HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Honeycombe8 » Journal
Page: 1 2 Next »

Honeycombe8

Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Hometown: LA
Member since: Sat Feb 10, 2007, 01:29 PM
Number of posts: 37,648

Journal Archives

Big Bad Voodoo Daddy




Awesome awesome awesome awesome! A talented group & excellent musicians. Enjoy!

I think Trump may be, in addn to other things, a sadist.

I hate to say it. He is so many things that are bad. Narcissistic, egotistical, arrogant, unintelligent, uninformed, rash, mean, juvenile, vindictive, petty, no respect for truth, dishonorable, a blowhard, a bully, power hungry.

But it strikes me, finally, that he may actually be sadistic.

SADIST. a person who derives pleasure, especially sexual gratification, from inflicting pain or humiliation on others.


Vanity Fair's article from today says that someone reports that Trump got joy from pulling Brennan's security clearance. And that quashing praise of McCain's service and then raising the flags to full mast also fell into that category. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/08/donald-trump-nuts-rejects-war-council-intervention-goes-it-alone

Thinking back on all the times (the ones I remember) of how he called people names, even ordinary citizens with no power to fight back, damaged careers (Sen. Flake of AZ & others), the children in cages, the immigrants forced to give up their plea for amnesty in exchane for seeing their children again, put people in charge of agencies for the purpose of dismantling those depts & agencies, and all the rest. What would be the purpose? It strikes me that it may be as simple as...it gives him joy. It gives him pleasure to see hurt, pain, and damage that he causes. It makes him feel powerful?

It gives him joy to damage a career or humiliate someone. That would explain some of the things he's done. But was he always that way? Someone needs to do a psych profile on him after this is all over.

Or is this too dramatic? Too extreme? Still, it seems to fit.

Rachel tonight. Fascinating.

The convoluted machinations that led to the Cohen subpoena of months ago.

Cohen was served with a new subpoena today...as a witness in New York's investigation or action against Trump's charitable organization. The NY AG, Barbara Underwood, filed a CIVIL lawsuit against the charity that was long, detailed, and actually included evidence (like images of notes) embedded in the petition, months ago.

She then sent that petition to the IRS, New York's tax dept., and another NY dept. I think it was NY tax dept that then subpoenaed Cohen today as a witness.

Fascinating programs. Rachel is excellent at connecting the dots and run down the timelines & give background.

You can't make this stuff up.

Ken Olin: Nothing can fix the injustice done....

At the end of the day, Ken Olin's tweet is so true. The damage and injustice done to so many, not the least of whom is Hillary Clinton.

https://twitter.com/kenolin1/status/1032135548826054656

Rep Duncan Hunter (NOT Hines!) can NOT be removed from the ballot & replaced. Too late!

California secretary of State: GOP lawmaker can't be removed from ballot after getting indicted

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) will remain on the ballot in California's 50th Congressional District in November, despite being charged Tuesday with misusing at least $250,000 in campaign funds for personal expenses.

"There exists no process in California Elections Code for Duncan Hunter to remove his name from the November ballot," Sam Mahood, a spokesman for California's Secretary of State, told The Hill in a statement.

Mahood noted that Hunter was one of the top-two vote getters in the district's June primary. He added that there can be no write-in candidates for the November election.

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/402937-california-secretary-of-state-gop-lawmaker-cant-be-removed-from-ballot


Bwahahahahaha! Sometimes things come full circle. The trifecta today! Cohen...Manafort...Duncan. The cherry on top is that Duncan's indictment opens an opportunity in San Diego County, CA.

Today was a very good day.

The four questions the Manafort jury asked the judge today....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/jury-begins-deliberations-in-paul-manaforts-tax--and-bank-fraud-trial/2018/08/16/d2b0f486-a170-11e8-8e87-c869fe70a721_story.html?utm_term=.ad59042f9641

1. if someone was required to file a form called an FBAR — which is required of people with foreign bank accounts containing more than $10,000 — if they owned less than 50 percent of such an account and did not have signature authority but did have the ability to direct disbursement. At trial, Manafort’s lawyers suggested their client might have believed he did not have to file such forms, because the companies in question were set up under his consulting firm. After 2011, he shared ownership of the firm equally with his wife. (The Judge said that along with the requirement for people who own more than 50 percent of a company with foreign bank accounts, a person must file FBARs if he “controls the disposition of money, funds, or other assets held in a financial account by direct communications.”)

2. if the judge could define “shelf company” and the filing requirements related to income. Witnesses testified at Manafort’s trial that he used so-called shelf companies — companies previously created by a lawyer in Cyprus that could be used to control the bank accounts in question — in order to move Manafort’s money. To that question, the judge said the jury would have to rely on their memory of the evidence presented at trial.

3. if the judge could “redefine reasonable doubt.” Jurors sometimes struggle with what constitutes a reasonable doubt of someone’s guilt, versus an unreasonable doubt. The judge told them reasonable doubt “is a doubt based on reason,” but added: “The government is not required to prove guilt beyond all possible doubt.”

4. if they could have an updated exhibit list, connecting each piece of evidence to the corresponding charge in the indictment. The judge said they would have to rely on their collective memory to link exhibits to specific charges.


The article says the defense attorney was happy about this. IMO, it's not good if they need a redefinition of reasonable doubt. Then again, it may mean nothing other than clarification, so they know going into the deliberations.

If they're having trouble matching the evidence to the charges, it could take them a while. It could also mean they don't understand all the evidence. This is complicated stuff.

The hypnotic effect of "Chain of Fools" (smoooooth Aretha)



One of my Aretha favorites.

Manafort trial - Defense rests w/o calling a single witness.

Unusual. Closing arguments tomorrow.

The investigation needs a win on this, or will give Trump's team more fodder to claim "witch hunt! witch hunt!"

I went to see BlacKkKlansman today.

It was excellent. Powerful. Humorous. Spike Lee did a great job.

Just wanted to say...if you're on the fence about it, it's worth your time & money.

Trump Admin. has lifted ban on using bee-killing pesticides in wildlife areas...

where there is farming.

https://twitter.com/Earthjustice/status/1026579103162368002

The world is perplexed about the disappearance of bees across the world. Humans need bees to pollinate plants. Some scientists think the widespread use of certain pesticides plays a big part in killing the bees.

There's no end to the ruin these people are leaving in their wake. No insect, no animal, no person, no economy is left unaffected and healthy, once they wave their wand over it.
Go to Page: 1 2 Next »