstein files contain explicit but unsubstantiated claim that Trump abused minor. Department of Justice did not release FBI memos when it uploaded millions of pages of files beginning in December.”
Three memos that describe four interviews conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in 2019 contain explicit but unsubstantiated claims that Donald Trump sexually abused a woman when she was a minor in the early 1980s with the assistance of Jeffrey Epstein, according to a Guardian review of those documents.
The Department of Justice did not release those records when it uploaded millions of pages of files related to Epstein beginning in December. The existence of the missing documents was first reported by independent journalist Roger Sollenberger and subsequently confirmed by NPR, causing outrage in Washington and sparking an investigation from congressional Democrats.
The Guardian obtained the missing FBI Form 302 reports, which memorialize 25 pages of agents’ notes from the four interviews conducted in the summer and fall of 2019. The notes describe how the woman came forward to tell agents she recognized Epstein from a photo sent by a childhood friend. Only the first session, in which she did not name Trump, made it into the public release. The Guardian has chosen not to publish the woman’s name.
All we know about the Hillary Testimony comes from Clinton herself. This is from the New York Times and reported by Annie Karni. “In Tense Deposition, Hillary Clinton Denies Knowing Epstein or His Crimes. After resisting testifying for months, the former secretary of state entered the session defiant and grew irate after a Republican leaked a photo from inside the room.”
In a lengthy opening statement her aides distributed in advance, Mrs. Clinton accused House Republicans of using her as a prop in “partisan political theater” and excoriated their investigation as “designed to protect one political party and one public official, rather than to seek truth and justice for the victims and survivors.”
“You have compelled me to testify, fully aware that I have no knowledge that would assist your investigation, in order to distract attention from President Trump’s actions and to cover them up despite legitimate calls for answers,” she said.
She added: “You have made little effort to call the people who show up most prominently in the Epstein files,” noting that not a single Republican had attended a closed-door session last week in Ohio to depose Leslie Wexner, the retail billionaire and prolific G.O.P. donor who helped Mr. Epstein build his wealth.
In a day’s worth of questioning that she later called “repetitive” and unproductive, Mrs. Clinton told the committee that she did not recall ever encountering Mr. Epstein and “never flew on his plane or visited his island, homes or offices.”
“I don’t know how many times I had to say I did not know Jeffrey Epstein,” she told reporters after the session had ended. “It’s on the record numerous times.”
The deposition briefly went off the rails when, as Republicans questioned her, Mr. Johnson’s post of the photograph showing Mrs. Clinton’s testifying while wearing a weary expression prompted an eruption in the room. Her lawyers vociferously objected and called for journalists to be allowed inside to document the proceedings. House Democrats noted that Republicans had refused to grant the Clintons’ request for a public hearing.
“We are sitting through an incredibly unserious clown show of a deposition,” Representative Yassamin Ansari, Democrat of Arizona, said, claiming Republicans were “more concerned with getting their photo op” than with holding anyone accountable.
This is from the Washington Examiner. It’s reported by David Zimmermann. “Clinton says she was asked about UFOs and Pizzagate at ‘unusual’ Epstein deposition.”
After exiting her deposition on Thursday, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton suggested some members of Congress were more concerned with UFOs and Pizzagate instead of Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell in their questions.
The high-profile witness called the House oversight committee deposition “quite unusual” as it concluded.
“I started being asked about UFOs and a series of questions about Pizzagate, one of the most vile bogus conspiracy theories that was propagated on the internet, that was serving as the basis of a member’s questions to me,” Clinton said in Chappaqua, New York, where the closed-door deposition hearing was held.
It’s unclear why Clinton was questioned on extraterrestrial life, as UFOs have nothing to do with the late convicted sex offender’s crimes. Last week, President Donald Trump said he would start declassifying government files related to the existence of aliens.
The Pizzagate conspiracy theory refers to a child sex ring linked to members of the Democratic Party, and it went viral during the 2016 presidential election cycle when Clinton was running against Trump for president. At one point, a pizza restaurant in Washington, D.C., named Comet Ping Pong was caught up in the right-wing conspiracy theory.
Clinton did not name the member who asked the unusual questions, nor whether the lawmaker was a Republican or a Democrat.
The hearing was disrupted earlier when Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) shared a photo of Clinton with conservative commentator Benny Johnson, who then posted the image on social media. As a result of the stunt, the hearing was paused for about 30 minutes. Closed-door hearings forbid unauthorized photography as it could violate House rules and confidentiality agreements.
Clinton denied she ever met Epstein and claimed to never have “any connection or communication” with the convicted sex offender, although she admitted knowing Maxwell “casually as an acquaintance.”
She criticized the GOP-led committee’s decision to reject her and her husband’s bid for public hearings.
“It was disappointing that they refused to hold a public hearing, so I wouldn’t have to be out here characterizing it for you. You could have seen it for yourself,” she told reporters. “We had asked for that. We think it would have been better for the committee and its efforts to gather whatever information they are seeking.”
The former Cabinet secretary also slammed oversight committee Republicans for skipping the recent deposition of former Victoria’s Secret CEO Les Wexner, whom the FBI labeled a co-conspirator of Epstein. Chairman James Comer (R-KY) did not attend that deposition due to an already scheduled medical procedure.
Despite her criticisms, Clinton noted the “best exchange” came toward the end of the hearing, when Comer asked a “series of significant questions” related to the investigation’s focus.
Since I’ve already mentioned polls, I think I’ll share the results of an interesting one analyzed by G. Elliott Morris in his Substack, Strength in Numbers. “New poll: Democrats’ real problem isn’t being too liberal — it’s being seen as too weak. Americans, including swing voters, see the Republican Party as 20 points more extreme than Democrats — and the Democrats as weak and ineffective. So why would the *Democrats* moderate?”
In our February poll, we asked voters whether each of 10 adjectives describes the Democratic and Republican parties. Each person was asked to rank how well each word — such as “extreme”, “elitist”, “tough”, and “weak” — described both parties on a scale from 1 to 10, with 10 indicating the word described the party very well.
The Republican Party’s defining traits in voters’ minds are extreme (60% agree), elitist (57%), tough, (56%) and cruel (51%). The percentage of Americans agreeing with descriptions of positive traits is comparatively smaller: just 41% say the party is competent, 41% say principled, and only 31% — less than a third — say the GOP can be considered empathetic.
The average American sees Democrats in a much different light. The top descriptors of the party are empathetic (54%) and principled (49%). Comparatively few people think of it as “tough” (31%), and nearly half the country calls the Democrats weak (48%) and ineffective (47%). Democrats’ competence rating is 46% — five points higher than the GOP’s — but it’s the weakness and ineffectiveness labels that dominate voters’ impressions and national discourse about the party.
The chart above is ordered by the gap between the percentage of Americans who say each descriptor applies to each party — and these gaps are revealing. Democrats lead on empathetic by 23 points (54% versus 31%) and on principled by 8 (49% versus 41%). The GOP leads on exactly one positive trait: toughness (56% versus 31%). That’s it.
Being seen as tough is an advantage in a politics where voters want parties to deliver for them no matter what, but it’s likely not worth being called cruel and elitist. In our poll, Democrats lead the Republicans on the U.S. House generic ballot by 10 percentage points among registered voters. At least in the short term, that’s a worthwhile trade.
But the Democrats’ weakness problem stands out as a particularly strong signal of intra-party dissatisfaction. When we look at how each party’s own identifiers rate their own party, the weakness gap for the Democrats really jumps out. Just 53% of Democrats call their party tough, compared to 80% of Republicans. And 31% of Democrats say their own party is weak — almost three times the 13% of Republicans who say the same about theirs.
On most traits, partisans rate their own party similarly. Democrats and Republicans are within a few points of each other on being competent, principled, and cynical. But on toughness and weakness, Democrats are far more self-critical. That matters electorally: a party whose own base doubts its strength will struggle to turn out its base. And in an era of close elections, that is not a loss a party can afford.
Those results were not much of a surprise to me. Today, it’s Bill Clinton’s turn to testify in the Epstein Investigation. NBC News has live updates on its website. “Trump administration live updates: Bill Clinton testifies in House Jeffrey Epstein probe. Clinton is the first sitting or former president to testify before members of Congress in more than 40 years.” This is reported by Rebecca Shabad.
Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, said this morning that Democrats have “real questions that deserve serious answers from former President Clinton” during his closed-door deposition in Chappaqua today.
“We have said from day one that Democrats want to talk to anyone, whether they are a Republican or a Democrat, no matter how powerful they are, whatever position that they’ve been in,” Garcia told reporters ahead of the deposition.
Garcia said that they don’t want to see another “sideshow” today like what happened during Hillary Clinton’s deposition yesterday, in which he said Republicans asked her about UFOs and conspiracy theories.
Because “Republicans have now set a new precedent, which is to bring in presidents and former presidents to testify,” Democrats are again demanding that Trump testify before their panel about his relationship with Epstein, Garcia said.
Trump appears in the Epstein files “almost more than anybody else,” Garcia said.
Trump has denied any wrongdoing, and authorities have not accused him of any wrongdoing in connection with Epstein.
They’re also reporting that lots of Diet Cokes have been brought into the building for the former President. I guess we’ll see what happens.
That’s about all I’m good for today. The entire Epstein show is getting old. I do have a local source from WDSU, the news station I watch here in New Orleans. At least a few of these sick, powerful pedophiles are feeling a bit of justice. “Here’s who has faced fallout from the Epstein files. Since Congress and the Department of Justice released the Epstein files, several high-profile people have been burned by past links to convicted sex-offender.” Please note the word several. I guess that’s a start though.
Several individuals in government, private companies and universities have faced fallout over alleged links to convicted sex offender and financier Jeffrey Epstein.
The Get the Facts Data Team has created a timeline of reports on individuals who have faced professional or reputational consequences or legal action since Epstein’s arrest in 2019.
Among those who faced professional or reputational consequences were CEOs who resigned or sold their companies, faculty who were suspended and public figures who issued apologies.
You may read the list and the ‘consequences’ at the link.
What’s on your Reading, Action, and Blogging list today?
#2026Polls #JohnbussBskySocial #BillClintonTestimony #HillaryClintonTestimony #RepRobertGarcia #TheEpsteinFiles -
Finally Friday Reads: He Said, She Said
“It might happen sooner.” John Buss, @repeat1968
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
It’s one of those days where I really wonder if I should actually get up, even though today Temple and I beat the garbage collectors to the street for a walk. We usually manage to shadow the postman. I saw a question on C-SPAN’s Facebook page that’s really worth asking. “Are you better off financially today than a year ago?” The answer for everyone I know is absolutely no. Our democracy and ability to get justice are getting worse by the minute, also.
So, yesterday, Hillary Clinton testified in a closed session about her complete lack of a relationship with Epstein, which she framed as a basic waste of everyone’s time and money. She stated that, to her knowledge, she’d never even met the guy, then told them to ask Bill. Meanwhile, we’re getting more calls for an investigation into Trump’s obvious associations. This headline from Bill Sher writing at the Washington Monthly says it all. “It’s Time for the Media to Press Trump on Allegations of Abusing a Minor. The president should be scrutinized with the same intensity as others in the Epstein Files.”
I was skeptical that the Jeffrey Epstein files would implicate President Donald Trump in illegal sexual abuse of a minor. It’s not that one cannot imagine Trump being untoward; on the contrary, a jury found him to be liable for sexual abuse. But Trump committing sex crimes against underage girls seemed dubious.
Yet inconclusive but tantalizing evidence exists in a 21-slide presentation, apparently created last summer by two joint Federal Bureau of Investigation-New York Police Department task forces, summarizing four “Jeffrey Epstein Investigations.”
A “Timeline” slide of developments in the case, from July 24, 2006, to July 22, 2025, spanning the initial Epstein investigation through Ghislaine Maxwell’s conviction and appeal, indicates that the presentation was created after that date. To put it in context, the allegations against Trump appear to come from a single witness and don’t include physical evidence, such as notes or texts.
One slide titled “Prominent Names” dishes allegations against several famous people and leads with two regarding Trump:
1. [REDACTED] stated Epstein introduced her to Trump who subsequently forced her head down to his exposed penis which she subsequently bit. In response, Trump punched her in the head and kicked her out. (date range 1983-1985, [REDACTED] would have been 13- 15)
2. [REDACTED] remember Epstein introduced her to Trump saying “This is a good one, huh” and Trump responded “Yes”. (date range roughly 1984, [REDACTED] would have been 14)
An email thread from July 24, 2025, circulating in the FBI’s New York field office, appears to include a draft of the “Prominent Names” slide text. The Trump text, which has a typo, is identical to what is in a slightly different, probably draft, slideshow.
When the latest Epstein files were released on January 30, the allegations against Trump immediately drew attention. For example, that same day, the progressive MeidasTouch Network posted the email thread on X and CNN’s Jake Tapper, among others, highlighted an email thread covering August 6 and 7, 2025, about “NTOC Names,” which refers to tips collected by the National Threat Operations Center, the bureau’s hub for receiving and vetting public tips regarding federal crimes. The thread includes Epstein-related tips and, in some cases, how federal authorities responded. One emailer notes that in one document, some rows have “yellow highlighting … for the salacious piece,” which appears to refer to the “Prominent Names” slide. (An emailer in July asks for “a sentence or two” for each of the names with “salacious statements.”)
Several tips mention that federal authorities were unable to follow up with the tipsters or verify their stories; those items were not on the “Prominent Names” slide. But one entry on Trump tracks what’s in the slide:
[REDACTED] reported an unidentified female friend who was forced to perform oral sex on President Trump approximately 35 years ago in NJ. The friend told [REDACTED] that she was approximately 13-14 years old when this occurred, and the friend allegedly bit President Trump while performing oral sex. The friend was allegedly hit in the face after she laughed about biting President Trump. The friend said she was also abused by Epstein.
The table’s “Response” column notes, “Spoke with caller who identified [REDACTED] as friend. Lead was sent to Washington Office to conduct interview.”
Some media outlets, including The Mirror, The Telegraph, The Daily Beast, and Mediaite, covered the allegation. But most reporters elided the bit-penis-hit-in-the-face allegation in favor of vague references to multiple unsubstantiated claims while the Justice Department sought to inoculate the president by stating, “Some of the documents contain untrue and sensationalist claims against President Trump.” The media’s attention gravitated to other famous names mentioned in the Epstein files, regardless of whether the files contained evidence of sexual misconduct. Several prominent figures have since resigned from their positions due to their associations with Epstein.
Then, starting on February 15, Roger Sollenberger, the independent journalist, pieced together information indicating that the FBI interviewed the accuser four times in 2019. Sollenberger suggests this means that the FBI found her “credible.” Furthermore, records of three of those interviews were not in the Epstein Files release. He also found a “Jane Doe 4” in a lawsuit against Epstein with similar biographical details, making similar allegations against an unnamed Epstein friend. Jane Doe 4 was deemed ineligible for the Epstein Victims’ Compensation Program, but the suit nonetheless appears to have led to a settlement for her from Epstein.
Bolstering the case that the FBI found the accuser credible, Nina Burleigh and Katie Chenoweth, the independent journalists, noted that, uniquely, her redacted name is routinely followed by the phrase, “PROTECT SOURCE,” which is “typically used for high-risk informants such as mafia rats.”
There is so much more to this story that I hope you take the time to read it all. The Guardian also has more information on the claim. “Epstein files contain explicit but unsubstantiated claim that Trump abused minor. Department of Justice did not release FBI memos when it uploaded millions of pages of files beginning in December.”
Three memos that describe four interviews conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in 2019 contain explicit but unsubstantiated claims that Donald Trump sexually abused a woman when she was a minor in the early 1980s with the assistance of Jeffrey Epstein, according to a Guardian review of those documents.
The Department of Justice did not release those records when it uploaded millions of pages of files related to Epstein beginning in December. The existence of the missing documents was first reported by independent journalist Roger Sollenberger and subsequently confirmed by NPR, causing outrage in Washington and sparking an investigation from congressional Democrats.
The Guardian obtained the missing FBI Form 302 reports, which memorialize 25 pages of agents’ notes from the four interviews conducted in the summer and fall of 2019. The notes describe how the woman came forward to tell agents she recognized Epstein from a photo sent by a childhood friend. Only the first session, in which she did not name Trump, made it into the public release. The Guardian has chosen not to publish the woman’s name.
All we know about the Hillary Testimony comes from Clinton herself. This is from the New York Times and reported by Annie Karni. “In Tense Deposition, Hillary Clinton Denies Knowing Epstein or His Crimes. After resisting testifying for months, the former secretary of state entered the session defiant and grew irate after a Republican leaked a photo from inside the room.”
In a lengthy opening statement her aides distributed in advance, Mrs. Clinton accused House Republicans of using her as a prop in “partisan political theater” and excoriated their investigation as “designed to protect one political party and one public official, rather than to seek truth and justice for the victims and survivors.”
“You have compelled me to testify, fully aware that I have no knowledge that would assist your investigation, in order to distract attention from President Trump’s actions and to cover them up despite legitimate calls for answers,” she said.
She added: “You have made little effort to call the people who show up most prominently in the Epstein files,” noting that not a single Republican had attended a closed-door session last week in Ohio to depose Leslie Wexner, the retail billionaire and prolific G.O.P. donor who helped Mr. Epstein build his wealth.
In a day’s worth of questioning that she later called “repetitive” and unproductive, Mrs. Clinton told the committee that she did not recall ever encountering Mr. Epstein and “never flew on his plane or visited his island, homes or offices.”
“I don’t know how many times I had to say I did not know Jeffrey Epstein,” she told reporters after the session had ended. “It’s on the record numerous times.”
The deposition briefly went off the rails when, as Republicans questioned her, Mr. Johnson’s post of the photograph showing Mrs. Clinton’s testifying while wearing a weary expression prompted an eruption in the room. Her lawyers vociferously objected and called for journalists to be allowed inside to document the proceedings. House Democrats noted that Republicans had refused to grant the Clintons’ request for a public hearing.
“We are sitting through an incredibly unserious clown show of a deposition,” Representative Yassamin Ansari, Democrat of Arizona, said, claiming Republicans were “more concerned with getting their photo op” than with holding anyone accountable.
This is from the Washington Examiner. It’s reported by David Zimmermann. “Clinton says she was asked about UFOs and Pizzagate at ‘unusual’ Epstein deposition.”
After exiting her deposition on Thursday, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton suggested some members of Congress were more concerned with UFOs and Pizzagate instead of Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell in their questions.
The high-profile witness called the House oversight committee deposition “quite unusual” as it concluded.
“I started being asked about UFOs and a series of questions about Pizzagate, one of the most vile bogus conspiracy theories that was propagated on the internet, that was serving as the basis of a member’s questions to me,” Clinton said in Chappaqua, New York, where the closed-door deposition hearing was held.
It’s unclear why Clinton was questioned on extraterrestrial life, as UFOs have nothing to do with the late convicted sex offender’s crimes. Last week, President Donald Trump said he would start declassifying government files related to the existence of aliens.
The Pizzagate conspiracy theory refers to a child sex ring linked to members of the Democratic Party, and it went viral during the 2016 presidential election cycle when Clinton was running against Trump for president. At one point, a pizza restaurant in Washington, D.C., named Comet Ping Pong was caught up in the right-wing conspiracy theory.
Clinton did not name the member who asked the unusual questions, nor whether the lawmaker was a Republican or a Democrat.
The hearing was disrupted earlier when Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) shared a photo of Clinton with conservative commentator Benny Johnson, who then posted the image on social media. As a result of the stunt, the hearing was paused for about 30 minutes. Closed-door hearings forbid unauthorized photography as it could violate House rules and confidentiality agreements.
Clinton denied she ever met Epstein and claimed to never have “any connection or communication” with the convicted sex offender, although she admitted knowing Maxwell “casually as an acquaintance.”
She criticized the GOP-led committee’s decision to reject her and her husband’s bid for public hearings.
“It was disappointing that they refused to hold a public hearing, so I wouldn’t have to be out here characterizing it for you. You could have seen it for yourself,” she told reporters. “We had asked for that. We think it would have been better for the committee and its efforts to gather whatever information they are seeking.”
The former Cabinet secretary also slammed oversight committee Republicans for skipping the recent deposition of former Victoria’s Secret CEO Les Wexner, whom the FBI labeled a co-conspirator of Epstein. Chairman James Comer (R-KY) did not attend that deposition due to an already scheduled medical procedure.
Despite her criticisms, Clinton noted the “best exchange” came toward the end of the hearing, when Comer asked a “series of significant questions” related to the investigation’s focus.
Since I’ve already mentioned polls, I think I’ll share the results of an interesting one analyzed by G. Elliott Morris in his Substack, Strength in Numbers. “New poll: Democrats’ real problem isn’t being too liberal — it’s being seen as too weak. Americans, including swing voters, see the Republican Party as 20 points more extreme than Democrats — and the Democrats as weak and ineffective. So why would the *Democrats* moderate?”
In our February poll, we asked voters whether each of 10 adjectives describes the Democratic and Republican parties. Each person was asked to rank how well each word — such as “extreme”, “elitist”, “tough”, and “weak” — described both parties on a scale from 1 to 10, with 10 indicating the word described the party very well.
The Republican Party’s defining traits in voters’ minds are extreme (60% agree), elitist (57%), tough, (56%) and cruel (51%). The percentage of Americans agreeing with descriptions of positive traits is comparatively smaller: just 41% say the party is competent, 41% say principled, and only 31% — less than a third — say the GOP can be considered empathetic.
The average American sees Democrats in a much different light. The top descriptors of the party are empathetic (54%) and principled (49%). Comparatively few people think of it as “tough” (31%), and nearly half the country calls the Democrats weak (48%) and ineffective (47%). Democrats’ competence rating is 46% — five points higher than the GOP’s — but it’s the weakness and ineffectiveness labels that dominate voters’ impressions and national discourse about the party.
The chart above is ordered by the gap between the percentage of Americans who say each descriptor applies to each party — and these gaps are revealing. Democrats lead on empathetic by 23 points (54% versus 31%) and on principled by 8 (49% versus 41%). The GOP leads on exactly one positive trait: toughness (56% versus 31%). That’s it.
Being seen as tough is an advantage in a politics where voters want parties to deliver for them no matter what, but it’s likely not worth being called cruel and elitist. In our poll, Democrats lead the Republicans on the U.S. House generic ballot by 10 percentage points among registered voters. At least in the short term, that’s a worthwhile trade.
But the Democrats’ weakness problem stands out as a particularly strong signal of intra-party dissatisfaction. When we look at how each party’s own identifiers rate their own party, the weakness gap for the Democrats really jumps out. Just 53% of Democrats call their party tough, compared to 80% of Republicans. And 31% of Democrats say their own party is weak — almost three times the 13% of Republicans who say the same about theirs.
On most traits, partisans rate their own party similarly. Democrats and Republicans are within a few points of each other on being competent, principled, and cynical. But on toughness and weakness, Democrats are far more self-critical. That matters electorally: a party whose own base doubts its strength will struggle to turn out its base. And in an era of close elections, that is not a loss a party can afford.
Those results were not much of a surprise to me. Today, it’s Bill Clinton’s turn to testify in the Epstein Investigation. NBC News has live updates on its website. “Trump administration live updates: Bill Clinton testifies in House Jeffrey Epstein probe. Clinton is the first sitting or former president to testify before members of Congress in more than 40 years.” This is reported by Rebecca Shabad.
Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, said this morning that Democrats have “real questions that deserve serious answers from former President Clinton” during his closed-door deposition in Chappaqua today.
“We have said from day one that Democrats want to talk to anyone, whether they are a Republican or a Democrat, no matter how powerful they are, whatever position that they’ve been in,” Garcia told reporters ahead of the deposition.
Garcia said that they don’t want to see another “sideshow” today like what happened during Hillary Clinton’s deposition yesterday, in which he said Republicans asked her about UFOs and conspiracy theories.
Because “Republicans have now set a new precedent, which is to bring in presidents and former presidents to testify,” Democrats are again demanding that Trump testify before their panel about his relationship with Epstein, Garcia said.
Trump appears in the Epstein files “almost more than anybody else,” Garcia said.
Trump has denied any wrongdoing, and authorities have not accused him of any wrongdoing in connection with Epstein.
They’re also reporting that lots of Diet Cokes have been brought into the building for the former President. I guess we’ll see what happens.
That’s about all I’m good for today. The entire Epstein show is getting old. I do have a local source from WDSU, the news station I watch here in New Orleans. At least a few of these sick, powerful pedophiles are feeling a bit of justice. “Here’s who has faced fallout from the Epstein files. Since Congress and the Department of Justice released the Epstein files, several high-profile people have been burned by past links to convicted sex-offender.” Please note the word several. I guess that’s a start though.
Several individuals in government, private companies and universities have faced fallout over alleged links to convicted sex offender and financier Jeffrey Epstein.
The Get the Facts Data Team has created a timeline of reports on individuals who have faced professional or reputational consequences or legal action since Epstein’s arrest in 2019.
Among those who faced professional or reputational consequences were CEOs who resigned or sold their companies, faculty who were suspended and public figures who issued apologies.
You may read the list and the ‘consequences’ at the link.
What’s on your Reading, Action, and Blogging list today?
#2026Polls #JohnbussBskySocial #BillClintonTestimony #HillaryClintonTestimony #RepRobertGarcia #TheEpsteinFiles -
Finally Friday Reads: He Said, She Said
“It might happen sooner.” John Buss, @repeat1968
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
It’s one of those days where I really wonder if I should actually get up, even though today Temple and I beat the garbage collectors to the street for a walk. We usually manage to shadow the postman. I saw a question on C-SPAN’s Facebook page that’s really worth asking. “Are you better off financially today than a year ago?” The answer for everyone I know is absolutely no. Our democracy and ability to get justice are getting worse by the minute, also.
So, yesterday, Hillary Clinton testified in a closed session about her complete lack of a relationship with Epstein, which she framed as a basic waste of everyone’s time and money. She stated that, to her knowledge, she’d never even met the guy, then told them to ask Bill. Meanwhile, we’re getting more calls for an investigation into Trump’s obvious associations. This headline from Bill Sher writing at the Washington Monthly says it all. “It’s Time for the Media to Press Trump on Allegations of Abusing a Minor. The president should be scrutinized with the same intensity as others in the Epstein Files.”
I was skeptical that the Jeffrey Epstein files would implicate President Donald Trump in illegal sexual abuse of a minor. It’s not that one cannot imagine Trump being untoward; on the contrary, a jury found him to be liable for sexual abuse. But Trump committing sex crimes against underage girls seemed dubious.
Yet inconclusive but tantalizing evidence exists in a 21-slide presentation, apparently created last summer by two joint Federal Bureau of Investigation-New York Police Department task forces, summarizing four “Jeffrey Epstein Investigations.”
A “Timeline” slide of developments in the case, from July 24, 2006, to July 22, 2025, spanning the initial Epstein investigation through Ghislaine Maxwell’s conviction and appeal, indicates that the presentation was created after that date. To put it in context, the allegations against Trump appear to come from a single witness and don’t include physical evidence, such as notes or texts.
One slide titled “Prominent Names” dishes allegations against several famous people and leads with two regarding Trump:
1. [REDACTED] stated Epstein introduced her to Trump who subsequently forced her head down to his exposed penis which she subsequently bit. In response, Trump punched her in the head and kicked her out. (date range 1983-1985, [REDACTED] would have been 13- 15)
2. [REDACTED] remember Epstein introduced her to Trump saying “This is a good one, huh” and Trump responded “Yes”. (date range roughly 1984, [REDACTED] would have been 14)
An email thread from July 24, 2025, circulating in the FBI’s New York field office, appears to include a draft of the “Prominent Names” slide text. The Trump text, which has a typo, is identical to what is in a slightly different, probably draft, slideshow.
When the latest Epstein files were released on January 30, the allegations against Trump immediately drew attention. For example, that same day, the progressive MeidasTouch Network posted the email thread on X and CNN’s Jake Tapper, among others, highlighted an email thread covering August 6 and 7, 2025, about “NTOC Names,” which refers to tips collected by the National Threat Operations Center, the bureau’s hub for receiving and vetting public tips regarding federal crimes. The thread includes Epstein-related tips and, in some cases, how federal authorities responded. One emailer notes that in one document, some rows have “yellow highlighting … for the salacious piece,” which appears to refer to the “Prominent Names” slide. (An emailer in July asks for “a sentence or two” for each of the names with “salacious statements.”)
Several tips mention that federal authorities were unable to follow up with the tipsters or verify their stories; those items were not on the “Prominent Names” slide. But one entry on Trump tracks what’s in the slide:
[REDACTED] reported an unidentified female friend who was forced to perform oral sex on President Trump approximately 35 years ago in NJ. The friend told [REDACTED] that she was approximately 13-14 years old when this occurred, and the friend allegedly bit President Trump while performing oral sex. The friend was allegedly hit in the face after she laughed about biting President Trump. The friend said she was also abused by Epstein.
The table’s “Response” column notes, “Spoke with caller who identified [REDACTED] as friend. Lead was sent to Washington Office to conduct interview.”
Some media outlets, including The Mirror, The Telegraph, The Daily Beast, and Mediaite, covered the allegation. But most reporters elided the bit-penis-hit-in-the-face allegation in favor of vague references to multiple unsubstantiated claims while the Justice Department sought to inoculate the president by stating, “Some of the documents contain untrue and sensationalist claims against President Trump.” The media’s attention gravitated to other famous names mentioned in the Epstein files, regardless of whether the files contained evidence of sexual misconduct. Several prominent figures have since resigned from their positions due to their associations with Epstein.
Then, starting on February 15, Roger Sollenberger, the independent journalist, pieced together information indicating that the FBI interviewed the accuser four times in 2019. Sollenberger suggests this means that the FBI found her “credible.” Furthermore, records of three of those interviews were not in the Epstein Files release. He also found a “Jane Doe 4” in a lawsuit against Epstein with similar biographical details, making similar allegations against an unnamed Epstein friend. Jane Doe 4 was deemed ineligible for the Epstein Victims’ Compensation Program, but the suit nonetheless appears to have led to a settlement for her from Epstein.
Bolstering the case that the FBI found the accuser credible, Nina Burleigh and Katie Chenoweth, the independent journalists, noted that, uniquely, her redacted name is routinely followed by the phrase, “PROTECT SOURCE,” which is “typically used for high-risk informants such as mafia rats.”
There is so much more to this story that I hope you take the time to read it all. The Guardian also has more information on the claim. “Epstein files contain explicit but unsubstantiated claim that Trump abused minor. Department of Justice did not release FBI memos when it uploaded millions of pages of files beginning in December.”
Three memos that describe four interviews conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in 2019 contain explicit but unsubstantiated claims that Donald Trump sexually abused a woman when she was a minor in the early 1980s with the assistance of Jeffrey Epstein, according to a Guardian review of those documents.
The Department of Justice did not release those records when it uploaded millions of pages of files related to Epstein beginning in December. The existence of the missing documents was first reported by independent journalist Roger Sollenberger and subsequently confirmed by NPR, causing outrage in Washington and sparking an investigation from congressional Democrats.
The Guardian obtained the missing FBI Form 302 reports, which memorialize 25 pages of agents’ notes from the four interviews conducted in the summer and fall of 2019. The notes describe how the woman came forward to tell agents she recognized Epstein from a photo sent by a childhood friend. Only the first session, in which she did not name Trump, made it into the public release. The Guardian has chosen not to publish the woman’s name.
All we know about the Hillary Testimony comes from Clinton herself. This is from the New York Times and reported by Annie Karni. “In Tense Deposition, Hillary Clinton Denies Knowing Epstein or His Crimes. After resisting testifying for months, the former secretary of state entered the session defiant and grew irate after a Republican leaked a photo from inside the room.”
In a lengthy opening statement her aides distributed in advance, Mrs. Clinton accused House Republicans of using her as a prop in “partisan political theater” and excoriated their investigation as “designed to protect one political party and one public official, rather than to seek truth and justice for the victims and survivors.”
“You have compelled me to testify, fully aware that I have no knowledge that would assist your investigation, in order to distract attention from President Trump’s actions and to cover them up despite legitimate calls for answers,” she said.
She added: “You have made little effort to call the people who show up most prominently in the Epstein files,” noting that not a single Republican had attended a closed-door session last week in Ohio to depose Leslie Wexner, the retail billionaire and prolific G.O.P. donor who helped Mr. Epstein build his wealth.
In a day’s worth of questioning that she later called “repetitive” and unproductive, Mrs. Clinton told the committee that she did not recall ever encountering Mr. Epstein and “never flew on his plane or visited his island, homes or offices.”
“I don’t know how many times I had to say I did not know Jeffrey Epstein,” she told reporters after the session had ended. “It’s on the record numerous times.”
The deposition briefly went off the rails when, as Republicans questioned her, Mr. Johnson’s post of the photograph showing Mrs. Clinton’s testifying while wearing a weary expression prompted an eruption in the room. Her lawyers vociferously objected and called for journalists to be allowed inside to document the proceedings. House Democrats noted that Republicans had refused to grant the Clintons’ request for a public hearing.
“We are sitting through an incredibly unserious clown show of a deposition,” Representative Yassamin Ansari, Democrat of Arizona, said, claiming Republicans were “more concerned with getting their photo op” than with holding anyone accountable.
This is from the Washington Examiner. It’s reported by David Zimmermann. “Clinton says she was asked about UFOs and Pizzagate at ‘unusual’ Epstein deposition.”
After exiting her deposition on Thursday, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton suggested some members of Congress were more concerned with UFOs and Pizzagate instead of Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell in their questions.
The high-profile witness called the House oversight committee deposition “quite unusual” as it concluded.
“I started being asked about UFOs and a series of questions about Pizzagate, one of the most vile bogus conspiracy theories that was propagated on the internet, that was serving as the basis of a member’s questions to me,” Clinton said in Chappaqua, New York, where the closed-door deposition hearing was held.
It’s unclear why Clinton was questioned on extraterrestrial life, as UFOs have nothing to do with the late convicted sex offender’s crimes. Last week, President Donald Trump said he would start declassifying government files related to the existence of aliens.
The Pizzagate conspiracy theory refers to a child sex ring linked to members of the Democratic Party, and it went viral during the 2016 presidential election cycle when Clinton was running against Trump for president. At one point, a pizza restaurant in Washington, D.C., named Comet Ping Pong was caught up in the right-wing conspiracy theory.
Clinton did not name the member who asked the unusual questions, nor whether the lawmaker was a Republican or a Democrat.
The hearing was disrupted earlier when Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) shared a photo of Clinton with conservative commentator Benny Johnson, who then posted the image on social media. As a result of the stunt, the hearing was paused for about 30 minutes. Closed-door hearings forbid unauthorized photography as it could violate House rules and confidentiality agreements.
Clinton denied she ever met Epstein and claimed to never have “any connection or communication” with the convicted sex offender, although she admitted knowing Maxwell “casually as an acquaintance.”
She criticized the GOP-led committee’s decision to reject her and her husband’s bid for public hearings.
“It was disappointing that they refused to hold a public hearing, so I wouldn’t have to be out here characterizing it for you. You could have seen it for yourself,” she told reporters. “We had asked for that. We think it would have been better for the committee and its efforts to gather whatever information they are seeking.”
The former Cabinet secretary also slammed oversight committee Republicans for skipping the recent deposition of former Victoria’s Secret CEO Les Wexner, whom the FBI labeled a co-conspirator of Epstein. Chairman James Comer (R-KY) did not attend that deposition due to an already scheduled medical procedure.
Despite her criticisms, Clinton noted the “best exchange” came toward the end of the hearing, when Comer asked a “series of significant questions” related to the investigation’s focus.
Since I’ve already mentioned polls, I think I’ll share the results of an interesting one analyzed by G. Elliott Morris in his Substack, Strength in Numbers. “New poll: Democrats’ real problem isn’t being too liberal — it’s being seen as too weak. Americans, including swing voters, see the Republican Party as 20 points more extreme than Democrats — and the Democrats as weak and ineffective. So why would the *Democrats* moderate?”
In our February poll, we asked voters whether each of 10 adjectives describes the Democratic and Republican parties. Each person was asked to rank how well each word — such as “extreme”, “elitist”, “tough”, and “weak” — described both parties on a scale from 1 to 10, with 10 indicating the word described the party very well.
The Republican Party’s defining traits in voters’ minds are extreme (60% agree), elitist (57%), tough, (56%) and cruel (51%). The percentage of Americans agreeing with descriptions of positive traits is comparatively smaller: just 41% say the party is competent, 41% say principled, and only 31% — less than a third — say the GOP can be considered empathetic.
The average American sees Democrats in a much different light. The top descriptors of the party are empathetic (54%) and principled (49%). Comparatively few people think of it as “tough” (31%), and nearly half the country calls the Democrats weak (48%) and ineffective (47%). Democrats’ competence rating is 46% — five points higher than the GOP’s — but it’s the weakness and ineffectiveness labels that dominate voters’ impressions and national discourse about the party.
The chart above is ordered by the gap between the percentage of Americans who say each descriptor applies to each party — and these gaps are revealing. Democrats lead on empathetic by 23 points (54% versus 31%) and on principled by 8 (49% versus 41%). The GOP leads on exactly one positive trait: toughness (56% versus 31%). That’s it.
Being seen as tough is an advantage in a politics where voters want parties to deliver for them no matter what, but it’s likely not worth being called cruel and elitist. In our poll, Democrats lead the Republicans on the U.S. House generic ballot by 10 percentage points among registered voters. At least in the short term, that’s a worthwhile trade.
But the Democrats’ weakness problem stands out as a particularly strong signal of intra-party dissatisfaction. When we look at how each party’s own identifiers rate their own party, the weakness gap for the Democrats really jumps out. Just 53% of Democrats call their party tough, compared to 80% of Republicans. And 31% of Democrats say their own party is weak — almost three times the 13% of Republicans who say the same about theirs.
On most traits, partisans rate their own party similarly. Democrats and Republicans are within a few points of each other on being competent, principled, and cynical. But on toughness and weakness, Democrats are far more self-critical. That matters electorally: a party whose own base doubts its strength will struggle to turn out its base. And in an era of close elections, that is not a loss a party can afford.
Those results were not much of a surprise to me. Today, it’s Bill Clinton’s turn to testify in the Epstein Investigation. NBC News has live updates on its website. “Trump administration live updates: Bill Clinton testifies in House Jeffrey Epstein probe. Clinton is the first sitting or former president to testify before members of Congress in more than 40 years.” This is reported by Rebecca Shabad.
Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, said this morning that Democrats have “real questions that deserve serious answers from former President Clinton” during his closed-door deposition in Chappaqua today.
“We have said from day one that Democrats want to talk to anyone, whether they are a Republican or a Democrat, no matter how powerful they are, whatever position that they’ve been in,” Garcia told reporters ahead of the deposition.
Garcia said that they don’t want to see another “sideshow” today like what happened during Hillary Clinton’s deposition yesterday, in which he said Republicans asked her about UFOs and conspiracy theories.
Because “Republicans have now set a new precedent, which is to bring in presidents and former presidents to testify,” Democrats are again demanding that Trump testify before their panel about his relationship with Epstein, Garcia said.
Trump appears in the Epstein files “almost more than anybody else,” Garcia said.
Trump has denied any wrongdoing, and authorities have not accused him of any wrongdoing in connection with Epstein.
They’re also reporting that lots of Diet Cokes have been brought into the building for the former President. I guess we’ll see what happens.
That’s about all I’m good for today. The entire Epstein show is getting old. I do have a local source from WDSU, the news station I watch here in New Orleans. At least a few of these sick, powerful pedophiles are feeling a bit of justice. “Here’s who has faced fallout from the Epstein files. Since Congress and the Department of Justice released the Epstein files, several high-profile people have been burned by past links to convicted sex-offender.” Please note the word several. I guess that’s a start though.
Several individuals in government, private companies and universities have faced fallout over alleged links to convicted sex offender and financier Jeffrey Epstein.
The Get the Facts Data Team has created a timeline of reports on individuals who have faced professional or reputational consequences or legal action since Epstein’s arrest in 2019.
Among those who faced professional or reputational consequences were CEOs who resigned or sold their companies, faculty who were suspended and public figures who issued apologies.
You may read the list and the ‘consequences’ at the link.
What’s on your Reading, Action, and Blogging list today?
#2026Polls #JohnbussBskySocial #BillClintonTestimony #HillaryClintonTestimony #RepRobertGarcia #TheEpsteinFiles -
Finally Friday Reads: He Said, She Said
“It might happen sooner.” John Buss, @repeat1968
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
It’s one of those days where I really wonder if I should actually get up, even though today Temple and I beat the garbage collectors to the street for a walk. We usually manage to shadow the postman. I saw a question on C-SPAN’s Facebook page that’s really worth asking. “Are you better off financially today than a year ago?” The answer for everyone I know is absolutely no. Our democracy and ability to get justice are getting worse by the minute, also.
So, yesterday, Hillary Clinton testified in a closed session about her complete lack of a relationship with Epstein, which she framed as a basic waste of everyone’s time and money. She stated that, to her knowledge, she’d never even met the guy, then told them to ask Bill. Meanwhile, we’re getting more calls for an investigation into Trump’s obvious associations. This headline from Bill Sher writing at the Washington Monthly says it all. “It’s Time for the Media to Press Trump on Allegations of Abusing a Minor. The president should be scrutinized with the same intensity as others in the Epstein Files.”
I was skeptical that the Jeffrey Epstein files would implicate President Donald Trump in illegal sexual abuse of a minor. It’s not that one cannot imagine Trump being untoward; on the contrary, a jury found him to be liable for sexual abuse. But Trump committing sex crimes against underage girls seemed dubious.
Yet inconclusive but tantalizing evidence exists in a 21-slide presentation, apparently created last summer by two joint Federal Bureau of Investigation-New York Police Department task forces, summarizing four “Jeffrey Epstein Investigations.”
A “Timeline” slide of developments in the case, from July 24, 2006, to July 22, 2025, spanning the initial Epstein investigation through Ghislaine Maxwell’s conviction and appeal, indicates that the presentation was created after that date. To put it in context, the allegations against Trump appear to come from a single witness and don’t include physical evidence, such as notes or texts.
One slide titled “Prominent Names” dishes allegations against several famous people and leads with two regarding Trump:
1. [REDACTED] stated Epstein introduced her to Trump who subsequently forced her head down to his exposed penis which she subsequently bit. In response, Trump punched her in the head and kicked her out. (date range 1983-1985, [REDACTED] would have been 13- 15)
2. [REDACTED] remember Epstein introduced her to Trump saying “This is a good one, huh” and Trump responded “Yes”. (date range roughly 1984, [REDACTED] would have been 14)
An email thread from July 24, 2025, circulating in the FBI’s New York field office, appears to include a draft of the “Prominent Names” slide text. The Trump text, which has a typo, is identical to what is in a slightly different, probably draft, slideshow.
When the latest Epstein files were released on January 30, the allegations against Trump immediately drew attention. For example, that same day, the progressive MeidasTouch Network posted the email thread on X and CNN’s Jake Tapper, among others, highlighted an email thread covering August 6 and 7, 2025, about “NTOC Names,” which refers to tips collected by the National Threat Operations Center, the bureau’s hub for receiving and vetting public tips regarding federal crimes. The thread includes Epstein-related tips and, in some cases, how federal authorities responded. One emailer notes that in one document, some rows have “yellow highlighting … for the salacious piece,” which appears to refer to the “Prominent Names” slide. (An emailer in July asks for “a sentence or two” for each of the names with “salacious statements.”)
Several tips mention that federal authorities were unable to follow up with the tipsters or verify their stories; those items were not on the “Prominent Names” slide. But one entry on Trump tracks what’s in the slide:
[REDACTED] reported an unidentified female friend who was forced to perform oral sex on President Trump approximately 35 years ago in NJ. The friend told [REDACTED] that she was approximately 13-14 years old when this occurred, and the friend allegedly bit President Trump while performing oral sex. The friend was allegedly hit in the face after she laughed about biting President Trump. The friend said she was also abused by Epstein.
The table’s “Response” column notes, “Spoke with caller who identified [REDACTED] as friend. Lead was sent to Washington Office to conduct interview.”
Some media outlets, including The Mirror, The Telegraph, The Daily Beast, and Mediaite, covered the allegation. But most reporters elided the bit-penis-hit-in-the-face allegation in favor of vague references to multiple unsubstantiated claims while the Justice Department sought to inoculate the president by stating, “Some of the documents contain untrue and sensationalist claims against President Trump.” The media’s attention gravitated to other famous names mentioned in the Epstein files, regardless of whether the files contained evidence of sexual misconduct. Several prominent figures have since resigned from their positions due to their associations with Epstein.
Then, starting on February 15, Roger Sollenberger, the independent journalist, pieced together information indicating that the FBI interviewed the accuser four times in 2019. Sollenberger suggests this means that the FBI found her “credible.” Furthermore, records of three of those interviews were not in the Epstein Files release. He also found a “Jane Doe 4” in a lawsuit against Epstein with similar biographical details, making similar allegations against an unnamed Epstein friend. Jane Doe 4 was deemed ineligible for the Epstein Victims’ Compensation Program, but the suit nonetheless appears to have led to a settlement for her from Epstein.
Bolstering the case that the FBI found the accuser credible, Nina Burleigh and Katie Chenoweth, the independent journalists, noted that, uniquely, her redacted name is routinely followed by the phrase, “PROTECT SOURCE,” which is “typically used for high-risk informants such as mafia rats.”
There is so much more to this story that I hope you take the time to read it all. The Guardian also has more information on the claim. “Epstein files contain explicit but unsubstantiated claim that Trump abused minor. Department of Justice did not release FBI memos when it uploaded millions of pages of files beginning in December.”
Three memos that describe four interviews conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in 2019 contain explicit but unsubstantiated claims that Donald Trump sexually abused a woman when she was a minor in the early 1980s with the assistance of Jeffrey Epstein, according to a Guardian review of those documents.
The Department of Justice did not release those records when it uploaded millions of pages of files related to Epstein beginning in December. The existence of the missing documents was first reported by independent journalist Roger Sollenberger and subsequently confirmed by NPR, causing outrage in Washington and sparking an investigation from congressional Democrats.
The Guardian obtained the missing FBI Form 302 reports, which memorialize 25 pages of agents’ notes from the four interviews conducted in the summer and fall of 2019. The notes describe how the woman came forward to tell agents she recognized Epstein from a photo sent by a childhood friend. Only the first session, in which she did not name Trump, made it into the public release. The Guardian has chosen not to publish the woman’s name.
All we know about the Hillary Testimony comes from Clinton herself. This is from the New York Times and reported by Annie Karni. “In Tense Deposition, Hillary Clinton Denies Knowing Epstein or His Crimes. After resisting testifying for months, the former secretary of state entered the session defiant and grew irate after a Republican leaked a photo from inside the room.”
In a lengthy opening statement her aides distributed in advance, Mrs. Clinton accused House Republicans of using her as a prop in “partisan political theater” and excoriated their investigation as “designed to protect one political party and one public official, rather than to seek truth and justice for the victims and survivors.”
“You have compelled me to testify, fully aware that I have no knowledge that would assist your investigation, in order to distract attention from President Trump’s actions and to cover them up despite legitimate calls for answers,” she said.
She added: “You have made little effort to call the people who show up most prominently in the Epstein files,” noting that not a single Republican had attended a closed-door session last week in Ohio to depose Leslie Wexner, the retail billionaire and prolific G.O.P. donor who helped Mr. Epstein build his wealth.
In a day’s worth of questioning that she later called “repetitive” and unproductive, Mrs. Clinton told the committee that she did not recall ever encountering Mr. Epstein and “never flew on his plane or visited his island, homes or offices.”
“I don’t know how many times I had to say I did not know Jeffrey Epstein,” she told reporters after the session had ended. “It’s on the record numerous times.”
The deposition briefly went off the rails when, as Republicans questioned her, Mr. Johnson’s post of the photograph showing Mrs. Clinton’s testifying while wearing a weary expression prompted an eruption in the room. Her lawyers vociferously objected and called for journalists to be allowed inside to document the proceedings. House Democrats noted that Republicans had refused to grant the Clintons’ request for a public hearing.
“We are sitting through an incredibly unserious clown show of a deposition,” Representative Yassamin Ansari, Democrat of Arizona, said, claiming Republicans were “more concerned with getting their photo op” than with holding anyone accountable.
This is from the Washington Examiner. It’s reported by David Zimmermann. “Clinton says she was asked about UFOs and Pizzagate at ‘unusual’ Epstein deposition.”
After exiting her deposition on Thursday, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton suggested some members of Congress were more concerned with UFOs and Pizzagate instead of Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell in their questions.
The high-profile witness called the House oversight committee deposition “quite unusual” as it concluded.
“I started being asked about UFOs and a series of questions about Pizzagate, one of the most vile bogus conspiracy theories that was propagated on the internet, that was serving as the basis of a member’s questions to me,” Clinton said in Chappaqua, New York, where the closed-door deposition hearing was held.
It’s unclear why Clinton was questioned on extraterrestrial life, as UFOs have nothing to do with the late convicted sex offender’s crimes. Last week, President Donald Trump said he would start declassifying government files related to the existence of aliens.
The Pizzagate conspiracy theory refers to a child sex ring linked to members of the Democratic Party, and it went viral during the 2016 presidential election cycle when Clinton was running against Trump for president. At one point, a pizza restaurant in Washington, D.C., named Comet Ping Pong was caught up in the right-wing conspiracy theory.
Clinton did not name the member who asked the unusual questions, nor whether the lawmaker was a Republican or a Democrat.
The hearing was disrupted earlier when Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) shared a photo of Clinton with conservative commentator Benny Johnson, who then posted the image on social media. As a result of the stunt, the hearing was paused for about 30 minutes. Closed-door hearings forbid unauthorized photography as it could violate House rules and confidentiality agreements.
Clinton denied she ever met Epstein and claimed to never have “any connection or communication” with the convicted sex offender, although she admitted knowing Maxwell “casually as an acquaintance.”
She criticized the GOP-led committee’s decision to reject her and her husband’s bid for public hearings.
“It was disappointing that they refused to hold a public hearing, so I wouldn’t have to be out here characterizing it for you. You could have seen it for yourself,” she told reporters. “We had asked for that. We think it would have been better for the committee and its efforts to gather whatever information they are seeking.”
The former Cabinet secretary also slammed oversight committee Republicans for skipping the recent deposition of former Victoria’s Secret CEO Les Wexner, whom the FBI labeled a co-conspirator of Epstein. Chairman James Comer (R-KY) did not attend that deposition due to an already scheduled medical procedure.
Despite her criticisms, Clinton noted the “best exchange” came toward the end of the hearing, when Comer asked a “series of significant questions” related to the investigation’s focus.
Since I’ve already mentioned polls, I think I’ll share the results of an interesting one analyzed by G. Elliott Morris in his Substack, Strength in Numbers. “New poll: Democrats’ real problem isn’t being too liberal — it’s being seen as too weak. Americans, including swing voters, see the Republican Party as 20 points more extreme than Democrats — and the Democrats as weak and ineffective. So why would the *Democrats* moderate?”
In our February poll, we asked voters whether each of 10 adjectives describes the Democratic and Republican parties. Each person was asked to rank how well each word — such as “extreme”, “elitist”, “tough”, and “weak” — described both parties on a scale from 1 to 10, with 10 indicating the word described the party very well.
The Republican Party’s defining traits in voters’ minds are extreme (60% agree), elitist (57%), tough, (56%) and cruel (51%). The percentage of Americans agreeing with descriptions of positive traits is comparatively smaller: just 41% say the party is competent, 41% say principled, and only 31% — less than a third — say the GOP can be considered empathetic.
The average American sees Democrats in a much different light. The top descriptors of the party are empathetic (54%) and principled (49%). Comparatively few people think of it as “tough” (31%), and nearly half the country calls the Democrats weak (48%) and ineffective (47%). Democrats’ competence rating is 46% — five points higher than the GOP’s — but it’s the weakness and ineffectiveness labels that dominate voters’ impressions and national discourse about the party.
The chart above is ordered by the gap between the percentage of Americans who say each descriptor applies to each party — and these gaps are revealing. Democrats lead on empathetic by 23 points (54% versus 31%) and on principled by 8 (49% versus 41%). The GOP leads on exactly one positive trait: toughness (56% versus 31%). That’s it.
Being seen as tough is an advantage in a politics where voters want parties to deliver for them no matter what, but it’s likely not worth being called cruel and elitist. In our poll, Democrats lead the Republicans on the U.S. House generic ballot by 10 percentage points among registered voters. At least in the short term, that’s a worthwhile trade.
But the Democrats’ weakness problem stands out as a particularly strong signal of intra-party dissatisfaction. When we look at how each party’s own identifiers rate their own party, the weakness gap for the Democrats really jumps out. Just 53% of Democrats call their party tough, compared to 80% of Republicans. And 31% of Democrats say their own party is weak — almost three times the 13% of Republicans who say the same about theirs.
On most traits, partisans rate their own party similarly. Democrats and Republicans are within a few points of each other on being competent, principled, and cynical. But on toughness and weakness, Democrats are far more self-critical. That matters electorally: a party whose own base doubts its strength will struggle to turn out its base. And in an era of close elections, that is not a loss a party can afford.
Those results were not much of a surprise to me. Today, it’s Bill Clinton’s turn to testify in the Epstein Investigation. NBC News has live updates on its website. “Trump administration live updates: Bill Clinton testifies in House Jeffrey Epstein probe. Clinton is the first sitting or former president to testify before members of Congress in more than 40 years.” This is reported by Rebecca Shabad.
Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, said this morning that Democrats have “real questions that deserve serious answers from former President Clinton” during his closed-door deposition in Chappaqua today.
“We have said from day one that Democrats want to talk to anyone, whether they are a Republican or a Democrat, no matter how powerful they are, whatever position that they’ve been in,” Garcia told reporters ahead of the deposition.
Garcia said that they don’t want to see another “sideshow” today like what happened during Hillary Clinton’s deposition yesterday, in which he said Republicans asked her about UFOs and conspiracy theories.
Because “Republicans have now set a new precedent, which is to bring in presidents and former presidents to testify,” Democrats are again demanding that Trump testify before their panel about his relationship with Epstein, Garcia said.
Trump appears in the Epstein files “almost more than anybody else,” Garcia said.
Trump has denied any wrongdoing, and authorities have not accused him of any wrongdoing in connection with Epstein.
They’re also reporting that lots of Diet Cokes have been brought into the building for the former President. I guess we’ll see what happens.
That’s about all I’m good for today. The entire Epstein show is getting old. I do have a local source from WDSU, the news station I watch here in New Orleans. At least a few of these sick, powerful pedophiles are feeling a bit of justice. “Here’s who has faced fallout from the Epstein files. Since Congress and the Department of Justice released the Epstein files, several high-profile people have been burned by past links to convicted sex-offender.” Please note the word several. I guess that’s a start though.
Several individuals in government, private companies and universities have faced fallout over alleged links to convicted sex offender and financier Jeffrey Epstein.
The Get the Facts Data Team has created a timeline of reports on individuals who have faced professional or reputational consequences or legal action since Epstein’s arrest in 2019.
Among those who faced professional or reputational consequences were CEOs who resigned or sold their companies, faculty who were suspended and public figures who issued apologies.
You may read the list and the ‘consequences’ at the link.
What’s on your Reading, Action, and Blogging list today?
#2026Polls #JohnbussBskySocial #BillClintonTestimony #HillaryClintonTestimony #RepRobertGarcia #TheEpsteinFiles -
Il #film di oggi è #delittonellastrada di #donsiegel #unofilm #cinema #unocinema #johncassavetes #salmineo #moir #biancoenero
https://www.valeriotagliaferri.it/delitto-nella-strada-di-don-siegel/
iscriviti gratis al #podcast #lafogliadacanto e ascolta tutta la #recensione
https://youtu.be/yvc9b4cbK-8?si=UNqgxnPOo_1hw9q8
https://open.spotify.com/episode/6WHix9Jj9QtPW6SN4TfOb0?si=j5g64TKoQliGar3TLWyV0Q
-
Mostly Monday Reads: Harsh Headlines
“Trump addresses the nation from Mar A Lardo to justify his invasion of Venezuela.” John Buss, @repeat1968
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
They say politics make strange bedfellows. The actions of the Rotter in the White House and his feckless lackies make even stranger ones. Today, I present a headline from George F. Will, writing at The Washington Post, with which I agree wholeheartedly. Stranger things may happen someday, but right now I’ll stick with my strangest of bedfellows. Kudos for this headline. “A sickening moral slum of an administration. Regarding Venezuela, Ukraine, and much more, Trump and his acolytes are worse than simply incompetent.”
This headline and article are about Hegesthordering the killing of those two survivors on board a sinking ship, and the recently launched Rubio position on the 28 Point Plan concerning Ukraine. It’s also a perfect fit for overthrowing the Venezuelan government, which followed the other two misadventures.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth seems to be a war criminal. Without a war. An interesting achievement.
In 1967, novelist Gwyn Griffin published a World War II novel, “An Operational Necessity,” that 58 years later is again pertinent. According to the laws of war, survivors of a sunken ship cannot be attacked. But a German submarine captain, after sinking a French ship, orders the machine-gunning of the ship’s crew, lest their survival endanger his men by revealing where his boat is operating. In the book’s dramatic climax, a postwar tribunal examines the German commander’s moral calculus.
Forty-four days after the survivors were killed, the four-star admiral who headed the U.S. Southern Command announced he would be leaving that position just a year into what is usually a three-year stint. He did not say why. Inferences are, however, permitted.
The killing of the survivors by this moral slum of an administration should nauseate Americans. A nation incapable of shame is dangerous, not least to itself. As the recent “peace plan” for Ukraine demonstrated.
Marco Rubio, who is secretary of state and Trump’s national security adviser, seemed to be neither when the president released his 28-point plan for Ukraine’s dismemberment. The plan was cobbled together by Trump administration and Russian officials, with no Ukrainians participating. It reads like a wish-list letter from Vladimir Putin to Santa Claus: Ukraine to cede land that Russia has failed to capture in almost four years of aggression; Russia to have a veto over NATO’s composition, peacekeeping forces in Ukraine and the size of Ukraine’s armed forces. And more.
Rubio, whose well-known versatility of convictions is perhaps not infinite, told some of his alarmed former Senate colleagues that the plan was just an opening gambit from Russia — although Trump demanded that Ukraine accept it within days. South Dakota Republican Sen. Mike Rounds, a precise and measured speaker, reported that, in a conference call with a bipartisan group of senators, Rubio said the plan was a Russian proposal: “He made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was delivered to one of our representatives. It is not our recommendation. It is not our peace plan.” Hours later, however, Rubio reversed himself, saying on social media that the United States “authored” the plan.
Meetings, speeches, and press conferences are ongoing today regarding the Venezuela situation, while additional actions appear to be in the planning stage. It would seem that more immediate active responses would be pertinent. This headline comes from today’s New York Times. “Trump Suggests U.S. Could Take Action Against More Countries. In remarks aboard Air Force One, President Trump threatened Colombia and its president, described Cuba as “ready to fall” and reasserted his desire to acquire Greenland.” This is reported by Yang Zuhang.
President Trump suggested on Sunday that the United States could take action against other countries after its attack on Venezuela. He threatened Colombia and its president, described Cuba as “ready to fall” and reasserted his desire to take control of Greenland.
Mr. Trump has been facing questions about his plans for Venezuela since a U.S. raid in Caracas captured the country’s president, Nicolás Maduro, and brought him to New York City to face federal drug trafficking and weapons charges. As Mr. Trump took questions about that on Sunday, he spoke of other countries in Latin America and beyond.
On Air Force One, Mr. Trump told reporters that Colombia was being “run by a sick man who likes making cocaine and selling it to the United States.”
“He’s not going to be doing it for very long,” he said of Colombia’s president, Gustavo Petro, who has frequently criticized Mr. Trump. “He has cocaine mills and cocaine factories.”
Mr. Trump and Mr. Petro have been locked in an escalating dispute over the United States’ series of boat strikes in the Caribbean and the eastern Pacific, which have ratcheted up pressure on Colombia, a nexus of the region’s drug trade.
Asked whether his administration would carry out an operation targeting Colombia, Mr. Trump replied, “It sounds good to me.”
Mr. Petro responded angrily in a post on X, warning that any attempt to detain him would unleash popular fury.
Mr. Trump also suggested that the United States could take action against other countries, including Mexico and Iran, over a range of issues.
He said that drugs were “pouring” through Mexico and that “we’re going to have to do something,” adding that the cartels there were “very strong.”
Mexico’s president, Claudia Sheinbaum brushed aside the remarks. “This is just President Trump’s manner of speaking,” she said at a news conference on Monday.
Of Iran, which is being roiled by protests, Mr. Trump said, “If they start killing people like they have in the past, I think they’re going to get hit very hard by the United States.”
Mr. Trump suggested that military intervention was unnecessary in Cuba, a key ally of Venezuela, because it was “ready to fall.”
“I don’t think we need any action,” Mr. Trump said. “It looks like it’s going down.”
“I don’t know if they’re going to hold out, but Cuba now has no income,” he added. “They got all their income from Venezuela, from the Venezuelan oil.”
Secretary of State Marco Rubio had suggested earlier in the day that Cuba could face U.S. military action.
Sounds to me like the United States Government has its eyes on creating a world war. It has a distinctly Trumpian tone. He’s got grievances, he’s found more ways to take money from others, and he’s narcissistic and enough of a psychopath to do it. Plus, he’s got a moral slum of an administration fecklessly following his insanity.
Insanity: Sources close to the White House told the Washington Post Trump lost interest in backing Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado to lead the country because she accepted her Nobel Peace Prize rather than demanding it be given to Trump, which was viewed as an “ultimate sin.”
It’s difficult to gauge the responses to this. NATO (via Newseek) has already discussed responses to the threat to Greenland and to possible Russian invasion of NATO members. The UN is ‘boldly’ meeting as I write this. This is from The Times of London, as that’s the reporting we have available at the moment. There are live updates on the situation. “Venezuela latest: UN holds emergency meeting on US strikes — watch live. President Maduro and his wife are taken to a New York court on narco-terrorism charges as Trump repeats threats to annex Greenland.”
What you need to know
Nicolás Maduro is due to appear in court in New York at 5pm UK time
The UN security council is discussing the US intervention in Venezuela in an emergency meeting
Delcy Rodríguez is due to be sworn in on Monday as Venezuelan president, having offered to ‘work together’ with the US
China has said any agreements it has in place with Venezuela over oil exports will be ‘protected by law’, regardless of US action
Sir Keir Starmer has backed Denmark after President Trump suggested the US would annex Greenland
Other tidbits:
Mike Waltz, the US envoy to the United Nations, has said that America is not at war with Venezuela and it is not an occupying power in the country.
He made his remarks at the ongoing UN security council meeting.
Russia and China have called on the US to release President Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.
Moscow and Beijing’s envoys to the UN both made the call at the current meeting of the security council, which is ongoing in New York.
Denmark’s prime minister has said she believes President Trump is serious about wanting to take over Greenland.
The New York Times provides live updates, with much attention also given to the courthouse where President Maduro and his wife are being held.
Nicolás Maduro, the ousted Venezuelan president, and his wife were brought to the federal courthouse in Lower Manhattan on Monday ahead of their arraignment on charges of drug trafficking and other crimes, two days after they were captured in a U.S. military raid in Caracas.
Mr. Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, were escorted off a helicopter in downtown Manhattan under heavy security and were set to face charges including narco-terrorism and conspiracy to import cocaine, according to an unsealed indictment. Their capture in a U.S. commando raid in Caracas, the Venezuelan capital, on Saturday followed a monthslong campaign by the Trump administration to drive out the autocratic leader.
Additional details at the link. It appears that the attack on Venezuela has already claimed the lives of Cuban military personnel. This is from the AP. “Cuba says 32 Cuban officers were killed in US operation in Venezuela.”
An American military operation in Venezuela killed 32 Cuban officers over the weekend, the Cuban government said Sunday in the first official death count provided of the American strikes in the South American nation.
The Cuban military and police officers were on a mission the Caribbean country’s military was carrying out at the request of Venezuela’s government, according to a statement read on Cuban state TV on Sunday night.
What the Cubans were working on in the South American nation was unclear, but Cuba is a close ally of Venezuela’s government and has sent military and police forces to assist in operations for years. Rumors of the deaths circulated on the island over the weekend.
“You know, a lot of Cubans were killed yesterday,” U.S. President Donald Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One as he flew Sunday night from Florida back to Washington. “There was a lot of death on the other side. No death on our side.”
I want to include one more headline, unrelated to Venezuela, but very much on point about the moral slum. This is from CNBC. “Pentagon to cut Sen. Mark Kelly’s military retirement pay over ‘seditious’ video: Hegseth.”
The Pentagon will cut the military retirement pay of Sen. Mark Kelly for what Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth called the Arizona Democrat’s “seditious” statements on a video with other members of Congress telling service members they have the right to refuse to execute illegal orders.
Hegseth also issued a formal letter of censure against Kelly, which the Defense secretary said details “reckless misconduct” by the retired Navy captain and astronaut.
Hegesth said that the Defense Department has begun a proceeding aimed at reducing Kelly’s rank in retirement, which would in turn lead to a decrease in retirement pay.
“Six weeks ago, Senator Mark Kelly — and five other members of Congress — released a reckless and seditious video that was clearly intended to undermine good order and military discipline,” Hegseth said in a statement on X.“As a retired Navy Captain who is still receiving a military pension, Captain Kelly knows he is still accountable to military justice. And the Department of War — and the American people — expect justice,” Hegseth said.
Kelly has 30 days to file a response to the decision to cut his rank and retirement pay, according to Hegseth’s tweet.
The Pentagon in November announced a probe of Kelly for his involvement with the video, and said that further actions could include a recall to active duty and a court-martial proceeding.
Hegeth’s statement on Monday suggests that the Pentagon has ruled out that more severe option.
But, in his tweet, Hegseth warned, “Captain Kelly’s status as a sitting United States Senator does not exempt him from accountability, and further violations could result in further action.”
Kelly, in a statement on X, said, vowed to fight the disciplinary action “with everything I’ve got,” and called Hegseth “the most unqualified Secretary of Defense in our country’s history.”
“Over twenty-five years in the U.S. Navy, thirty-nine combat missions, and four missions to space, I risked my life for this country and to defend our Constitution – including the First Amendment rights of every American to speak out,” Kelly wrote. “I never expected that the President of the United States and the Secretary of Defense would attack me for doing exactly that.”
“My rank and retirement are things that I earned through my service and sacrifice for this country. I got shot at. I missed holidays and birthdays. I commanded a space shuttle mission while my wife Gabby recovered from a gunshot wound to the head– all while proudly wearing the American flag on my shoulder,” Kelly wrote. “Generations of servicemembers have made these same patriotic sacrifices for this country, earning the respect, appreciation, and rank they deserve.
“Pete Hegseth wants to send the message to every single retired servicemember that if they say something he or Donald Trump doesn’t like, they will come after them the same way,” the senator said. “It’s outrageous and it is wrong. There is nothing more un-American than that.”
It’s hard to describe the multitude of simultaneous feelings I have about all of this. The news about these actions is terrifying and reveals a deep-seated immorality. As this unfolds, we should be prepared for anything.
What’s on your reading and blogging list today?
Oh, the summertime is coming
And the leaves are sweet returning
But those flowers of peace
It’s for them I’m really yearningWill they bloom, ever bloom?
Will they bloom in the springtime?
Oh, you flowers of peace
When the world should be ringtime
Will ye bloom, ever bloom?I built my love a bower by a clear, crystal river
But the thing her heart desires is a thing I cannot give herOh, providеnce smiled impassive
Whilе I fell on bended knee
Said, the lives of you empires
Are no more than swarms of beesIf you and I would see those flowers
Get up and rouse your neighbors
When first the seed I’d planted
It takes long and careful laborIf you and I would see those flowers
Go out and till the fertile soil
It will take more than prayers
It takes hard and sweaty toil#ASickeningMoralSlumOfAnAdministration #JohnbussBskySocialJohnBuss #attackOnVenezuela #Colombia #cuba #FlowersOfPeace #GeorgeFWill #Greenland #MarcoRubio #OrangeCaligula #PeteHegsethWeirdoSexualAssaulter #PeteSeeger #SenatorMarkKelly #ThreatsMexico
-
Il #film di oggi è #gloria #unanottedestate di #johncassavetes #genarowlands #unofilm #cinema #unocinema #cinemadautore #cinemaindipendente #filmastodon #recensioni
https://www.valeriotagliaferri.it/gloria-una-notte-destate-di-john-cassavetes/
iscriviti gratis al #podcast #lafogliadacanto per ascoltare tutta la #recensione
-
Il #film di oggi è #gloria #unanottedestate di #johncassavetes #genarowlands #unofilm #cinema #unocinema #cinemadautore #cinemaindipendente #filmastodon #recensioni
https://www.valeriotagliaferri.it/gloria-una-notte-destate-di-john-cassavetes/
iscriviti gratis al #podcast #lafogliadacanto per ascoltare tutta la #recensione
-
Il #film di oggi è #gloria #unanottedestate di #johncassavetes #genarowlands #unofilm #cinema #unocinema #cinemadautore #cinemaindipendente #filmastodon #recensioni
https://www.valeriotagliaferri.it/gloria-una-notte-destate-di-john-cassavetes/
iscriviti gratis al #podcast #lafogliadacanto per ascoltare tutta la #recensione
-
Il #film di oggi è #gloria #unanottedestate di #johncassavetes #genarowlands #unofilm #cinema #unocinema #cinemadautore #cinemaindipendente #filmastodon #recensioni
https://www.valeriotagliaferri.it/gloria-una-notte-destate-di-john-cassavetes/
iscriviti gratis al #podcast #lafogliadacanto per ascoltare tutta la #recensione
-
Il #film di oggi è #gloria #unanottedestate di #johncassavetes #genarowlands #unofilm #cinema #unocinema #cinemadautore #cinemaindipendente #filmastodon #recensioni
https://www.valeriotagliaferri.it/gloria-una-notte-destate-di-john-cassavetes/
iscriviti gratis al #podcast #lafogliadacanto per ascoltare tutta la #recensione
-
Finally Friday Reads: No Kings!
“Happy No Kings Eve!” @repeat1968, John Buss
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
Last week was a tough one for those of us committed to keeping a working democracy in this country and with those who have been long-standing allies. We’ve watched the USA, countries aligned with NATO, and even Israel, where fascist-leaning leaders have won elections with less than a majority.
A lot of these countries have parliamentary democracies, so they may get a composite of parties choosing the leader. There’s been a tendency for the right wing to join up with factions that can include those with strict religious beliefs hoping for theocracy, people looking to nationalism and clinging to xenophobia to overcome their fear and hatred of others, and of course, those just around for the spoils of corruption. The militia movement is a significant part of the Trump coalition. I love my country and all its people. I was excited to put money in my friend’s boxes to grow trees in Israel as a kid. Israelis deserve better than Netanyahu. Poland and Hungary are in play now, too. WTF is going on?
This piece was written by a UK blogger, Carolyn Gallaher is an excellent read. It was written back in February about the pardons of all the J6 criminals and others associated with the militia movement. “Trump’s pardons suggest he will run a far-right government with paramilitary backing.”
Trump’s pardons suggest he has adopted a personalistic approach to law. While he isn’t likely to meddle with the legal code, he is likely to intervene when his high-profile supporters are charged with breaking the law. Intervention will be at a distance, but effective. Indeed, all he will need to do is post negative commentary about the charges on social media, and at least some officers of the court will respond. Prosecutors, for example, may refuse to indict Trump’s cronies, or judges may may dismiss legally solid cases, as US District Judge Aileen Cannon did with the government’s classified documents case in the summer of 2024. Trump can also use the bully pulpit to change how a prosecution is seen. Trump adopted this approach with January 6 cases, spending the last four years priming the wider public to see the government’s prosecutions as “politically motivated” and the defendants “hostages” and “political prisoners.”
The most particularly alarming event this week was Trump’s speech at Fort Bragg, where the soldiers attending the event were filtered for Trump enablers and cheered to a clearly political and self-serving rally. Military News has this analysis.
It was supposed to be a routine appearance, a visit from the commander in chief to rally the troops, boost morale and celebrate the Army‘s 250th-birthday week, which culminates with a Washington, D.C., parade slated for Saturday.
Instead, what unfolded Tuesday at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, bore little resemblance to the customary visit from a president and defense secretary. There, President Donald Trump unleashed a speech laced with partisan invective, goading jeers from a crowd of soldiers positioned behind his podium — blurring the long-standing and sacrosanct line between the military and partisan politics.
As Trump viciously attacked his perceived political foes, he whipped up boos from the gathered troops directed at California leaders, including Gov. Gavin Newsom — amid the president’s controversial move to deploy the National Guard and Marines against protesters in Los Angeles — as well as former President Joe Biden and the press. The soldiers roared with laughter and applauded Trump’s diatribe in a shocking and rare public display of troops taking part in naked political partisanship.
As I have been politically active for over 50 years, I really have seen it coming–especially the White Christian Nationalist movement–but always felt that our institutions would be strong enough to head it off. These folks do play the long game, and little by little, they’ve worked to put their followers into the military, police, school boards, judges, and all levels of elected officials. They’ve embedded themselves in the institutions with the intention of twisting them to their personal views. One of the best sources of information on the movement in our country comes from people who grew up, then left. This interview from the PBS News Hour with former evangelical minister within this movement, Brad Onishi, is worth a look or listen.
Brad Onishi, Co-Host, “Straight White American Jesus”: Christian nationalism is an ideology that is based around the idea that this is a Christian nation, that this was founded as a Christian nation, and, therefore, it should be a Christian nation today and should be so in the future.
According to survey data, Christian nationalists agree with statements like the federal government should declare the United States of America a Christian nation. Our laws should be based on Christian values. being a Christian is important if you want to be a real American.
The unprecedented move by Trump of sending Marines and the National Guard to hype the L.A. immigration protests for a reality show production and excite the xenophobes is really beyond anything we’ve ever seen. The birth of our country really wasn’t the Boston Tea Party. It was the Boston Massacre that happened on March 5, 1770.
I know, my history major roots are showing, but this really is the seminal event and situation that started our country. You may read more about it at the History Channel. Basically, British soldiers were occupying the city. You may not know that there was a black man among those protesting the soldiers and the enforcement of what was essentially tariffs among the five American dead. His name was Crispus Attucks,
The British soldiers were put on trial, and patriots John Adams and Josiah Quincy agreed to defend the soldiers in a show of support of the colonial justice system. When the trial ended in December 1770, two British soldiers were found guilty of manslaughter and had their thumbs branded with an “M” for murder as punishment.
The Sons of Liberty, a Patriot group formed in 1765 to oppose the Stamp Act, advertised the “Boston Massacre” as a battle for American liberty and just cause for the removal of British troops from Boston. Patriot Paul Revere made a provocative engraving of the incident, depicting the British soldiers lining up like an organized army to suppress an idealized representation of the colonist uprising. Copies of the engraving were distributed throughout the colonies and helped reinforce negative American sentiments about British rule.
April 1775 is usually where most of us start our first American History lesson. The seminal events here were the Battles of Lexington and Concord. All of this is good to know as we watch our Army celebrate its 250th anniversary.
Unfortunately, Trump has turned this into an event worthy of the Dear Leader of North Korea. There is a massive, nationwide protest planned called “No Kings. that day.” It also appears likely that there will be heavy rains in the District. I pity the soldiers with this assignment. They’re already sleeping on the floors of federal buildings with mixed feelings, I’m sure.
This is the one thing that I thought I’d recommend. It’s from The Bulwark. It’s written by Jill Lawrence. “The Patriotic Rich. Not all of them are like Trump, willing to see the poor get poorer so the rich can get richer.”
DONALD TRUMP HAS HUGGED A FLAG more than once, and he’s now adding flagpoles on the north and south White House lawns. He addressed uniformed troops at Fort Bragg (at least the fit ones who love him and don’t look fat) and he’s ordered up a $45 million military parade on June 14 that could wreck D.C. streets to the tune of $16 million.
He probably thinks of himself as a patriotic billionaire.
Imagine, if you would, a different kind of wealthy role model for our nation’s youth—and its grownups, too, for that matter. A millionaire or billionaire who does not waste taxpayer money, destroy government services, attack science, undermine public health, pave the Rose Garden, and decorate the Oval Office with so much gilt that you halfway expect Marie Antoinette to show up anytime.
How about a millionaire or billionaire who obeys the law and isn’t constantly, voraciously on the hunt for more power and more money? Who would prefer a more equitable society and would pay more taxes to make it so?
These people do exist. Some are philanthropists. Some put money into political activism. And some create policy advocacy groups, like the nonpartisan Patriotic Millionaires. The group’s members are self-described “proud traitors to their class,” offering a platform of foundational economic changes to coincide with the nation’s 250th birthday next year: AMERICA 250: The Money Agenda.
“Over the long term, the unfair tax system is a cause of the oligarchy being able to do what it does. The proposals that even the progressives are making are not sufficient to actually change the course of history,” Patriotic Millionaires Chair Morris Pearl, former managing director at BlackRock, told me in an interview.
The group’s four-part proposal, released in April, aims to do just that. It starts with exempting people below a certain income from federal taxes and making up the revenue by imposing a 3 percent surtax on income above $1 million, rising to 8 percent above $10 million. Other elements include raising the minimum wage to the cost of living for a single adult, and indexing it; equalizing the tax rate for capital gains and ordinary income over $1 million; and significantly taxing the intergenerational transfer of wealth.
Forget false modesty. “The solutions to the problem are not complicated, and the Patriotic Millionaires have them all,” the group says on its home page. Their plan, they say, would “ensure prosperity and stability for America’s next 250 years.”
I’m not sure if I should laugh or cry about that. The interesting thing today is that the headlines are all about the real events in the world, like Israel Bombing Iran and Iran attacking back. L.A. is still on the front pages, and Kristi Noem, the psycho puppy killer. The only place you’ll find the parade is in the political cartoons.
The other thing is that Trump’s Budget Busting Bill is now buried by the distraction and the truly awful Noem event, where a U.S. Senator was manhandled into the hallway, put in cuffs, and treated quite the way you’d expect an SS Storm Trooper. We will now call the Storm Trumpers. This is from Paul Krugman’s Substack. “Reverse Robin Hood and Trumpian Totalitarianism. Trump’s big beautiful bill is a sadistic monstrosity.”
House Republicans have passed Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act. After having spent decades covering Republican domestic policies, I have a pretty jaundiced view of their intentions. But this bill is so cruelly regressive that it shocked even me. This bill is truly unprecedented in the extent to which it takes away from the have-nots and gives to the ultra-haves. It slashes Medicaid, taking health care away from millions. It slashes food stamps, ensuring that many will go hungry. At the same time, it gives huge tax cuts to the wealthy.
Those of us who followed the legislation knew that it would be highly regressive. New estimates from the Congressional Budget Office, a non-partisan agency of economic technocrats, confirm in detail just how bad the OBBBA is.
C.B.O.’s numbers, released yesterday, are startling. Here’s the percentage change in households’ purchasing power by decile of the income distribution caused by the OBBBA:
That 4 percent income decline for the poorest 10 percent of Americans is the scale of economic damage you’d expect from a severe recession. But here it is being deliberately inflicted on the poorest Americans.
In the OBBBA, pain on the least well-off Americans is not a price that is being paid in order to reduce the U.S. budget deficit. Remember,the benefit cuts for those in the bottom decile of the income distribution are being paired with tax cuts at the top of the income distribution. So the net effect will be a large increase in the U.S. budget deficit.
Wait, it gets worse. The CBO’s analysis doesn’t consider the effect of the Trump tariffs on household incomes. This is important because tariffs are taxes — regressive taxes, that fall more heavily on lower-income than higher-income families. I’ll be writing about the distributional impact of tariffs in the future.
I have just one more article to recommend on this topic by HuffPo by Jennifer Bendary. “Senate GOP Strips Contempt Provision From Tax Bill — But Still Lets Trump Be King. They took language out of the House GOP’s “big, beautiful bill” that limited courts’ powers, but now want to price people out of being able to sue the government at all.”
Senate Republicans have removed a disturbing provision from the House GOP’s massive tax-and-spending bill that would have allowed President Donald Trump to circumvent the courts and essentially serve as a king.
But they have swapped in new language that would still let Trump ignore the courts amid his lawlessness: Their provision would make it nearly impossible for people to sue the federal government by forcing them to cough up millions, if not billions, of dollars to do so.
Late Thursday, Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) released the panel’s proposed text for the GOP’s so-called Big Beautiful Bill. The House passed its version of the bill last month, so now the Senate is making its changes. Each committee is tasked with putting together language for its relevant section in the legislation.
The text that Grassley released for the bill’s judicial section doesn’t include this jarring, one-sentence provision that House Republicans buried in their 1,116-page bill:
Translated, this provision would restrict the ability of any court, including the Supreme Court, to enforce compliance with its orders by holding people in contempt. Contempt citations are an essential tool for the courts; they allow judges to threaten fines, sanctions or even jail if people disobey their orders.
The provision in the House GOP’s bill also would apply retroactively to all temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions, leaving courts with no real way of enforcing orders they’ve already handed down.
Yam Tits has definitely put the dismal into the dismal science. There’s more. Okay, here are the two big stories. This is from Tommy Christopher writing for Mediaite. “Sen. Alex Padilla Tells MSNBC FBI ‘Escorted’ Him To Trump DHS Presser They Claim He Crashed.” Both Patel and Noem have some explaining to do. Don’t forget, we also have a New Jersey Congresswoman waiting for her trial for something that the facts really don’t support, either. “U.S. Representative LaMonica McIver was charged in a three-count indictment today for forcibly impeding and interfering with federal officers, U.S. Attorney Alina Habba announced.” Back to the Senator’s story.
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-CA) told MSNBC’s Jacob Soboroff that he was “escorted” to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s press conference by FBI agents, where he was then manhandled by agents under the claim they didn’t know who he was.
Sen. Padilla found himself at the center of a maelstrom when he tried to ask a question Thursday at Noem’s briefing on ICE protests in Los Angeles and was brought to the ground and handcuffed by Secret Service and FBI agents. Noem and her agents falsely claimed Padilla didn’t identify himself as a U.S. senator and accused him of “lunging” in a threatening manner.
The incident sparked widespread shock and criticism, and an impassioned response from Sen. Padilla after his release.
On Thursday night’s edition of MSNBC’s The Beat with Ari Melber, Padilla gave his first sit-down after his release, and called out several inaccuracies. He told Soboroff he didn’t “barge” into the presser, he was signed in and escorted, and was listening in the room for 10 minutes before he tried to ask a question:
SOBOROFF: We heard from you briefly at the press conference after you came outside of the federal building in Westwood. We’ve heard more extensively from Secretary Noem and the Department of Homeland Security. And I want to just tell you a little bit, because I’m sure this has been a whirlwind, about what they’ve been saying.
Secretary Noem said that you, quote, “lunged” towards her at this press conference. The Department of Homeland Security said the Secret Service believed that you were an attacker. And the Department of Homeland Security called this political theater. What’s your response and what’s your version of what happened?
PADILLA: Well, first of all, that’s ridiculous. It’s a lie, but par for the course for this administration, right? So here’s the stage. Look, I was in the federal building here in Los Angeles for a scheduled briefing, just as when my colleagues and I had to go all the way to Guantanamo Bay to begin to get information about that facility being used as a detention facility. They’ve been non-responsive to requests for information. And so I had scheduled. They approved a briefing with representatives of the Northern Command in that federal building.
We were there prior to the 10:30 original appointment date when we caught wind that secretary of Homeland Security was going to be down the hall at a press conference. And — and our briefing was now delayed because of that press conference. So since the secretary has been non-responsive, I figured, let me go over and listen to what she has to say. Maybe we can glean some information here.
SOBOROFF: So let me make sure I understand the…
PADILLA: But so the…
SOBOROFF: Go ahead.
PADILLA: So the … whole time, right, we’re, the whole time, being escorted in this federal building by somebody from the National Guard, somebody from the FBI. I’ve gone through screening. This is a federal building. And so tell them, let’s go listen to the press conference. They escort me over to that room. And I’m sitting in the back of the room, behind the cameras, behind the reporters, listening, listening. And at one point, it was just too much to take. Not the first, but the second attack on the political leadership of California and this notion that Donald Trump and Kristi Noem have to come in and rescue the people of Los Angeles from Gavin Newsom and Karen Bass? It was too much. And so I spoke up. I introduced myself and said I had a question.
Look, they said I wasn’t wearing my pin, my polo says “United States Senate.” There was no threat. There was no lunging. I raised my voice to ask a question. And it took, what, maybe half a second before multiple agents were on me.
SOBOROFF: The video clearly shows, and you can hear on the audio, that you identify yourself as Senator Padilla. Did you — she said you barged into the room or you — you basically broke into the room. I’m paraphrasing here. Just set the record straight on that.
PADILLA: I didn’t barge into the room. As I mentioned, I was in a different conference room a couple doors down the hall. I let it be known, I’d like to go listen to the press conference. The folks that were escorting me in the building walked me over. I didn’t even open the door. The door was opened for me. And I spent a few minutes in the back of the room just listening in until the rhetoric, the political rhetoric got to be too much to take. So I spoke up.
And now for the Congresswoman’s story. This is from Liz Die at Public Notice. “We’ve reached the indicting the opposition stage of fascism. There’s no sane world in which Rep. McIver committed felonies during her altercation with ICE. ” If this entire event was not staged, I’ll eat my favorite summer hat.
On Tuesday, June 10, Alina Habba, the interim US attorney for New Jersey, indicted sitting Democratic Rep. LaMonica McIver. The Newark Democrat is charged with two felony counts and one misdemeanor for assaulting, resisting, and impeding a federal officer in the performance of his official duties.
Habba has zero prosecutorial background and came to the job after her spectacular performance as Donald Trump’s personal lawyer, where she got him half a billion dollars in civil fraud penalties in New York, $83 million in damages in the E. Jean Carroll assault and defamation cases, and a million dollars in sanctions for filing a RICO trollsuit against Hillary Clinton, James Comey, the Perkins Coie law farm, and half the Democrats in DC. (Spoiler alert: It’s never RICO.)
The indictment of Rep. McIver arises from an incident outside Delaney Hall, an ICE facility in Newark. In February, the GEO Group, the private prison company which runs the facility, was awarded a 15-year, $1 billion contract to run the 1,000-bed facility. It became an immediate flashpoint for protesters, as well as city officials, who said that they’d been blocked from inspecting for health and safety.
…
But Habba wasn’t hired for her legal chops — she was hired to advance political agendas. So even as she’s facing a civil suit for malicious prosecution and defamation by Baraka, she filed a criminal complaint against Rep. McIver, and then followed it up with an actual indictment.
The charges are thin, to say the least. Footage shows McIver, in the red jacket, attempting to shield the mayor with her body. She is jostled in the crowd and swipes at an agent who grabs her. No body slam was recorded.
It’s often said that a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich. The joke here is that the standard for an indictment is so low and the scales so tilted toward the prosecution at the grand jury stage, that an indictment is virtually guaranteed. The target is not entitled to be present or to introduce competing evidence. A grand jury need only find that there is probable cause to believe that the crime occurred, and need not be unanimous. And an indictment can be secured if a mere 12 jurors out of 16-23 assembled vote in favor of it.
Convincing a jury of 12 Garden State citizens, most likely the congresswoman’s own constituents, that she assaulted an ICE officer and made him fear for his safety beyond a reasonable doubt, is another matter. Rep. McIver will also have a powerful defense in the Speech or Debate Clause, which protects members of Congress from prosecution when they are carrying out official business.
I especially liked Die’s conclusion.
If Habba does not slink off again, the case will be heard by Judge Jamel Semper, a veteran of the US attorney’s office Habba now leads, who was appointed to the bench by President Biden. Arraignment is set for next Monday.
McIver, who declined a plea agreement Habba tried to foist on her earlier, called the indictment “a brazen attempt at political intimidation.”
Noem’s appearance on Fox following all that drama was definitely right out of a right-wing reality wet dream. This is from Talking Points Memo. Nicole Lafond has the story. “Noem Says National Guard Occupation Is Meant To ‘Liberate’ LA From Its Mayor And Governor.” Psychopaths have no shame.
Just before Sen. Alex Padilla (D-CA) was forcibly removed from a Department of Homeland Security press briefing, forced to the ground and then handcuffed for asking a question, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem was in the middle of making a bizarre but crucial point.
“We are not going away,” she said, referring to the National Guard and DHS presence in Los Angeles this week amid protests against Trump’s sweeping and drastic deportation mission in the city. “We are staying here to liberate the city from the socialists and the burdensome leadership that this governor and that this mayor have placed on this country and what they have tried to insert into the city.”
The statement said the quiet part out loud: the military was there to “liberate” a city from its democratically elected governor and mayor. (It was also not entirely clear what “burdensome” actions she was referring to.)
Leading up to this moment in the press briefing, Noem spent several minutes thanking the National Guard, FBI, local law enforcement and the IRS (??) for their efforts on the ground in LA. (Apparently, per Noem, IRS agents have been there in person working to determine what groups are organizing the protests in the city! Normal stuff!) She then said that the National Guard and DHS were working to “make every single community great again and safe again” before lamenting that the people of LA were “suffering” “under the policies of Governor Newsom and under the policies of Mayor Bass.”
Those remarks combined with the liberation speak amount to a pretty pellucid admission of the Trump administration’s ultimate vision here. As I noted earlier this week, much of the effort to deploy troops to LA to clamp down on mostly peaceful protesters in the city can be seen through the lens of the president’s months-long effort to punish blue cities and states. While he is hiding behind the guise of targeting Democratic-led states and cities that function as sanctuaries for undocumented immigrants, Trump’s barely disguised his bloodlust for using his second term to punish all of his perceived political enemies. Gov. Gavin Newsom and LA Mayor Karen Bass most certainly fall into this category.
So, I’m going to put a few links up about the attacks by Israel on Iran. They’re supposedly trying to knock back the nuclear capabilities of Iran. It seems strange, though, that Trump had already scheduled the Middle East envoy to Iran and that the US was heavily involved with the preplanning, according to Israel. This is the latest from NBC News. Netanyahu is like Trump to me. Love the country and the people. The leaders need to be sent to the World Court for Justice. “Live updates: Israel strikes Iranian nuclear facilities as fears of war mount. Iran’s top military official, Mohammad Hossein Bagheri and Hossein Salami, the commander of the Revolutionary Guard Corps, were killed, according to state media.”
TENSIONS REACH NEW HEIGHTS: Israel launched strikes on Iran early Friday local time, a dramatic escalation of long-running tensions between the two countries.
NUCLEAR PROGRAM TARGETED: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the operation targeted Iran’s nuclear program and “will continue for as many days as it takes to remove this threat.” Explosions continue to rock Tehran and other sites in Iran.
IRAN RETALIATES: In a televised address, Iran’s president Masoud Pezeshkian promised a “powerful response.” The IDF have reported attacks from Iran throughout the day, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned Israelis to brace for retaliation.
POWERFUL LEADERS KILLED: In a significant blow to Iran’s army, it’s top military official, Mohammad Hossein Bagheri, was killed along with Hossein Salami, the commander in chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps.
CASUALTIES IN TEHRAN: The strikes killed nearly 80 people and injured more than 300 in Iran’s capital, Tehran, according to semiofficial Fars news agency. Iranian authorities have not confirmed these numbers.
U.S. POSITION: Secretary of State Marco Rubio initially said the U.S. was “not involved in the strikes against Iran.” However, President Donald Trump later said “we knew everything,” about the strikes and that Israel had used American weapons.
STATUS OF U.S.-IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL: In a phone call with NBC News, Trump said Iran had missed an opportunity to make a deal. “Now, they may have another opportunity. We’ll see.” Iranian State TV reported that Iran had pulled out from the next round of talks.
“Give me your rich, screw the huddled masses.” John Buss, @repeat1968
All of the chaos comes back to the fact that we have a weak president. He doesn’t know a damn thing about economics. He couldn’t care less about the military or foreign policy. He’s only interested in what he can get out of this country. Where is the money coming from for this parade and all the damage it will do to the streets of Washington, DC? Here’s what the Google AI entity has to say about spending at Homeland Security. I just asked it if they were spending more than their budget.
Yes, spending on Homeland Security is at risk of exceeding its allocated budget, particularly for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Reports indicate that ICE has already begun spending beyond its appropriated level, leading to concerns about violating the Antideficiency Act, which prohibits federal agencies from spending funds before Congress authorizes them. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is likely to shift funds between accounts to sustain current operations, potentially impacting other agencies and their priorities.
It makes no sense to give the rich tax breaks, pay for all this nonsense that is nothing but a political display of faux strength, then expect the rest of the country to give up public education, Medicaid, and likely Medicare? Are we going to have another infrastructure week? What about the inflation and expected negative impacts on the economy? What about our long-standing allies? Are we just buddies now with the world’s bullies?
What’s on your reading and blogging list today?
#NoKings #JohnbussBskySocialJohnBuss #AlinaHabbaSociopathAndCunt #BigBudgetBustingBill #DonaldTrumpSociopathAndCunt #EarlyStagesOfFascism #ICE #kakistocracy #KristiNoemSociopathAndCunt
